HomeMy WebLinkAboutMonkeyWrench_Draft_Prospectus_DRAFT_reduced
PROSPECTUS
Draft
September 15, 2023
WILDLANDS FALLS LAKE NEUSE 01
UMBRELLA MITIGATION BANK
Site Name: Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Orange County, NC
Neuse River Basin
HUC 03020201
USACE Action ID No. TBD
DWR# TBD
DRAFT PROSPECTUS
Wildlands Falls Lake Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Site Name: Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Orange County, NC
Neuse River Basin
HUC 03020201
USACE Action ID No. TBD
DWR# (To Be Determined)
PREPARED BY:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
312 West Millbrook Rd, Suite 225
Raleigh, NC 27609
Phone: (919) 851‐9986
September 15, 2023
Wildlands Upper Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 1
1.0 Mitigation Bank Introduction and Objectives ........................................................................ 1
1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Bank Location ............................................................................................................................ 1
1.3 Goals and Objectives ................................................................................................................. 2
1.4 Qualifications of Bank Sponsor ................................................................................................. 2
2.0 Establishment and Operation of Mitigation Bank .................................................................. 3
2.1 Ownership Agreements ............................................................................................................. 3
2.2 Landowner Information ............................................................................................................ 3
2.3 Proposed Service Area............................................................................................................... 3
2.4 Need and Feasibility of Mitigation Bank ................................................................................... 3
3.0 Ecological Suitability of Site .................................................................................................. 5
3.1 Bank Site Characterization ........................................................................................................ 5
3.2 Cultural Resources and Significant Natural Heritage Areas ...................................................... 8
3.3 Threatened and Endangered Species ........................................................................................ 8
3.4 Floodplain Compliance .............................................................................................................. 9
3.5 Site Constraints and Access ....................................................................................................... 9
4.0 Mitigation Work Plan ......................................................................................................... 10
4.1 Stream Restoration ................................................................................................................. 10
4.2 Stream Enhancement I ............................................................................................................ 11
4.3 Stream Enhancement II ........................................................................................................... 11
4.4 Stream Preservation ................................................................................................................ 11
4.5 Wetlands ................................................................................................................................. 11
4.6 Vegetation Plan ....................................................................................................................... 12
5.0 Determination of Mitigation Credits ................................................................................... 12
5.2 Initial Allocation of Released Credits ....................................................................................... 15
5.3 Subsequent Credit Releases .................................................................................................... 15
6.0 Performance Standards and Monitoring Plan ..................................................................... 16
6.1 Stream Morphological Parameters and Channel Stability ...................................................... 16
6.2 Hydrology ................................................................................................................................ 17
6.3 Vegetation ............................................................................................................................... 17
6.4 Other Parameters .................................................................................................................... 17
7.0 Maintenance and Long‐Term Sustainability ........................................................................ 18
7.1 Maintenance ........................................................................................................................... 18
7.2 Adaptive Management ............................................................................................................ 19
7.3 Long Term Management Provisions ........................................................................................ 19
8.0 References ......................................................................................................................... 20
Wildlands Upper Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus Page ii
TABLES
Table 1. Mitigation Goals and Objectives ........................................................................................... 2
Table 2. Landowner Information ........................................................................................................ 3
Table 3. Project Soil Type and Description.......................................................................................... 8
Table 4. Federally Protected Species in Orange County, NC ................................................................ 8
Table 5. Proposed Easement Crossings............................................................................................... 9
Table 6. Proposed Stream Mitigation Credits ................................................................................... 13
Table 7. Proposed Wetland Mitigation Credits ................................................................................. 13
Table 8. Stream Credit Release Schedule .......................................................................................... 14
Table 9. Riparian Wetland Credit Release Schedule.......................................................................... 15
Table 10. Maintenance Plan ............................................................................................................... 18
FIGURES
Figure 1 Service Area Map
Figure 2 Vicinity Map
Figure 3 NCDOT Draft STIP FY 2020‐2029
Figure 4 USGS Topographic Map
Figure 5 Site Map
Figure 6 Watershed Map
Figure 7 Soils Map
Figure 8 Concept Map
Figure 8B Concept Map with Nutrient Offset Areas
Figure 9 LiDAR Map
APPENDICES
Appendix A Historic Aerials
Appendix B NCDWR Stream Classification Forms
Appendix C Existing Geomorphic Data
Appendix D EDR Radius Report Summary
Appendix E Landowner Authorizations
Widllands Upper Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus Page 1
Executive Summary
Wildlands Holdings XI, LLC (“Sponsor”) proposes a modification request to add the Monkey Wrench
Mitigation Site (“Site”) to a new Wildlands Falls Lake Neuse 01 UMBI (Bank). The Bank is currently in
development with the Camp Creek mitigation site in Durham County (SAW‐2023‐01616; NCDWR # TBD).
Wildlands Holdings XI, LLC is managed by Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) and developed for the
sole purpose of holding mitigation banks. This prospectus is for the second site to be developed under
the Wildlands Falls Lake Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank, which will include restoration of streams
and wetlands along North Fork Little River and its unnamed tributaries (Figure 1). The purpose of the
Bank is to provide stream and wetland mitigation credits to compensate for impacts to Waters of the
United States and/or State Waters within the service area, Hydrologic Unit 03020201 (Neuse 01), as
depicted in Figure 2. The resulting conservation easement is estimated to be 41 acres.
1.0 Mitigation Bank Introduction and Objectives
1.1 Introduction
The Site being established under the proposed Bank is located on an active beef cattle farm that
includes bordering woodlands. In addition to North Fork Little River, the Site contains four unnamed
tributaries to North Fork Little River that, for the purpose of this project, are referred to as Rocky Creek,
Lathan Branch, Kitty Branch, and Spike Branch. The Site is located in the DWR Subbasin 03‐04‐01. All
project streams flow to North Fork Little River, which is classified as a Water Supply II Water (WS‐II), a
High Quality Water (HQW), and a Nutrient Sensitive Water (NSW).
A review of historic aerials from 1937 to 2020 shows the Site streams have existed in their approximate
existing locations over time. Before 1982, Rocky Creek was cleared just upstream of Lathan Branch.
Around 1990, and prior to 1993, the wet area around Rocky Creek and near Hester Road was converted
to pasture by the landowner’s father. Another forested area north of North Fork Little River was also
converted to pasture during this time. Last, Rocky Creek in the vicinity of Lathan Branch in the 1990s. A
pond was constructed on Lathan Branch at this time but the dam has since failed.
Within the project area, the streams are mostly eroding, incised, and some are severely impacted by
livestock access. Wetlands have been degraded due to historic channelization and channel incision. The
wetlands on the site have been hydrologically disconnected from the stream channels.
The Sponsor proposes to restore 6,128 linear feet (LF), enhance 972 LF, and preserve 444 LF of the site
streams. The Sponsor proposes to re‐establish 8.156 wetland acres. This stream and wetland mitigation
will include a conservation easement area that is estimated to total 41 acres.
1.2 Bank Location
The proposed Bank (36.221196° N, 79.081904° W) is in northern Orange County approximately eleven
miles north of Hillsborough, NC (Figure 1, Figure 2). The site is located within the Hydrologic Unit Code
(HUC) 03020201020010 and DWR Subbasin 03‐04‐01. The project site drains to Little River which drains
to Falls Lake.
To get to the Site from Raleigh, NC take I‐40 West to I‐885 North, NC‐147 North, and I‐85 South. From I‐
85, take exit 170 for US‐70 West towards NC‐86 North. Just north of Hillsborough, take NC‐86 North for
four miles and go right on Walnut Grove Church Road. The site is 6 miles on Walnut Grove Church Road
on the left.
Widllands Upper Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus Page 2
1.3 Goals and Objectives
The proposed Bank described above will provide numerous ecological benefits within the Neuse River
Basin. Project benefits include site specific improvements and watershed scale benefits.
The project goals and related objectives are described in Table 1. Project goals are desired project
outcomes and objectives are activities that will result in the accomplishment of goals. The project will be
monitored after construction to demonstrate success. A detailed monitoring program will be described
in the forthcoming mitigation plan.
Table 1. Mitigation Goals and Objectives
Goal Objective Expected Outcomes
Improve stream
channel stability.
Construct stream channels that will
maintain stable cross‐sections, patterns,
and profiles over time. Repair eroding
stream banks with bioengineering.
Reduce shear stress on channel boundary.
Reduce sediment inputs from bank erosion.
Improve instream
habitat.
Install habitat features such as
constructed riffles, cover logs, and brush
toes in restored/enhanced streams. Add
woody materials to channel beds.
Construct pools of varying depth.
Increase and diversify available habitats for
macroinvertebrates, fish, and amphibians,
leading to colonization and an increase in
biodiversity over time. Add complexity
including large woody debris (LWD) to the
streams.
Exclude livestock
from streams and
wetlands.
Remove livestock from site or install
livestock exclusion fencing along the
conservation easement.
Reduce sediment, turbidity, nutrient, and
fecal coliform bacteria inputs.
Reconnect
channels with
floodplains.
Construct stream channels with
appropriate bankfull dimensions and
depth relative to the existing floodplain.
Allow more frequent flood flows to disperse
on the floodplain. Support geomorphology
and higher‐level functions. Improve wetland
hydrology.
Restore wetland
hydrology, soils,
and plant
communities.
Remove livestock to allow soil profiles to
stabilize. Restore riparian wetlands and
associated soil structure by raising stream
beds, plugging existing ditches, and
planting native wetland species.
Raise local groundwater elevations.
Periodically inundate floodplain wetlands and
vernal pools.
Restore and
enhance native
floodplain and
streambank
vegetation.
Plant native canopy species in riparian
zone and plant native shrub and
herbaceous species on streambanks. Treat
invasive species within the project area.
Reduce sediment inputs from bank erosion
and runoff. Increase nutrient cycling and
storage in floodplain. Provide riparian habitat.
Add a source of LWD and organic material to
streams. Support all stream functions.
Permanently
protect the project
from harmful uses.
Establish a conservation easement on the
Bank.
Protect Bank from encroachment on the
riparian corridor and direct impact to streams
and wetlands. Support all stream functions.
1.4 Qualifications of Bank Sponsor
The Sponsor, which is managed by Wildlands, was developed for the sole purpose of holding mitigation
banks. Wildlands is a multidisciplinary professional engineering firm that brings together the expertise
necessary to create outstanding ecological restoration projects in a timely and cost‐effective manner. To
execute stream and wetland mitigation projects, Wildlands assembles a team of project specific
subcontractors to perform surveying, construction services, and planting. Each of these subcontractors
has substantial experience in stream, wetland, and buffer restoration in North Carolina and a substantial
Wildlands Upper Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 1
1.0 Mitigation Bank Introduction and Objectives ........................................................................ 1
1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Bank Location ............................................................................................................................ 1
1.3 Goals and Objectives ................................................................................................................. 2
1.4 Qualifications of Bank Sponsor ................................................................................................. 2
2.0 Establishment and Operation of Mitigation Bank .................................................................. 3
2.1 Ownership Agreements ............................................................................................................. 3
2.2 Landowner Information ............................................................................................................ 3
2.3 Proposed Service Area............................................................................................................... 3
2.4 Need and Feasibility of Mitigation Bank ................................................................................... 3
3.0 Ecological Suitability of Site .................................................................................................. 5
3.1 Bank Site Characterization ........................................................................................................ 5
3.2 Cultural Resources and Significant Natural Heritage Areas ...................................................... 8
3.3 Threatened and Endangered Species ........................................................................................ 8
3.4 Floodplain Compliance .............................................................................................................. 9
3.5 Site Constraints and Access ....................................................................................................... 9
4.0 Mitigation Work Plan ......................................................................................................... 10
4.1 Stream Restoration ................................................................................................................. 10
4.2 Stream Enhancement I ............................................................................................................ 11
4.3 Stream Enhancement II ........................................................................................................... 11
4.4 Stream Preservation ................................................................................................................ 11
4.5 Wetlands ................................................................................................................................. 11
4.6 Vegetation Plan ....................................................................................................................... 12
5.0 Determination of Mitigation Credits ................................................................................... 12
5.2 Initial Allocation of Released Credits ....................................................................................... 15
5.3 Subsequent Credit Releases .................................................................................................... 15
6.0 Performance Standards and Monitoring Plan ..................................................................... 16
6.1 Stream Morphological Parameters and Channel Stability ...................................................... 16
6.2 Hydrology ................................................................................................................................ 17
6.3 Vegetation ............................................................................................................................... 17
6.4 Other Parameters .................................................................................................................... 17
7.0 Maintenance and Long‐Term Sustainability ........................................................................ 18
7.1 Maintenance ........................................................................................................................... 18
7.2 Adaptive Management ............................................................................................................ 19
7.3 Long Term Management Provisions ........................................................................................ 19
8.0 References ......................................................................................................................... 20
Wildlands Upper Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus Page ii
TABLES
Table 1. Mitigation Goals and Objectives ........................................................................................... 2
Table 2. Landowner Information ........................................................................................................ 3
Table 3. Project Soil Type and Description.......................................................................................... 8
Table 4. Federally Protected Species in Orange County, NC ................................................................ 8
Table 5. Proposed Easement Crossings............................................................................................... 9
Table 6. Proposed Stream Mitigation Credits ................................................................................... 13
Table 7. Proposed Wetland Mitigation Credits ................................................................................. 13
Table 8. Stream Credit Release Schedule .......................................................................................... 14
Table 9. Riparian Wetland Credit Release Schedule.......................................................................... 15
Table 10. Maintenance Plan ............................................................................................................... 18
FIGURES
Figure 1 Service Area Map
Figure 2 Vicinity Map
Figure 3 NCDOT Draft STIP FY 2020‐2029
Figure 4 USGS Topographic Map
Figure 5 Site Map
Figure 6 Watershed Map
Figure 7 Soils Map
Figure 8 Concept Map
Figure 8B Concept Map with Nutrient Offset Areas
Figure 9 LiDAR Map
APPENDICES
Appendix A Historic Aerials
Appendix B NCDWR Stream Classification Forms
Appendix C Existing Geomorphic Data
Appendix D EDR Radius Report Summary
Appendix E Landowner Authorizations
Widllands Upper Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus Page 1
Executive Summary
Wildlands Holdings XI, LLC (“Sponsor”) proposes a modification request to add the Monkey Wrench
Mitigation Site (“Site”) to a new Wildlands Falls Lake Neuse 01 UMBI (Bank). The Bank is currently in
development with the Camp Creek mitigation site in Durham County (SAW‐2023‐01616; NCDWR # TBD).
