The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20081268 Ver 3_Year 1 Monitoring Report_USACE Ledgers_20220413Mitigation Project Information Upload ID#* 20081268 Version* 3 Select Reviewer: * Erin Davis Initial Review Completed Date 04/14/2022 Mitigation Project Submittal - 4/13/2022 .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site? * 0 Yes O No Type of Mitigation Project:* Stream Wetlands Buffer Nutrient Offset (Select all that apply) Project Contact Information Contact Name: * Matt Butler Project Information ID#:* 20081268 Existing ID# Project Type: Project Name: County: DMS • Mitigation Bank Tull Wooten III Stream Bank Lenoir Document Information Mitigation Document Type: * Mitigation Monitoring Report File Upload: Signature ............................................ Print Name: * Signature:* Email Address: * mbutler@res.us Version:* 3 Existing Version Tull Wooten III MY1 Monitoring Report_USACE 19.77MB Ledgers.pdf Please upload only one PDF of the complete file that needs to be submitted... Matt Butler NEU-CON UMBRELLA WETLAND AND STREAM MITIGATION BANK TULL WOOTEN III WETLAND CREDIT LEDGER (HUC 03020202) Tuesday, January 25, 2022 Riparian Wetland Transaction Credits Released Credits Debited Number To Bank From Bank Current Credit Balance Cred its Reserved Purchaser Project Permit Number Closing Date 1 4.245 Total 4.245 0.00 4.245 0.00 Credits Released: Task 1 12/17/20 NEU-CON UMBRELLA WETLAND AND STREAM MITIGATION BANK TULL WOOTEN III STREAM CREDIT LEDGER (HUC 03020202) 1/25/2022 Transaction Credits Released Credits Debited Number To Bank From Bank Current Credit Balance Credits Reserved Purchaser Project Permit Number Closing Date 1 553.70 Credits Released: Task 1 12/17/20 2 531.00 Credits Released Task 2 12/1/21 Total 1,084.70 0.00 1,084.70 0.0 fires February 7, 2022 Kyle Barnes U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Division 69 Darlington Ave Wilmington, NC 28403 Subject: NeuCon UMBI Tull Wooten III (SAW-2017-00847) Year 1 Monitoring Report Submittal Mr. Barnes: 360o Glenwood Avenue, Suite too Raleigh, NC 27612 Corporate Headquarters 6575 West Loop South, Suite 300 Bellaire, TX 7740t Main: 713.520.5400 Please find attached the Tull Wooten III Year 1 Monitoring Report. In Year 1, all nine fixed vegetation plots and two random vegetation plots met the 320 stems per acre success criteria. Two bankfull events were recorded on the stage recorder along TW2-A. Both flow gauges, on TW2-A and TW3, recorded periods of continuous flow. The maximum consecutive flow days for TW2-A and TW3 were 100 and 215, respectively. There are a few bare areas noted throughout the northern and middle portions of the site, formerly used for crop production, that will be re -seeded with a winter riparian mix, during spring 2022. One area of encroachment observed along TW4 earlier in 2021 was addressed and repaired using t-posts and horse tape. Per the approved mitigation plan and as referenced in the Year 1 Monitoring report, RES plans to perform supplemental planting and livestaking on TW1 and TW4 to fulfill the adaptive crediting strategy in spring 2022. The livestaking will include shade tolerant species (buttonbush and silky dogwood) and occur every four feet along the bottom of both banks on both reaches. The supplemental planting will be performed in areas of low stem density/heavy invasive treatment and include shade tolerant species such as flowering dogwood, eastern redbud, persimmon, blackgum, sugarberry, and laurel oak. The additional work will take place during this current dormant season and change the credit ratios for TW1 and TW4 from 10:1 to 5:1. RES is requesting a 10% stream credit release (354.00 SMUs) based on the approved mitigation plan. All wetland credits for this bank are preservation and were released in the initial Task 1 release. Please see the enclosed credit release timeline and updated credit ledgers. Thank you for all of your time and consideration and we look forward to continuing to work with you all as this Project progresses. Please contact me if you have any questions or require any additional information. Thank you, Katie Webber, Project Manager kwebber@res.us I (984) 275-3483 res.us YEAR 1 MONITORING REPORT TULL WOOTEN III MITIGATION SITE LENOIR COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA USACE Action ID: SAW-2017-00847 1 DWR Project # 2008-1268v3 NEU-CON STREAM AND WETLAND UMBRELLA MITIGATION BANK Provided by: fires Bank Sponsor: EBX-Neuse I, LLC, An entity of Resource Environmental Solutions 3600 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 100 Raleigh, NC 27612 919-209-1055 February 2022 Table of Contents 1.0 Project Summary 1 1.1 Project Location and Description 1 1.2 Project Goals and Objectives 1 1.3 Project Success Criteria 2 Stream Restoration Success Criteria 2 Vegetation Success Criteria 3 Adaptive Crediting Strategy 3 1.4 Project Components 4 1.5 Stream and Wetland Design/Approach 4 1.6 Construction and As -Built Conditions 5 1.7 Year 1 Monitoring Performance (MY1) 5 Vegetation 5 Stream Geomorphology 5 Stream Hydrology 6 Adaptive Crediting 6 2.0 Methods 6 3.0 References 7 Appendix A: Background Tables Table 1. Project Mitigation Components Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History Table 3. Project Contacts Table Table 4. Project Background Information Table Figure 1. Site Location Map Appendix B: Visual Assessment Data Figure 2. Current Conditions Plan View Vegetation Plot Photos Monitoring Device Photos Appendix C: Vegetation Plot Data Table 5. Planted Species Summary Table 6. Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary Table 7. Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot Species Appendix D: Stream Measurement and Geomorphology Data Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary Table 9. Cross Section Morphology Data Table Cross Section Overlay Plots Appendix E: Hydrology Table 10. 2021 Rainfall Summary Table 11. Documentation of Geomorphically Significant Flow Events Stream Flow Hydrographs 1.0 Project Summary 1.1 Project Location and Description The Tull Wooten III Mitigation Site (Project) is located within Lenoir County, less than two miles east of Kinston. The Project lies within the Neuse River Basin, North Carolina Department of Water Resources (NCDWR) sub -basin 03-04-05 and United States Geological Survey (USGS) 14-digit hydrologic unit code (HUC) 03020202060040. The Project is being designed to help meet compensatory mitigation requirements for stream impacts in the HUC 03020202. The Project restores 2,912 linear feet (LF), enhances 2,911 LF, preserves 208 LF of existing stream, preserves 42.45 acres of intact wetlands, and provides water quality benefit for the 136-acre project drainage area. This mitigation plan was approved in accordance with the Neu -Con Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Banking Instrument Modification with the addition of Tull Wooten III Mitigation Site (SAW-2017-00847). This site is co -located with a DWR Riparian Buffer Bank of the same name (Tull Wooten III). The width of the riparian restoration and enhancement areas where buffer credits are generated begins at the most landward limit of the top of bank and