20130653 Ver 1_Year 2 Monitoring Report_2015_20160328

Muddy Run 11 Stream and Wetland Restoration - USGS MUC 03030007
Year2 Monitoring Report- Duplin County, North Carolina - March 2016
MUDDY RUN II STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION
PROJECT
MONITORING REPORT
MONITORING YEAR 2
DUPLIN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
CONTRACT No. 004632 - PROJECT # 95354
Prepared for:
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
March 2016
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC

Muddy Run II Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS MUC 03030007
Year2 Monitoring Report• Duplin County, North Carolina • March 2016
Muddy Run II
Duplin County, North Carolina
DMS Project ID 95354
Cape Fear River Basin
HUC 0030007060010
Prepared by:
fires
Resource Environmental Solutions
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
919-829-9909
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC ii

Muddy Run 11 Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS MUC 03030007
Year2 Monitoring Report• Duplin County, North Carolina • March 2016
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Muddy Run II Stream and Wetland Restoration Project is located within an agricultural
watershed in Duplin County, North Carolina, approximately six miles south of Beulaville. The stream
channels were heavily impacted by channelization and agricultural practices. The project involved the
restoration and protection of streams in the Muddy Creek watershed. The purpose of this restoration
project was to restore and enhance a stream/wetland complex located within the Cape Fear River
Basin.
The project lies within USGS Hydrologic Unit Code 03030007060010 (USGS, 1998) and within the
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) Cape Fear River Subbasin 03-06-22
(NCDENR, 2002). The project consists of six unnamed tributaries to Muddy Creek, but the project
has been divided into nine distinct reaches for design purposes. Reach 1 is one of the upstream -most
portions of the project; it begins on the edge of an existing agricultural field and extends to STA
04+48. Similarly, Reach 2 is one of the upper -most portions of the stream project. It begins in a
disturbed forest corridor between several agricultural fields and extends to STA 19+14. Reach 3a
starts at the confluence of Reaches 1 and 2 (STA 00+00) and flows north north-west through a
disturbed hardwood buffer and several agricultural fields before being partially diverted to enter
Reach 3b near STA 37+23. Reach 3b flows to the north and west where it flows into Reach 3c at STA
57+92. Reach 3c flows through a pine plantation to STA 65+30, where it flows into Reach 3 of the
Muddy Run project. Reach 4 is a perennial channel that flows through a forested area from a ditch
draining an agricultural field. Reach 4 flows into Reach 3A at STA 18+76. Reach 5a consists of the
main stem beginning at STA 00+00 where it adjoins with Reach 1C of the Muddy Run project. Reach
5a flows north and flows into Reach 5b at STA 19+59. Reach 5b is the most downstream reach of the
project, ending at the right-of-way for State Highway 41. Reach 6 begins in a forested area south of
Reach 5 and flows in a northerly direction to the confluence with Reach 5a near STA 9+20. Two
areas containing drained hydric soil were identified for restoration, located along Reach 3b and Reach
5a.
This Year 2 Annual Monitoring Report presents the data from 28 vegetation monitoring plots, four
manual crest gauges, four auto crest gauges, an auto -logging rain gauge, seven wetland restoration
groundwater gauges, three reference groundwater gauges, 59 stream cross sections, 20 sets of bank
pins, and photo reference locations, as required by the approved Mitigation Plan for the site.
The Muddy Run II Year 2 morphological and vegetation monitoring activities were completed in
December 2015 and visual assessment activities were completed in early February 2016. All Year 2
monitoring data is presented below and in the appendices. Data presented shows the site has areas of
bed and bank erosion along Reaches 3B and 5A; however, with adaptive management, the site is on
track to meeting stream, wetland and vegetation interim success criteria.
Throughout the Year 2 monitoring season, the majority of restored stream channel remained stable
and continued to provide the intended habitat and hydrologic functions. Minimal changes were
noticed for most Year 2 cross section surveys resulting from stable bed and bank conditions. Like
MY1, six out of 59 cross sections showed noticeable changes resulting from aggradation or
degradation. Two of the six cross sections have continued to show signs of aggradation while the
remaining four along Reach 5B continued to widen and down cut. Reach 5B cross sections are
definitely showing signs of worsening conditions and a remedial plan is underway. Bankfull events
have been observed during Year 2 monitoring activities on all four crest gauges. During several site
visits throughout Year 2, each stream reach was noted to be flowing during normal conditions.
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC iii

Muddy Run II Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS MUC 03030007
Year2 Monitoring Report• Duplin County, North Carolina • March 2016
Five stream problem areas were observed during the Year 2 monitoring period. The problem areas
observed during Year 2 monitoring activities consist of bank erosion due to structure failure and
unstable bed and banks. Each stream problem area is addressed in this report detailing the severity of
the problem and recommended adaptive management.
All seven wetland gauges achieved the success criteria by remaining continuously within 12 inches of
the soil surface for at least nine percent of the growing season. Groundwater gauge data indicate the
hydroperiods being very responsive to rainfall events.
The Year 2 vegetation monitoring observations for the Muddy Run II Site are summarized in this
report. Planted -stem survival for 25 of the 28 Vegetation Plots (VP) at Muddy Run was above the
interim success criterion of 320 trees per acre at the end of Monitoring Year 3. The average stem
density (excluding live stakes) across all vegetation plots was 559 stems per acre. Volunteers were
noted in five plots and are outlined in the Vegetation Plot data. Vegetation problem areas noted
during Monitoring Year 2 include Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense) along portions of Reach 2,
Reach 3a, Reach 3c, and Reach 5b. Three other problem areas were noted for low stem densities,
having stem counts less than the MY3 vegetative success criteria of 320 stems/acre. Five vegetation
problem areas (three low density planted areas, and two encroachment areas) that were highlighted in
the Year 1 monitoring report were remedied before the Year 2 monitoring season, and are no longer
threats to achieving vegetation success criteria. The Muddy Run 1I Site is on track to meet the Year 3
vegetation survival success criterion of 320 trees per acre as specified in the Mitigation Plan.
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC iv

Muddy Run 11 Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS HUC 03030007
Year2 Monitoring Report• Duplin County, North Carolina • March 2016
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 PROJECT GOALS, BACKGROUND AND ATTRIBUTES........................................................ 3
1.1 Location and Setting...............................................................................................................
3
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives..................................................................................................3
1.3 Project Structure..................................................................................................................... 4
1.3.1 Restoration Type and Approach.....................................................................................4
1.4 Project History, Contacts and Attribute Data.........................................................................7
1.4.1 Project History................................................................................................................7
1.4.2 Project Watersheds.........................................................................................................7
2 SUCCESS CRITERIA...................................................................................................................
8
2.1 Stream Restoration................................................................................................................. 8
2.1.1 Bankfull Events..............................................................................................................
8
2.1.2 Cross Sections................................................................................................................
8
2.1.3 Digital Image Stations....................................................................................................
8
2.2 Wetland Restoration...............................................................................................................
8
2.3 Vegetation..............................................................................................................................
9
2.4 Scheduling/Reporting.............................................................................................................9
3 MONITORING PLAN...................................................................................................................
9
3.1 Stream Restoration.................................................................................................................
9
3.1.1 As -Built Survey..............................................................................................................
9
3.1.2 Bankfull Events..............................................................................................................
9
3.1.3 Cross Sections..............................................................................................................10
3.1.4 Digital Image Stations..................................................................................................10
3.1.5 Bank Pin Arrays...........................................................................................................10
3.1.6 Visual Assessment Monitoring.....................................................................................10
3.1.7 Surface Flow.................................................................................................................
11
3.2 Wetland Hydrology..............................................................................................................11
3.3 Vegetation............................................................................................................................11
4 Maintenance and Contingency plan.............................................................................................
11
4.1 Stream...................................................................................................................................11
4.2 Wetlands...............................................................................................................................12
4.3 Vegetation............................................................................................................................12
5 YEAR 2 MONITORING CONDITIONS (MY2)........................................................................
12
5.1 Year 2 Monitoring Data Collection......................................................................................13
5.1.1 Morphological State of the Channel.............................................................................13
5.1.2 Vegetation.....................................................................................................................13
5.1.3 Photo Documentation...................................................................................................14
5.1.4 Stream Hydrology........................................................................................................14
5.1.5 Wetland Hydrology......................................................................................................14
6 REFERENCES.............................................................................................................................
14
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC v

Muddy Run 11 Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS MUC 03030007
Year2 Monitoring Report• Duplin County, North Carolina • March 2016
APPENDICES
Appendix A. Project Background Data and Maps
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table 2. Project Activity and reporting History
Table 3. Project Contacts
Table 4. Project Information and Attributes
Figure 1. Project Vicinity Map
Figure 2. Project USGS Map
Appendix B. Visual Assessment Data
Figure 3. Current Conditions Plan View Map (CCPV)
Table 5. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Table 6. Vegetation Condition Assessment
Table 7. Stream Problem Areas
Table 8. Vegetation Problem Areas
Stream Photos
Vegetation Photos
Stream and Vegetation Problem Photos
Appendix C. Vegetation Plot Data
Table 9a. Planted Stem Count Summary
Table 9b. Planted Species Totals
Table 9c. Planted and Total Stem Counts (Species by Plot)
Appendix D. Stream Geomorphology Data
Table 10. Morphological Parameters Summary Data
Table 11. Dimensional Morphology Summary — Cross Sections Data
Table 12. Bank Pin Array Summary Data
Cross Section Plots
Appendix E. Hydrology Data
Table 13. Documentation of Geomorphologically Significant Flow Events
Table 14. Rainfall Summary
Table 15. Wetland Hydrology Criteria Attainment
Chart 1. 2014 Precipitation Data for Muddy Run 11 Site
Chart 2. 2014 Groundwater Monitoring Gauge Hydrographs
Crest Gauge Verification Photos
Appendix F. Adaptive Management Plan
Muddy Run II Adaptive Management Plan for Reach 3B and 5A
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC vi

Muddy Run II Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS H TC 03030007
Year I Monitoring Report, Duplin County, North Carolina • March 2016
l PROJECT GOALS, BACKGROUND AND ATTRIBUTES
1.1 Location and Setting
The Muddy Run II Stream and Wetland Restoration Site is located in Duplin County approximately
1.4 miles east of Chinquapin, NC (Figure 1). The project is in the Cape Fear River Basin (8 -digit
USGS HUC 03030007,14 -digit USGS HUC 0303007060010) (USGS, 1998) and the NCDWQ Cape
Fear 03-06-22 sub -basin (NCDWQ, 2002). To access the Site from the town of Chinquapin, travel
east on Highway 50, take the first left onto Pickett Bay Road (SR 1819), go 1.1 miles, then turn left
onto Kenney Crawley Road. This private road is gravel and will split just past the residential house on
the right. Keeping to the left will take you to the Reaches 3b, 3c, 5b, and 6. Going to the right at the
split will take you to Reaches 1, 2, 3a, and 4.
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives
The Muddy Run II stream and wetland mitigation project will provide numerous ecological and water
quality benefits within the Cape Fear River Basin. While many of these benefits are limited to the
project area, others, such as pollutant removal and improved aquatic and terrestrial habitat, have more
far-reaching effects. Expected improvements to water quality, hydrology, and habitat are outlined
below.
Design Goals and Objectives
Benefits Related to Water Quality
Benefit will be achieved through filtering of runoff from adjacent CAFOs through buffer areas, the
Nutrient removal
conversion of active farm fields to forested buffers, improved denitrification and nutrient uptake
through buffer zones, and installation of BMPs at the headwaters of selected reaches and ditch outlets.
Benefit will be achieved through the stabilization of eroding stream banks and reduction of sediment
Sediment removal
loss from field areas due to lack of vegetative cover. Channel velocities will also be decreased through
a reduction in slope, therefore decreasing erosive forces.
Increase dissolved oxygen
Benefit will be achieved through the construction of instream structures to increase turbulence and
concentration
dissolved oxygen concentrations and lower water temperature to increase dissolved oxygen capacity.
Runoff filtration
Benefit will be achieved through the restoration of buffer areas that will receive and filter runoff,
thereby reducing nutrients and sediment concentrations reaching water bodies downstream.
Benefits to Flood Attenuation
Water storage
Benefit will be achieved through the restoration of buffer areas which will infiltrate more water during
precipitation events than under current site conditions.
Improved groundwater
Benefit will be achieved through the increased storage of precipitation in buffer areas, ephemeral
recharge
depressions, and reconnection of existing floodplain. Greater storage of water will lead to improved
infiltration and groundwater recharge.
Improved/restored
Benefit will be achieved by restoring the stream to a natural meandering pattern with an appropriately
hydrologic connections
sized channel, such that the channel's floodplain will be flooded more frequently at flows greater than
the bankfull stage.
Benefits Related to Ecological Processes
Restoration of habitats
Benefit will be achieved by restoring riparian buffer habitat to appropriate bottomland hardwood
ecosystem.
Improved substrate and
Benefit will be achieved through the construction of instream structures designed to improve bedform
instream cover
diversity and to trap detritus. Substrate will become more coarse as a result of the stabilization of
stream banks and an overall decrease in the amount of fine materials deposited in the stream.
Resource Environmental Solutions.

