20081816 Ver 1_Mitigation Evaluation_20090422

' Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
Date of Office Review: Evaluator's Name(s):
onitoring Year,
Date of Report: VPresn Report for M
Date of Field Review. Evaluator's Name(s):
Other Individuals/Agenci Weather Conditions (today & recent):
Directions to Site: US 264 toward Wilson/Greenville. The first exit is NC 97. Go left/east onto NC 97 to NC 39. Left/north onto
NC 39, sit4e is approx. 0.5 miles on right.
1. Office Review Information:
Project Number: 20081816
Project Name: Moccasin Creek Site
County(ies): Wake Franklin
Basin & subbasin: Neuse 03020203
Nearest Stream: Moccasin Creek
Water Quality Class of Nearest Stream: C; NSW
Mitigator Type: EEP/WRP
DOT Status:
Total Mitig ation on Site
Wetland: 48.52 acres
Stream: 311 linear feet
Buffer: 2.38 acres
Nutr. Offset:
Project History
Event Event Date
Report Receipt: Monitoring 12/16/2008
Approved mitigation plan available? Yes No
Monitoring reports available? Yes No
Problem areas identified in reports? Yes No
Problem areas addressed on site. Yes No
? I
Mitigation required on site: *Add significant project-related events: reports,
Associated impacts (if known): received construction, planting, repairs, etc.
During office review, note success criteria and evaluate each component based on monitoring report
results. Record relevant data in Sections II and III.
On back of sheet, note other information found during office review and/or to be obtained during site visit.
II. Summary of Results:
Mitigation Component
Monitoring Success Success
Year (report) (field) Resolved
20081816-1 311 linear feet Stream (Perennial) Restoration
20081816-2 0.38 acres Wetland (Riparian) Restoration
20081816-3 4.93 acres Wetland (Riparian) Enhancement
20081816-4 43.21 acres Wetland (Riparian) Preservation
20081816-5
I_ . 2.38 acres Buffer Restoration
f .?
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 1 of 2
Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
MITIGATION SUCCESS:
Compared to the approved mitigation plan, this project is: successful partially successful unsuccessful
List specific reasons for lack of success for this project:
I
Additional comments (e.g. DWQ follow-up actions, recommendations, etc.):
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 2 of 2
Buffer Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
Component: 2.38 acres Buffer Restoration Component ID: 20081816-5
Description:
Location within project: See maps
1
III. Buffer Site Details: ` I j o VN)
Riparian Buffer (Streams Only)
Streams verified by DWQ: Yes No
I Comments:
Nutrient Offset (Streams or Ditches)
Buffer Width:
Comments:
Total Acres: Total Acres:
Restored Acres: Restored Acres:
Enhanced Acres: Enhanced Acres:
Buffer Width: 50' > 50'
Grandfathered Site? (EEP Only) Yes No
IV. Success Criteria Evaluation:
VEGETATION: Dominant Plant Species
Species Story TPA/'/ cover
NOTE: Success Criteria is 320 spa
Monitoring report indicates success? Yes No
Average TPA for entire site (per report):
Observational field data agrees? Yes No
Date of last planting:
Vegetation growing successfully. Yes No
General observations on condition of riparian/buffer areas and associated stream bank (e.g. bank stability,
overall health of vegetation, etc.)
Version 1.2 (March 5, 2009)
Page 1 of 2
Buffer Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
Specific vegetation plots or site locations with little to no vegetation:
Estimated acreage or site percentage of unvegetated areas:
Invasive species on site (species, location(s), and % cover):
Easement Marking Method:
List any remaining issues to address (e.g. plant survival, easement encroachment, etc.):
MITIGATION SUCCESS:
Compared to the mitigation plan, this component is: successful partially successful not successful
List specific reasons for lack of success for this component:
4
Additional Comments (e.g. DWQ follow-up actions, recommendations, etc.):
i
During site visit, document representative conditions and areas of concern. Label and attach photos to
this report.
Attach maps showing photo locations, problem areas, and/or important field observations.
Additional notes related to evaluation of this component:
Version 1.2 (March 5, 2009) Page 2 of 2
' Stream Mitigation Component Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
Component: 311 linear feet Stream (Perennial) Restoration Component ID: 20081816-1
Description: Removal of culverts from 4 streams
Location within project: See maps
III. Success Criteria Evaluation:
STREAMBANK STABILITY - Approved Success Criteria:
Stable PDP
Are streambanks stable? Yes No
if no, provide description and notes regarding stability issues:
STRUCTURES - Approved Success Criteria:
Stable structures
List all types of structures present on site:
Are the structures installed correctly? Yes No
Are the structures made of acceptable material? Yes No
(Unacceptable materials include: railroad ties, concrete with rebar, etc.
