20061780 Ver 1_Complete File_20061109

.t
lftwl<
WDICKSON
community infrastructure consultants
November 8, 2006
Oto -11go
Mr. Josh Pelletier
USACE Washington Field Office
107 Union Drive, Suite 202
Washington, North Carolina 27889
Dear Mr. Pelletier:
RECEIVED
The attached NWP 27 PCN and restoration plan for the Floogie mitigation site is presented by WK
Dickson on behalf of Environmental Banc and Exchange (Applicant). The goal of the project is provide
full-delivery mitigation to the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program for impacts in
hydrologic unit 03010107 of the Lower Roanoke River Basin. The Floogie Site is located in Bertie
County, North Carolina approximately nine miles northeast of Windsor. The property is 827 acres
located west of Browns School Road (SR 1348) and is accessed via a farm road north of passing over
Flat Swamp Creek.
The proposed mitigation includes 11,420 linear feet of stream restoration on Flat Swamp Creek and 25
acres of riverine wetland restoration. The proposed stream restoration reach was disturbed by historic
channelization and the proposed wetland restoration area is prior-converted (PC) cropland that was
ditched and drained. The Floogie Site has a history of agriculture and timber production. The site
currently supports agricultural production a clear-cut/pine plantation.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this important project and please contact me at 919-782-0495
if you have questions or require additional information.
Sincerely,
W.K. Dickson & Co., Inc.
Jef eaton, PE ® ?9
Project Manager
NOV ? ZOC6
cc: NCDWQ 401/Wetlands Unit
Norton Webster, Environmental Banc and Exchange WE>x.NDSAN STOR?MWATERORMON
3101 john Humphries Wynd
Raleigh, NC 27612
Tel. [phone]
Fax [phone]
www.wkdicksoti.com
Norf:h Carolina e South Carolina • Georgia e Florida
Office Use Only: Form Version March 05
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No. ulo - I T9 C)
(it any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
1. Processing PAYMENT
RECEIVED
Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ? Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
? Section 10 Permit ? Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification ? Express 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NWP 27, WQC 3495
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ?
4. If payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed
for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance letter from NCEEP, complete section VIII,
and check here: ?
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), chec M 6? RmRo
II. Applicant Information
NO V 2006
1. Owner/Applicant Information DENR watER
Name: Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC?wos, RoAL;ry
Mailing Address: South East Regional Office R?vcH
2530 Meridian Parkway
Durham NC 27713
nlcrko * wlrbstp_SL Attention: Norton Webster
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number:
E-mail Address: NortonAebxusa.com
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: Jeff Keaton
Company Affiliation: WK Dickson
Mailing Address: 3101 John Humphries Wnyd
Raleigh, NC 27612
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address: [e-mail]
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 1 of 9
III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Floosie Mitigation Site
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): N/A
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): (6 parcels) 6836386851, 6837503535,
6836585672,6836781176,6836668225,6836636697
4. Location
County: Bertie Nearest Town: Windsor
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.): From Windsor, drive
approximately 5.3 miles on 17 east. Turn left onto Wakelon Road (SR 1001 Drive
approximately 5 miles on Wakelon Road to Bull Hill Road (SR 1301. Turn right on Bull
Hill Road and travel approximately 2.5 miles and turn left onto Browns School Road (SR
1348). Site is approximately 2.5 miles on left. Site is accessed from farm path Figure 1).
5. Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that
separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimum): 36.1183245 ON 77.8502890 °W
6. Property size (acres): Total property size is 827 acres. Enclosed in conservation easement is
74.85 acres.
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: Flat Swamp Creek
8. River Basin: Lower Roanoke River Basin (USGS HUC 03010107160051) and NCDWQ
sub-basin 03-02-10
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://l12o.enr.state.nc.us/adminhnaps/.)
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 2 of 9
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: Flat Swamp Creek has a drainage area of 2,150 acres (3.36
mil) at the downstream end of the _restoration project. The wetland restoration area has a
drainage area of 1,456 acres (2.28 mi`). The dominant land use is agricultural production of
cotton and soybeans, pine plantation and woodland. Local drainage patterns have been
altered in the past to drain wetlands and promote agricultural production The USGS
Elizabeth City, NC topographic quadrangle shows that drainage from the site flows in a
southerly direction (Figure 2). The stream is a tributary to Hoggard's Mill Creek There are
numerous agricultural ditches on the project property that are used to promote drainage an
the adjacent channel. The ditches and swales were constructed to route water off the site
draining areas that were once wetland. NRCS soil mapping and aerial photography is shown
in Figure 3. On-site topography, soils, and existing wetland areas demonstrate that the site
historically supported both riverine and non-riverine wetland areas. The restoration and
preservation areas will be protected by a conservation easement. Areas of the property
outside the conservation easement may continue to be used as woodland pine plantation
agriculture, or wildlife food plots (Figure 4).
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: The
project will involve the stream restoration of Flat Swamp Creek and the wetland restoration
of adjacent PC cropland. Stream restoration on Flat Swamp Creek will consist excavating a
new channel and filling the old channel. Native material revetments will be installed This
project also includes restoration of non-riverine wetlands. Wetland restoration activities will
include plugging and filling existing ditches, relocating the existing farm access road and re-
grading selected ditches outside the proposed conservation easement to aid site drainage
patterns (Figures 5). All wetland restoration activities are taking place in non- urisdictional
PC-cropland or uplands. All disturbed areas will be stabilized and planted with native
vegetation. Equipment to be used includes track hoes bulldozers trucks and other earth
moving equipment as necessary. The enclosed CD-ROM contains the Restoration Plan and
discusses the project in detail.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: The project is being developed to provide
full delivery mitigation to the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) for
impacts in hydrologic unit 03010107 of the Roanoke River Basin The proposed stream
restoration reach was disturbed by historic channelization and the proposed wetland
restoration area is prior-converted (PC) cropland that was ditched and drained The Floogie
Site has a history of agriculture and timber production. The site currently supports
agricultural production (primarily corn) woodlands and clear-cut/pine plantation pine
plantation, mid-successional bottomland hardwood forest. The stream restoration will restore
a natural flow pattern and create a design that will allow flows that exceed the design
bankfull stage to spread out over the floodplain. The design will provide for stable cross-
sectional geometry, an increase in planform sinuosity, and restoration of sand-bed channel
features and stream bed diversity to improve benthic habitat. The wetland restoration will
create hydrologic retention and encourage species diversification that will provide a
continuous riverine wetland system grading into riverine wetlands and the stream restoration
site that will enhance wildlife habitat wildlife passage and water quality functions The
enclosed CD-ROM contains the Restoration Plan and discusses the project in detail
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 3 of 9
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules. No previous submittals have been made to the USACE A wetland
delineation was performed by WK Dickson and is provided as Figure 4
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
An Erosion Control Plan will be submitted to NCDENR Land Quality Division prior to
construction.
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. Each impact must be
listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from
riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary. All proposed impacts,
permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial)
should be shown on a delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems.
Wetland and stream evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate.
Photographs, may be included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for
wetland or stream mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional
space is needed for listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: Impacts resulting from the proposed
restoration include: filling/plugging 8,218 linear feet of existing channel, excavating 11,420
linear feet of new channel resulting in 2.12 acres of permanent wetlands impacts; and
clearing 5.49 acres of wetland to provide construction access and tempora stockpile areas
No impacts will result from wetland restoration or preservation activities
2. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of impacts include, but are not limited to
mechanized clearing, grading, fill, excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams,
separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 4 of 9
Wetland Impact Type of Wetland Located within Distance to Area of
Site Number Type of Impact (e.g., forested, marsh, 100-year Nearest Impact
(indicate on map) herbaceous, bog, etc.) Floodplain (yes/no) Stream (linear (acres)
feet)
Channel construction permanent Mid-successional bottomland No Adjacent 2
12
hardwood forest .
Temporary
construction access
Temporary Mid-successional bottomland
No
Adjacent
5
49
and stockpile areas hardwood forest .
Total Wetland Impact (acres) 7.61
3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: 260 (estimated)
4. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts. Be sure to identify temporary
impacts. Stream impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam
construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e.g., cement walls, rip-rap, crib
walls, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is proposed,
plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams
must be included. To calculate acreage, multiply length X width, then divide by 43,560.
Stream Impact Perennial or Average Impact Area of
Number Stream Name Type of Impact Intermittent? Stream Width Length Impact
(indicate on ma) Before Impact (linear feet) (acres)
Reach 1 Flat Swamp Creek Permanent Perennial 15 1,930 0.665
Reach 2 Flat Swamp Creek Permanent Perennial 15 1,920 0.661
Reach 3 Flat Swamp Creek Permanent Perennial 12 1,820 0.501
Reach 4 Flat Swamp Creek Permanent Perennial 14 2,548 0.819
Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 8,218 2.65
5. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.). Open water impacts include, but are not limited to
fill, excavation, dredging, flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
Open Water Impact
Site Number Name of Waterbody
(if applicable)
Type of Impact Type of Waterbody
(lake, pond, estuary, sound, bay, Area of
Impact
(indicate on ma) ocean, etc.) (acres)
N/A
Total Open Water Impact (acres)
6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the project:
Stream Impact (acres): 2.65
Wetland Impact (acres): 7.61
Open Water Impact (acres):
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 5.22
Total Stream Impact (linear feet): 8,218
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 5 of 9
7. Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ? Yes ® No
Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet). Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE.
8. Pond Creation (N/A)
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ? uplands ? stream ? wetlands
Describe, the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.):
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.):
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond:
Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts. Due to the nature of this
project, avoidance is not possible. Impacts are minimized using a staged construction ap rp oach
Where possible the channel will be constructed prior to turning stream flow into a segment This
approach allows minimization of the impact of each stage during the project construction
Additionally all work in wetlands and streams will be conducted during dry conditions and/or
with mats to protect soil structure. Efforts will be made to preserve individual high value trees
located within the stream restoration area. The enclosed CD-ROM contains the Restoration Plan
and discusses the project in detail.
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2002, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 6 of 9
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCEEP concurrence shall be placed on hold as incomplete.
An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration in DWQ's
Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://l12o.enr.state.Dc.us/ncwetlaDds/strnigide.htm1.
Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
N/A
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
[phone] to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating
that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form. For
additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP
website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/=. ndex.htm. If use of the NCEEP is proposed, please
check the appropriate box on page five and provide the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet):
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet):
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres):
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of
public (federal/state) land? Yes ® No ?
2. If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 7 of 9
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ? No
3. If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please
attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter. Yes ? No ?
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
1. Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Neuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 02B .0243 (Catawba) 15A NCAC
2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please
identify )? Yes ? No
2. If "yes", identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers.
If buffer mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the
buffer multipliers.
Zone* Impact Multiplier Required
(crn,nra fno4l ,,?,,,? ?,
1 3 (2 for Catawba)
2 1.5
Total
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from the top of the near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
3. If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e.,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 2B.0242 or.0244, or.0260.
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site. Discuss stormwater
controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands downstream from the property. If
percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations demonstrating total proposed
impervious level. N/A No changes in impervious acreage proposed
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 8 of 9
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ? No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application? Yes ? No
XIV. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ)
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ? No
If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description:
This is a stream and wetland restoration site that will be protected through a conservation
easement and will not facilitate or deter surrounding development
XV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
The enclosed CD-ROM contains the Restoration Plan and discusses the project in detail

Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 9 of 9
Figure 1.
Project Vicinity Map
Floogie Site
0 0.5 1 2 3 4
Miles
LEGEND
NCDOT Roads
Existing Waterbody
HUC 03010107160050
HUC 03010203090030
BERTIE COUNTY
Scale: NTS

0
' .
1 1
I

Cam Per
to

Paa
?-?? I

1 A
e e
?
o? I a ? o o?y4

Whites 1 i h
20. e • •
1344 ` I

i
I o

Proposed Riverine ' ?.
ro??'? yes
e?? +

Wetland Restoration ?s .

N %
j :CerrKJ)
J

Existing Wetland Boundary ! 7e.. Proposed Stream ?-
r' Restoration

I (
Q
?
, \I ? ,. dt. ?a?,
1

1
Note: Wate{s'??ed:l3b
8ary wasdellrieate7)ising A daWandmofU-SObi po

Figure 2. LEGEND
NCOOTRoads
USGS Quadrangle Map Stream

Floogie Site
F--J Existing Wetland Boundary
Project Area
Potential Riverine
l
d R
i
0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000
Feet Wet
an
estorat
on
Watershed Boundary

GoA
Na GoA GoA
Proposed Riverine Ly
Wetland Restoration
Gt ExA R GoA
ExA
GoA
ExA
q Na
ExA Existing Wetland Boundary
ExA
Na
Ly
II
Na
Na
WE
GoA
ExA
A
Gt
Na
Gt
Project Area
) Proposed Stream Restoration I
JxA?(
J Na
ExA
AE
SOIL SERIES LEGEND
Hydric Soils
Non-Hydric Soils GoA Goldsboro sandy loam, 0 to 3% slopes Na Nahunta very fine sandy loam
ExA Exum very fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 % slopes Gt Grantham silt loam Ra Rains sandy loam
Ly Lynchburg sandy loam WE Wehadkee loam, frequently flooded
Figure 3. LEGEND
Soils Map NCDOT Roads G0A Soil Series and Phase
Stream Potential Riverine
Floogie Site Existing Wetland Restoration
Wetland Boundary
0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 Project Area
Feet
Fi ,r.. f Ntr, ?- .
M
>r
efe-
z
AU Project Area r A
+ i
a `. 46 X i'Rd'G
.
Figure 4.
Existing Stream Conditions
Floogie Site
0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000
Feet
LEGEND
NCDOT Roads
Existing Stream Reaches
O Project Area

lu
gn
zN
go
sZ
o ?
°s Ru
g ?
F
Ji'.• i
I??';a I
m
z
r p
OZ
m O
AG) z
m m ?
O r
Z _? m
j G-)
D Z
o -I C)
? O ke
= z
m
o n
2
r O z
M G)
C) m
r
r
n
r
v o
r O
D G)
z m
O
< (n
m C)
z
fTl ?
L D
z
(n

O?T RPi?p?q OII?'W'L?iY1?STO?i16 00.10011, M FRL RI N?PMi wT? ?i MI?iM CP?iI Q ll?
RIXI01 ? 00. NC, R RIPBiRI. bLY Cf1L1 nq1 MF MR 00RYpi, •MRD t.M N1 AYIK
t vNq, Ac
T ? II
V
1
D
n c--ii m - / i
O 2
Z G7 ' /
--I O A r
O C> r- 0
N m Z
` / ? 111
ch
Z
r
r
/ G7
m
m°
? rl ? I
I
I l
i
i
/ o
O
- \
K D y
y
O ° 2 2 CZi
° °m n n
i
g
z 'z
v c o ? ?n m iT
I
I
i
\ I
4

Floogie Project] %'A. el" 4o
lift
Subject: [Fwd: Re: Floogie Project
From: Cvndi Karoly <[e-mail]>
Due: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 10:23:12 -0500
To: John Domey <[e-mail]>, John Hennessy <[e-mail], tan McMillan <[e-mail]>, Lia Myott <[e-mail]>, Cynthia <[e-mail]1>,
Amy Chapman <[e-mail]>, Bev Strickland <[e-mail]>, Laurie J Dennison <[e-mail]>
Glad to know the Corps is not under the same restrictions we are.
Subject: RE: Floogie Project
From: "Lekson, David M SAW" <David. [e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 08:57:51 -0500
To: "Norton Webster" <norton@ebxusacom>
CC: "Thom Rinker" <thom@ebxusacom>, <[e-mail]>, "Guy Pearce \(E-mail\)" <[e-mail]>, "Michael Ellison \(E-maih)" <mellison@wkdicksoacom>, 'Jeff Keaton'
<[e-mail]>, "Daniel Ingram" <[e-mail]>,'Biddlecome, William 1 SAW" <Willi=[e-mail]>, "McLendon, Scott C SAW"
<Scott.C.McLendon@saw02,usace.army.mil>, "Jolly, Samuel K SAW" <Samuel. [e-mail]>, "Cyndi Karoly" <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, "Wescott, William G SAW"
<[e-mail]>, "Walker, William T SAW" <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Norton,
To summarize the letter I just sent, the project as proposed does not qualify for a nationwide permit,
regardless of any further narrative justification you may provide. As proposed, the project will require a
Department of the Army individual permit. As stated, this permit may be difficult to obtain. Should you wish to
modify your proposal to avoid impacts to the very high quality bottomland hardwood wetlands that exist on the
site, you may submit a new proposal and we will consider it. For those who have not been onsite, I have attached
a picture of the wetland area that will be destroyed by construction of this sinuous water conveyance.
David
From: Norton Webster [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 1:49 PM
To: Biddlecome, William J SAW; Lekson, David M SAW
Cc: Thom Rinker; [e-mail]; Guy Pearce (E-mail); Michael Ellison (E-mail); Jeff Keaton; Daniel
Ingram
Subject: Action ID No. SAW-2006-41469-108/ Floogie Stream and Wetland Restoration Project
Mr. Lexson and Mr. Biddlecome,
Thank you for your prompt review and field visit for the Nationwide Permit 27 request of the proposed Floogie
Stream and Wetland Restoration Project. We plan to resubmit within the next month the Nationwide 27 permit
request with additional data to support our proposed restoration plan. We understand that you do not believe that
we provided sufficient information in the original permit application to address your concerns regarding potential
adverse environmental effects from the proposed project. Our project as currently proposed will provide
functional uplift to the watershed and will provide a net gain in function as well as a net gain of jurisdictional
wetlands and stream. The proposed plan was developed with a goal restoring the existing system back to its
historic condition prior to its being channelized and deepened. We would like to meet with you and NC EEP and
NC DWQ staff to discuss this proposed project after resubmitting the Nationwide Permit 27.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Norton
Norton Webster
Environmental. Banc & Exchange, LLC
2630 Meridian Parkway
Suite 200
Durham" North Carolina 27713
office 919.806.4542
cell 919.608.9688
fax [phone]
[e-mail]
www.ebxusa.com
1 of 3 11/30/2006 10:55 AM
AFl gie Project]
2 of 3 11/30/2006 10:55 AM
iRe: Floogie Project Content-Type. message/%822
)C on te n t- Enco ding: 7bit

/ Legend
Elevation (ft)
Value
_4
d; -3.999999999 - -2
f -1.999999999 - 0
0-2
fi ? I
1
2.000000001 -4
---?'' `-' 4.000000001 -6
6.000000001 - 8
i. •`•`?? ,?-:" } _ }_r' 8.000000001 - 10
10.00000001 - 12
. ePz 12.00000001 - 14
14.00000001 16
/ 16.00000001 - 18
18.00000001 20
t20.00000001 - 22
1
?` ? ""-•- ? 22.00000001 - 24
24.00000001 - 26
- 26.00000001 28
- -a
28.00000001 - 30
30.00000001 - 32
® 32.00000001 - 34
- 34.00000001 - 36
36 00000001 - 38
38.00000001 - 40
r 'Y'r _ l 40.00000001 - 42
42.00000001 - 44
s - 44.00000001 - 46
M 46.00000001 - 48
48.00000001 - 50
I
M 50.00000001 - 52 'i
w 52.00000001 - 54
,x S ric ¢ `°` * r 1 54.00000001 - 56
kr 56.00000001 - 58
'.- - ,.,,,•,.., ',. -_' { ' x - .?,;r , ;,..- 58.00000001 - 60
60.00000001 - 62
x n =, 62.00000001 - 64
7-
_& x
? 64.00000001 - 66
z Fr $ 66.00000001 - 68
o-s t r .ka c 68.00000001 - 70
70.00000001 - 72
72.00000001 - 74
4
74.00000001 - 76
999 76.00000001 - 78
U ?qs?g? i Hy ? 78.00000001 - 80
x
{ ? - 80.00000001 - 82
f?4 1 i/?' 82.00000001 -84
1 2?
, .-Natin
84.00000001 - 86
As:
86.00000001 - 88
-NR
2 tr o ' 88.00000001 - 90
90.00000001 -92
N, -0 0
:t y300 '' .'. I C) 1? 92.00000001 - 94
x t _. 94.00000001 - 96
96.00000001 - 98
98.00000001 - 100
3M 100.0000001 - 102
i
TopoZone - USGS Colerain (NC) Topo Map
http://www.topozone.com;'print.asp?lat=36.12555&lon=-76.85653&s..
I
a
tOPOZON
Con)
C?oI?+V+'?20C3 Alps a i nne ?c ? ?- ;. - _
DIN,
i7A-? d
< ..° II - ?i 1 ?Qb
Il J
Whites
• Crossroads
f .:JI i
i
• \ ,`ISO '
I
i iJ !r \\ I
C-il
11 - .c s,Cp '? r
4. ? !I
17 4
i's ?0 6 } 1
T) 1 I
Cora" '
C-em
0
14
nn
0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 km
0 f?.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 mi
UTM 18 332928E 3999269N (NAD27)
USGS Colerain (NC) Quadrangle
Projection is UTM Zone 18 NAD83 Datum
I 1 of I
M=-10.185
G=-1.095
11/30/2006 7:44 AM
? Rlm?l??ln?
All"
?V
to
l°z
QQ? ?
oaf
$ Y°?

m
z
TI ?7
r O
Oz
m O K
m C) z
r, F, D
o r
z ? m
Z
D
o -I n
=0?
m
A -OX
o _
> O z
m
C) m
-,
r
r
r7
m
O
r O
D 0
z m
0
O m
m G)
/ z
m ?
D
z
(n