Muddy Run II Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS H TC 03030007
Year I Monitoring Report, Duplin County, North Carolina • March 2016
Addition of large woody
Benefit will be achieved through the addition of wood structures as part of the restoration design.
debris
Such structures may include log vanes, root wads, and log weirs.
Reduced temperature of
water due to shading
Benefit will be achieved through the restoration of canopy tree species to the stream buffer areas.
Restoration of terrestrial
habitat
Benefit will be achieved through the restoration of riparian buffer bottomland hardwood habitats.
1.3 Project Structure
Table 1. Muddy Run II Project Components- Stream Mitigation
Reach 4
P 1 Restoration
As -Built
Existing
As -Built
Mitigation
173
Reach
Mitigation Type
Stationing
Length
Length
Ratio
SMUs
Reach 5b
Enhancement II
19+59 to 23+68
(LF)
(LF)
1:2.5
164
Reach 1
Headwater Valley
0+00 to 4+48
438
398
1:1
398
Reach 2
Headwater Valley
0+00 to 5+04
504
504
1:1
504
Reach 2
P1 Restoration
5+04 to 19+14
1,223
1,410
1:1
1,410
Reach 3a
P1 Restoration
0+00 to 37+23
3,301
3,586
1:1
3,586
Reach 3b
P1 Restoration
37+23 to 57+92
NA
1,979
1:1
1,979
Reach 3c
Enhancement I
57+92 to 65+30
737
708
1:1.5
472
Reach 4
P 1 Restoration
0+44 to 2+17
120
173
1:1
173
Reach 5a
P1 Restoration
0+00 to 19+59
1,602
1,926
1:1
1,926
Reach 5b
Enhancement II
19+59 to 23+68
401
409
1:2.5
164
Reach 6
Enhancement II
9+02 to 12+19
317
318
1:2.5
127
8,643
11,411
10,739
Table 2. Muddv Run II Proiect Comuonents — Wetland MitiLyation
Wetland Mitigation Type
Mitigation
Area (ac)
MitigationWMUs
Ratio
WA Restoration
3.60
1:1
3.60
WB Restoration
1.32
1:1
1.32
Total
4.92
4.92
1.3.1 Restoration Type and Approach
Reach 1
Headwater valley restoration approach was performed along Reach 1. The existing channel/ditch was
backfilled, and flow has been directed from its current position along the tree line back to within the
historic valley location down to the confluence with Reaches 2 and 3a. A 100 foot wide forested
buffer has been planted throughout the reach. The upstream limit of Reach 1 ties into an existing
headwater valley system comprised of intermittent sections of single and multiple channels. This
Resource Environmental Solutions. 4

Muddy Run II Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS H TC 03030007
Year I Monitoring Report, Duplin County, North Carolina • March 2016
system will be used as a reference site for incorporating a small baseflow channel into the headwater
valley restoration design.
Reach 2
Similar to Reach 1, headwater valley restoration was performed along the upper section of Reach 2.
The existing channel was backfilled with existing spoil material located along the channel, a result of
previous dredging activities. Areas within the 100 foot buffer that were disturbed or lack riparian
vegetation were planted. Grade control structures were installed along three ditches that enter Reach 2
at the upstream end of the project. These structures raised the upstream channel bed elevations
slightly to tie into existing ditches to the project reach. An existing CMP culvert located along the
upstream section was removed and replaced outside the easement (upstream) to continue to allow the
landowner access to all areas of his property. Priority 1 restoration was performed for the majority of
Reach 2. Restoration activities involved relocating the channel to the north through an existing
wooded area consisting primarily of pines and a few hardwoods. Existing spoil piles located along the
channel banks were removed and used to fill the existing ditch. Diffuse flow structures have been
installed along several ditches that outlet to the reach from both the north and south. The structures
will attenuate and disperse flows as the existing ditches enter the proposed easement.
Reach 3a
Priority Level I restoration was performed on Reach 3a. The restoration approach on this reach
included relocating the channel on either side of its current location to follow the natural valley and
removing the adjacent roadbed to allow continuous access to the floodplain. Two existing 36" CMP
culvert crossings were located along this reach. Each culvert was removed and replaced in-line with
the proposed stream to allow the landowners to access portions of their respective properties to the
west of the project site. Reach 3a now flows in a northwesterly direction until it reaches a property
line. At this point, the existing ditch that continued to flow in a northerly direction was plugged and a
diversion structure was installed. The structure is designed to pass 100 percent of baseflow and small
storms through the project, and divert up to 70 percent of storms larger than the 25 -yr storm to the
existing ditch and offsite. See Section 7.3.1.1 (Stream Hydrologic Analysis) for hydraulic analysis
details.
Just downstream of the diversion structure, the channel was relocated south of several turkey houses,
and now flows in a westerly direction as Reach 3b. The network of ditches surrounding the turkey
houses appear to cross a small ridge, directing flow away from the project area. An additional culvert
crossing was constructed where flow will be diverted to the west at the turkey houses. Priority I
restoration is appropriate for this channel because it is the only mitigation approach that addresses bed
and bank instability, establishes a forested riparian buffer, and significantly enhances aquatic habitat.
Diffuse flow structures were constructed where existing agricultural ditches enter the easement area.
The diversion structure was constructed at the downstream end of Reach 3a to alleviate and prevent
flooding caused by rerouting flow and increased drainage areas, to provide continued flow through
the existing ditch for storms larger than bankfull (design) events, and to reduce impacts from
proposed grading activities. Per discussions with Mr. Lanier (owner of parcel northwest of proposed
structure), larger storm events overtop the existing ditch flowing to the north. This flooding may be
attributed to inefficiencies with existing structures and ditch alignments in conjunction with low
gradients. The culvert associated with the gravel access road that leads from Ludie Brown Road to the
turkey houses outlets perpendicular to the receiving ditch that flows to the northeast and under Ludie
Brown Road. This ditch continues to the northeast and crosses Route 111, where it flows to the north
into Muddy Creek. By diverting up to 70 percent of higher flows through the existing ditch and
offsite, existing flooding issues will be reduced adjacent to the turkey houses. This diversion also
decreases potential flooding impacts that would occur if 100 percent of storm events were passed
Resource Environmental Solutions.

Muddy Run II Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS H TC 03030007
Year I Monitoring Report, Duplin County, North Carolina • March 2016
through the proposed channel, Reach 3b. There are several residential parcels within zero to 200 feet
of the proposed easement along Reach 3b. Because the topography is very flat through this area, the
flooding associated with the majority of storm events greater than bankfull would negatively impact
these parcels.
Finally, by diverting a percentage of the proposed higher flows, flooding impacts will also be reduced
along Reaches 5a and 5b and at the existing HWY 41culvert at the downstream end of the project.
Currently, agricultural fields are present along the north side of Reach 5a. By reducing high flows, the
flooding extent and duration will be reduced; thus, preventing adverse impacts to crops. If 100
percent of higher storm events were allowed to pass through the project, significant grading would be
required to cut floodplain terraces/benches to relieve flooding of the adjacent agricultural fields.
Approximately 1,611 LF of the existing ditch that flows to the north from the Reach 3a/3b diversion
structure will be impacted (dewatered). This length includes the segment of the ditch from the
diversion structure downstream to the Muddy Creek floodplain. The channel impacts resulting from
the proposed channel relocation will be addressed in the ensuing NWP application.
Reach 3b
Priority Level I restoration was performed on Reach 3b. The restoration approach on this reach
included relocating the channel in a westerly direction through an open pasture. The pasture area has
been extensively modified and substantial grading was required. The design then moves the channel
to a historic drainage way as observed on LiDAR and historical aerial photographs.The flow path is
now connected to a small relic channel identified in the forested area west of the pasture. Subsequent
topographic survey confirmed positive drainage along the relic channel which follows a low lying
feature observed on LiDAR. The restoration approach included some minor grading to enlarge the
existing channel and to create a diverse bed habitat by constructing pools. Log grade control
structures were installed at the confluence with Reach 3c and at the connection to the relic channel.
Small, mechanical equipment and hand tools were used to minimize damage to the existing forested
buffer. A livestock protected culvert crossing was constructed near the existing pasture along an
existing farm path to allow the landowner uninterrupted access to his property.
Reach 3c
Enhancement I was performed on Reach 3c as it flows through a forested area downstream from
Reach 3b to Reach 3 of the Muddy Run Stream Mitigation Project. A grade control structure was
installed at the upstream end to stabilize the transition from an existing agricultural ditch to the stable
channel. A crossing was constructed along the upper section to allow the landowner access to both
sides of his property. Enhancement activities included removing portions of exising spoil piles
located along top of banks, cutting floodplain benches and laying back banks, and installing woody
debris habitat structures. Diffuse flow structures were also constructed at the downstream limit where
existing agricultural ditches enter the easement area. Invasive species management was performed
throughout the buffer, and any bare or disturbed areas were planted with native riparian vegetation.
Reach 4
Priority 1 restoration was performed on the downstream end of Reach 4 as it flows through a forested
area below a ditch draining an agricultural field. A grade control structure was installed at the
upstream end to transition from the existing ditch to a stable channel. The lower section of the reach
was constructed into an E -type channel before its confluence with Reach 3a. Invasive species
management was performed throughout the buffer, and any bare or disturbed areas were planted with
native riparian vegetation.
Reach 5a
Resource Environmental Solutions.

Muddy Run II Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS H TC 03030007
Year I Monitoring Report, Duplin County, North Carolina • March 2016
Priority Level I restoration was performed on Reach 5a. The channel was relocated north of its
current location into the adjacent agricultural field. The existing ditch was backfilled and plugged at
any locations that may cross the proposed channel. The upstream end of the reach ties into Reach 1C
of the Muddy Run Stream Mitigation Project. The single -thread channel will flows through proposed
wetland WB beginning approximately 300 feet downstream of the Muddy Run project. A CMP
culvert crossing was installed in-line with the proposed design near the middle of the reach to allow
the landowners access to the adjacent parcels. Priority I restoration is appropriate for this channel
because it is the only mitigation approach that addresses bed and bank instability, establishes a
forested riparian buffer, and significantly enhances aquatic habitat.
Reach 5b
Enhancement Level II was performed on Reach 5b. Several log grade controls and woody debris
structures were installed along the bed to increase aquatic habitat and bed diversity. The right bank
along the reach was laid back and spoil piles along the tops of banks were removed using small
equipment to minimize impacts to the existing buffer. Additionally, invasive species management
was performed throughout the buffer, and any bare or disturbed areas were planted with native
riparian vegetation.
Reach 6
Enhancement Level II was performed on the downstream section of Reach 6 (STA 9+02 to STA
12+19). The right and left banks were laid back, and the channel was backfilled using spoil located
adjacent to the channel such that positive drainage is maintained throughout the reach down to the
confluence with Reach 5a. Invasive species management was performed throughout the buffer where
enhancement took place, and any bare or disturbed areas were planted with native riparian vegetation.
A 50 foot wide buffer was provided along the upper section of Reach 6 (STA 0+00 to STA 9+02);
however, no enhancement activities were performed through this section other than filling portions of
the channel. This additional easement was provided to account for any hydrologic impacts that may
occur as a result of the proposed enhancement activities.
1.4 Project History, Contacts and Attribute Data
1.4.1 Project History
The Muddy Run Restoration Site was restored by Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC (RES)
through a full -delivery contract awarded by NCDMS in 2011. Tables 2, 3, and 4 in Appendix A
provide a time sequence and information pertaining to the project activities, history, contacts, and
baseline information.
1.4.2 Project Watersheds
The easement totals 37.6 acres and is broken into nine reaches. Reach 1 has a drainage area of 68
acres; it begins at the start of the restoration project (STA 0+00) and extends west to STA 4+48.
Reach 2 has a drainage area of 114 acres; it begins at STA 0+00 and extends to STA 19+14. Reach 3a
(Sta. 0+00 to 37+23) begins at the confluence of Reaches 1 and 2 and has a drainage area of 227
acres. Reach 3b has a drainage area of 333 acres and flows west into Reach 3c; it begins at STA
37+23 and extends to STA 57+92. Reach 3c has a drainage area of 370 acres extending north to south
and flows into Reach 3 of the Muddy Run project; it begins at STA 57+92 and extends to STA
65+30. Reach 4 has a drainage area of 46 acres and flows from the east into Reach 3a; it begins at
STA 0+44 and extends to STA STA 2+17. Reach 5a begins at the downstream limit of the Muddy
Run project, flows into Reach 5b, and has a drainage area of 774 acres; it begins at STA 0+00 and
extends to STA 19+59. Reach 5b has a drainage area of 908 acres; it starts at STA 19+59 and extends
Resource Environmental Solutions.

Muddy Run II Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS H TC 03030007
Year I Monitoring Report, Duplin County, North Carolina • March 2016
to STA 23+68. Reach 6 has a drainage area of 318 acres and flows from the south into Reach 5a; it
starts at STA 9+02 and extends to STA 12+19 (Figure 2). The land use in the project watershed is
approximately 38 percent cultivated, 32 percent evergreen forest, 15 percent shrub/scrub, 6 percent
bottomland forest/hardwood swamp, 5 percent mixed forest, 2 percent developed, and 2 percent
managed herbaceous cover.
2 SUCCESS CRITERIA
The success criteria for the Muddy Run Site stream restoration will follow accepted and approved
success criteria presented in the USACE Stream Mitigation Guidelines and subsequent NCDMS and
agency guidance. Specific success criteria components are presented below.
2.1 Stream Restoration
2.1.1 Bankfull Events
Two bankfull flow events must be documented within the five-year monitoring period. The two
bankfull events must occur in separate years. Otherwise, the stream monitoring will continue until
two bankfull events have been documented in separate years. Bankfull events will be documented
using crest gauges, auto -logging crest gauges, photographs, and visual assessments for evidence of
debris rack lines.
2.1.2 Cross Sections
There should be little change in as -built cross-sections. If changes do take place, they should be
evaluated to determine if they represent a movement toward a less stable condition (for example
down -cutting or erosion), or are minor changes that represent an increase in stability (for example
settling, vegetative changes, deposition along the banks, or decrease in width/depth ratio). Cross-
sections shall be classified using the Rosgen stream classification method, and all monitored cross-
sections should fall within the quantitative parameters defined for channels of the design stream type.
2.1.3 Digital Image Stations
Digital images will be used to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or degradation, bank erosion,
success of riparian vegetation, and effectiveness of erosion control measures. Longitudinal images
should not indicate the absence of developing bars within the channel or an excessive increase in
channel depth. Lateral images should not indicate excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the
banks over time. A series of images over time should indicate successional maturation of riparian
vegetation.
2.2 Wetland Restoration
The NRCS does not have a current WETS table for Duplin County upon which to base a normal
rainfall amount and average growing season. The closest comparable data was determined to be from
Sampson County. The growing season for Sampson County is 242 days long, extending from March
17 to November 14, and is based on a daily minimum temperature greater than 28 degrees Fahrenheit
occurring in five of ten years.
Because of the surface roughing and shallow depressions, a range of hydroperiods are expected. The
water balance indicates that the site will have a positive water balance in the early part of the growing
season for four to five weeks, on average. The hydrology success criterion for the site is to restore the
water table at the site so that it will remain continuously within 12 inches of the soil surface for at
Resource Environmental Solutions.