extend landward to a distance of at least 50 feet perpendicular to the streams, and again from 151-200 feet from the top of bank. There is no overlapping buffer crediting areas with stream or wetland crediting areas from 51-150 feet. The Project is upstream of the Neuse River and is comprised of four unnamed intermittent tributaries that drain to a wetland slough directly upstream of the Neuse River. The stream and wetland mitigation components are summarized in Table 1. The Project abuts two closed out bank sites, Tull Wooten I and Tull Wooten II. The Tull Wooten I project is comprised of approximately 145 acres of wetland preservation and was closed out in September of 2005. The Tull Wooten II project is comprised of approximately 42 acres of wetland preservation and was closed out in March of 2010. The Project is accessible from Tower Hill Road. Coordinates for the Project are as follows: 35.255000 N,-77.544000 W. The intermittent streams where restoration was performed had been significantly impacted by agricultural practices, and two reaches lack riparian buffer entirely. Improvements to the Project help meet the river basin needs expressed in the 2010 Neuse River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) as well as ecological improvements to riparian corridor within the easement. 1.2 Project Goals and Objectives Through the comprehensive analysis of the Project's maximum functional uplift using the Stream Functions Pyramid Framework, specific, attainable goals and objectives will be realized by the Project. These goals clearly address the degraded water quality and nutrient input from farming that were identified as major watershed stressors in the 2010 Neuse River RBRP. The Project addresses outlined RBRP Goals 2, 3, and CU specific goal 2. The Project goals are: • Improve water transport from watershed to the channel in a non -erosive manner in a stable channel • Improve flood flow attenuation on site and downstream by allowing for overbanks flows and connection to the active floodplain • Improve instream habitat • Restore, enhance, and preserve native wetland and floodplain vegetation • Preserve wetlands • Indirectly support the goals of the 2010 Neuse RBRP to improve water quality and to reduce sediment and nutrient loads Tull Wooten III 1 Year 1 Monitoring Report Mitigation Site February 2022 The Project objectives to address the goals are: • Designed and reconstructed stream channels sized to convey bankfull flows that maintain a stable dimension, profile, and planform based on modeling, watershed conditions, and reference reach conditions • Added in -stream structures and bank stabilization measures to protect restored and enhanced streams • Installed habitat features such as brush toes, constructed riffles, woody materials, and pools of varying depths to restored and enhanced streams • Reduced bank height ratios and increase entrenchment ratios to reference reach conditions • Increased forested riparian buffers to at least 50 feet on both sides of the channel along the Project reaches with a hardwood riparian plant community • Treated exotic invasive species • Established a permanent conservation easement on the Project that will perpetually protect streams, wetlands, and their associated buffers 1.3 Project Success Criteria The success criteria for the Project follows the 2016 USACE Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update, the Tull Wooten III Final Mitigation Plan, and subsequent agency guidance. Cross section and vegetation plot monitoring takes place in Years 0, 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7. Stream hydrology, wetland hydrology, and visual monitoring takes place annually. Specific success criteria components are presented below. Stream Restoration Success Criteria Four bankfull flow events must be documented within the seven-year monitoring period. The bankfull events must occur in separate years. Otherwise, the stream monitoring will continue until four bankfull events have been documented in separate years. Stream restoration reaches will be monitored to document intermittent or seasonal surface flow. This will be accomplished through direct observation and the use of stream gauge transducers with data loggers (flow gauge) on intermittent, restoration only reaches. Reaches must demonstrate a minimum of 30 consecutive days of flow. Two flow gauges were installed: one on TW2-A and one on TW3. 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 less stable 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. Bank height ratio shall not exceed 1.2, and the entrenchment ratio shall be above 2.2 within restored riffle cross sections. Channel stability should be demonstrated through a minimum of four bankfull events documented in the seven-year monitoring period. 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 the absence of developing bars within the channel or an 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. Cross section, vegetation plot, stage recorder, and flow gauge locations will be used as permanent digital image stations. Tull Wooten III 2 Year 1 Monitoring Report Mitigation Site February 2022 Vegetation Success Criteria Specific and measurable success criteria for plant density within the riparian buffers on the Project follow IRT Guidance. The interim measures of vegetative success for the Project is the survival of at least 320 planted three-year old trees per acre at the end of Year 3, 260 trees per acre with an average height of six feet at the end of Year 5, and the final vegetative success criteria is 210 trees per acre with an average height of eight feet at the end of Year 7. Volunteer trees are counted, identified to species, and included in the yearly monitoring reports, but are not included in the success criteria of total planted stems until they are present in the plot for greater than two seasons. Moreover, any single species can only account for up to 50 percent of the required number of stems within any vegetation plot. Any stems from a species in excess of 50 percent will be shown in the monitoring table but will not be used to demonstrate success. Invasive species presence should not exceed more than five percent of the project area and will be treated through the monitoring period to remain below this threshold. RES will develop a species -specific treatment plan should invasive species presence exceed five percent of the project area. Adaptive Crediting Strategy Additional work may be required along TW1 and TW4 during the monitoring period to further provide ecological uplift and establishing desired plant communities following invasive species treatment. Additional work may include live staking, supplemental planting, or bank grading. The table below outlines the adaptive crediting strategy, where Enhancement III ratios of 10:1 will be adjusted to either 5:1 or 8:1 depending on which of the two activities are selected as additional enhancement on the project reach. These strategies can be implemented on one or both reaches and will not be required to be the same set of activities. Ratio Activities 5:1 Live staking along channel banks AND Supplemental planting post invasive species