Wildlands Holdings XI, LLC is managed by Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) and developed for the
sole purpose of holding mitigation banks. This prospectus is for the second site to be developed under
the Wildlands Falls Lake Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank, which will include restoration of streams
and wetlands along North Fork Little River and its unnamed tributaries (Figure 1). The purpose of the
Bank is to provide stream and wetland mitigation credits to compensate for impacts to Waters of the
United States and/or State Waters within the service area, Hydrologic Unit 03020201 (Neuse 01), as
depicted in Figure 2. The resulting conservation easement is estimated to be 41 acres.
1.0 Mitigation Bank Introduction and Objectives
1.1 Introduction
The Site being established under the proposed Bank is located on an active beef cattle farm that
includes bordering woodlands. In addition to North Fork Little River, the Site contains four unnamed
tributaries to North Fork Little River that, for the purpose of this project, are referred to as Rocky Creek,
Lathan Branch, Kitty Branch, and Spike Branch. The Site is located in the DWR Subbasin 03‐04‐01. All
project streams flow to North Fork Little River, which is classified as a Water Supply II Water (WS‐II), a
High Quality Water (HQW), and a Nutrient Sensitive Water (NSW).
A review of historic aerials from 1937 to 2020 shows the Site streams have existed in their approximate
existing locations over time. Before 1982, Rocky Creek was cleared just upstream of Lathan Branch.
Around 1990, and prior to 1993, the wet area around Rocky Creek and near Hester Road was converted
to pasture by the landowner’s father. Another forested area north of North Fork Little River was also
converted to pasture during this time. Last, Rocky Creek in the vicinity of Lathan Branch in the 1990s. A
pond was constructed on Lathan Branch at this time but the dam has since failed.
Within the project area, the streams are mostly eroding, incised, and some are severely impacted by
livestock access. Wetlands have been degraded due to historic channelization and channel incision. The
wetlands on the site have been hydrologically disconnected from the stream channels.
The Sponsor proposes to restore 6,128 linear feet (LF), enhance 972 LF, and preserve 444 LF of the site
streams. The Sponsor proposes to re‐establish 8.156 wetland acres. This stream and wetland mitigation
will include a conservation easement area that is estimated to total 41 acres.
1.2 Bank Location
The proposed Bank (36.221196° N, 79.081904° W) is in northern Orange County approximately eleven
miles north of Hillsborough, NC (Figure 1, Figure 2). The site is located within the Hydrologic Unit Code
(HUC) 03020201020010 and DWR Subbasin 03‐04‐01. The project site drains to Little River which drains
to Falls Lake.
To get to the Site from Raleigh, NC take I‐40 West to I‐885 North, NC‐147 North, and I‐85 South. From I‐
85, take exit 170 for US‐70 West towards NC‐86 North. Just north of Hillsborough, take NC‐86 North for
four miles and go right on Walnut Grove Church Road. The site is 6 miles on Walnut Grove Church Road
on the left.
Widllands Upper Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus Page 2
1.3 Goals and Objectives
The proposed Bank described above will provide numerous ecological benefits within the Neuse River
Basin. Project benefits include site specific improvements and watershed scale benefits.
The project goals and related objectives are described in Table 1. Project goals are desired project
outcomes and objectives are activities that will result in the accomplishment of goals. The project will be
monitored after construction to demonstrate success. A detailed monitoring program will be described
in the forthcoming mitigation plan.
Table 1. Mitigation Goals and Objectives
Goal Objective Expected Outcomes
Improve stream
channel stability.
Construct stream channels that will
maintain stable cross‐sections, patterns,
and profiles over time. Repair eroding
stream banks with bioengineering.
Reduce shear stress on channel boundary.
Reduce sediment inputs from bank erosion.
Improve instream
habitat.
Install habitat features such as
constructed riffles, cover logs, and brush
toes in restored/enhanced streams. Add
woody materials to channel beds.
Construct pools of varying depth.
Increase and diversify available habitats for
macroinvertebrates, fish, and amphibians,
leading to colonization and an increase in
biodiversity over time. Add complexity
including large woody debris (LWD) to the
streams.
Exclude livestock
from streams and
wetlands.
Remove livestock from site or install
livestock exclusion fencing along the
conservation easement.
Reduce sediment, turbidity, nutrient, and
fecal coliform bacteria inputs.
Reconnect
channels with
floodplains.
Construct stream channels with
appropriate bankfull dimensions and
depth relative to the existing floodplain.
Allow more frequent flood flows to disperse
on the floodplain. Support geomorphology
and higher‐level functions. Improve wetland
hydrology.
Restore wetland
hydrology, soils,
and plant
communities.
Remove livestock to allow soil profiles to
stabilize. Restore riparian wetlands and
associated soil structure by raising stream
beds, plugging existing ditches, and
planting native wetland species.
Raise local groundwater elevations.
Periodically inundate floodplain wetlands and
vernal pools.
Restore and
enhance native
floodplain and
streambank
vegetation.
Plant native canopy species in riparian
zone and plant native shrub and
herbaceous species on streambanks. Treat
invasive species within the project area.
Reduce sediment inputs from bank erosion
and runoff. Increase nutrient cycling and
storage in floodplain. Provide riparian habitat.
Add a source of LWD and organic material to
streams. Support all stream functions.
Permanently
protect the project
from harmful uses.
Establish a conservation easement on the
Bank.
Protect Bank from encroachment on the
riparian corridor and direct impact to streams
and wetlands. Support all stream functions.
1.4 Qualifications of Bank Sponsor
The Sponsor, which is managed by Wildlands, was developed for the sole purpose of holding mitigation
banks. Wildlands is a multidisciplinary professional engineering firm that brings together the expertise
necessary to create outstanding ecological restoration projects in a timely and cost‐effective manner. To
execute stream and wetland mitigation projects, Wildlands assembles a team of project specific
subcontractors to perform surveying, construction services, and planting. Each of these subcontractors
has substantial experience in stream, wetland, and buffer restoration in North Carolina and a substantial
Widllands Upper Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus Page 3
full‐time professional staff presence in North Carolina. For this project, Wildlands will serve as the
Authorized Agent.
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
Phone: (704) 332‐7754
Fax: (704) 332‐3306
Attn: Shawn Wilkerson
Email: swilkerson@wildlandseng.com
2.0 Establishment and Operation of Mitigation Bank
2.1 Ownership Agreements
The Site is located on one parcel owned by two individuals, and an option agreement to record a
conservation easement for the Site has been signed by the landowner. Upon completion of the review
process for the bank prospectus, the Sponsor will submit a detailed mitigation plan and an umbrella
mitigation banking instrument (UMBI) for the site. The UMBI will provide detailed information regarding
bank operation and the long‐term management of the Bank. Once the final mitigation plan is approved
and the accompanying instrument executed by members of the Interagency Review Team (IRT), the
Sponsor will record a conservation easement on the Bank.
2.2 Landowner Information
Table 2 lists the landowner name, parcel identification numbers, deed reference, and address associated
with the parcel on the site.
Table 2. Landowner Information
Landowner Parcel ID Number Deed Reference Address
Lathan and Katherine
Hawkins 9879592873 Book 1960, Page 553 8400 Walnut Grove Church Rd,
Hillsborough, NC
Robert and Staci
Hengsterman 9979582378 Book 2342, Page 435 8328 Walnut Grove Church Rd,
Hillsborough, NC
2.3 Proposed Service Area
The Bank will be established to mitigate impacts to Waters of the United States and/or State Waters
within the service area depicted in Figure 1. This service area includes the Neuse (Hydrologic Unit
03020201) and the City of Raleigh, Falls Lake, Wake Forest, Hillsborough, Creedmoor, Rolesville, Garner,
Knightdale, Cary, Clayton, Smithfield, and portions of Durham, Morrisville, Holly Springs, and Fuquay‐
Varina.
2.4 Need and Feasibility of Mitigation Bank
2.4.1 Need
Basinwide
The Neuse 01 River Basin, as described in the North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) 2009
Neuse River Basinwide Water Quality Plan (RBWQP), is undergoing rapid population growth. Wake
County is the most populous county in the state as of 2020, growing by 25.4% between 2010 and 2020
(ncdemography.org). Johnston County grew by 27.9%, and Durham by 21.4% in that same time period.
Wake, Johnston, and Durham Counties are expected to grow by 18.4%, 25.0%, and 13.9% respectively
(NC Office of State Budget and Management, 2020). This increase in population increases
Widllands Upper Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus Page 4
developmental pressures, change in land use, and the need for expanded infrastructure (roads, utilities,
etc.) all of which create the necessity for impacts to Waters of the United States to be mitigated for
appropriately and allow the economic growth of this region to continue while the environment and
water quality remain a priority.
The Sponsor expects Bank customers will include private enterprises and public entities with North
Carolina Division of Transportation (NCDOT) as the primary client. Figure 3 depicts the potential projects
set forth by NCDOT for fiscal years 2015‐2025 within the Neuse 01 watershed. This includes
transportation projects along several state, regional, and transition highways.
Sources:
Carolina Demography. “NC Population Growth 2010‐2020”. https://www.ncdemography.org/2021/08/12/first‐look‐at‐2020‐
census‐for‐north‐carolina/ Accessed: 7/27/23
Office of State Budget and Management “Projected Population Change in North Carolina Counties: 2020‐2030”.
https://files.nc.gov/ncosbm/demog/countygrowth_2030.html Accessed: 7/27/23
Local Subbasin
The proposed Bank is located in DWR subbasin 03‐04‐01 and HUC 03020201020010. The Site includes
North Fork Little River. The project site drains to Little River which drains to Falls Lake. This Site is four
miles southwest of an existing DMS full delivery project, Byrd’s Creek, that was initiated in 2011 and
closed out in 2020.
The 2009 Neuse River Basinwide Water Quality Plan lists major stressors in Subbasin 03‐04‐01 to be
total suspended solids (TSS), nutrients, and chlorophyll α. The 2010 (amended 201Neuse River Basin
Restoration Priorities (RBRP) highlights the importance of riparian buffers for stream restoration
projects. Riparian buffers retain and remove nutrients and suspended sediments. The RBRP states that
“priority [restoration] projects should increase or improve buffers.” Another goal of the RBRP for the
Neuse 01 HU is to support the Falls Lake watershed plan. The Falls Lake water supply is downstream of
the Site and is classified as water supply waters (WS‐IV) and nutrient sensitive waters (NSW). The RBRP
also states that a goal for the Neuse 01 CU is to, “…promote nutrient and sediment reduction in
agricultural areas by restoring and preserving wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers.”
The Neuse River basin is also discussed in the 2005 North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission’s
(NCWRC) Wildlife Action Plan (WAP). In the report, non‐point source pollution including nutrient loading
and erosion from stream channelization for agriculture attributed to degraded aquatic habitats in the
basin. Additionally, fertilizers and livestock contribute 60 percent of the nitrate and phosphate found in
the Neuse River basin according to the report. This report notes the importance of stream restoration
and land protection efforts in the watershed to address the observed stressors.
The Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site is beneficial because of its location within a Targeted Local
Watershed and its potential to address the goals of the Basinwide Water Quality Plan, the RBRP, and the
WAP through stream and buffer restoration, enhancement, and preservation. The proposed treatments
of streams on the Site will directly and indirectly address stressors identified in the planning documents
by creating stable stream banks, restoring meandering pattern, and restoring, enhancing, and preserving
forested riparian buffers. The project will slow surface runoff, increase retention times, provide shade to
streams, and reconnect the streams to their historic floodplains and riparian wetlands, which will reduce
sediment and nutrient loads which contribute to eutrophication of downstream waters. In addition,
restoration will provide and improve instream and terrestrial (riparian) habitats while improving stream
stability and overall hydrology.
Widllands Upper Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus Page 5
The watershed for North Fork Little River is comprised of agriculture/pasture, forestland, and developed
land (42%, 51%, and 7% respectively). The Rocky Creek drainage area consists of agriculture/pasture,
forestland, and developed land (61%, 25%, and 14% respectively).
2.4.2 Feasibility
A Radius Map Report was ordered for the Bank through Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) and
obtained on July 27, 2023. The target property was not listed in any of the Federal, State, or Tribal
environmental databases searched by EDR. A summary of the EDR report is included in the appendix.
The Bank is located in a rural watershed where the dominant land uses are agriculture, forest, and
residential. The site is located near Hillsborough which could develop in the future as Orange County
grows. Future changes in land use might alter the watershed but it is likely that low density residential
use would result in minimal site hydrology changes.
Based on the preliminary existing conditions assessments performed at the Bank in 2023, Wildlands is
confident that the site has substantial potential for the development of a viable mitigation bank. The
project will provide substantial uplift to the Falls Lake watershed and the Neuse River Basin.
3.0 Ecological Suitability of Site
3.1 Bank Site Characterization
The Bank Site is currently maintained for livestock pasture with sparsely wooded buffers along the
project streams. The Site is a livestock operation with 30 head of free‐range beef cattle on site
throughout the year. This does not include calves nor bulls so the average on the farm is probably closer
to 50 animals. Cattle have access to pastures and streams. It appears, however, that they don’t access
the upper part of N. Fork Little River because it is distant from pasture grass. Pastures are fertilized with
nitrogen once a year in the fall and livestock waste is left to break down in place on pastures. Most of
the streams and wetlands on site have been heavily impacted by livestock access. The existing
conditions of Bank streams are described in Section 3.1.1, existing wetlands are described in Section
3.1.2, and existing vegetation is described in Section 3.1.3. The appendix contains stream determination
forms and stream geomorphic data. Figure 4 is a topographic map of the site, Figure 5 illustrates the
existing Site conditions, and Figure 6 is a map of the project stream watersheds.
3.1.1 Existing Conditions ‐ Streams
North Fork Little River
North Fork Little River flows from west to east through the Site. Reach 1
begins at the upstream property line as a moderately incised channel
with a wide and mature riparian buffer. The lower streambanks are
frequently eroding in outside bends and the pools are typically
embedded with sand. Coarse riffles, however, are present and the
streambanks have mostly suitable herbaceous cover.
Approximately 450 feet downstream from the property line, North Fork
Little River Reach 2 begins as the channel becomes straighter and
increasingly incised below a riffle that is holding grade. Within 200 feet, as the bank height ratios
increase and the channel attempts to meander, streambank erosion worsens, marking the start of Reach
3. Here bank height ratios range from 1.3 to 1.4 but streambank erosion is pronounced and the channel
is disconnected from a wide floodplain. Bedform diversity is limited with sand embedding much of the
coarser bed material, making riffle and pool areas poorly defined. As above, the riparian buffer is mature
and wide. Additionally, approximately 700 feet from the start of Reach 3, cattle impacts become severe.
North Fork Little River
Widllands Upper Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus Page 6
A relic, broken fence marks an old crossing and cattle tend to not travel upstream from here, probably
due to the distance from pasture. Downstream from this point, however, cattle congregate in the
stream and have created many access ramps. Toward the downstream end of Reach 3, the buffer
narrows considerably, bedform is dominated by sand with minimal distinction between pools and riffles,
and bank erosion is prevalent.
Reach 4 begins at the confluence with Rocky Creek. The channel remains moderately incised at this
point but bank erosion is often severe. A livestock exclusion fence keeps cattle from the creek about 150
feet below the confluence. Bedform continues to be dominated by sand with little variation between
pools and riffles. The lowest 300 feet of the reach has been historically channelized and the buffer is
mature and wide on the right bank, but limited to about 50 feet on the left bank.
Rocky Creek
Rocky Creek enters the property at Hester Road as several intermittent
channels flow through a linear wetland. These pilot channels have
formed within the wetland and carry seasonal flow. The pilot channels
reach headcuts approximately 400 feet from the Hester Road culvert and
coalesce into a single thread, eroding stream channel. At this point,
Reach 2 continues as an intermittent stream.
The channel lacks riparian buffer for most of its length to the confluence
with Lathan Branch. The channel in this section is deeply incised (BHR =
2.8) and severely eroding. It has also been historically straightened for much of this length. The
substrate contains abundant cobble but the riffle‐pool sequencing is poorly defined. The riparian buffer
is absent except for 400 feet of the lower right bank, which has been livestock impacted but contains
trees for more than 200 feet from the channel.
Once below Lathan Branch, Rocky Creek Reach 3 becomes slightly more stable but still has impairments.
A head cut is located about 100 feet below the confluence followed by a long cobble riffle that stably
drops grade via a slightly incised channel. A farm road comes within 50 feet of the channel’s left bank
but otherwise the buffer is mature, wide, and livestock impacted.
A ford crossing marks a transition to the final section of Rocky Creek. This section has a flatter profile
and is in a wooded setting but the trees are relatively sparse. Reach 4 has a moderately incised channel
(BHR = 1.4) that is typically eroding only at the outside bends and at the streambank bottoms. Riffle‐
pool sequences are not well defined. The incision and erosion increase, however, as Rocky Creek Reach
5 approaches the North Fork Little River. The bank height ratio increases to 2.0 and the streambed
becomes less coarse and more dominated by sand. The streambanks are mostly covered by herbaceous
vegetation with trees spaced well apart.
Cattle have access to the entire length of Rocky Creek but their impacts are more pronounced in the
upper sections, which are closer to pasture.
Rocky Creek
Widllands Upper Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus Page 7
Lathan Branch
Lathan Branch enters the project property as an intermittent stream just
below a headcut and becomes more deeply incised and eroding as it extends
through the Site. The landowner’s father attempted to build a dam and
backwater the branch in approximately 1994. The pond dam has since failed
and, though stagnant water collects in the formed depression, the branch
directly flows to Rocky Creek. The bank height ratio is 1.7 and there are no
trees along the branch. A remnant pond dam with a corrugated plastic pipe
is present close to Rocky Creek.
Kitty Branch
Kitty Branch begins on site at an active headcut within a pasture. The branch descends to an incised
elevation and has eroding streambanks. A spring beyond the branch’s right bank adds flow
approximately 200 feet below the headcut. The channel remains incised with herbaceous vegetation
growing at the top of bank and sometimes within the channel. The bank height ratio is 2.6 and it
appears to be increasing. About 400 feet from the origin, Kitty Branch enters a wooded area that has
been impacted by cattle. The stream continues to be incised and eroding, with tree roots extending
above the channel bottom from one bank to the other. The bed material is predominantly sand.
Spike Branch
Spike Branch is a 150‐long intermittent channel that joins Kitty Branch after the latter reaches its
downstream, wooded section. A headcut is migrating up Spike Branch, leaving exposed tree roots and a
small, eroding channel.
3.1.2 Existing Wetlands
The project area includes approximately 1.1 acres of existing wetland in the floodplains of Rocky Creek
and Lathan Branch. Existing wetland areas with persistent wetland hydrology in the floodplain of Rocky
Creek and Lathan Branch, while influenced to an extent by groundwater, are also driven by overland
runoff from adjacent agricultural fields and hillslopes with moderate to steep grades. Existing wetland
areas have compacted soils from cattle trampling. Vegetation communities are dominated by a dense
herbaceous stratum with little to no woody species. Invasive species are not prevalent in existing
wetland areas. As a whole, soil compaction from cattle trampling and lack of woody vegetation are the
primary impairments to existing wetlands (Figure 5).
An additional 8.156 acres of the project area contains hydric soil or buried hydric soil, but lacks
contemporary wetland hydrology. Wetland hydrology of these areas has been removed by subsurface
drainage to channelized streams and placement of spoil material on hydric soils. The spoil originated
from channel modification along Lathan Branch and earthwork upslope of the valleys. Watershed
characteristics and limited floodplain access have resulted in excessive sedimentation and formation of
a natural upland levee along most of North Fork Little River and Rocky Creek. Buried floodplain soils
were observed in several locations within the project area, suggesting the presence of former wetlands.
3.1.3 Existing Vegetation
The condition of the riparian buffer along project streams varies throughout the site. Riparian buffers
are absent along Rocky Creek Reaches 1 and 2, Lathan Branch, and the upper portion of Kitty Branch.
Riparian buffers along these streams and reaches consist of open pasture dominated by pasture grasses
with little to no woody species. The riparian buffer along Rocky Creek Reaches 4 and 5, North Fork Little
River, Spike Branch, and the lower portion of Kitty Branch consist of headwater forest and bottomland
hardwood forest comprised mostly of native species including white oak (Quercus alba), sycamore
(Platanus occidentalis), ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana), green ash (Fraxinus pensylvannica), black
Lathan Branch pond breach
Widllands Upper Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus Page 8
walnut (Juglans nigra), and red maple (Acer rubrum) in the canopy and understory. Chinese privet was
noted in the understory along North Fork Little River and Rocky Creek, but was not dominant. The
herbaceous layer mainly consisted of species such as soft rush (Juncus effusus) and various sedges
(Carex spp.), but was dominated by Japanese stiltgrass (Microstegium vimineum).
3.1.4 Soils
The floodplain areas of the proposed project are mapped by the Orange County Soil Survey as primarily
Chewacla soils (Figure 7). This complex transitions from a loam to a silty clay loam and then a clay loam
at depth. An unconsolidated bedrock layer may be found at 80 inches or deeper. This series often
contains inclusions of Wehadkee, which were identified during soil mapping exercises. Wehadkee are
listed on the National Hydric Soil list.
Much of the soils along Rocky Creek Reaches 1 and 2 are mapped as Helena‐Sedgefield complex, but are
actually more similar to the Chewacla series.
Table 3. Project Soil Type and Description
Soil Name Description
Chewacla and
Wehadkee Soils
Generally found on floodplains. Somewhat poorly drained with bedrock layer more than
80 inches deep.
Helena Sandy Loam Moderately well drained soil generally found on hillslopes.
Helena‐Sedgefield
Complex Moderately well drained soil generally found on ridges and hillslopes.
Appling Sandy Loam Well drained, found on summits and interfluves.
Source: Soil Survey of Orange County, North Carolina, USDA‐NRCS,
https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx
3.2 Cultural Resources and Significant Natural Heritage Areas
No sites listed on the National Register with the State Historic Preservation Office are located
immediately adjacent to or within the project area. The archaeological site files at the North Carolina
Office of State Archaeology (OSA) have not been reviewed at this time. All appropriate cultural resource
agencies will be contacted for their review and comment prior to any land disturbing activity.
One registered Natural Heritage Area is located within one mile of the project site, Jimmy Ed Road
Hardpan Forest. No Managed Heritage Areas are located withing one mile of the project site.
3.3 Threatened and Endangered Species
Wildlands searched the USFWS and North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NHP) databases to
identify federally listed threatened and endangered plant and animal species for Orange County, NC.
Table 4 details the current list of threatened and endangered species for Orange County. Wildlands will
conduct a full review for protected species in the mitigation planning phase and will coordinate with
USFWS and NCWRC as necessary based on that review.
Table 4. Federally Protected Species in Orange County, NC
Species Federal Status Habitat
Birds
Red‐cockaded woodpecker
(Picoides borealis) Endangered Mature pine forest. Longleaf pines are preferred but can
be found in other species of southern pines.
Mammals
Tricolored bat
(Perimyotis subflavus) Proposed Endangered Roost in trees during the summer and caves or mines in
the winter. Prefers to forage in forested riparian areas.
Widllands Upper Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus Page 9
Species Federal Status Habitat
Amphibians
Neuse River waterdog
(Necturus lewisi) Threatened
Inhabits perennial streams with clean, flowing water
with high concentrations of dissolved oxygen. Often
found under leaf packs or rocks.
Fish
Carolina madtom
(Noturus furiosus) Endangered Inhabits swiftly flowing, moderate gradient streams with
sand and gravel substrates
Cape Fear shiner
(Notropis mekistocholas) Endangered
Inhabits streams and rivers with gravel, cobble, and
boulder substrates and can be found in pools, riffles,
and runs.