Muddy Run II Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS H TC 03030007
Year I Monitoring Report, Duplin County, North Carolina - March 2016
least nine percent of the growing season (approximately 22 days) at each groundwater gauge location
during normal rainfall years. Overbank flooding events will provide additional inputs that may extend
the hydroperiod in some years.
Gauge data will be compared to reference wetland well data in growing seasons with less than normal
rainfall. In periods of low rainfall, if a restoration gauge hydroperiod exceeds the reference gauge
hydroperiod, and both exceed five percent of the growing season, then the gauge will be deemed
successful. If a gauge location fails to meet these success criteria in the five year monitoring period,
then monitoring may be extended, remedial actions may be undertaken, or the limits of wetland
restoration will be determined.
2.3 Vegetation
Specific and measurable success criteria for plant density within the riparian buffers on the site will
follow NCDMS Guidance. Vegetation monitoring plots are 0.02 acres in size, and cover greater than
two percent of the planted area. Vegetation monitoring will occur annually in the fall of each year.
The interim measures of vegetative success for the site will be the survival of at least 320 three-year-
old trees per acre at the end of Year 3, and the final vegetative success criteria will be 260 trees per
acre at the end of Year 5. Invasive species on the site will be monitored and controlled if necessary
throughout the required vegetation monitoring period.
2.4 Scheduling/Reporting
The monitoring program will be implemented to document system development and progress toward
achieving the success criteria. The restored stream morphology will be assessed to determine the
success of the mitigation. The monitoring program will be undertaken for five years or until the final
success criteria are achieved, whichever is longer.
Monitoring reports will be prepared in the fall of each year of monitoring and submitted to NCDMS.
The monitoring reports will include all information, and will be in the format required by NCDMS in
Version 2.0 of the NCDMS Monitoring Report Template.
3 MONITORING PLAN
Annual monitoring shall be conducted for stream, wetland, and vegetation monitoring parameters as
noted below for five years prior to completion of construction or until success criteria have been met.
3.1 Stream Restoration
3.1.1 As -Built Survey
An as -built survey was conducted following construction to document channel size, condition, and
location. The survey includes a complete profile of thalweg, top of bank, and in stream channel
structures to compare with future geomorphic data. Longitudinal profiles will not be required in
annual monitoring reports unless requested by NCDMS or USACE.
3.1.2 Bankfull Events
Four sets of manual and auto -logging crest gauges were installed on the site, one along Reach 2, one
along Reach 3a, one along Reach 3b, and one along Reach 5a. The auto logging crest gauges were
installed within the channel and will continuously record flow conditions at an hourly interval.
Manual crest gauges were installed on the bank at bankfull elevation. Crest gauges will be checked
Resource Environmental Solutions.

Muddy Run II Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS H TC 03030007
Year I Monitoring Report, Duplin County, North Carolina • March 2016
during each site visit to determine if a bankfull event has occurred since the last site visit. Crest gauge
readings and debris rack lines will be photographed to document evidence of bankfull events.
3.1.3 Cross Sections
A total of 59 permanent cross sections were installed to monitor channel dimensions and stability.
Four cross sections were installed along Reach 1 and ten cross sections were installed along Reach 2.
There were 21 cross sections (nine runs, nine pools, and three riffles) installed along Reach 3A and
six cross sections installed along Reach 3B. Four cross sections were installed along Reach 3C and
two cross sections were installed along Reach 4. Reach 5A had eight cross sections installed, while
Reach 5B and 6 each had two cross sections installed. Cross sections were typically located at
representative shallow and pool sections along each stream reach. Each cross section was
permanently marked with 3/8 rebar pin to establish a monument location at each end. A marker pole
was also installed at both ends of each cross section to allow ease locating during monitoring
activities. Cross section surveys will be performed once a year during annual monitoring and will
include all breaks in slope including top of bank, bottom of bank, streambed, edge of water, and
thalweg.
3.1.4 Digital Image Stations
Digital photographs will be taken at least once a year to visually document stream and vegetation
conditions. This monitoring practice will continue for five years following construction and planting.
Permanent photo point locations at cross sections and vegetation plots have been established so that
the same directional view and location may be repeated each monitoring year. Monitoring
photographs will also be used to document any stream and vegetation problematic areas such as
erosion, stream and bank instability, easement encroachment and vegetation damage.
3.1.5 Bank Pin Arrays
Twenty bank pin arrays have been installed at cross sections located on meander pools. These bank
pin arrays were installed along the upstream and downstream third of the meander. Bank pins are a
minimum of three feet long, and have been installed just above the water surface and every two feet
above the lowest pin. Bank pin exposure will be recorded at each monitoring event, and the exposed
pin will be driven flush with the bank.
3.1.6 Visual Assessment Monitoring
Visual monitoring of all mitigation areas will be conducted a minimum of twice per monitoring year
by qualified individuals. The visual assessments will include vegetation density, vigor, invasive
species, and easement encroachments. Visual assessments of stream stability will include a complete
stream walk and structure inspection. Digital images will be taken at fixed representative locations to
record each monitoring event as well as any noted problem areas or areas of concern. Results of
visual monitoring will be presented in a plan view exhibit with a brief description of problem areas
and digital images. Photographs will be used to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or
degradation, bank erosion, success of riparian vegetation, and effectiveness of erosion control
measures. Longitudinal photos should indicate the absence of developing bars within the channel or
an excessive increase in channel depth. Lateral photos should not indicate excessive erosion or
continuing degradation of the banks over time. A series of photos over time should indicate
successional maturation of riparian vegetation.
Resource Environmental Solutions. 10

Muddy Run II Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS H TC 03030007
Year I Monitoring Report, Duplin County, North Carolina • March 2016
3.1.7 Surface Flow
Headwater valley restoration areas will be monitored to document intermittent or seasonal surface
flow. This will be accomplished through direct observation, photo documentation of hydrology
conditions, and dye tests if necessary.
3.2 Wetland Hydrology
Wetland hydrology will be monitored to document hydric conditions in the wetland restoration
areas. Seven automatic recording pressure transducer gauges were installed in representative
locations across the restoration areas and an additional three gauges were installed in reference
wetlands. The gauges will be downloaded quarterly and wetland hydroperiods will be calculated
during the growing season. Gauge installation followed current regulatory and NCDMS
guidance. Visual observations of primary and secondary wetland hydrology indicators will also be
recorded during quarterly site visits.
3.3 Vegetation
A total of 28 vegetation plots were randomly established within the planted stream riparian buffer
easement. Each vegetation plot measures 22 feet by 40 feet (0.02 acres) and has all four corners
marked with PVC posts. Planted woody vegetation was assessed within each plot to establish a
baseline dataset. Within each vegetation plot, each planted stem was identified for species, "X" and
"Y" origin located, and measured for height. Reference digital photographs were also captured to
document baseline conditions. Species composition, density, growth patterns, damaged stems, and
survival ratios will be measured and reported on an annual basis. Vegetation plot data will be reported
for each plot as well as an overall site average.
4 MAINTENANCE AND CONTINGENCY PLAN
All identified problematic areas or areas of concern such as stream bank erosion/instability,
aggradation/degradation, lack of targeted vegetation, and invasive/exotic species which prevent the
site from meeting performance success criteria will be evaluated on a case by case basis. These areas
will be documented and adaptive management will be discussed with NCDMS staff. If it is
determined remedial action is required, a plan will be provided.
4.1 Stream
Five stream problem areas were noted during the Year 2 monitoring period. The problem areas
observed during Year 2 monitoring activities range from minor bank erosion to failing log structures
with unstable bed and banks. Problem areas have been mapped on the Current Conditions Plan View
(CCPV). Reach 1 had one problem (SPA1) with a loose toe log structure at station 3+25 that has
become slightly undercut. SPA1 was noted during the Year 1 Monitoring season, but the bed and
bank have remained stable and no further erosion was noted during Year 2 monitoring. No remedial
action is recommended at this time; however, SPAI will continue to be monitored. Two stream
problem areas are located on Reach 3B. At station 37+22, concentrated flow has eroded a gully on
the left bank behind the flow diversion structure (SPA2) at the reach break between Reach 3A and
3B. Some rip -rap was added to the gully after the Year 1 monitoring season, but additional minor
repairs are still needed. It is recommended that the scour pool be re -graded on the left floodplain
with a stable swale to redirect overland flow, and the bank be livestaked in the spring 2016. The
second problem area (SPA3) on Reach 3B is located at station 57+30 to 57+80. This area has five log
structures that have failed due to improper installation. Remedial actions are also planned for stream
problem 3 (SPA3). The streambed and banks will be repaired, new log grade control structures will
be installed, and livestakes will be planted along the banks before the Year 3 monitoring period. The
Resource Environmental Solutions. 11

Muddy Run II Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS H TC 03030007
Year I Monitoring Report, Duplin County, North Carolina • March 2016
detailed plan sheets are outlined in the adaptive management plan (Appendix F). Reach 3C has one
stream problem area, SPA4, with two minor headcuts forming on the left bank located at stations
60+00 and 61+00. SPA4 can easily be repaired by installing live stakes to armor the bank and divert
concentrated flows; however, the banks are currently stable and has not gotten worse during
monitoring year 2. SPA4 will continue to be monitored. The most prominent stream problem area
(SPAS) is located along the downstream segment of Reach 5A from station 13+25 to 19+50. The
Year 1 monitoring report had this area broken down into multiple problem areas, but for the purpose
of this report the entire section has been lumped into one problem area. Throughout the length of this
575 linear -foot stream segment, log structures have failed and localized areas of bank and bed erosion
are frequent on both sides of the channel. Log structures along this portion failed due to improper
installation and sandy soil cohesion in this localized project area. To address SPAS, an adaptive
management plan has been developed and will be implemented before monitoring year 3 (Appendix
F). The adaptive management plan will includes the installation of new log structures, re -grading the
bed and banks, and the construction of a floodplain bench. After all repair work is completed, the
area will be replanted and livestaked. Stream problem areas requiring adaptive management occupy
less than five percent of the total channel length.
4.2 Wetlands
No wetland problem areas were noted during the Year 2 monitoring period. During the 2015 growing
season, all seven wells recorded water continuously within 12 inches of the soil surface for at least
nine percent of the growing season. If any wetland problem areas are noted in the future, they will be
documented and mapped on the Current Conditions Plan View (CCPV) as part of the annual stream
and wetland monitoring report. Detailed wetland hydrology data is provided in Appendix E.
4.3 Vegetation
Eight vegetation problem areas were identified during the Year 2 monitoring period and have been
mapped on the CCPV. Invasive Chinese privet was observed along portions of Reach 2, Reach 3a,
Reach 3c, and Reach 5b (VPA1, VPA2, VPA3, VPA6, and VPA8); management will consist of
continued clearing and stump treatment for these areas. Three other problem areas (VPA4, VPA5,
and VPA7) were noted for low stem densities, having stem counts less than the MY3 vegetative
success criteria of 320 stems/acre. VPA4 and VPA5 areas will be planted with approximately 100
trees and VPA7 area will be planted with approximately 200 trees. Accelerated growing species will
be planted to ensure the site stays on track to meet vegetative success criteria. Two encroachment
areas that were noted in the Year 1 monitoring season, were addressed during the Year 2 season.
These 2 areas were replanted and vehicle access has been restricted from the easement. Landowner
notification was achieved to aid in the prevention of future easement encroachment issues. Three
other low density planting areas were replanted in Year 2 and are now on track and trending towards
success. All vegetation issues are described in Appendix B.
5 YEAR 2 MONITORING CONDITIONS (MY2)
The Muddy Run II Year 2 morphological and vegetation monitoring activities were completed in
December 2015 and visual assessment activities were completed in early February 2016. All Year 2
monitoring data is present below and in the appendices. Data presented shows the site has localized
areas of bed and bank erosion; however, the site is on track to meeting stream, wetland and vegetation
interim success criteria.
Resource Environmental Solutions. 12

Muddy Run II Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS H TC 03030007
Year I Monitoring Report, Duplin County, North Carolina • March 2016
5.1 Year 2 Monitoring Data Collection
5.1.1 Morphological State of the Channel
All morphological stream data for the Year 2 survey and dimensions were collected during the annual
monitoring survey performed during December 2015. Appendix D includes summary data tables,
morphological parameters, cross section plots, and bank pin array tables.
Profile
The baseline (MY -0) profiles closely matches the proposed design profiles. The plotted longitudinal
profiles can be found on the As -Built Drawings. Longitudinal profiles will not be performed in annual
monitoring reports unless requested by NCDMS or USACE. Morphological summary data tables can
be found in Appendix D.
Dimension
The Year 2 (MY -2) cross sectional dimensions closely matches the baseline cross section parameters.
Minimal changes were noticed for most Year 2 cross section surveys resulting from stable bed and
bank conditions. Only seven out of 59 cross sections showed noticeable changes resulting from
aggradation or degradation. Cross sections 40, (Reach 313) and 43 (Reach 3C), 56 and 57 (Reach 5B)
showed evidence of slight-aggradation. Cross sections 52, 54, and 55 all located on Reach 5A,
exhibited down cutting and/or widening. All cross section plots and data tables can be found in
Appendix D.
Sediment Transport
The Year 2 conditions show that shear stress and velocities have been reduced for all six restoration
reaches. Pre -construction conditions documented all six reaches as sand bed channels and remain
classified as sand bed channels post -construction. Visual assessments (Appendix B) show the
channels are transporting sediment as designed and will continue to be monitored for aggradation and
degradation. Areas of excessive erosion appear due to improper structure installation and unstable
soil conditions.
Bank Pin Arrays
Ten pool cross section locations with bank pin arrays were observed and measured for bank erosion
located on the outside meander bends. If bank pin exposure was noticeable, it was measured,
recorded, photographed, and then driven flush with the bank at each monitoring location. Two bank
pin array locations had measurable readings during annual Year 2 monitoring activities. Bank pins
located at cross sections 53 and 54 had noticeable bank erosion around the pins; bank pins at cross
section 54 were completely dislodged from the bank due to this segment of Reach 5A being currently
unstable. Bank pin array data tables can be found in Appendix D.
5.1.2 Vegetation
The Year 2 monitoring (MY -2) vegetation survey was completed in December 2015. The Year 2
vegetation monitoring on the Muddy Run II Stream Restoration Site resulted in an average of 573
planted stems per acre, which is above the interim survival density of 320 stems per acre at the end of
Year 3 monitoring. The average stems per vegetation plot was 11.5 planted stems. The minimum
planted stem per plot was 5 stems and the maximum was 18 stems per plot. A total of nine volunteer
stems were counted throughout vegetation plots within the project area. Vegetation summary data
tables can be found in Appendix C and vegetation plot photos in Appendix B.
Resource Environmental Solutions. 13

