CDIA SCF Basin_Annual Monitoring Report_20240306_reduced

FEZ
2024 SCF In -Line
Detention Basin Year 1
Annual Monitoring Report
Charlotte Douglas International Airport
Deicing Pad and South Crossfield Taxiway
(SCF) In -line Detention Basin
i�
.r..�.r Charlotte, NC
March 6, 2024
W�
r

This page intentionally left blank.

Charlotte Douglas International Airport 12024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report ���
Contents
Contents
Acronyms and Abbreviations
1 Project Background............................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Project Status............................................................................................................................
1
2 Methods...............................................................................................................................................1
2.1 Rainfall Monitoring.....................................................................................................................
1
2.2 Monitoring Locations.................................................................................................................
1
2.2.1 Dimension Assessment................................................................................................
2
2.2.2 Substrate Characterization...........................................................................................2
2.2.3 Bank Erosion Hazard Index(BEHI)..............................................................................2
2.2.4 North Carolina Stream Assessment Methodology(NCSAM).......................................
2
2.2.5 Photographic Documentation.......................................................................................
3
2.3 Quality Assurance/Quality Control............................................................................................
3
3 Results.................................................................................................................................................3
3.1 Rainfall Monitoring.....................................................................................................................3
3.2 Stream Monitoring.....................................................................................................................
3
3.2.1 S25-2............................................................................................................................
4
3.2.2 S25-3............................................................................................................................
5
3.2.3 S25-4............................................................................................................................
5
3.2.4 S32-1............................................................................................................................
5
3.2.5 S32-2............................................................................................................................
6
3.2.6 S34-1............................................................................................................................
6
4 Discussion...........................................................................................................................................
9
5 References........................................................................................................................................
11
Tables
Table 1 Summary of Monitoring as of February 2024.................................................................................. 1
Table 2 Summary of Post -Construction (2023) and Year 1 Annual (2024) Stream Assessments ............... 8

Charlotte Douglas International Airport 12024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report ���
Contents
Figures
Figure 1 SCF Project Detention Basin and Survey Locations as of May 2023
Appendices
Appendix A —Approved Monitoring Plan
Appendix B — Representative Photographs
Appendix C — Stream Cross Sections
Appendix D — Data Forms

Charlotte Douglas International Airport 12024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Applicant City of Charlotte's Aviation Department
BEHI Bank Erosion Hazard Index
CLT or Airport Charlotte Douglas International Airport
CWA Clean Water Act
D50 average particle diameter by mass
IP Individual Permit
mm millimeters
NCDWR North Carolina Division of Water Resources
NCSAM North Carolina Stream Assessment Method
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
SCF South Crossfield Taxiway
USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
USGS United States Geological Survey

Charlotte Douglas International Airport 12024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report ���
Acronyms and Abbreviations
This page intentionally left blank.

Charlotte Douglas International Airport 12024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report ���
Project Background
1 Project Background
The City of Charlotte's Aviation Department (Applicant) submitted a Phased Clean Water Act
(CWA) Section 404/401 Individual Permit (IP) on January 31, 2020, for the proposed expansion
of the Charlotte Douglas International Airport (CLT or Airport) in Mecklenburg County, North
Carolina. The CWA Section 401 Individual Water Quality Certification was issued by the North
Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) on August 21, 2020 and the CWA Section 404
IP was approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) on December 15, 2020.
A component of the approved Phased IP includes stormwater detention basins located in -line
with existing channels. An in -line detention basin associated with the Deicing Pad and South
Crossfield Taxiway (SCF) Project and a permanent, culverted stream crossing were constructed
on Coffey Creek (S25) from 2021 to 2023 (Figure 1). The purpose of the in -line detention basin
is to provide peak discharge reduction for storm events up to the 100-year event to reduce peak
flows downstream. During the design storm event, inundation and flooding of streamside areas
to three streams (Coffey Creek [S25] and two unnamed tributaries to Coffey Creek [S32 and
S34]) would occur, with attenuation within 48 hours.
During the Phased IP Public Notice period, the USACE and the NCDWR requested a
Monitoring Plan of the stream channels subject to in -line detention flooding. The Monitoring Plan
requires documentation of pre- and post -construction detention basin conditions, as well as five
years of periodic monitoring beginning six months after the post -construction survey
(Appendix A). The five years of monitoring includes annual surveys, quarterly post -storm, and
annual post -storm surveys (also called "monitoring events").

LEGEND
Basin Flood Limits
Monitoring Locations
o Streams
[� Coffey Creek
Wetlands
Ilk 0 Feet 1,000
Charlotte Douglas International Airport 12024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report ���
Project Background
7XV
Figure 1. SCF Project Detention Basin and Survey Locations as of May 2023
1

Charlotte Douglas International Airport 12024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report ���
Methods
1.1 Project Status
The pre -construction survey was completed and shared with the USACE and NCDWR in spring
2021 (Table 1). Construction of the SCF in -line detention basin was finalized in quarter 2 of
2023 and the post -construction survey was completed in June 2023. The post -construction
monitoring report was filed with the agencies in September 2023.
In accordance with the approved Monitoring Plan, annual surveys of the stream channels within
the flood limits of the basin were completed on January 23, 2024, approximately six months
after the post -construction survey. As of the time of this reporting, no annual or quarterly post -
storm monitoring events have been necessary according to the conditions required by the
Monitoring Plan'. This report provides the findings of the first annual monitoring event.
Table 1 Summary of Monitoring as of February 2024
Monitoring Event
Frequency
Status
Pre -Construction
1 time
Completed (April 29-30, 2021)
Post -Construction
1 time
Complete (June 29, 2023)
Annual
1 x/year for 5 years
Year 1 complete (January 23, 2024)
Annual
Maximum 1x/year for 5 years
Condition requirements not met
(Post -Storm)
Quarterly
Maximum 4x/year for 2 years
Condition requirements not met
(Post -Storm)
2 Methods
2.1 Rainfall Monitoring
Rainfall in the vicinity of the SCF Project was evaluated during the period of construction.
Discharges reaching bankfull elevation are known as channel -forming flows; therefore,
precipitation resulting in streams meeting or exceeding bankfull elevations are capable of
causing natural changes to the stream channels within the detention basin. Rainfall was
monitored at CRN-04 Raingage at Fire Station 30, Charlotte, NC — 351132080562345 (USGS
2023), which is the nearest rain gauge to the SCF Project at just over a quarter of a mile. No
rain gauges are installed directly on Coffey Creek.
2.2 Monitoring Locations
Stream monitoring locations were selected in consultation with NCDWR prior to pre -construction
baseline monitoring. A total of seven monitoring locations were established at riffle features: four
' Up to four quarterly post -storm monitoring events can happen per year, at one per quarter maximum. A quarterly
post -storm monitoring event will be conducted following a 2+-year storm event, which is a rainfall event with point
precipitation frequency of 2.45 inches within a six -hour period (NOAA 2023). An annual post -storm monitoring
event will be conducted the first time a 10+-year storm event occurs. A 10-year storm event is a rainfall event with
point precipitation frequency of 3.54 inches within a six -hour period (NOAA 2023).

Charlotte Douglas International Airport 12024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report ���
Methods
along Coffey Creek (S25-1, S25-2, S25-3, and S25-4) and three along tributaries to Coffey
Creek (S32-1, S32-2, and S34-1) (Figure 1). In accordance with the Monitoring Plan, location
S25-1 (downstream of the detention area) is monitored only following annual or quarterly post -
storm routine monitoring. As of the time of this reporting, no annual or quarterly post -storm
monitoring events have been necessary and therefore, no results for S25-1 are presented in this
report.
Monitoring locations within the detention basin (S25-2, S25-3, S25-4, S32-1, S32-2, and S34-1)
are subject to dimension, substrate, Bank Erosion Hazard Index (BEHI), and North Carolina
Stream Assessment Methodology (NCSAM) assessments, as well as photographic
documentation.
2.2.1 Dimension Assessment
Cross -sectional dimension data was collected for monitoring locations S25-2, S25-3, S25-4,
S32-1, S32-2, and S34-1 applying standard surveying techniques using a basic surveyor's level
(CST Berger), rod, and a tape strung from bank to bank. Cross sections were surveyed
assuming height of instrument as elevation zero, typically at the left "bank pin" (i.e., rebar), and
differential leveling. Elevations were recorded at important features such as top of bank, slope
breaks, bankfull indicators, edge of water, and thalweg.
Channel parameters, based on The Key to the Rosgen Stream Classification of Natural Rivers
(Rosgen 1994), were calculated from the plotted elevation data. These parameters
(entrenchment ratio, width/depth ratio, sinuosity, and substrate) were used to assign a channel
classification type for each cross-section location.
2.2.2 Substrate Characterization
A Wolman pebble count (Wolman 1954) study was performed at all monitoring locations to
characterize the existing grain size distribution of substrate. The Wentworth grain size
classification scale (Wentworth 1922) was used to assign size classes to the substrate.
Substrate particle sizes were plotted by size class and frequency to determine distributions for
each cross section.
2.2.3 Bank Erosion Hazard Index (BEHI)
Changes in upstream or streamside conditions leading to higher -energy flows can contribute to
streambank erosion, leading to downstream sedimentation and stream instability. The BEHI
(Rosgen 2001) is a fluvial geomorphic assessment that was conducted to evaluate the
susceptibility of potential streambank erosion based on a combination of multiple factors
including the bank material and/or stratification, root depth and density, streambank angle, the
bankfull height to bank height ratio, and the amount of surface protection present. The BEHI
assessment resulted in a numerical value that corresponded to an overall qualitative BEHI
rating (very low, low, moderate, high, very high, or extreme).
2.2.4 North Carolina Stream Assessment Methodology (NCSAM)
The NCSAM (NCDWQ 2010) was created through a collaborative effort of several entities,
including the USACE, U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, and many others, to provide the public and private sectors

Charlotte Douglas International Airport 12024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report ���
Results
with an accurate, consistent, rapid, observational, and science -based field method to determine
the level of function of streams within North Carolina. NCSAM was used to assess stream
quality and function at each monitoring location by an evaluation of hydrological influence, water
quality, and biology for each monitoring location.
2.2.5 Photographic Documentation
Photographs were taken at each monitoring location to visually document the existing conditions
of the channel, including views facing upstream, downstream, and each bank (left and right).
2.3 Quality Assurance/Quality Control
A biologist with Rosgen training (Wildland Hydrology, Inc.) led the field assessments for
baseline condition monitoring. All data transcribed from field data sheets was reviewed by a
second scientist for accuracy and to review documentation maintained for records. A second
Rosgen-trained scientist also reviewed the geomorphic assessments.
3 Results
3.1 Rainfall Monitoring
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Precipitation Frequency Data
Server (NOAA 2023) was consulted to determine point precipitation frequency estimates at the
SCF Project. Channel -forming, bankfull-level discharges typically occur on a 1.5-year frequency
(Rosgen 1996); based on the NOAA point precipitation frequency estimates, 2.25 inches of
rainfall would need to fall within a 6-hour period to meet this criterion (an average of a one-year
storm event of 2.04 inches within 6 hours and a two-year storm event of 2.46 inches within 6
hours at this location). Between the time that post -construction monitoring was conducted in
June 2023 and the 2024 annual monitoring event took place, one 1.5-year storm event occurred
(January 9, 2024). These events had the potential to cause natural changes to the streams by
natural streambank erosion, transfer of sediments and substrates, and movement of natural
materials such as woody debris and vegetation.
3.2 Stream Monitoring
Year 1 annual monitoring was completed on January 23, 2024. Some changes in stream
conditions were noted since the post -construction survey in June 2023. Large woody debris
including several trees were found within the Coffey Creek stream channel at the S25-2 cross
section location, likely as a result of the January 9 storm event which totaled 2.85 inches of
rainfall, with 2.26 inches falling within a six -hour period, qualifying as a 1.5-year storm event
(see Section 3.1). The storm also produced sustained winds up to 33 miles per hour and wind
gusts up to 56 miles per hour (TWC 2024). No obvious effects to in -stream conditions, such as
exacerbated streambank erosion beyond that documented previously, were observed.
The substrate characterization of cross sections within Coffey Creek (S25-2, S25-3, and S25-4),
indicated by the average particle diameter by mass (D50), appears to have lowered since the
June 2023 survey. D5o for cross sections located on tributaries to Coffey Creek did not change.
A significant amount of sediment deposition downstream of the basin observed on February 2,