Cl)
2 V)
°z
0 0 .-n i
Nmz ?' ,,
'/ rn
? r
CO)
^z
a?
e°
?o
r rl ? ?
I
I
i
i i
w
- '
ppA ? ? K
/ V O X D _y
z Z A
O O CJ O
s s D i A
_" T N t? N
D A D z O
Z D Z Z N m
o c o i-
m
I Iz
I o
I
I
? I I
4
gyp,. _?
R
I . ;
1. INTRODUCTION
This report supports a design to restore 11,420 linear feet of Flat Swamp Creek
and 25 acres of riverine wetlands at the Floogie Mitigation Site in Bertie County,
North Carolina (Table 1). The purpose of this project is to provide full delivery
mitigation to the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) for
impacts in Cataloging Unit 03010107 of the Lower Roanoke River Basin. The
proposed stream restoration reach was disturbed by historic channelization.
The proposed wetland restoration area is primarily prior-converted (PC)
agricultural land drained by an extensive network of ditches. The Floogie Site
has a history of agriculture and timber production. Much of the site is currently
used for row crop production including cotton, soy beans, peanuts, and corn.
The rest of the site is woodlands or shrub/scrub areas.
The Floogie Site is located in Bertie County, North Carolina, 9 miles northeast of
Windsor (Figure 1). The property includes 104 acres located immediately
southwest of SR 1348 (Browns School Road) and is accessed via a farm road that
runs adjacent to the channel.
The objective of this project is to produce a minimum of 11,325 stream
mitigation units (SMU) and 25 riverine wetland mitigation units (WMU) by
maximizing the improvement of riparian and aquatic habitats and water quality
through ecological restoration practices. The stream and riverine wetlands
restoration have been designed conjunctively. Overbank stream flows will
provide a portion of the hydrology for the wetlands. The proposed restoration
project will provide multiple ecological and water quality benefits within the
Roanoke River Basin. Benefits include nutrient removal, sediment reduction,
water storage, improved groundwater recharge, improved in-stream and
riparian habitat, and restored wetland habitat.
Table 1. Flooaie Mitiaation Summary
Mitigation Practice Size Ratio - Mitigation Units
Wetland
Riverine wetland restoration 25 ac 1:1 25
Total: 25 WMUs
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
1
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
/

Stream
Stream Restoration (Flat Swamp Creek) 11,420
If 1:1 11,420
Total: 11,420 SMUs
II. STUDY AREA
PHYSIOGRAPHY, TOPOGRAPHY, AND DRAINAGE
The. Floogie mitigation is located in the Lower Roanoke River Basin within North
Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) sub-basin 03-02-10. The stream
restoration area is in hydrologic unit 03010107160050. The site is in the
Coastal Plain Physiographic Province and is underlain by marine sedimentary
rocks of the Yorktown Formation. The Yorktown formation is predominantly
fossiliferous clay that contains varying amounts of fine-grained sand with
concentrated lenses of bluish grey shell material (North Carolina Geologic
Survey, 1985). This formation is common for locations in the upper and middle
sections of the Coastal Plain province of North Carolina. The local topography is
very flat with
INSERT FIGURE 1
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
2
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site

r L.
elevations ranging from 38 to 55 feet above mean sea level (NAD 27) based
upon USGS mapping (Figure 2) and recent topographic survey data.
The project will involve the restoration of Flat Swamp Creek, a tributary to
Hoggard's Mill Creek and adjacent riverine wetlands. The wetlands that will be
restored consist of prior-converted (PC) cropland and hydrologically altered
shrub/scrub habitat that drain to Flat Swamp Creek. Flat Swamp Creek is listed
as Class T Sw" by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ). The
primary classification "C" indicates waters that support aquatic life and
secondary recreational uses. The supplemental classification "Sw" is used to
denote swamp waters which may have the natural characteristics of low velocity,
low dissolved oxygen, and low pH. Hoggard's Mill Creek discharges into the
Cashie River which was listed on the State's 303(d) list in 2004 for Fish
Consumption due to mercury.
SOIL MAPPING
The property is located within the Wehadkee loam (We), frequently flooded,
Rains sandy loam (Ra), and Lynchburg sandy loam (Ly) soils associations. The
NRCS mapped soils for the site are shown in Figure 3. Soils are described in
detail in Section IV Existing Conditions.
WETLAND DELINEATION
A wetland delineation was performed utilizing the routine on-site determination
method (USACE, 1987). This delineation found that the wetland restoration area
was non jurisdictional due to artificial ditching and lowering of stream channel
bed. Onsite wetlands include riverine wetlands along both sides of Flat Swamp
Creek. Wetlands are described in detail in Section IV Existing Conditions.
PROTECTED SPECIES
Table 2 lists the Bertie County species listed by the US Fish and Wildlife Service
as protected or species of concern under the Federal Endangered Species Act.
No suitable habitat for the red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) is present on the
site. A review of Natural Heritage Program database revealed two abandoned
RCW colonies approximately one mile west and south of the project boundary.
No further protected species surveys are anticipated.
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
3
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
%
Table 2. Protected Species in Bertie Countv
Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status
Eastern Henslow's
Ammodramus henslowii Species of Concern
sparrow
Corynorhinus (=Plecotus) Rafinesque's big-eared
Species of Concern
nes uii
rafi bat
Dendroica cerulea Cerulean warbler Species of Concern
Orconectes vir inianus Chowanoke crayfish Species of Concern
Red-cockaded
Picoides borealis Endangered
Woodpecker
In an effort to promote a diverse wildlife community, three bat habitat
structures are proposed for the lower portions of the stream restoration
corridor. These structures will provide suitable roosting habitat for a variety of
bat species including Rafinesque's big-eared bat.
INSERT FIGURE 2
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
4
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
INSERT FIGURE 3
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site

111. GENERAL WATERSHED INFORMATION
Flat Swamp Creek has a drainage area of 1,168 acres (1.83 miz) at the upstream
end of the restoration area and 2,150 acres (3.36 miz) at the,downstream end of
the project (Figure 2). The wetland restoration area has a drainage area of
1,456 acres (2.28 miz). The dominant land use within the watershed is
agricultural production of crops including cotton, soy beans, corn and timber;
although some areas are woodlands.
The watershed is at the edge of the Roanoke River Basin immediately adjacent to
the Chowan River Basin. Drainage in the watershed is generally in a southerly
direction. The drainage pattern is dendritic and the drainage density is 0.93
mi/miz.
The watershed has very little relief with elevations ranging from 38 to 68 feet
above mean sea level (NAD 27). Wetland mapping indicates that wetlands cover
a large portion of the watershed (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2005). These
conditions will likely cause the watershed lag time to be long, i.e. it may
respond slowly to hydrologic inputs resulting in reduced peak flows and
potentially prolonged periods of stormflow. Natural drainage patterns
throughout the watershed have been historically altered to drain wetlands and
promote agricultural production. There are numerous agricultural ditches on the
project property that are used to promote drainage. The ditches were
constructed and streams were channelized to route water off the site, draining
areas that were once wetland.
IV. EXISTING CONDITIONS
ExiSTING CONDITIONS OF THE
STREAM CHANNEL
Flat Swamp Creek flows
across the property in a
southeasterly direction and
was historically straightened
in Site
Photo 1. Typical channelized condition of Flat
[ C
and channelized for the entire length of the project site (Photo 1). The channel
planform through the site is generally straight with occasional bends of large
radius and short arc length. The project reach has a very flat gradient with an
overall measured slope of 0.0008 ft/ft. The valley gradient along the upper
three fourths of the project reach is approximately 0.0015 ft/ft. The lower
portion of the project reach has a valley gradient of approximately 0.0005 ft/ft.
Bedforms are generally absent but there are occasional shallow pools. Bedforms
of this nature are common in Coastal Plain sand bed channels. The stream bed
and banks are comprised almost entirely of sand and silt. The floodplain
consists mostly of crop lands along the upstream portion of the project and
forest and herbaceous grasses along the downstream section. Entrenchment
ratios for the project reach range from large to very large (1.6) in the upstream
section to nearly 1 near the downstream end. This indicates that during
channelization, the upstream portion of the stream was dug exceedingly deep
to aid in draining the adjacent wetlands. The stream has been classified as a
predominantly E5 stream type using the Rosgen stream classification system
(Rosgen, 1994). The design reach has been separated into four distinct sections
which are described below and shown in Figure 4. Channel characteristics are
summarized in Table 3.
Reach 1
The upstream section of the subject stream, Reach 1, begins at the culvert
under Browns School Road, approximately 8,950 feet downstream of the origin
of the channel. Reach 1 has a drainage area of 1,381 acres (2.16 miz) at the
downstream end. This 1,930 foot section of channel is very straight (sinuosity
= 1.05) and has a low gradient of 0.002 ft/ft. Reach 1 flows beside active crop
land on the western side and cutover woody vegetation on the eastern side of
the stream. This portion of the stream has an average cross-sectional area of
approximately 70.0 ft2 at the top of bank. Bankfull stage was estimated using
North Carolina Coastal Plain regional curves (Doll, et al., 2003) resulting in a
bankfull cross-sectional area of 24.1 ftz and a bank height ratio of 1.6. These
values indicate that the reach is quite incised. The bed material along Reach 1
is medium sand (Dso =0.25 mm).
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
7
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
I %
Reach 2
Reach 2 of the existing stream is immediately downstream of Reach 1 and is
1,920 feet in length. This reach has a drainage area of 1,482 acres (2.31 mil) at
the downstream end. This reach has a low sinuosity (1.03) and very flat
(gradient = 0.001 ft/ft). Reach 2 flows beside fields that consist of mostly
shrubs, small woody vegetation, and herbaceous grasses on the western side
and woody vegetation on the eastern side. Average cross-sectional area at the
top of bank is approximately 47.7 ft2. The estimated bankfull stage results in a
cross-sectional area of 25.3 ftz and a bank height ratio of 1.3 indicating that
this reach is slightly incised. The bed material along Reach 2 is fine sand (Dso =
0.063 mm).
Reach 3
The third section of the existing stream, Reach 3, begins immediately
downstream of Reach 2 and extends 1,820 feet to an' unnamed tributary that
flows from the east into Flat Swamp Creek. Reach 3 has a drainage area of
1,616 acres (2.53 mi2). The reach has low sinuosity (1.12) and a very low
gradient (0.001 ft/ft). This reach flows through mid-successional bottomland
hardwood forest on both sides of the channel. The right stream bank (western
side) is immediately adjacent to a road bed. This reach has an existing cross-
sectional area of approximately 24.9 ft2 to the top of bank. The estimated
bankfull stage results in a cross-sectional area of 26.8 and a bank height ratio
of < 1.0. These values indicate that the reach is slightly undersized. The bed
material along Reach 3 is medium sand (Dso = 0.25 mm).
Reach 4
The downstream reach, Reach 4, begins at the unnamed tributary confluence
and continues for 2,548 feet to a confluence with a second unnamed tributary
which enters from the west. The drainage area for this reach is 2,148 acres
(3.36 mi2). This reach flows through the
INSERT FIGURE 4
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
8
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
I >
same mid-successional bottomland hardwood forest as Reach 3 and has the
road bed adjacent to the right bank. It has a sinuosity of 1.14 and a gradient of
essentially zero. This
reach has an existing cross-sectional area of approximately 35.9 ft2 at the top
of bank. The estimated bankfull stage results in a cross-sectional area of 32.3
and a bank height ratio of 1.1. Therefore, this reach appears to be slightly
incised. The bed material along Reach 4 is medium sand (Dso = 0.25 mm). A
beaverdam has been built at the end of this section approximately 700 feet
north of the unnamed tributary flowing into the main channel.
Table 3. Summary of Existinq Channel Characteristics
Existing Est.
Drainag TOB Cross Existing Bank
e Area Sect. Area Length Height Slope Dso
Reach (Ac) (ftz) (ft) Ratio Sinuosity (ft/ft) (mm)
1 1,381 70.0 1,930 1.6 1.05 0.002 0.25
0.06
2 1,482 47.7 1,920 1.3 1.03 0.001 3
3 1,616 24.9 1,820 <1.0 1.12 0.001 0.25
4 2,148 32.3 2,548 1.1 1.14 0.00 0.25
EXISTING CONDITIONS OF WETLAND RESTORATION AREAS
The existing conditions of the wetland restoration area consist of two separate
components: prior converted (PC) farmland and a clear-cut/pine plantation
area. In order to effectively characterize existing habitats, a series of data points
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
10
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
I L
was established consisting of: soil boring, hydrologic assessment, and
vegetation assessment (Figure 5). Soil Boring Logs are located in Appendix A.
Prior Converted (PC) Farmland
During field investigations the existing PC farmland was producing corn (Photo
2). Drainage for the fields is maintained through an extensive network of
drainage ditches typically four feet deep and six feet wide.
INSERT FIGURE 5
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
11
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
I >
ridges. Both soils series are listed on state and federal hydric soils listings.
Six soil auger borings were advanced within the PC farmland. Soil profiles within
this area typically met the F3: Depleted Matrix hydric soil indicator. A typical soil
profile within this area displayed a dark grayish brown (2.5 Y 4/2) sandy loam
matrix within the upper 7 inches of the plow layer. Soils below the plow layer
displayed a light gray (5Y 7/2) sandy loam matrix with common distinct olive
yellow (2.5 Y 6/6) mottles from 7 to 20 inches in depth. Soils below 20 inches
displayed a light brownish gray (10 YR 6/2) sandy clay loam matrix with
common distinct strong brown (7.5 YR 5/8) mottles. Additionally, depth to
water table was observed to be between 6 and 42 inches at each soil auger
boring. This variation occurs because water table depth is related to elevation
and distance to the nearest ditch.
Clear- Cut/Pine Plantation Area
The clear-cut/pine plantation area (Photo 3) is located south and east of the PC
farmland and has recently been logged. This portion of the wetland restoration
area consists of two vegetative communities that are dominated by herbaceous
and shrub species. These communities were identified as primarily wetland
habitat within the undrained portions of the clear-cut area and as a drained or
dry shoulder area.
Wetlands
The clear-cut/pine plantation areas contain jurisdictional wetlands due to a lack
of ditching and hydrophytic vegetation. Wetland delineations have been
completed to confirm boundaries (Figure 6).
Vegetation within the
wetland areas consists of
mostly herbaceous
obligate facultative-
wetland species including
smartweed, (Poiygonum
pennsyianicum) soft rush
(luncus effusus), giant
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
Photo 3. Clear-cut/pine plantation area
I I
cane (Arundinaria gigantea), sedges (Carex spp.), asters (Aster spp.), royal fern
(Osmunda regalis), netted chain fern (Woodwardia areolata) greenbrier (Smilax
rotundifolia), and wool grass (Scripus cyperinus). A less dominant shrub layer
contains pokeweed (Phytolacca sp.), black willow (Salix nigra), and blackberry
(Rubus argutus). Additionally, few saplings were present including red maple
(Acer rubrum), swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii) and tulip poplar
(Liriodendron tulipifera).Soils within the eastern portions of this area are
mapped as Wehadkee, frequently flooded. Typically, these soils displayed the
A8: Muck Presence hydric soil indicator within the surface layer. Soils
contained a black (1 OYR 2/1) mucky clay matrix within the upper 21
INSERT FIGURE 6
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
13
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
I !
inches of the soil surface. At the time of the field investigations, pockets of
standing water and water stained leaves were observed throughout the wetland
areas. Additionally, a shallow water table at 6 inches was observed in auger
holes.
Drained, Dry Shoulder Areas
This vegetation community is found along the stream channel and existing
ditches. It generally contains fewer wetland species, indicating subsurface
drainage and lack of wetland hydrology due to adjacent ditches. Dominant
species include: southern lady fern (Athyrium filix femina), sensitive fern
(Onoclea sensibilis), soft rush, deer tongue (Dichanthelium clandestinum), and
grape vine (Vitis rotundifolia) A less dominant shrub layer consists of Japanese
honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), and blackberry. Additionally, various saplings
were present including red maple, sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), white
oak (Quercus alba), and tulip poplar. This plant community is generally
facultative and does not include obligate wetland species.
Soils in the western portion of the clear-cut/pine plantation area are mapped as
Rains sandy loam. A typical soil profile displayed a black (1 OYR 211) mucky clay
matrix from 0 to 8 inches, which also met the A8: Muck Presence hydric soil
indicator. However, soil horizons below the surface layer did not have a hydric
soil indicator and were more typical of drained soils. From 8 to 15 inches soils
displayed a mixed matrix of black (5Y 2.5/1) and
a strong brown (7.5YR 5/8) clayey sand with few yellowish red (5YR 5/8)
mottles. Soils from 15 to 38 inches also displayed a mixed matrix of strong
brown (7.5 YR 5/8) and a light yellowish brown (2.5 Y 6/4) sandy clay.
Additionally, the water table was not encountered within 41 inches of the
surface.
Disturbed Scrub/Shrub
The portion of the wetland restoration area, referred to as disturbed
shrub/scrub, is located east of the existing stream channel outside of the dry
shoulder area. No ditching was constructed within this portion of the wetland
restoration area. The disturbed shrub/scrub habitat was clear cut several years
ago and consists of mostly shrubby and herbaceous vegetation with few mature
trees. The dominant shrub layer consists of blackberry, Japanese honeysuckle,
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
14
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
,
groundsel (Baccharis ha/imifo/ia), southern wild raisin (Vibrunum nudum) and
tulip poplar saplings. The herbaceous layer includes aster, grape vine, sensitive
fern, soft rush, southern lady fern, cinnamon fern (Osmunda cinnamomea), wool
grass, giant cane, and netted chain fern. The less dominant tree layer includes
sweetgum and red maple.
Soils within this area are mapped as loam, frequently flooded and Lynchburg
sandy loam soils series. Lynchburg (Ly) soils are nearly level, somewhat poorly
drained and located on smooth ridges and shallow depressions. Lynchburg
soils are also listed on state and federal hydric soils listings.
Nine (9) soil auger borings were completed throughout the stream channel
corridor. Based on these observations, soils typically displayed a F3: Depleted
Matrix hydric soil indicator. A typical profile contained a dark brown (7.5 YR
3/2) loam matrix from 0 to 8 inches. From 8 to 20 inches soils displayed a
grayish brown (2.5Y 5/2) silty clay matrix with common distinct yellowish brown
(10 YR 5/8) mottles and common prominent yellowish red (5YR 5/8) mottles.
Soils from 20 to 40 inches displayed a grayish brown (2.5Y 5/2) sandy clay
matrix with common distinct yellowish brown (10YR 5/8) mottles and many
prominent strong brown (7.5 YR 5/8) mottles. Additionally, depth to water table
along this corridor was observed between 24 and 39 inches below ground
surface although much of this area was delineated as wetland.
V. STREAM RESTORATION PLAN
The goal of the stream restoration portion of the project is to restore 11,420
linear feet of existing stream channel to an approximation of a natural condition
while providing for channel stability, improved habitat, and appropriate
hydraulic and sediment transport function. Once constructed, the restoration
will increase the planform sinuosity of the channel; restore natural cross-
sectional dimensions; provide in-stream habitat in the form of woody debris,
pools, and bank vegetation; and restore a forested riparian buffer. Forested
riparian buffers will be established to have widths of at least 50 feet on each
side of the restored stream channel. The result will be 11,420 linear feet of
stream restoration.
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
15
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
A l
RESTORATION SUMMARY
Natural channel design techniques have been used to develop the restoration
designs described in this document. The reference reach design method was
determined to be appropriate for this project because the watershed is rural, the
causes of disturbance are known and have been abated, and there are no
infrastructure constraints. The original design parameters were developed from
reference stream data and applied to the subject stream. The parameters were
then analyzed and adjusted through an iterative process as necessary using
analytical tools and numerical simulations of fluvial processes. The designs
presented in this report provide for the restoration of natural Coastal Plain
sand-bed channel features and stream bed diversity to improve benthic habitat.
The proposed design will allow flows that exceed the design bankfull stage to
spread out over the floodplain and provide a portion of the hydrology for the
restored riverine wetland.
A large portion of the existing stream will be filled using material excavated
from the restoration channel. However, many segments will be left unfilled to
provide habitat diversity and flood storage. Native woody material will be
installed throughout the restored reach to reduce bank stress, provide grade
control, and increase habitat diversity.
Forested riparian buffers will be established along the project reach to have
widths of at least fifty feet on both sides of the channel. An appropriate riparian
plant community will be established to develop multiple strata and a diverse mix
of species. Replanting of native species will occur where the existing buffer is
impacted during construction of the downstream end of the project.
REFERENCE REACH ANALYSIS
Standard field methods were used to obtain geomorphic data from a reference
stream. Measurements included longitudinal profiles, cross sections, and bulk
sampling of channel sediments. Calculations of hydraulic geometry based on
field indicators of bankfull stage for the reference reaches correlated well with
regional curve for the rural North Carolina Coastal Plain (Doll et al., 2003).
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
16
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site

Reference reach data were collected from a bottomland hardwood swamp
system located approximately 4.0 miles from the project site (Photo 4). This
swamp run is an unnamed tributary to Eastmost Swamp. This reference reach
was selected due to its apparent physical stability and proximity to the
mitigation project. The reference reach exhibits the following characteristics:
• Undisturbed stable reach;
• A geomorphically active floodplain that is hydrologically connected to the
stream;
• Sinuosity of approximately 1.4;
• Healthy riparian forest buffer;
• Location within the same physiographic and meteorological region as the
project site;
• Channel bed and bank materials of fine sand and silt comparable to the
project site.
Table 4 describes the stream restoration design parameters derived from the
reference reach.
appropriate for very low gradient coastal streams.
be based on the secondary channels of this reach.
In addition, a sand-
dominated, multiple
thread anabranching
stream was located in an
adjacent county. This
stream system was
studied in order to
develop designs for side
channels to be
constructed on the
downstream reach of the
project site (Reach 4).
This type of channel is
Designs of side channels will
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
17
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
Dhntn d Rafaranra ranrh• I IT to Faetmnet Cwamn