Are the structures located approximately where shown on the plan? Yes No
Are the structures stable (e.g. erosion, deposition, etc.)? Yes No
Provide description and notes regarding problematic structures:
i
?I
FEATURES - Approved Success Criteria:
NA
Are riffles and pools in approximately the correct locations Yes No
Is the final sinuosity and gradient designed approximately to plan specifications? Yes No
Any evidence of vegetation growing on the stream bed or in the thalweg Yes No
Percentage of the restoration reach that has: Flowing water Ponded areas
Describe any stream features that provide evidence of unstable stream reaches (e.g. mid-channel bars,
downstream meander migration, chute cutoff formation, etc.):
AQUATIC BIOTA - Approved Success Criteria:
NA
Is aquatic life present in the channel? Yes No
Description of taxa observed, incl. quantities of individuals and general distribution of biota
description of the sampling methodology.
I
Include a brief
List any remaining aquatic biota issues to address (e.g. erosion, discharges or toxicants, etc.):
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007)
Page 1 of 2
Stream Mitigation Component Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
VEGETATION -Approved Success Criteria: Dominant Plant Species
I?
- Species Story TPA/'/ cover
Monitoring report indicates success? Yes No
Average TPA for entire site (per report):
Observational field data agrees? Yes No
based on community composition? Yes No
based on TPA and/or % cover? Yes No
Vegetation planted on site? Yes No
Date of last planting:
Vegetation growing successfully? Yes No
General observations on condition of riparian/buffer areas (e.g. buffer width, overall health of vegetation,
etc.):
Specific vegetation plots or site locations with little to no vegetation:
Estimated acreage or site percentage of unvegetated areas:
Invasive species on site (species, location(s), and % cover):
List any remaining vegetation issues to address (e.g. plant survival, concerns, etc.):
MITIGATION SUCCESS:
Compared to the approved mitigation plan, this component is: successful partially successful unsuccessful
j List specific reasons for lack of success for this component:
Additional comments (e.g. DWQ follow-up actions, recommendations, etc.):
Use the definitions in the joint state/federal stream mitigation guidelines to determine the correct type of
mitigation used for this component.
- During site visit, document representative conditions and areas of concern. Observe preservation and
enhancement areas that may not have specific success criteria. Label and attach photos to this report.
Attach maps showing photo locations, problem areas, and/or important stream features.
Additional notes related to evaluation of this component:
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 2 of 2
Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
Component: 0.38 acres Wetland (Riparian) Restoration Component ID: 20081816-2
Description: Removal of reoadway through wetland
Location within project: See maps
III. Success Criteria Evaluation:
HYDROLOGY - Approved Success Criteria:
Unclear - may 12.5%?
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in upper 12 inches
Monitoring report indicates success Yes No Drift lines
Observational field data agrees? Yes No Drainage patterns in wetlands
based on mitigation plan? Yes No I Sediment deposits
based on wetland type? Yes No j Water marks
List any remaining hydrology issues to address (e.g. remaining ditches, excessive water, etc.):
SOILS - Approved Success Criteria:
Are soils hydric or becoming hydric? Yes No
List indicators of hydric soils:
List any remaining soil issues to address (e.g. erosion, upland areas, etc.):
VEGETATION - Approved Success Criteria:
320 spa
Monitoring report indicates success? Yes No
Average TPA for entire site (per rep ort):
Observational field data agrees? Yes No
based on community composition? Yes No
based on TPA and/or % cover? Yes No
Vegetation planted on site? Yes No
Date of last planting:
Vegetation growing successfully? Yes No
Dominant Plant Species
Species Story TPA/'1. cover
Specific vegetation plots or site locations with little to no vegetation:
Estimated acreage or site percentage of unvegetated areas:
Invasive species on site (species, location(s), and % cover):
List any remaining vegetation issues to address (e.g. plant survival, concerns, etc.):
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 1 of 6
Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
NCWAM - Approved Success Criteria or Evaluative Techniques: T NCWAM Type on Site:
Coastal
Riverine
j Monitoring report indicates success? Yes No ! Riparian
Observational field data agrees? Yes No Non-riparian (wetter)
Attach NCWAM analysis results to this report. Non-riparian (drier)
ice-- -- - - -- - - ----- - _ - - - - --
List any remaining NCWAM issues to address (e.g. functionality, developing wetland type, etc.):
MITIGATION SUCCESS:
Compared to the approved mitigation plan, this component is: successful partially successful unsuccessful
List specific reasons for lack of success for this component:
Additional comments (e.g. DWQ follow-up actions, recommendations, etc.):
During site visit, document representative conditions and areas of concern. Observe preservation and
enhancement areas that may not have specific success criteria. Label and attach photos to this report.
Attach maps showing photo locations, areas of concern, and important field observations.