Mussels
Atlantic pigtoe
(Fusconaia masoni) Endangered
Inhabits small creeks to larger rivers with excellent
water quality and flows sufficient to maintain clean, silt‐
free substrates.
Dwarf wedgemussel
(Alasmidonta heterodon) Endangered Requires milkweed species for breeding habitat and
flowering plants for foraging habitat.
Habitat information from the following website: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/report/species‐listings‐by‐current‐range‐
county?fips=37135
3.4 Floodplain Compliance
The Site is represented on the Orange County Flood Map 3710986800K and 3710996000L. North Fork
Little River and Site tributaries are mapped in a Zone AE Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) on Orange
County Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Panels 9868 and 9960. A limited detailed study has been
performed on North Fork Little River with base flood elevations defined and delineated floodplain. The
remaining tributaries do not have detailed hydraulic studies performed, but the downstream portions of
said reaches fall within the North Fork Little River SFHA. Effective hydraulic modeling for North Fork
Little River will be obtained from the NC Floodplain Mapping Program. A no‐rise condition will be
pursued if compatible with stream restoration and floodplain enhancement grading. If a no‐rise
condition is not attainable, then a CLOMR will be prepared. Wildlands’ engineers have successfully
navigated the CLOMR process for several similar mitigation project sites. The project will be designed to
avoid adverse floodplain impacts or hydrologic trespass on adjacent properties or local roads.
3.5 Site Constraints and Access
Five crossings are required on the Site property. However, only two of those crossings are within the
project and will allow livestock access. Crossings at Hester Road and above Lathan Branch are upstream
from the project. A third easement break is to allow access to a septic system in case maintenance is
needed. Two traditional crossings are on Rocky Creek and N. Fork Little River. Crossings are summarized
and numbered below in Table 5 and on Figure 8.
An area between Kitty Branch and Rocky Creek has an existing septic drainfield and repair area. This
area will be surveyed and left out of the conservation easement. A preliminary estimate of the area is
shown in Figure 8.
Table 5. Proposed Easement Crossings
No. Width (ft) Location Internal or
External Crossing Type Purpose
1 30 Rocky Creek –
upstream from Reach 1 Internal Ford Livestock passage over non‐
jurisdictional coneyance
Widllands Upper Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus Page 10
No. Width (ft) Location Internal or
External Crossing Type Purpose
2 40 Lathan Branch –
upstream from Reach 1 Internal Culvert Livestock passage over a
jurisdictional stream
3 60 N. Fork Little River –
Reach 3 Internal Ford Livestock passage over newly
constructed ford crossing
4 60 Rocky Creek – Reach 2 Internal Ford Livestock passage via an existing,
stable ford crossing
5 10 Lathan Branch Internal No crossing; break for
existing septic system.
Allow maintenance access to
existing septic drain line en route
to drain field.
The easement boundaries around streams proposed for mitigation credit provide the required 50‐foot
minimum riparian buffer for Piedmont streams. The entire easement area can be accessed for
construction, monitoring, and long‐term stewardship from Walnut Grove Church and Hester Roads. The
Whitfield Farms airport is located about four miles of the Site.
4.0 Mitigation Work Plan
Wildlands will begin the project by identifying the best design approach to meet the stated project
objectives and implement the appropriate degree of intervention. A combination of analog, empirical,
and analytical design approaches will potentially be used. All project resources will be designed to create
stable, functional stream channels and riparian wetlands.
4.1 Stream Restoration
All project reaches are proposed for restoration with the
exception of upper N. Fork Little River, Rocky Creek
Reaches 1 and 4, and Spike Branch. The restoration
reaches will be designed and built with appropriate
dimension, pattern, and profile to allow for frequent
overbank flooding, provide stable bank slopes, enable
biological lift, and reconnect streams with existing
floodplains. Reference streams will be identified and will
serve as one of the primary sources of information on
which restoration designs are based. Wildlands has
developed a general approach to be used as the basis for
stream restoration design. The design approach, which is tailored to each site, continues to develop as
additional projects are implemented.
All reaches proposed for restoration will be designed with a Priority 1 approach, raising channel beds to
reconnect them with existing floodplains. Priority 2 restoration will be required on the downstream end
of N. Fork Little River to stably connect with existing grades. The Priority 2 length will be minimized.
Stream structures will be installed to promote water quality, stabilize the bed and banks, provide
bedform diversity, and increase aquatic and terrestrial habitat. Wildlands plans to evaluate stream
substrate and determine appropriate gradations/bed features for the Site streams. At this stage,
Wildlands believes most of these channels will be built using a threshold channel approach with a
cobble‐gravel substrate. Wildlands believes based on other work in this area that appropriate substrate
will be able to be harvested on‐site.
Sandy Branch Mitigation Site
Designed and Constructed by Wildlands
Widllands Upper Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus Page 11
4.2 Stream Enhancement I
N. Fork Little RIver Reach 2 is slated for an Enhancement I approach. The channel incises further below a
stable cobble riffle. From this point, Wildlands will install constructed riffles to raise the stream bed
elevation in preparation for Priority 1 restoration in Reach 3.
Rocky Creek Reach 4 is also proposed for Enhancement I. Though it has less erosion than reaches slated
for restoration, its bank height ratio is 1.4, indicating it is moderately incised and not well connected
with the floodplain. An Enhancement I approach that focuses on raising the bed with constructed riffles
will increase floodplain interaction and increase bedform diversity in the form of riffle‐pool sequences.
The riparian buffer along Reach 4 is also sparse and supplemental planting and livestock exclusion will
be incorporated.
4.3 Stream Enhancement II
Rocky Creek Reach 1 and Spike Branch are slated for an Enhancement II approach. Rocky Creek Reach 1
is largely stable but is impacted by livestock trampling and does not have trees. The proposed approach
is to exclude livestock and plant a native riparian buffer.
Spike Branch is a short reach and stabilizing the headcut at the upstream end is the most critical need.
Given its small drainage area, raising the bed below this point could result in loss of jurisdictional status.
But streambank stabilization will be employed through bank grading and matting.
4.4 Stream Preservation
Upper N. Fork Little River is only slightly incised and has a very wide and mature riparian buffer
surrounding it. Though there is some erosion, preservation is proposed to protect it from degradation.
4.5 Wetlands
Proposed wetland mitigation includes approximately 8.156 acres of wetland re‐establishment. Two
activities will be used to improve wetland hydrology to justify wetland re‐establishment in the areas
identified in Figure 8. First, and likely most relevant, the restoration of incised streams using Priority 1
techniques will serve to effectively change the subsurface flow gradient and discharge characteristics of
the groundwater table to the receiving stream, rehydrating wetlands adjacent to the channel. Secondly,
cattle will be excluded from riparian areas, which will improve soil structure and allow native vegetation
to regenerate and proliferate. Areas lacking diversity of native riparian species will be scheduled for an
appropriate level of vegetation planting in addition to invasive species control. The credit ratio proposed
for wetland re‐establishment areas is 1:1.
Existing jurisdictional wetlands located adjacent to streams will benefit from planting of native riparian
vegetation and Priority 1 restoration techniques that will raise the groundwater table and re‐establish a
more traditional hydrology regime for headwater forests and bottomland hardwood forests. However,
these areas are targeted for nutrient offset mitigation and will not be proposed for wetland credit.
Widllands Upper Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus Page 12
4.6 Vegetation Plan
Native riparian buffers will be planted along restored and
enhanced stream reaches, in all proposed wetland
restoration zones, and in all riparian restoration areas. The
ecological uplift can be summarized as transforming an
agriculturally impacted area to a protected riparian
corridor. Buffer restoration will involve planting appropriate
native tree species along the riparian corridor. Herbaceous
riparian vegetation will also be planted, but additional
herbaceous plants are expected to re‐establish naturally
and through the placement of a native seed mix in
disturbed areas. Live stake shrub species will be planted
along restored streams. Vegetation management and herbicide applications will be needed over the first
few years of tree establishment in the riparian buffer restoration areas to prevent encroachment of
invasive species. Portions of the site that have been maintained as cleared agricultural fields will require
little site preparation other than select herbicide treatments or limited mechanical clearing to remove
undesirable underbrush prior to planting.
The planting plan will be based on an appropriate nearby reference community and past project
experience. The plan will be developed to restore appropriate strata (canopy, understory, shrub, and
herbaceous layers). Vegetation planted in restored wetland areas will be based on species identified
within appropriate reference locations and professional experience based on site conditions.
Areas with an existing wooded riparian corridor will be treated for invasive species. The Site will be
protected in perpetuity under a conservation easement and will be marked per IRT guidelines.
5.0 Determination of Mitigation Credits
The mitigation stream and wetland credit calculations were derived using the US Army Corps of
Engineers’ Stream Mitigation Guidance and was based on Wildlands’ conceptual design for maximum
ecological uplift. Given the existing conditions of the stream channels, wetlands, the disturbance factors,
and the constraints, management objectives for each reach have been established.
The Site will be a combination of stream restoration and enhancement level II activities. Stream
restoration is proposed at a ratio of 1:1, enhancement level I is proposed at 1.5:1, enhancement level II
is proposed at 2.5:1, and preservation is proposed at 10:1, as listed below. The management objective,
the mitigation type, and proposed amount of mitigation is presented in the below in Tables 6 and 7.
Planted riparian buffer
Widllands Upper Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus Page 13
Table 6. Proposed Stream Mitigation Credits
Stream Credits
Reach Management Objectives Type of Mitigation Length
(feet) Ratio Stream
Credits
RESTORATION
N. Fork Little River
Reaches 3 and 4
Restore appropriate dimension, pattern,
and profile with Priority 1 restoration.
Install habitat structures, allow bankfull
floodplain access. Establish native riparian
buffer, execute long term protection
instrument, mark easement.
Restoration
1,920 1 1,920
Rocky Creek
Reaches 2, 3, and 5 2,768 1 2,768
Lathan Branch 600 1 600
Kitty Branch 840 1 840
Restoration Subtotal: 6,128 6,128
ENHANCEMENT I
N. Fork Little River
Reach 2
Add constructed riffles to lower bank height
ratios and establish riffle‐pool sequences,
stabilize banks and add structures where
needed, establish native riparian buffer
where needed, execute long term
protection instrument, mark easement.
Enhancement I
210 1.5 140
Rocky Creek Reach 4 315 1.5 210
Enhancement I Subtotal: 525 350
ENHANCEMENT II
Rocky Creek Reach 1 Exclude livestock and plant forested riparian
buffer.
Enhancement II
297 3.5 85
Spike Branch
Stabilize headcut, treat invasive species,
stabilize banks where needed, plant
livestakes, execute long term protection
instrument, mark easement.
150 2.5 60
Enhancement II Subtotal: 447 145
PRESERVATION
N. Fork Little River
Reach 1
Treat invasive species, long term
protections instrument, mark easement. Preservation 444 10 44
Preservation Subtotal: 444 44
TOTAL 7,544 6,663
Table 7. Proposed Wetland Mitigation Credits
Wetland credits
Area Management Objectives Type of
Mitigation
Area
(Acres) Ratio Wetland
Credits
Wetland
Reestablishment
Reduce soil compaction, raise adjacent stream
beds and remove concentrated floodplain flow
paths (as needed) to restore hydrology, remove
overburden and excess sediment, establish native
hydrophytic vegetation
Wetland
Reestablishment 8.156 1:1 8.156
TOTAL: 8.156 8.156
Widllands Upper Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus Page 14
5.1.1 Credit Release Schedule
All credit releases will be based on the total credit generated as reported by the as‐built surveys of the
Bank. Under no circumstances shall the Bank be debited until the necessary Department of Army (DA)
authorization has been received for its construction or the District Engineer (DE) has otherwise provided
written approval for the project in the case where no DA authorization is required for construction of
the mitigation project. The DE, in consultation with the IRT, will determine if performance standards
have been satisfied sufficiently to meet the requirements of the release schedules below. In cases where
some performance standards have not been met, credits may still be released depending on the
specifics of the case. Monitoring may be required to restart or be extended, depending on the extent to
which the site fails to meet the specified performance standard. The release of project credits will follow
the Monitoring Requirements and Performance Standards for Compensatory Mitigation in North
Carolina, dated February 9, 2013. The proposed credit release schedule is shown in Tables 8 and 9.
Table 8. Stream Credit Release Schedule
Credit
Release
Milestone
Credit Release Activity Interim
Release
Total
Released
1 Bank Establishment 15% 15%
2 Completion of all initial physical and biological improvements made
pursuant to the Mitigation Plan 15% 30%
3 First year monitoring report demonstrates channels are stable and interim
performance standards have been met 10% 40%
4 Second year monitoring report demonstrates channels are stable and
interim performance standards have been met 10% 50%
5 Third year monitoring report demonstrates channels are stable and interim
performance standards have been met 10% 60%
6 Fourth year monitoring report demonstrates channels are stable and
interim performance standards have been met 5% 65%
(75%*)
7 Fifth year monitoring report demonstrates performance standards are
being met 10% 75%
(85%*)
8 Sixth year monitoring report demonstrates performance standards are
being met 5% 80%
(90%*)
9 Seventh year monitoring report demonstrates that channels are stable,
performance standards have been met. 10% 90%
(100%*)
*A 10% reserve of credits to be held back until the bankfull event performance standard has been met.