Muddy Run II Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS H TC 03030007
Year I Monitoring Report, Duplin County, North Carolina • March 2016
5.1.3 Photo Documentation
Permanent photo point locations have been established at cross sections, vegetation plots, stream
crossings, and stream structures by RES staff. Any additional problem areas or areas of concern have
been documented with a digital photograph during monitoring activities. All stream and vegetation
digital photographs can be found in Appendix B.
5.1.4 Stream Hydrology
Multiple bankfull events have been observed during Year 2 monitoring activities on all four crest
gauges. Four sets of manual and auto -logging crest gauges are installed on the site, one along Reach
2, one along Reach 3A, one along Reach 313, and one along Reach 5A to document flow conditions.
Crest gauge 1 recorded its maximum bankfull flow event on October 2' and Crest Gauge 2 recorded
its maximum bankfull flow event on November 19ti'. Crest gauges 3 and 4 recorded maximum
bankfull events on February 26tY'. During several site visits throughout Year 2, each stream reach was
noted to be flowing during normal conditions. Crest gauge and rainfall data is presented in Appendix
E.
5.1.5 Wetland Hydrology
All seven of the wetland gauges achieved the success criteria by remaining continuously within 12
inches of the soil surface for at least nine percent of the growing season during monitoring year 2.
Groundwater gauge data indicate the hydroperiods being responsive to rainfall events. Two of the
three reference gauges (RAW1 and RAW3) met the nine percent success criteria while the remaining
gauge (RAW2) had a hydroperiod of eight percent of the growing season. Wetland gauge and rainfall
data is presented in Appendix E.
6 REFERENCES
Chow, Ven Te. 1959. Open -Channel Hydraulics, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and
Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological
Services, FWS/OBS-79/31. U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC.
Environmental Banc & Exchange (2012). Muddy Run Stream Restoration Project Final Mitigation
Plan. North Carolina Ecosystems Enhancement Program, Raleigh, NC.
Horton, J. Wright Jr. and Victor A. Zullo. 1991. The Geology of the Carolinas, Carolina Geological
Society Fiftieth Anniversary Volume. The University of Tennessee Press. Knoxville, TN.
Johnson PA. 2006. Assessing stream channel stability at bridges in physiographic regions.
U.S. Department of Transportation. Federal Highway Administration. Report Number
FHWA-HRT-05-072.
Krstolic, J.L., and Chaplin, J.J. 2007. Bankfull regional curves for streams in the non -urban,
non -tidal Coastal Plain Physiographic Province, Virginia and Maryland: U.S. Geological
Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2007-5162, 48 p.
LeGrand, H.E., Jr. and S.P. Hall, eds. 1999. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Animal
Species of North Carolina. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and
Resource Environmental Solutions. 14

Muddy Run II Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS H TC 03030007
Year I Monitoring Report, Duplin County, North Carolina • March 2016
Recreation, North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Raleigh, North
Carolina.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS). 2007. Stream Restoration Design Handbook (NEH
654), USDA
NCDENR. "Water Quality Stream Classifications for Streams in North Carolina." Water Quality
Section. http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wqhome/html (June 2005).
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles and F.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the Carolinas. The
University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North
Carolina, Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and
Recreation, NCDENR, Raleigh, NC.
Sweet, William V. and Jens W. Geratz. 2003. Bankfull Hydraulic Geometry Relationships and
Recurrence Intervals for North Carolina's Coastal Plain. J. of the American Water Resources
Association (JAWRA) 39(4):861-871.
Tweedy, K. A Methodology for Predicting Channel Form in Coastal Plain Headwater Systems.
Stream Restoration in the Southeast: Advancing the Science and Practice, November 2008, Asheville,
NC. Unpublished Conference Paper, 2008.
http://www.bae.ncsu.edu/programs/extension/wqg/srp/2008conference/tweedy_paper.pdf
Resource Environmental Solutions. 15

Appendix A
Project Background Data and Maps
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table 2. Project Activity and reporting History
Table 3. Project Contacts
Table 4. Project Information and Attributes
Figure 1. Project Vicinity Map
Figure 2. Project USGS Map

Appendix A. General Tables and Figures
Table 1 Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Monitoring Report Year 2
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Muddy Run I1 Stream and Wetland Restoration/NCDMS Project # NC -95354
Mitigation Credits
Stream
Riparian Wetland
Non-riarian Wetland
Buffer
Nitrogen
Nutrient Offset
Phosphorous
Nutrient Offset
Type
R
RE
R
RE
RRE
Totals
10,739
4.92
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Project Components
Project Component -or- Reach ID
As -Built
Stationing/Location (LF)
Existing
Footage/Acreage
Approach
(PI, PII etc.)
Restoration -or-
Restoration
Equivalent
Restoration
Footage or
Acreage
Mitigation Ratio
Reach 1
0+00-4+48
438
HWV
Restoration
398
1 : 1
Reach 2
0+00-5+04
504
HWV
Restoration
504
1 : 1
Reach 2
5+04-19+14
1,223
P1
Restoration
1,410
1 : 1
Reach 3A
0+00-37+23
3,301
P1
Restoration
3,586
1 : 1
Reach 3B
37+23 —57+92
NA
P1
Restoration
1,979
1 : 1
Reach 3C
57+92 —65+30
737
Enh. I
Rest. Equivalent
708
1 : 1.5
Reach 4
0+44-2+17
120
P 1
Restoration
173
1: 1
Reach 5A
0+00-19+59
1,602
P1
Restoration
1,926
1 : 1
Reach 5B
19+59 —23+68
401
Enh. II
Rest. Equivalent
409
1 : 2.5
Reach 6
9+02-12+19
317
Enh. II
Rest. Equivalent
318
1 : 2.5
Component Summation
Restoration Level
Stream
(linear feet)
Riparian Wetland
(acres)
Non -riparian Wetland
(acres)
Buffer
(square feet)
Upland
(acres)
Riverine
Non-Riverine
Restoration
9,074
4.92
Headwater Valley
902
Enhancement
Enhancement 1
708
Enhancement II
727
Creation
Preservation
High Quality
Preservation
BMP Elements
Element
Location
Purpose/Function
Notes
BMP Elements
BR = Bioretention Cell; SF = Sand Filter; SW = Stormwater Wetland; WDP = Wet Detention Pond; DDP = Dry Detention Pond; FS = Filter Strip; S = Grassed
Swale; LS = Level Spreader; NI = Natural Infiltration Area; FB = Forested Buffer

Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Project Activity and Reporting History
Muddy Run II Stream and Wetland Restoration / NCDMS Project #95354
Activity or Report
Data Collection
Complete
Completion or
Delivery
Mitigation Plan
NA
January 2014
Final Design — Construction Plans
NA
March 2014
Construction Completed
NA
May 2014
Site Planting Completed
NA
May 2014
Baseline Monitoring Document Year 0 Monitoring — baseline
June 2014
August 2014
Year 1 Monitoring
December 2014
December 2014
Year 2 Monitoring
December 2015
February 2016
Year 3 Monitoring
Seeding Contractor
Rain Services, Inc.
Year 4 Monitoring
Lupe Cruz
Seed Mix Sources
Year 5 Monitoring
Nursery Stock Suppliers
Arbogen
Table 3. Project Contacts
Project Contacts Table
Muddy Run II Stream and Wetland Restoration /NCDMS Project # 95354
Designer
WK Dickson and Co., Inc.
720 Corporate Center Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
[phone]
Frasier Mullen, PE
Construction Contractor
GP Jenkins
6566 HWY 55 W
Kinston, NC 28504
[phone]
Gary Jenkins
Planting Contractor
H&J Forestry
Matt Hitch
Seeding Contractor
Rain Services, Inc.
Lupe Cruz
Seed Mix Sources
Green Resource
Nursery Stock Suppliers
Arbogen
Full Delivery Provider
Resource Environmental Solutions
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
[phone]
Project Manager:
Daniel Ingram
Monitoring Performers
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
302 Jefferson Street. Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
[phone]
Project Manager:
Brian Hockett

Table 4. Project Information
Project Information
Project Name
Muddy Run II Stream and Wetland Restoration
County
Duplin
Project Area (acres)
37.6
Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude)
34.8308430 N, -77.792838 ° W
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province
Coastal Plain
River Basin
Cape Fear
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-
digit
03030007
USGS Hydrologic
Unit 14 -digit
0303007060010
DWQ Sub -basin
03-06-22
Project Drainage Area (acres)
908
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area
<1%
CGIA Land Use Classification
Reach Summary Information
Parameters Reach 1
Reach 2
Reach 3a Reach 3b Reach 3c Reach 4
Reach 5a Reach 5b Reach 6
Length of Reach (linear feet) 398
1914
3586 1979 708 173
1926 409 318
Valley Classification
Drainage Area (acres) 68
114
227 333 370 46
774 908 77
NCDWQ Stream Identification 24.75
24.75
36.5 NA 40.5 32.0
35.5 37.5 20.75
NCDWQ Water Quality NA
NA
NA NA NA NA
NA NA NA
Morphological Description (stream
Evolutionary Trend
Underlying Mapped Soils Rains
Rains
Goldsboro/ Goldsboro/ Goldsboro/ Goldsboro/ Goldsboro / Goldsboro Goldsboro /
Rains Rains Rains Rains Rains Rains
Drainage Class ---
---
--- --- ---
Soil Hydric Status Hydric
Hydric
Hydric Hydric Hydric Hydric
Hydric Hydric Hydric
Slope 0.0043
0.0021
0.0016 0.0023 0.0022 0.0034
0.0024 0.0015 0.0024
FEMA Classification Zone X
Zone X
Zone X Zone X Zone X Zone X
Zone X Zone X Zone X
Native Vegetation Community
Coastal Plain Small Stream Swam
Percent Composition of Exotic 0%
0%
1 0% 1 0% 1 0% 0%
0% 0% 0%
land So ry Information
Parameters
Wetland A
Wetland B
Size of Wetland (acres)
3.60
1.32
Wetland Type (non -riparian, riparian riverine or riparian
Riparian
Riparian
Mapped Soil Series
Goldsboro
Rains
Drainage class
Moderately Well
Poorly
Soil Hydric Status
Yes
Yes
Source of Hydrology
Runoff/Overbank Flows
Runoff/Overbank Flows
Hydrologic Im airment
Ditched/Incised Channel
Ditched/Incised Channel
Native vegetation community
Cultivated
Cultivated
Percent composition of exotic invasive vegetation
NA
NA
Regulatory Considerations
Regulation
Applicable? Resolved?
Supporting Documentation
Waters of the United States — Section 404
X X
USAGE NWP 27
Waters of the United States — Section 401
X X
401 Water Quality Cert.
Endangered Species Act
X X
USFWS (Corr. Letter)
Historic Preservation Act
X X
SHPO (Corr. Letter)
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)/ Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA)
N/A N/A
N/A
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
Essential Fisheries Habitat
N/A N/A
N/A

oMw
J
0
Legend
INC Highway
State Roads
Streams
Muddy Run II Easement
Waterbody
HUC 03030007060010
v
<r vm
V O O
i
v
N ctale Road 1 04 Roa
Muddy Run II Site
NC
t J State R
oa
ate Road
(1 00
v✓ � � N
s
ck Pierce Ln
' J
1715
state R 4
EBXFigure
1.
Project Vicinity Map
Muddy Run 11 Mitigation Site
0.75
•T
{

:
. r
,IqqIr -� I L r f r—ti a NV
17
41
2
Drainage Area = 1.4 mi
I
r
FAf 5.9 , • I - l _ 6 l ,' ' I7
i
�R15
��-.•. -- �s f a,� r r �� • rl , 'M1 1 -,I � ' f� I� r�, }�' � {iP1�+_ * ��
Figure 2. Proposed Streams
USGS/Watershed Map Waterbodies
Muddy Run II Mitigation Site Muddy Run II Easement
0 1,000 2,000 4,000 Muddy Run Easement
Feet
1 inch= 2,000 feet Drainage Area
r
FAf 5.9 , • I - l _ 6 l ,' ' I7
i
�R15
��-.•. -- �s f a,� r r �� • rl , 'M1 1 -,I � ' f� I� r�, }�' � {iP1�+_ * ��
Figure 2. Proposed Streams
USGS/Watershed Map Waterbodies
Muddy Run II Mitigation Site Muddy Run II Easement
0 1,000 2,000 4,000 Muddy Run Easement
Feet
1 inch= 2,000 feet Drainage Area

Appendix B
Visual Assessment Data
Figure 3. Current Conditions Plan View Map (CCPV)
Table 5. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Table 6. Vegetation Condition Assessment
Table 7. Stream Problem Areas
Table 8. Vegetation Problem Areas
Stream Photos
Vegetation Photos
Stream and Vegetation Problem Area Photos

Figure 3a.
Muddy Run II
Mitigation Site
Current Conditions Map
Duplin County, NC
fires
Legend
Easement Boundary
Cross Sections
� Stream Structures
P1 Restoration
HWV Restoration
Enhancement I
Enhancement II
Vegetation Plots
Crest Gauges
Q Reach Breaks
Riparian Buffer Conditions
Target Community
Present Mar inal Absent
m
u AbsentNo Fill
c.
> Present
N
III I
IIIII
Common

0 75 150 300
Feet
As -Built Mitigation
Reach Mitigation Type Length Ratio SMUs
Reach 1 Headwater Valley 398 1:1 398 -
Reach 2 Headwater Valley 504 1:1 504
Reach 2 PI Restoration 1,410 1:1 1,410
Reach 3a P1 Restoration 3,586 1:1 3,586
Reach 3b P1 Restoration 1,979 1:1 1,979''
Reach 3c Enhancement I 708 1:1.5 472
Reach 4 P1 Restoration 173 1:1 173
Reach 5a P1 Restoration 1,926 1:1 1,926
Reach 5b Enhancement II 409 1:2.5 164
Reach 6 Enhancement II 318 1:2.5 127
TOTAL 11,411 10,739
VPA4
Ng - -k.-
L. �tiM
V.lk ' �► " ad°
AL
VPA2
Figure 3b.
Muddy Run II
Mitigation Site
Current Conditions Map
Duplin County, NC
p re !r
Legend
Easement Boundary
Cross Sections
Stream Structures
Reach Breaks
Crest Gauges
P1 Restoration
HWV Restoration
Enhancement I
Enhancement II
Vegetation Plots
Wetland Restoration
Well Hydroperiod
®
< 5%
®
5-8%
ED
> 9%
Riparian Buffer Conditions
Target Community
H Present Mar inal Absent
m
U Absent No Fill
CL
U)
>Present
N IIIII
----
Common

V ._
VPA6
_IM �_..
0 75 150 300
Feet
SPA3
4v IV
_ r t40 v
r'
N
LM
Figure 3c.
Muddy Run II
Mitigation Site
Current Conditions Map
Duplin County, NC
fires
Legend
Easement Boundary
Cross Sections
Stream Structures
As -Built
NEtigation
P1 Restoration
Reach
Mitigation T. pe
Enhancement I
SMUs
Enhancement II
Length
Ratio
Wetland Restoration
Reach 1
Headwater Valley
398
1:1
398
Reach 2
Headwater Valley
504
1:1
504
Reach 2
P1 Restoration
1,410
1:1
1,410
Reach 3a
P1 Restoration
3,586
1:1
3,586
Reach 3b
PI Restoration
1,979
1:1
1,979
Reach 3c
Enhancement I
708
1:1.5
472
Reach 4
PI Restoration
173
1:1
173
Reach 5a
PI Restoration
1,926
1:1
1,926
Reach 5b
Enhancement 11
409
1:2.5
164
Reach 6
Enhancement 11
318
1:2.5
127
TOTAL
11,411
10,739
N
LM
Figure 3c.
Muddy Run II
Mitigation Site
Current Conditions Map
Duplin County, NC
fires
Legend
Easement Boundary
Cross Sections
Stream Structures
P1 Restoration
HWV Restoration
Enhancement I
Enhancement II
Vegetation Plots
Wetland Restoration
Reach Breaks
®
Crest Gauges
Well
Hydroperiod
®
< 5%
®
5-8%
®
> 9%
Riparian Buffer Conditions
Target Community
H Present Marginal Absent
d
u Absent No Fill
a
>Present
N IIIII
R ----
c Common