treatment 8:1 Supplemental planting post invasive species treatment OR Live staking along channel banks Tull Wooten III 3 Year 1 Monitoring Report Mitigation Site February 2022 1.4 Project Components Through stream restoration, enhancement, and preservation, the Project presents 6,031 LF of stream, generating 3,269.800 base Warm Stream Mitigation Units (SMUs) (Table 1). By incorporating wider buffers, the total adjusted SMUs for the Project amount to 3,562.885 SMUs Additionally, the Project presents 42.45 acres of wetland preservation, generating 4.245 Wetland Mitigation Units (WMUs) (Table 1). Stream Mitigation Mitigation Approach Linear Feet Ratio Base Warm SMU Restoration 2,912 1:1 2,912.000 Enhancement I 81 1.5:1 54.000 Enhancement III 2,830 10:1 283.000 Preservation 208 10:1 20.800 Total 6,031 3,269.800 Non -Standard Buffer Width Adjustment 293.085 Total Adjusted SMUs 3,562.885 Wetland Mitigation Mitigation Approach Area Ratio WMU Preservation 42.45 10:1 4.245 1.5 Stream and Wetland Design/Approach TW1 - Enhancement activities included establishing a conservation easement that is protected in perpetuity and treating invasive species during the monitoring period. TW2-A - Restoration activities included constructing a new channel within the natural valley with appropriate dimensions and pattern, grading out a floodplain bench and backfilling the abandoned channel. In -stream structures such as log sills, rock sills, constructed wood riffles, brush toes, step pools, and log vanes were installed for stability and to improve habitat. Habitat was further improved through buffer plantings, treating invasive species, and increasing the buffer to at least 150 feet. Buffer activities improve riparian areas that filter runoff from adjacent cropland, thereby reducing nutrient and sediment loads to the channel. TW2-B — Enhancement activities included the placement of several instream habitat structures to improve flow regime diversity through the creation of pools. TW2-C - Preservation activities included establishing a conservation easement that is protected in perpetuity and treating invasive species during the monitoring period. TW3 - Restoration activities included constructing a new channel within the natural valley with appropriate dimensions and pattern and backfilling the abandoned channel. In -stream structures such as log sills, rock sills, brush toes, constructed wood riffles, and log vanes were installed for stability and to improve habitat. Habitat was further improved through buffer plantings, treating invasive species, and increasing the buffer to at least 150 feet. Buffer activities improved riparian areas that filter runoff from adjacent cropland, thereby reducing nutrient and sediment loads to the channel TW4 - Enhancement activities included improving habitat by increasing the riparian buffer to at least 150 feet from the reach, treating invasive species during the monitoring period, and establishing a conservation easement that is protected in perpetuity. Tull Wooten III 4 Year 1 Monitoring Report Mitigation Site February 2022 Wetlands - 42.25 acres of wetland are being pursued for wetland preservation credit (Wetland E and Wetland F), due to their quality and connectivity to the closed out Tull Wooten I and Tull Wooten II conservation easements. The entirety of WE and WF are not being pursued for wetland preservation since some areas adjacent to the project streams are being utilized for non-standard buffer width SMU adjustments. Wetland preservation activities include the establishment of a permanent conservation easement, initial treatment of invasive species, and treatment of invasive species throughout the monitoring period. 1.6 Construction and As -Built Conditions Stream construction and planting was completed in March 2021. The Tull Wooten III Site was overall built to design plans and guidelines. The only minor change made was the addition of an engineered sediment pack at the top of TW3, above the ephemeral/intermittent call. The record drawings are included in Appendix E. An initial invasive species treatment was conducted across the entire site in July 2021. The only planting plan change was the replacing black gum (Nyssa sylvatica) and yellow poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) with buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis). This change was based on bare root availability. Minor monitoring device location changes were made during as -built installation; however, the quantities remained as proposed in the Final Mitigation Plan. 1.7 Year 1 Monitoring Performance (MY1) The Tull Wooten III Year 1 Monitoring (MY1) activities were performed in December 2021. All MY1 monitoring data is present below and in the appendices. The Project is on track to meeting vegetation, stream, and wetland interim success criteria. Vegetation Monitoring of nine fixed vegetation plots and two random vegetation plots were completed during December 2021. Vegetation data are in Appendix C, associated photos are in Appendix B, and plot locations are in Appendix B. MY1 monitoring data indicates that all plots are exceeding the interim success criteria of 320 planted stems per acre. Planted stem densities ranged from 405 to 1,255 planted stems per acre with a mean of 817 planted stems per acre across all plots. A total of 10 species were documented within the plots. Volunteer stems were noted in two plots and are expected to further establish in upcoming years. The average stem height in the plots was 1.9 feet. Visual assessment of vegetation outside of the monitoring plots indicates that the herbaceous vegetation is becoming well established throughout the project. There are a few bare areas throughout the northern and middle portions of the site, formerly used for crop production, that will be re -seeded with a winter riparian mix, during the 2022 dormant season. One area of encroachment observed along TW4 earlier in 2021 was addressed and repaired using t-posts and horse tape (photos in Appendix B). Additionally, invasive species treatment was administered in July, October, and December 2021 throughout the site. There are a few remaining patches of Chinese privet resprouts, scattered throughout the middle and western portions of the site, seen on Figure 2. Treatment for these and future problem areas will include a combination of foliar spraying, basal bark spraying, mulching, and other manual methods such as pulling, cutting, and clearing. Stream Geomorphology Geomorphology data for MY1 was collected during December 2021. Summary tables and cross section plots are in Appendix D. Overall the Year 1 cross sections relatively match the proposed design. The cross Tull Wooten III 5 Year 1 Monitoring Report Mitigation Site February 2022 section plot overlays (Appendix D) displaying both as -built and MY1 conditions, show little to no deviation from one another in both channel and floodplain profile. The Year 1 conditions show that shear stress and velocities have been reduced for the restoration reaches. Bank height ratios remain less than 1.2 and entrenchment ratios greater than 2.2. Visual assessment of the stream channel was performed to document signs of