Widllands Upper Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus Page 15
Table 9. Riparian Wetland Credit Release Schedule
Credit
Release
Milestone
Credit Release Activity Interim
Release
Total
Released
1 Bank Establishment 15% 15%
2 Completion of all initial physical and biological improvements made
pursuant to the Mitigation Plan 15% 30%
3 First year monitoring report demonstrates interim performance standards
are being met 10% 40%
4 Second year monitoring report demonstrates interim performance
standards are being met 10% 50%
5 Third year monitoring report demonstrates interim performance standards
are being met 15% 65%
6 Fourth year monitoring report demonstrates interim performance
standards are being met 5% 70%
7
Fifth year monitoring report demonstrates performance standards are
being met; Provided that all performance standards are met, the IRT may
allow the Bank Sponsor to discontinue hydrologic monitoring after the fifth
year, but vegetation monitoring must continue for an additional two years
after the fifth year for a total of seven years
15% 85%
8 Sixth year monitoring report demonstrates performance standards are
being met 5% 90%
9 Seventh year monitoring report demonstrates performance standards are
being met, and project has received close‐out approval 10% 100%
5.2 Initial Allocation of Released Credits
The initial allocation of released credits is defined as Bank Establishment in the 2013 Wilmington District
credit release schedule guidance document. The initial allocation can be released without prior written
approval of the DE upon satisfactory completion of the following activities:
a. Execution of the UMBI by the Sponsor and the USACE.
b. Approval of the final mitigation plan.
c. Recordation of the conservation easement and delivery of a title opinion acceptable to the
USACE.
d. Delivery of the financial assurances described in the mitigation plan.
e. 404 permit verification for construction of the site, if required.
5.3 Subsequent Credit Releases
All subsequent credit releases must be approved by the DE, in consultation with the IRT, based on a
determination that required performance standards have been achieved. For stream projects, a reserve
of 10% of a site’s total stream credits shall be released after four bankfull events have occurred in
separate years, provided the channel is stable and all other performance standards are met. In the event
that less than four bankfull events occur during the monitoring period, release of these reserve credits
shall be at the discretion of the IRT. As the bank approaches milestones associated with the credit
release, Wildlands will submit a request for credit release to the DE along with documentation
substantiating achievement of criteria required for release to occur. This documentation will be included
with the annual monitoring report.
Widllands Upper Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus Page 16
6.0 Performance Standards and Monitoring Plan
The performance criteria for the Site will follow approved performance criteria presented in the October
2016 IRT Mitigation Monitoring Guidance. Annual monitoring and semi‐annual site visits will be
conducted to assess the condition of the completed project. Specific performance standard components
are proposed for stream morphology, hydrology, and vegetation. The stream restoration reaches of the
project will be assigned specific performance criteria components for hydrology, vegetation, and
geomorphology. The enhancement II reaches will be assigned specific performance criteria components
for vegetation only. Performance criteria will be evaluated throughout the (up to) seven years of post‐
construction monitoring. If all stream, vegetation, and hydrologic performance criteria have been
successfully met and at least four bankfull events have occurred during separate years, Wildlands may
propose to terminate stream and/or vegetation monitoring after five years with written approval from
the USACE and North Carolina Interagency Review Team (IRT). An outline of the performance criteria
components follows.
6.1 Stream Morphological Parameters and Channel Stability
Dimension
Riffle cross sections on the restoration reaches should be stable and should show little change in
bankfull area, bank height ratio, and width‐to‐depth ratio. Riffle cross sections should fall within the
parameters defined for channels of the appropriate stream type. If any changes do occur, these changes
will be evaluated to assess whether the stream channel is showing signs of instability. Changes in the
channel that indicate a movement toward stability or enhanced habitat include a decrease in the width‐
to‐depth ratio in meandering channels or an increase in pool depth. These sorts of bed changes do not
constitute a problem or indicate a need for remedial actions. If channel changes indicate a movement
toward stability, remedial action will not be taken.
In order to assess channel dimension performance, permanent
cross sections will be installed on restoration and reaches per
the IRT Mitigation Monitoring Guidelines (October 2016). Each
cross section will be permanently marked with pins to establish
its location. Cross section surveys will include points measured
at all breaks in slope, including top of bank, bankfull, edge of
water, and thalweg. Cross section and bank pin surveys (if
applicable) will be conducted in monitoring years one, two,
three, five, and seven.
Profile and Pattern
Longitudinal profile surveys will be conducted during the as‐built survey but will not be conducted
during the seven‐year monitoring period unless other indicators during the annual monitoring indicate a
trend toward vertical and lateral instability. If a longitudinal profile is deemed necessary, monitoring will
follow standards as described in the Stream Channel Reference Sites: An Illustrated Guide to Field
Technique (Harrelson et. al., 1994) for the necessary reaches.
Substrate
Channel substrate materials will be sampled with the pebble count method along restoration, and
enhancement I reaches. These reaches should show maintenance of coarser materials in the riffle
features and smaller particles in the pool features. A reach‐wide pebble count will be performed in each
restoration reach each monitoring year for classification purposes. A pebble count will be performed at
each surveyed riffle cross‐section, only during the as‐built survey to characterize the pavement.
Example of a cross section survey
Widllands Upper Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus Page 17
6.2 Hydrology
Stream
Four bankfull flow events, occurring in separate years, must be documented on the restoration reaches
within the seven‐year monitoring period. Stream monitoring will continue until success criteria in the
form of four bankfull events in separate years have been documented. Bankfull events will be
documented using photographs and either a crest gage or a pressure transducer, as appropriate for Site
conditions. The selected measurement device will be installed in the stream within a surveyed riffle
cross section. Photographs will also be used to document the occurrence of debris lines and sediment
deposition.
Where restoration activities are proposed for intermittent streams, monitoring gages will be installed to
track the frequency and duration of stream flow events. Continuous surface water flow within the
tributaries must be documented to occur every year for at least 30 consecutive days during the seven‐
year monitoring period. This 30‐day period of flow can occur at any point during the year. Additional
monitoring may be required if surface water flow cannot be documented due to abnormally dry
conditions.
Wetland
Groundwater monitoring will be conducted for seven years after construction to evaluate the hydrologic
state of the restored wetland areas. Wetland groundwater gages will be installed in accordance with the
techniques and standards described in the USACE document entitled “Technical Standard for Water‐
Table Monitoring of Potential Wetland Sites” (ERDC TN‐WRAP‐05‐2, June 2005). Groundwater
monitoring gages will be established throughout the wetland area to adequately characterize the
different soils, vegetation communities, and surface topographic variations that are found across the
site. According to Table 1 in the USACE Mitigation Guidance update, Wehadkee soils have a wetland
saturation range of 12‐16% of the growing season. Based on this, the final criteria for wetland hydrology
will be groundwater levels within 12 inches of the soil surface for a minimum period of 12% of the
growing season.
6.3 Vegetation
The final vegetative success criteria will be the survival of 210 planted stems per acre in the riparian
corridors at the end of the required monitoring period (year seven). The interim measure of vegetative
success for the Site will be the survival of at least 320 native species stems per acre at the end of the
third monitoring year and at least 260 stems per acre at the end of the fifth year of monitoring. Also,
trees must average seven feet in height at the end of the fifth monitoring year, and ten feet in height at
the end of the seventh monitoring year. If this performance standard is met by year five and stem
density is trending towards success (i.e., vigor), and invasive species are not threatening ecological
success, monitoring of vegetation on the Site may be terminated with written approval by the USACE in
consultation with the IRT. The extent of invasive species coverage will also be monitored and controlled
as necessary throughout the required monitoring period.
Vegetation monitoring quadrants will be installed across the Site to measure the survival of the planted
trees. The number of monitoring quadrants required, and frequency of monitoring will be based on the
October 2016 IRT Mitigation Monitoring Guidance. Vegetation monitoring will occur in the summer and
will follow the CVS‐EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation (2008).
6.4 Other Parameters
Photo Reference Stations
Photographs should illustrate the Site’s vegetation and morphological stability on an annual basis. Cross
section photos should demonstrate no excessive erosion or degradation of the banks. Longitudinal
Widllands Upper Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus Page 18
photos should indicate the absence of persistent mid‐channel bars within the channel or vertical
incision. Grade control structures should remain stable. Deposition of sediment on the bank side of vane
arms is preferable. Maintenance of scour pools on the channel side of vane arms is expected.
Photographs will be taken once a year to visually document stability for seven years following
construction. Permanent markers will be established and located with GPS equipment, so that the same
locations and view directions on the Site are photographed each year. Photos will be used to monitor
restoration and enhancement areas, as well as vegetation plots.
Longitudinal reference photos will be established at regular intervals along the channel by taking a
photo looking upstream and downstream. Cross sectional photos will be taken of each permanent cross
section looking upstream and downstream. Reference photos will also be taken for each of the
vegetation plots. Representative digital photos of each permanent photo point, cross section, and
vegetation plot will be taken when the stream and vegetation assessments are conducted. The
photographer will make every effort to consistently maintain the same area in each photo over time.
Visual Assessments
Visual assessments should support the specific performance standards for each metric as described
above. Visual assessments will be performed along stream reaches on a semi‐annual basis during the
seven‐year monitoring period. Problem areas such as channel instability (e.g. lateral and/or vertical
instability, instream structure failure/instability and/or piping, headcuts), vegetation health (e.g. low
stem density, vegetation mortality, invasive species, or encroachment), beaver activity, or livestock
access will be noted. Areas of concern will be mapped and photographed and will be accompanied by a
written description in the annual report. Problem areas will be re‐evaluated during each subsequent
visual assessment. Should remedial actions be required, a plan of action will be provided in the annual
monitoring report.
Benthic Macroinvertebrates
If required by DWR as part of the project’s permitting process, benthic macroinvertebrate sampling will
be performed on the restored site. Any required sampling will be performed using DWR Standard
Operating Procedures for Benthic Macroinvertebrates (October 2012).
7.0 Maintenance and Long‐Term Sustainability
7.1 Maintenance
The Bank shall be monitored on a regular basis and a physical inspection of the project shall be
conducted at a minimum of once per year throughout the post‐construction monitoring period until
performance standards are met. These site inspections may identify site components and features that
require routine maintenance. Routine maintenance will be conducted to rectify identified deficiencies
and may include the activities listed in Table 10.
Table 10. Maintenance Plan
Component /
Feature Maintenance through project close‐out
Stream
Routine channel maintenance and repair activities may include chinking of in‐stream structures to
prevent piping, securing loose coir matting, and supplemental installations of live stakes and
other target vegetation along the channel. Areas where stormwater and floodplain flows
intercept the channel may also require maintenance to prevent bank failures and head‐cutting.
Beaver dams that inundate the streams channels shall be removed and the beaver shall be
trapped.
Widllands Upper Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus Page 19
Component /
Feature Maintenance through project close‐out
Vegetation
Vegetation shall be maintained to ensure the health and vigor of the targeted community.
Routine vegetation maintenance and repair activities may include supplemental planting,
pruning, mulching, and fertilizing. Exotic invasive plant species affecting the viability of the
mitigation shall be controlled by mechanical and/or chemical methods. Any vegetation control
requiring herbicide application will be performed in accordance with the NC Department of
Agriculture (NCDA) rules and regulations.
Site
Boundary
Site boundaries shall be identified in the field to ensure clear distinction between the bank site
and adjacent properties. Boundaries may be identified by fence, marker, bollard, post, tree‐
blazing, or other means as allowed by site conditions and/or conservation easement. Boundary
markers disturbed, damaged, or destroyed will be repaired and/or replaced on an as‐needed
basis.
7.2 Adaptive Management
Upon completion of site construction, the Sponsor will implement the post‐construction monitoring
protocols and minor remedial actions (routine maintenance) will be performed as needed for the
duration of the monitoring period. The Sponsor will notify the USACE immediately if monitoring results
or visual observations suggest a trend towards instability, major remedial actions are needed, or that
performance standards cannot be achieved. Should major remedial measures be required, the Sponsor
will submit a Corrective Action Plan and coordinate with the USACE until authorization is secured to
conduct the adaptive management activities. The Sponsor is responsible for funding and/or providing
the services necessary to secure any necessary permits to support the proposed major remedial
adaptive management actions, to implement the corrective action plan, and to deliver record drawings
that depict the extent and nature of the work performed. If the USACE determines that the Bank is not
meeting performance standards or the Sponsor is not complying with the terms of the instrument, the
USACE may take appropriate actions, including but not limited to: suspending credit sales, utilizing
financial assurances, and/or terminating the instrument.