Charlotte Douglas International Airport 12024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report ���
Results
2023, suggests a large influx of sediment was transported through Coffey Creek within the in -
line detention basin limits. It does not appear that the sediment originated from within the SCF
Project limits. Although the fine sediments were deposited downstream of the basin culvert,
coarser sediments such as small gravel may have been deposited within the Coffey Creek
channel upstream of the culvert, resulting in lower D50 characterization for each of the Coffey
Creek cross sections.
Other changes noted across several stream monitoring locations included higher severity
scores for BEHI assessments and lower scores for NCSAM assessments. These changes are
largely attributable to the typical change in seasonal conditions related to vegetation coverage
and presence of aquatic life. The post -construction monitoring event was performed in June
2023 and followed by the first annual stream monitoring event conducted six months after, in
January 2024, in accordance with the approved monitoring plan. The post -construction survey
documents conditions that subsequent routine (annual and quarterly) monitoring events are
compared to, however this approach has resulted in an evaluation of conditions observed during
the summer season (June) compared to the winter season (January). Natural shifts in
vegetation coverage (due to dormancy) and aquatic life (due to low water temperatures)
typically observed during winter resulted in poorer scores for some stream crossings.
Details noted during the annual survey for each permanent cross section location are provided
below. Representative photographs including upstream, downstream, and streambank views
are provided in Appendix B, plotted cross sections are provided in Appendix C, and data forms
are provided in Appendix D.
3.2.1 S25-2
S25-2 is the most downstream location on Coffey Creek within the flood limits of the detention
basin (Figure 1). Coffey Creek is a perennial stream. At the time of survey in 2023, S25-2 was
assessed to be a Rosgen "F4" stream and this classification did not change in 2024 (Table 2).
F4 streams are gravel -dominated, entrenched, deeply incised meandering channels (Rosgen
1996). The top of bank elevation is much greater than the bankfull stage. F4 channels have low
to moderate gradient, exhibit riffle/pool bed features, and have high to very high width/depth
ratios. Sediment supply in the F4 stream type is moderate to high depending on erodibility
conditions. Streambank erosion rates are high with marginal stability from riparian vegetation.
Depositional features are common in this stream type and, over time, promote development of
floodplain inside of the bankfull channel. Streambanks at S25-2 in 2023 exhibited moderate
erosion on both banks according to the BEHI assessment; in 2024, the left bank was elevated to
high erosion risk due to reduced vegetation coverage and root density.
Substrate at S25-2 consisted primarily of gravel material, however the D50 metric reduced from
coarse gravel (D5o of 30 millimeters [mm]) to fine gravel (D5o of 5.5 mm) (Table 2). As mentioned
above, a significant amount of sediment appears to have migrated through Coffey Creek, and
finer gravels may have deposited within the channel upstream of the culvert.
The NCSAM score for water quality was rated as "low" in 2024, compared to "medium" in 2023,
resulting in an overall NCSAM score of "low" (Table 2). The lower score for water quality was

Charlotte Douglas International Airport 12024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report ���
Results
driven by the absence of aquatic life, which is likely due to the seasonal (winter) conditions (e.g.,
lower water temperatures).
3.2.2 S25-3
S25-3 is the middle location on Coffey Creek within the flood limits of the detention basin
(Figure 1).The Rosgen classification of "F4" did not change between 2023 and 2024 (Table 2),
and therefore generally exhibits the characteristics of those listed above for S25-2. As noted in
2023 (and prior), the right bank at this location exhibits degradation with a BEHI score of "high",
which remained the case in 2024. The D50, like observed at S25-2, exhibited smaller gravel size
with a change from very coarse gravel (34 mm) to medium gravel (13 mm).
The NCSAM scores remained unchanged from the June 2023 survey, which rated the
hydrology, water quality, and habitat functional classes all as low due to factors such as limited
woody vegetation in the stream buffer, lack of stream shading, and right bank stream instability
(Table 2). As for the other stream crossings, aquatic life was also absent at the time of survey
due to the time of year.
3.2.3 S25-4
S25-4 is the most upstream location on Coffey Creek within the flood limits of the detention
basin (Figure 1). The Rosgen classification of "C4" did not change between 2023 and 2024
(Table 2). C4 streams are slightly entrenched, meandering, gravel -dominated, riffle -pool
channels with well -developed floodplains (Rosgen 1996). C4 stream channels have gentle
gradients of less than 2% and high width/depth ratios. Rates of streambank erosion and lateral
adjustment are influenced by the presence and condition of riparian vegetation. BEHI score for
the left bank was elevated compared to the June 2023 survey due to a reduced root density and
surface coverage during the winter season.
Substrate characterization, like the downstream cross sections on Coffey Creek, saw a reduced
D50 value from 46 mm (very coarse gravel) to 9.5 mm (medium gravel) (Table 2). The overall
NCSAM score maintained at "medium" stream functionality.
3.2.4 S32-1
S32-1 is the most upstream monitoring location on an intermittent, unnamed tributary to Coffey
Creek located on the western side of the detention basin (Figure 1). The Rosgen classification
of "E4" did not change between 2023 and 2024 (Table 2). In general, E-type streams have low -
to -moderate sinuosity, gentle- to moderately steep channel gradients, and very low channel
width/depth ratios (Rosgen 1996). They are hydraulically efficient and maintain sediment
transport capacity (during periods of flow for intermittent streams). The narrow and relatively
deep channels maintain a high resistance to plan form adjustment which results in channel
stability without significant downcutting. E5 channels are generally stable unless streambanks
are disturbed or if significant changes in sediment supply and/or streamflow occur (such as
upstream/watershed development).
The BEHI scores for the left and right streambanks at S32-1 were "high" and "moderate",
respectively, in 2023, and increased to both categorized as "high" in 2024 due to seasonal
changes (reductions) in surface protection and root density (Table 2). The left bank just

Charlotte Douglas International Airport 12024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report ���
Results
downstream of S32-1 exhibits significant erosion on the outside meander (see Photo 14 in
Appendix B).
Unlike the cross sections surveyed on Coffey Creek, the substrate characterization at S32-1 did
not appear to have changed since the 2023 post -construction survey (D50 comparison of 4.0
mm in 2023 and 5.6 mm in 2024) (Table 2). The NCSAM scores for S32-1 also did not change
from 2023 to 2024 and maintained an overall score of "high". A greater area of riparian buffer
that was preserved during the construction of the basin as compared to S25 (Coffey Creek)
likely contributes to a higher NCSAM rating at this cross section location. S32 (associated
tributary) is also not considered an urban stream according to the assessment method because
the percent impervious area is less than 24 percent, suggesting that this reach may not be as
exposed to intermittent, high-energy flows (i.e., "flashy" flows) as compared to Coffey Creek.
3.2.5 S32-2
S32-2 is the downstream monitoring location on the western unnamed tributary to Coffey Creek
(Figure 1). In 2023, the stream at this location was classified as a "134" Rosgen classification
and this classification did not change in 2024 (Table 2). B4 stream types are moderately
entrenched with gradients of 24% and moderate width/depth ratios. The channel bed
morphology is dominated by fine gravel and also did not change substantially between 2023
and 2024 (D5o of 7.6 and 7.4, respectively). B4 stream types are considered to be relatively
stable and are not high -sediment supply streams.
Streambanks were previously scored with "low" and "moderate" BEHI ratings for the left and
right banks, respectively, in 2023, however both banks were scored as "low" in 2023 due to
increased root depth and density related to higher riparian vegetation density (Table 2). While
most cross section locations saw a decline in vegetation due to seasonal dormancy, S32-2
vegetation increased during the period of construction and over the prior growing season due to
reduced stream shading, which contributed to higher root density and surface protection. The
overall NCSAM score remained at "high" stream functionality.
3.2.6 S34-1
S34-1 is a small intermittent stream on the eastern side of the detention basin and flows
southwest to a confluence with Coffey Creek (Figure 1). In -stream and riparian conditions were
similar between 2024 and 2023. However, due to the small size of the stream, a minor change
in cross section survey (specifically, the bankfull width measured 2.4 inches wider in 2024
compared to 2023) resulted in a lower entrenchment ratio, potentially reclassifying this stream
(see comparison cross section of S34-1 provided in Appendix C). Typically, widening of stream
channels is observed in unstable stream types such as F-type streams, in which the high
velocity of stream flow is progressively eroding the stream banks in effort to establish a
functional floodplain within the confines of the stream channel through degradation and
aggradation. The streambanks at S34-1 do not exhibit significant bank erosion and BEHI scores
were not exceptionally severe compared to those observed in 2023, considering typical
seasonal changes in vegetation coverage (Table 2). No obvious changes in stream flow or
riparian vegetation were observed that would suggest significant differences in lateral flow or
upstream watershed inputs. Given the other stream metrics (e.g., width/depth ratio) and no

Charlotte Douglas International Airport 12024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report ���
Results
obvious changes to stream or riparian condition, the Rosgen classification of S34-1 remains at
E5 but will be revisited and reconsidered during the next annual survey (2025).
The D5o was documented to be similar in 2024 with a small shift from medium sand to coarse
sand (D5o 0.9 mm) (Table 2). Streambanks were rated as generally stable, with BEHI scores of
"low" and "moderate". The overall NCSAM rating remained at "high" stream functionality.

Charlotte Douglas International Airport 12024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report ���
Results
Table 2 Summary of Post -Construction (2023) and Year 1 Annual (2024) Stream Assessments
Survey Location S25-2 S25-3 S25-4 S32-1 S32-2 S34-1
Year 2023 2024 2021 2023 2021 2023 2021 2023 2021 2023 2021 2023
Entrenchment Ratio
1.2
1.3
1.2
1.4
2.3
2.9
2.5
2.6
1.6
1.4
2.3
1.8
Bankfull Width (ft.)
35.3
34.7
28.7
30.5
16.2
16.2
4.0
4.6
5.9
6.5
2.0
2.4
Mean Bankfull Depth (ft.)
1.7
1.9
1.0
1.5
1.2
1.3
1.2
1.0
0.5
0.3
0.3
0.3
Width/Depth Ratio
20.8
18.6
30.2
20.3
13.6
12.9
3.4
4.5
13.0
19.9
6.9
8.6
Bankfull Area (sq. ft.)
59.8
64.6
27.3
45.8
19.3
20.3
4.7
4.6
2.7
2.1
0.6
0.7
Bankfull Maximum Depth (ft.)
2.4
2.3
1.4
2.1
2.1
1.9
1.2
1.3
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.4
Width of Flood -prone Area
42.5
43.7
35.8
41.2
37.9
46.8
10.1
11.9
9.7
9.1
4.5
4.3
(ft.)
Sinuosity
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.1
1.1
Rosgen Stream Type
F4
F4
F4
F4
C4
C4
E4
E4
B4
B4
E5
E5
Size
30.0
5.5
34.0
13.0
46.0
9.5
4.0
5.6
7.6
7.4
0.4
0.9
Average Particle (mm)
Diameter by
Coarse
Fine
Very
Medium
Very
Medium
Very
Fine
Fine
Fine
Medium
Coarse
Mass (Dso) Material
gravel
gravel
coarse
gravel
coarse
gravel
fine
gravel
gravel
gravel
sand
sand
gravel
gravel
gravel
Bank Erosion Hazard Index
(BEHI) Qualitative Score
M/M
H/M
L/H
L/H
L/L
M/L
H/M
H/H
L/M
L/L
L/VL
L/M
(Left Bank/Right Bank)','
Hydrology
Low
Low
Low
Low
Medium
Medium
High
High
High
High
High
High
Water Quality
Medium
Low
Low
Low
Medium
Low
Medium
Medium
Low
Low
Low
Low
NCSAMz
Habitat
Medium
Medium
Low
Low
Medium
Medium
High
High
High
High
High
High
Overall Score
Medium
Low
Low
Low
Medium
Medium
High
High
High
High
High
High
'VL: Very Low; L: Low; M: Moderate; H: High
2Typical seasonal changes in vegetation coverage (i.e., winter dormancy) and water temperatures likely contributed to higher BEHI and lower NCSAM scores at the
time of the 2024 annual monitoring survey.
8

Charlotte Douglas International Airport 12024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report ���
Discussion
4 Discussion
No significant changes to stream channel condition or Rosgen classification were noted during
the 2024 annual monitoring event as compared to the 2023 post -construction survey.
Reductions in BEHI scores and NCSAM functional ratings, likely related to typical seasonal
changes in vegetation coverage and aquatic life presence/densities, will be reassessed during
quarterly or annual post -storm monitoring events if, or when they take place (i.e., within 30 days
of the relevant rainfall event). If no quarterly or annual post -storm surveys have been performed
by the end of quarter 3 (September 2024), HDR recommends that a monitoring event be
conducted no later than October in order to make assessments during the growing season for
consideration of conditions compared to those made in June 2023.
Although all cross section locations maintained gravel substrate types, those located on Coffey
Creek exhibited smaller grain size as compared to those surveyed in June 2023 and were likely
the result of sediments passing through from upstream sources. These smaller gravel sizes may
continue to be transported at higher flow events and flushed downstream; over time, the D50
grain size may return to that which was observed during the post -construction survey.
Coffey Creek at locations S25-2 and S25-3 continue to exhibit unstable conditions in 2023, as
they did in prior surveys. The streambanks show significant active erosion in many areas along
these reaches. Both cross sections were classified as "F" type streams, which are
characteristically incised with high, unstable streambanks (Rosgen 1997).
Streams and rivers are dynamic systems that change over time when the variables that shape
them are altered, such as the velocity of flow, discharge, and sedimentation and debris (Rosgen
1997). Streams have an "evolutionary tendency" in response to these external influences, with
predictable sequence of events. The most upstream location surveyed on Coffey Creek (S25-4)
was classified as a stable "C4" cross section, exhibiting slight entrenchment and a moderate to
high width/depth ratio. It is likely that at one time, S25-2 and S25-3 were also "C4"
classifications. The stream channel is seeking equilibrium in response to more recent hydraulic
conditions (e.g., watershed development and subsequent stormwater flows); in general, it is
actively eroding streambanks in order to establish a functional floodplain within the incised
channel (Rosgen 1997). The floodplain will allow for reduction in flow velocities, which will in
turn reduce erosion and facilitate streambank stabilization.
No other substantial changes were observed during the annual monitoring survey. As
mentioned in prior reports, the river -right buffer along Coffey Creek was disturbed in the in Fall
2022 and the agencies consulted. Sedimentation related to the incident was localized and the
buffer area was immediately stabilized; no effects from this incident were noted from the
conditions assessed at S25-2 during the post -construction survey. Vegetation planted in the
disturbance area appears to have a high rate of survival based on observation of budding and
healthy stems. This area will continue to be monitored during future survey events.
In accordance with the Monitoring Plan, the first annual monitoring event occurred six months
following the post -construction baseline survey. Rainfall is monitored regularly and if a 2+-year

