20070833 Ver 1_Mitigation Evaluation_20080206

Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
Date of Office Review: __2k)t ?C xs Evaluator's Name(s). mmi.j
Date of Report: P, 1,)Zr , ?-6 &')Report for Monitoring Year:
Date of Field Review: I)IJ -l IL A Evaluator's Name(s):LG
Other Individuals/Agencies Present: ?lSA C C- P_*n'+t_t a 6ttrtirfl + Sr c?E ? rhC i-ct
Weather Conditions (today & recent): e k r 6 e taW
Directions to Site: N of Jacksonville, adjacent to White Oak Pocosin, at intersection of Quaker Bridge & Sopp Ilow Rds.
n? I. Office Review Infor ' . _RQn:
?.
cam,,- -- -- ---- --- - __ -- -_ - _ __
Project Number: 20070833 Project History
Project Name: Hofmann Forest Wetland Mitigation Bank
County(ies):Onslow
x
-Basin & subbasin: White Oak serv area
Nearest Str m:
Water Quality Class of Nearest Stream:
Mitigator Type: Mitigation Ba
DOT Status: non-DOT
Total Mitigation on Site
Wetland: 330 acres
Stream:
Buffer:
Event Event Date
Report Review - Wetlands 12/3/2007
1c1C)C1 -2000 PLCtr?}i, (hlvCkN ? 13)
?b0 L0t US Lti\-?S? ?L
?G? 1Le_- C?, l CC V L\ 'Ac l?-Ca
2 C 02- L?
C Sc.Yx.F J' LCl to
i
fir) Gn J. J n r?
I
2cG`I-2CCS r?.rnC(t.?_'. e?ka?c
? c h t ? rat t rt c? ?.l [ vc k 3 ?? ? l ?',n?h??
k?
?l VC
Approved mitigation plan available? Yes lob ?pb, ry-)6Y rnpCli{C C ` +
Monitoring reports available? C No
Problem areas identified in reports? Yes No
YYtCY\A?
Problem areas addressed on site? Yes No 2C?L?l - u? y??tk? C, SLak6- !?
Mitigation required on site: *Add significant project-related events: reports, i
Associated impacts (if known): -N/.&, 1 received, construction, planting, repairs, etc.
During office review, note success criteria and evaluate each component based on monitoring report
results. Record relevant data in Sections II and III.
On back of sheet, note other information found during office review and/or to be obtained during site visit.
II. Summary of Results:
Monitoring Success Success
Mitigation Component Year (report) (field) Resolved
20070833-1 res Wetland Restoration 3
20070833- cres Wetland Restoration 3 Li L]

4
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 1 of 2
Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
MITIGATION SUCCESS:
Compared to the approved mitigation plan, this project is: s ccessful partially successful unsuccessful
List specific reasons for lack of success for this project: 1
e Ln7c n LQ
Additional comments (e.g. DWQ follow-up actions, recommendations, etc.): C?-X 1
t? lam-. tre?t?l? r__V=auti W,3 VttZ ffCvC Lr?.
J
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 2 of 2
Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
Component: acres Wetland Restoration Component ID: 20070833-1
Description: Blocks 1 & 2, mix of longleaf pine savannah forest, nonriverine cypress swamp & wet HW forest
Location within project:
III. Success Criteria Evaluation:
HYDROLOGY - Approved Success Criteria: Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Saturation Win top 12" for at least 12% of GS (I.e. minim 29 ? Inundated
consecutive days) in a normal growing season ?Saturated in upper 12 inches
Monitoring report indicates success a No Drift lines
Observational field data agrees? Y No Drainage patterns in wetlands
based on mitigation plan? Yes No Sediment deposits
based on wetland type? Yes No Water marks
List any remaining hydrology issues to address
(e.g. remaining ditches, excessive water, etc.):
CLLR Cl'-c'? ?t
11LYYv 1--'o's?
! ?]?l JlTS1Y
?JUVJ. LCCVt CULl-Yvd.CL
SOILS -Approved Success Criteria: NA b t goal to restore hydro) to prior converted ag soils; block 1 is P ;
Are soils hydric or becoming hydric? es No
List indicators of hydric soils:
List any remaining soil issues to address (e.g. erosion, upland areas, etc.):
VEGETATION - Approved Success Criteria:
260 planted TPA surviving at end of yr 5; no single vol
species (esp red maple, loblolly, sweetgum) >50& of total
veg composition or avg >2X height of planted trees
Monitoring report indicates success? e
Average TPA for entire site (per report): _
Observational field data agrees? Ye
based on community composition? es
based on TPA and/or % cover? Yes
Vegetation planted on site? Ye
Date of last planting:
Vegetation growing successfully? Yes
Dominant Plant Species
Species Story TPAI'1o cover
1
No
No
No
No
CZL.?
o c le n.? ?eJ UD?wit?kl;?-
Specific vegetation plots or site locations with little to no vegetation:
Estimated acreage or site percentage of unvegetated areas:
Invasive species on site (species, location(s), and % cover):
List any remaining vegetation issues to address (e.g. plant survival, concerns, etc.):
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 1 of 4
Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
NCWAM - Approved Success Criteria or Evaluative Techniques: NCWAM Type on Site:
NA Coastal
Riverine
Monitoring report indicates success? Yes No Riparian
Observational field data agrees? Yes No Non-riparian (wetter)
Attach NCWAM analysis results to this report. Non-riparian (drier)
List any remaining NCWAM issues to address (e.g. functionality, developing wetland type, etc.):
I - DUI PoC can 1a2 -Q?l _ - - - -
MITIGATION SUCCESS:
Compared to the approved mitigation plan, this component is: successful partially successful unsuccessful
List specific reasons for lack of success for this component:
Additional comments (e.g. DWQ follow-up actions, recommendations, etc.):
During site visit, document representative conditions and areas of concern. Observe preservation and
enhancement areas that may not have specific success criteria. Label and attach photos to this report.
Attach maps showing photo locations, areas of concern, and important field observations.
Additional notes related to evaluation of this component:
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 2 of 4

Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
Component: acres Wetland Restoration Component ID: 20070833-2
Description: Blocks 3, 4 & 5; same veg mix
Location within project:
III. Success Criteria Evaluation:
HYDROLOGY - Approved Success Criteria: Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Saturation Win top 12" for at least 12% of GS (i.e. minim 29 Inundated
consecutive days) in a normal growing season Saturated in upper 12 inches
Monitoring report indicates success No Drift lines
Observational field data agrees? es No Drainage patterns in wetlands
based on mitigation plan? Yes No Sediment deposits
based on wetland type? Yes No Water marks
List any remaining hydrology issues to address (e.g. remaining ditches, excessive water, etc.):
-- - ,
SOILS -Approved Success Criteria: NA b oal to restore hYdrol to prior converted ag soils block 1 is P
Are soils hydric or becoming hydric? Yes No
List indicators of hydric soils:
List any remaining soil issues to address (e.g. erosion, upland areas, etc.):
VEGETATION - Approved Success Criteria: Dominant Plant Species
at end of yr 5, minim 90% of surviving stems or aerial Species Story TPA/'/ cover
coverage per acre will be pocosin spec either found at Sopp
Hollow reference or listed as pocosin spec; existing planted
c o
trees (at time of 2006 restor plan modify not incl i If
Monitoring report indicates success? No
Average TPA for entire site (per report
Observational field data agrees? es No
based on community composition? es No
based on TPA and/or % cover? Yes No
Vegetation planted on site? E0 No
Date of last planting:
Vegetation growing successfully? Yes N
Specific vegetation plots or site locations with little to no vegetation:
access ?0"
Estimated acreage or site percentage of unvegetated areas:
Invasive species on site (species, location(s), and % cover):
List any remaining vegetation issues to address (e.g. plant survival, concerns, etc.):
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007)
Page 3 of 4

Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
NCWAM - Approved Success Criteria or Evaluative Techniques: NCWAM Type on Site:
NA Coastal
Riverine
Monitoring report indicates success? Yes No Riparian
Observational field data agrees? Yes No Non-riparian (wetter)
Attach NCWAM analysis results to this report. Non-riparian (drier)
List any remaining NCWAM issues to address (e.g. functionality, developing wetland type, etc.):
-- ---- D??i p-?- -- - - --- -- - - - - - --- - - ---
MITIGATION SUCCESS:
Compared to the approved mitigation plan, this component is: successful partially successful unsuccessful
List specific reasons for lack of success for this component:
Additional comments (e.g. DWQ follow-up actions, recommendations, etc.):
During site visit, document representative conditions and areas of concern. Observe preservation and
enhancement areas that may not have specific success criteria. Label and attach photos to this report.
Attach maps showing photo locations, areas of concern, and important field observations.
Additional notes related to evaluation of this component:
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 4 of 4