STREAM HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS
Hydrologic analyses were performed for the Floogie Site using five different
methods to determine and validate the design bankfull discharge and adjust
channel geometry appropriately to provide regular flooding of the restored
wetland. The use of various methods allows for comparison of results and
eliminates reliance on a single model. Peak flows (summarized in Table 5 at the
end of this section) and corresponding channel cross-sectional areas were
determined using the following methods:
• US Army Corps of Engineers' Hydrologic Modeling System (HEC-HMS)
• SCS Curve Number Method (HEC-1)
• Flood frequency analysis for regional USGS gauge stations
• USGS regional regression equations for rural conditions in the Coastal
Plain
• NC Regional Curves for the Coastal Plain
INSERT TABLE 4
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
18
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
t
Appendix B contains documentation of the hydrologic analyses.
HEC-HMS
Evaluations were made at the downstream limits of the design reach and its
contributing tributaries. The US Army Corps of Engineers' Hydrologic Modeling
System ( HEC-HMS) was used to simulate the precipitation-runoff processes of
watershed systems using two modules: a basin model and meteorological
model. These models were then used to calculate the peak discharge for the
entire watershed based on design storms, a weighted curve number developed
for the watershed, and a calculated time of concentration. The model was
developed by subdividing the entire watershed into three subbasins and their
corresponding reaches. Each subbasin was modeled using its own
characteristics and flood frequency storms to predict precipitation entering the
system.
Each subbasin and its corresponding reach were modeled by pairing a
precipitation process and a runoff process. The Muskingum-Cunge 8-Point
method was used to calculate flow for the channel. The channel is described in
the model with eight station-elevation coordinates for each cross-section. The
representative cross sections used in the model were created from data
collected in the field. The lag method was used to model the tributary (units are
in minutes). The lag method routes channel flow with translation and no
attenuation. Lag was found by calculating the mean velocity using Manning's
velocity equation:
(1) V=1.49(Rzi3x 51 iz)/n
Where V = Mean velocity (ft/s), R = Hydraulic radius (ft), S = Slope in
subbasin (ft/ft), n = roughness coefficient.
Topographic data obtained from the North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) were used to detemine the time of travel through the
system. The calculated mean velocity was 3.3 ft/s and lag time was 33 minutes.
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
19
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site

Several methods were used to model each subbasin but the key method used in
HEC-HMS was the SCS Curve Number method, which estimates total excess
precipitation for a storm based on cumulative precipitation, soil cover, land use,
and imperviousness. Weighted curve numbers were calculated for each
subbasin. Each subbasin was divided into areas according to land use and with
each land use there is a corresponding curve number. The weighted curve
number is calculated by:
(2) Caw=(FCi *Ai)/Ar
Where Caw=Weighted curve number, Ci=Curve number of land use,
Ai=Area of land use in subbasin (ac), At=Total area of subbasin (ac).
Several runoff methods were paired with an infiltration method. The key runoff
method used was the SCS Unit Hydrograph developed by the Natural Resources
Conservation Service and based on empirical data from small agricultural
watersheds across the US. The only parameter needed for this method is the
SCS lag time in minutes. The lag time is found by calculating the time of
concentration and multiplying it by 0.6. Time of concentration is calculated by:
(3) T1=(L311y)0.3851 128
Where Tc = Time of concentration (min), L = Length in subbasin from highest
point to lowest point (ft), and H = Change in elevation in subbasin (ft).
A 2-year return interval was modeled for comparative purposes and resulted in
higher flows in some cases than the other methods used in this analysis.
SCS Curve Number Method (HEC-1)
The US Army Corps of Engineers developed HEC-1 as a flood hydrograph
package that simulates the precipitation-runoff processes of a watershed. HEC-
1 requires a set of input parameters which specify the particular components
the physical processes modeled. Both a 1-year storm and a 2-year storm were
evaluated with this model.
USGS Regression Equations
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
20
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
USGS regression equations estimate the magnitude and frequency of flood-peak
discharges (Pope, et. al., 2001). The regression equations were developed from
gauge data in different physiographic regions of North Carolina. For this
analysis, there was only concern for the 2-year return interval. The equation for
the rural Coastal Plain is:
(4) Q2=64.7*(DA)0.673
Where Q2=2-year peak discharge (ft3/s) and DA=drainage area (mi2).
USGS Stream Gauge Analysis
Flood frequency analysis was completed for the study region using historic
gauge data on all nearby USGS gauges with drainage areas less than 9,600 acres
(15 mil) which passed the Dalrymple homogeneity test (Dalrymple, 1960). This
is a subset of gauges used for USGS regression equations. Regional flood
frequency equations were developed for the 1-, 1.5-, and 2-year peak
discharges based on the gauge data. Discharges were then computed for the
design reach. These discharges were compared to those predicted by the
discharge regional curve and USGS regional regression 2-year discharge
equations.
Regional Curve Regression Equations
The North Carolina Coastal Plain regional curve for discharge (Doll et al, 2003)
was used to predict the bankfull discharge for the site. The discharge regional
curve predicted flows that are very similar to those predicted by the 1-year
USGS regression equation. The 1.5-year regional flood frequency equation
predicted considerably higher discharges. The regional curve equation for
discharge is:
(5) Qbkt= 16.56*(DA)0.72
Where Qbkf=bankfull discharge (ft3/s) and DA=drainage area (mi2).
The fact that the regional curves predict flows similar to the 1-year flood
frequency analysis indicates that the bankfull flows occur in the region with a
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
21
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
frequency of approximately one year. The developers of the Coastal Plain
regional curves report an average recurrence interval of 1.12 years for the
gauged streams included in their study (Doll et al., 2003).
Table S. Summarv of Hvdrolooic Analvsis
T

o
_`
E3 n

M a

= n ?
m a 1< o

? n n o
m a w°

z
a °

Z

s

c

*+
v
rrDD a CT V)
n o =3
n o rrDD -^
w n o - i o is 3 p_
c ca ro ran
LO w o
o
w„ w c w w
c w w w
D Q rD
a
?
c
l/1 S rD
r Q0
S -
S ri 2 2
M W w ? o
to (f
??
'G
1-year
(Q1) --- --- --- --- 64.0 --- --- 45.0
2-year 149.
(Q2) 135.1 111.11 101.7 178.1 147.0 --- 145.1 7
Bankfull --- --- --- --- --- 39.0 --- ---
All discharge values are in cfs
DESIGN BANKFULL DISCHARGE
Based on the hydrologic analysis described above, a design bankfull discharge
of 45.0 cubic feet per second was selected which will have a recurrence interval
of approximately 1 year. This discharge will cause frequent flooding of the
restored wetlands (a 1-year recurrence interval indicates nearly a 100% chance
of occurrence each year). This discharge was selected based on the following
rationale:
• The HEC-1 model for the 1-year storm produced a discharge of 64.0 cfs.
Because of the character of the project watershed, HEC-1 may over-
estimate discharge.
• The USGS gauge analysis for the 1-year discharge produced a value
somewhat lower than HEC-1 and very comparable to the Coastal Plain
regional curve bankfull discharge.
• The USGS gauge analysis produced a 2-year discharge very similar to the
USGS regional regression equations further validating the 1-year
discharge from the gauge analysis.
• The four HEC-HMS methods evaluated produced various 2-year
discharges, the average of which is 131.5 cfs. This average is
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
22
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
comparable (slightly lower) than results from all other methods for 2-year
discharge.
STREAM HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS
A hydraulic analysis was performed to confirm that the restoration design
results in a channel that will convey the design discharge and provide for
frequent flooding of the adjacent riverine wetlands. Channel characteristics
including cross-sectional dimension, slope, and roughness, were used to
analyze and adjust design parameters calculated by the reference reach
approach.
HEC-RAS was used to perform the hydraulic analysis. This model is a hydraulic
model developed by the US Army Corps of Engineers' Hydrologic Engineering
Center to perform one-dimensional steady and unsteady flow calculations. The
model uses common geometric data (cross-sections) and hydraulic computation
routines.
Design cross-sectional dimensions determined through the reference reach
approach were evaluated using the channel design functions within the HEC-
RAS Model (Version 3.1.3). The cross-sectional dimensions for reaches 1
through 3 were iteratively adjusted based on the model results to produce a
channel design that will flood the adjacent restored wetlands frequently enough.
Model results are presented in tabular format in Appendix C. The results are
organized by reach, discharge, and station number and include water surface
elevation, velocity, flow area, stream power, shear stress, and maximum channel
depth. Appendix C also includes graphical representations of typical profiles
and cross-sections of each reach.
EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION ANALYSIS
An erosion and sedimentation analysis was performed to confirm that the
restoration design creates a stable sand bed channel that will neither aggrade
nor degrade over time. While the use of relatively simple equations may work in
estimating entrainment for gravel bed streams, these equations are not as
effectively applied to sand bed channels in which the entire bed becomes mobile
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
23
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site

during geomorphically significant flows including the bankfull discharge.
Therefore, more sophisticated modeling techniques were used to analyze the
stream design for this project. The following methods and functions were
employed during the sediment transport analysis:
• Stable Channel Model (SAMwin) - Copeland Method
• HEC-6T
SAMwin
Design cross-section dimensions as determined from the reference reach
approach were evaluated using the stable channel design functions within the
SAMwin Model (Version 1.0) and ajustments were made as necessary. These
functions are based upon the methods used in the SAM Hydraulic Design
Package for Channels developed by the USACE Waterways Experiment Station.
The Copeland Method was developed specifically for sand bed channels (median
grain size restriction of 0.0625 mm to 2 mm), and was therefore selected for
application at the Floogie site. The method sizes stable dimensions as a
function of slope, discharge, roughness, side slope, bed material gradation, and
the inflowing sediment discharge. Results are presented as a range of widths
and slopes, and their unique solution for depth, making it easy to adjust
channel dimensions to achieve stable channel configurations.
HEC-6T (Sedimentation in Stream Networks)
HEC-6T Version 5.13 is a one-dimensional sedimentation model designed to
simulate and predict changes in river profiles resulting from scour or deposition
over moderate time periods. The model simulates the capability of a stream to
transport its sediment load, given the yield from other sources. The method
involves the analysis of a series of steady flows of variable discharges and
durations along with energy slope, velocity, depth, and other variables at each
cross-section. For this project, WK Dickson staff assessed the watershed and
channels upstream of the project site and used the revised universal soil loss
equation (RUSLE) to produce a sediment budget for the project. This sediment
budget was used to create a sediment rating curve that was input into the
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
24
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
model. Potential sediment entrainment, transport, and deposition rates were
then computed by the model for each section. The rates provide a volumetric
accounting of sediment within each reach. Results are presented in tabular
format with a range of values in regards to the reach, discharge, and station
number. Table 6 shows the results for a range of flows and durations for each
reach. Scour and deposition of -0.42 to 0.17 feet are predicted. For reaches
1,2, and 4 the values are acceptable and within the expected error assumed by
the model. Grade control structures were added to prevent predicted
degradation in reach 3. See Appendix D for additional model output.
Table 6. HEC-6T Results
Reach Storm Discharge Duration Channel Bed
Event (cfs) (days) Adjustmen t (ft)?
Reach l 1-Year 29 10 -0.13 to 0.17
2-Year 117 1 -0.27 to 0.01
5-Year 225 1 -0.28 to 0.01
Reach 2 1-Year 31 10 -0.13 to 0.09
2-Year 122 1 -0.25 to 0.02
5-Year 234 1 -0.26 to 0.01
Reach 3 1-Year 34 10 -0.23 to 0.07
2-Year 128 1 -0.30 to 0.05
5-Year 246 1 -0.42 to 0.02
Reach 4 1-Year 45 10 -0.14 to 0.04
2-Year 151 1 -0.13 to 0.01
5-Year 290 1 -0.14 to 0.01
TYPICAL DESIGN SECTIONS
The cross-section dimensions were originally developed for the four design
reaches based on the design parameters in Table 5. The cross sections have
been adjusted based on hydraulic and erosion/sedimentation analysis and were
designed to facilitate constructability. However, the cross-sectional areas were
conserved for each reach and width to depth ratios remain similar. Typical
cross sections for shallows and pools for the single thread design (Reaches 1, 2,
and 3) and the multi-thread design (Reach 4) are shown on the design plans in
Appendix E.
LONGITUDINAL PROFILES
The design profiles are shown in Appendix E. These profiles extend throughout
the entire project for the proposed channel alignment. The profiles were
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
25
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
designed using the reference reach bed features. The bed slopes and bankfull
energy gradients were set for each design reach based on the existing valley
slope and the sinuosity of the design reach.
TYPICAL DETAILS
Detail drawings have been developed for this design and are included in
Appendix E. The details include in-stream structures and habitat features,
stream bank revetments, plantings, bat houses, and other design features to be
used to optimize project success.
CHANNEL ALIGNMENT AND MEANDER PATTERN
The plan for the design channel alignment is provided in Appendix E. The
design meander pattern was derived from the plan form geometry of the
reference reach (Table 5).
ANABRANCHING CHANNEL
The anabranching (multiple-thread) channel design was completed for Reach 4.
This type of stream is common to low-lying areas of the North Carolina Coastal
Plain and is the likely natural condition of much of the Floogie Mitigation Site.
Reach 4 was designed as an anabranching channel because of its very low valley
gradient (0.0005) and its essentially flat channel gradient. Anabranching rivers
are characterized by "multiple channels separated by stable islands which are
large relative to the size of the channels and which divide the flow at discharges
up to and including bankfull" (Knighton, 1998). The designed side channel beds
are hydraulically connected at both ends to the main channel and are typically
located at an elevation above the main channel bed, but below the floodplain
surface. The main channel of Reach 4 was designed based on the same
reference stream (UT to Eastmost Swamp) as Reaches 1, 2, and 3. The side
channels were designed in a similar fashion based on the multiple-thread
reference reach.
RIPARIAN BUFFER RESTORATION
A riparian buffer will be planted for at least 50 feet on both sides of the restored
stream channel. Species planted along the stream corridor will be the same as
those planted in the adjacent wetland restoration areas. Proposed species are
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
26
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
listed in the planting plan under Section V. Species selection was based on
reference wetland vegetation and literature. Plant materials will be primarily
container-grown stock with supplemental bare root stock as needed.
VI. WETLAND RESTORATION PLAN
The goal of the wetland restoration is to restore a Coastal Plain small stream
swamp as described by Schafale and Weakley (1990). Twenty-five acres of
riverine wetland restoration are proposed. Much of the proposed 50-foot
stream buffer will also result in wetland restoration but is not included in the
restoration acreage. Existing wetlands are located on both sides of Flat Swamp
Creek outside of the PC cropland. The wetlands are restricted in size by stream
channelization and ditching.
REFERENCE WETLAND STUDIES
In order to create baseline criteria for the wetland restoration design and
planting plan, reference wetlands were identified and examined. Candidate
sites were first selected from a review of the Bertie County Soil Survey (March
2001) mapping, National Wetland Inventory (NWI) mapping, and USGS
topographic mapping. Specifically, areas with soils similar to those of the
Floogie site, exhibiting stream swamp landscape positions, and within the Flat
Swamp Creek Watershed were studied. Based on field examinations of multiple
sites, two reference wetland locations were selected.
Reference Wetland 1
Reference Wetland 1 (Photo 5) is a riverine wetland system located on Flat
Swamp Creek downstream of the Floogie Site. This wetland complex is a small
low-lying stream swamp that consists of primarily bottomland hardwoods and a
multiple-thread stream channel. The Reference Wetland 1 hydrology consists of
intermittently flooded and seasonally flooded hydrologic regimes. Shallow
pockets of water were observed in various locations throughout the hardwood
forest. In areas with little or no standing water, auger borings confirmed a
shallow groundwater table between 8 and 16 inches below the ground surface
during field investigations in May 2006.
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
27
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site

The vegetative community is comprised of primarily mature and mid-
sucessional hardwoods. The canopy layer consists of swamp chestnut oak, red
maple, willow oak (Quercus phe/%s), water birch (Betula occidenta/is), sweet
gum, bald cypress (Taxodium
distichum), black gum (Nyssa
sylvatica), and green ash
(Franxinus pennsylvancia). The
sub-canopy contains bald
cypress saplings, red maple
saplings, and green ash
saplings. The shrub and
herbaceous layer contains
button bush (Cephalanthus
occidentalis), soft rush,
Photo 5. Reference wetland 1 smartweed, arrow arum
(Peltandra virginica), wool grass, lizard's tail (Saururus cernuus), royal fern,
greenbrier, and giant cane.
Additionally, soils auger borings were taken at each data point to verify the
presence of hydric soils. Several auger boring displayed a very dark grayish
brown (2.5Y 3/2) sandy loam matrix from 0 to 4 inches. Soils from 4 to 8
inches displayed an olive gray (5Y 5/2) sandy clay loam matrix with large iron
and manganese masses (5Y 2.5/2). Soils from 8 to 24 inches displayed a
grayish brown (1 OYR 5/2) sandy clay matrix with many distinct brownish yellow
0 0YR 6/8) mottles. These soils are mapped as Wehadkee loam, frequently
flooded, and are similar to soils found on the wetland restoration area in both
color and texture.
Reference Wetland 2
Reference Wetland 2 (Photo 6)
is a riverine wetland located
southwest of the Floogie Site
on Cucklermaker Creek, a
tributary of Flat Swamp Creek.
ation Site
This wetland represents a mature bottomland hardwood forest adjacent to a
stream channel. Data point locations were also established throughout this
wetland to examine the vegetative composition, soils, and hydrology. Based on
field observations, it is likely that this wetland system experiences seasonal
flooding during periodic high flows due to the presence of water stained leaves
and water marks on trees one to two feet above ground. Additionally, soil auger
borings confirmed a water table between 8 and 24 inches across the site during
field investigations in May 2006.
The vegetation consists of a diverse bottomland hardwood forest that is
primarily bald cypress dominant. The canopy includes bald cypress, swamp
chestnut oak, green ash, red maple, river birch, water tupelo, and sweetgum.
The herbaceous layer consists mostly of lizard's tail, sedges, and netted chain
fern.
Additionally, soil auger borings confirmed the presence of hydric soils.
Typically, soils from 0 to 8 inches displayed a gray (2.5Y 5/1) clay matrix with
many distinct strong brown (7.5YR 5/6) mottles and common distinct strong
brown (7.5YR 5/8) mottles. From 8 to 16 inches soils displayed a light brownish
gray (2.5Y 6/2) sandy clay matrix with common distinct reddish yellow (7.5YR
6/8) mottles. Below 16 inches, soils contained a grayish brown (10YR 5/2)
sandy clay matrix with common distinct reddish yellow (7.5YR 6/8) mottles and
many distinct yellowish red (5YR 5/8) mottles. These soils are mapped as
Wehadkee loam, frequently flooded, and are similar to soils found on the
wetland restoration area in both color and texture.
RESTORATION SUMMARY
Wetland restoration activities will include plugging existing ditches, opening
ditches outside the restoration area to promote infiltration, restoring
microtopography, planting wetland species, and relocating an existing farm
road outside of the easement. This roadbed interrupts surface flow to and
from the channel. Grading will include microtopograhy on the floodplain to
create hydrologic retention and encourage species diversification. Combined
with the proposed stream restoration these actions will result in a sufficiently
high water table and flood frequency to support hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology, resulting in restored riverine wetlands.
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
29
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
The primary restoration activities will include constructing a stream channel that
floods the adjacent wetlands frequently (as described above) and construction of
ditch plugs throughout the PC area and clearcut/pine plantation area. A typical
ditch plug will be 15 feet wide and extend above the ditch bank elevation
approximately six inches. Plugs are to be constructed of compacted fill (clay or
sandy clay) in 12 inch lifts with the upper 18 inches minimally compacted to
facilitate plant growth. Plugs are spaced such that successive plugs are no more
than 12 inches in elevation below the next plug up gradient. Where plugs may
impact adjacent ditches (outside of the proposed conservation easement) the
top of plug elevation will be equal to the existing ditch invert outside of the
easement to prevent hydrologic trespass. Several ditches extend in a north-
south direction outside of the proposed restoration area adjacent to existing
agricultural land. A series of eight openings will be constructed in these ditches
to allow diffuse surface flow from the ditch through the restoration area and
toward the stream channel. Two small ditches near the proposed stream will be
filled entirely to restore wetland hydrology.
The farm road adjacent to the existing stream will be relocated outside of the
proposed easement. Existing culverts will carry ditch flow and surface flow
under the farm path and into the wetland restoration area. The existing
roadbed will be removed, graded to match surrounding contours, disced, and
planted.
WETLAND HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS
In general, hydrology of a small stream swamp wetland system is derived from
seasonal or temporary overbank flooding of the adjacent stream channel and
seasonal high water table elevation controlled by the stream water surface
elevation. Many resources describe the duration and frequency of flooding as
highly inconsistent. As described by Schafale and Weakley (1990), small stream
swamp systems have highly variable flow regimes with floods of short duration
and periods of very low flow; however, smaller watersheds lead to a more
variable flooding regime. Additionally the influence of channel overbank flow
may vary seasonally to yearly in magnitude, duration, and frequency (WRP
Technical Note HY-EV-2.1, 1993). It may be anticipated that the majority of
flooding of riverine wetlands occurs during the winter months and the early
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
30
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
portions of the growing season. Surface water of riverine wetlands may be
present for extended periods during the growing season and usually greater
than 14 consecutive days, but is typically absent by the end of the growing
season in most typical years (EPA, 2006). Field indicators of surface inundation
include water-stained leaves, drifts lines and water marks on trees (EPA, 2006).
In the absence of surface water, the water table is often near the ground
elevation.
Due to the direct relationship between stream flow and riverine wetland
hydrology the proposed stream was designed to provide periodic overbank flow
within the bounds of the proposed wetland. In addition, WK Dickson studied
seven USGS monitored stream stations closest to the site to provide reference
hydrology.
Wetland Hydrology at USGS Stream Gauge Site
Seven USGS gauged streams in the project physiographic region were reviewed
to determine suitability as a reference site. In order to be selected, a station
was required to have adjacent bottomland hardwood habitat with a small
drainage area similar to that of the project site. If a site was found, stream
gauge data, precipitation data, and stream bank measurements would be used
to determine duration and frequency of overbank flooding of the reference
wetland.
Only one USGS stream gauge location met the criteria needed to perform this
analysis; however this site was found to be an inactive crest stage gauge. The
gauge datum could not be identified in the field because the equipment had
been completely removed. Therefore, a study of water surface elevations and
flood durations was not possible. This stream gauge (02081060) was located
on a tributary of Smithwick Creek near US Highway 17, south of Williamston,
Martin County, North Carolina. This reference site contains bottomland
hardwood stream swamp habitat. According to USGS gauge data, the drainage
area of the Smithwick Creek tributary is approximately 0.92 square miles.
At the time of the field investigation Ouly, 2006), the floodplain was not
inundated; surface water was observed only within the stream channel.
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
31
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
However, evidence of seasonal flooding was noted due to the presence of water
stained leaves and water marks on trees. Additionally, soil auger borings
confirmed a water table as shallow as 8 inches below ground surface.
The vegetative community consisted of mature and mid-successional
hardwoods. The canopy layer contained red maple, sweetgum, water tupelo
(Nyssa aquatica), and green ash. The shrub and herbaceous layer contained
smartweed, lizard's tail, greenbrier, and giant cane. Additionally, soil auger
borings confirmed the presence of hydric soils. Typically, soils in the upper 16
inches displayed a very dark gray clayey loam matrix. Soils below 16 inches
displayed a gray clayey sand matrix with redoximorphic features.
Proposed Wetland Hydrology
The Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation site was once a Coastal Plain small
stream swamp subject to prolonged inundation as indicated by soils mapping,
historical aerial photography, and personal communication with landowners.
The upstream portion of Reach 1 was historically cleared and drained. NRCS
aerial photography from 1938 and 1954 indicates the project site was likely a
Coastal Plain small stream swamp approximately 1,000 feet wide.
The restoration plan for the Floogie wetlands consists of reconstructing the
stream channel with a higher bed elevation and plugging existing drainage
ditches. The ditch plugs will lengthen wetland hydroperiods by halting artificial
subsurface drainage and preventing rapid surface drainage. The stream design
parameters will reconnect the stream to the floodplain and provide seasonal
overbank flows. These periodic flows will provide surface and subsurface
hydrology support to the newly created Coastal Plain small stream swamp
system. This periodic flooding is vital to sustain plants and wildlife characteristic
of riverine wetlands (Ainslie, 2002).
The drainage area for the upstream portion of the project is approximately 1.83
square miles. The wetland restoration area should experience seasonal flooding
similar to the duration and frequency of the reference wetland/stream gauge
site. The restored wetlands will have a variable flooding regime due to the small
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
32
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
size of the drainage area. Modeling of the stream design indicates that a 2.29
inch six-hour rainfall event will produce an out-of-bank flow. Analysis of daily
rainfall totals indicate that a 2.29 inch or greater daily rainfall total occurs on
average two times per year. Figure 7 presents a chart of the historic rainfall
data and corresponding number of out of bank events expected with current
design parameters. The anticipated flood events range from zero to seven
events per year. This periodic flooding is vital to sustain plants and wildlife
characteristic of riverine wetlands (Ainslie, 2002). In the absence of inundation,
groundwater levels should remain near the surface due to reduced artificial
drainage, increased infiltration, and elevated stream bed elevation.
The use of historic rainfall and stream modeling to estimate flood events
demonstrates that the wetland restoration area will be subject to inundation and
function as a riverine wetland system. However, limitations with the rainfall
data set did not allow for statistically rigorous analysis of flooding depth or
return interval. Supplemental to the above discussion a conventional water
budget was performed.
Historic Flood Events
8? - - -
i
L
L
a j -
d
W
V
°0 3
LL
?k
l
2 1 -
1 I - -
0
0?1 0?$ 0?? 900 A?''S 0$'L 0$3 Aar 04i? 0?6 ?i$'1 0?9 0$? X00 0p''y 0°''L 0?3 ?i°'b 0?5 0°?6 0?? 0°'0 0?A
1 1 1 '> 'y 1 1 'r 1 1 1 1 '> 1 1 1 1 'y 'y ti 1 '?. 1
Year