Charlotte Douglas International Airport 12024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report
Discussion
or 10+-year storm event occurs, field data for substrate characterization, BEHI, and stream
functionality (NCSAM) will be completed as required. Plotted cross sections and data forms
completed during the Year 1 annual monitoring event are provided in Appendix C and
Appendix D.
10

Charlotte Douglas International Airport 12024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report
References
5 References
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2023. NOAA Atlas 14 Point
Precipitation Frequency Estimates: NC. Accessed August 2023. [Online] URL:
https://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/pfds/pfds map cont.html?bkmrk=nc.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2010. Methodology for Identification of
Intermittent and Perennial Streams and their Origins, Version 4.11. North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality, Raleigh,
NC. [Online] URL: Stream ID Manual and Form (nc.gov).
Rosgen, D.L. 1994. A classification of natural rivers. Catena (22): 169-199.
1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, Colorado.
1997. A Geomorphological Approach to Restoration of Incised Rivers. Proceedings of
the Conference on Management of Landscapes Disturbed by Channel Incision. S.S.Y.
Wang, E.J. Langendoen, and F.D. Shields, Jr. (eds). 13 pp.
.. 2001. A Practical Method for Computing Stream Bank Erosion Rate. In: Pages 9-15 in
Proceedings of the 7th Federal Interagency Sedimentation Conference, Mar 25-29, U.S.
Interagency Committee on Water Resources, Subcommittee on Sedimentation, Reno,
Nevada, pp. 9-15.
TWC Product and Technology LLC (TWC). 2024. Charlotte, NC Weather History for January 9,
2024. Accessed February 8, 2024. [URL]:
https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/nc/charlotte/KCLT/date/2024-1-9.
United States Geological Survey (USGS). 2023. CRN-04 Raingage at Fire Station 30, Charlotte,
NC — 351132080562345. [Online] URL: https://waterdata.usgs.gov/monitoring-
location/351132080562345/#DarameterCode=00045&startDT=2023-06-
01 &endDT=2023-06-30.
Wentworth, C.K. 1922. A Scale of Grade and Class Terms for Clastic Sediments. The Journal of
Geology 30(5): 377-392.
Wolman, M.G. 1954. A Method of Sampling Coarse River -Bed Material. Transactions —
American Geophysical Union, 35, 951-956. [Online] URL:
http://dx.doi.org/l 0.1029/TR035i006p00951.
11

Charlotte Douglas International Airport 12024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report
Appendix A —Approved Monitoring Plan
F
Appendix A — Approved
Monitoring Plan
F

Charlotte Douglas International Airport 12024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report FN
Appendix A — Approved Monitoring Plan
This page intentionally left blank.

EA Appendices
CLT Airport Expansion
SAW-2018-01071
EA Appendix E
Monitoring Plan

FN
Proposed Monitoring Plan
Introduction
CLT Airport Expansion I SAW-2018-01071
In -Line Detention Monitoring Plan
August 4, 2020
The City of Charlotte — Aviation Department (Applicant) submitted a Department of the Army Phased
Individual Permit (IP) on January 31, 2020, for the proposed expansion of the Charlotte Douglas
International Airport (CLT or Airport) in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. A component of the Phased
IP proposes stormwater detention in -line with existing channels. During the Public Notice period, the
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the North Carolina Department of Environmental
Quality (NCDEQ) Division of Water Resources (DWR) requested a monitoring plan of those channels
subject to in -line detention.
In the application, in -line detentions are proposed on Ticer Branch (Stream 1 [S1]) for the North End
Around Taxiway (NEAT) element and on Coffey Creek (S25) for the South Crossfield Taxiway (SCF)
element. The purpose of an in -line detention is to provide peak discharge reduction for storm events up to
the 100 year event. Both in -line detentions propose permanent impacts as a result of a culvert and berm
that would be sized to reduce peak flows downstream. For purposes of analysis storm frequencies
modeled include the 2-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year storm events. Additionally, each detention basin also
proposes a culverted stream crossing for road access within a basin for construction and maintenance.
During the design storm event, the streams would overtop their banks and flood the detention area (i.e.
the stream's floodplain) for stormwater detention, but attenuate within 48 hours. Beyond the culvert and
berm and access road culvert in each basin, no other direct impacts as a result of the in -line detention are
proposed to the stream channels. However, the streamside areas of both Ticer Branch and Coffey Creek
would require an earthen embankment, grading, and removal of trees in order to provide the capacity
necessary to detain the designed storm event. A 10-foot vegetated buffer along each stream will be
maintained.
In the Ticer Branch in -line detention, S1 and S2 are proposed to experience flooding of streamside area.
In the Coffey Creek in -line detention, S25, S32, and S34 are proposed to experience flooding of
streamside area. All five channels will require monitoring per the USACE and DWR request.
Monitoring Locations
The location and number of monitoring locations within both the Ticer Branch and Coffey Creek detention
areas and one monitoring location downstream of each detention basin will be identified. These locations
will be submitted to the DWR prior to baseline monitoring implementation. For the Ticer Branch detention
basin, one location will be located downstream of the detention, but before Ticer Branch enters a culvert
that goes beneath 1-485. For the Coffey Creek detention basin, one location will be downstream of the
detention but upstream of the next downstream stream confluence. Permanent monitoring locations will
be field located using GPS grade accuracy, and set prior to construction by setting permanent
monuments on both stream banks to facilitate comparison of data collected during future monitoring
events.
Monitoring locations within the detention basins will be subject to dimension, substrate, Bank Erosion
Hazard Index (BEHI), and North Carolina Stream Assessment Methodology (NCSAM) assessments, as
well as photographic documentation. Monitoring locations downstream of the detention basins will be
subject to substrate and BEHI assessments, as well as photographic documentation.
Page11

FN
CLT Airport Expansion I SAW-2018-01071
In -Line Detention Monitoring Plan
August 4, 2020
All monitoring locations are subject to baseline pre- and post -construction events. The monitoring
locations within the detention basins will be subject to both the annual and quarterly monitoring events.
The monitoring locations downstream of the detention basins will be monitored on a quarterly basis only,
within 30 days of a 2-year storm event or greater (a 2-year storm defined as a rain event of at least 2.28
inches within 6 continuous hours). A storm event greater than the 2-year is a 10-year or greater storm (a
10-year storm defined as a rain event of at least 3.72 inches within 6 continuous hours).
Timing/Frequency
BASELINE MONITORING
The baseline monitoring events will take place pre -construction and post -construction. The purpose of the
pre -construction event is to capture existing conditions of streams subject to detention. The post -
construction event is to document any changes between pre -construction and post -construction and
construction conditions; ideally, the post -construction conditions of streams would be the same as
existing conditions pre -construction with the exception of the streamside areas being converted to
detention areas. If a 2-year storm occurs between the pre -construction and post -construction events, it
should be documented and noted that the post -construction baseline would capture any changes from
said storm event prior to the detentions becoming operational. The data collected immediately following
construction would be expected to be representative of conditions that subsequent monitoring events
would be compared to, taking into account normal stream dynamics and fluctuation.
Baseline monitoring event data collection will include dimension, substrate, Bank Erosion Hazard Index
(BEHI), and NCSAM assessments, as well as photographic documentation.
ANNUAL MONITORING
Annual monitoring events will be held on an annual basis for a period of five years post -construction of
both the Ticer Branch and the Coffey Creek detention basins. This annual monitoring will occur
regardless of storm event occurrence. The first annual monitoring event shall occur six months after the
post -construction baseline event occurs. If at the end of the five year period of monitoring, the results
during the monitoring events have not significantly changed since the post -construction baseline
condition, then the annual monitoring requirements shall be successfully satisfied.
Annual monitoring event data collection will include dimension, substrate, Bank Erosion Hazard Index
(BEHI), and NCSAM assessments, as well as photographic documentation at locations within the
detention basins.
ANNUAL MONITORING POST -STORM
Annually, monitoring shall occur within 30 days following the first 10-year storm event or greater for a
period of five years post -construction of both the Ticer Branch and the Coffey Creek detention basins.
Only one annual monitoring event per 10-year or greater storm event is necessary. This post -storm
annual monitoring event could be additional to quarterly events or become the quarterly event, depending
on storm frequency timing.
Post -storm annual monitoring event data collection will include substrate and BEHI assessments, as well
as photographic documentation at locations within the detention basins and downstream of the detention
basins.
QUARTERLY MONITORING
On a quarterly basis, monitoring shall occur within 30 days following the first 2-year storm event or greater
(2-year+) of the respective quarter up to two years. Only one monitoring event per quarter per 2-year+
storm event is necessary. If a 2-year+ storm event does not occur, then monitoring during that respective
Page 12

FN
CLT Airport Expansion I SAW-2018-01071
In -Line Detention Monitoring Plan
August 4, 2020
quarter is not required. If at the end of the two year period of quarterly monitoring, the results during the
monitoring events have not significantly changed since the post -construction baseline condition, then the
quarterly monitoring requirements shall be successfully satisfied.
Quarterly monitoring event data collection will include substrate and BEHI assessments, as well as
photographic documentation.
Table 1. Summary of Monitoring Requirements
Monitoring•
uirements
Within
Dimension,
Pre -Construction
1 time
detention
substrate, BEHI,
n/a
basins
NCSAM, photos
Within
Dimension,
Post -Construction 1 time
detention
substrate, BEHI,
n/a
basins
NCSAM, photos
1x/yearfor
Within
Dimension,
Annual
detention
substrate, BEHI,
n/a
5 years
basins
NCSAM, photos
Within and
Annual
1x/year for
downstream
Substrate, BEHI,
10-year or
(Post -Storm)
5 years
of detention
photos
greater
basins
2-year or
Downstream
greater,
Quarterly
4x/year for
Substrate, BEHI,
whichever
(Post -Storm)
2 years
of detention
photos
comes 1st
basins
in a
quarter
Methods
Notes
Conducted regardless of storm
event.
Conducted the 1st time a 10-
year+ event occurs in a year.
Could occur additional to the 4
quarterly events or could be
equal to and take the place of
a quarterly event. If no 10-
year+ storms occur in a year,
then annual monitoring post -
storm would not occur.
Would only be conducted if a
2-year+ storm event occurs in
a quarter. If no 2-year+ storms
occur in a quarter, then
monitoring in that quarter
would not occur.
DIMENSION ASSESSMENT
Dimensional data will be collected based on The Key to the Rosgen Stream Classification of Natural
Rivers which is a classification system that assigns a channel type based on channel slope, width to
depth ratio, bed material, entrenchment ratio, and sinuosity. Permanent cross section monitoring will be
conducted at one or more riffle features that are established during the baseline monitoring events on
each channel subject to in -line detention. A stream classification type will be determined at each cross
section during the baseline events as well as subsequent monitoring events. Graphical representations of
cross sections will be provided and as data is collected year to year, the graphical representations will be
overlaid to each other for comparison.
Data collected in dimensional assessment will be presented as a list of parameters (Table 1) resulting in a
Rosgen Classification channel type, which represents the measure of all dimension assessment
parameters. Classifying a channel type based on Rosgen methodology on an annual basis allows for
observation in shifts of channel geomorphology, if any. Geomorphological evolution is a natural channel
Page 13