7.3 Long Term Management Provisions
The Sponsor will institute a Long Term Management Plan responsible for assessing the condition of the
Bank and implementing maintenance provisions to maintain performance of the Bank. The proposed
conservation easement will help to ensure that only IRT‐allowable activities take place. This easement
will be transferred to an IRT‐approved non‐profit organization once monitoring success criteria have
been achieved.
The provider for long term management of the sites is anticipated to be Unique Places to Save
(UP2Save). UP2Save is a 501c3 nonprofit committed to land conservation through conservation planning
and management. The funding mechanism for long term management will be a stewardship
endowment funded by Wildlands. Contact information for UP2Save is listed below.
Unique Places to Save
206 Causeway Drive #206
Wrightsville Beach, NC 28480
Phone: (910) 707‐3622
Email: info@uniqueplacestosave.org
To monitor the project’s continued success, a Long Term Management Plan will be implemented
following the seven‐year monitoring period. All components of the bank will be inspected annually or
less frequently as needed to ensure that the Bank remains stable in perpetuity. Sources of instability or
Widllands Upper Neuse Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Draft Prospectus Page 20
other deficiencies will be addressed. Invasive species will be managed annually or less frequently as
needed to ensure the long term survivability of the planned native vegetation community. All reporting
will be documented and kept on file for future reference.
8.0 References
Geologic Map of North Carolina 1:500,000 scale, 1985. Compiled by Philip M. Brown at el. Raleigh, NC,
North Carolina Geological Survey.
https://ncdenr.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=a8281cbd24b84239b29cd2ca7
98d4a10
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), 2011. Web Soil Survey.
http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm
North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) 2009 Neuse River Basinwide Water Quality Plan,
accessed at:
https://www.deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water‐resources/water‐planning/basin‐planning/river‐
basin‐plans/neuse
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS). 2018 Neuse River Basin Restoration Priorities
(RBRP), accessed at:
https://www.deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/mitigation‐services/dms‐planning/watershed‐planning‐
documents/neuse‐river‐basin‐documents
Soil Survey of Durham County, North Carolina, USDA‐NRCS, accessed at
https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx
Appendix A
Historic Aerials
The EDR Aerial Photo Decade Package
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
8400 Walnut Grove Church Road
Hurdle Mills, NC 27541
Inquiry Number:
July 31, 2023
7402845.5
6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor
Shelton, CT 06484
Toll Free: 800.352.0050
www.edrnet.com
2020 1"=500'Flight Year: 2020 USDA/NAIP
2016 1"=500'Flight Year: 2016 USDA/NAIP
2012 1"=500'Flight Year: 2012 USDA/NAIP
2009 1"=500'Flight Year: 2009 USDA/NAIP
2006 1"=500'Flight Year: 2006 USDA/NAIP
1999 1"=500'Acquisition Date: January 01, 1999 USGS/DOQQ
1993 1"=500'Acquisition Date: March 01, 1993 USGS/DOQQ
1982 1"=500'Flight Date: March 28, 1982 NHAP
1980 1"=500'Flight Date: January 19, 1980 USGS
1977 1"=500'Flight Date: March 25, 1977 USGS
1964 1"=500'Flight Date: March 12, 1964 USGS
1955 1"=500'Flight Date: March 30, 1955 USDA
1950 1"=500'Flight Date: November 18, 1950 USGS
1938 1"=500'Flight Date: April 28, 1938 USGS
EDR Aerial Photo Decade Package 07/31/23
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
Site Name:Client Name:
Wildlands Eng, Inc.
8400 Walnut Grove Church Road 1430 South Mint Street
Hurdle Mills, NC 27541 Charlotte, NC 28203
EDR Inquiry #7402845.5 Contact:Tasha King
Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) Aerial Photo Decade Package is a screening tool designed to assist
environmental professionals in evaluating potential liability on a target property resulting from past activities. EDR’s
professional researchers provide digitally reproduced historical aerial photographs, and when available, provide one photo
per decade.
Search Results:
Year Scale Details Source
When delivered electronically by EDR, the aerial photo images included with this report are for ONE TIME USE
ONLY. Further reproduction of these aerial photo images is prohibited without permission from EDR. For more
information contact your EDR Account Executive.
Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
Copyright 2023 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of
Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.
EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, LLC or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein
are the property of their respective owners.
7402845 5-page 2
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, LLC. It cannot
be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. This Report is provided on an
“AS IS”, “AS AVAILABLE” basis. NO WARRANTY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT.
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, LLC AND ITS SUBSIDIARIES, AFFILIATES AND THIRD PARTY SUPPLIERS DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, OF ANY
KIND OR NATURE, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ARISING OUT OF OR RELATED TO THIS REPORT OR ANY OF THE DATA AND INFORMATION PROVIDED IN
THIS REPORT, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES REGARDING ACCURACY, QUALITY, CORRECTNESS, COMPLETENESS,
COMPREHENSIVENESS, SUITABILITY, MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT,
MISAPPROPRIATION, OR OTHERWISE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, LLC OR ITS
SUBSIDIARIES, AFFILIATES OR THIRD PARTY SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE TO ANYONE FOR ANY DIRECT, INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, SPECIAL,
CONSEQUENTIAL OR OTHER DAMAGES OF ANY TYPE OR KIND (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO LOSS OF PROFITS, LOSS OF USE, OR LOSS OF
DATA), ARISING OUT OF OR IN ANY WAY CONNECTED WITH THIS REPORT OR ANY OF THE DATA AND INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS REPORT.
Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels, or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to
provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only an assessment
performed by a qualified environmental professional can provide findings, opinions or conclusions regarding the environmental risk or conditions in, on or at any
property.
7402845.5
2020
= 500'
7402845.5
2016
= 500'
7402845.5
2012
= 500'
7402845.5
2009
= 500'
7402845.5
2006
= 500'
7402845.5
1999
= 500'
7402845.5
1993
= 500'
7402845.5
1982
= 500'
7402845.5
1980
= 500'
7402845.5
1977
= 500'
7402845.5
1964
= 500'
7402845.5
1955
= 500'
7402845.5
1950
= 500'
7402845.5
1938
= 500'
Appendix B
NCDWR Stream Classification Forms
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: July 19, 2023 Project/Site:
Monkey Wrench
Latitude: 36.21907
Evaluator: S. Law Trib/Reach: E1 Longitude: -79.08289
Total Points: 16.75 Stream Determination: Ephemeral (<19) County: Orange
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =
10)
Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1. Continuity of channel bed
and bank
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☑ 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along
thalweg
☐ 0 ☑ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
3. In-channel structure ☐ 0 ☑ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
4. Particle size of stream
substrate
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☑ 2 ☐ 3
5. Active/relict floodplain ☐ 0 ☑ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
6. Depositional bars or
benches
☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
8. Headcuts ☐ 0 ☑ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
9. Grade control ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
10. Natural valley ☐ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☑ 1 ☐ 1.5
11. Second or greater order
channel ☑ No = 0 ☐ Yes = 3
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 1)
12. Presence of Baseflow ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
14. Leaf litter ☐ 1.5 ☑ 1 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 0
15. Sediment on plants or
debris
☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or
piles
☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
17. Soil-based evidence of
high water table? ☑ No = 0 ☐ Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = 5.75)
18. Fibrous roots in
streambed
☐ 3 ☑ 2 ☐ 1 ☐ 0
19. Rooted upland plants in
streambed
☑ 3 ☐ 2 ☐ 1 ☐ 0
20. Macrobenthos (note
diversity and abundance)
☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
21. Aquatic Mollusks ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
22. Fish ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
23. Crayfish ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
24. Amphibians ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
25. Algae ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
26. Wetland plants in
streambed
☑ FACW = 0.75; ☐ OBL = 1.5; ☐ Other = 0
Notes:
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: July 26, 2023 Project/Site:
Monkey Wrench
Latitude: 36.219102
Evaluator: S. Law Trib/Reach: Spike Branch Longitude: -79.082913
Total Points: 24.5 Stream Determination: Intermittent (19 to <30) County: Orange
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =
16.5)
Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1. Continuity of channel bed
and bank
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☑ 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along
thalweg
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☑ 2 ☐ 3
3. In-channel structure ☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☑ 2 ☐ 3
4. Particle size of stream
substrate
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☑ 3
5. Active/relict floodplain ☐ 0 ☑ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
6. Depositional bars or
benches
☐ 0 ☑ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
8. Headcuts ☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☑ 3
9. Grade control ☐ 0 ☑ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
10. Natural valley ☐ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☑ 1 ☐ 1.5
11. Second or greater order
channel ☑ No = 0 ☐ Yes = 3
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 2)
12. Presence of Baseflow ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
14. Leaf litter ☐ 1.5 ☑ 1 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 0
15. Sediment on plants or
debris
☐ 0 ☑ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or
piles
☐ 0 ☑ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
17. Soil-based evidence of
high water table? ☑ No = 0 ☐ Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = 6)
18. Fibrous roots in
streambed
☑ 3 ☐ 2 ☐ 1 ☐ 0
19. Rooted upland plants in
streambed
☑ 3 ☐ 2 ☐ 1 ☐ 0
20. Macrobenthos (note
diversity and abundance)
☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
21. Aquatic Mollusks ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
22. Fish ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
23. Crayfish ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
24. Amphibians ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
25. Algae ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
26. Wetland plants in
streambed
☐ FACW = 0.75; ☐ OBL = 1.5; ☑ Other = 0
Notes:
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: July 26, 2023 Project/Site:
Monkey Wrench
Latitude: 36.218078
Evaluator: S. Law Trib/Reach: Kitty Branch R1 Longitude: -79.083689
Total Points: 22.5 Stream Determination: Intermittent (19 to <30) County: Orange
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =
13.5)
Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1. Continuity of channel bed
and bank
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☑ 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along
thalweg
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☑ 2 ☐ 3
3. In-channel structure ☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☑ 2 ☐ 3
4. Particle size of stream
substrate
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☑ 2 ☐ 3
5. Active/relict floodplain ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
6. Depositional bars or
benches
☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
8. Headcuts ☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☑ 3
9. Grade control ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
10. Natural valley ☐ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☑ 1.5
11. Second or greater order
channel ☑ No = 0 ☐ Yes = 3
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 5.5)
12. Presence of Baseflow ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
14. Leaf litter ☑ 1.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 0
15. Sediment on plants or
debris
☐ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☑ 1 ☐ 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or
piles
☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
17. Soil-based evidence of
high water table? ☐ No = 0 ☑ Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = 3.5)
18. Fibrous roots in
streambed
☐ 3 ☐ 2 ☑ 1 ☐ 0
19. Rooted upland plants in
streambed
☐ 3 ☐ 2 ☑ 1 ☐ 0
20. Macrobenthos (note
diversity and abundance)
☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
21. Aquatic Mollusks ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
22. Fish ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
23. Crayfish ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
24. Amphibians ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
25. Algae ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
26. Wetland plants in
streambed
☐ FACW = 0.75; ☑ OBL = 1.5; ☐ Other = 0
Notes:
Persicaria spp., Juncus spp., & other FACW-OBL plants in streambed. Multiple red cedar and 1 maple growing in channel (~5%
coverage). Taken right below headcut, starts at headcut.