I
l
I
000 001 00'L 003 0?°`
ti ti ti ti
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
33
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
Figure 7. Historic rainfall events sufficient to produce overbank flow in restored stream
WETLAND WATER BUDGET
As discussed above, the wetland restoration hydrology will be largely driven by
stream bed elevation and out of bank flows. This water budget is a model for
groundwater availability and potential drawdown for the proposed wetland. A
watershed approach was applied and methods outlined in Panning hydrology
for constructed wet/ands (Pierce, 1993) were followed.
The water budget presented in this report was determined from the following
equation:
(6) 5=P+R-ET-i.
Where S is storage, P is precipitation, R is runoff, ET is evapotranspiration, and I
is infiltration (Pierce, 1993).
Precipitation
Daily precipitation data from the Peanut Belt Research Station (Lewiston) weather
station has been compiled for a 26-year period of record from January 1, 1980
through December 31, 2005 (North Carolina State Climatologist). Average
monthly precipitation values were then calculated from these data and applied
to the water budget calculations.
Evapotranspiration
Three years of evapotranspiration data from the Peanut Belt Research Station.
(Lewiston) weather station were also compiled for this analysis (North Carolina
State Climatologist).
Runoff Calculations
Runoff onto the wetland restoration area was determined by using the TR-55
Curve Number Method as described by Pierce 1993. This was done by first
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
34
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
determining the amount of rainfall required over a 24-hour period to produce
runoff (Q) for the drainage area. Two individual drainage areas (east side of
stream and west side of stream) were delineated using NCDOT topographic data
for Bertie County, North Carolina.
The values of Q for the drainage areas were then subtracted from daily
precipitation values over the period of record. Those days that returned positive
values (i.e. runoff occurred) were then summed to return the total amount of
runoff (R) produced within the watershed area. The equation for calculating
runoff is as follows:
(7) Q _ (Pia -0.2S)2
(Pz4 + 0.8S)
(8) S=(1CN -10
2
-
10
P24 -0.2 ((1000)
(9) Q =
[P24+0.8 ((1000)-10
Where P24 is the maximum rainfall occurring in a 24-hour period (over the period
of record), CN is the composite curve number, and S is the storage capacity of
the soil. A composite curve was calculated by subdividing the watershed with
respect to soil hydrologic group and land use then determining the appropriate
curve number for each subdivision using tables published by the USDA (1986).
The area and curve number was multiplied, summed and divided by the total
watershed area to calculate the composite curve number (see equation 2).
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
35
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
By this method, the composite curve number for proposed east wetland
restoration site was 76.8. The composite curve number for proposed west
wetland restoration site was 81.7.
A 24-hour rainfall record was determined using precipitation data. The
maximum climatological-day precipitation (non-tropical event) over the 30-year
period of record occurred on November 6, 1977, with 4.75 inches of rainfall.
Therefore P24 = 4.75 in.
The minimum rainfall needed to produce runoff (Q) was calculated using the
above equation. As calculated: Q-East = 2.4, Q-West = 2.8.
Using these values, the runoff produced by each rain event was calculated by
subtracting the minimum 24-hour rainfall amount needed to produce runoff,
(Q), from the amount of precipitation (P) on each day. Those events that return
positive values (i.e. runoff occurred) are then summed to return the amount of
runoff, (R), produced by each acre in the watershed. These values are then
averaged by month for the entire period to give the average monthly runoff for
the watershed. Once runoff values were calculated for the drainage area, it was
necessary to adjust these values to reflect the amount of water seen on the site
as follows:
(10) R = (Watershed Runoff) * (Watershed Area) / (Site Area)
Infiltration
The proposed wetland creation/enhancement area contains primarily Rains and
Wehadkee soils. Field investigations revealed that the existing soils have clay
and sandy clay subsurface. Infiltration through the column will be minimal due
to the clay texture and inherently difficult to estimate. Additionally, the
restored stream channel will maintain the water table elevation well above the
current level. For the purposes of this hydrologic evaluation infiltration was
assumed to be zero.
Hydrographs
The calculated data have been compiled and hydrographs have been plotted
illustrating the flow of water in and out of the proposed wetland restoration
areas (Figure 8 and Figure 9). These values are represented in acre-inches.
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
36
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
Results of this analysis indicate that there is a period of drawdown during the
months of April through July; however, the restored stream channel will
maintain an elevated water table through the floodplain area year-round. These
results also indicate that runoff will provide minimal inputs to the restoration
areas. However, direct precipitation, retention of water onsite, and stream bed
elevation will provide adequate wetland hydrology to the restored wetland area.
This water budget analysis was conducted to evaluate the existing hydrology of
the proposed wetland restoration area and to determine if the proposed wetland
design is appropriate for this site. The modeling presented in this report
indicates that there is sufficient hydrology during the growing season (April 9 to
October 23, NRCS 2001) to support wetland vegetation.
Floogie East Wetland Restoration Hydrograph
4- F
z
0
DEva r tation 10
ranspiration
- 4
-6 -
8
Month
Figure 8. East Wetland Restoration Hydrograph
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
37
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
Floogie West Wetland Restoration Hydrograph
s

4

2

0-
U ¦ Runoff
L J 26 act
? PQC? ?s? Jco ,?A
g log,
?
? 0
?
? OPrecipitation
z QO? P° Q?O o° oa0
cP ? Evapotranspiration
¦Total

6
-
8-
-
Month
Figure 9. West Wetland Restoration Hydrograph
PLANTING PLAN
Two planting areas are delineated: an area of frequent flooding and standing
water; and adjacent upgradient wetland areas that may experience less frequent
flooding and greater drawdown during dry periods. Species to be planted in
each area are listed in Table 6, and are intended to restore communities
comparable to the Coastal Plain small stream swamp as described by Schafale
and Weakley (1990). Species selection was based on reference wetland
vegetation and literature. Plant materials will be primarily container grown with
some bare root seedlings. This species mix results in a diverse habitat that
includes mast producing species and fast growing early successional species.
The existing clearcut/pine plantation community and dry shoulder community
will be treated with a herbicide application to control invasive species such as
Japanese honeysuckle and Chinese privet. Mechanical or manual clearing may
also be employed to facilitate re-planting and establishment of a riverine
wetland plant assemblage.
Table 7. Coastal Plain small stream swamp restoration planting plan
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
38
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
Species Common Name
Zone 7 (frequent inundation)
Quercus phe/%s Willow oak
Taxodium distichum Bald cypress
N ssa a uatica Water tupelo
Fraxinus enns lvanica Green ash
Quercus laurifolia Laurel oak
N ssa biflora Swamp black um
Quercus l rata Overcu oak
Zone 2 (infrequent
inundation)
Liriodendron tulipitera Tulip-poplar
Betula ni ra River birch
Quercus michauxii Swam chestnut oak
Fraxinus pens lvanica Green ash
Quercus hellos Willow oak
Quercus michauxii Swam chestnut oak
N ssa biflora Swam black um
SOILS
As previously mentioned, a total of 18 soil borings (Figure 4 and Appendix A)
were installed across the proposed restoration area and adjacent wetlands to
verify soils mapping, quantify any fill material, and generally evaluate growing
conditions. The soil borings indicate hydric soil throughout the entire
proposed wetland restoration area. Subsurface texture was typically sandy clay
or clay. At the time of restoration the soil across the site will be disked or
otherwise surficially disturbed to allow for micro-topography formation and
extended retention of surface water.
VII. SUCCESS CRITERIA
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
39
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site

The success criteria components will adhere to EEP and USACE guidelines.
Specific success criteria are presented below.
STREAM RESTORATION SUCCESS CRITERIA
Bankfull Events
Two bankfull flow events must be documented within the 5-year monitoring
period. The two bankfull events must occur in separate years. Otherwise, the
stream monitoring will continue until two bankfull events have been
documented in separate years.
Cross Sections
There should be little change in as-built cross sections. If changes do take
place, they should be evaluated to determine if they represent a movement
toward a more unstable condition (for example down cutting or erosion) or are
minor changes that represent an increase in stability (for example settling,
vegetative changes, deposition along the banks, or decrease in width/depth
ratio). Cross sections shall be classified using the Rosgen stream classification
method and all monitored cross sections should fall within the quantitative
parameters defined for channels of the design stream type. It should be noted
that in sand bed channels, more variability in cross-sectional dimensions over
time is expected than in channels with coarser boundary conditions.
Longitudinal Profiles
The longitudinal profiles should show that the bedform features remain
generally stable, e.g. they are not aggrading or degrading. The pools should
remain deep and the riffles should remain shallower than the pools. Bedforms
observed should be consistent with those observed for channels of the design
stream type. However, since the stream is a sand-bed channel, all bedforms are
expected to be dynamic.
Stream Buffer Vegetation Success Criteria
Specific and measurable success criteria for plant density within the riparian
buffer on the site will be based on the recommendations found in the WRP
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
40
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site

Technical Note and correspondence from review agencies on mitigation sites
approved under the Neu-Con Mitigation Banking Instrument.
The interim measure of vegetative success for the site will be the survival of at
least 320 3-year old planted trees per acre at the end of year three of the
monitoring period. The final vegetative success criteria will be the survival of
260 5-year old planted trees per acre at the end of year five of the monitoring
period.
Digital Image Stations
Digital images will be used to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or
degradation, bank erosion, success of riparian vegetation and effectiveness of
erosion control measures. Longitudinal images should not indicate excessive
increase in channel depth. Lateral images should not indicate excessive erosion
or continuing degradation of the banks over time. A series of images over time
should indicate successional maturation of riparian vegetation.
WETLAND RESTORATION SUCCESS CRITERIA
Hydrology
Successful establishment of wetland hydrology will be demonstrated by a
wetland hydroperiod in excess of seven percent of one growing season (16
days) at each groundwater gauge location. Gauge data will be compared to
reference wetland well data in growing seasons with less than normal rainfall.
In periods of low rainfall, if a restoration gauge hydroperiod exceeds the
reference gauge hydroperiod and both exceed five percent of the growing
season, then the gauge will be deemed successful.
If a gauge location fails to meet these success criteria in the five year monitoring
period then monitoring may be extended, remedial actions may be undertaken,
or groundwater modeling may be used to demonstrate the limits of wetland
restoration.
Vegetation
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
41
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site

Successful establishment of wetland vegetation will be the survival of 320
planted trees following year three monitoring and 260 planted trees following
year five monitoring.
Digital Image Stations
Digital images will be used to subjectively evaluate the restoration site over
time. A series of images over the five-year monitoring period should
demonstrate maturation of planted vegetation and colonization by hydrophytic
species.
VIII. MONITORING
Monitoring will follow current EEP guidelines and will be presented in annual
reports. The purpose of the monitoring program is to evaluate the performance
of the project relative to success criteria. An as-built report (Mitigation Plan)
documenting the entire project will be developed following completion of
planting. The report will include elevations, photographs, sampling plot
locations, and a description of initial species composition by community type,
and gauge locations. The report will also include a list of the species planted
and the associated densities.
STREAM RESTORATION MONITORING
The stream monitoring program will be implemented to document system
development and progress toward achieving the success criteria. The
monitoring program will be undertaken for 5 years or until the final success
criteria are achieved, whichever is longer.
Hydrology
The occurrence of bankfull events within the monitoring period will be
documented by the use of a crest gauge and photographs. The crest gauge will
record the highest watermark between site visits, and the gauge will be checked
each time there is a site visit to determine if a bankfull event has occurred.
Digital images will be used to document the occurrence of debris lines and
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
42
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site

sediment deposition on the floodplain during monitoring site visits. All crest
gauges will be checked monthly.
Cross Sections
Two permanent cross sections will be installed per 1,000 linear feet of stream
restoration work, with one located at a ripple cross section and one located at a
pool cross section. Each cross section will be marked on both banks with
permanent pins to establish the exact transect used. A common benchmark will
be used for cross sections and consistently used to facilitate easy comparison of
year-to-year data. The annual cross-section survey will include points
measured at all breaks in slope, including top of bank, bankfull, inner berm,
edge of water, and thalweg, if the features are present. Ripple cross sections will
be classified using the Rosgen stream classification system.
Bed Material Analyses
The project stream reach is composed of bedforms in the sand size sediment
fraction. Since the median grain size Q50) is similar to the analog reaches
studied, it is unexpected that a substantial change will occur. Bulk samples will
be collected and analyzed to determine any changes in substrate. Composite
samples will be taken across the channel bottom at no less than 6 cross
sections.
Longitudinal Profiles
A longitudinal profile will be measured in years one, three, and five of the
monitoring period. The profile will be measured along a representative length of
restored channel. Measurements will include thalweg, water surface, bankfull,
and top of low bank. Each of these measurements will be taken at the head of
each feature, for example, shallow, pool, and the max pool depth. The survey
will be tied to a permanent benchmark.
Vegetation Monitoring
In order to determine if the success criteria are achieved, vegetation-monitoring
stations will be installed on approximately 2 percent of the restoration site. The
size of individual monitoring plots will be 100 mz. Vegetation monitoring will
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
43
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
. #b I
occur in spring after leaf-out has occurred. Individual plot data for woody
species will be provided in annual reports. Permanent plots for the sampling of
planted species will be systematically distributed across the restoration area
with the specific plot location and orientation assigned randomly. Plant density
of planted species will equal the number of live stems in the plot divided by the
plot size in acres. Individual planted trees will be marked with a 4-foot PVC
stake and aluminum tag such that they can be identified in succeeding
monitoring years. Mortality will be determined from the difference between the
previous year's living planted seedlings and the current year's living planted
seedlings.
At the end of the first growing season, species composition, density, and
survival will be evaluated. For each subsequent year, until the final success
criteria are achieved, the restored site will be evaluated between July and
November.
Digital Image Stations
Digital images will be used to visually document restoration success. Reference
stations will be imaged before construction and continued for at least five years
following construction. Reference images will be taken once a year. After
construction has taken place, reference stations will be marked with wooden
stakes.
Lateral reference images. Reference image transects will be taken at each
permanent cross section. Images will be taken of both banks at each cross
section. The survey tape
will be centered in the images of the banks. The water line will be located in the
lower edge of the frame and as much of the bank as possible included in each
image. Survey personnel shall make an effort to consistently maintain the same
area in each image over time.
Structure images
Images will be taken at each grade control structure along the restored stream.
Survey personnel shall make every effort to consistently maintain the same area
in each image over time.
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
44
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
4
Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Fish Sampling
No benthic macro-invertebrate or fish sampling are required on the restored
site at this time. Should sampling eventually be required by the review agencies,
appropriate sampling methodologies and success criteria will be implemented
based on those accepted and approved by the review agencies.
WETLAND RESTORATION MONITORING SUMMARY
The wetland monitoring program will be implemented to document system
development and progress toward achieving the success criteria. The
monitoring program will be undertaken for 5 years or until the final success
criteria are achieved, whichever is longer.
Hydrology Monitoring
Hydrology monitoring will consist of automatic recording groundwater gauges,
manual groundwater measurements, on-site rain gauge, and reference wetland
automatic recording groundwater gauge. The groundwater gauges will be
installed to provide uniform coverage over the restoration site. Manual
measurements will be correlated to adjacent automatic gauges with regression
equations to determine daily water table elevations. All groundwater gauges
and rain gauges will be visited monthly to download data, record water table
elevations, and perform routine maintenance.
Following each growing season, all gauge data will be compiled into
hydroperiod charts and included in the annual monitoring report. The monthly
rainfall data will be compared with the 30-year average to determine abnormally
high or low rainfall, and presented in the annual monitoring report.
Vegetative Monitoring
In order to determine if the success criteria are achieved, vegetation-monitoring
stations will be installed on approximately 2 percent of the restoration site. The
size of individual monitoring plots will be 100m2. Vegetation monitoring will
occur in spring after leaf-out has occurred. Individual plot data for woody
species will be provided in annual reports. Permanent plots for the sampling of
planted species will be systematically distributed across the restoration area
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
45
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
I 10 Y
with the specific plot location and orientation assigned randomly. Plant density
of planted species will equal the number of live stems in the plot divided by the
plot size in acres. Individual planted trees will be marked with a 4-foot PVC
stake and aluminum tag such that they can be identified in succeeding
monitoring years. Mortality will be determined from the difference between the
previous year's living planted seedlings and the current year's living planted
seedlings.
At the end of the first growing season, species composition, density, and
survival will be evaluated. For each subsequent year, until the final success
criteria are achieved, the restored site will be evaluated between July and
November.
Digital Image Stations
Digital images will be used to visually document restoration success. Reference
stations will be imaged before construction and continued for at least five years
following construction. Reference images will be taken once a year. After
construction has taken place, reference stations will be marked with wooden
stakes.
REMEDIAL ACTIONS
In the event that the site or a specific component of the site fails to achieve the
defined success criteria, EBX will develop necessary adaptive management plans
and/or implement appropriate remedial actions for the site in coordination with
the review agencies. Remedial action required by the review agencies will be
designed to achieve the success criteria specified previously, and shall include a
work schedule and monitoring criteria that will take into account physical and
climactic conditions.
IX. CONCLUSIONS
As originally conceived, the Floogie Stream and Wetland Mititgation Project was
intended to provide 11,300 stream mitigation units (SMU) and 25 wetland
mitigation units (WMU). The stream mitigation design presented herein
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
46
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site

provides a total of 11,420 linear feet of stream restoration (11,420 smu). The
wetland mitigation design presented herein provides 25 acres of restoration (25
wmu). Additional wetland mitigation units may be available through
preservation, additional restoration, and enhancement. EBX has purchased a
conservation easement on the restoration site. The easement includes a
minimum 50-foot buffer on the stream restoration site outside of the total belt
width. The easement limits will be clearly marked with marker posts, signage,
or other appropriate means. No fencing is anticipated as no livestock
operations are located on the property. Crossings shown on the plans will be
retained as assets within the easement.
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
47
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site