FN
CLT Airport Expansion I SAW-2018-01071
In -Line Detention Monitoring Plan
August 4, 2020
process, that when observed, doesn't necessarily indicate channel degradation, but does provide insight
as to whether or not a channel is widening, incising, straightening, or experiencing sediment loading
based on the measured parameters.
The Rosgen Classification channel type is not expected to significantly change from baseline conditions;
however, if channel type changes do occur, then it would be expected that one or more parameter has
significantly been altered from the baseline channel classification type. Further analysis of the individual
parameters (i.e. substrate) would need to be evaluated to determine if degradation has occurred.
SUBSTRATE
A Wolman pebble count is a characterization of the composition of streambed and bank substrate
material. Monitoring substrate during monitoring events can indicate changes in stream character, erosion
rates, and sediment supply. Wolman pebble counts categorize substrate types into silt/clay, sands,
gravels, cobbles, boulders, and bedrock, which are sub -categorized within the substrate types based on
diameter size. The data collected from a substrate sample can be analyzed by sizes (diameter in mm)
and by distribution of size. For example, D50 is the median diameter of a substrate sample and also the
diameter size at which 50% of the substrate particles are smaller and 50% of the substrate particles are
larger than the mean diameter distributed across a sample.
Wolman pebble count methodology will be utilized to calculate the D50 of the stream bed material to
establish baseline particle size and distribution at the permanent cross -sections to aid in determining
Rosgen classification channel type. The post -construction baseline D50 will also be the parameter to
which future substrate analysis would be compared. If future substrate monitoring indicates a trend of the
Dso shifting to a smaller particle size diameter (by more than 20% of original size) after three substrate
monitoring events, then DWR will be notified and remedial actions will be evaluated for consideration.
BANK EROSION HAZARD INDEX
While stream bank erosion is a natural process that occurs in every watershed, excessive erosion has
serious adverse consequences for the physical and biological function of streams and rivers. It is often
difficult, however, to distinguish between streambanks that are eroding at a natural rate from those that
are or have the potential to erode at unnaturally high rates due to altered watershed hydrology or
sediment loads. The Bank Erosion Hazard Index (BEHI) is a methodology for assessing streambank
erosion condition and potential that assigns point values to bank condition. BEHI will be assessed utilizing
the modified BEHI procedure that includes ratios of root depth to bank height, root density in percentage,
surface protection in percent, and bank angle in degrees.
The BEHI scoring falls into six categories ranging from Very Low to Extreme. In reference to the post -
construction baseline BEHI scores, if future monitoring events produce a BEHI score two categories
greater than the baseline from three subsequent events, then DWR will be notified and remedial actions
will be evaluated for consideration. DWR will be contacted if the baseline score is "Extreme", for further
discussion and possible procedure modification.
NORTH CAROLINA STREAM ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
The North Carolina Stream Assessment Methodology (NCSAM) will be utilized to assess stream quality
and function at each cross section. The assessment length at each cross section will be 100 feet
upstream and downstream of the cross section location. The NCSAM method provides for an evaluation
of streamside riparian vegetation as well as a field assessment of hydrological influence, water quality,
and biology within a reach. However, due to the nature of the detention construction, the streamside
areas will be cleared of trees with the exception of a 10-foot vegetated buffer. The NCSAM assessments
Page14

FN
CLT Airport Expansion I SAW-2018-01071
In -Line Detention Monitoring Plan
August 4, 2020
should take into consideration the NCSAM matrices that assess vegetated buffer parameters so that the
detention construction itself does not influence the NCSAM scores.
PHOTOGRAPHIC DOCUMENTATION
Photographs looking upstream and downstream at each monitoring location will be taken during the
baseline monitoring to visually document the existing conditions of the channels. Photographs will also be
taken post -construction, and at annual and quarterly monitoring events. Photographs will be provided in
both the annual and quarterly reports, but will also be displayed side by side over time as the
photographs are collected.
Summary
The proposed monitoring plan for the channels subject to in -line detention will consist of multiple
measurements and assessments noted above that will provide a way to track the geomorphology,
substrate, stability, and quality of the channels over time. Pre- and post -construction baseline conditions
will be presented with a short cover letter and report of findings will be provided to the USACE and DWR
for review. Subsequently, after each annual and quarterly monitoring event, a short cover letter and report
of findings will be provided for review.
At each cross section identified within the detention basins, dimensional data, substrate characterization,
NCSAM, BEHI will be assessed and described above. A variation of the following table will be utilized to
report baseline, annual, and quarterly data at each cross-section. At each monitoring location identified
downstream of the detention basins, substrate characterization and BEHI will be assessed and described
above.
Table 2. Example Table for Assessment Data
Parameter Stream # Stream # Stream #
Cross Section # Cross Section # Cross Section #
Bankfull Width (ft)
Floodprone Width (ft)
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
Width/Depth Ratio
Entrenchment Ratio
D5o (mm)
Rosgen Classification
NCSAM Score
BEHI
A variation of the following table will be utilized to report overall data after each collection event over time.
Stream # #
Stream # #
Stream # #
Stream # #
Page 15

FN
Methodology References
CLT Airport Expansion I SAW-2018-01071
In -Line Detention Monitoring Plan
August 4, 2020
The Key to the Rosgen Stream Classification of Natural Rivers:
https://wildlandhydrology.com/resources/docs/River%20Restoration%20and%20Natural%20Channel%20
Design/Rosgen 2011 Natural Channel Design.pdf
Wolman Pebble Count:
htti)s://dep.wv.gov/WWE/getinvolved/sos/Documents/SOPs/PebbleCount Methods.pdf
Bank Erosion Hazard Index:
https://dep.wv.gov/WW E/getinvolved/sos/Documents/SOPs/BEH I-Overview.pdf
North Carolina Stream Assessment Methodology:
https://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Portals/59/docs/regulatory/pubIicnotices/2013/NCSAM Draft User Man
ual 130318.pdf
Page 16

Charlotte Douglas International Airport 12024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report
Appendix B — Representative Photographs — January 23, 2024
F�
r
Appendix B — Representative
Photographs — January 23,
2024

Charlotte Douglas International Airport 12024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report ���
Appendix B — Representative Photographs — January 23, 2024
This page intentionally left blank.

2024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report L.)�
Charlotte Douglas International Airport
Photo 1. View of Coffey Creek, S25-2, facing upstream.
L`�
W
Photo 2. View of Coffey Creek, S25-2, facing
downstream.
}i
'-.agjr ' d
INAW
Epp i
y'_`.w

2024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report L.)� Charlotte Douglas International Airport
Photo 3. View of Coffey Creek, S25-2, facing left bank. Photo 4. View of Coffey Creek, S25-2, facing right bank.
Photo 5. View of Coffey Creek, S25-3, facing upstream.
Photo 7. View of Coffey Creek, S25-3, facing left bank.
B-2
Photo 6. View of Coffey Creek, S25-3, facing
downstream.
Photo 8. View of Coffey Creek, S25-3, facing right bank.

2024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report L.)� Charlotte Douglas International Airport
y �� '"•. � _ fir' .,� ff,�
Photo 9. View of Coffey Creek, S25-4, facing upstream.
Photo 11. View of Coffey Creek, S254, facing left bank.
B-3
Photo 10. View of Coffey Creek, S25-4, facing
downstream.
J# L=a:tiw�1���1:1
Photo 12. View of Coffey Creek, S25-4, facing right
bank.

2024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report L.)�
Charlotte Douglas International Airport
Photo 13. View of western UT to Coffey Creek, S32-1,
facing upstream.
Photo 15. View of western UT to Coffey Creek, S32-1,
facing left bank.
Ml
Photo 14. View of western UT to Coffey Creek, S32-1,
facing downstream.
Photo 16. View of western UT to Coffey Creek, S32-1,
facing right bank.

2024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report L.)j Charlotte Douglas International Airport
Photo 17. View of western UT to Coffey Creek, S32-2,
facing upstream.
Photo 19. View of western UT to Coffey Creek, S32-2,
facing left bank.
Photo 18. View of western UT to Coffey Creek, S32-2,
facing downstream.
Photo 20. View of western UT to Coffey Creek, S32-2,
facing right bank.

2024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report L.)R Charlotte Douglas International Airport
Photo 21. View of eastern UT to Coffey Creek, S34-1,
facing upstream.
M.
Photo 22. View of eastern UT to Coffey Creek, S34-1,
facing downstream.

Charlotte Douglas International Airport 12024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report ���
Appendix C — Stream Cross Sections

Charlotte Douglas International Airport 12024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report ���
Appendix C — Stream Cross Sections
This page intentionally left blank.

2024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report ���
Charlotte Douglas International Airport
25-2 Riffle
1
0
—
1
-
-2
— —
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
-3
—
—
a�
-4
---
--
---
--- --- --- ---
---
---
— —
Q
----
- 5
---
--
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
--
---
8
-
-9
-10
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Horizontal Distance (feet)
•••••• Bankfull Width — —Flood-Prone Width Water Surface o Bankfull Indicators
25-3 Riffle
1
0
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
1
---
—---
- —
-
— — —
— —
— — —
— —
— — —
— —
— — —
— —
— — -
— —
— —
— —
-2
---
--
---
— — —
---
— — —
---
3
............................
.
W
-4
--
'
---
�4
1—
5-------------------
---
-6
0 5 10
15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Horizontal Distance (feet)
Bankfull Width
Flood -Prone Width Water Surface o Bankfull Indicators
C-1

2024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report ���
Charlotte Douglas International Airport
25-4 Rifle
1
o---
---
---
---
---
---
1
--- ---
--
---
---
---
---
a�
cz
-2
---
---
---
y
3
W
-4— — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — --- — —
-5
0 5 10
15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Horizontal Distance (feet)
Bankfull Width
— — Flood -Prone Width Water Surface • Bankfull Indicators
32-1 Riffle
1
o--------
— — -----
----
0
....
....
....
...
m
-2
w
-3
-4
0
5 10 15
Horizontal Distance (feet)
Bankfull Width
— —Flood-Prone Width Water Surface • Bankfull Indicators
C-2

2024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report ���
Charlotte Douglas International Airport
32-2 Riffle
-2
a�
7
.......................................
LV
-4
-5
0
5 10 15
Horizontal Distance (feet)
Bankfull Width
— —Flood-Prone Width Water Surface + Bankfull Indicators
34-1 Riffle
-4
a�
c
°
i -5
Q)
- - - -
- -
- -
w
...................
-U
0 5 10
Horizontal Distance (feet)
Bankfull Width --Flood-Prone Width Water Surface + Bankfull Indicators
C-3

2024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report ���
Charlotte Douglas International Airport
34-1 Riffle - Comparison
1
a� 0
0
as
w 1
-2
Horizontal Distance (feet)
— 2024 2023
C-4

Charlotte Douglas International Airport 12024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report ���
Appendix D — Data Forms

Charlotte Douglas International Airport 12024 SCF In -Line Detention Basin Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report ���
Appendix D — Data Forms
This page intentionally left blank.

Stream:
525-2 Left Bank
Reach:
Location:
CDIA SCF
Date:
1 /23/2024
Erodibility Variables
Bank Height / Bankfull Height Ratio
Bank Height
Bankfull Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
8.58
2.16
3.97
10.00
Extreme
Root Depth / Bank Height Ratio
Root Depth
Bank Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
1.27
+8.58
0.15
7.93
High
Weighted Root Density
o
Root Density (/o)
Root Depth /
Bank Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
60.00
0.15
8.88
8.57
Very High
Bank Angle
Bank Angle ( o)
Index
Bank Erosion Potental Notes
30.00
2.44
Low
Surface Protection
Surface Protection
(%)
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
70.00
2.71
Low
Adjustment
Notes
Bank Materials
Adjustment
Notes
Bank Stratification
TOTAL SCORE
31.65
Observer(s):
HRI, EBS, SP
Data
1/29/2024
QA/QC:
HRI
Total Score:
131.65
High
Total Score
Values:
I Very Low
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Extreme
1 5-10
10-20
20-30
30-40
40-45
45-50
Bank Erosion Potential
Very Low
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Extreme
Value
1.00-1.10
1.11-1.19
1.20-1.50
1.60-2.00
2.10-2.80
>2.80
Bank Height / Bankfull Height
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
a
Index
Q
Value
1.00-0.90
0.89-0.50
0.49-0.30
0.29-0.15
0.14-0.05
<0.05
Root Depth / Bank Height
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
Value
100-80
79-55
54-30
29-15
14-5
<5
a
Weighted Root Density
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
b
Index
0
w
Value
0-20
21-60
61-80
81-90
91-119
>119
Bank Angle
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
Value
100-80
79-55
54-30
29-15
14-10
<10
Surface Protection
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
Adjustments
Bedrock
Bedrock banks have a very low erosion potential.
Boulders
Boulder banks have a low erosion potential.
Cobble
Substract 10 points. No adjustment if sand/gravel compose greater than 50% ofbank.
y
Clay/Silt Loam
Add 5 points.
Gravel
Add 5-10 points depending on percentage of bank material composed of sand.
a
Sand
Add 10 points.
Silt / Clay
INo adjustment.
Stratification
Add 5-10 points depending on position of unstable layers in relation to bankfull stage.