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: July 26, 2023 Project/Site:
Monkey Wrench
Latitude: 36.218381
Evaluator: S. Law Trib/Reach: Kitty Branch R2 Longitude: -79.08351
Total Points: 28 Stream Determination: Intermittent (19 to <30) County: Orange
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =
14.5)
Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1. Continuity of channel bed
and bank
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☑ 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along
thalweg
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☑ 2 ☐ 3
3. In-channel structure ☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☑ 2 ☐ 3
4. Particle size of stream
substrate
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☑ 3
5. Active/relict floodplain ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
6. Depositional bars or
benches
☐ 0 ☑ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
8. Headcuts ☐ 0 ☑ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
9. Grade control ☐ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☑ 1 ☐ 1.5
10. Natural valley ☐ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☑ 1.5
11. Second or greater order
channel ☑ No = 0 ☐ Yes = 3
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 7)
12. Presence of Baseflow ☐ 0 ☑ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
14. Leaf litter ☑ 1.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 0
15. Sediment on plants or
debris
☐ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☑ 1 ☐ 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or
piles
☐ 0 ☑ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
17. Soil-based evidence of
high water table? ☐ No = 0 ☑ Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = 6.5)
18. Fibrous roots in
streambed
☐ 3 ☑ 2 ☐ 1 ☐ 0
19. Rooted upland plants in
streambed
☑ 3 ☐ 2 ☐ 1 ☐ 0
20. Macrobenthos (note
diversity and abundance)
☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
21. Aquatic Mollusks ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
22. Fish ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
23. Crayfish ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
24. Amphibians ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
25. Algae ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
26. Wetland plants in
streambed
☐ FACW = 0.75; ☑ OBL = 1.5; ☐ Other = 0
Notes:
Persicaria dominating plants in streambed with Juncus throughout taken right above spring
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: July 26, 2023 Project/Site:
Monkey Wrench
Latitude: 36.21949
Evaluator: S. Law Trib/Reach: Kitty Branch R3 Longitude: -79.083111
Total Points: 36 Stream Determination: Perennial (>=30) County: Orange
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =
22.5)
Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1. Continuity of channel bed
and bank
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☑ 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along
thalweg
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☑ 3
3. In-channel structure ☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☑ 3
4. Particle size of stream
substrate
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☑ 3
5. Active/relict floodplain ☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☑ 2 ☐ 3
6. Depositional bars or
benches
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☑ 2 ☐ 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits ☐ 0 ☑ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
8. Headcuts ☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☑ 3
9. Grade control ☐ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☑ 1 ☐ 1.5
10. Natural valley ☐ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☑ 1.5
11. Second or greater order
channel ☑ No = 0 ☐ Yes = 3
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 7.5)
12. Presence of Baseflow ☐ 0 ☑ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
14. Leaf litter ☑ 1.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 0
15. Sediment on plants or
debris
☐ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☑ 1 ☐ 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or
piles
☐ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☑ 1 ☐ 1.5
17. Soil-based evidence of
high water table? ☐ No = 0 ☑ Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = 6)
18. Fibrous roots in
streambed
☑ 3 ☐ 2 ☐ 1 ☐ 0
19. Rooted upland plants in
streambed
☑ 3 ☐ 2 ☐ 1 ☐ 0
20. Macrobenthos (note
diversity and abundance)
☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
21. Aquatic Mollusks ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
22. Fish ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
23. Crayfish ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
24. Amphibians ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
25. Algae ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
26. Wetland plants in
streambed
☐ FACW = 0.75; ☐ OBL = 1.5; ☑ Other = 0
Notes:
Starts at confluence. Flow might be buried from sediment and cattle activity.
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: July 26, 2023 Project/Site:
Monkey Wrench
Latitude: 36.217803
Evaluator: S. Law Trib/Reach: Lathan Branch Longitude: -79.085091
Total Points: 33.5 Stream Determination: Perennial (>=30) County: Orange
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =
17)
Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1. Continuity of channel bed
and bank
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☑ 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along
thalweg
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☑ 2 ☐ 3
3. In-channel structure ☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☑ 2 ☐ 3
4. Particle size of stream
substrate
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☑ 3
5. Active/relict floodplain ☐ 0 ☑ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
6. Depositional bars or
benches
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☑ 2 ☐ 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
8. Headcuts ☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☑ 2 ☐ 3
9. Grade control ☐ 0 ☑ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
10. Natural valley ☐ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☑ 1.5
11. Second or greater order
channel ☑ No = 0 ☐ Yes = 3
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 8)
12. Presence of Baseflow ☐ 0 ☑ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria ☐ 0 ☑ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
14. Leaf litter ☑ 1.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 0
15. Sediment on plants or
debris
☐ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☑ 1 ☐ 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or
piles
☐ 0 ☑ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
17. Soil-based evidence of
high water table? ☐ No = 0 ☑ Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = 8.5)
18. Fibrous roots in
streambed
☑ 3 ☐ 2 ☐ 1 ☐ 0
19. Rooted upland plants in
streambed
☑ 3 ☐ 2 ☐ 1 ☐ 0
20. Macrobenthos (note
diversity and abundance)
☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
21. Aquatic Mollusks ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
22. Fish ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
23. Crayfish ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
24. Amphibians ☐ 0 ☑ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
25. Algae ☐ 0 ☑ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
26. Wetland plants in
streambed
☐ FACW = 0.75; ☑ OBL = 1.5; ☐ Other = 0
Notes:
Fe & algae limited to pools. E/I throughout reach. Impounded at bottom right above confluence. Relict headcut on boundary,
actively moving up offsite. Water in pools only. Rock steps and riffles present.
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: July 26, 2023 Project/Site:
Monkey Wrench
Latitude: 36.218378
Evaluator: S. Law Trib/Reach: Rocky Creek R1 Longitude: -79.088883
Total Points: 22 Stream Determination: Intermittent (19 to <30) County: Orange
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =
8.5)
Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1. Continuity of channel bed
and bank
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☑ 2 ☐ 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along
thalweg
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☑ 2 ☐ 3
3. In-channel structure ☐ 0 ☑ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
4. Particle size of stream
substrate
☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
5. Active/relict floodplain ☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☑ 2 ☐ 3
6. Depositional bars or
benches
☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
8. Headcuts ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
9. Grade control ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
10. Natural valley ☐ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☑ 1.5
11. Second or greater order
channel ☑ No = 0 ☐ Yes = 3
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 7)
12. Presence of Baseflow ☐ 0 ☑ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria ☐ 0 ☑ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
14. Leaf litter ☑ 1.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 0
15. Sediment on plants or
debris
☐ 0 ☑ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or
piles
☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
17. Soil-based evidence of
high water table? ☐ No = 0 ☑ Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = 6.5)
18. Fibrous roots in
streambed
☐ 3 ☐ 2 ☑ 1 ☐ 0
19. Rooted upland plants in
streambed
☑ 3 ☐ 2 ☐ 1 ☐ 0
20. Macrobenthos (note
diversity and abundance)
☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
21. Aquatic Mollusks ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
22. Fish ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
23. Crayfish ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
24. Amphibians ☐ 0 ☑ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
25. Algae ☐ 0 ☑ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
26. Wetland plants in
streambed
☐ FACW = 0.75; ☑ OBL = 1.5; ☐ Other = 0
Notes:
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: July 26, 2023 Project/Site:
Monkey Wrench
Latitude: 36.218964
Evaluator: S. Law Trib/Reach: Rocky Creek R2 Longitude: -79.087918
Total Points: 25.5 Stream Determination: Intermittent (19 to <30) County: Orange
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =
14.5)
Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1. Continuity of channel bed
and bank
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☑ 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along
thalweg
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☑ 2 ☐ 3
3. In-channel structure ☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☑ 2 ☐ 3
4. Particle size of stream
substrate
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☑ 3
5. Active/relict floodplain ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
6. Depositional bars or
benches
☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
8. Headcuts ☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☑ 3
9. Grade control ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
10. Natural valley ☐ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☑ 1.5
11. Second or greater order
channel ☑ No = 0 ☐ Yes = 3
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 5)
12. Presence of Baseflow ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
14. Leaf litter ☑ 1.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 0
15. Sediment on plants or
debris
☐ 0 ☑ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or
piles
☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
17. Soil-based evidence of
high water table? ☐ No = 0 ☑ Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = 6)
18. Fibrous roots in
streambed
☑ 3 ☐ 2 ☐ 1 ☐ 0
19. Rooted upland plants in
streambed
☑ 3 ☐ 2 ☐ 1 ☐ 0
20. Macrobenthos (note
diversity and abundance)
☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
21. Aquatic Mollusks ☑ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
22. Fish ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
23. Crayfish ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
24. Amphibians ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
25. Algae ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
26. Wetland plants in
streambed
☐ FACW = 0.75; ☐ OBL = 1.5; ☑ Other = 0
Notes:
Soils are really compact - limits roots. Banks depleted near toe. Below multiple headcuts.
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: July 26, 2023 Project/Site:
Monkey Wrench
Latitude: 36.218956
Evaluator: S. Law Trib/Reach: Rocky Creek R3 Longitude: -79.087818
Total Points: 43 Stream Determination: Perennial (>=30) County: Orange
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =
22.5)
Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1. Continuity of channel bed
and bank
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☑ 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along
thalweg
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☑ 3
3. In-channel structure ☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☑ 3
4. Particle size of stream
substrate
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☑ 3
5. Active/relict floodplain ☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☑ 2 ☐ 3
6. Depositional bars or
benches
☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☐ 2 ☑ 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits ☐ 0 ☑ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
8. Headcuts ☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☑ 2 ☐ 3
9. Grade control ☐ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☑ 1 ☐ 1.5
10. Natural valley ☐ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☑ 1.5
11. Second or greater order
channel ☑ No = 0 ☐ Yes = 3
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 10)
12. Presence of Baseflow ☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☑ 2 ☐ 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria ☐ 0 ☐ 1 ☑ 2 ☐ 3
14. Leaf litter ☐ 1.5 ☑ 1 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 0
15. Sediment on plants or
debris
☐ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☑ 1 ☐ 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or
piles
☐ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☑ 1 ☐ 1.5
17. Soil-based evidence of
high water table? ☐ No = 0 ☑ Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = 10.5)
18. Fibrous roots in
streambed
☑ 3 ☐ 2 ☐ 1 ☐ 0
19. Rooted upland plants in
streambed
☑ 3 ☐ 2 ☐ 1 ☐ 0
20. Macrobenthos (note
diversity and abundance)
☐ 0 ☑ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
21. Aquatic Mollusks ☐ 0 ☑ 1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3
22. Fish ☐ 0 ☑ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
23. Crayfish ☑ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☐ 1 ☐ 1.5
24. Amphibians ☐ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☑ 1 ☐ 1.5
25. Algae ☐ 0 ☐ 0.5 ☑ 1 ☐ 1.5
26. Wetland plants in
streambed
☐ FACW = 0.75; ☐ OBL = 1.5; ☑ Other = 0
Notes:
Left-sided snails, multiple frogs, caddisflies observed. Some areas have flow, mostly stagnant or slow-velocity water throughout.
Some areas appear buried in sediment or by cattle activity.
Appendix C
Existing Geomorphic Data
Appendix D
EDR Radius Report Summary
FORM-LBD-MGA
®kcehCoeG htiw tropeR ™paM suidaR RDE ehT
6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor
Shelton, CT 06484
Toll Free: 800.352.0050
www.edrnet.com
Monkey Wrench Mitigation Site
8400 Walnut Grove Church Road
Hurdle Mills, NC 27541
Inquiry Number: 7402845.2s
July 28, 2023
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
Executive Summary ES1
Overview Map 2
Detail Map 3
Map Findings Summary 4
Map Findings 8
Orphan Summary 9
Government Records Searched/Data Currency Tracking GR-1
GEOCHECK ADDENDUM
Physical Setting Source Addendum A-1
Physical Setting Source Summary A-2
Physical Setting SSURGO Soil Map A-5
Physical Setting Source Map A-12
Physical Setting Source Map Findings A-14
Physical Setting Source Records Searched PSGR-1
Thank you for your business.
Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050
with any questions or comments.
Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data
Resources, LLC. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist
from other sources. This Report is provided on an "AS IS", "AS AVAILABLE" basis. NO WARRANTY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED IS MADE
WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, LLC AND ITS SUBSIDIARIES,
AFFILIATES AND THIRD PARTY SUPPLIERS DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, OF ANY KIND OR NATURE, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
ARISING OUT OF OR RELATED TO THIS REPORT OR ANY OF THE DATA AND INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS REPORT,
INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES REGARDING ACCURACY, QUALITY, CORRECTNESS, COMPLETENESS,
COMPREHENSIVENESS, SUITABILITY, MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT,
MISAPPROPRIATION, OR OTHERWISE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA
RESOURCES, LLC OR ITS SUBSIDIARIES, AFFILIATES OR THIRD PARTY SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE TO ANYONE FOR ANY DIRECT,
INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR OTHER DAMAGES OF ANY TYPE OR KIND (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED
TO LOSS OF PROFITS, LOSS OF USE, OR LOSS OF DATA) INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS REPORT. Any analyses, estimates,
ratings, environmental risk levels, or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to
provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property.
Only an assessment performed by a qualified environmental professional can provide findings, opinions or conclusions regarding the
environmental risk or conditions in, on or at any property.
Copyright 2023 by Environmental Data Resources, LLC. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any
report or map of Environmental Data Resources, LLC, or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.
EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, LLC or its affiliates. All other
trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners.
TC7402845.2s Page 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC7402845.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
A search of available environmental records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR).
The report was designed to assist parties seeking to meet the search requirements of EPA’s Standards
and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312), the ASTM Standard Practice for
Environmental Site Assessments (E1527 - 21), the ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site
Assessments for Forestland or Rural Property (E2247 - 16), the ASTM Standard Practice for Limited
Environmental Due Diligence: Transaction Screen Process (E1528 - 22) or custom requirements developed
for the evaluation of environmental risk associated with a parcel of real estate.
TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION
ADDRESS
8400 WALNUT GROVE CHURCH ROAD
HURDLE MILLS, NC 27541
COORDINATES
36.2217970 - 36˚ 13’ 18.46’’Latitude (North):
79.0846130 - 79˚ 5’ 4.60’’Longitude (West):
Zone 17Universal Tranverse Mercator:
672158.4UTM X (Meters):
4010049.2UTM Y (Meters):
646 ft. above sea levelElevation:
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH TARGET PROPERTY
13839876 CALDWELL, NCTarget Property Map:
2019Version Date:
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY IN THIS REPORT
20200711Portions of Photo from:
USDASource:
7402845.2s Page 2
NO MAPPED SITES FOUND
MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:
8400 WALNUT GROVE CHURCH ROAD
HURDLE MILLS, NC 27541
Click on Map ID to see full detail.
MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)
ID DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTIONSITE NAME ADDRESS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC7402845.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3
TARGET PROPERTY SEARCH RESULTS
The target property was not listed in any of the databases searched by EDR.
DATABASES WITH NO MAPPED SITES
No mapped sites were found in EDR’s search of available ("reasonably ascertainable ") government
records either on the target property or within the search radius around the target property for the
following databases:
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Lists of Federal NPL (Superfund) sites
NPL National Priority List
Proposed NPL Proposed National Priority List Sites
NPL LIENS Federal Superfund Liens
Lists of Federal Delisted NPL sites
Delisted NPL National Priority List Deletions
Lists of Federal sites subject to CERCLA removals and CERCLA orders
FEDERAL FACILITY Federal Facility Site Information listing
SEMS Superfund Enterprise Management System
Lists of Federal CERCLA sites with NFRAP
SEMS-ARCHIVE Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive
Lists of Federal RCRA facilities undergoing Corrective Action
CORRACTS Corrective Action Report
Lists of Federal RCRA TSD facilities
RCRA-TSDF RCRA - Treatment, Storage and Disposal
Lists of Federal RCRA generators
RCRA-LQG RCRA - Large Quantity Generators
RCRA-SQG RCRA - Small Quantity Generators
RCRA-VSQG RCRA - Very Small Quantity Generators (Formerly Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity
Generators)
Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries
LUCIS Land Use Control Information System
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC7402845.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4
US ENG CONTROLS Engineering Controls Sites List
US INST CONTROLS Institutional Controls Sites List
Federal ERNS list
ERNS Emergency Response Notification System
Lists of state- and tribal (Superfund) equivalent sites
NC HSDS Hazardous Substance Disposal Site
Lists of state- and tribal hazardous waste facilities
SHWS Inactive Hazardous Sites Inventory
Lists of state and tribal landfills and solid waste disposal facilities
SWF/LF List of Solid Waste Facilities
DEBRIS Solid Waste Active Disaster Debris Sites Listing
OLI Old Landfill Inventory
LCID Land-Clearing and Inert Debris (LCID) Landfill Notifications
Lists of state and tribal leaking storage tanks
LAST Leaking Aboveground Storage Tanks
LUST Regional UST Database
INDIAN LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUST TRUST State Trust Fund Database
Lists of state and tribal registered storage tanks
FEMA UST Underground Storage Tank Listing
UST Petroleum Underground Storage Tank Database
AST AST Database
INDIAN UST Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
State and tribal institutional control / engineering control registries
INST CONTROL No Further Action Sites With Land Use Restrictions Monitoring
Lists of state and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
INDIAN VCP Voluntary Cleanup Priority Listing
VCP Responsible Party Voluntary Action Sites
Lists of state and tribal brownfield sites
BROWNFIELDS Brownfields Projects Inventory
ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Local Brownfield lists
US BROWNFIELDS A Listing of Brownfields Sites
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC7402845.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5
Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites
HIST LF Solid Waste Facility Listing
SWRCY Recycling Center Listing
INDIAN ODI Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands
DEBRIS REGION 9 Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations
ODI Open Dump Inventory
IHS OPEN DUMPS Open Dumps on Indian Land
Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites
US HIST CDL Delisted National Clandestine Laboratory Register
US CDL National Clandestine Laboratory Register
Local Land Records
LIENS 2 CERCLA Lien Information
Records of Emergency Release Reports
HMIRS Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System
SPILLS Spills Incident Listing
IMD Incident Management Database
SPILLS 90 SPILLS 90 data from FirstSearch
SPILLS 80 SPILLS 80 data from FirstSearch
Other Ascertainable Records
RCRA NonGen / NLR RCRA - Non Generators / No Longer Regulated
FUDS Formerly Used Defense Sites
DOD Department of Defense Sites
SCRD DRYCLEANERS State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Listing
US FIN ASSUR Financial Assurance Information
EPA WATCH LIST EPA WATCH LIST
2020 COR ACTION 2020 Corrective Action Program List
TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act
TRIS Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
SSTS Section 7 Tracking Systems
ROD Records Of Decision
RMP Risk Management Plans
RAATS RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
PRP Potentially Responsible Parties
PADS PCB Activity Database System
ICIS Integrated Compliance Information System
FTTS FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide
Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
MLTS Material Licensing Tracking System
COAL ASH DOE Steam-Electric Plant Operation Data
COAL ASH EPA Coal Combustion Residues Surface Impoundments List
PCB TRANSFORMER PCB Transformer Registration Database
RADINFO Radiation Information Database
HIST FTTS FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing
DOT OPS Incident and Accident Data
CONSENT Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC7402845.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6
INDIAN RESERV Indian Reservations
FUSRAP Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program
UMTRA Uranium Mill Tailings Sites
LEAD SMELTERS Lead Smelter Sites
US AIRS Aerometric Information Retrieval System Facility Subsystem
US MINES Mines Master Index File
ABANDONED MINES Abandoned Mines
FINDS Facility Index System/Facility Registry System
DOCKET HWC Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket Listing
UXO Unexploded Ordnance Sites
ECHO Enforcement & Compliance History Information
FUELS PROGRAM EPA Fuels Program Registered Listing
PFAS NPL Superfund Sites with PFAS Detections Information
PFAS FEDERAL SITES Federal Sites PFAS Information
PFAS TSCA PFAS Manufacture and Imports Information
PFAS RCRA MANIFEST PFAS Transfers Identified In the RCRA Database Listing
PFAS ATSDR PFAS Contamination Site Location Listing
PFAS WQP Ambient Environmental Sampling for PFAS
PFAS NPDES Clean Water Act Discharge Monitoring Information
PFAS ECHO Facilities in Industries that May Be Handling PFAS Listing
PFAS ECHO FIRE TRAINING Facilities in Industries that May Be Handling PFAS Listing
PFAS PART 139 AIRPORT All Certified Part 139 Airports PFAS Information Listing
AQUEOUS FOAM NRC Aqueous Foam Related Incidents Listing
PFAS PFAS Contamination Site Listing
AIRS Air Quality Permit Listing
ASBESTOS ASBESTOS
COAL ASH Coal Ash Disposal Sites
DRYCLEANERS Drycleaning Sites
Financial Assurance Financial Assurance Information Listing
NPDES NPDES Facility Location Listing
UIC Underground Injection Wells Listing
AOP Animal Operation Permits Listing
PFAS TRIS List of PFAS Added to the TRI
MINES MRDS Mineral Resources Data System
PCSRP Petroleum-Contaminated Soil Remediation Permits
CCB Coal Ash Structural Fills (CCB) Listing
SEPT HAULERS Permitted Septage Haulers Listing
EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS
EDR Exclusive Records
EDR MGP EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants
EDR Hist Auto EDR Exclusive Historical Auto Stations
EDR Hist Cleaner EDR Exclusive Historical Cleaners
EDR RECOVERED GOVERNMENT ARCHIVES
Exclusive Recovered Govt. Archives
RGA HWS Recovered Government Archive State Hazardous Waste Facilities List
RGA LF Recovered Government Archive Solid Waste Facilities List
RGA LUST Recovered Government Archive Leaking Underground Storage Tank
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC7402845.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7
SURROUNDING SITES: SEARCH RESULTS
Surrounding sites were not identified.
Unmappable (orphan) sites are not considered in the foregoing analysis.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TC7402845.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 8
There were no unmapped sites in this report.
EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.
6
80
680
680
760
7
20
7
2
0
640
680
720
6
80
6 80680
6 8 0
6 8 0
6 8 0
6 8 0
6
8
0
6
8
0
6 8 0
6
8
0 68 0
6
8
0
6
8
0
6 8 0
640
680
64
0
6
4
0
6
4
0
6 40
6
4
0
640
6 40
6
40
6
4
0
6406406
4
0640
6 4 0
6
4
0
640
6 4 0
640
6 4 0
6 4 0
6 40
6 4 0
6 4 0
6 4 0
EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.EDR Inc.
680
640
640
640
6
4
0
640
64
0
64
0
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
TargetDistance Total
Database Property(Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Lists of Federal NPL (Superfund) sites
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000NPL
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000Proposed NPL
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000NPL LIENS
Lists of Federal Delisted NPL sites
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000Delisted NPL
Lists of Federal sites subject to
CERCLA removals and CERCLA orders
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500FEDERAL FACILITY
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500SEMS
Lists of Federal CERCLA sites with NFRAP
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500SEMS-ARCHIVE
Lists of Federal RCRA facilities
undergoing Corrective Action
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000CORRACTS
Lists of Federal RCRA TSD facilities
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500RCRA-TSDF
Lists of Federal RCRA generators
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250RCRA-LQG
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250RCRA-SQG
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250RCRA-VSQG
Federal institutional controls /
engineering controls registries
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500LUCIS
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500US ENG CONTROLS
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500US INST CONTROLS
Federal ERNS list
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001ERNS
Lists of state- and tribal
(Superfund) equivalent sites
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000NC HSDS
Lists of state- and tribal
hazardous waste facilities
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000SHWS
Lists of state and tribal landfills
and solid waste disposal facilities
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500SWF/LF
TC7402845.2s Page 4
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
TargetDistance Total
Database Property(Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500DEBRIS
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500OLI
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500LCID
Lists of state and tribal leaking storage tanks
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500LAST
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500LUST
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500INDIAN LUST
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500LUST TRUST
Lists of state and tribal registered storage tanks
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250FEMA UST
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250UST
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250AST
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250INDIAN UST
State and tribal institutional
control / engineering control registries
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500INST CONTROL
Lists of state and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500INDIAN VCP
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500VCP
Lists of state and tribal brownfield sites
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500BROWNFIELDS
ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Local Brownfield lists
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500US BROWNFIELDS
Local Lists of Landfill / Solid
Waste Disposal Sites
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500HIST LF
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500SWRCY
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500INDIAN ODI
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500DEBRIS REGION 9
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500ODI
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500IHS OPEN DUMPS
Local Lists of Hazardous waste /
Contaminated Sites
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001US HIST CDL
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001US CDL
Local Land Records
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001LIENS 2
Records of Emergency Release Reports
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001HMIRS
TC7402845.2s Page 5
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
TargetDistance Total
Database Property(Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001SPILLS
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500IMD
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001SPILLS 90
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001SPILLS 80
Other Ascertainable Records
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250RCRA NonGen / NLR
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000FUDS
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000DOD
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500SCRD DRYCLEANERS
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001US FIN ASSUR
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001EPA WATCH LIST
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.2502020 COR ACTION
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001TSCA
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001TRIS
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001SSTS
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000ROD
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001RMP
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001RAATS
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001PRP
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001PADS
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001ICIS
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001FTTS
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001MLTS
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001COAL ASH DOE
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500COAL ASH EPA
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001PCB TRANSFORMER
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001RADINFO
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001HIST FTTS
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001DOT OPS
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000CONSENT
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000INDIAN RESERV
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000FUSRAP
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500UMTRA
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001LEAD SMELTERS
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001US AIRS
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250US MINES
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250ABANDONED MINES
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001FINDS
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001DOCKET HWC
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000UXO
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001ECHO
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250FUELS PROGRAM
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250PFAS NPL
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250PFAS FEDERAL SITES
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250PFAS TSCA
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250PFAS RCRA MANIFEST
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250PFAS ATSDR
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250PFAS WQP
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250PFAS NPDES
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250PFAS ECHO
TC7402845.2s Page 6
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
TargetDistance Total
Database Property(Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250PFAS ECHO FIRE TRAINING
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250PFAS PART 139 AIRPORT
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250AQUEOUS FOAM NRC
0 NR NR NR NR NR TPPFAS
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001AIRS
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001ASBESTOS
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500COAL ASH
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250DRYCLEANERS
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001Financial Assurance
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001NPDES
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001UIC
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001AOP
0 NR NR NR 0 0 0.250PFAS TRIS
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001MINES MRDS
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500PCSRP
0 NR NR 0 0 0 0.500CCB
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001SEPT HAULERS
EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS
EDR Exclusive Records
0 NR 0 0 0 0 1.000EDR MGP
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.125EDR Hist Auto
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.125EDR Hist Cleaner
EDR RECOVERED GOVERNMENT ARCHIVES
Exclusive Recovered Govt. Archives
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001RGA HWS
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001RGA LF
0 NR NR NR NR 0 0.001RGA LUST
0 0 0 0 0 0 0- Totals --
NOTES:
TP = Target Property
NR = Not Requested at this Search Distance
Sites may be listed in more than one database
TC7402845.2s Page 7
MAP FINDINGSMap ID
Direction
EDR ID NumberDistance
EPA ID NumberDatabase(s)SiteElevation
NO SITES FOUND
TC7402845.2s Page 8
Appendix E
Landowner Authorizations