Figure 3d.
Muddy Run II
Mitigation Site
Current Conditions Map
Duplin County, NC
fires
Legend
LEasement Boundary
Cross Sections
Stream Structures
Riparian Buffer Conditions
Target Community
H Present Marginal Absent
d
u Absent No Fill
Q
N
>Present
N I I I A
M ----
c Common
P1 Restoration
HWV Restoration
Enhancement I
Enhancement II
Vegetation Plots
Wetland Restoration
Crest Gauges
Q
Reach Breaks
Well
Hydroperiod
®
< 5%
®
5-8%
®
> 9%
Riparian Buffer Conditions
Target Community
H Present Marginal Absent
d
u Absent No Fill
Q
N
>Present
N I I I A
M ----
c Common

Table 5a Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Reach ID Reach 1
Assessed Length 398
1 Bed - Coastal plain sand bed channels have a mobile bed along their entire length during geomorphically significant flows. Therefore, the number of shallows and pools,
bedform shape, and thalweg position will vary by monitoring event and are not suitable indicators of stability or function.
2 Percentage based on visual assessment of channel bed condition.
Adjusted %
Number'
Number with
Footage with
for
Major
Stable,
Total
Number of
Amount of
% Stable 2,
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Channel
Channel
Performing
Number in
Unstable
Unstable
Performing
Woody
Woody
Woody
Category
Sub-Cateaory
Metric
as Intended
As -built
Se ments
Footage
as Intended
Vegetation
Vegetation
Vegetation
1. Bed
1. Vertical Stability
(Riffle and Run units)
1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect
flow laterally (not to include point bars)
0
0
100%
2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting
0
0
100%
2. Riffle Condition
1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate
NA
NA
100%
3. Meander Pool
Condition
1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6)
NA
NA
100%
2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of
upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)
NA
NA
100%
4.Thalweg Position
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run)
NA
NA
100%
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide)
NA
NA
100%
2. Bank
1. Scoured/Eroding
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
scour and erosion
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
Banks undercutloverhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
2. Undercut
likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
and are providing habitat.
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
Totals
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
3. Engineered
Structures
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs.
3
4
o
75/o
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill.
4
4
100%
2a. Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms.
4
4
100%
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed
15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document)
0
0
IL
100%
4. Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining — Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull
Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base -flow.
0100%
I
I
1 Bed - Coastal plain sand bed channels have a mobile bed along their entire length during geomorphically significant flows. Therefore, the number of shallows and pools,
bedform shape, and thalweg position will vary by monitoring event and are not suitable indicators of stability or function.
2 Percentage based on visual assessment of channel bed condition.

Table 5b Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Reach ID Reach 2
Assessed Length 1914
1 Bed - Coastal plain sand bed channels have a mobile bed along their entire length during geomorphically significant flows. Therefore, the number of shallows and pools,
bedform shape, and thalweg position will vary by monitoring event and are not suitable indicators of stability or function.
2 Percentage based on visual assessment of channel bed condition.
Adjusted %
Number'
Number with
Footage with
for
Major
Stable,
Total
Number of
Amount of
% Stable 2,
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Channel
Channel
Performing
Number in
Unstable
Unstable
Performing
Woody
Woody
Woody
Category
Sub-Cateaory
Metric
as Intended
As -built
Se ments
Footage
as Intended
Vegetation
Vegetation
Vegetation
1. Bed
1. Vertical Stability
(Riffle and Run units)
1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect
flow laterally (not to include point bars)
0
0
100%
2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting
0
0
100%
2. Riffle Condition
1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate
NA
NA
100%
3. Meander Pool
Condition
1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6)
NA
NA
100%
2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of
upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)
NA
NA
100%
4.Thalweg Position
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run)
NA
NA
100%
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide)
NA
NA
100%
2. Bank
1. Scoured/Eroding
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
scour and erosion
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
Banks undercutloverhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
2. Undercut
likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
and are providing habitat.
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
Totals
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
3. Engineered
Structures
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs.
14
14
°
100/o
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill.
13
13
100%
2a. Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms.
14
14
100%
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed
15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document)
0
0IL
100%
4. Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining — Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull
Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base -flow.
1
1
100%
1 Bed - Coastal plain sand bed channels have a mobile bed along their entire length during geomorphically significant flows. Therefore, the number of shallows and pools,
bedform shape, and thalweg position will vary by monitoring event and are not suitable indicators of stability or function.
2 Percentage based on visual assessment of channel bed condition.

Table 5c Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Reach ID Reach 3A
Assessed Length 3586
1 Bed - Coastal plain sand bed channels have a mobile bed along their entire length during geomorphically significant flows. Therefore, the number of shallows and pools,
bedform shape, and thalweg position will vary by monitoring event and are not suitable indicators of stability or function.
2 Percentage based on visual assessment of channel bed condition.
Adjusted %
Number'
Number with
Footage with
for
Major
Stable,
Total
Number of
Amount of
% Stable 2,
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Channel
Channel
Performing
Number in
Unstable
Unstable
Performing
Woody
Woody
Woody
Category
Sub-Cateaory
Metric
as Intended
As -built
Se ments
Footage
as Intended
Vegetation
Vegetation
Vegetation
1. Bed
1. Vertical Stability
(Riffle and Run units)
1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect
flow laterally (not to include point bars)
0
0
100%
2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting
0
0
100%
2. Riffle Condition
1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate
NA
NA
100%
3. Meander Pool
Condition
1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6)
NA
NA
100%
2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of
upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)
NA
NA
100%
4.Thalweg Position
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run)
NA
NA
100%
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide)
NA
NA
100%
2. Bank
1. Scoured/Eroding
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
scour and erosion
2
15
100%
0
0
100%
Banks undercutloverhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
2. Undercut
likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
and are providing habitat.
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
Totals
2
15
100%
0
0
100%
3. Engineered
Structures
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs.
21
21
°
100/o
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill.
11
11
100%
2a. Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms.
19
21
90%
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed
15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document)
1
1
100%
4. Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining — Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull
Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base -flow.
1010
100%
WIL
1 Bed - Coastal plain sand bed channels have a mobile bed along their entire length during geomorphically significant flows. Therefore, the number of shallows and pools,
bedform shape, and thalweg position will vary by monitoring event and are not suitable indicators of stability or function.
2 Percentage based on visual assessment of channel bed condition.

Table 5d Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Reach ID Reach 3B
Assessed Length 1979
1 Bed - Coastal plain sand bed channels have a mobile bed along their entire length during geomorphically significant flows. Therefore, the number of shallows and pools,
bedform shape, and thalweg position will vary by monitoring event and are not suitable indicators of stability or function.
2 Percentage based on visual assessment of channel bed condition.
Adjusted %
Number'
Number with
Footage with
for
Major
Stable,
Total
Number of
Amount of
% Stable 2,
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Channel
Channel
Performing
Number in
Unstable
Unstable
Performing
Woody
Woody
Woody
Category
Sub-Cateaory
Metric
as Intended
As -built
Se ments
Footage
as Intended
Vegetation
Vegetation
Vegetation
1. Bed
1. Vertical Stability
(Riffle and Run units)
1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect
flow laterally (not to include point bars)
0
0
100%
2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting
1
50
97%
2. Riffle Condition
1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate
NA
NA
100%
3. Meander Pool
Condition
1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6)
NA
NA
100%
2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of
upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)
NA
NA
100%
4.Thalweg Position
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run)
NA
NA
100%
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide)
NA
NA
100%
2. Bank
1. Scoured/Eroding
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
scour and erosion
1
50
99%
0
0
99%
Banks undercutloverhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
2. Undercut
likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
and are providing habitat.
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
1
30
99%
0
0
99%
Totals
2
80
98%
0
0
98%
3. Engineered
Structures
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs.
12
17
o
71/o
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill.
4
9
44%
2a. Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms.
12
17
71%
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed
15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document)
1
1
100%
4. Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining — Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull
Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base -flow.
7100%
1 Bed - Coastal plain sand bed channels have a mobile bed along their entire length during geomorphically significant flows. Therefore, the number of shallows and pools,
bedform shape, and thalweg position will vary by monitoring event and are not suitable indicators of stability or function.
2 Percentage based on visual assessment of channel bed condition.

Table 5e Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Reach ID Reach 3C
Assessed Length 708
1 Bed - Coastal plain sand bed channels have a mobile bed along their entire length during geomorphically significant flows. Therefore, the number of shallows and pools,
bedform shape, and thalweg position will vary by monitoring event and are not suitable indicators of stability or function.
2 Percentage based on visual assessment of channel bed condition.
Adjusted %
Number'
Number with
Footage with
for
Major
Stable,
Total
Number of
Amount of
% Stable 2,
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Channel
Channel
Performing
Number in
Unstable
Unstable
Performing
Woody
Woody
Woody
Category
Sub-Cateaory
Metric
as Intended
As -built
Se ments
Footage
as Intended
Vegetation
Vegetation
Vegetation
1. Bed
1. Vertical Stability
(Riffle and Run units)
1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect
flow laterally (not to include point bars)
0
0
100%
2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting
0
0
100%
2. Riffle Condition
1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate
NA
NA
100%
3. Meander Pool
Condition
1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6)
NA
NA
100%
2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of
upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)
NA
NA
100%
4.Thalweg Position
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run)
NA
NA
100%
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide)
NA
NA
100%
2. Bank
1. Scoured/Eroding
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
scour and erosion
2
15
99%
2
10
100%
Banks undercutloverhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
2. Undercut
likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
and are providing habitat.
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
Totals
2
15
99%
2
10
100%
3. Engineered
Structures
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs.
5
5
o
100/o
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill.
3
3
100%
2a. Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms.
5
5
100%
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed
15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document)
0
0
IL
100%
4. Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining — Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull
Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base -flow.
2100%
I
I
1 Bed - Coastal plain sand bed channels have a mobile bed along their entire length during geomorphically significant flows. Therefore, the number of shallows and pools,
bedform shape, and thalweg position will vary by monitoring event and are not suitable indicators of stability or function.
2 Percentage based on visual assessment of channel bed condition.

Table 5f Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Reach ID Reach 4
Assessed Length 173
1 Bed - Coastal plain sand bed channels have a mobile bed along their entire length during geomorphically significant flows. Therefore, the number of shallows and pools,
bedform shape, and thalweg position will vary by monitoring event and are not suitable indicators of stability or function.
2 Percentage based on visual assessment of channel bed condition.
Adjusted %
Number'
Number with
Footage with
for
Major
Stable,
Total
Number of
Amount of
% Stable 2,
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Channel
Channel
Performing
Number in
Unstable
Unstable
Performing
Woody
Woody
Woody
Category
Sub-Cateaory
Metric
as Intended
As -built
Se ments
Footage
as Intended
Vegetation
Vegetation
Vegetation
1. Bed
1. Vertical Stability
(Riffle and Run units)
1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect
flow laterally (not to include point bars)
0
0
100%
2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting
0
0
100%
2. Riffle Condition
1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate
NA
NA
100%
3. Meander Pool
Condition
1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6)
NA
NA
100%
2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of
upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)
NA
NA
100%
4.Thalweg Position
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run)
NA
NA
100%
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide)
NA
NA
100%
2. Bank
1. Scoured/Eroding
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
scour and erosion
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
Banks undercutloverhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
2. Undercut
likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
and are providing habitat.
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
Totals
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
3. Engineered
Structures
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs.
3
3
°
100/o
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill.
2
2
100%
2a. Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms.
3
3
100%
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed
15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document)
0
0
100%
4. Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining — Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull
Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base -flow.
1
1
100%
1 Bed - Coastal plain sand bed channels have a mobile bed along their entire length during geomorphically significant flows. Therefore, the number of shallows and pools,
bedform shape, and thalweg position will vary by monitoring event and are not suitable indicators of stability or function.
2 Percentage based on visual assessment of channel bed condition.

Table 5g Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Reach ID Reach 5A
Assessed Length 1926
1 Bed - Coastal plain sand bed channels have a mobile bed along their entire length during geomorphically significant flows. Therefore, the number of shallows and pools,
bedform shape, and thalweg position will vary by monitoring event and are not suitable indicators of stability or function.
2 Percentage based on visual assessment of channel bed condition.
Adjusted %
Number'
Number with
Footage with
for
Major
Stable,
Total
Number of
Amount of
% Stable 2,
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Channel
Channel
Performing
Number in
Unstable
Unstable
Performing
Woody
Woody
Woody
Category
Sub-Cateaory
Metric
as Intended
As -built
Se ments
Footage
as Intended
Vegetation
Vegetation
Vegetation
1. Bed
1. Vertical Stability
(Riffle and Run units)
1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect
flow laterally (not to include point bars)
0
0
100%
2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting
1
700
64%
2. Riffle Condition
1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate
NA
NA
100%
3. Meander Pool
Condition
1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6)
NA
NA
100%
2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of
upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)
NA
NA
100%
4.Thalweg Position
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run)
NA
NA
100%
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide)
NA
NA
100%
2. Bank
1. Scoured/Eroding
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
scour and erosion
1
350
91%
0
0
91%
Banks undercutloverhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
2. Undercut
likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable
1
350
91%
0
0
91%
and are providing habitat.
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
1
350
91%
0
0
91%
Totals
3
1050
73%
0
0
73%
3. Engineered
Structures
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs.
14
22
o
64/o
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill.
9
16
56%
59%
2a. Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms.
13
22
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed
15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document)
0
0
100%
4. Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining — Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull
Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base -flow.
4
6
67%
1 Bed - Coastal plain sand bed channels have a mobile bed along their entire length during geomorphically significant flows. Therefore, the number of shallows and pools,
bedform shape, and thalweg position will vary by monitoring event and are not suitable indicators of stability or function.
2 Percentage based on visual assessment of channel bed condition.