Stream:
S25-2 Right Bank
Reach:
Location:
CDIA SCF
Date:
1/23/2024
Erodibility Variables
Bank Height / Bankfull Height Ratio
Bank Height
Bankfull Height
Value Index
13aiik Erosion Potental
Notes
7.28
3.59
2.03 8.03
Very High
Root Depth / Bank Height Ratio
Root Depth
Bank Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental Notes
3.69
7.28
0.51
3.87
Low
Weighted Root Density
Root Density (%)
Root Depth /
Bank Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
40.00
0.51
20.27
7.18
High
Bank Angle
Bank Angle (°)
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
75.00
5.40
Moderate
Surface Protection
Surface Protection (%)
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
90.00
1.45
Very Low
Adjustment
Notes
Bank Materials
Adjustment
Notes
Bank Stratification
TOTALSCOREJ
25.93
Observer(s):
HRI, EBS, SP
Data:
1/29/2024
QA/QC:
HRI
otal Score: 25.93
Moderate
otal Score Very Low Low Moderate High Very High Extreme
'aloes: 5-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-45 45-50
Bank Erosion Potential
Amk;a
Very Low
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Extreme
Value
1.00-1.10
1.11-1.19
1.20-1.50
1.60-2.00
2.10-2.80
>2.80
y
Bank Height / Bankfull Height
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
44
0
Index
Value
1.00-0.90
0.89-0.50
0.49-0.30
0.29-0.15
0.14-0.05
<0.05
Root Depth / Bank Height
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
9
Index
Value
100-80
79-55
54-30
29-15
14-5
<5
a
Weighted Root Density
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
0
'
W
Value
0-20
21-60
61-80
81-90
91-119
>119
Bank Angle
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
Value
100-80
79-55
54-30
29-15
14-10
<10
Surface Protection
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
Adjustments
Bedrock
Bedrock banks have a very low erosion potential.
Boulders
Boulder banks have a low erosion potential.
Cobble
Substract 10 points. No adjustment if sand/gravel compose greater than 50% of bank.
Clay/Silt Loam
Add 5 points.
Gravel
Add 5-10 points depending on percentage of bank material composed of sand.
Sand
Add 10 points.
Silt / Clay
No adjustment.
Stratification
Add 5-10 points depending on position of unstable layers in relation to bankfull stage.

Stream:
S25-3 Left Bank
Reach:
Location:
CDIA SCF
Date:
1/23/2024
Erodibility Variables
Bank Height / Bankfull Height Ratio
Bank Height
Bankfull Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
3.90
1.12
3.48
10.00
Extreme
Root Depth / Bank Height Ratio
Root Depth
Bank Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental Notes
3.00
3.90
0.77
2.59
Low
Weighted Root Density
Root Density (%)
Root Depth /
Bank Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
75.00
0.77
57.69
3.69
Low
Bank Angle
Bank Angle (°)
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
25.00
2.19
Low
Surface Protection
Surface Protection (%)
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
100.00
1.00
Very Low
Adjustment
Notes
Bank Materials
Adjustment
Notes
Bank Stratification
TOTALSCOREJ
19.47
Total Score: 19.47
Low
Total Score Very Low Low Moderate High Very High Extreme
Values: 5-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-45 45-50
Bank Erosion Potential
Very Low
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Extreme
Value
1.00-1.10
1.11-1.19
1.20-1.50
1.60-2.00
2.10-2.80
>2.80
Bank Height / Bankfull Height
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
v
Z
Index
Value
1.00-0.90
0.89-0.50
0.49-0.30
0.29-0.15
0.14-0.05
<0.05
R
Root Depth / Bank Height
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
9
Index
Value
100-80
79-55
54-30
29-15
14-5
<5
a
Weighted Root Density
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
0
'
W
Value
0-20
21-60
61-80
81-90
91-119
>119
Bank Angle
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
Value
100-80
79-55
54-30
29-15
14-10
<10
Surface Protection
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
Bedrock Bedrock banks have a very low erosion potential.
Boulders Boulder banks have a low erosion potential.
Cobble Substract 10 points. No adjustment if sand/gravel compose greater than 50% of bank.
Clay/Silt Loam Add 5 points.
Gravel Add 5-10 points depending on percentage of bank material composed of sand.
c Sand Add 10 points.
Silt / Clay INo adjustment.
Stratification
Add 5-10 points depending on position of unstable layers in relation to bankfull stage.
Observer(s):
HRI, EBS, SP
Data:
1/29/2024
QA/QC:
HRI

Stream:
S25-4 Left Bank
Reach:
Location:
CDIA SCF
Date:
1/23/2024
Erodibility Variables
Bank Height / Bankfull Height Ratio
Bank Height
Bankfull Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
5.18
1.34
3.87
10.00
Extreme
Root Depth / Bank Height Ratio
Root Depth
Bank Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental Notes
1.87
5.18
0.36
5.29
Moderate
Weighted Root Density
Root Density (%)
Root Depth /
Bank Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
60.00
0.36
21.66
7.00
High
Bank Angle
Bank Angle (°)
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
90.00
7.90
High
Surface Protection
Surface Protection (%)
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
35.00
5.50
Moderate
Adjustment
Notes
Bank Materials
Adjustment
Notes
Bank Stratification
TOTALSCOREJ
35.69
Total Score: 35.69
High
Total Score [L5yl
rLow Low Moderate High Very High Extreme
Values: 0 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-45 45-50
Bank Erosion Potential
Very Low
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Extreme
Value
1.00-1.10
1.11-1.19
1.20-1.50
1.60-2.00
2.10-2.80
>2.80
Bank Height / Bankfull Height
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
v
Z
Index
Value
1.00-0.90
0.89-0.50
0.49-0.30
0.29-0.15
0.14-0.05
<0.05
R
Root Depth / Bank Height
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
9
Index
Value
100-80
79-55
54-30
29-15
14-5
<5
a
Weighted Root Density
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
0
'
W
Value
0-20
21-60
61-80
81-90
91-119
>119
Bank Angle
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
Value
100-80
79-55
54-30
29-15
14-10
<10
Surface Protection
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
Bedrock Bedrock banks have a very low erosion potential.
Boulders Boulder banks have a low erosion potential.
Cobble Substract 10 points. No adjustment if sand/gravel compose greater than 50% of bank.
Clay/Silt Loam Add 5 points.
Gravel Add 5-10 points depending on percentage of bank material composed of sand.
c Sand Add 10 points.
Silt / Clay INo adjustment.
Stratification
Add 5-10 points depending on position of unstable layers in relation to bankfull stage.
Observer(s):
HRI, EBS, SP
Data:
1/29/2024
QA/QC:
HRI

Stream:
S25-4 Left Bank
Reach:
Location:
CDIA SCF
Date:
1/23/2024
Erodibility Variables
Bank Height / Bankfull Height Ratio
Bank Height
Bankfull Height
Value
Index
Batik Erosion Potental
Notes
2.32
1.14
2.04
8.07
Very High
Root Depth / Bank Height Ratio
Root Depth
Bank Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental Notes
1.49
2.32
0.64
3.21
Low
Weighted Root Density
Root Density (%)
Root Depth /
Bank Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
50.00
0.64
32.11
5.73
Moderate
Bank Angle
Bank Angle (°)
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
45.00
3.17
Low
Surface Protection
Surface Protection (%)
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
70.00
2.71
Low
Adjustment
Notes
Bank Materials
Adjustment
Notes
Bank Stratification
TOTALSCOREJ
22.89
Total Score: 22.89
Moderate
Total Score Very Low Low Moderate High Very High Extreme
Values: 5-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-45 45-50
Bank Erosion Potential
Very Low
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Extreme
Value
1.00-1.10
1.11-1.19
1.20-1.50
1.60-2.00
2.10-2.80
>2.80
Bank Height / Bankfull Height
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
v
Z
Index
Value
1.00-0.90
0.89-0.50
0.49-0.30
0.29-0.15
0.14-0.05
<0.05
R
Root Depth / Bank Height
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
9
Index
Value
100-80
79-55
54-30
29-15
14-5
<5
a
Weighted Root Density
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
0
'
W
Value
0-20
21-60
61-80
81-90
91-119
>119
Bank Angle
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
Value
100-80
79-55
54-30
29-15
14-10
<10
Surface Protection
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
Bedrock Bedrock banks have a very low erosion potential.
Boulders Boulder banks have a low erosion potential.
Cobble Substract 10 points. No adjustment if sand/gravel compose greater than 50% of bank.
Clay/Silt Loam Add 5 points.
Gravel Add 5-10 points depending on percentage of bank material composed of sand.
c Sand Add 10 points.
Silt / Clay No adjustment.
Stratification
Add 5-10 points depending on position of unstable layers in relation to bankfull stage.
Observer(s):
HRI, EBS, SP
Data:
1/29/2024
QA/QC:
HRI

Stream:
S25-4 Right Bank
Reach:
Location:
CDIA SCF
Date:
1/23/2024
Erodibility Variables
Bank Height / Bankfull Height Ratio
Bank Height
Bankfull Height
Value Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
2.02
1.20
1.68 6.40
High
Root Depth / Bank Height Ratio
Root Depth
Bank Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental Notes
1.85
2.02
0.92
1.76
Very Low
Weighted Root Density
Root Density (%)
Root Depth /
Bank Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
60.00
0.92
54.95
3.90
Low
Bank Angle
Bank Angle (°)
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
60.00
3.90
Low
Surface Protection
Surface Protection (%)
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
100.00
1.00
Very Low
Adjustment
Notes
Bank Materials
Adjustment
Notes
Bank Stratification
TOTALSCOREJ
16.96
Total Score: 16.96
Low
Total Score Very Low Low Moderate High Very High Extreme
Values: 5-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-45 45-50
Bank Erosion Potential
Very Low
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Extreme
Value
1.00-1.10
1.11-1.19
1.20-1.50
1.60-2.00
2.10-2.80
>2.80
Bank Height / Bankfull Height
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
v
Z
Index
Value
1.00-0.90
0.89-0.50
0.49-0.30
0.29-0.15
0.14-0.05
<0.05
R
Root Depth / Bank Height
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
9
Index
Value
100-80
79-55
54-30
29-15
14-5
<5
a
Weighted Root Density
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
0
'
W
Value
0-20
21-60
61-80
81-90
91-119
>119
Bank Angle
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
Value
100-80
79-55
54-30
29-15
14-10
<10
Surface Protection
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
Bedrock Bedrock banks have a very low erosion potential.
Boulders Boulder banks have a low erosion potential.
Cobble Substract 10 points. No adjustment if sand/gravel compose greater than 50% of bank.
Clay/Silt Loam Add 5 points.
Gravel Add 5-10 points depending on percentage of bank material composed of sand.
c Sand Add 10 points.
Silt / Clay INo adjustment.
Stratification
Add 5-10 points depending on position of unstable layers in relation to bankfull stage.
Observer(s):
HRI, EBS, SP
Data:
1/29/2024
Bank Length
HRI

Stream: 532-1 Left Bank
Reach:
Location:
Date: 1/23/2024
Erodibility Variables
Bank Height / Bankfull Height Ratio
Bank Height
Bankfull Height
Value Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
1.52
1.30
1.17 3.46
Low
Root Depth / Bank Height Ratio
Root Depth
Bank Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental Notes
0.33
1.52
0.22
6.99
High
Weighted Root Density
Root Density (%)
Root Depth /
Bank Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
30.00
0.22
6.51
8.83
Very High
Bank Angle
Bank Angle (°)
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
130.00
10.00
Extreme
Surface Protection
Surface Protection (%)
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
5.00
10.00
Extreme
Adjustment
Notes
Bank Materials
Adjustment
Notes
Bank Stratification
TOTALSCOREJ
39.28
Total Score: 39.28
High
Total Score Very Low Low Moderate High Very High Extreme
Values: 5-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-45 45-50
Bank Erosion Potential
Very Low
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Extreme
Value
1.00-1.10
1.11-1.19
1.20-1.50
1.60-2.00
2.10-2.80
>2.80
Bank Height / Bankfull Height
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
v
Z
Index
Value
1.00-0.90
0.89-0.50
0.49-0.30
0.29-0.15
0.14-0.05
<0.05
R
Root Depth / Bank Height
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
9
Index
Value
100-80
79-55
54-30
29-15
14-5
<5
a
Weighted Root Density
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
0
'
W
Value
0-20
21-60
61-80
81-90
91-119
>119
Bank Angle
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
Value
100-80
79-55
54-30
29-15
14-10
<10
Surface Protection
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
Bedrock Bedrock banks have a very low erosion potential.
Boulders Boulder banks have a low erosion potential.
Cobble Substract 10 points. No adjustment if sand/gravel compose greater than 50% of bank.
Clay/Silt Loam Add 5 points.
Gravel Add 5-10 points depending on percentage of bank material composed of sand.
c Sand Add 10 points.
Silt / Clay No adjustment.
Stratification
Add 5-10 points depending on position of unstable layers in relation to bankfull stage.
Observer(s):
HRI EBS SP
Data;
1/29/2024
QA/QC:
HRI

Stream: S32-1 Right Bank
Reach:
Location:
Date: 1/23/2024
Erodibility Variables
Bank Height / Bankfull Height Ratio
Bank Height
Bankfull Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
1.54
1.12
1.38
5.11
Moderate
Root Depth / Bank Height Ratio
Root Depth
Bank Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
0.50
1.54
0.32
5.65
Moderate
Weighted Root Density
Root Density (%)
Root Depth /
Bank Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
10.00
0.32
3.25
10.00
Extreme
Bank Angle
Bank Angle (°)
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
75.00
5.40
Moderate
Surface Protection
Surface Protection (%)
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
5.00
10.00
Extreme
Adjustment
Notes
Bank Materials
Adjustment
Notes
Bank Stratification
TOTALSCOREJ
36.16
1
Total Score: 36.16
High
Total Score Very Low Low Moderate High Very High Extreme
Values: 5-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-45 45-50
Bank Erosion Potential
Very Low
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Extreme
Value
1.00-1.10
1.11-1.19
1.20-1.50
1.60-2.00
2.10-2.80
>2.80
Bank Height / Bankfull Height
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
v
Z
Index
Value
1.00-0.90
0.89-0.50
0.49-0.30
0.29-0.15
0.14-0.05
<0.05
R
Root Depth / Bank Height
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
9
Index
Value
100-80
79-55
54-30
29-15
14-5
<5
a
Weighted Root Density
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
0
'
W
Value
0-20
21-60
61-80
81-90
91-119
>119
Bank Angle
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
Value
100-80
79-55
54-30
29-15
14-10
<10
Surface Protection
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
Bedrock Bedrock banks have a very low erosion potential.
Boulders Boulder banks have a low erosion potential.
Cobble Substract 10 points. No adjustment if sand/gravel compose greater than 50% of bank.
Clay/Silt Loam Add 5 points.
Gravel Add 5-10 points depending on percentage of bank material composed of sand.
c Sand Add 10 points.
Silt / Clay INo adjustment.
Stratification
Add 5-10 points depending on position of unstable layers in relation to bankfull stage.
Observer(s):
HRI EBS SP
Data:
1/29/2024
QA/QC:
HRI