instability, such as eroding banks, structural instability, or excessive sedimentation. The channel is transporting sediment as designed and will continue to be monitored for aggradation and degradation. Stream Hydrology One stage recorder and two flow gauges were installed on restoration reaches March 31, 2021 and document bankfull events and flow days, respectively. The stage recorder on TW2-A measured two bankfull events, of which the largest event measured 0.08 feet above the top of bank. The flow gauge on TW2-A measured six periods of contiguous flow, of which the longest event lasted 100 days. The flow gauge on TW3 measured two periods of contiguous flow, of which the longest event lasted 215 days. All gauges are exceeding threshold for flow. The gauge locations can be found on Figure 2, photos are in Appendix B, and associated data is in Appendix E. Adaptive Crediting RES plans to livestake and supplemental plant along TW1 and TW4 during the 2022 dormant season. The livestaking will include shade tolerant species (buttonbush and silky dogwood) and occur every four feet along the bottom of both banks. The supplemental planting would be performed in areas of low stem density/heavy invasive treatment and include all shade tolerant species such as flowering dogwood, eastern redbud, persimmon, blackgum, sugarberry, and laurel oak. 2.0 Methods Stream cross section monitoring was conducted using a Topcon GTS-312 Total Station. Three-dimensional coordinates associated with cross-section data were collected in the field (NAD83 State Plane feet FIPS 3200). Morphological data were collected at eight cross -sections. Survey data were imported into CAD, ArcGIS®, and Microsoft Excel® for data processing and analysis. The stage recorders include an automatic pressure transducer placed in PVC casing in a pool. The elevation of the bed and top of bank at each stage recorder are used to detect bankfull events. The flow gauge was also installed in a pool and records flow conditions at an hourly interval. Water level data from the flow gauge is corrected using the height of the downstream riffle to detect stream flow events. Vegetation success is being monitored at nine fixed monitoring plots and two random monitoring plots. Vegetation plot monitoring follows the CVS-EEP Level 2 Protocol for Recording Vegetation, version 4.2 (Lee et al. 2008) and includes analysis of species composition and density of planted species. Data are processed using the CVS data entry tool. In the field, the four comers of each plot were permanently marked with PVC at the origin and metal conduit at the other corners. Photos of each plot are to be taken from the origin each monitoring year. The random plot is to be collected in locations where there are no permanent vegetation plots. Random plot will most likely be collected in the form of 100 square meter belt transects with variable dimensions. Tree species and height will be recorded for each planted stem and the transects will be mapped and new locations will be monitored in subsequent years. Tull Wooten III 6 Year 1 Monitoring Report Mitigation Site February 2022 3.0 References Griffith, G.E., J.M.Omernik, J.A. Comstock, M.P. Schafale, W.H.McNab, D.R.Lenat, T.F.MacPherson, J.B. Glover, and V.B. Shelburne. (2002). Ecoregions of North Carolina and South Carolina, (color Poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and photographs): Reston, Virginia, U.S. Geological Survey (map scale 1:1,500,000). Lee Michael T., Peet Robert K., Roberts Steven D., and Wentworth Thomas R., 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation Level. Version 4.2 Peet, R.K., Wentworth, T.S., and White, P.S. (1998), A flexible, multipurpose method for recording vegetation composition and structure. Castanea 63:262-274 Resource Environmental Solutions (2020). Tull Wooten III Final Mitigation Plan. Schafale, M.P. 2012. Guide to the Natural Communities of North Carolina, Fourth Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, NCDENR, Raleigh, NC. USACE. (2016). Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update. NC: Interagency Review Team (IRT). Tull Wooten III 7 Year 1 Monitoring Report Mitigation Site February 2022 Appendix A Background Tables Table 1. Tull Wooten III - Mitigation Assets and Components Project Segment Existing Footage or Acreage Mitigation Plan Footage or Acreage Mitigation Category Restoration Level Priority Level Mitigation Ratio (X:1) Mitigation Plan Credits As -Built Footage or Acreage Comments TW1 965 965 Warm Ell! N/A 10.00000 96.500 96.500 Invasive treatment TW2-A 329 405 Warm R II 1.00000 405.000 405.000 Full channel restoration, invasive treatment, planting TW2-A 1,406 1,423 Warm R I 1.00000 1423.000 1423.000 Full channel restoration, invasive treatment, planting TW2-A 434 478 Warm R I 1.00000 478.000 478.000 Full channel restoration, invasive treatment, planting TW2-B 121 81 Warm El N/A 1.50000 54.000 54.000 Instream structures, planting TW2-C 210 208 Warm P N/A 10.00000 20.800 20.800 Invasive treatment TW3 511 606 Warm R I/II 1.00000 606.000 606.000 Full channel restoration, invasive treatment, planting TW4 1,865 1,865 Warm Ell! N/A 10.00000 186.500 186.500 Invasive treatment, planting Wetlands 42.45 42.45 RR P N/A 10.00000 4.245 4.245 Invasive treatment Note: All crossings and utility easements have been removed from credit calculations Project Credits Restoration Level Stream Riparian Wetland Non -Rip Wetland Coastal Marsh Warm Cool Cold Riverine Non-Riv Restoration 2912.000 Re-establishment Rehabilitation Enhancement Enhancement I 54.000 Enhancement II Enhancement II (5:1) Enhancement III 283.000 Creation Preservation 20.800 4.245 NSBW Adjustment 293.085 Total 3562.885 4.245 Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History Tull Wooten III Elapsed Time Since grading complete: 11 months Elapsed Time Since planting complete: 11 months Number of reporting Years : 1 Activity or Deliverable Data Collection Complete Completion or Delivery Restoration Plan NA Apr-20 Final Design — Construction Plans NA Nov-20 Stream Construction NA Mar-21 Site Planting NA Mar-21 As -built (Year 0 Monitoring — baseline) Mar-21 Jul-21 Year 1 Monitoring Dec-21 Jan-22 Invasive Treatment NA July-21 October-21 December-21 Year 2 Monitoring Year 3 Monitoring Year 4 Monitoring Year 5 Monitoring Year 6 Monitoring Year 7 Monitoring = The number of reports or data points produced excluding the baseline Table 3. Project Contacts Table Tull Wooten III Designer Primary project design POC RES / 3600 Glenwood Ave., Suite 100, Raleigh, NC 27612 Frasier Mullen, PE Construction Contractor Construction contractor POC Carolina Environmental Contracting Inc. (RES) / PO Box 1905 Mount Airy, NC 27030 James Poe Survey Contractor Survey contractor POC Matrix East, PLLC / 906 N. Queen St., Suite A, Kinston, NC 28501 Chris Paderick, PLS Planting Contractor Planting contractor POC Shenandoah Habitats David Coleman Monitoring Performers RES / 3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100, Raleigh, NC 27612 Monitoring POC Emily Ulman (910-274-8231) Table 4. Project Background Information Project Name Tull Wooten III County Lenoir Project Area (acres) 103.84 Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude) 35.255000° N,-77.544000° W Planted Acreage (Acres of Woody Stems Planted) 12.78 Project Watershed Summary Information Physiographic Province Southeastern Floodplains and Low Terraces River Basin Neuse USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit I 03020202 USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit I 03020202060040 DWR Sub -basin 03-04-05 Project Drainage Area (Acres) 136 Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area <1 % Reach Summary Information Parameters TW1 TW2-A TW2-B TW2-C TW3 TW4 Length of reach (linear feet) 965 2,306 81 208 606 1,865 Drainage area (Acres) 32 40 70 75 18 29 Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral I I I I I I larveytown P6 e'lco Beech./ �0 n ,n Ave ,st Ave swell St e ro C f � spar Holbxay Park F np rC .ton )rts ting ti4- m 00 borne Ave Hackett Rd a, � I u I m TNman Ave H fel i mO L. Eastrldge Clr N C Bnght St ,smond St Ilille St tn Willow Sto Lntcoln St 0 O State r'r 0 0 I � t w _ Alm;, Tower VldHIII Rd Georgetown h,l:,t. Tull Wooten II Legend L J Conservation Easement 7 Tull Wooten I & II Service Area - 03020202 Hydrologic Unit - 03020202060040 Tull Wooten I Greenville New Be Ha JackSOI35.255, -77.544 0 1,000 2.000 Feet Figure 1 - Site Location Tull Wooten III Mitigation Project Date: 5/6/2020 Drawn by: MDE Checked by: KAW 1 inch = 2,000 feet fires Lenoir County, North Carolina Appendix B Visual Assessment Data fires s 0 100 200 Feet Figure 2 Current Conditions Plan View MY1 2021 Tull Wooten III Mitigation Site Lenoir County, NC Date 1/5/2022 at 35 259440 Drawn by EJU Long -77 543483 LEGEND O Conservation Easement O Closed Out Tull Wootens ▪ TWIII RVP MY1 ▪ Fixed Veg Plot o Wetland Preservation m Wetland (No Credit) =Top of Bank — Structure Stream Mitigation — Restoration — Enhancement — Enhancement III — Preservation — Crossing — Cross Section — Existing Stream • Flow Gauge • Stage Recorder Vegetation Condition Assessment Target Community Absen 0.2 Presen Pr s nt Mar anal Abs nt ®IIIIIIIIIIIIII fires 0 100 200 Feet Figure 2 Current Conditions Plan View MY1 2021 Tull Wooten III Mitigation Site Lenoir County, NC Date 1/5/2022 at 35 259440 Drawn by EJU Long -77 543483 LEGEND =Conservation Easement =Closed Out Tull Wootens ▪ TWIII RVP MY1 ▪ Fixed Veg Plot o Wetland Preservation m Wetland (No Credit) =Top of Bank — Structure Stream Mitigation — Restoration Enhancement I — Enhancement III — Preservation — Crossing Cross Section Existing Stream • Flow Gauge • Stage Recorder Vegetation Condition Assessment Target Community Absen Presen Present Manlnal Absent ®IIIIIIIIIIIIII Tull Wooten III MY1 Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos —12/2/2021 Vegetation Plot 1 Vegetation Plot 3 Vegetation Plot 5 Vegetation Plot 2 Vegetation Plot 4 Vegetation Plot 6 Tull Wooten III MY1 Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos-12/2/2021 Vegetation Plot 7 Vegetation Plot 9 Random Vegetation Plot 2 Vegetation Plot 8 Random Vegetation Plot 1 Tull Wooten III Monitoring Device Photos Flow Gauge TW2-A Stage Recorder TW2-A Flow Gauge TW3 Crossing Upstream TW2-A (looking upstream) Crossing Upstream TW2-A (looking downstream) Crossing Downstream TW2-A (looking upstream) Crossing Downstream TW2-A (looking downstream) Encroachment Repair on TW4 (horse tape and t-posts) Engineered Sediment Pack (ESP) installed (April 2021) upstream of flow gauge on TW3 (photo: 8/11/2021) Appendix C Vegetation Plot Data Appendix C. Vegetation Assessment Data Table 5. Planted Species Summary Common Name Scientific Name Mit Plan % As -Built % Total Stems Planted Water Oak Quercus nigra 15 24 2,900 Willow Oak Quercus phellos 15 23 2,700 Sycamore Platanus occidentalis 15 19 2,250 River Birch Betula nigra 15 12 1,500 Persimmon Diospyros virginiana 10 11 1,250 Buttonbush Cephalanthus occidentalis 0 6 750 Green Ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica 5 5 650 Yellow Poplar Liriodendron tulipifera 10 0 0 Blackgum Nyssa sylvatica 15 0 0 Total 12,000 Planted Area 12.78 As -built Planted Stems/Acre 939 Table 6. Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary Plot # Planted Stems/Acre Volunteer Stems/Acre Total Stems/Acre Success Criteria Met? Average Planted Stem Height (ft) 1 1255 0 1255 Yes 2 2 405 0 405 Yes 1.7 3 809 0 809 Yes 1.3 4 728 0 728 Yes 2 5 890 0 890 Yes 1.8 6 971 445 1416 Yes 1.4 7 890 0 890 Yes 2.3 8 1133 405 1538 Yes 1.8 9 728 0 728 Yes 1.6 R1 567 0 567 Yes 2.8 R2 607 0 607 Yes 1.8 Project Avg 817 77 894 Yes 1.9 Appendix C. Vegetation Assessment Data Table 7. Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot Species Current Plot Data (MY1 2021) Scientific Name Common Name Species Type 100153-01-0001 100153-01-0002 100153-01-0003 100153-01-0004 100153-01-0005 100153-01-0006 100153-01-0007 100153-01-0008 100153-01-0009 PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T Betulanigra river birch Tree 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 6 6 2 2 2 8 8 8 Cephalanthus occidentalis common buttonbush Shrub 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 2 2 2 Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 Fraxinuspennsylvanica green ash Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 Liquidambarstyraciflua sweetgum Tree 10 10 Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree 1 Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree 14 14 14 1 1 1 3 3 3 5 5 5 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 6 6 6 Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree I 1 1 1 Quercus nigra water oak Tree 3 3 3 1 1 1 5 5 5 1 1 1 6 6 6 4 4 4 1 1 1 10 10 10 4 4 4 Quercusphellos willow oak Tree 10 10 10 1 1 1 7 7 7 11 11 11 6 6 6 12 12 12 4 4 4 16 16 16 3 3 3 Stem count size (arcs) size (ACRES) Species count Stems per ACRE 31 31 31 10 10 10 20 20 20 18 18 18 22 22 22 24 24 35 22 22 22 28 28 38 18 18 18 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 6 6 6 7 7 7 6 6 6 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 7 7 7 7 4 4 5 5 5 5 1255 1255 1255 M. 405 405 809 809 809 728 728 728 890 890 890 971 1416 890 890 890 1133 1133 1538 728 728 728 Annual Means Scientific Name Common Name Species Type 100153-01-R1 100153-01-R2 MY1 (2021) MYO (2021) PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T Betula nigra river birch Tree 1 1 1 22 22 22 22 22 22 Cephalanthus occidentalis common buttonbush Shrub 19 19 19 15 15 15 Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree 6 6 6 11 11 11 Fraxinuspennsylvanica green ash Tree 5 5 5 9 9 9 Liquidambarstyraciflua sweetgum Tree 20 Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree 1 Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree 7 7 7 43 43 43 55 55 55 Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree 1 1 1 Quercus nigra water oak Tree 4 4 4 3 3 3 42 42 42 40 40 40 Quercusphellos willow oak Tree 3 3 3 11 11 11 84 84 84 73 73 73 Stem count size (arcs) size (ACRES) Species count Stems per ACRE 14 14 14 15 15 15 222 222 243 225 225 225 1 1 11 9 0.02 0.02 0.27 0.22 3 3 3 3 3 3 8 8 10 7 7 7 567 567 567 607 607 607 817 817 894 1012 1012 Appendix D Stream Measurement and Geomorphology Data Table 8. Baseline St eam Data Summary Tull Wooten III Mitigation Site - Reach TW2-A (US) Parameter Gauge2 Regional Curve Pre -Existing Condition Reference Reach(es) Data Design Monitoring Baseline Dimension and Substrate - Riffle Only LL UL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SD' n Min Mean Med Max SD' n Min Med Max Min Mean Med Max SD' n Bankfull Width (ft) --- --- --- --- --- 3.9 --- --- 1 -- -- 10.9 --- --- 1 --- 6.0 --- 4.2 4.4 -- 4.5 -- 2 Floodprone Width (ft) --- --- 6.5 --- --- 1 -- -- >50 --- --- 1 --- >30 --- >45.9 >47.95 --- >50 -- 2 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) --- --- --- --- --- 0.6 --- --- 1 -- -- 1.0 --- --- 1 --- 0.5 --- --- --- -- -- -- --- ' Bankfull Max Depth (ft) --- --- 1.0 --- --- 1 -- -- 1.7 --- --- 1 --- 0.8 --- 0.8 0.9 -- 1.0 -- 2 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft) _- _- _- --- --- 2.4 --- --- 1 -- -- 11.0 --- --- 1 --- 3.1 --- 2.2 3.2 --- 4.2 -- 2 Width/Depth Ratio --- --- 6.4 --- --- 1 -- -- 10.9 --- --- 1 --- 11.6 --- --- --- -- -- -- Entrenchment Ratio --- --- 1.7 --- --- 1 -- -- >2.2 --- --- 1 --- >2.2 --- >7.6 >8.85 --- >10.1 -- 2 'Bank Height Ratio --- --- 2.2 --- --- 1 -- -- 1.1 --- --- 1 --- 1.0 --- 1.0 1.0 -- 1.0 -- 2 Profile I I Riffle Length (ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 4 -- --- 19.9 --- --- 7 --- 18 7 17 16 51 7 51 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) -- --- --- -- --- --- - -- --- -- --- --- --- --- --- 0.01 1.96615 1.725 6.69 1.33058 52 Pool Length (ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 6.9 -- --- 21.6 --- --- 17 --- 51 11 29 27 55 9 50 Pool Max depth (ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- -- -- --- ___--- --- -- -- -- Pool Spacing (ft) -- --- --- -- --- --- 40.3 -- --- 109.8 --- --- 34 --- 60 25 47 44 95 13 51 Pattern Channel Beltwidth (ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 29 -- --- 43.5 --- --- 18 --- 36 18 --- --- 36 -- Radius of Curvature (ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 13.1 -- --- 24.6 --- --- 12 --- 36 12 --- --- 36 -- --- Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 1.2 -- --- 2.3 --- --- 2 --- 6 2 --- -- 6 -- Meander Wavelength (ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 49.5 -- --- 64.9 --- --- 36 --- 90 36 --- --- 90 -- Meander Width Ratio --- --- --- --- --- --- 2.7 -- --- 4 --- --- 6 --- 15 6 --- --- 15 -- Transport parameters Reach Shear Stress (competency) Ib/r - - --- -- Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull - - - Stream Power (transport capacity) W/m2 --- --- -- Additional Reach Parameters Rosgen Classification G4 E5 C4 C4 Bankfull e oa y s --- --- --- -- Bankfull Discharge (cfs) --- --- --- - ---- Valley length (ft) 1134 285 1134 1134 Channel Thalweg length (ft) 1189 375 1355 1355 Sinuosity (ft) 1.05 1.32 1.19 1.19 Water Surface Slope (Channel) --- -- Channel slope (ft/ft) 0.009 0.025 0.006 0.006 3Bankfull Floodplain Area (acres) --- --- --- -- of Reach with Eroding Banks --- --- Channel Stability or Habitat Metric --- --- Biological or Other a. --- --- Shaded cells mdicate that these will typi.ly not be filled m I- The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the a ss section measurements and the longitudinal profile 2-- For pro, ectsunmal USG, sag unth the pro, ect reach(added bankwl oa,amuoo rare). Table 8. Baseline St eam Data Summary Tull Wooten III Mitigation Site - Reach TW2-A (DS) Parameter Gauge2 Regional Curve Pre -Existing Condition Reference Reach(es) Data Design Monitoring Baseline Dimension and Substrate - Riffle Only LL UL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SD' n Min Mean Med Max SD' n Min Med Max Min Mean Med Max SD' n Bankfull Width (ft) --- --- --- --- --- 10.1 --- --- 1 -- -- 10.9 --- --- 1 --- 8.0 --- 8.8 10.4 --- 11.9 -- 2 Floodprone Wdth (ft) --- --- 13.6 --- --- 1 -- -- >50 --- --- 1 --- >30 --- >50.1 >50.2 --- >50.3 -- 2 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) --- --- --- --- --- 0.5 --- --- 1 -- -- 1.0 --- --- 1 --- 0.5 --- --- --- -- -- -- --- ' Bankfull Max Depth (ft) --- --- 1.0 --- --- 1 -- -- 1.7 --- --- 1 --- 0.8 --- 0.9 1.0 -- 1.0 -- 2 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft) _- _- _- --- --- 4.8 --- --- 1 -- -- 11.0 --- --- 1 --- 4.0 --- 5.2 5.5 --- 5.8 -- 2 Width/Depth Ratio --- --- 21.2 --- --- 1 -- -- 10.9 --- --- 1 --- 16.0 --- --- --- --- -- -- Entrenchment Ratio --- --- 1.3 --- --- 1 -- -- >2.2 --- --- 1 --- >2.2 --- >4.2 >4.95 --- >5.7 -- 2 'Bank Height Ratio --- --- 2.2 --- --- 1 -- -- 1.1 --- --- 1 --- 1.0 --- 1.0 1.0 -- 1.0 -- 2 Profile I I Riffle Length (ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 4 -- --- 19.9 --- --- 8 --- 20 7 17 16 51 7 51 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) -- --- --- -- --- --- - -- --- -- --- --- --- --- --- 0.01 1.96615 1.725 6.69 1.33058 52 Pool Length (ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 6.9 -- --- 21.6 --- --- 19 --- 67 11 29 27 55 9 50 Pool Max depth (ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- -- -- --- ___--- --- -- -- -- Pool Spacing (ft) -- --- --- -- --- --- 40.3 -- --- 109.8 --- --- 33 --- 73 25 47 44 95 13 51 Pattern Channel Beltwidth (ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 29 -- --- 43.5 --- --- 24 --- 48 24 --- --- 48 -- Radius of Curvature (ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 13.1 -- --- 24.6 --- --- 16 --- 48 16 --- --- 48 -- --- Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 1.2 -- --- 2.3 --- --- 2 --- 6 2 --- -- 6 -- Meander Wavelength (ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 49.5 -- --- 64.9 --- --- 48 --- 120 48 --- --- 120 -- Meander Width Ratio --- --- --- --- --- --- 2.7 -- --- 4 --- --- 6 --- 15 6 --- --- 15 -- --- Transport parameters Reach Shear Stress (competency) Ib/r - - --- -- Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull - - - Stream Power (transport capacity) W/m2 --- --- -- Additional Reach Parameters Rosgen Classification F4 E5 C4 C4 Bankfull e oa y s --- --- --- -- Bankfull Discharge (cfs) --- --- --- ---- - Valley length (ft) 894 285 894 894 Channel Thalweg length (ft) 1124 375 1139 1139 Sinuosity (ft) 1.26 1.32 1.27 1.27 Water Surface Slope (Channel) --- -- Channel slope (ft/ft) 0.013 0.025 0.013 0.013 3Bankfull Floodplain Area (acres) --- --- --- -- nfReach Eroding Banks ywith Channel Stability orHabitat Metrica. --- --- Biological or Other --- --- I- The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the a ss section measurements and the longitudinal profile 2-- For pro, ectsunmal USG, sag unth the pro, ect reach(added bankwl oa,amuoo rare). Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary Tull Wooten III Mitigation Site - Reach TW3 Parameter Gauge' Regional Curve Pre -Existing Condition Reference Reach(es) Data Design Monitoring Baseline Dimension and Substrate - Riffle Only LL UL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SD' n Min Mean Med Max SD' n Min Med Max Min Mean Med Max SD' n Bankfull Width (ft) --- --- --- 3.3 3.4 --- 3.4 --- 2 -- -- 10.9 --- --- 1 --- 5.0 --- --- --- 8.6 -- -- Floodprone Width (ft) 3.8 5.7 --- 7.5 --- 2 -- -- >50 --- --- 1 --- >30 --- --- --- >48.1 -- -- Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) --- --- --- 0.4 0.6 --- 0.7 --- 2 -- -- 1.0 --- --- 1 --- 0.4 --- --- --- -- -- -- --- ' Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.5 0.8 --- 1.0 --- 2 -- -- 1.7 --- --- 1 --- 0.6 --- --- --- 0.6 -- -- Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft) _- _- -- 1.2 1.8 --- 2.4 --- 2 -- -- 11.0 --- --- 1 --- 1.9 --- --- --- 2.2 -- -- Width/Depth Ratio 4.7 6.9 --- 9.0 --- 2 -- -- 10.9 --- --- 1 --- 13.2 --- --- --- --- -- -- Entrenchment Ratio 1.2 1.7 --- 2.2 --- 2 -- -- >2.2 --- --- 1 --- >2.2 --- --- --- >5.6 -- -- 'Bank Height Ratio 2.0 4.9 --- 7.8 --- 2 -- -- 1.1 --- --- 1 --- 1.0 --- --- --- 1.0 -- -- Profile Riffle Length (ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 4 -- --- 19.9 --- --- 6 --- 14 6 15 12 38 8 15 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) -- --- --- -- --- --- - -- --- -- --- --- --- --- --- 0.1 2.5 2.6 6.7 2.0 15 Pool Length (ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 6.9 -- --- 21.6 --- --- 14 --- 41 10 19 17 36 8 13 Pool Max depth (ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- -- -- --- ___--- --- -- -- -- Pool Spacing (ft) -- --- --- -- --- --- 40.3 -- --- 109.8 --- --- 17 --- 51 20 32 29 59 11 14 Pattern Channel Beltwidth (ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 29 -- --- 43.5 --- --- 15 --- 30 15 --- --- 30 -- --- Radius of Curvature (ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 13.1 -- --- 24.6 --- --- 10 --- 30 10 --- --- 30 -- --- Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 1.2 -- --- 2.3 --- --- 2 --- 6 2 --- -- 6 -- --- Meander Wavelength (ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- 49.5 -- --- 64.9 --- --- 30 --- 75 30 --- --- 75 -- --- Meander Width Ratio --- --- --- --- --- --- 2.7 -- --- 4 --- --- 6 --- 15 6 --- --- 15 -- --- Transport parameters Reach Shear Stress (competency) Ib/r - - I --- -- Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull - - - Stream Power (transport capacity) W/m2 --- --- -- Additional Reach Parameters Rosgen Classification G5 E5 C4 C4 Bankfull e oa y s --- --- --- -- Bankfull Discharge (cfs) --- --- --- ---- - Valley length (ft) 478 285 478 478 Channel Thalweg length (ft) 511 375 606 606 Sinuosity (ft) 1.07 1.32 1.27 1.27 Water Surface Slope (Channel) --- -- Channel slope (ft/ft) 0.024 0.025 0.015 0.015 3Bankfull Floodplain Area (acres) --- --- --- -- nfReach Eroding Banks ywith Channel Stability orHabitat Metrica. --- --- Biological or Other --- --- I- The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the a ss section measurements and the longitudinal profile 2-- For pro, ectsunmal USG, sag unth the pro, ect reach(added bankwl oa,amuoo rare). Appendix D. Table 9 - Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross Sections) Tull Wooten III Cross S ction 1 (Pool) Cross Section 2 (Riffle) Cross Section (Pool) Cross Section (Riffle Cross S ction 5 (Riffle) Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB -RSA' 56.7 56.7 56.4 56.4 51.1 51.1 50.8 50.8 41.1 41.1 Bankthll Width (1t)' - - 4.5 4.7 - - 4.2 8.9 8.8 8.7 Floodprone Width (1t)1 - - >45.9 >44.1 - - >50 >50 >50.1 >49.8 Bankthll Max Depth (it)' 1.5 0.8 0.8 0.8 2.0 1.6 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.8 Low Bank Elevation (10 - - 56.4 56.4 - - 50.8 50.8 41.1 41.1 Bankthll Cross Sectional Area (ft2)2 6.1 3.2 2.2 2.3 6.5 4.7 4.2 3.5 5.2 4.0 Bankthll Entrenchment Ratio - - >10.1 >9.3 - - >7.6 >5.6 >5.7 >5.7 Bankthll Bank Height Ratio - - 1.0 1.0 - - 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Cross Section 6 (Pool) Cross Section 7 (Riffle) Cross Section (Pool) Cross Section (Riffle Cross Section 10 (Pool) Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB -RSA' 40.7 40.7 32.1 32.1 31.9 31.9 56.0 56.0 56.0 56.0 Bankfull Width (1t)1 - - 11.9 13.0 - - 8.6 6.5 - - Floodprone Width (1t)1 - - >50.3 >50.4 - - >48.1 >46.4 - Bankthll Max Depth (1t)2 2.0 0.8 1.0 0.8 1.7 1.3 0.6 0.4 1.3 1.3 Low Bank Elevation (10 - - 32.1 32.1 - - 56.0 56.0 - - Bankthll Cross Sectional Area (ft2)2 8.6 2.1 5.8 3.6 10.4 6.4 2.2 1.1 4.4 2.7 Bankthll Entrenchment Ratio - - >4.2 >3.9 - - >5.6 >7.1 - - BankiillBankHeightRatio - - 1.0 1.0 - - 1.0 1.0 - - 1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subseque t years ankfull elevation 2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basi for adjusting each subsequent year bankthll elevation Upstream Downstream Tull Wooten III - Reach TW2-A - Cross Section 1 - Pool - Restoration an Exaggeration Elevation (ft) i U1 O) V 00 CO C 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 Distance (ft) 48 3X Vertical MYO 2020 MY1 2021 — — —Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area Cross Section 1 (Pool) MYO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Bankfull IIevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSA 56.71 56.7 Bankfull Width (ft)' - - Floodprone Width (ft)' - - Bankfull MaxDepth (ft)2 1.5 0.8 Low Bank Elevation (ft) - - Bankfull Cross SectionalArea(ft2)2 6.1 3.2 Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio' - - Bankfull Bank Height Ratio' - - 1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation 2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation Upstream Downstream Tull Wooten III - Reach TW2-A - Cross Section 2 - Riffle - Restoration cn Elevation (ft) i U1 O) V 03 CO C 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 Distance (ft) MYO 2020 MY1 2021 — — —Approx. Bankfull Area Low Bank Elevation Floodprone 3X Vertical Exaggeration Cross Section 2 (Riffle) MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSA1 56.36 56.4 Bankfull Width (ft)1 4.5 4.7 Floodprone Width (ft)1 >45.9 >44.1 Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2 0.8 0.8 Low Bank Elevation (ft) 56.36 56.4 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)2 2.2 2.3 Bankfull Entrenchment Ratios >10.1 >9.3 Bankfull Bank Height Ratios 1.0 1.0 1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation 2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation Upstream Downstream Tull Wooten III - Reach TW2-A - Cross Section 3 - Pool - Restoration SA Exaggeration Elevation (ft) A U1 01 U1 U1 c. 0 CO 0 N CO a 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 Distance (ft) 48 3X Vertical MYO 2020 MY1 2021 — — • Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area Cross Section 3 tPool) MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSA1 51.13 51.1 Bankfull Width (ft)1 - - Floodprone Width (ft)1 - - Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2 2.0 1.6 Low Bank Elevation (ft) - - Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)2 6.5 4.7 Bankfull Entrenchment Ratios - - Bankfull Bank Height Ratios - - 1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation 2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation Upstream Downstream Tull Wooten III - Reach TW2-A - Cross Section 4 - Riffle - Restoration Elevation (ft) it A 01 U1 U1 to (O N W a ._.._.sue..,.. _ _.._._ _.._._.._. ._._.._._.._._.._._. _._.._._.._._.._. 