X. REFERENCES
Ainslie, W.B. 2002. Southern Forest Resource Assessment Final Technical Report.
Chapter 20: Forested Wetlands; United States Department of Agriculture (USDA),
Forest Service's Southern Research Station and Southern Region.
Dalrymple, T. 1960. "Flood frequency analysis, Manual of Hydrology: Part 3.
Flood-Flow
Techniques." US Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1543-A.
Doll, Barbara A., A.D. Dobbins, J. Spooner, D.R. Clinton, D.A. Bidelspach. 2003.
Hydraulic Geometry Relationships for the Rural North Carolina Coastal Plain, NC
Stream Restoration Institute Report to NC Division of Water Quality for 319
Grant Project.
Dunne, Thomas and L.B. Leopold. 1978. Water in Environmental Planning. New
York: W.H. Freeman.
Horton, J. Wright jr. and Victor A. Zullo. 1991. The Geology of the Carolinas.
Carolina Geological Society Fiftieth Anniversary Volume. The University of
Tennessee Press. Knoxville, TN.
National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils (NTCHS).
http://www.nres.usda.gov/ Technical Note 13. Altered Hydric Soils.
Deliberations of National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils.
NCDENR. 2005. "Water Quality Stream Classifications for Streams in North
Carolina." Water Quality Section. http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wghome/html .
NCDOT - Hydraulics Unit. January 2005. Reference Reach Database.
http://www.doh.dot.state.nc.us/preconstruct/"highway/hydro/
North Carolina Geological Survey. 1985. Geologic Map of North Carolina.
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development. Raleigh, NC.
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
48
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
.1 • t
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. 2006. Threatened and Endangered
species workroom.
The North Carolina State Climatologist. 2006. http://www.nc-climate.ncsu.edu/
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission. 2005. Significant Aquatic
Endangered Species Habitats GIS database.
Pierce, Gj. 1993. Planning Hydrology for Constructed Wetlands. Wetland
Training Institute, Inc. Poolesville, MD.
Pope, B.F., Tasker, G.D., and Robbins, J.C. 2001. Estimating the Magnitude and
Frequency of Floods in Rural Basins of North Carolina - Revised: U.S. Geological
Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 01-4207, 49 p.
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles, and C.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of
the Carolinas. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, N.C. 1,183 pp.
Rosgen, Dave. 1994. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology. Pagosa
Springs, CO.
Schafale, Michael P. and Alan S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural
Communities of North Carolina Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural
Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, Department of Environment
and Natural Resources. Raleigh, NC. 325 pp.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation
Service. 2001. Soil Survey of Bertie County, North Carolina.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation
Service. 2006. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States. Version 6.0.
G.W. Hurt and L.M. Vasilas (eds.). USDA, NRCS, in cooperation with the National
Technical Committee for Hydric Soils.
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
49
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
I . P
United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2006. Memorandum:
Application of Best Mana clement Practices to Mechanical Silvicultural Site
Preparation Activities for the Establishment of Pine Plantation in the Southeast.
US Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2006. "Threatened and Endangered
Species in North Carolina." North Carolina Ecological Services.
http://nces.fws.gov/es/countyfr.htmi.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2005. "National Wetlands Inventory."
http://www.fws.gov/nwi/
United States Geological Survey. 1962. 7.5 Minute Topographic Map, Merry Hill
NW, NC.
WK Dickson & Co., Inc.
50
Restoration Plan - Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site

FILIACIL g
November 2, 2006
Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC
Attn: Mr. Norton Webster
220 Chatham Business Drive
Pittsboro, North Carolina 27312
Subject: Floogie Mitigation Site - Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Roanoke River Basin - Cataloging Unit 03010107
Bertie County, North Carolina
Contract # D06011
Dear Mr. Webster:
On October 17, 2006 Environmental Banc & Exchange (EBX) submitted a Restoration Plan for the Floogie Site -
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Project. The project is located roughly 5 miles east of Askewville, in Bertie County,
and is in the Roanoke River Basin (Cataloging Unit 03010107). The Plan proposes to improve riparian and aquatic
habitat by restoring a section of Flat Swamp Creek (3.36 square mile drainage area) and the associated riparian
wetlands by:
1. Raising the stream bed elevation of Flat Swamp Creek sufficiently to allow the stream to access its
historical floodplain and restoring the stream to a more natural pattern, dimension and profile;
2. Filling/Plugging of existing onsite drainage ditches through prior converted cropland, which in conjunction
with overbank flooding of Flat Swamp Creek, will restore riparian wetland hydrology along the stream
corridor.
3. Using log structures as needed to provide grade control and bank protection along the restored stream
section, and
4. Planting appropriate wetland vegetation within the easement area.
Successful completion of the project will generate 11,420 Stream Mitigation Units (SMUs) and 25.0 Riparian
Wetland Mitigation Units (WMUs) to be used by the Ecosystem Enhancement Program to offset permitted
unavoidable impacts to streams and/or wetlands.
The Ecosystem Enhancement Program has reviewed the plan and has no additional comments at this time. Please
proceed with acquiring all necessary permits and/or certifications and complete the implementation of the earthwork
portion of the mitigation project (Task 4). A copy of this letter should be included with your permit 401/404 permit
applications.
If you have any questions, or wish to discuss this matter further, please contact me at [phone] or email at
[e-mail].
Sin rely,
c?
Guy C. P e
EEP Full Delivery Program Supervisor
cc: files
A.-
Proh" 0"41 Rate,
NCDEN
North (arolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service (enter, Raleigh, N( 27699-1652 / 919-715-0476 / www.nceep.net
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL oftwK
WDICKSON
community infrastructure consultants
3101 John Humphries Wynd Raleigh, North Carolina 27612 919.782.0495 tel. [phone] fax
wtttarids(
TO: N0)fNRL- q01 WAtei- &AbUafT.i DATE: II
C rfth caj- m U Y! it
232 Gnu,6-ty-tt B(Vd, RE: F-IAv
R,[ffGh NC 2.104
ATTENTION: la h N`eCy i t h
We are sending via: 20 eerrn??t El Regular Mail F-1 Pick-up ? Hand Delivered
The following items: ? Correspondence ? Plans ? Specifications ? Other as listed below:
COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION
Sits Fuv I e, 12 (A,hS
? NGEEP DD Gu vY1,?h fig,
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
? For Approval ? As Requested ? Approved as Submitted ? Returned for Corrections
["For Your Use ? For Review and Comment ? Approved as Noted ? Forward to Subcontractor
REMARKS:
COPY TO: gq 3 1. Gil. RZA D:
D F, q D
NOV 2 1 2006
DENR - WATER QUALITY
WETLANDS AND STORMWATER BRANCH
4,49
Here are our thoughts.
In general, you are correct - major changes need to be made to the site plan in order to be permittable.
Sections 1 and 2 are generally okay as planned but sections 3 and 4 need major changes. We see three
options as outlined below:
1. Construct sections 1 and 2 as planned. In sections 3 and 4, do the work within the existing
disturbed corridor where the road and associated berm are located. The sinuosity within these sections
would have to be much less than planned so more structures may be needed to have a stab tream
channel. We could still call this restoration if the existing channel is filled and some sin oci is
restored.
2. Construct sections 1 and 2 as planned. Do on-site stabilization, planting and removal of the
road/berm in sections 3 and 4. This would then be enhancement for these sections rather than
restoration. This is less preferable than option 1 since the channel will still be incized but it does
retain the wetlands and restores hydrology to them.
3. Abandon the project entirely. We do not prefer this option since we believe that improvements are
truly needed to this system but if they are planning on a certain amount of mitigation, this may be the
only economically viable option.
We will also be sending a letter stating that the file is retired just to keep the paper trail straight.
If you have any concerns, let me know. Thankx
Lekson, David M SAW wrote:
Please let me know what they thought about it...
Thanks,
David
-----Original Message-----
From: John Dorney [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 1:33 PM
To: Periann Russell; Eric Kulz
Cc: Lekson, David M SAW
Subject: Re: Floogie Project
Periann and Eric - FYI.
Dave - Periann and Eric visited this site today. thankx
Lekson, David M SAW wrote:
Norton,
To summarize the letter I just sent, the project as proposed does
not qualify for a nationwide permit, regardless of any further
narrative justification you may provide. As proposed, the project
will require a Department of the Army individual permit. As stated,
this permit may be difficult to obtain. Should you wish to modify
your proposal to avoid impacts to the very high quality bottomland
hardwood wetlands that exist on the site, you may submit a new
proposal and we will consider it. For those who have not been onsite,
I have attached a picture of the wetland area that will be destroyed
by construction of this sinuous water conveyance.
1 of 2 12/4/2006 8:19 AM
A
David
*From:* Norton Webster [mailto:[e-mail]]
*Sent:* Wednesday, November 29, 2006 1:49 PM
*To:* Biddlecome, William J SAW; Lekson, David M SAW
*Cc:* Thom Rinker; [e-mail]; Guy Pearce (E-mail); Michael
Ellison (E-mail); Jeff Keaton; Daniel Ingram
*Subject:* Action ID No. SAW-2006-41469-108/ Floogie Stream and
Wetland Restoration Project
Mr. Lexson and Mr. Biddlecome,
Thank you for your prompt review and field visit for the Nationwide
Permit 27 request of the proposed Floogie Stream and Wetland
Restoration Project. We plan to resubmit within the next month the
Nationwide 27 permit request with additional data to support our
proposed restoration plan. We understand that you do not believe that
we provided sufficient information in the original permit application
to address your concerns regarding potential adverse environmental
effects from the proposed project. Our project as currently proposed
will provide functional uplift to the watershed and will provide a net
gain in function as well as a net gain of jurisdictional wetlands and
stream. The proposed plan was developed with a goal restoring the
existing system back to its historic condition prior to its being
channelized and deepened. We would like to meet with you and NC EEP
and NC DWQ staff to discuss this proposed project after resubmitting
the Nationwide Permit 27.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Norton
Norton Webster
Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC
2630 Meridian Parkway
Suite 200
Durham, North Carolina 27713
/office/ 919.806.4542
/cell/ 919.608.9688
/fax/ 919.806.4301
[e-mail]
www.ebxusa.com

2 of 2 12/4/2006 8:19 AM

Ia aL%-1.1.1. .
Vkr.a[rFTAM
November 2, 2006
Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC
Attn: Mr. Norton Webster
220 Chatham Business Drive
Pittsboro, North Carolina 27312
Subject: Floogie Mitigation Site - Stream and Wetland Restoration Plan
Roanoke River Basin - Cataloging Unit 03010107
Bertie County, North Carolina
Contract # D06011
Dear Mr. Webster:
On October 17, 2006 Environmental Banc & Exchange (EBX) submitted a Restoration Plan for the Floogie Site -
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Project. The project is located roughly 5 miles east of Askewville, in Bertie County,
and is in the Roanoke River Basin (Cataloging Unit 03010107). The Plan proposes to improve riparian and aquatic
habitat by restoring a section of Flat Swamp Creek (3.36 square mile drainage area) and the associated riparian
wetlands by:
1. Raising the stream bed elevation of Flat Swamp Creek sufficiently to allow the stream to access its
historical floodplain and restoring the stream to a more natural pattern, dimension and profile;
2. Filling/Plugging of existing onsite drainage ditches through prior converted cropland, which in conjunction
with overbank flooding of Flat Swamp Creek, will restore riparian wetland hydrology along the stream
corridor.
3. Using log structures as needed to provide grade control and bank protection along the restored stream
section, and
4. Planting appropriate wetland vegetation within the easement area.
Successful completion of the project will generate 11,420 Stream Mitigation Units (SMUs) and 25.0 Riparian
Wetland Mitigation Units (WMUs) to be used by the Ecosystem Enhancement Program to offset permitted
unavoidable impacts to streams and/or wetlands.
The Ecosystem Enhancement Program has reviewed the plan and has no additional comments at this time. Please
proceed with acquiring all necessary permits and/or certifications and complete the implementation of the earthwork
portion of the mitigation project (Task 4). A copy of this letter should be included with your permit 401/404 permit
applications.
If you have any questions, or wish to discuss this matter further, please contact me at [phone] or email at
[e-mail].
Sin rely,
Guy C. P e
EEP Full Delivery Program Supervisor
cc: files
R?°.StOV'G12?... .. PbOteC Gt?t? oar .Stat& A'r-' R
North (arolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service (enter, Raleigh; NC 27699-1652 / 919-715-0476 / wwwnceep.net
I ft? W K
WDICKSON
community infrastructure consultants
November 8, 2006
Mr. Josh Pelletier
USACE Washington Field Office
107 Union Drive, Suite 202
Washington, North Carolina 27889
Dear Mr. Pelletier:
PAYrViENT
RECEIVED
The attached NWP 27 PCN and restoration plan for the Floogie mitigation site is presented by WK
Dickson on behalf of Environmental Banc and Exchange (Applicant). The goal of the project is provide
full-delivery mitigation to the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program for impacts in
hydrologic unit 03010107 of the Lower Roanoke River Basin. The Floogie Site is located in Bertie
County, North Carolina approximately nine miles northeast of Windsor. The property is 827 acres
located west of Browns School Road (SR 1348) and is accessed via a farm road north of passing over
Flat Swamp Creek.
The proposed mitigation includes 11,420 linear feet of stream restoration on Flat Swamp Creek and 25
acres of riverine wetland restoration. The proposed stream restoration reach was disturbed by historic
channelization and the proposed wetland restoration area is prior-converted (PC) cropland that was
ditched and drained. The Floogie Site has a history of agriculture and timber production. The site
currently supports agricultural production a clear-cut/pine plantation.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this important project and please contact me at 919-782-0495
if you have questions or require additional information.
Sincerely,
W.K. Dickson & Co., Inc.
Jef eat n, PE
Project Manager
cc: NCDWQ 401/Wetlands Unit NOV 9 : 2006
Norton Webster, Environmental Banc and Exchange QUAiITY
WATER
y,pMOS AND STORMIWM SR BRANCH
E'to
3101 John Humphries Wynd
Raleigh, NC 27612
Tel. 919.782.049 5)
Fax [phone]
www.wkdickson.com
D6-ilga
North Carolina • South Carolina • Georgia e Florida
Office Use Only: Form Version March 05
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No. O
(It any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
1. Processing ',,/M ENT
1LCEIVEQ
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ? Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
? Section 10 Permit ? Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification ? Express 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NWP 27, WQC 3495
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ?
4. If payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed
for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance letter from NCEEP, complete section VIII,
and check here: ?
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), chec
I V Q D`7 ?
II. Applicant Information
NOV 9 = zoos
Owner/Applicant Information DENR - WATER QUALITY
Name: Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC YdETLAND3A..ND STCRMWA,TER BRANC14
Mailing Address: South East Regional Office
2530 Meridian Parkway
Durham NC 27713
Attention: Norton Webster
Telephone Number:_ [phone] Fax Number:
E-mail Address: Nortongebxusa.com
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: Jeff Keaton
Company Affiliation: WK Dickson
Mailing Address: 3101 John Humphries Wnyd
Raleigh, NC 27612
Telephone Number:_ [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address: ikeaton(a,wkdickson.com
Updated 11/1/2005
Pagel of 9
III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Floosie Mitigation Site
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only)
N/A
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): (6 parcels) 6836386851, 6837503535,
6836585672, 6836781176, 6836668225, 6836636697
4. Location
County: Bertie Nearest Town: Windsor
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.): From Windsor, drive
approximately 5.3 miles on 17 east. Turn left onto Wakelon Road (SR 1001) Drive
approximately 5 miles on Wakelon Road to Bull Hill Road (SR 1301 Turn right on Bull
Hill Road and travel approximately 2.5 miles and turn left onto Browns School Road (SR
1348). Site is approximately 2.5 miles on left. Site is accessed from farm path Figure 1)
Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that
separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimum): 36.1183245 ON 77.8502890 °W
6. Property size (acres): Total property size is 827 acres. Enclosed in conservation easement is
74.85 acres.
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: Flat Swamp Creek
8. River Basin: Lower Roanoke River Basin (USGS HUC 03010107160051) and NCDWO
sub-basin 03-02-10
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://112o.eni,.state.nc.us/admi.n/amps/.)
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 2 of 9
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: Flat Swamp Creek has a drainage area of 2,150 acres (3.36
mil) at the downstream end of the restoration protect. The wetland restoration area has a
drainage area of 1,456 acres (2.28 mi`). The dominant land use is agricultural production of
cotton and soybeans, pine plantation and woodland. Local drainage patterns have been
altered in the past to drain wetlands and promote agricultural production The USGS
Elizabeth City, NC topographic quadrangle shows that drainage from the site flows in a
southerly direction (Figure 2). The stream is a tributary to Hoggard's Mill Creek There are
numerous agricultural ditches on the project property that are used to promote drainage and
the adjacent channel. The ditches and swales were constructed to route water off the site
draining areas that were once wetland. NRCS soil mapping and aerial photography is shown
in Figure 3. On-site topography, soils and existing wetland areas demonstrate that the site
historically supported both riverine and non-riverine wetland areas. The restoration and
preservation areas will be protected by a conservation easement. Areas of the property
outside the conservation easement may continue to be used as woodland pine plantation
agriculture, or wildlife food plots (Figure 4).
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: The
project will involve the stream restoration of Flat Swamp Creek and the wetland restoration
of adjacent PC cropland. Stream restoration on Flat Swamp Creek will consist excavating
new channel and filling the old channel. Native material revetments will be installed This
project also includes restoration of non-riverine wetlands. Wetland restoration activities will
include plugging and filling existing ditches relocating the existing farm access road and re-
grading selected ditches outside the proposed conservation easement to aid site drainage
patterns (Figures 5). All wetland restoration activities are taking place in non jurisdictional
PC-cropland or uplands. All disturbed areas will be stabilized and planted with native
vegetation. Equipment to be used includes track hoes bulldozers trucks and other earth
moving equipment as necessary. The enclosed CD-ROM contains the Restoration Plan and
discusses the project in detail.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: The project is being developed to provide
full delivery mitigation to the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) for
impacts in hydrologic unit 03010107 of the Roanoke River Basin The proposed stream
restoration reach was disturbed by historic channelization and the proposed wetland
restoration area is prior-converted (PC) cropland that was ditched and drained The Floogie
Site has a history of agriculture and timber production The site currently supports
agricultural production (primarily orn) woodlands and clear-cut/pine plantation pine
plantation, mid-successional bottomland hardwood forest The stream restoration will restore
a natural flow pattern and create a design that will allow flows that exceed the design
bankfull stage to spread out over the floodplain. The design will provide for stable cross-
sectional geometry, an increase in planform sinuosity, and restoration of sand-bed channel
features and stream bed diversity to improve benthic habitat. The wetland restoration will
create hydrologic retention and encourage species diversification that will provide a
continuous riverine wetlands s? grading into riverine wetlands and the stream restoration
site that will enhance wildlife habitat wildlife passage and water quality functions The
enclosed CD-ROM contains the Restoration Plan and discusses the project in detail
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 3 of 9
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts; along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules. No previous submittals have been made to the USACE. A wetland
delineation was performed by WK Dickson and is provided as Figure 4.
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
An Erosion Control Plan will be submitted to NCDENR Land Quality Division prior to
construction.
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. Each impact must be
listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from
riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary. All proposed impacts,
permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial)
should be shown on a delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems.
Wetland and stream evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate.
Photographs.may be included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for
wetland or stream mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional
space is needed for listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: Impacts resulting from the proposed
restoration include: filling/plugging 8,218 linear feet of existing channel, excavating 11,420
linear feet of new channel resulting in 2.12 acres of permanent wetlands impacts; an
clearing 5.49 acres of wetland to provide construction access and temporary stockpile areas
No impacts will result from wetland restoration or preservation activities.
2. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of impacts include, but are not limited to
mechanized clearing, grading, fill, excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams,
separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 4 of 9
Wetland Impact Type of Wetland Located within Distance to Area of

Site Number
Type of Impact
(e.g., forested, marsh,
100-year Nearest Impact

(indicate on map)
herbaceous, bog, etc.)
Floodplain (yes/no) Stream (linear (acres)
feet)
Channel construction permanent Mid-successional bottomland No Adjacent 2.12
hardwood forest
Temporary Mid-successional bottomland
construction access Temporary hardwood forest No Adjacent 5.49
and stockpile areas
Total Wetland Impact (acres) 7.61
3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: 260 (estimated)
4. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts. Be sure to identify temporary
impacts. Stream impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam
construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e.g., cement walls, rip-rap, crib
walls, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is proposed,
plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams
must be included. To calculate acreage, multiply length X width, then divide by 43,560.
Stream Impact
Perennial or Average Impact Area of
Number Stream Name Type of Impact Intermittent? Stream Width Length Impact
(indicate on ma) Before Impact (linear feet) (acres)
Reach 1 Flat Swamp Creek Permanent Perennial 15 1,930 0.665
Reach 2 Flat Swamp Creek Permanent Perennial 15 1,920 0.661
Reach 3 Flat Swamp Creek Permanent Perennial 12 1,820 0.501
Reach 4 Flat Swamp Creek Permanent Perennial 14 2,548 0.819
Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 8,218 2.65
5. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.). Open water impacts include, but are not limited to
fill, excavation, dredging, flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
Open Water Impact Name of Waterbody Type of Waterbody Area of
Site Number (if applicable) Type of Impact (lake, pond, estuary, sound, bay, Impact
(indicate on ma) ocean, etc.) (acres)
N/A
Total Open Water Impact (acres)
6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the project:
Stream Impact (acres): 2.65
Wetland Impact (acres): 7.61
Open Water Impact (acres):
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 5.22
Total Stream Impact (linear feet): 8,218
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 5 of 9
7. Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ? Yes ® No
Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet). Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE.
8. Pond Creation (N/A)
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated. on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ? uplands ? stream ? wetlands
Describe, the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.):
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.):
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond:
Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts. Due to the nature of this
project, avoidance is not possible. Impacts are minimized using, a staged construction approach
Where possible the channel will be constructed prior to turning stream flow into a segment This
approach allows minimization of the impact of each stage during the project construction
Additionally all work in wetlands and streams will be conducted during dry conditions and/or
with mats to protect soil structure. Efforts will be made to preserve individual high value trees
located within the stream restoration area. The enclosed CD-ROM contains the Restoration Plan
and discusses the project in detail.
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2002, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 6 of 9
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCEEP concurrence shall be placed on hold as incomplete.
An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration in DWQ's
Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
htlp://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/strnigide.htm1.
Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
[phone] to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating
that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form. For
additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP
website at http://h2o.enr.state.n.c.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of the NCEEP is proposed, please
check the appropriate box on page five and provide the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet):
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet):
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres):
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
1. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of
public (federal/state) land? Yes ® No ?
2. If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 7 of 9
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ? No
3. If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please
attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter. Yes ? No ?
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
1. Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Neuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 02B .0243 (Catawba) 15A NCAC
213 .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please
identify )? Yes ? No
2. If "yes", identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers.
If buffer mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the
buffer multipliers.
* Impact Required
Zone Multiplier
1 1 I 13 (2 for Catawba)
1 2 1.5
Total I
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from the top of the near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
3. If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e.,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0244, or. 0260.
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site. Discuss stormwater
controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands downstream from the property. If
percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations demonstrating total proposed
impervious level. N/A -No changes in impervious acreage proposed.
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 8 of 9
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
N/A
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ? No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application? Yes ? No
XIV. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ)
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ? No
If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description:
This is a stream and wetland restoration site that will be protected through a conservation
easement and will not facilitate or deter surrounding development.
XV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
The enclosed CD-ROM contains the Restoration Plan and discusses the project in detail

/I /C-7 a
Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 9 of 9
Figure 1.
Project Vicinity Map
Floogie Site
0 0.5 1 2 3 4
Miles
LEGEND
NCDOT Roads
Existing Waterbody
HUC 03010107160050
HUC 03010203090030
BERTIE COUNTY
Scale: NTS
em ?'ly 30-.?

s
,'
Whites
f
•C 1 33
• ?`
••
I ij 1` ?.