Stream: 532-2 Left Bank
Reach:
Location:
Date: 1/23/2024
Erodibility Variables
Bank Height / Bankfull Height Ratio
Bank Height
Bankfull Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
1.92
0.38
5.05
10.00
Extreme
Root Depth / Bank Height Ratio
Root Depth
Bank Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental Notes
1.92
1.92
1.00
1.00
Very Low
Weighted Root Density
Root Density (%)
Root Depth /
Bank Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
85.00
1.00
85.00
1.68
Very Low
Bank Angle
Bank Angle (°)
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
25.00
2.19
Low
Surface Protection
Surface Protection (%)
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
100.00
1.00
Very Low
Adjustment
Notes
Bank Materials
Adjustment
Notes
Bank Stratification
TOTALSCOREJ
15.87
Total Score: 15.87
Low
Total Score Very Low Low Moderate High Very High Extreme
Values: 5-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-45 45-50
Bank Erosion Potential
Very Low
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Extreme
Value
1.00-1.10
1.11-1.19
1.20-1.50
1.60-2.00
2.10-2.80
>2.80
Bank Height / Bankfull Height
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
v
Z
Index
Value
1.00-0.90
0.89-0.50
0.49-0.30
0.29-0.15
0.14-0.05
<0.05
R
Root Depth / Bank Height
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
9
Index
Value
100-80
79-55
54-30
29-15
14-5
<5
a
Weighted Root Density
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
0
'
W
Value
0-20
21-60
61-80
81-90
91-119
>119
Bank Angle
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
Value
100-80
79-55
54-30
29-15
14-10
<10
Surface Protection
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
Bedrock Bedrock banks have a very low erosion potential.
Boulders Boulder banks have a low erosion potential.
Cobble Substract 10 points. No adjustment if sand/gravel compose greater than 50% of bank.
Clay/Silt Loam Add 5 points.
Gravel Add 5-10 points depending on percentage of bank material composed of sand.
c Sand Add 10 points.
Silt / Clay No adjustment.
Stratification
Add 5-10 points depending on position of unstable layers in relation to bankfull stage.
Observer(s):
HRI EBS SP
Data:
1/29/2024
QA/QC:
HRI

Stream: 532-2 Right Bank
Reach:
Location:
Date: 1/23/2024
Erodibility Variables
Bank Height / Bankfull Height Ratio
Bank Height
Bankfull Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
2.02
0.66
3.06
10.00
Extreme
Root Depth / Bank Height Ratio
Root Depth
Bank Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental Notes
2.02
2.02
1.00
1.00
Very Low
Weighted Root Density
Root Density (%)
Root Depth /
Bank Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
70.00
1.00
70.00
2.71
Low
Bank Angle
Bank Angle (°)
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
45.00
3.17
Low
Surface Protection
Surface Protection (%)
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
100.00
1.00
Very Low
Adjustment
Notes
Bank Materials
Adjustment
Notes
Bank Stratification
TOTALSCOREJ
17.88
Total Score: 17.88
Low
Total Score Very Low Low Moderate High Very High Extreme
Values: 5-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-45 45-50
Bank Erosion Potential
Very Low
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Extreme
Value
1.00-1.10
1.11-1.19
1.20-1.50
1.60-2.00
2.10-2.80
>2.80
Bank Height / Bankfull Height
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
v
Z
Index
Value
1.00-0.90
0.89-0.50
0.49-0.30
0.29-0.15
0.14-0.05
<0.05
R
Root Depth / Bank Height
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
9
Index
Value
100-80
79-55
54-30
29-15
14-5
<5
a
Weighted Root Density
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
0
'
W
Value
0-20
21-60
61-80
81-90
91-119
>119
Bank Angle
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
Value
100-80
79-55
54-30
29-15
14-10
<10
Surface Protection
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
Bedrock Bedrock banks have a very low erosion potential.
Boulders Boulder banks have a low erosion potential.
Cobble Substract 10 points. No adjustment if sand/gravel compose greater than 50% of bank.
Clay/Silt Loam Add 5 points.
Gravel Add 5-10 points depending on percentage of bank material composed of sand.
c Sand Add 10 points.
Silt / Clay No adjustment.
Stratification
Add 5-10 points depending on position of unstable layers in relation to bankfull stage.
Observer(s):
HRI EBS SP
Data:
1/29/2024
QA/QC:
HRI

Stream:
S34-1 Left Bank
Reach:
Location:
CDIA SCF
Date:
1/23/2024
Erodibility Variables
Bank Height / Bankfull Height Ratio
Bank Height
Bankfull Height
Value Index
13aiik Erosion Potental
Notes
0.84
0.32
2.63 8.75
Very High
Root Depth / Bank Height Ratio
Root Depth
Bank Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental Notes
0.84
0.84
1.00
1.00
Very Low
Weighted Root Density
Root Density (%)
Root Depth /
Bank Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
60.00
1.00
60.00
3.50
Low
Bank Angle
Bank Angle (°)
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
30.00
2.44
Low
Surface Protection
Surface Protection (%)
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
100.00
1.00
Very Low
Adjustment
Notes
Bank Materials
Adjustment
Notes
Bank Stratification
TOTALSCOREJ
16.69
Total Score: 16.69
Low
Total Score Very Low Low Moderate High Very High Extreme
Values: 5-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-45 45-50
Bank Erosion Potential
Very Low
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Extreme
Value
1.00-1.10
1.11-1.19
1.20-1.50
1.60-2.00
2.10-2.80
>2.80
Bank Height / Bankfull Height
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
v
Z
Index
Value
1.00-0.90
0.89-0.50
0.49-0.30
0.29-0.15
0.14-0.05
<0.05
R
Root Depth / Bank Height
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
9
Index
Value
100-80
79-55
54-30
29-15
14-5
<5
a
Weighted Root Density
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
0
'
W
Value
0-20
21-60
61-80
81-90
91-119
>119
Bank Angle
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
Value
100-80
79-55
54-30
29-15
14-10
<10
Surface Protection
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
Bedrock Bedrock banks have a very low erosion potential.
Boulders Boulder banks have a low erosion potential.
Cobble Substract 10 points. No adjustment if sand/gravel compose greater than 50% of bank.
Clay/Silt Loam Add 5 points.
Gravel Add 5-10 points depending on percentage of bank material composed of sand.
c Sand Add 10 points.
Silt / Clay INo adjustment.
Stratification
Add 5-10 points depending on position of unstable layers in relation to bankfull stage.
Observer(s):
HRI, EBS, SP
Data:
1/29/2024
Bank Length
HRI

Stream:
S34-1 Right Bank
Reach:
Location:
CDIA SCF
Date:
1/23/2024
Erodibility Variables
Bank Height / Bankfull Height Ratio
Bank Height
Bankfull Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
1.44
0.36
4.00
10.00
Extreme
Root Depth / Bank Height Ratio
Root Depth
Bank Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental Notes
0.64
1.44
0.44
4.46
Moderate
Weighted Root Density
Root Density (%)
Root Depth /
Bank Height
Value
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
65.00
0.44
28.89
6.02
High
Bank Angle
Bank Angle (°)
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
75.00
5.40
Moderate
Surface Protection
Surface Protection (%)
Index
Bank Erosion Potental
Notes
100.00
1.00
Very Low
Adjustment
Notes
Bank Materials
Adjustment
Notes
Bank Stratification
TOTALSCOREJ
26.87
1
Total Score: 126.87
Moderate
Total Score Very Low Low Moderate High Very High Extreme
Values: 5-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-45 45-50
Bank Erosion Potential
Very Low
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Extreme
Value
1.00-1.10
1.11-1.19
1.20-1.50
1.60-2.00
2.10-2.80
>2.80
Bank Height / Bankfull Height
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
v
Z
Index
Value
1.00-0.90
0.89-0.50
0.49-0.30
0.29-0.15
0.14-0.05
<0.05
R
Root Depth / Bank Height
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
9
Index
Value
100-80
79-55
54-30
29-15
14-5
<5
a
Weighted Root Density
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
0
'
W
Value
0-20
21-60
61-80
81-90
91-119
>119
Bank Angle
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
Value
100-80
79-55
54-30
29-15
14-10
<10
Surface Protection
1.0-1.9
2.0-3.9
4.0-5.9
6.0-7.9
8.0-9.0
10
Index
Bedrock Bedrock banks have a very low erosion potential.
Boulders Boulder banks have a low erosion potential.
Cobble Substract 10 points. No adjustment if sand/gravel compose greater than 50% of bank.
Clay/Silt Loam Add 5 points.
Gravel Add 5-10 points depending on percentage of bank material composed of sand.
c Sand Add 10 points.
Silt / Clay No adjustment.
Stratification
Add 5-10 points depending on position of unstable layers in relation to bankfull stage.
Observer(s):
HRI, EBS, SP
Data:
1/29/2024
QA/QC:
HRI

Riffle Surface
Material
r
Size Range (mm'
Count
silt/clay
0
0.062
0
very fine sand 0.062 - 0.125
fine sand 0.125 - 0.25
medium sand 0.25 - 0.5
coarse sand 0.5 - 1
very coarse sand 1 - 2
0
0
0
10
0
very fine gravel
fine gravel
fine gravel
medium gravel
medium gravel
coarse gravel
coarse gravel
very coarse gravel
very coarse gravel
2
4
6
8
11
16
22
32
45
-4
- 6
- 8
- 11
- 16
- 22
- 32
- 45
- 64
32
13
6
9
5
0
4
6
5
small cobble
medium cobble
large cobble
very large cobble
64
90
128
180
- 90
- 128
- 180
- 256
4
1
0
0
small boulder 256 - 362
small boulder 362 - 512
medium boulder 512 - 1024
large boulder 1024 - 2048
very large boulder 2048 - 4096
total particle count:
bedrock -------------
clay hardpan-------------
detritus/wood-------------
artificial -------------
0
0
0
0
10
105
0
0
total count:
Note: QC HRI 01/29/2024
105
Reach S25-2
—cumulative %
—# of particles
100%
silt/claV
sand gravel
cobble
boulder
35
90%
-- -
---
- - - - -- -- - - - - --
30
80%
I
I m
70%
I
25
w
I
�
c
60%
20
a
m
c
50%
— — —
———
— — — — —— —
I
o
a
40%
I
I
I
I
15
I
�
30%
I
I
10
In
20%
I
I
I
I
5
10%
I
0%
I
0
0.01
0.1
1 10
100
1000
10000
particle size (mm)
Size (mm)
Size Distribution
Type
D16
2.3
mean 11.3
silt/clay
0%
D35
3.6
dispersion 6.3
sand
10%
D50
5.5
skewness 0.27
gravel
76%
D65
10
cobble
5%
D84
56
boulder
10%
D95
2800

Riffle Surface
Material
r
Size Range (mm'
Count
silt/clay
0
0.062
3
very fine sand 0.062 - 0.125
fine sand 0.125 - 0.25
medium sand 0.25 - 0.5
coarse sand 0.5 - 1
very coarse sand 1 - 2
0
0
0
10
4
very fine gravel
fine gravel
fine gravel
medium gravel
medium gravel
coarse gravel
coarse gravel
very coarse gravel
very coarse gravel
2
4
6
8
11
16
22
32
45
- 4
- 6
- 8
- 11
- 16
- 22
- 32
- 45
- 64
10
9
4
7
13
9
13
7
8
small cobble
medium cobble
large cobble
very large cobble
64
90
128
180
- 90
- 128
- 180
- 256
5
1
0
1
small boulder 256 - 362
small boulder 362 - 512
medium boulder 512 - 1024
large boulder 1024 - 2048
very large boulder 2048 - 4096
total particle count:
bedrock -------------
clay hardpan -------------
detritus/wood-------------
artificial -------------
0
0
0
0
0
104
0
0
0
0
total count:
Note: QC HRI 01/29/2024
104
Reach S25-3
—cumulative %
—# of particles
100%
silt/claV
sand gravel
cobble
boulder
14
90%
-- —
———
— — — — —— — — — —— —
12
80%
I
I m
70%
I
10
w
I
�
c
60%
8
a
m
c
50%
— — —
— — —
— — —— — — —
O
a
40%
6
30%
4
Cn
20%
I
I
2
10%
I
0%
I
0
0.01
0.1
1 10
100
1000
10000
particle size (mm)
Size (mm)
Size Distribution
Type
D16
1.9
mean 8.9
silt/clay
3%
D35
6.2
dispersion 5.0
sand
13%
D50
13
skewness -0.14
gravel
77%
D65
21
cobble
7%
D84
42
boulder
0%
D95
72