Table 5h Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Reach ID Reach 5B
Assessed Length 409
1 Bed - Coastal plain sand bed channels have a mobile bed along their entire length during geomorphically significant flows. Therefore, the number of shallows and pools,
bedform shape, and thalweg position will vary by monitoring event and are not suitable indicators of stability or function.
2 Percentage based on visual assessment of channel bed condition.
Adjusted %
Number'
Number with
Footage with
for
Major
Stable,
Total
Number of
Amount of
% Stable 2,
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Channel
Channel
Performing
Number in
Unstable
Unstable
Performing
Woody
Woody
Woody
Category
Sub-Cateaory
Metric
as Intended
As -built
Se ments
Footage
as Intended
Vegetation
Vegetation
Vegetation
1. Bed
1. Vertical Stability
(Riffle and Run units)
1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect
flow laterally (not to include point bars)
0
0
100%
2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting
0
0
100%
2. Riffle Condition
1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate
NA
NA
100%
3. Meander Pool
Condition
1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6)
NA
NA
100%
2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of
upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)
NA
NA
100%
4.Thalweg Position
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run)
NA
NA
100%
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide)
NA
NA
100%
2. Bank
1. Scoured/Eroding
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
scour and erosion
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
Banks undercutloverhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
2. Undercut
likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
and are providing habitat.
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
Totals
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
3. Engineered
Structures
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs.
1
1
o
100/o
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill.
1
1
100%
2a. Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms.
1
1
100%
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed
15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document)
0
0
1k
100%
4. Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining — Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull
Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base -flow.
0100%
I
1 Bed - Coastal plain sand bed channels have a mobile bed along their entire length during geomorphically significant flows. Therefore, the number of shallows and pools,
bedform shape, and thalweg position will vary by monitoring event and are not suitable indicators of stability or function.
2 Percentage based on visual assessment of channel bed condition.

Table 5a Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Reach ID Reach 6
Assessed Length 318
1 Bed - Coastal plain sand bed channels have a mobile bed along their entire length during geomorphically significant flows. Therefore, the number of shallows and pools,
bedform shape, and thalweg position will vary by monitoring event and are not suitable indicators of stability or function.
2 Percentage based on visual assessment of channel bed condition.
Adjusted %
Number'
Number with
Footage with
for
Major
Stable,
Total
Number of
Amount of
% Stable 2,
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Channel
Channel
Performing
Number in
Unstable
Unstable
Performing
Woody
Woody
Woody
Category
Sub-Cateaory
Metric
as Intended
As -built
Se ments
Footage
as Intended
Vegetation
Vegetation
Vegetation
1. Bed
1. Vertical Stability
(Riffle and Run units)
1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect
flow laterally (not to include point bars)
0
0
100%
2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting
0
0
100%
2. Riffle Condition
1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate
NA
NA
100%
3. Meander Pool
Condition
1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6)
NA
NA
100%
2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of
upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)
NA
NA
100%
4.Thalweg Position
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run)
NA
NA
100%
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide)
NA
NA
100%
2. Bank
1. Scoured/Eroding
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
scour and erosion
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
Banks undercutloverhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
2. Undercut
likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
and are providing habitat.
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
Totals
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
3. Engineered
Structures
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs.
2
2
o
100/o
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill.
2
2
100%
2a. Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms.
2
2
100%
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed
15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document)
0
0
100%
4. Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining — Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull
Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base -flow.
0
0
100%
1 Bed - Coastal plain sand bed channels have a mobile bed along their entire length during geomorphically significant flows. Therefore, the number of shallows and pools,
bedform shape, and thalweg position will vary by monitoring event and are not suitable indicators of stability or function.
2 Percentage based on visual assessment of channel bed condition.

Table 6 Vegetation Condition Assessment
Planted Acreage 17
Easement Acreaae` 37.6
Mapping
CCPV
Number of
Combined
% of Planted
Vegetation Category
Definitions ThresholdDe
iction
Pol ons
Acreage
Acreage
Combined
Easement
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Threshold
De iction
Polygons
Acreage
Acreage
1. Bare Areas
Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material. 0.1 acres
®
0
0.00
0.0%
1000 SF
® LE
7
1.43
3.8%
2. Low Stem Density Areas
Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on MY3, 4, or 5 stem count criteria. 0.1 acres
5. Easement Encroachment Areas'
®
none
3
0.45
2.6%
Total
3
0.45
2.6%
3. Areas of Poor Growth Rates or Vigor
Areas with woody stems of a size class that are obviously small given the monitoring year. 0.25 acres
0
0.00
0.0%
Cumulative Total
3
0.45
2.6%
Easement Acreaae` 37.6
1 = Enter the planted acreage within the easement. This number is calculated as the easement acreage minus any existing mature tree stands that were not subject to supplemental planting of the understory, the channel acreage,
crossings or any other elements not directly planted as part of the project effort.
2 = The acreage within the easement boundaries
3 = Encroachment may occur within or outside of planted areas and will therefore be calculated against the overall easement acreage. In the event a polygon is cataloged into items 1, 2 or 3 in the table and is the result of encroachment,
the associated acreage should be tallied in the relevant item (i.e., item 1,2 or 3) as well as a parallel tally in item 5.
4 = Invasives may occur in or out of planted areas, but still within the easement and will therefore be calculated against the overall easement acreage. Invasives of concern/interest are listed below. The list of high concern spcies are
those with the potential to directly outcompete native, young, woody stems in the short-term (e.g. monitoring period or shortly thereafter) or affect the community structure for existing, more established tree/shrub stands over timeframes
that are slightly longer (e.g. 1-2 decades). The low/moderate concern group are those species that generally do not have this capacity over the timeframes discussed and therefore are not expected to be mapped with regularity, but can
be mapped, if in the judgement of the observer their coverage, density or distribution is suppressing the viability, density, or growth of planted woody stems. Decisions as to whether remediation will be needed are based on the integration
of risk factors by EEP such as species present, their coverage, distribution relative to native biomass, and the practicality of treatment. For example, even modest amounts of Kudzu or Japanese Knotweed early in the projects history will
warrant control, but potentially large coverages of Microstegium in the herb layer will not likley trigger control because of the limited capacities to impact tree/shrub layers within the timeframes discussed and the potential impacts of
treating extensive amounts of ground cover. Those species with the "watch list" designator in gray shade are of interest as well, but have yet to be observed across the state with any frequency. Those in red italics are of particular
interest given their extreme risk/threat level for mapping as points where isolated specimens are found, particularly ealry in a projects monitoring history. However, areas of discreet, dense patches will of course be mapped as polygons.
The symbology scheme below was one that was found to be helpful for symbolzing invasives polygons, particulalry for situations where the conditon for an area is somewhere between isolated specimens and dense, discreet patches. In
any case, the point or polygon/area feature can be symbolized to describe things like high or low concern and species can be listed as a map inset, in legend items if the number of species are limited or in the narrative section of the
executive summary.
% of
Mapping
CCPV
Number of
Combined
Easement
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Threshold
De iction
Polygons
Acreage
Acreage
4. Invasive Areas of Concern
Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale).
1000 SF
® LE
7
1.43
3.8%
5. Easement Encroachment Areas'
Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale).
none
0
0.00
0.0%
1 = Enter the planted acreage within the easement. This number is calculated as the easement acreage minus any existing mature tree stands that were not subject to supplemental planting of the understory, the channel acreage,
crossings or any other elements not directly planted as part of the project effort.
2 = The acreage within the easement boundaries
3 = Encroachment may occur within or outside of planted areas and will therefore be calculated against the overall easement acreage. In the event a polygon is cataloged into items 1, 2 or 3 in the table and is the result of encroachment,
the associated acreage should be tallied in the relevant item (i.e., item 1,2 or 3) as well as a parallel tally in item 5.
4 = Invasives may occur in or out of planted areas, but still within the easement and will therefore be calculated against the overall easement acreage. Invasives of concern/interest are listed below. The list of high concern spcies are
those with the potential to directly outcompete native, young, woody stems in the short-term (e.g. monitoring period or shortly thereafter) or affect the community structure for existing, more established tree/shrub stands over timeframes
that are slightly longer (e.g. 1-2 decades). The low/moderate concern group are those species that generally do not have this capacity over the timeframes discussed and therefore are not expected to be mapped with regularity, but can
be mapped, if in the judgement of the observer their coverage, density or distribution is suppressing the viability, density, or growth of planted woody stems. Decisions as to whether remediation will be needed are based on the integration
of risk factors by EEP such as species present, their coverage, distribution relative to native biomass, and the practicality of treatment. For example, even modest amounts of Kudzu or Japanese Knotweed early in the projects history will
warrant control, but potentially large coverages of Microstegium in the herb layer will not likley trigger control because of the limited capacities to impact tree/shrub layers within the timeframes discussed and the potential impacts of
treating extensive amounts of ground cover. Those species with the "watch list" designator in gray shade are of interest as well, but have yet to be observed across the state with any frequency. Those in red italics are of particular
interest given their extreme risk/threat level for mapping as points where isolated specimens are found, particularly ealry in a projects monitoring history. However, areas of discreet, dense patches will of course be mapped as polygons.
The symbology scheme below was one that was found to be helpful for symbolzing invasives polygons, particulalry for situations where the conditon for an area is somewhere between isolated specimens and dense, discreet patches. In
any case, the point or polygon/area feature can be symbolized to describe things like high or low concern and species can be listed as a map inset, in legend items if the number of species are limited or in the narrative section of the
executive summary.

Table 7. Stream Problem Areas
Muddy Run H Stream and Wetland Restoration Project - Project # 95354
Feature Issue
Station # / Range
Suspected Cause; Repair
Photo Number
Loose grade control toe log
Reach 1 @ 3+25
Concentrated flow; Log toe is undercut, but bed
SPAT
structure
3+00
is stable; Will continue to monitor
VPAI
Left bank erosion behind flow
Concentrated flow; Grade scour pool on left
Reach 313 @ 37+22
floodplain withstable swale to channel, repair
SPA2
diversion structure
-16+00
bank, livestake
VPA2
Failed grade control structures
Reach 3B @ 57+30 to
Improper installation; Bed/bank repair, install
SPA3
at 3C confluence
57+80
new grade controls, bench floodplain, livestake
Minor left bank erosion (Head
Reach 3C @ 60+00
Concentrated flow; Repair scour on left bank
SPA4
cut forming)
and 61+00
and install live stakes
Failed grade control structures
Reach 5A @ Sta 13+25
Irnproper installation; Install rock/log structures
VPA4
Reach 3B @ Sta 48+00
and repair banks, bench floodplain, livestake,
SPA5
and bank erosion
19+50
replant
UPAS
Table 8. Vegetation Problem Areas
Muddy Run II Stream and Wetland Restoration Project - Project # 95354
Feature Category
Station Numbers
Suspected Cause; Repair
Photo Number
Reach 2 @ Sta 0+50 -
Ligustrum: encroachment from outside
Invasive/Exotic Populations
3+00
easement; Continued clearing and stump
VPAI
treatment.
Reach 3A @ Sta 11+00
Ligustrum: encroachment from outside
Invasive/Exotic Populations
-16+00
easement; Continued clearing and stump
VPA2
treatment.
Reach 3A- localized
Ligustrum; Continued clearing and stump
Invasive/Exotic Populations
areas- see plan view
treatment.
VPA3
Reach 4 @ Sta
Low density due to low soil fertility; Plant area
Low Stem Density
1+00-2+00
with approximaely 100 trees
VPA4
Reach 3B @ Sta 48+00
Low density due to low soil fertility; Plant area
Low Stem Density
-49+00
with approximaely 100 trees
UPAS
Reach 3C- localized
Ligustrum: encroachment from outside
Invasive/Exotic Populations
areas- see plan view
easement; Continued clearing and stump
VPA6
treatment.
Reach 5A @ Sta 16+50
Low density due to low soil fertility; Plant area
Low Stem Density
-18+00
with approximaely 200 trees
VPAI
Reach 513 @ Sta 19+60
Ligustrum: encroachment from outside
Invasive/Exotic Populations
-23+68
easement; Continued clearing and stump
VPA8
treatment.

Appendix B -Stream Photos
Reach 1— Looking Downstream - Sta. 1+25 — MY2
(2/11/2016)
Reach 1— Looking Upstream - Sta. 1+25 — MY2
(2/11/2016)
Reach 2 Looking Downstream Sta. 16+35
MY2 (05/22/2014)
Reach 2 Looking Downstream Sta. 16+35-
MY2 (2/11/2016)
Reach 3A Looking Downstream Sta. 4+25
MY2 (2/11/2016)
Reach 3A Looking Downstream Sta. 7+50-
MY2 (2/11/2016)

Reach 3A Looking Downstream Sta. 19+80-
MY2 (2/11/2016)
Reach 3A Looking Downstream Sta. 31+50- MY2
(2/11/2016)
Reach 3B Sta. 44+75 Looking Downstream MY2
(2/11/2016)
Reach 3B Sta. 44+75 Looking Upstream MY2
(2/11/2016)
Reach 3B Looking Upstream Sta. 48+70 MY2
(2/10/2016)
Reach 3B Looking Downstream Sta. 52+25-MY2
(2/10/2016)

Reach 3C Looking Downstream Sta. 64+00 MY2
Reach 3C Looking Upstream Sta. 64+00- MY2
Reach 4 Looking Downstream Sta. 0+65- MY2
(2/11/2016)
Reach 4 Looking Upstream Sta. 0+65- MY2
(2/11/2016)
Reach 5A Looking Upstream Sta. 8+50 MY2
(2/10/2016)
Reach 5a Looking Downstream Sta. 8+25 — MY2-
(2/10/2016)

Reach 5A Looking Downstream Sta. 17+25 MY2
Reach 5A Looking Downstream Sta. 17+80 MY2
Reach 5B Looking Downstream Sta. 20+05 - MY2
(2/10/2016)
Reach 5B Looking Upstream Sta. 20+05- MY2
(2/10/2016)
Reach 6 Looking Downstream Sta. 9+75- MY2
(2/10/2016)
Reach 6 Looking Upstream Sta. 9+75- MY2
(2/10/2016)

Crest Gauge 1- Reach 2 (12/04/2014)
Crest Gauge 2- Reach 3A (12/03/2014)
Crest Gauge 3- Reach 3B (2/10/2016)
Crest Gauge 4 — Reach 5B (12/03/2014)

Appendix B- Vegetation Plot Photos
Vegetation Plot 1 (12/15/2015)
Vegetation Plot 3 (12/15/2015)
Vegetation Plot 2 (12/15/2015)
Vegetation Plot 4 (12/15/2015)
Vegetation Plot 5 (12/15/2015)
Vegetation Plot 6 (12/15/2015)