1 •
a PA
• P?
_
`

.t4 l ?!

E o -
? ,? ..
\ +
t ,
i Iri
1001 ? aP •.{ `1

Proposed Riverine .
?
Wetland Restoration .?
o

Existing Wetland Boundary
,8.. ` Proposed Stream
,t
Restoration 1..'s

0150
Nste: Watetsbeu ary_ was deljtfeafe?_L`sins A datq an?mstyU.SqS ts's
Figure 2.
USGS Quadrangle Map
Floogie Site
0 5001,000 2,000 3,000 4,000
Feet
LEGEND
NCDOT Roads
Stream
Existing Wetland Boundary
Project Area
Potential Riverine
Wetland Restoration
Watershed Boundary

GoA
N
Na GoA GoA
Proposed Riverine
Ly Gt
Wetland Restoration Project Area
Gt ExA R GoA
ExA IC-P Na
0
GoA
N
S
C
0
ExA ExA
Na
Proposed Stream Restoration
Existing Wetland Boundary oA
ExA
Na
xA WE
ExA

Na GoA
Ly
?
l ExA
E
Gt
ExA ExA
Na
Na
ExA

SOIL SERIES LEGEND
Hydric Soils
Non-Hydric Soils GoA Goldsboro sandy loam, 0 to 3% slopes Na Nahunta very fine sandy loam
ExA Exum very fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 % slopes Gt Grantham silt loam Ra Rains sandy loam
Ly Lynchburg sandy loam WE Wehadkee loam, frequently flooded

Figure 3. LEGEND

Soils Map NCDOT Roads GOA Soil Series and Phase

Floogie Site Stream
Potential Riverine
Existing Wetland Restoration
Wetland Boundary
0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,0
00
O Project Area

F
F
eet

a x> ? ?. - r '+? ? ?,^ ? y ? i ? ?.,may . ;''0? r.?? ? / ? r? ? r - :4 ;
r r ?
vel
fi; +sr'f `? .r
Project Areas 3 .
f ? ? Y• -y?` ? ASS {?"fd?
?'d• ?x ; fir{ •r
.? Yfi f W
+ 4+ 'i7ar" F' r fietS? ? r
. -:, b, .i v'*4a• '4 w .4_ ti? ti>;ter ?f?`
c'? ?'w !A'+ = rv
y J. ? 3
}E 3x ? / J r
,
H f.
? c 3 y .
rM Jv
q.. hh R
- FV ?` 3
. fa N' ?
fir.
?
? b n
-
.f y
.

-
17
,4 p

4 M f ';gf Y 5t" yr 4 9.
t }

Figure 4.
Existing Stream Conditions
Floogie Site
0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000
MOMEEMEMMOMM= Feet
LEGEND
NCDOT Roads
Existing Stream Reaches
Project Area
mxewr ?aa aexar ? m nc adn rrtmrEn. rsimKed a uz a n< m,ro?n s na
? oanp•. r r,aa a, r ..wr..mour read comer o u
aaisox i m. rc rt rxrirm. as Ms oaardr, .usm .n. w
J
gn
aN
E
sZ
F41s
552 6
$ n ? y,
_q;
x -- y
Ya
I I I'sPl
4w, 7
m
Z
TI ?7
r O
Oz
co O K
A C) m
Z
I m ?
0 ? D
z =I m
j Z
o D C)
= O ?
0 m
o n
> O
C) Z C) O
m
-I-
r
r
C7
-Tl
r
-p O
r O
D Q
Z M
O m
< cn
m C)
z
IT1 ?
? D
Z
N
O
Nom/
------------
1.
-Ti
rri
Ono
Ox
--i o;u
O
C: 1 c? r
?mz
v ? 0 (,
.-r r
/ t
rn
?I
" I (l ??`I l
o'
I
I
i
i i
0 0 ? p?p
s s
Z D Z Z A Z
o c o ? ,n m r
m
i z
Im
I o
I
I
\ ? I
s
11-86-'06 01;21 FROM-WK Dickson
AO & Co, INC 9197829672
T
..: t.
I D ell It
??riS?H?9?nn
November 2, 2006
Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC
Attn: W. Norton Webster
220 Chatham Business Drive
Pittsboro, North Carolina 27312
Subject: Floogie Mitigation Site - Stream; and Wetland Restoration Plan
Roanoke River Basin - Cataloging Unit 03010107
Bertie County, North Carolina
Contract ll D06011
Dear Mr. Webster.
T-123 P002/002 F-393
On October 17, 2006 Environmental Banc & Exchange (EBX) submitted a Restoration Plan for the )Floogie Site -
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Project. The project is located roughly 5 miles east of Askewville, in Bertie County,
and is in the Roanoke River Basin (Cataloging Unit 03010107). The Plan proposes to improve riparian and aquatic
habitat by restoring a section of Flat Swamp Creek (3.36 square mile drainage area) and the associated riparian
wetlands by:
1. Raising the stream bed elevation of Flat Swamp Creek sufficiently to allow the stream to access its
historical floodplain and restoring the stream to a more natural pattern, dimension and profile;
2. )Filling/Plugging of existing onsite drainage ditches through prior converted cropland, which in conjunction
with overbmk flooding of Flat Swamp Creek, will restore riparian wetland hydrology along the stream
corridor.
3. UAng log structures as needed to provide grade control and bank protection along the restored stream
section, and
4.. Planting appropriate wetland vegetation within the easement area.
Successful completion of the project will generate 11,420 Stream Mitigation Units (SMUs) and 25.0 Riparian
Wetland Mitigation Units (WMUs) to be used by the Ecosystem Enhancement Program to offset permitted
unavoidable impacts to streams and/or wetlands.
The Ecosystem Enhancement Program has reviewed the plan and has no additional comments at this time. Please
proceed with acquiring all necessary permits and/or certifications and complete the implementation of the earthwork
portion of the, mitigation project (Task 4). A copy of this letter should be included with your permit 4011404 permit
applications.
If you have any questions, or wish to discuss this matter further, please contact me at [phone] or email at
[e-mail].
S' rely,,
QW
Guy G. P e
EEP Full Delivery Program Supervisor
cc: files
K"to
... hke -- Pro 0" S -
"J E" .
ancement ail Service Center, L 27699-1652 919-715-0476 c e
North Carolina Ecosystem Enh Program, 1651 Raleigh, N / / www n e p.net
NOV-13-2006 MON 10:10 TEL:[phone] NAME:DWO-WETLANDS P. 2
11-06-'06 01;20 FROM-WK Dickson & Co, INC
DWK
DICKS0N
community infrastructure consulfonts
Fax To: Cyndi Karoly
Fax #: [phone]
From: Jeff Keaton
9197829672
Pages: 2
RE: Floogie Mitigation Site- EEP Letter
Cyndi:
T-123 P001/002 F-393
We copied your unit on a PCN package for the Floogie Stream and Wetland Mitigation
Site in Bertie County last creek. However, we neglected to include the written
notification from EEP ensuring us that this is in fact an EEP approved project. Please
find the written notification from EEP attached. Please call me at 919-782-0495 if you
need any additional information regarding this matter. Thank you.
Jeff Keaton
rA
NOV-13-2006 MON 10:09 TEL:[phone] NAME:DWO-WETLANDS P. 1
A

y
/
'A
tip
Figure 4.
Existing Stream Conditions
Floogie Site
0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2.000
Feet
LEGEND
NCDOT Roads
Existing Stream Reaches
O Project Area
7 1
lftwl<
WDICKSON
community infrastructure consultants
November 8, 2006
Mr. Josh Pelletier
USACE Washington Field Office
107 Union Drive, Suite 202
Washington, North Carolina 27889
Dear Mr. Pelletier:
C) o L-0 -11gti
PAY ET
RECEIVED
The attached NWP 27 PCN and restoration plan for the Floogie mitigation site is presented by WK
Dickson on behalf of Environmental Banc and Exchange (Applicant). The goal of the project is provide
full-delivery mitigation to the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program for impacts in
hydrologic unit 03010107 of the Lower Roanoke River Basin. The Floogie Site is located in Bertie
County, North Carolina approximately nine miles northeast of Windsor. The property is 827 acres
located West of Browns School Road (SR 1348) and is accessed via a farm road north of passing over
Flat Swamp Creek.
The proposed mitigation includes 11,420 linear feet of stream restoration on Flat Swamp Creek and 25
acres of riverine wetland restoration. The proposed stream restoration reach was disturbed by historic
channelization and the proposed wetland restoration area is prior-converted (PC) cropland that was
ditched and drained. The Floogie Site has a history of agriculture and timber production. The site
currently supports agricultural production a clear-cut/pine plantation.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this important project and please contact me at 919-782-0495
if you have questions or require additional information.
Sincerely,
W.K. Dickson & Co., Inc.
Jef eaton, PE
Project Manager
cc: NCDWQ 401/Wetlands Unit
Norton Webster, Environmental Banc and Exchange

3101 John Humphries Wynd
Raleigh, NC 27612
Tel. [phone]
Fax [phone]
www.wkdicl<son.<:.-om
NOV 9 2006
DIrNR - WATER QUALITY
WETLMD9 ANA STt3ftMWA"R
North Carolina • South Carolina • Georgia e Florida
T
Office Use Only: Form Version March 05
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No. O l0 - I ' g p
/TF......, .......F.... 1..-:........ :............ _1;--I-1,, a,. ...__. tt XT_. ? _-1_t l_11 __. t-TI ? tt ?
%,. ,..,.J t,..,..,..,..... -... - -, u.lo F1liv , rlvuuv vL1 - 1 ` nFFAJ" vi 1-41 t-1 -)
1. Processing PAYMENT
RECEIVED
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ? Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
? Section 10 Permit ? Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification ? Express 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NWP 27, WQC 3495
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ?
4. If payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed
for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance letter from NCEEP, complete section VIII,
and check here: ?
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check D Ur 2_3
II. Applicant Information _
NOV 9 = 2006
1. Owner/Applicant Information
DENR - WATER QUALITY
Name: Environmental Banc & Exchange LLC W ANnc ANn sTOMAWAjER BRANCH
Mailing Address: South East Regional Office
2530 Meridian Parkway
Durham, NC, 27713
Attention: Norton Webster
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number:
E-mail Address: Nortongebxusa.com
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: Jeff Keaton
Company Affiliation: WK Dickson
Mailing Address: 3101 John Humphries Wnyd
Raleigh, NC 27612
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address: ikeatonAwkdickson.com
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 1 of 9
III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Floosie Mitigation Site
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): N/A
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): (6 parcels) 6836386851, 6837503535,
6836585672,6836781176,6836668225,6836636697
4. Location
County: Bertie Nearest Town: Windsor
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.): From Windsor, drive
approximately 5.3 miles on 17 east. Turn left onto Wakelon Road (SR 1001) Drive
approximately 5 miles on Wakelon Road to Bull Hill Road (SR 1301) Turn right on Bull
Hill Road and travel approximately 2.5 miles and turn left onto Browns School Road (SR
1348). Site is approximately 2.5 miles on left Site is accessed from farm path (Figure 1)_
5. Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that
separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimum): 36.1183245 ON 77.8502890 °W
6. Property size (acres): Total property size is 827 acres. Enclosed in conservation easement is
74.85 acres.
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: Flat Swamp Creek
8. River Basin: Lower Roanoke River Basin (USGS HUC 03010107160051) and NCDWQ
sub-basin 03-02-10
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at .htip:/,/h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 2 of 9
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: Flat Swamp Creek has a drainage area of 2,150 acres (3.36
m12) at the downstream end of the restoration proiect. The wetland restoration area hnc n
aramage area of 1,456 acres (2.28 mi`). The dominant land use is agricultural production of
cotton and soybeans, pine plantation, and woodland. Local drainage patterns have been
altered in the past to drain wetlands and promote agricultural production The USGS
Elizabeth City, NC topographic quadrangle shows that drainage from the site flows in a
southerly direction (Figure re 2). The stream is a tributary to Hoggard's Mill Creek There are
numerous agricultural ditches on the project property that are used to promote drainage and
the adjacent channel. The ditches and swales were constructed to route water off the site
draining areas that were once wetland. NRCS soil mapping and aerial photography is shown
in Figure 3. On-site topography, soils and existing wetland areas demonstrate that the site
historically supported both riverine and non-riverine wetland areas The restoration and
preservation areas will be protected by a conservation easement Areas of the property
outside the conservation easement may continue to be used as woodland pine plantation
agriculture, or wildlife food plots (Figure 4).
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: The
project will involve the stream restoration of Flat Swamp Creek and the wetland restoration
of adjacent PC cropland. Stream restoration on Flat Swamp Creek will consist excavating a
new channel and filling the old channel. Native material revetments will be installed This
project also includes restoration of non-riverine wetlands Wetland restoration activities will
include plugging and filling existing ditches relocating the existing farm access road and re-
grading selected ditches outside the proposed conservation easement to aid site drainage
patterns (Figures 5). All wetland restoration activities are taking place in non jurisdictional
PC-cropland or uplands. All disturbed areas will be stabilized and planted with native
vegetation. Equipment to be used includes track hoes bulldozers trucks and other earth
moving equipment as necessary. The enclosed CD-ROM contains the Restoration Plan and
discusses the project in detail.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work:The project is being d_eveloped to provide
full delivery mitigation to the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) for
impacts in hydrologic unit 03010107 of the Roanoke River Basin The proposed stream
restoration reach was disturbed by historic channelization and the proposed wetland
restoration area is prior-converted (PC) cropland that was ditched and drained The Floogie
Site has a history of agriculture and timber production The site currently supports
agricultural production (primarily corn) woodlands and clear-cut/pine plantation pine
plantation, mid-successional bottomland hardwood forest The stream restoration will restore
a natural flow pattern and create a design that will allow flows that exceed the design
bankfull stage to spread out over the floodplain. The design will provide for stable cross-
sectional geometry, an increase in planform sinuosity, and restoration of sand-bed channel
features and stream bed diversity to improve benthic habitat The wetland restoration will
create hydrologic retention and encourage species diversification that will provide a
continuous riverine wetlands system grading into riverine wetlands and the stream restoration
site that will enhance wildlife habitat, wildlife passage and water quality functions The
enclosed CD-ROM contains the Restoration Plan and discusses the project in detail
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 3 of 9
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules. No previous submittals have been made to the USACE. A wetland
delineation was performed by WK Dickson and is provided as Figure 4.
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
An Erosion Control Plan will be submitted to NCDENR Land Quality. Division prior to
construction.
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. Each impact must be
listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from
riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary. All proposed impacts,
permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial)
should be shown on a delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems.
Wetland and stream evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate.
Photographs may be included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for
wetland or stream mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional
space is needed for listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: Impacts resulting from the proposed
restoration include: filling/plugging 8,218 linear feet of existing channel; excavating 11,420
linear feet of new channel resulting in 2.12 acres of permanent wetlands impacts; and
clearing 5.49 acres of wetland to provide construction access and temporary Stockpile areas
No impacts will result from wetland restoration or preservation activities.
2. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of impacts include, but are not limited to
mechanized clearing, grading, fill, excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams,
separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 4 of 9
Wetland Impact Type of Wetland Located within Distance to Area of
Site Number Type of Impact (e.g., forested, marsh, 100-year Nearest Impact
(indicate on map) herbaceous, bog, etc.) Floodplain (yes/no) Stream (linear (acres)
feet)
Channel construction permanent Mid-successional bottomland No Adjacent 2
12
hardwood forest .
Temporary
construction access
Temporary Mid-successional bottomland
No
Adjacent
49
5
and stockpile areas hardwood forest .
Total Wetland Impact (acres) 7.61
3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: 260 (estimated)
4. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts. Be sure to identify temporary
impacts. Stream impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam
construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e.g., cement walls, rip-rap, crib
walls, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is proposed,
plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams
must be included. To calculate acreage, multiply length X width, then divide by 43,560.
Stream Impact
Perennial Average Impact Area of
Number Stream Name Type of Impact Intermittent? Stream Width Length Impact
indicate on ma
()
Before Impact
(linear feet) )
(acres)
Reach 1 Flat Swamp Creek Permanent Perennial 15 1,930 0.665
Reach 2 Flat Swamp Creek Permanent Perennial 15 1,920 0.661
Reach 3 Flat Swamp Creek Permanent Perennial 12 1,820 0.501
Reach 4 Flat Swamp Creek Permanent Perennial 14 2,548 0.819
Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 8,218 2.65
5. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.). Open water impacts include, but are not limited to
fill, excavation, dredging, flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
Open Water Impact Name of Waterbody Type of Waterbody Area of
Site Number (if applicable) Type of Impact (lake, pond, estuary, sound, bay, Impact
(indicate on ma) ocean, etc.) (acres)
N/A
Total Open Water Impact (acres)
6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the project:
Stream Impact (acres): 2.65
Wetland Impact (acres): 7.61
Open Water Impact (acres):
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 5.22
Total Stream Impact (linear feet): 8,218
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 5 of 9
7. Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ? Yes ® No
Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet). Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE.
8. Pond Creation (N/A)
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and. illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ? uplands ? stream ? wetlands
Describe. the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.):
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.):
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond:
Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts. Due to the nature of this
project, avoidance is not possible. Impacts are minimized using a staged construction approach
Where possible the channel will be constructed prior to turning stream flow into a segment This
approach allows minimization of the impact of each stage during the project construction
Additionally all work in wetlands and streams will be conducted during dry conditions and/or
with mats to protect soil structure. Efforts will be made to preserve individual high value trees
located within the stream restoration area. The enclosed CD-ROM contains the Restoration Plan
and discusses the project in detail.
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2002, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 6 of 9
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCEEP concurrence shall be placed on hold as incomplete.
An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration in DWQ's
Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/strnigide.html.
1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
[phone] to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating
that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form. For
additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP
website at http:Hh2o.enr.state.n.c.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of the NCEEP is proposed, please
check the appropriate box on page five and provide the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet):
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet):
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres):
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
1. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of
public (federal/state) land? Yes ® No ?
2. If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 7 of 9
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ? No
3. If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please
attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter. Yes ? No ?
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
1. Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Neuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 02B .0243 (Catawba) 15A NCAC
2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please
identify )? Yes ? No
2. If "yes", identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers.
If buffer mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the
buffer multipliers.
* Impact Required
Zone ??? pro f o*` Multiplier
1 3 (2 for Catawba)
2 1.5
Total
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from the top of the near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
3. If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e.,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0244, or .0260.
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site. Discuss stormwater
controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands downstream from the property. If
percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations demonstrating total proposed
impervious level. N/A -No changes in impervious acreage proposed.
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 8 of 9
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ? No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application? Yes ? No
XIV. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ)
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ? No
If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
littp://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description:
This is a stream and wetland restoration site that will be protected through a conservation
easement and will not facilitate or deter surrounding development.
XV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
The enclosed CD-ROM contains the Restoration Plan and discusses the project in detail

/I/C-7 he
Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 9 of 9
Figure 1.
Project Vicinity Map
Floogie Site
0 0.5 1 2 3
LEGEND
NCDOT Roads
Existing Waterbody
HUC 03010107160050
mMiles HUC 03010203090030
BERTIE COUNTY
Scale: NTS

ern

i ?
1
!~ i
Cem i \ Per o 1

A

L
?
Whites
/ C i o -
20..
l1
? 13
i .?