Additional notes related to evaluation of this component:
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 2 of 6
Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
Component: 4.93 acres Wetland (Riparian) Enhancement Component ID: 20081816-3
Description: Planting of cleared wetland areas
Location within project: See maps
III. Success Criteria Evaluation:
HYDROLOGY - Approved Success Criteria:
NA
Monitoring report indicates success Yes No
Observational field data agrees? Yes No
based on mitigation plan? Yes No
based on wetland type? Yes No
List any remaining hydrology issues to address (e.g. remaining ditches, excessive water, etc.):
SOILS - Approved Success Criteria:
Are soils hydric or becoming hydric? Yes No
List indicators of hydric soils:
List any remaining soil issues to address (e.g. erosion, upland areas, etc.):
VEGETATION - Approved Success Criteria:
320 spa
Monitoring report indicates success? Yes No
Average TPA for entire site (per report):
Observational field data agrees? Yes No
based on community composition? Yes No
based on TPA and/or % cover? Yes No
Vegetation planted on site? Yes No
Date of last planting:
j Vegetation growing successfully? Yes No
Dominant Plant Species
Species Story TPA/'/ cover
Specific vegetation plots or site locations with little to no vegetation:
Estimated acreage or site percentage of unvegetated areas:
Invasive species on site (species, location(s), and % cover):
List any remaining vegetation issues to address (e.g. plant survival, concerns, etc.):
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in upper 12 inches
Drift lines
Drainage patterns in wetlands
Sediment deposits
Water marks
Page 3 of 6
Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information. Table
NC Division of Water Quality
NCWAM - Approved Success Criteria or Evaluative Techniques: NCWAM Type on Site:
Coastal
Riverine
Monitoring report indicates success? Yes No Riparian
Observational field data agrees? Yes No Non-riparian (wetter)
Attach NCWAM analysis results to this report. Non-riparian (drier)
List any remaining NCWAM issues to address (e.g. functionality, developing wetland type, etc.):
MITIGATION SUCCESS:
Compared to the approved mitigation plan, this component is: successful partially successful unsuccessful
List specific reasons for lack of success for this component:
I
Additional comments (e.g. DWQ follow-up actions, recommendations, etc.):
During site visit, document representative conditions and areas of concern. Observe preservation and
enhancement areas that may not have specific success criteria. Label and attach photos to this report.
Attach maps showing photo locations, areas of concern, and important field observations.
Additional notes related to evaluation of this component:
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 4 of 6
Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
Component: 43.21 acres Wetland (Riparian) Preservation
Description:
Location within project: See maps
III. Success Criteria Evaluation:
HYDROLOGY - Approved Success Criteria:
Component ID: 20081816-4
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in upper 12 inches
Monitoring report indicates success Yes No unit lines
Observational field data agrees? Yes No Drainage patterns in wetlands
based on mitigation plan? Yes No Sediment deposits
based on wetland type? Yes No Water marks
List any remaining hydrology issues to address (e.g. remaining ditches, excessive water, etc.):

SOILS - Approved Success Criteria:
Are soils hydric or becoming hydric? Yes No
List indicators of hydric soils:
List any remaining soil issues to address (e.g. erosion, upland areas, etc.): j
VEGETATION - Approved Success Criteria:
Monitoring report indicates success? Yes No
Average TPA for entire site (per report):
Observational field data agrees? Yes No
based on community composition? Yes No
based on TPA and/or % cover? Yes No
Vegetation planted on site? Yes No
Date of last planting:
Vegetation growing successfully? Yes No
Dominant Plant Species
Species Story TPA,,% cover
Specific vegetation plots or site locations with little to no vegetation:
Estimated acreage or site percentage of unvegetated areas:
Invasive species on site (species, location(s), and % cover):
List any remaining vegetation issues to address (e.g. plant survival, concerns, etc.):
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 5 of 6
Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
NCWAM - Approved Success Criteria-or-Evaluative Techniques: NCWAM Type on Site:
Coastal
Riverine
Monitoring report indicates success? Yes No Riparian
Observational field data agrees? Yes No Non-riparian (wetter)
Attach NCWAM analysis results to this report. Non-riparian (drier)
List any remaining NCWAM issues to address (e.g. functionality, developing wetland type, etc.):
MITIGATION SUCCESS:
j Compared to the approved mitigation plan, this component is: successful partially successful unsuccessful
List specific reasons for lack of success for this component:
Additional comments (e.g. DWQ follow-up actions, recommendations, etc.):
I
I
I
During site visit, document representative conditions and areas of concern. Observe preservation and
enhancement areas that may not have specific success criteria. Label and attach photos to this report.
Attach maps showing photo locations, areas of concern, and important field observations.
Additional notes related to evaluation of this component:
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 6 of 6

nz
a
no
=r
t1
0
.A
3
o ADO z
Z
S?"SU.000IV 3Y 71.uuu Iv -,-+ -??•??? ??
.,7B v
FRI
00
O z ? f _ : ? _ I J C
m
o `' ?? I w v
I)ff
OD CC
? ar 3
A
00 00
C? ;J
I! Nj-
41.
I _
00
r
i
1-
A t . { i,?:.9 'fir . ?? •P
yu0, ? w
\_ '•? q
O
O
?? ??•??? 11 3D"51.000 N 35o52.000'N
APC,
ApB2
ApB
,PWIM'.� WW_l;R),d4
31
APC2�
H A
_14
W
IWO
*410
"' it