Vegetation Plot 7 (12/15/2015)
Vegetation Plot 8 (12/15/2015)
Vegetation Plot 9 (12/15/2015)
Vegetation Plot 10 (12/15/2015)
Vegetation Plot 11 (12/15/2015)
Vegetation Plot 12 (12/15/2015)

Vegetation Plot 13 (12/15/2015)
Vegetation Plot 14 (12/15/2015)
Vegetation Plot 15 (12/15/2015)
Vegetation Plot 16 (12/15/2015)
Vegetation Plot 17 (12/15/2015)
Vegetation Plot 18 (12/15/2015)

Vegetation Plot 19 (12/15/2015)
Vegetation Plot 20 (12/15/2015)
Vegetation Plot 21 (12/15/2015)
Vegetation Plot 22 (12/15/2015)
Vegetation Plot 23 (12/15/2015)
Vegetation Plot 24 (12/15/2015)

Vegetation Plot 25 (12/15/2015)
Vegetation Plot 27 (12/15/2015)
Vegetation Plot 26 (12/15/2015)
v!
Vegetation Plot 28 (12/15/2015)

Appendix B - Stream Problem Area Photos
SPA1- Loose grade control toe log structure -
Reach 2 @ Sta 3+25
SPA2- Left bank erosion behind flow diversion
structure -Reach 3b @ Sta 37+22
SPA3- Failed grade control structures- Reach 3B @ SPA4- Minor left bank erosion — Reach 3C @ Sta
Sta 57+30 — 57+80 60+00 and 61+00
SPA5- Failed grade control structures and bank
erosion- Reach 5A @ Sta 13+25- Sta 16+50
SPA5- Right bank erosion- Reach 5A @ Sta
14+00
n .nl
Ya"'F
Y
� K
SPA1- Loose grade control toe log structure -
Reach 2 @ Sta 3+25
SPA2- Left bank erosion behind flow diversion
structure -Reach 3b @ Sta 37+22
SPA3- Failed grade control structures- Reach 3B @ SPA4- Minor left bank erosion — Reach 3C @ Sta
Sta 57+30 — 57+80 60+00 and 61+00
SPA5- Failed grade control structures and bank
erosion- Reach 5A @ Sta 13+25- Sta 16+50
SPA5- Right bank erosion- Reach 5A @ Sta
14+00

SPA5- Failed grade control structures, bed/bank
erosion- Reach 5A @ Sta 16+50- 19+50

Appendix B - Vegetation Problem Area Photos
VPA1- Invasive population: Ligustrum along
Reach 2 @ Sta 1+50 — Sta 2+50.
VPA2- Invasive population: Ligustrum along
Reach 3a @ Sta 11+00 — Sta 16+00.
VPA3- Localized invasive populations: Ligustrum
VPA4- Low stem density: Reach 4 @ Sta 1+00 —
Sta 2+00
VPA5- Low stem density: Reach 3B @ Sta 48+00
— Sta 49+00
VPA6 - Localized invasive populations: Ligustrum
along Reach 3c

VPA 7- Low stem density: Reach 5A @ Sta 16+50 VPA 8 Invasive population: Ligustrum along Reach
— Sta 18+00 5b @ Sta 19+60 — Sta 23+68.

Appendix C
Vegetation Plot Data
Table 9a. Planted Stem Count Summary
Table 9b. Planted Species Totals
Table 9c. Planted and Total Stem Counts (Species by Plot)

Table 9a. Monitoring Year 2 Stem Count Summary
Baseline
Year 1
Year 2
Planted
Planted
Planted
Volunteers
Vegetation Plot
Stems
Planted
Stems/Acre
Baseline
Stems/Acre
Living Stems Year 1
Living
Stems
Stems/Acre
Year 2
Living
Stems
Total Stems/Acre
Year 2
1
16
800
16 800
13
650
1
750
2
17
850
14 700
11
550
--
550
3
15
750
13 650
I1
550
550
4
14
700
12 600
8
400
400
5
16
800
12 600
10
500
500
6
17
850
14 700
13
650
650
7
15
750
13 650
12
600
600
8
16
800
14 700
12
600
600
9
17
850
11 550
10
500
500
10
14
700
9 450
6
300
1
350
11
13
650
13 650
11
550
--
550
12
15
750
9 450
11
1 550
--
550
13
16
800
14 700
13
650
650
14
14
700
10 500
10
500
--
500
15
15
750
13 650
13
650
5
900
16
16
800
15 750
14
700
--
700
17
15
750
]0 500
11
550
1
600
18
14
700
14 700
13
650
1
700
19
9
450
8 400
11
550
--
550
20
10
500
7 350
5
1 250
250
21
18
900
16 800
15
750
750
22
16
800
13 650
12
600
600
23
13
650
11 550
12
600
600
24
17
1 850
1 11 550
8
400
400
25
16
800
12 600
11
550
550
26
11
550
7 350
6
300
300
27
19
950
17 850
16
800
800
28
17
850
17 850
1 15
1 750
750
Average
15.0
752
12.3 616
11.2
559
2
577
Min
9
450
7 350
5
250
1
250
Max
19
950
17 850
16
800
5
900

Table 9b. Planted Species Totals
Live Stakes
Salix nigra Black Willow 3,000
Total 3,000
Plot Size = 40 X 22 feet = 0.020 Acres
Number Trees/Acres = # of Trees ` 50
Common Name
Total Planted
Trees - Bare Root
Taxodium distichum
Bald Cypress
1,800
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green Ash
1,900
Quercus lyrata
Overcup Oak
1,800
Betula nigra
River birch
1,800
Quercus michauxii
Swamp Chestnut Oak
2,200
N ssa bi ora
Swamp Tupelo
2,000
Plantanus occidentalis
I American Sycamore
2,200
Quercus lauri olia
I Laurel Oak
1,800
Total
15,500
Live Stakes
Salix nigra Black Willow 3,000
Total 3,000
Plot Size = 40 X 22 feet = 0.020 Acres
Number Trees/Acres = # of Trees ` 50

Table 9C. Planted Total Stem Counts.
Vegetation Plot 11
Vegetation Plot 1
Vegetation Plot 12
Vegetation Plot 2
Vegetation Plot 7
Vegetation Plot 3
Vegetation Plot 14
Vegetation Plot 8
Vegetation Plot 4
Species
Vegetation Plot 5
Species
Common Name
MYO
MY1
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MYO
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5 MYO
MY1
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MYO
MY1
MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5 MYO
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
Taxodium distichum
Bald Cypress
3
3
2
Bald Cypress
6
6
5
5
1
1
1
1
1 1
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green Ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green Ash
2
2
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green Ash
1
1
5
5
4
1
1 1
Quercus sp.
Unknown Oak sp.
1
1
Quercus sp.
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
Quercus lyrata
Overcup Oak
0
Overcup Oak
1
8
8 8
4
4
2
Quercus lyrata
Overcup Oak
2
8
7 6
Betula nigra
River birch
6
6
5
2
2
Betula nigra
3
2
2
Betula nigra
2
1 1
Quercus michauxii
Swamp Chestnut Oak
2
2
2
2
2 2
1
1
1
6
3
1
1
1 1
Nyssa biflora
Swamp Tupelo
5
7
6
4
4 1
3
3
3
2
1
1
Swamp Tupelo
4
Plantanus occidentalis
American Sycamore
1
1
1
4
1
3
3
3
5
5
2
4
Plantanus occidentalis
Quercus laurifolia
Laurel Oak
4
4
3
1
0
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
Quercus nigra
Water Oak
1
1
1
Quercus laurifolia
Laurel Oak
5
3
2
3
2
2
Species Count
5
5
5
5
4 3
6
6
6
5
4
4
7
6 5
9
Stem Countl
16
16
13
17
14 11
15
13
11
14
12
8
16
12 10
5
Stems per Acre 1
800 1
800
1 650
850
1 700 1 550
750 1
650 1
550
700 1
600
1 400
800
600 500
Vegetation Plot 11
Vegetation Plot 6
Vegetation Plot 12
Vegetation Plot 7
Vegetation Plot 14
Vegetation Plot 8
Vegetation Plot 15
Species
Vegetation Plot 9
MYO
Vegetation Plot 10
Species
Common Name
MYO
MY1
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MYO
MY1
MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5 MYO
MY1
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MYO
MY1
MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5 MYO
MY1
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
Taxodium distichum
Bald Cypress
6
6
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
2
2
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green Ash
2
2
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green Ash
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
1
1
1
Quercus sp.
Unknown Oak sp.
1
Quercus sp.
Unknown Oak sp.
1
1
1
0
Overcup Oak
1
Quercus lyrata
Overcup Oak
1
3
Quercus lyrata
Overcup Oak
2
1
2
3
3
3
2
2
2
6
Betula nigra
3
2
2
Betula nigra
River birch
3
3
3
3
2
2
Swamp Chestnut Oak
1
1
10
6
6
3
1
1
Quercus michauxii
Swamp Chestnut Oak
5
5
7
6
5
Swamp Tupelo
8
0
6
5
3
Nyssa biflora
Swamp Tupelo
4
4
Nyssa biflora
Swamp Tupelo
6
3
4
1
1
9
3
3
2
3
4
Plantanus occidentalis
4
2
1
Plantanus occidentalis
American Sycamore
1
1
1
Laurel Oak
1
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
Quercus laurifolia
Laurel Oak
5
3
2
3
2
2
4
4
3
3
3
2
Quercus nigra
Water Oak
Species Count
3
2 2
5
4
9
4
4
4
1
4
Species Count
6
6
6
Species Count
5
5
5
6
5
4
6
5
5
4
3
3
5
5
4
11
Stem Countl
17
14
13
15
13
12
16
14
12
17
11
10
14
9
6
550
Stems per Acre 1
850 1
700
1 650
750
1 650
1 600
800 1
700
1 600
850 1
550
1 500
700
450
300
Vegetation Plot 11
Vegetation Plot 12
Vegetation Plot 13
Vegetation Plot 14
Vegetation Plot 15
Species
Common Name
MYO
MY1
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MYO
MY1
MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5 MYO
MY1
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MYO
MY1
MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5 MYO
MY1
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
Taxodium distichum
Bald Cypress
2
2
2
0
1
1
1
1
1
0
2
2
2
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green Ash
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
1
1
1
Quercus sp.
Unknown Oak sp.
1
2
1
0
Overcup Oak
Quercus lyrata
Overcup Oak
1
3
3
2
2
4
2
Betula nigra
0
6
Betula nigra
River birch
1
1
1
3
1
0
1
1
1
1
Swamp Chestnut Oak
1
1
1
1
Quercus michauxii
Swamp Chestnut Oak
5
5
5
7
6
5
Swamp Tupelo
8
0
6
5
3
Nyssa biflora
Swamp Tupelo
4
4
2
6
3
4
4
4
9
6
6
3
3
4
Plantanus occidentalis
American Sycamore
1
1
1
2
1
1
Quercus laurifolia
Laurel Oak
1
0
1
1
1
Quercus laurifolia
Laurel Oak
3
3
3
Quercus nigra
Water Oak
0
1
0
Quercus nigra
Water Oak
Species Count
3
2 2
5
4
9
4
4
4
1
4
Species Count
6
6
6
6
4
5
6
5
5
4
3
9
7
6
8
11
Stem Countl
13
13
11
15
9
11
16
14
13
14
10
10
15
13
13
500 1
Stems per Acre 1
650 1
650 1
550
750
1 450
1 550 1
800 1
700
1 650 1
700 1
500 1
500
750
650
1 650
Vegetation Plot 16
Vegetation Plot 17
Vegetation Plot 18
Vegetation Plot 19
Vegetation Plot 20
Species
Common Name
MYO
MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MYO
MY1
MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5 MYO
MY1
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MYO
MY1
MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5 MYO
MY1
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
Taxodium distichum
Bald Cypress
0
1
1
1
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green Ash
0
6
6
6
1
Quercus sp.
Unknown Oak sp.
1
1
Quercus lyrata
Overcup Oak
1
3
3
3
1
1
2
Betula nigra
River birch
6
4
4
1
1
1
1
1
2
Quercus michauxii
Swamp Chestnut Oak
7
7 7
1
1
1
1
2
3
3
Nyssa biflora
Swamp Tupelo
8
8 7
4
2
2
4
4
4
6
3
1
Plantanus occidentalis
American Sycamore
3
3
3
5
5
5
2
1
Quercus laurifolia
Laurel Oak
1
0
Quercus nigra
Water Oak
Species Count
3
2 2
5
4
9
4
4
4
5
4
5
3
3
2
Stem Countl
16
15 14
15
10
12
14
14
14
9
8
11
10
7
4
Stems per Acrel
800 1
750 700 1
750
1 500
1 600 1
1 700 1
700
1 700 1
450 1
400 1
550 1
500 1
350
1 200

Vegetation Plot 21
Vegetation Plot 22
Vegetation Plot 23
Species
Vegetation Plot 24
MYO
Vegetation Plot 25
Species
Common Name
MYO
MY1
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MYO
MY1
MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5 MYO
MY1
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MYO
MY1
MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5 MYO
MY1
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
Taxodium distichum
Bald Cypress
2
3
8
8
8
2
2
2
1
1
Unknown Oak sp.
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green Ash
6
6
6
Quercus lyrata
Overcup Oak
7
6
6
1
4
4
4
Quercus sp.
Unknown Oak sp.
1
1
1
1
Quercus michauxii
Swamp Chestnut Oak
2
2
2
1
Quercus lyrata
Overcup Oak
3
4
3
Nyssa biflora
Swamp Tupelo
3
1
2
2
1
1
Plantanus occidentalis
Betula nigra
River birch
1
3
3
3
7
6
Quercus laurifolia
6
3
3
4
3
3
Quercus michauxii
Swamp Chestnut Oak
2
2
3
Water Oak
5
4
4
Nyssa biflora
Swamp Tupelo
2
5
4
4
5
5
5
Stem Countl
3
3
3
6
5
4
Plantanus occidentalis
American Sycamore
1 15
Stems per Acrel
550 1
350 1
300 1 1 1 1
950
1 850
1 800 1 11
1
850
1 750
Quercus laurifolia
Laurel Oak
4
1
5
2
1
2
1
2
6
3
1
1
Quercus nigra
Water Oak
Species Count
6
5
3
3
3
3
5
4
4
5
5
4
4
3
3
StemCount
18
16
12
16
13
12
13
11
12
17
11
8
16
12
11
Stems per Acre
900
800
600
800
650
600
650
550
600
850
550
400
800
600
550
Vegetation Plot 26
Vegetation Plot 27
Vegetation Plot 28
Species
Common Name
MYO
MY1
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MYO
MY1
MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5 MYO
MY1
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
Taxodium distichum
Bald Cypress
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green Ash
9
9
9
Quercus sp.
Unknown Oak sp.
Quercus lyrata
Overcup Oak
4
4
4
1
4
4
4
Betula nigra
River birch
1
1
1
1
Quercus michauxii
Swamp Chestnut Oak
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
Nyssa biflora
Swamp Tupelo
3
1
Plantanus occidentalis
American Sycamore
1
1
1
1
7
7
6
Quercus laurifolia
Laurel Oak
7
6
5
4
4
3
Quercus nigra
Water Oak
Species Count
5
3
2
5
4
4
5
5
5
Stem Countl
11 1
7 1
6 1 1 i 1
19
1 17
1 16 1
17 1
17
1 15
Stems per Acrel
550 1
350 1
300 1 1 1 1
950
1 850
1 800 1 11
850
1 750