1001 ? c `.} ? ?' 1 ?
j

Cem
Proposed Riverine
- - Wetland Restoration
.
'
_
,, ,
.....
. ? ? r. -
-° i ? to
U+
/.?
i i ?B[SKJ1
?
`, ^, s
1 ) 1 r?r

Existing Wetland Boundary Proposed Stream
Restoration l.. s

,

%

1
was delirfeafeaLsirj9 A data-and-'notyU.S topo _. -
Note: Wate[siaed Bbu 4iary
_

LEGEND
Figure 2• NCDOT Roads
USGS Quadrangle Map Stream
Floo ie Site Existing Wetland Boundary
g
Project Area
* Potential Riverine
R
i
x .
estorat
on
0 5001,000 2,000 3,000 4,000
Feet Watershed Boundar
y

GoA
N
Na GoA GoA
Proposed Riverine Ly Gt
Wetland Restoration Project Area
Gt ExA R GoA
ExA O Na
0
GoA N
N
s
0
o,
ExA ExA
Na
Proposed Stream Restoration
Existing Wetland Boundary oA
ExA
Na
xA WE
ExA

Na GoA
Ly
ExA
ExA
Gt
ExA ExA
Na
Na
ExA
E

SOIL SERIES LEGEND
Hydric Soils
Non-Hydric Soils GoA Goldsboro sandy loam, 0 to 3% slopes Na Nahunta very fine sandy loam
ExA Exum very fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 % slopes Gt Grantham silt loam Ra Rains sandy loam
Ly Lynchburg sandy loam WE Wehadkee loam, frequently flooded

Figure 3. LEGEND
Soils Map NCDOT Roads GoA Soil Series and Phase

R
Floogie Site Stream Potential Riverine
Existing Wetland Restoration
Wetland Boundary
0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000
0 Project Area
Feet

•
lftwl<
WDICKSON
community infrastructure consultants
November 8, 2006
oL' -112D
Mr. josh Pelletier
USACE Washington Field Office
107 Union Drive, Suite 202
Washington, North Carolina 27889
Dear Mr. Pelletier:
PAYMENT
RECEIVED
The attached NWP 27 PCN and restoration plan for the Floogie mitigation site is presented by WK
Dickson on behalf of Environmental Banc and Exchange (Applicant). The goal of the project is provide
full-delivery mitigation to the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program for impacts in
hydrologic unit 03010107 of the Lower Roanoke River Basin. The Floogie Site is located in Bertie
County, North Carolina approximately nine miles northeast of Windsor. The property is 827 acres
located West of Browns School Road (SR 1348) and is accessed via a farm road north of passing over
Flat Swamp Creek.
The proposed mitigation includes 11,420 linear feet of stream restoration on Flat Swamp Creek and 25
acres of riverine wetland restoration. The proposed stream restoration reach was disturbed by historic
channelization and the proposed wetland restoration area is prior-converted (PC) cropland that was
ditched and drained. The Floogie Site has a history of agriculture and timber production. The site
currently supports agricultural production a clear-cut/pine plantation.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this important project and please contact me at 919-782-0495
if you have questions or require additional information.
Sincerely,
W.K. Dickson & Co., Inc.
13
jef eaton, PE NOV 20Q6
Project Manager
DENR WATER va cH
cc: NCDWQ 401/Wetlands Unit WETON03 W0ST"
Norton Webster, Environmental Banc.and Exchange
3101 John Humphries Wynd
Raleigh, NC 27612
Tel. [phone]
Fax [phone]
www.wl<dickson.c:-om
North Carolina • South Carolina • Georgia e Florida
Office Use Only: Form Version March 05
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No. (Oto - 11 Q 0
(1t any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
I. Processing PAYMENT
Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project: RECEIVED
® Section 404 Permit ? Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
? Section 10 Permit ? Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification ? Express 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NWP 27, WQC 3495
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ?
4. If payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed
for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance letter from NCEEP, complete section VIII,
and check here: ?
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), chec
old: o? ?
II. Applicant Information y 2006
NOV ? =
1. Owner/Applicant Information
DENR -WATER QUALITY
Name: Environmental Banc & Exchange LLC TLaNDSMI)STQRMwAIERSWCM
Mailing Address: South East Regional Office
2530 Meridian Parkway
Durham, NC 27713
Attention: Norton Webster
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number:
E-mail Address: NortoDgebxusa.com
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: Jeff Keaton
Company Affiliation: WK Dickson
Mailing Address: 3101 John Humphries Wnyd
Raleigh, NC 27612
Telephone Number:_ [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address: ikeatongwkdickson.com
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 1 of 9

Ill. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Floogie Mitigation Site
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): N/A
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): (6 parcels) 6836386851, 6837503535,
6836585672, 6836781176, 6836668225, 6836636697
4. Location
County: Bertie Nearest Town: Windsor
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.): From Windsor, drive
approximately 5.3 miles on 17 east. Turn left onto Wakelon Road (SR 1001) Drive
approximately 5 miles on Wakelon Road to Bull Hill Road (SR 1301 Turn right on Bull
Hill Road and travel approximately 2.5 miles and turn left onto Browns School Road (SR
1348). Site is approximately 2.5 miles on left. Site is accessed from farm path (Figure 1)
5. Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that
separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimum): 36.1183245 ON 77.8502890 °W
6. Property size (acres): Total property size is 827 acres. Enclosed in conservation easement is
74.85 acres.
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: Flat Swamp Creek
8. River Basin: Lower Roanoke River Basin (USGS HUC 03010107160051) and NCDWQ
sub-basin 03-02-10
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at .http:/,/l12o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/leaps/.)
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 2 of 9
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: Flat Swamp Creek has a drainage area of 2,150 acres (3.36
mil) at the downstream end of the restoration nroiect. The wetland restoration area has a
drainage area of 1,456 acres (2.28 mi`). The dominant land use is agricultural Droduction of
cotton and soybeans, pine plantation and woodland. Local drainage patterns have been
altered in the past to drain wetlands and promote agricultural production The USGS
Elizabeth City, NC topographic quadrangle shows that drainage from the site flows in a
southerly direction (Figure 2). The stream is a tributary to Hoggard's Mill Creek There are
numerous agricultural ditches on the project property that are used to promote drainage and
the adjacent channel. The ditches and swales were constructed to route water off the site
draining areas that were once wetland. NRCS soil mapping and aerial photography is shown
in Figure 3. On-site topography, soils and existing wetland areas demonstrate that the site
historically supported both riverine and non-riverine wetland areas The restoration and
preservation areas will be protected by a conservation easement Areas of the property
outside the conservation easement may continue to be used as woodland pine plantation
agriculture, or wildlife food plots (Figure 4).
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: The
project will involve the stream restoration of Flat Swamp Creek and the wetland restoration
of adjacent PC cropland. Stream restoration on Flat Swamp Creek will consist excavating a
new channel and filling the old channel. Native material revetments will be installed This
project also includes restoration of non-riverine wetlands Wetland restoration activities will
include plugging and filling existing ditches relocating the existing farm access road and re-
grading selected ditches outside the proposed conservation easement to aid site drainage
patterns (Figures 5). All wetland restoration activities are taking place in non-jurisdictional
PC-cropland or uplands. All disturbed areas will be stabilized and planted with native
vegetation. Equipment to be used includes track hoes bulldozers trucks and other earth
moving equipment as necessary. The enclosed CD-ROM contains the Restoration Plan and
discusses the project in detail.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: The project is being developed to provide
full delivery mitigation to the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) for
impacts in hydrologic unit 03010107 of the Roanoke River Basin The proposed stream
restoration reach was disturbed by historic channelization and the proposed wetland
restoration area is prior-converted (PC) cropland that was ditched and drained The Floo ie
Site has a history of agriculture and timber production. The site currently supports
agricultural production (primarily corn) woodlands and clear-cut/pine plantation pine
plantation, mid-successional bottomland hardwood forest The stream restoration will restore
a natural flow pattern and create a design that will allow flows that exceed the design
bankfull stage to spread out over the floodplain. The design will provide for stable cross-
sectional geometry, an increase in planform sinuosity, and restoration of sand-bed channel
features and stream bed diversi to improve benthic habitat The wetland restoration will
create hydrologic retention and encourage species diversification that will provide a
continuous riverine wetlandsystem grading into riverine wetlands and the stream restoration
site that will enhance wildlife habitat wildlife passage and water quality functions The
enclosed CD-ROM contains the Restoration Plan and discusses the project in detail
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 3 of 9
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts; along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules. No previous submittals have been made to the USACE. A wetland
delineation was performed by WK Dickson and is provided as Figure 4.
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
An Erosion Control Plan will be submitted to NCDENR Land Quality Division prior to
construction.
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. Each impact must be
listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from
riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary. All proposed impacts,
permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial)
should be shown on a delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems.
Wetland and stream evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate.
Photographs,may be included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for
wetland or stream mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional
space is needed for listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: Impacts resulting from the proposed
restoration include: fillinWylugging 8,218 linear feet of existing channel; excavating 11,420
linear feet of new channel resulting in 2.12 acres of permanent wetlands impacts; and
clearing 5.49 acres of wetland to provide construction access and temporary stockpile areas
No impacts will result from wetland restoration or preservation activities
2. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of impacts include, but are not limited to
mechanized clearing, grading, fill, excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams,
separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 4 of 9
Wetland Impact Type of Wetland Located within Distance to Area of

Site Number
Type of Impact
(e.g., forested, marsh,
100-year Nearest Impact
(indicate on map) herbaceous, bog, etc.) Floodplain (yes/no) Stream (linear (acres)
feet)
Channel construction permanent Mid-successional bottomland No Adjacent 2
12
hardwood forest .
Temporary Mid-successional bottomland
construction access Temporary
T hardwood forest No Adjacent 5.49
and stockpile areas
Total Wetland Impact (acres) 7.61
3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: 260 (estimated)
4. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts. Be sure to identify temporary
impacts. Stream impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam
construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e.g., cement walls, rip-rap, crib
walls, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is proposed,
plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams
must be included. To calculate acreage, multiply length X width, then divide by 43,560.
Stream Impact
Perennial Average Impact Area of
Number Stream Name Type of Impact Intermittent? Stream Width Length Impact
(indicate on ma) Before Impact (linear feet) (acres)
Reach 1 Flat Swamp Creek Permanent Perennial 15 1,930 0.665
Reach 2 Flat Swamp Creek Permanent Perennial 15 1,920 0.661
Reach 3 Flat Swamp Creek Permanent Perennial 12 1,820 0.501
Reach 4 Flat Swamp Creek Permanent Perennial 14 2,548 0.819
Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 8,218 2.65
5. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.). Open water impacts include, but are not limited to
fill, excavation, dredging, flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
Open Water Impact Name of Waterbody Type of Waterbody Area of
Site Number (if applicable) Type of Impact (lake, pond, estuary, sound, bay, Impact
(indicate on ma) ocean, etc.) (acres)
N/A
Total Open Water Impact (acres)
6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the project:
Stream Impact (acres): 2.65
Wetland Impact (acres): 7.61
Open Water Impact (acres):
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 5.22
Total Stream Impact (linear feet): 8,218
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 5 of 9
7. Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ? Yes ® No
Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet). Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE.
Pond Creation (N/A)
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ? uplands ? stream ? wetlands
Describe. the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.):
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.):
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond:
Size of watershed draining to pond:
Expected pond surface area:
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts. Due to the nature of this
project, avoidance is not possible. Impacts are minimized using a staged construction ap rp oach
Where possible the channel will be constructed prior to turning stream flow into a segment This
approach allows minimization of the impact of each stage during the project construction
Additionally all work in wetlands and streams will be conducted during dry conditions and/or
with mats to protect soil structure. Efforts will be made to preserve individual high value trees
located within the stream restoration area. The enclosed CD-ROM contains the Restoration Plan
and discusses the project in detail.
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ -'In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2002, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 6 of 9
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCEEP concurrence shall be placed on hold as incomplete.
An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration in DWQ's
Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
htip://l12o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/strniizide.html.
1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
[phone] to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating
that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form. For
additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP
website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wip/index.htni. If use of the NCEEP is proposed, please
check the appropriate box on page five and provide the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet):
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet):
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres):
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
1. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of
public (federal/state) land? Yes ® No ?
2. If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 7 of 9
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ? No
3. If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please
attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter. Yes ? No ?
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
1. Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Neuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 02B .0243 (Catawba) 15A NCAC
2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please
identify )? Yes ? No°
2. If "yes", identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers.
If buffer mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the
buffer multipliers.
* Impact I Required
Zone f o+? Multiplier
1 3 (2 for Catawba)
2 1.5
Total
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from the top of the near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
3. If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e.,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 213 .0242 or .0244, or .0260.
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site. Discuss stormwater
controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands downstream from the property. If
percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations demonstrating total proposed
impervious level. N/A -No changes in impervious acreage proposed.
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 8 of 9
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
N/A
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ? No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application? Yes ? No
XIV. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ)
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ? No
If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
lhttp://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description:
This is a stream and wetland restoration site that will be protected through a conservation
easement and will not facilitate or deter surrounding development.
XV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
The enclosed CD-ROM contains the Restoration Plan and discusses the project in detail

/l/C-1 a
Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 9 of 9
Figure 1.
Project Vicinity Map
Floogie Site
0 0.5 1 2 3 4
Miles
LEGEND
NCDOT Roads
Existing Waterbody
w . HUC 03010107160050
HUC 03010203090030
BERTIE COUNTY
Scale: NTS

,Cem r-zs 1 Per o ?
dO. zn- ` N I

Whites 1 ; h
i .C 1 O
?
?'?
I
,4
ae
8M
20.. t _
. i 3 1
..

, rrr.
?
loot j ?.? ? ',i { '' ? I f
r± T ;t I

Cem^
Proposed Riverine wo,.
.r.rrr ?,e ?e t
Wetland Restoration r g.
i
0

t j
00

Existing Wetland Boundary
Proposed Stream
I
•??1. Restoration L-'$

`
~
` -?
t.• f tea

Note: Watetsbed Abu aary
wasdellrfeate lisin9 A dateandmotiuS topo '•.
%j
,
_
_. { ..

LEGEND
Figure 2. NCDOT Roads
' USGS Quadrangle Map Stream
FI00 ie Site Existing Wetland Boundary
g
Project Area
x' Potential Riverine
i
Restorat
on
0 5001,000 2,000 3,000 4,000
Feet Watershed Boundary

GoA
N
Na GoA GoA
Proposed Riverine
Ly Gt
Wetland Restoration Project Area
Gt ExA R . GoA
ExA m Na
0
GoA N
N
S
0
0
ExA ExA
Na
Proposed Stream Restoration
Existing Wetland Boundary oA
ExA
Na
xA WE
ExA

Na GoA
Ly
ExA
E
Gt
ExA ExA
Na
Na
ExA
E

SOIL SERIES LEGEND
Hydric Soils
Non-Hydric Soils GoA Goldsboro sandy loam, 0 to 3% slopes Na Nahunta very fine sandy loam
ExA Exum very fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 % slopes Gt Grantham silt loam Ra Rains sandy loam
Ly Lynchburg sandy loam WE Wehadkee loam, frequently flooded

Figure 3. LEGEND
Soils Map NCDOT Roads GoA Soil Series and Phase

Floogie Site Stream Potential Riverine
Existing Wetland Restoration
Wetland Boundary
0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 Project Area
Feet

I f

a! h n? ?? r j r
M
f
: ?
?
yy
?S
l
y ?
? t

xW. {Y Q•y .
Project Area

?+ d
AC)
i

1.
1.
{
X } !
ti.
a „.K p Fy - ???t.

41,

44
I
i

;Y
S, '4

p 4'jF•?+h . Y
r
y
? ?
t` 4¢' ? "???'? ?T,
y r
il"
?µ
,3
fi
y
?
-
Jill o

Figure 4.
Existing Stream Conditions
Floogie Site
0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000
Feet
LEGEND
NCDOT Roads
Existing Stream Reaches
Project Area
mrrwwr a?w?w ! m..c ui +wn +aw?m. w#micriw w us s M mown w r?.s r
oonrwr, ' ion w Doom m ms oonlE>r.. wu w . r.>r..mour wrro1 mnwr a u
wfn01 ! (A MC n rla?m), wlv my nw M wou? 6 MS m]YNr wnim ?m wl woiu
t vMA. A<

aN
?O
BZ
5>c
Y n $

Ise%.:' JC:'
m
Z
TI Z7
r 0
Oz
m0K
A z
m m ?
D
o
z W
Z
D I?
o
? O
= Z ?
m
- 2
s O- D
m z
C7 0
En
r
r
C)
m
r
O
r 0
D O
Z m
0 m
< N
m 0
z
<
m
D
Z
(n
0
?II
O \ 1 `1
A O
cn
i
? ? r 11 I -J f I
p O
0 2 /
O X
0C: >
?mz
? G7 ? f
r
r ?
_ ? rn
f' ?I v
i
I
i
i
O
i i
- p X
y
? 0 O D N
z
D z z C
Z D Z Z S 2
o c v N m r
m
I Irmz
I z
I o
F
v-a O ffi l m
? R

M
5
:
? frt
?
W cTR ic'F'
7
??( -f h?''ut
tyre ?r,!",1,'
tt t
?i [u?
g ?
? C
?
?
?
p O y
? ?i 9 qqq
Q
105 r3
? g i g
3 l
(y ??
G q p
1
6 6 6 C ? ? i?.,. .
h'.
b ? 'H ?? ?? ?? ?? I I I 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 11 1 I I I I I I l II ?, I I $ I I ?I I ? g I I A I I a ? ? .??:

s
+
?
ig
°?
?
W
?
k
$
i
II
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
1
11
11
1
1
1
5
o
1
1
1
1
1 is
i
o '

?
v
??
??
?
$?
?N
I
II
II
I
I
I
II
I
II
I
I
lI
I
1
1
1
1
1
111
1
ri
l
li
m
,
I I
V, Il
w
? i
?
N, .
o A i Ig Ii L: l li ll l l l ll l ll l l ll l I I I 1 11 11 1 ? I l o i f ol l? ol l ?ll ? r
.
st,

N a
N (
O O
?
O N
?
A >
N 'yy
N v ?
N
N ?' ?
` ? i.l
A A
b .o £
b " p
H O p
O G b
w `? 'v
T y?"
N? ^ pp
P?
? F.?
N ?V
N ?
V ? ?v,
N V H ? p
W ??pp
O ?
V N
A ((???
O [?[??
Li (?? ?
O y ?p
O O ?J .`
O O p, yi,? y
V S , A
?? ? ?
O ?
??
? 3?y}tf,
' ? ?(?',

?'
w
l
ll
ll
l Pg
8 P8
8
? m
? -N
aA $
ss N
s ? A
Ws Pr
B b
$ „A,
g1
1
I
I
I
1
11
11
1 ?
V ?
V ?
V ?
G ?
O ..p
C V o
A8 ov
CW u V
n+ wp,Y
0N ,N?,
.
?O p
t
b
N
f}"``

b

?

??

??
C
w

?

?s

N
Y,
N
A N
?N
Y P
??
b
s

A

e
N
??
V
?
P
&s
Y b
w
F
a
P?
?P
N
?

?

?

V

?
N
?

s?
W
??

I
..
g
.?
V
N
A
N
?