41 , 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 Distance (ft) 2020 2021 — — — Approx. Bankfull Area Low Bank Elevation MYO MY1 Floodprone 3X Vertical Exaggeration Cross Section 4 (Riffle) I. MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSA1 50.83 50.8 Bankfull Width (ft)' 4.2 8.9 Floodprone Width (ft)' >50 >50 Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2 1.0 0.9 Low Bank Elevation (ft) 50.83 50.8 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)2 4.2 3.5 Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio' >7.6 >5.6 Bankfull Bank Height Ratio' 1.0 1.0 1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation 2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation Upstream Downstream Tull Wooten III - Reach TW2-A - Cross Section 5 - Riffle - Restoration AA Elevation (ft) a co A A A A 4 0 CO 0 N CO 4 ..".."11\6ftlia., 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 Distance (ft) MY0 2020 MY1 2021 — — — Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area Low Bank Elevation 3X Vertical Exaggeration Cross Section 5 (Riffle) MYO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSA1 41.07 41.1 Bankfull Width (ft)1 8.8 8.7 Floodprone Width (ft)1 >50.1 >49.8 Bankfull MaxDepth (ft)2 0.9 0.8 Low BankElevation (ft) 41.07 41.1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)2 5.2 4.0 Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio t >5.7 >5.7 Bankfull Bank Height Ratio t 1.0 1.0 1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation 2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation Upstream Downstream Tull Wooten III - Reach TW2-A - Cross Section 6 - Pool - Restoration 41 Exaggeration Elevation (ft) a w w a A A a a co (O O N ( Of 7 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 Distance (ft) 48 3X Vertical MYO 2020 — MY1 2021 — —— Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area Cross Section 6 tPool) MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSA1 40.74 40.7 Bankfull Width (ft)1 - - Floodprone Width (ft)1 - - Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2 2.0 0.8 Low Bank Elevation (ft) - - Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)2 8.6 2.1 Bankfull Entrenchment Ratios - - Bankfull Bank Height Ratios - - 1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation 2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation Upstream Downstream Tull Wooten III - Reach TW2-A - Cross Section 7 - Riffle - Restoration ZS Elevation (ft) D 0 -, N W A c. LV 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 Distance (ft) MYO 2020 MY1 2021 — — — Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area Low Bank Elevation 3X Vertical Exaggeration Cross Section 7 (Riffle) MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Bankfull IIevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSA1 32.13 32.1 Bankfull Width (ft)1 11.9 13.0 Floodprone Width (ft)1 >50.3 >50.4 Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2 1.0 0.8 Low Bank Elevation (ft) 32.13 32.1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)2 5.8 3.6 Bankfull Entrenchment Ratios >4.2 >3.9 Bankfull Bank Height Ratios 1.0 1.0 1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation 2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation Upstream Downstream Tull Wooten III - Reach TW2-E - Cross Section 8 - Pool - Restoration z� Exaggeration Elevation (ft) o w w w w c D 0 N W A c 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 Distance (ft) 48 3X Vertical MYO 2020 MY1 2021 — — — Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area Cross Section 8 Pool) MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSA1 31.86 31.9 Bankfull Width (ft)1 - - Floodprone Width (ft)1 - - Bankfull MaxDepth (ft)2 1.7 1.3 Low Bank Elevation (ft) - - Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)2 10.4 6.4 Bankfull Entrenchment Ratios - - Bankfull Bank Height Ratios - - 1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation 2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation Upstream Downstream Tull Wooten III - Reach TW3 - Cross Section 9 - Riffle - Restoration cn Elevation (ft) n cn cn cn cn cn C cn CS) ao ro C 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 Distance (ft) MYO 2020 MY1 2021 — — — Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area Low Bank Elevation Cross Section 9 (Riffle) MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Bankfull IIevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSA1 55.98 56.0 Bankfull Width (ft)1 8.6 6.5 Floodprone Width (ft)1 >48.1 >46.4 Bankfull MaxDepth (ft)2 0.6 0.4 Low Bank Elevation (ft) 55.98 56.0 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)2 2.2 1.1 Bankfull Entrenchment Ratios >5.6 >7.1 Bankfull Bank Height Ratio i 1.0 1.0 1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation 2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation Upstream Downstream Tull Wooten III - Reach TW3 - Cross Section 10 - Pool - Restoration cn Exaggeration Elevation (ft) n 0, 01 01 01 01 c J A 01 0) v 03 ( w 7 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 Distance (ft) 48 3X Vertical MY0 2020 MY1 2021 — — — Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area Cross Section 10 (Pool) MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSA1 55.96 56.0 Bankfull Width (ft)1 - - Floodprone Width (ft)1 - - Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2 1.3 1.3 Low Bank Elevation (ft) - - Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)2 4.4 2.7 Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio' - - Bankfull Bank Height Ratio' - - 1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation 2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation Appendix E Hydrology Table 10. Rainfall Summary MY1 2021 Month Average Normal Limits Kinston Station Precipitation 30 Percent 70 Percent January 3.81 2.61 4.54 7.26 February 3.39 2.19 4.09 8.08 March 3.82 2.85 4.47 6.57 April 3.47 2.34 4.14 1.14 May 3.71 2.51 4.44 1.76 June 5.75 3.86 6.88 9.95 July 5.99 4.65 6.94 7.74 August 6.25 3.98 7.54 8.80 September 6.32 3.59 7.69 1.61 October 3.38 1.91 4.07 1.50 November 3.36 1.78 4.10 0.80 December 3.28 2.24 3.91 2.80 Total 52.53 34.51 62.81 58.01 Above Normal Limits Below Normal Limits Within Normal Limits Note: Kinston Lower Coastal Plain Tobacco Research Station is 4.5 miles northwest of the project site Table 11. Documentation of Geomorphically Significant Flow Events Year Number of Bankfull Events Maximum Bankfull Height (ft) Date of Maximum Bankfull Event Stage Recorder TW2-A MY1 2021 2 0.08 6/10/2021 Number of How Events Maximum Cons ecutive How Days Maximum Cummlative Flow Days Maximum Cons ecutive How Date Rang e Flow Gauge TW2-A MY12021 6 100 253 6/2/2021- 9/10/2021 Flow Gauge TW3 MY12021 2 215 224 3/31/2021- 11/1/2021 MY1 2021 Tull Wooten III Flow Gauge TW2-A Stream Flow Hydrograph 15 Water Depth (ft) J � N 100 days - 14 - 13 12 - 11 - 10 c 9 — JJll c -8 ,e r _ - 5 4 3 . Ii ..II i I II. 1t hi I .. l I II , 11II I 11. 1 -2 -1 0 3/3 /21 4/30/21 5/31/21 6/30/21 7/31/21 8/31/21 9/30/21 10/31/21 11/30/21 12/31/21 Date Rain — TW2 A Depth — — — TW2-A DS Riffle — Bed MY1 2021 Tull Wooten III Flow Gauge TW3 Stream Flow Hydrograph 15 Water Depth (ft) 215 days - 14 - 13 - 12 - 11 10 l YI1 c c -8 'm re -7 -6 l t I. . Ii ..ill i I II, 4 ll 1.1I .. l I II , iiii _ I II. II ti 4 -1 0 3/31/21 4/30/21 5/31/21 6/30/21 7/31/21 8/31/21 9/30/21 10/31/21 11/30/21 12/31/21 Date Rain — TW3 Depth — — — TW3 DS Riffle — Bed