Riffle Surface r
Material Size Range (mm'
Count
silt/clay 0 0.062
0
very fine sand 0.062 - 0.125
fine sand 0.125 - 0.25
medium sand 0.25 - 0.5
coarse sand 0.5 - 1
very coarse sand 1 - 2
0
0
0
6
0
very fine gravel 2 - 4
fine gravel 4 - 6
fine gravel 6 - 8
medium gravel 8 - 11
medium gravel 11 - 16
coarse gravel 16 - 22
coarse gravel 22 - 32
very coarse gravel 32 - 45
very coarse gravel 45 - 64
12
10
3
13
5
1
2
7
3
small cobble 64 - 90
medium cobble 90 - 128
large cobble 128 - 180
very large cobble 180 - 256
7
1
4
2
small boulder 256 - 362 0
small boulder 362 - 512 0
medium boulder 512 - 1024 0
large boulder 1024 - 2048 0
very large boulder 2048 - 4096 0
total particle count: 76
bedrock ------------- 25
clay hardpan-------------
detritus/wood------------- 0
artificial -------------
total count:
Note: QC HRI 01/29/2024
101
Reach S25-4
—cumulative %
—# of particles
100%
silt/claV
sand gravel
cobble
boulder
14
90%
-- -
---
- - - - -- - -- - - --
r1o,12
80%
I
I m
w
70%
I
I
10
73
60%
8
c
a
0
c
50%
— — —
———
— — — — —— — —
I
o
a
40%
I
6
I
�
30%
i
4
Cn
20%
I
2
10%
I
0%
I
0
0.01
0.1
1 10
100
1000
10000
particle size (mm)
Size (mm)
Size Distribution
Type
D16
2.9
mean 14.2
silt/clay
0%
bedrock
25%
D35
5.7
dispersion 5.3
sand
6%
D50
9.5
skewness 0.15
gravel
55%
D65
18
cobble
14%
D84
70
boulder
0%
D95
150

Riffle Surface
Material
r
Size Range (mm'
Count
silt/clay
0
0.062
0
very fine sand 0.062 - 0.125
fine sand 0.125 - 0.25
medium sand 0.25 - 0.5
coarse sand 0.5 - 1
very coarse sand 1 - 2
5
0
1
3
6
very fine gravel
fine gravel
fine gravel
medium gravel
medium gravel
coarse gravel
coarse gravel
very coarse gravel
very coarse gravel
2
4
6
8
11
16
22
32
45
- 4
- 6
- 8
- 11
- 16
- 22
- 32
-45
- 64
30
40
16
15
24
8
8
0
0
small cobble
medium cobble
large cobble
very large cobble
64
90
128
180
- 90
- 128
- 180
- 256
0
0
0
0
small boulder 256 - 362
small boulder 362 - 512
medium boulder 512 - 1024
large boulder 1024 - 2048
very large boulder 2048 - 4096
total particle count:
bedrock -------------
clay hardpan -------------
detritus/wood-------------
artificial -------------
1
0
0
0
0
157
0
0
1
0
total count:
Note: QC HRI 01/29/2024
158
Reach S32-1
—cumulative %
—# of particles
100%
silt/cla
sand ravel
cobble
boulder
45
90%
40
80%
-- -
---
- - - - -- -- --
I
35
I
70%
I
30
a5
60%
25
m
c
50%
— — —
———
— — — — —— — I
o_
20
a
40%
30%
I
15
Cn
20%
I
I
10
10%
I
I
5
0%
0
0.01
0.1
1 10
100
1000
10000
particle size (mm)
Size (mm)
Size Distribution
Type
D16
2.5
mean 5.9
silt/clay
0%
D35
4.4
dispersion 2.4
sand
9%
D50
5.6
skewness 0.03
gravel
89%
wood/det
1 %
D65
8.2
cobble
0%
D84
14
boulder
1 %
D95
23

Riffle Surface
Material
r
Size Range (mm'
Count
silt/clay
0
0.062
0
very fine sand 0.062 - 0.125
fine sand 0.125 - 0.25
medium sand 0.25 - 0.5
coarse sand 0.5 - 1
very coarse sand 1 - 2
0
0
0
44
0
very fine gravel
fine gravel
fine gravel
medium gravel
medium gravel
coarse gravel
coarse gravel
very coarse gravel
very coarse gravel
2
4
6
8
11
16
22
32
45
- 4
- 6
- 8
- 11
- 16
- 22
- 32
-45
- 64
6
8
4
24
14
4
5
2
3
small cobble
medium cobble
large cobble
very large cobble
64
90
128
180
- 90
- 128
- 180
- 256
2
6
0
0
small boulder 256 - 362
small boulder 362 - 512
medium boulder 512 - 1024
large boulder 1024 - 2048
very large boulder 2048 - 4096
total particle count:
bedrock -------------
clay hardpan -------------
detritus/wood-------------
artificial -------------
0
0
0
0
0
122
0
0
0
0
total count:
Note: QC HRI 01/29/2024
122
Reach S32-2
—cumulative %
—# of particles
100%
silt/claV
sand gravel
cobble
boulder
50
90%
45
80%
-- —
— — —
— — —— — ------
I
40
I
70%
35
c
60%
30
a
m
50%
— — —
— — —
— — —— — — ——
25
o
a
40%
I
20
I
�
30%
15
�20%
IA
10
10%
L
5
0%
0
0.01
0.1
1 10
100
1000
10000
particle size (mm)
Size (mm)
Size Distribution
Type
D16
0.68
mean 3.6
silt/clay
0%
D35
0.98
dispersion 6.7
sand
36%
D50
7.4
skewness -0.26
gravel
57%
D65
10
cobble
7%
D84
19
boulder
0%
D95
88

Riffle Surface
Material
r
Size Range (mm'
Count
silt/clay
0
0.062
16
very fine sand 0.062 - 0.125
fine sand 0.125 - 0.25
medium sand 0.25 - 0.5
coarse sand 0.5 - 1
very coarse sand 1 - 2
10
2
1
20
3
very fine gravel
fine gravel
fine gravel
medium gravel
medium gravel
coarse gravel
coarse gravel
very coarse gravel
very coarse gravel
2
4
6
8
11
16
22
32
45
- 4
- 6
- 8
- 11
- 16
- 22
- 32
- 45
- 64
6
10
4
14
6
1
0
0
1
small cobble
medium cobble
large cobble
very large cobble
64
90
128
180
- 90
- 128
- 180
- 256
0
0
0
0
small boulder 256 - 362
small boulder 362 - 512
medium boulder 512 - 1024
large boulder 1024 - 2048
very large boulder 2048 - 4096
total particle count:
bedrock -------------
clay hardpan -------------
detritus/wood-------------
artificial -------------
0
0
0
0
0
94
0
0
13
0
total count:
Note: I QC ABM 5/13/2021
107
Reach S34-1
—cumulative %
—# of particles
100%
silt/clav
sand gravel
cobble
boulder
25
90%
80%
-- —
—
——
— — — — —— ----
I
20
I
70%
c
60%
15
a
m
c
50%
— — —
— — —
— — —— I
o
I
a
40%
I
10
I
0
30%
I
I
Cn
20%
I
I
5
10%
I
0%
I
0
0.01
0.1
1 10
100
1000
10000
particle size (mm)
Size (mm)
Size Distribution
Type
D16
0.062
mean 0.8
silt/clay
15%
D35
0.57
dispersion 12.6
sand
34%
D50
0.93
skewness -0.06
gravel
39%
wood/det
12%
D65
4.5
cobble
0%
D84
9.4
boulder
0%
D95
14

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user mianuai version &. i
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
South Cross Field Taxiway Detention
1. Project name (if any): Basin 2. Date of evaluation: 01/23/2024
Charlotte Douglas International
3. Applicant/owner name: Airport 4. Assessor name/organization: HRI/EBS/SP - HDR
5. County: Mecklenburg 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: Catawba on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Coffey Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.191129,-80.943252
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): S25-2 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 20
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 7.92 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 54.2 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ®Perennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ®A ❑B
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 miz) ®Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 miz) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑I ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ®NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ®No
1. Channel Water - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
®A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
❑B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
0C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction - streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A
Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
❑B ❑B
Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
®C ®C
Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
Water Quality Stressors - assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
❑A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes/Sketch"
section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
❑G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
❑1 Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
®J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather - watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
®C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream - assessment reach metric
❑Yes ®No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types - assessment reach metric
10a. [-]Yes ®No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
❑A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses 0 OF 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) C ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
®B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o Y ❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation Y LC ❑l Sand bottom
®C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) t ❑J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
❑D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots ❑K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate -assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
1la. ❑Yes ®No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
®A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
❑B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach - whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare
(R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 - 4096 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 - 256 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ® Gravel (2 - 64 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Sand (.062 - 2 mm)
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Detritus
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. ❑Yes ❑No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)

12. Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. ®Yes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ❑No Water ®Other:
12b. ❑Yes ®No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ ❑Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ❑Beetles
❑ ❑Caddisfly larvae (T)
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicula)
❑ ❑Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/tad poles
❑ ❑Snails
❑ ❑Stonefly larvae (P)
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑B ❑B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
®C ®C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage - streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water >- 6 inches deep
❑B ❑B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®C ®C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
❑Y ❑Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
®N ®N
16. Baseflow Contributors - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
❑A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction passing flow during low -flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom -release dam, weir)
❑D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
❑E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
®F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors - assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
®C Urban stream ( 24% impervious surface for watershed)
❑D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
❑F None of the above
18. Shading - assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
❑A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
®B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
❑C Stream shading is gone or largely absent

19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
®A ®A ❑A ❑A >_ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ®D ❑D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
❑E ❑E ❑E ®E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Mature forest
®B ❑B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
❑C ®C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D ❑D Maintained shrubs
❑E ❑E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22: ❑
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ®C ®C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Medium to high stem density
®B ®B Low stem density
❑C ❑C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
®A ❑A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
❑B ®B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
®B ®B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
❑C ❑C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity — assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes ®No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. ❑No Water ❑Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E >_ 230
Notes/Sketch

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name South Cross Field Taxiway Date of Assessment
01/23/2024
Detention Basin
Stream Category Pa3 Assessor Name/Organization
HRI/EBS/SP - HDR
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
YES
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NO
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary All
Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
LOW
(4) Floodplain Access
LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
LOW
(4) Microtopography
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
(4) Channel Stability
LOW
(4) Sediment Transport
HIGH
(4) Stream Geomorphology
MEDIUM
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(1) Water Quality
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
MEDIUM
(2) In -stream Habitat
HIGH
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall
LOW

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user mianuai version &. i
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
South Cross Field Taxiway Detention
1. Project name (if any): Basin 2. Date of evaluation: 01/23/2024
Charlotte Douglas International
3. Applicant/owner name: Airport 4. Assessor name/organization: HRI/EBS/SP - HDR
5. County: Mecklenburg 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: Catawba on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Coffey Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.191501,-80.944630
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): S25-3 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 20
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 3.72 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 40.5 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ®Perennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ®A ❑B
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 miz) ®Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 miz) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑I ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ®NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ®No
1. Channel Water - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
®A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
❑B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
0C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction - streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
®B ❑B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
❑C ®C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
Water Quality Stressors - assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
❑A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes/Sketch"
section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
❑G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
❑1 Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
®J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather - watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
®C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream - assessment reach metric
❑Yes ®No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types - assessment reach metric
10a. [-]Yes ®No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
❑A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses 0 ❑F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) C ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
®B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o Y ❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation Y LC El Sand bottom
®C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) t ❑J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
❑D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots ❑K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate -assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
1la. ❑Yes ®No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
®A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
❑B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach - whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare
(R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 - 4096 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 - 256 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ® Gravel (2 - 64 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Sand (.062 - 2 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Detritus
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. ❑Yes ❑No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)

12. Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. ®Yes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ❑No Water ®Other:
12b. ❑Yes ®No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ ❑Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ❑Beetles
❑ ❑Caddisfly larvae (T)
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicula)
❑ ❑Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/tad poles
❑ ❑Snails
❑ ❑Stonefly larvae (P)
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑B ❑B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
®C ®C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage - streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water >- 6 inches deep
❑B ❑B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®C ®C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
❑Y ❑Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
®N ®N
16. Baseflow Contributors - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
®A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction passing flow during low -flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom -release dam, weir)
❑D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
❑E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
❑F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors - assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
®C Urban stream ( 24% impervious surface for watershed)
❑D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
❑F None of the above
18. Shading - assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
❑A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
❑B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
0C Stream shading is gone or largely absent