I

Iw

I
?
I?
Ww
?I

IA

II

P

? W
??' L,?w'•,r
?w?l., ?f
,Ty?? tSryy,
MtY.!i.
W
?
O
ti O
yp,{?n
O O P
$y?
W O P
??
W

S
g?
:
N W
+
N A N
v
N N pp
?y
W O i
`?n
f W
Al
A
a
b N
PS?
N P I?
YyW
Y
P>q?
b w b
Zu
?
V
P ?"
?N
??
(V?
O
? (,.
b p
N
N
?
? p_
O°
N W
°?W
IVi
I
,
G _
?
V
?
i
?
I
I ?
I
I A
H
?°p°I
N
I ?
p
I I
?
N
('?
1I, ?' C" (Y3??
ypyy??
t? `;i?,{,a

1
OQQ O 00 b + + •
?1
A
N
P
P ? ? , N
O A N .
b A
p ?p
P
H
N
-?
?
? b
'? M
?
'
I
?p O
V
N
A
N
W
I _
I
I
A
I g
?
el
I ?
! I
N
3}?
h?,,.
;?
.
o-
N
p
A
+ oo oP

I pPp
N
W ya
O m ypa
O ?
N Y
N A?tn
N N r??
V
A A

$ ...
A ..
b pw
W
?V „
b.
b p
}? P
d p
+i.+ m
P y?p
O W
s a
W
?
b
?
W
N
N
s N
H
ti v?
?O

1 ??p
O ..,
V N
A

I

I

!
8
I g

? I
N
f

1 1
a

m
N
1_{__,
,.:
N N
O V V ;

GZT ?=
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 04- 11%c)
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
Washington Regulatory Field Office
P.O. Box 1000
Washington, North Carolina 27889-1000
November 27, 2006
Regulatory Division
Subject: Action ID No. SAW-2006-41469-108 / Floogie Stream and Wetland Restoration
Project
Mr. Norton Webster
Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC
South East Regional Office
2530 Meridian Parkway
Durham, North Carolina 27713
r@r -" p
NOV 2 8 2986
DENR L WATFR QU LITY
IIYE? LMDS AN i JTIYt!l+aw,'iT 4 PRA?? f+
Dear Mr. Webster:
On November 9, 2006, we received your request for verification to utilize Nationwide Permit
27 to impact 7.61 acres of Section 404 jurisdictional wetlands and 8,218 linear feet of Flat
Swamp Creek to facilitate construction of the proposed Floogie Stream and Wetland Restoration
Project. The project area is located west of NCSR 1348 (Browns School Road), south of NCSR
1344 and north of NCSR 1301, southeast the community of Whites Crossroads, adjacent to Flat
Swamp Creek, in Bertie County, North Carolina.
Based upon review of your application and the November 15, 2006 onsite inspection
conducted by myself and Mr. Bill Biddlecome of my staff, we have determined that the project
as proposed will result in greater than minimal adverse environmental effects. Accordingly, your
request for authorization under nationwide permit is not approved. The construction of such a
sinuous stream feature on the site would adversely impact and destroy a large area of high
quality, mature bottomland hardwood wetlands as well as thousands of feet of stable stream.
Furthermore, the proposed restoration plan and pre-construction notification do not support your
contention that the stream must be relocated to achieve the stated goals.
The perennial stream and adjacent wetlands that would be impacted by this project, in their
existing condition, provide valuable water quality and habitat functions that benefit both adjacent
and downstream receiving waters. Functions performed by these wetlands include the
attenuation of storm water runoff, nutrient uptake and transformation from adjacent farmland,
and valuable riparian corridor habitat for many species of birds, mammals, reptiles, and
amphibians.
Our inspection revealed that there may be a potential for wetland and stream restoration and
enhancement credits along stream reaches one and two. Additionally, there may be a potential
for wetland restoration, enhancement and preservation credits that may be achieved by removing
the existing roadway along the western side of Flat Swamp Creek along reaches three and four.

By copy of this correspondence, you are hereby notified that your request for verification
under NWP 27 has been retired and the file closed. Unless the current proposal is modified to
address our concerns as stated above, a Department of the Army (DA) individual permit will be
required. Please be aware that based upon our experience with projects of like impact within
similar high quality wetlands, this authorization may be difficult to obtain. If you decide to
modify the proposal, you may submit a new application for review.
Thank you for your time and cooperation. If you have any questions, please contact Mr.
Biddlecome of my Washington Regulatory Field Office staff, Post Office Box 1000,
Washington, North Carolina, 27889, or telephone [phone], extension 26.
Sincerely,

David M. Lekson, P.W.S.
Chief, Washington Regulatory Field Office
Copy Furnished:
Mr. William D. Gilmore, P.E.
EEP Director
NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
Mr. Jeff Schaffer
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
Mr. Guy Pearce
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
Mr. Jeff Keaton, PE
--WK Dickson
3101 John Humphries Wynd
Raleigh, North Carolina 27612
2

Mrs. Cyndi Karoly
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650
3
Re: bertie county stream restoration
Subject: Re: bertie county stream restoration
From: Chris Pullinger <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 09:31:04 -0500
To: Periann Russell <[e-mail]>
If memory serves me correctly, there's a Trade Mart right where Hwy 17 turns right at a dead-end
stop-light in Windsor over the Cashie River. It's right at the park w/the boardwalk in Windsor also, so
that's a real easy spot to meet, right at the Trade Mart on Hwy. 17 (same as at the intersection of S.
King and Water St. in Windsor)... If you can't find it, my cell # is 252.945.0197
Periann Russell wrote:
hi chris, kyle told me you are going with us to the stream restoration site this thursday...glad you
can make it.
the site is outside of windsor so we can meet somewhere in windsor. you probably know the area
much better than i do...can you suggest a location in windsor where we can meet. I'm thinking
around 10 am since it should take us a couple of hours to get down there.
periann
Periann Russell
NC Division of Water Quality
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Suite 250
Raleigh, NC 27604-2260
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us
l of 1 11/30/2006 8:12 AM
.`7
oftwK
WDICKSON
community infrastructure consultants
November 8, 2006
Mr. Josh Pelletier
USACE Washington Field Office
107 Union Drive, Suite 202
Washington, North Carolina 27889
Dear Mr. Pelletier:
o? - ?? go
RECEIVED
The attached NWP 27 PCN and restoration plan for the Floogie mitigation site is presented by WK
Dickson on behalf of Environmental Banc and Exchange (Applicant). The goal of the project is provide
full-delivery mitigation to the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program for impacts in
hydrologic unit 03010107 of the Lower Roanoke River Basin. The Floogie Site is located in Bertie
County, North Carolina approximately nine miles northeast of Windsor. The property is 827 acres
located west of Browns School Road (SR 1348) and is accessed via a farm road north of passing over
Flat Swamp Creek.
The proposed mitigation includes 11,420 linear feet of stream restoration on Flat Swamp Creek and 25
acres of riverine wetland restoration. The proposed stream restoration reach was disturbed by historic
channelization and the proposed wetland restoration area is prior-converted (PC) cropland that was
ditched and drained. The Floogie Site has a history of agriculture and timber production. The site
currently supports agricultural production a clear-cut/pine plantation.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this important project and please contact me at 919-782-0495
if you have questions or require additional information.
Sincerely,
W.K. Dickson &
JeflCea?n, PE U.'-- v p ??=
Project Manager NOV 9 = 2006
cc: NCDWQ 401/Wetlands Unit DENR-WRTERQUALITY
Norton Webster, Environmental Banc and Exchange TtAN6$ANDST WATfft"AMg?
3101 John Humphries Wynd
Raleigh, NC 27612
Tel. [phone]
Fax [phone]
11Jww.wkdic.kson.com
North Carolina 0 South Carolina • Georgia e Florida

Office Use Only: Form Version March 05
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No. O Lo - I 19 O
(1t any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
1. Processing
it 1 ? n ?? r-
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project: RECEIVED
® Section 404 Permit ? Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
? Section 10 Permit ? Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification ? Express 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NWP 27, WQC 3495
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ?
4. If payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed
for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance letter from NCEEP, complete section VIII,
and check here: ?
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coasta
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), the
II. Applicant Information
Owner/Applicant Information
Name: Environmental Banc & Exchange LLC
Mailing Address:_ South East Regional Office
2530 Meridian Parkway
Durham NC 27713
S*W Attention: Norton Webster
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number:
E-mail Address: Nortonnebxusa.com
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: Jeff Keaton
Company Affiliation: WK Dickson
Mailing Address: 3101 John Humphries Wnyd
Raleigh, NC 27612
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address: jkeatongwkdickson.com
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 1 of 9
NOV 9 - 2006
DENN - WATER QUALITY
WETLANDS AND S i 0,RMW.41rER BRANCH
III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Floosie Mitigation Site
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): N/A
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): (6 parcels) 6836386851, 6837503535,
6836585672,6836781176,6836668225 6836636697
4. Location
County: Bertie Nearest Town: Windsor
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.): From Windsor, drive
approximately 5.3 miles on 17 east. Turn left onto Wakelon Road (SR 1001 Drive
approximately 5 miles on Wakelon Road to Bull Hill Road (SR 1301 Turn right on Bull
Hill Road and travel approximately 2.5 miles and turn left onto Browns School Road (SR
1348). Site is approximately 2.5 miles on left. Site is accessed from farm path (Figure 1)_
5. Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that
separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimum): 36.1183245 ON 77.8502890 °W
6. Property size (acres): Total property size is 827 acres. Enclosed in conservation easement is
74.85 acres.
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: _ Flat Swamp Creek
8. River Basin: Lower Roanoke River Basin (USGS HUC 03010107160051) and NCDWQ
sub-basin 03-02-10
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/a.dmin/ingps/.)
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 2 of 9
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: Flat Swamp Creek has a drainage area of 2,150 acres (3.36
mil) at the downstream end of the restoration project. The wetland restoration area has a
drainage area of 1,456 acres 2_.28 mi`). The dominant land use is agricultural production of
cotton and soybeans, pine plantation and woodland. Local drainage patterns have been
altered in the past to drain wetlands and promote agricultural production The USGS
Elizabeth City, NC topographic quadrangle shows that drainage from the site flows in a
southerly direction (Figure 2). The stream is a tributary to Hogizard's Mill Creek There are
numerous agricultural ditches on the project property that are used to promote drainage and
the adjacent channel. The ditches and swales were constructed to route water off the site
draining areas that were once wetland. NRCS soil mapping and aerial photography is shown
in Figure 3. On-site topography, soils and existing wetland areas demonstrate that the site
historically supported both riverine and non-riverine wetland areas The restoration and
preservation areas will be protected by a conservation easement Areas of the property
outside the conservation easement may continue to be used as woodland pine plantation
agriculture, or wildlife food plots (Figure 4).
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: The
project will involve the stream restoration of Flat Swamp Creek and the wetland restoration
of adjacent PC cropland. Stream restoration on Flat Swamp Creek will consist excavating a
new channel and filling the old channel. Native material revetments will be installed This
project also includes restoration of non-riverine wetlands Wetland restoration activities will
include plugging and fillin existing ditches relocating the existing farm access road and re-
grading selected ditches outside the posed conservation easement to aid site drainage
patterns (Figures 5). All wetland restoration activities are taking, place in non-jurisdictional
PC-cropland or uplands. All disturbed areas will be stabilized and planted with native
vegetation. Equipment to be used includes track hoes bulldozers trucks and other earth
moving equipment as necessary. The enclosed CD-ROM contains the Restoration Plan and
discusses the project in detail.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: The project is being developed to provide
full delivery mitigation to the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) for
impacts in hydrologic unit 03010107 of the Roanoke River Basin The proposed stream
restoration reach was disturbed by historic channelization and the proposed wetland
restoration area is prior-converted (PC) cropland that was ditched and drained The Floogie
Site has a history of agriculture and timber production. The site currently supports
agricultural production (primarily corn) woodlands and clear-cut/pine plantation pine
plantation, mid-successional bottomland hardwood forest. The stream restoration will restore
a natural flow pattern and create a design that will allow flows that exceed the design
bankfull stage to spread out over the floodplain. The design will provide for stable cross-
sectional geometry, an increase in planform sinuosity, and restoration of sand-bed channel
features and stream bed diversity to improve benthic habitat The wetland restoration will
create hydrologic retention and encourage species diversification that will provide a
continuous riverine wetlands stem grading into riverine wetlands and the stream restoration
site that will enhance wildlife habitat wildlife passage and water quality functions The
enclosed CD-ROM contains the Restoration Plan and discusses the project in detail
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 3 of 9
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts; along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules. No previous submittals have been made to the USACE. A wetland
delineation was performed by WK Dickson and is provided as Figure 4.
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
An Erosion Control Plan will be submitted to NCDENR Land Quality Division prior to
construction.
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. Each impact must be
listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from
riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary. All proposed impacts,
permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial)
should be shown on a delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems.
Wetland and stream evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate.
Photographs,may be included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for
wetland or stream mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional
space is needed for listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: Impacts resulting from the proposed
restoration include: fillingZplug ing 8,218 linear feet of existing channel; excavating 11,420
linear feet of new channel resulting in 2.12 acres of permanent wetlands impacts; and
clearing 5.49 acres of wetland to provide construction access and temporary stockpile areas
No impacts will result from wetland restoration or preservation activities.
2. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of impacts include, but are not limited to
mechanized clearing, grading, fill, excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams,
separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 4 of 9
Wetland Impact Type of Wetland Located within Distance to Area of
Site Number Type of Impact (e.g., forested, marsh, 100-year Nearest Impact
(indicate on map) herbaceous, bog, etc.) Floodplain (yes/no) Stream (linear (acres)
feet)
Channel construction permanent Mid-successional bottomland No Adjacent 2.12
hardwood forest
Temporary

construction access
Temporary Mid-successional bottomland
No
Adjacent
49
5
and stockpile areas hardwood forest .
Total Wetland Impact (acres) 7.61
3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: 260 (estimated)
4. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts. Be sure to identify temporary
impacts. Stream impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam
construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e.g., cement walls, rip-rap, crib
walls, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is proposed,
plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams
must be included. To calculate acreage, multiply length X width, then divide by 43,560.
Stream Impact
Perennial Average Impact Area of
Number Stream Name Type of Impact t
Intermittent? Stream Width Length Impact
indicate on ma
(P) Before Impact (linear feet) (acres)
Reach 1 Flat Swamp Creek Permanent Perennial 15 1,930 0.665
Reach 2 Flat Swamp Creek Permanent Perennial 15 1,920 0.661
Reach 3 Flat Swamp Creek Permanent Perennial 12 1,820 0.501
Reach 4 Flat Swamp Creek Permanent Perennial 14 2,548 0.819
Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 8,218 2.65
5. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.). Open water impacts include, but are not limited to
fill, excavation, dredging, flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
Open Water Impact Name of Waterbody Type of Waterbody Area of
Site Number (if applicable) Type of Impact (lake, pond, estuary, sound, bay, Impact
(indicate on ma) ocean, etc.) (acres)
N/A
Total Open Water Impact (acres)
6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the project:
Stream Impact (acres): 2.65
Wetland Impact (acres): 7.61
Open Water Impact (acres):
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 5.22
Total Stream Impact (linear feet): 8,218
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 5 of 9
7. Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ? Yes ® No
Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet). Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE.
8. Pond Creation (N/A)
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ? uplands ? stream ? wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.):
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.):
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond:
Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts. Due to the nature of this
project, avoidance is not possible. Impacts are minimized using _a staged construction approach
Where possible the channel will be constructed prior to turning stream flow into a segment This
approach allows minimization of the impact of each stage during the project construction
Additionally all work in wetlands and streams will be conducted during dry conditions and/or
with mats to protect soil structure. Efforts will be made to preserve individual high value trees
located within the stream restoration area. The enclosed CD-ROM contains the Restoration Plan
and discusses the project in detail.
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2002, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 6 of 9
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCEEP concurrence shall be placed on hold as incomplete.
An applicant.may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration in DWQ's
Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://l12o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/strmgide.html.
Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
N/A
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
[phone] to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating
that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form. For
additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP
website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of the NCEEP is proposed, please
check the appropriate box on page five and provide the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet):
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet):
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres):
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of
public (federal/state) land? Yes ® No ?
2. If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 7 of 9
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ? No
3. If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please
attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter. Yes ? No ?
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
1. Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Neuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 02B .0243 (Catawba) 15A NCAC
2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please
identify )? Yes ? No
2. If "yes", identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers.
If buffer mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the
buffer multipliers.
I I Zone* Impact Multiplier Required
(square feet) Mitigation
1 3 (2 for Catawba)
2 1.5
Total
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from the top of the near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
3. If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e.,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 213.0242 or.0244, or.0260.
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site. Discuss stormwater
controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands downstream from the property. If
percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations demonstrating total proposed
impervious level. N/A -No changes in impervious acreage proposed.
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 8 of 9
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ? No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application? Yes ? No
XIV. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ)
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ? No
If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
htt2://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description:
This is a stream and wetland restoration site that will be protected through a conservation
easement and will not facilitate or deter surrounding development.
XV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
The enclosed CD-ROM contains the Restoration Plan and discusses the project in detail

Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 9 of 9
Figure 1.
Project Vicinity Map
Floogie Site
0 0.5 1 2 3 4
Miles
LEGEND
NCDOT Roads
Existing Waterbody
HUC 03010107160050
HUC 03010203090030
BERTIE COUNTY
Scale: NTS

1 ,
Per
i 'Cem r.-zs , o
Ot?
d ?o_-.•, B 4

Whites
'
am I- ?
? a• y r
S1? 20
. 1311 i 3
I
l

?
P ,
I - f
rir•
,I

1001 { :? ?„ ,` { 1' J
1{
.

cern;k
Proposed Riverine wow
`???*' e?"e5 i
Wetland Restoration j e

Existing Wetland Boundary
i Proposed Stream
_
...;
.
i
1_41
Restoration

t

was delirseatgk-O ng A dateand /notl
USgt topo
Note: Waters}ae?J bu 8ary
y
_
I

?f LEGEND
Figure 2. NCDOT Roads
USGS Quadrangle Map Stream
Existing Wetland Boundary
Floogie Site 0 Project Area
Riverine
*`+ W
l
d R
i
et
an
est
orat
on
0 5001,000 2,000 3,000 4,000
Feet Watershed Boundary

GoA
N
Na GoA GoA
Proposed Riverine Gt
Ly
Wetland Restoration
Project Area
Gt ExA R GoA
ExA Na
0
GoA N
N
S
0
o,
ExA ExA
Na
Proposed Stream Restoration
ExA Existing Wetland Boundary oA
Na
xA --?`WE
ExA
GoA
Na
Ly
ExA
E
Gt
ExA ExA
Na
Na
ExA
A
E

SOIL SERIES LEGEND
Hydric Soils
Non-Hydric Soils GoA Goldsboro sandy loam, 0 to 3% slopes Na Nahunta very fine sandy loam
ExA Exum very fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 % slopes Gt Grantham silt loam Ra Rains sandy loam
Ly Lynchburg sandy loam WE Wehadkee loam, frequently flooded
LEGEND
Figure 3.
NCDOT Roads GOA Soil Series and Phase
SOIIS Map
- Stream
® Potential Riverine
Floogie Site Existing Wetland Restoration
Wetland Boundary
r 0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 O Project Area
Feet

s -

LR
r r?': .?:y 1 }.a.by
T'
? t M

R
$
N

Project Area
}

b?
- 3 ?4
"
'
?? 1
°
r a
f'
T_i
?
as

t
}
y,
7 ,s
f

41, T,

R r -'3
jr?f? ? M ? s t Y?h\•
?V t 7 a,_
VT 4`t? `t
Ile
II
>? cI.

.4 5?

? • f: ti
? Yt? 71 r _
ryi 'c " X t
x:
Z
,

Itr
<
• i
r ? C w T 5 t J
rt ?1r
:
'? ??? '
ley'
r
: S[F:??
?' ?? ?
.
t 3 Cw ,
,?,
w
- j
,
.

t Y' t i 0

Figure 4.
Existing Stream Conditions
Floogie Site
0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000
Feet
LEGEND
NCDOT Roads
Existing Stream Reaches
O Project Area

a?
?V
$0
F
zUS
eZ
f'- 2
65R
ooh ???
Ya?
? m
0
.I

m
Z
-rl TJ
r O
Oz
m O K
?C) z
m m -I
o D
z _I CD
j
D Z
o -I n
=0?
?Z
D m
A X
o _
a OE D
rm z
nm
-I-
r
r
C)
TI
r
p O
r O
D G)
Z m
O m
< U7
m
Tl z
m ?
D
Z
cn
0

r II
X 1
OI 1
M 1
Cl)
rn=e// / \\
_Tl? 1 rf w
LD 0)
O 2 ' yr/ y I /1
Z OA
OCy r
m z /
y
t, . 12
?i
,. ! Z
I ? yY; pi rn
I
in
/
4
??I t
F?
' - f
e'
0
I '
I
I
i
i
x
1 ° AO x D v?
° mo cr m n
'f4 ? rn r? N z m
D D ; C
D Z Z A Z
fTl
I Im
I z
ti, I
\ I

¦
Mr
N

Bertie County
20-ft Elevation
0 13,500 27,000 54,000 Feet
I I I I I
Elevation (k)
Value
O 1- 1 46875
O 1468750001-6.9375
6.937500001 -124062-
12 40625001 - 17.875
17 87500001 - 23.34375
- 23.34375001 - 28.8125
- 28 81250001 - 34 28125
- 34 26125001 - 39.75
- 39 75000001 - 45 21675
- 45 21875001 - 506 75
- 50.68750001 _,6 15625
- 56.15625001 - 61.625
- 61 62500001 - 67.09375
® 67.09375001 - 72.5625
® 72.56250001 _7 8.03125
- 78.03125001 - 83.5
_ 83.50000001 -8896875
- 88968 5001 - 94.4375
- 94 43750001 -99 90625
_ 99 90625001 - 105.375
O 105 3750001 - 110.84375
110.8437501 - 116.3125
Q 116.3125001 - 121 78125
O 121 7812501 - 127.25
O 127250 001 - 13271875
Q 132718 501 - 138 1875
O 138.1875001 .14365625
® 143.6562501 - 149.125
® 149 1250001 - 154.59375
- 154.5937501 - 160.0625
- 160.0625001 -165,53125
- 165.5312501 - 171
Eni,ironanental Banc & Exchange LLC
NC"nTV NC Division of Water
DATE ?IHVOICErNO DESCRIPTION; INVOICE 'AMOUNT DEDUCTION BALANCE
11-03-06 110306 ebx 401 permit certificat' 475.00 475.00
CHEC
K 11-03-06
9
TOTAL> 475.00
475.00
DATE NUMBER
I'LtASt Ut IAUM HivU mr- iHIrv rum Tuum RGl VRV? ^$ ?gy p? Do
li'1.11?w,(i. Nov 9 - 2006
EnWronanental Banc & Exchange LLC
VYAIIx R QuAl q py
WET;.AN4s AN0 STO RMwr;, ER MANCH
NrnTV NC Division of Water
DATE INVOICE NO DESCRIPTION INVOICEAMOUNT DEDUCTION BALANCE
11-03-06 110306 ebx 401 permit certificat' 475.00 475.00
CHECK
11-03-06 CHECK r
TOTAL > . 00
475 • 00
DATE NUMBER