19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
®A ®A ❑A ❑A >_ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ®D ❑D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
❑E ❑E ❑E ®E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Mature forest
®B ❑B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
❑C ®C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D ❑D Maintained shrubs
❑E ❑E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22: ❑
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ®C ®C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Medium to high stem density
®B ❑B Low stem density
❑C ®C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
®A ®A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
❑B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
❑B ❑B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
®C ®C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity — assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes ®No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. ❑No Water ❑Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E >_ 230
Notes/Sketch

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name South Cross Field Taxiway Date of Assessment
01/23/2024
Detention Basin
Stream Category Pa3 Assessor Name/Organization
HRI/EBS/SP - HDR
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
YES
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NO
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary All
Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
LOW
(4) Floodplain Access
LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
LOW
(4) Microtopography
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
(4) Channel Stability
LOW
(4) Sediment Transport
HIGH
(4) Stream Geomorphology
MEDIUM
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(1) Water Quality
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat
MEDIUM
(2) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall
LOW

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user mianuai version &. i
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
South Cross Field Taxiway Detention
1. Project name (if any): Basin 2. Date of evaluation: 01/23/2024
Charlotte Douglas International
3. Applicant/owner name: Airport 4. Assessor name/organization: HRI/EBS/SP - HDR
5. County: Mecklenburg 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: Catawba on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Coffey Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.191501,-80.944630
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): S25-4 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 20
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 2.56 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 25 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ®Perennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ®A ❑B
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 miz) ®Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 miz) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑I ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ®NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ®No
1. Channel Water - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
❑A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
®B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
®A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction - streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A
Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
❑B ❑B
Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
®C ®C
Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
Water Quality Stressors - assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
❑A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes/Sketch"
section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
❑G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
❑1 Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
®J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather - watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
®C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream - assessment reach metric
❑Yes ®No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types - assessment reach metric
10a. [-]Yes ®No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
❑A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses 0 ❑F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) C ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
®B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o Y ❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation Y LC El Sand bottom
❑C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) t ❑J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
❑D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots ❑K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate -assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
1la. ❑Yes ®No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
®A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
❑B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach - whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare
(R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 - 4096 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 - 256 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Gravel (2 - 64 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Sand (.062 - 2 mm)
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Detritus
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. ❑Yes ❑No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)

12. Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. ®Yes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ❑No Water ®Other:
12b. ❑Yes ®No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ ❑Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ❑Beetles
❑ ❑Caddisfly larvae (T)
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicula)
❑ ❑Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/tad poles
❑ ❑Snails
❑ ❑Stonefly larvae (P)
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑B ❑B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
®C ®C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage - streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water >- 6 inches deep
❑B ®B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®C ❑C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
❑Y ❑Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
®N ®N
16. Baseflow Contributors - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
❑A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction passing flow during low -flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom -release dam, weir)
❑D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
❑E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
®F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors - assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
®C Urban stream ( 24% impervious surface for watershed)
❑D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
❑F None of the above
18. Shading - assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
❑A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
®B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
❑C Stream shading is gone or largely absent

19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
®A ®A ❑A ❑A >_ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ®D ®D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
❑E ❑E ❑E ❑E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Mature forest
®B ❑B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
❑C ®C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D ❑D Maintained shrubs
❑E ❑E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22: ❑
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ®C ®C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Medium to high stem density
®B ®B Low stem density
❑C ❑C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
®A ❑A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
❑B ®B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
®B ❑B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
❑C ®C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity — assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes ®No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. ❑No Water ❑Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E >_ 230
Notes/Sketch

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name South Cross Field Taxiway Date of Assessment
01/23/2024
Detention Basin
Stream Category Pa3 Assessor Name/Organization
HRI/EBS/SP - HDR
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
YES
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NO
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow
MEDIUM
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
LOW
(4) Floodplain Access
LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
LOW
(4) Microtopography
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
(4) Channel Stability
HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport
HIGH
(4) Stream Geomorphology
HIGH
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(1) Water Quality
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
MEDIUM
(2) In -stream Habitat
HIGH
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
(3) In -stream Habitat
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall
MEDIUM

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user mianuai version &. i
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
South Cross Field Taxiway Detention
1. Project name (if any): Basin 2. Date of evaluation: 01/23/2024
Charlotte Douglas International
3. Applicant/owner name: Airport 4. Assessor name/organization: HRI/EBS/SP - HDR
5. County: Mecklenburg 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: Catawba on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Coffey Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.191835,-80.945771
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): S32-1 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 20
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 1.8 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 7.5 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ❑Perennial flow ®Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ®A ❑B
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ®Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 miz) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 miz) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑I ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ®NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ®No
1. Channel Water - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
❑A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
®B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
®B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction - streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
®B ®B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
❑C ❑C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
Water Quality Stressors - assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
❑A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes/Sketch"
section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
❑G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
❑1 Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
®J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather - watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
®C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream - assessment reach metric
❑Yes ®No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types - assessment reach metric
10a. [-]Yes ®No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
❑A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses 0 ❑F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) C ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
®B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o Y ❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation Y LC El Sand bottom
®C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) t ❑J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
❑D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots ❑K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate -assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
1la. ❑Yes ®No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
®A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
❑B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach - whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare
(R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 - 4096 mm)
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 - 256 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ® Gravel (2 - 64 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Sand (.062 - 2 mm)
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Detritus
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. ❑Yes ❑No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)

12. Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. ®Yes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ❑No Water ❑Other:
12b. ❑Yes ®No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ ❑Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ❑Beetles
❑ ❑Caddisfly larvae (T)
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicula)
❑ ❑Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/tad poles
❑ ❑Snails
❑ ❑Stonefly larvae (P)
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.
LB RB
®A ❑A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑B ❑B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑C ®C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage - streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water >- 6 inches deep
®B ®B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
❑C ❑C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
❑Y ❑Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
®N ®N
16. Baseflow Contributors - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
❑A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction passing flow during low -flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom -release dam, weir)
❑D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
❑E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
®F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors - assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
❑C Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
❑D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
®F None of the above
18. Shading - assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
®A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
❑B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
❑C Stream shading is gone or largely absent

19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
®A ®A ®A ❑A >_ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
❑C ❑C ❑C ®C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
❑E ❑E ❑E ❑E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ❑A Mature forest
❑B ®B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
❑C ❑C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D ❑D Maintained shrubs
❑E ❑E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22: ❑
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ®C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ®A Medium to high stem density
❑B ❑B Low stem density
❑C ❑C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
®A ®A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
❑B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
®A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
❑B ®B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
❑C ❑C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity — assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes ®No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. ❑No Water ❑Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E >_ 230
Notes/Sketch

Draft INC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name South Cross Field Taxiway Date of Assessment
01/23/2024
Detention Basin
Stream Category Pal Assessor Name/Organization
HRI/EBS/SP - HDR
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
YES
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NO
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Intermittent
USACE/
NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary All Streams
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Floodplain Access
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Microtopography
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Channel Stability
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Sediment Transport
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Stream Geomorphology
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat
MEDIUM
HIGH
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Substrate
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) In -stream Habitat
MEDIUM
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
NA
Overall
HIGH
HIGH

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user mianuai version &. i
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
South Cross Field Taxiway Detention
1. Project name (if any): Basin 2. Date of evaluation: 01/23/2024
Charlotte Douglas International
3. Applicant/owner name: Airport 4. Assessor name/organization: HRI/EBS/SP - HDR
5. County: Mecklenburg 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: Catawba on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Coffey Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.1911895,-80.945217
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): S32-2 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 20
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 1.8 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 10.5 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ❑Perennial flow ®Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ®A ❑B
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ®Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 miz) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 miz) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑I ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ®NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ®No
1. Channel Water - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
❑A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
®B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
®A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction - streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
®A ❑A
Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
❑B ❑B
Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
❑C ®C
Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
Water Quality Stressors - assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
❑A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes/Sketch"
section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
❑G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
❑1 Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
®J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather - watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
®C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream - assessment reach metric
❑Yes ®No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types - assessment reach metric
10a. [-]Yes ®No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
❑A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses 0 ❑F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) C ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
®B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o Y ❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation Y LC El Sand bottom
®C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) t ❑J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
❑D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots ❑K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate -assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
1la. ❑Yes ®No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
®A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
❑B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach - whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare
(R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 - 4096 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 - 256 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Gravel (2 - 64 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Sand (.062 - 2 mm)
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Detritus
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. ❑Yes ❑No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)

12. Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. ®Yes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ❑No Water ❑Other:
12b. ❑Yes ®No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ ❑Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ❑Beetles
❑ ❑Caddisfly larvae (T)
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicula)
❑ ❑Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/tad poles
❑ ❑Snails
❑ ❑Stonefly larvae (P)
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.
LB RB
®A ❑A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑B ❑B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑C ®C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage - streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water >- 6 inches deep
®B ❑B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
❑C ®C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
❑Y ❑Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
®N ®N
16. Baseflow Contributors - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
❑A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction passing flow during low -flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom -release dam, weir)
❑D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
❑E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
®F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors - assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
❑C Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
❑D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
®F None of the above
18. Shading - assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
❑A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
❑B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
0C Stream shading is gone or largely absent

19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
®A ®A ®A ❑A >_ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ❑D ®D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
❑E ❑E ❑E ❑E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ❑A Mature forest
❑B ❑B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
❑C ®C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D ❑D Maintained shrubs
❑E ❑E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22: ❑
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ❑C ®C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ❑A Medium to high stem density
❑B ®B Low stem density
❑C ❑C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
®A ❑A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
❑B ®B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
®B ❑B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
❑C ®C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity — assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes ®No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. ❑No Water ❑Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E >_ 230
Notes/Sketch

Draft INC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name South Cross Field Taxiway Date of Assessment
01/23/2024
Detention Basin
Stream Category Pal Assessor Name/Organization
HRI/EBS/SP - HDR
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
YES
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NO
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Intermittent
USACE/
NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary All Streams
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Floodplain Access
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Microtopography
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Channel Stability
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Stream Geomorphology
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
LOW
LOW
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
LOW
LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Substrate
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
HIGH
(3) In -stream Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
NA
Overall
HIGH
HIGH

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user mianuai version &. i
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
South Cross Field Taxiway Detention
1. Project name (if any): Basin 2. Date of evaluation: 01/23/2024
Charlotte Douglas International
3. Applicant/owner name: Airport 4. Assessor name/organization: HRI/EBS/SP - HDR
5. County: Mecklenburg 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: Catawba on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Coffey Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.191758,-80.942089
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): S34-1 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 20
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 0.4 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 2.2 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ❑Perennial flow ®Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ®A ❑B
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ®Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 miz) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 miz) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑I ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ®NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ®No
1. Channel Water - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
❑A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
®B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
®A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction - streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
®A ❑A
Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
❑B ❑B
Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
❑C ®C
Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
Water Quality Stressors - assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
❑A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes/Sketch"
section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
❑G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
❑1 Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
®J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather - watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
®C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream - assessment reach metric
❑Yes ®No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types - assessment reach metric
10a. [-]Yes ®No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
❑A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses 0 ❑F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) C ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
®B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o Y ❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation Y LC El Sand bottom
®C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) t ❑J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
❑D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots ❑K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate -assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
1la. ❑Yes ®No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
®A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
❑B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach - whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare
(R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 - 4096 mm)
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 - 256 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Gravel (2 - 64 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Sand (.062 - 2 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Detritus
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. ❑Yes ❑No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)

12. Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. ®Yes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ❑No Water ❑Other:
12b. ❑Yes ®No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ ❑Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ❑Beetles
❑ ❑Caddisfly larvae (T)
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicula)
❑ ❑Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/tad poles
❑ ❑Snails
❑ ❑Stonefly larvae (P)
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.
LB RB
®A ❑A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑B ❑B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑C ®C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage - streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water >- 6 inches deep
❑B ❑B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®C ®C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
❑Y ❑Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
®N ®N
16. Baseflow Contributors - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
®A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction passing flow during low -flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom -release dam, weir)
❑D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
®E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
❑F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors - assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
❑C Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
❑D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
®F None of the above
18. Shading - assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
❑A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
®B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
❑C Stream shading is gone or largely absent

19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A >_ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
®B ❑B ®B ❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ®D ❑D ®D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
❑E ❑E ❑E ❑E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ❑A Mature forest
❑B ❑B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
❑C ®C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D ❑D Maintained shrubs
❑E ❑E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22: ❑
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ❑C ®C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ❑A Medium to high stem density
❑B ®B Low stem density
❑C ❑C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
®A ®A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
❑B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
®A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
❑B ®B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
❑C ❑C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity — assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes ®No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. ❑No Water ❑Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E >_ 230
Notes/Sketch

Draft INC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name South Cross Field Taxiway Date of Assessment
01/23/2024
Detention Basin
Stream Category Pal Assessor Name/Organization
HRI/EBS/SP - HDR
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
YES
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NO
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Intermittent
USACE/
NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary All Streams
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Floodplain Access
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Microtopography
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Channel Stability
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Stream Geomorphology
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
LOW
LOW
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat
MEDIUM
HIGH
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Substrate
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
HIGH
(3) In -stream Habitat
MEDIUM
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
NA
Overall
HIGH
HIGH

F)'Z
440 S Church Street, Suite 1200
Charlotte, NC 28202-2075
704.338.6700
NC License F0116
hdrinc.com
© 2024 HDR, Inc., all rights reserved