Appendix D
Stream Geomorphology Data
Table 10. Morphological Parameters Summary Data
Table 11. Dimensional Morphology Summary — Cross Sections Data
Table 12. Bank Pin Array Summary Data
Cross Section Plots

Appendix D. Table 10 - Morphological Paramters Summary Data
Project Name/Number: Muddy Run II Mitigation Project/95354
Existing' '2
xistin t'Z Desi n As-Built/Baseline
Reference Reach MRTT 1 MRTT 2 MRTT 3A MRTT 3R MRTT 3C MRTT 4 MRTT SA MRTT SR MRTT 6 MRTT 2 MRTT 3A !TT/Cl MRTT 3A m/Sl MRTT 3R I MRTT 4 I MRTT SA I MRTT 1 I MRTT 2 1 MRTT 3A aT/Sl I MRTT 3A m/Cl I MRTT 3R MRTT 4 1 MRTT SA
Feature
Pool
Run
Shallow
Run
Run
Run
Run
Run
Run
Run
Run
Run
Shallow
Shallow
Shallow
Shallow
Shallow
Shallow
Shallow
Shallow
Shallow
Shallow
Shallow
Shallow
Shallow
Drainage Area ac
286
286
286
68
115
227
NA/313
74/360
45
424/774
583/909
77
115
209
254
333
45
774
68
115
209
254
333
45
774
NC Regional Curve Dischaze cfs
9.3
3
5
8
NA/10
4/11
2
13/18
16/21
4
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
Design/Calculated Discharge cfs
---
---
13
---
---
---
---
I ---
---
---
---
---
7
14
16
10
5
40
5
7
14
16
10
5
40
Dimension
BF Width ft
10.9
8.9
7.0
4.8
8.1
6.9
7.1
8.0
4.2
6.7
9.9
6.9
7.6
9.2
12.4
9
5.6
15
9.7
11.28
10.4
11.9
9.8
8.4
14.7
Floodprone Width ft
100
100
100
8.7
10.2
8.1
>50
12.9
6.1
11.9
11.6
10.0
>40
>30
>30
>30
>30
>40
>30
>50
>50
>50
>50
>40
>50
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft)
11.4
8.4
5.0
2.3
4.1
2.8
2.4
3.9
2.1
6.6
11.1
6.2
5.9
8.7
15.7
8.3
3.3
22.7
3.7
10.2
11.6
16.5
8.0
6.3
23.9
BF Mean Depth ft
LO
0.9
0.8
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.5
0.5
LO
1.1
0.9
0.78
0.9
1.3
0.9
0.6
1.5
0.4
0.9
1.1
1.4
0.9
0.8
1.6
BF Max Depth ft
2.1
1.7
1.3
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.8
0.9
0.7
1.5
1.5
1.3
1.3
1.5
2.0
1.5
0.9
2.4
1.0
1.6
1.8
2.1
1.4
1.5
2.6
Width/Depth Ratio
10.4
9.5
8.8
9.6
16.2
17.3
20.9
16.0
8.4
6.7
9.0
7.7
9.7
9.8
9.8
9.7
9.3
9.9
25.8
12.9
9.4
8.7
13.9
11.1
9.1
Entrenchment Ratio
9.2
11.2
15.1
1.8
1.3
1.2
>2.2
1.6
1.5
1.8
1.2
1.4
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
Wetted Perimeter ft
12.8
9.7
7.4
5.2
8.3
7.1
7.4
8.3
4.6
7.6
11.4
7.8
R.l
9.8
13.2
9.6
6.0
15.9
10.1
11.9
11.2
13.1
10.4
9.1
15.9
Hydraulic Radius ft
0.9
0.9
0.7
0.4
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.5
0.4
0.9
1.0
0.8
0.7
0.9
1.2
0.9
0.5
1.4
0.4
0.8
1.0
1.2
0.9
0.7
1.4
Substrate
Fine Sand
Fine Sand
Fine Sand
Fine Sand
Fine Sand
Fine Sand
Fine Sand
Fine Sand
Fine Sand
Fine Sand
Fine Sand
Fine Sand
Fine Sand
Fine Sand
Fine Sand
Pattern
Min
Max
Med
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
Min Max
Min Max
Min Max
Min Max
Min Max
Min Max
Min Max
Min Max
Min Max
Min Max
Min Max
Min
Max
Min Max
Channel Beltwidth ft
13.6
31.8
23.1
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
14 32
17 39
22 53
16 38
10 24
27 64
7 17
14 39
16 52
21 44
18 36
8
24
19 68
Radius of Curvature ft
11.0
27.6
17.6
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
11 28
13 34
18 46
13 33
8 21
22 55
10 31
7 28
15 44
12 29
15 45
13
19
23 38
Radius of Curvature Ratio
1.5
3.7
2.3
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
1.5 3.7
1.5 3.7
1.5 3.7
1.5 3.7
1.5 3.7
1.5 3.7
1.0 3.2
0.6 2.5
1.4 4.2
1.0 2.4
1.6 4.5
1.5
2.3
1.6 2.6
Meander Wavelength ft
34.9
68.3
54.5
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
35 69
43 84
58 113
42 82
26 51
70 137
17 38
13 53
31 81
23 53
33 65
23
33
41 77
Meander Width Ratio
LS
4.2
3.1
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
1.8 4.2
1.8 4.2
1.8 4.2
1.8 4.2
1.8 4.2
1.8 4.2
0.7 1.8
1.2 3.5
1.5 5.0
1.7 3.7
1.9 3.7
0.9
2.8
1.3 4.6
Profile
Shallow Len h ft
3.1
30.7
12.6
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
3 31
4 38
5 51
4 37
2 23
6 61
8 12
7 22
7 20
5 45
6 25
6
23
6 35
Run Len h ft
2.2
33.2
11.3
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
2 34
3 41
4 55
3 40
2 25
4 66
8 9
5 16
8 25
5 56
5 20
4
15
8 27
Pool Length ft
4.2
1 9.5 1
5.8
--
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
4 1 10
5 12
7 16
5 11
3 7
8 19
8 10
14 29
10 28
13 30
13 25
12
15
8 23
Pool -to-Pool Spacing ft
17.5
1 59.8 1
36.3
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
18 1 60
22 74
29 99
21 72
13 45
35 120
15 42
36 60
18 63
25 1 100
17 56
43
75
15 104
Additional Reach Parameters
Valley Length ft
274
382
1678
3301
908
745
90
1620
383
1172
1682
1524
1648
1693
175
1530
376
1682
1524
1648
1693
175
1530
Channel Length ft
309
382
1678
3301
908
745
90
1620
383
1172
1828
1738
1890
1849
202
1790
398
1914
1796
1790
1979
173
1926
Sinuosity
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.09
1.14
1.15
1.09
1.15
1.17
1.1
1.14
1.18
1.09
1.17
0.99
1.26
Water Surface Slope ft/ft
0.004
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
Chanel Slope ft/ft
0.003
0.0043
0.0021
0.0016
0.0023
0.0022
0.0034
0.0024
0.0015
0.002427
0.0017
0.0026
0.0005
0.0014
0.0049
0.0017
0.0037
0.0022
0.0038
0.001
0.003
0.008
0.0030
Ros en Classification
E5
G5c
F5
F5
C5
F5
G5c
G5c
G5c
G5c
E5
E5
E5
E5
E5
E5
E5
E5
E5
E5
E5
E5
E5
"Habitat Index
Bankfull stage was estimated using NC Regional Curve equations and existing conditions data

1 = Widths and depths for annual measurements will be based on the baseline bankfull datum regardless of dimensional/depositional development. Input the elevation used as the datum, which should be consistent and based on the baseline datum established. If the performer has inherited the project and cannot acquire the datum used
for prior years this must be discussed with EEP. If this cannot be resolved in time for a given years report submission a footnote in this should be included that states: "It is uncertain if the monitoring datum has been consistent over the monitoring history, which may influence calculated values.
Additional data from a prior performer is being acquired to provide confirmation. Values will be recalculated in a future submission based on a consistent datum if determined to be necessary."
Appendix D. Table 11 - Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross Sections)
Project Name/Number: Muddy Run II Mitigation Project/95354
Cross Section 1 (Riffle)
Cross Section 2 (Pool)
Cross Section 3 (Pool)
Cross Section 4 (Riffle)
Cross Section 5 (Run)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation'
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+ Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5
MY+ Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
53.7
53.7
53.7
54.1
54.1
54.1
53.3
53.3
53.3
53.3
53.3
53.3
58.0
58.0
58.0
Bankfull Width (ft)
6.3
4.9
5.2
6.4
5.6
6.0
6.3
6.2
5.7
6.9
6.7
6.4
14.8
14.5
14.2
Floodprone Width (ft)
30.0
30.0
30.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
35.0
35.0
35.0
45.0
45.0
45.0
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.4
0.4
0.4 1 1
0.7
0.6
0.6 1 1
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.5
1.1
1.0
1.0
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
0.8
0.7
0.7
1.3
1.1
1.2
1.4
1.2
1.1
1.1
1.1
0.9
2.0
1.8
1.9
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area L
2.7
2.0
2.1
4.7
3.5
3.8
5.0
4.0
3.3
4.6
4.3
3.2
15.6
14.5
14.7
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
14.4
12.2
13.2
8.8
8.7
9.4
7.9
9.6
9.8
10.7
10.4
12.6
14.0
13.7
13.8
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Cross Section 6 (Run)
Cross Section 7 (Riffle)
Cross Section 8 (Pool)
Cross Section 9 (Riffle)
Cross Section 10 (Pool)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation'
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+ Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5
MY+ Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
56.6
56.6
56.6
55.8
55.8
55.8
55.5
55.5
55.5
55.3
55.3
55.3
54.8
54.8
54.8
Bankfull Width (ft)
13.5
13.4
12.7
8.4
7.6
7.2
9.4
8.8
8.8
9.8
9.5
9.2
7.0
6.7
6.7
Floodprone Width (ft)
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.9
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.6
1.0
0.9
0.8
1.2
1.1
1.0
1.1
1.1
0.9
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.6
1.4
1.3
1.9
1.8
1.6
1.9
1.8
1.7
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area LL
12.7
11.5
10.2
6.1
5.6
4.5
9.7
7.8
6.7
11.3
10.2
9.0
8.0
7.1
6.2
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
14.5
15.7
15.7
11.5
10.2
11.4
9.0
10.0
11.7
8.5
8.8
9.5
6.1
6.3
7.3
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Cross Section 11 (Riffle)
Cross Section 12 (Pool)
Cross Section 13 (Riffle)
Cross Section 14 (Pool)
Cross Section 15 (Run)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation'
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+ Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5
MY+ Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
53.9
53.9
53.9
54.3
54.3
54.3
53.3
53.3
53.3
52.8
52.8
52.8
53.0
53.0
53.0
Bankfull Width (ft)
9.0
7.2
7.7
11.3
10.2
1.0
12.1
10.2
10.2
9.0
7.8
10.1
11.8
11.9
10.8
Floodprone Width (ft)
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.7
0.8
0.6
1.4
1.2
1.2
0.7
0.8
0.6
1.0
0.9
0.7
1.2
1.1
1.2
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
1.3
1.2
1.1
2.6
2.3
2.3
1.5
1.5
1.3
2.0
1.8
1.5
1.8
1.8
1.7
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftZ
6.7
5.6
5.0
15.5
12.7
12.0
8.7
8.2
6.1
8.9
7.8
6.8
13.7
12.9
12.4
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
12.2
9.4
12.0
8.3
8.2
9.0
17.0
12.8
17.2
9.2
9.9
15.0
10.2
10.9
9.3
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>2.2
>2.2
2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Cross Section 16 (Run)
Cross Section 17 (Run)
Cross Section 18 (Pool)
Cross Section 19 (Run)
Cross Section 20 (Riffle)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+ Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5
MY+ Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
52.3
52.3
52.3
50.8
50.8
50.8
50.1
50.1
50.1
50.5
50.5
50.5
50.5
50.5
50.5
Bankfull Width (ft)
11.3
11.6
12.2
10.5
10.5
10.0
10.6
9.9
10.7
11.4
11.1
11.3
9.3
8.9
11.2
Floodprone Width (ft)
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.9
0.9
0.8
1.2
1.2
1.0
1.3
1.1
0.9
1.3
1.0
0.9
1.2
1.2
1.1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
1.9
1.7
1.6
1.8
2.0
1.5
2.0
1.8
1.4
2.0
1.6
2.0
2.0
2.0
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftp
9.8
9.9
9.4
12.4
12.7
10.0
14.2
11.3
9.6
14.2
10.3
11.3
10.3
11.2
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
13.0
13.6
15.8
8.9
8.6
10.0
7.9
8.7
12.1
9.1
d>2.2
12.5
7.7
7.7
8.8
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
L0
L0
1.0
1.0
10
L0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
L0:::J
1 = Widths and depths for annual measurements will be based on the baseline bankfull datum regardless of dimensional/depositional development. Input the elevation used as the datum, which should be consistent and based on the baseline datum established. If the performer has inherited the project and cannot acquire the datum used
for prior years this must be discussed with EEP. If this cannot be resolved in time for a given years report submission a footnote in this should be included that states: "It is uncertain if the monitoring datum has been consistent over the monitoring history, which may influence calculated values.
Additional data from a prior performer is being acquired to provide confirmation. Values will be recalculated in a future submission based on a consistent datum if determined to be necessary."

1 = Widths and depths for annual measurements will be based on the baseline bankfull datum regardless of dimensional/depositional development. Input the elevation used as the datum, which should be consistent and based on the baseline datum established. If the performer has inherited the project and cannot acquire the datum used
for prior years this must be discussed with EEP. If this cannot be resolved in time for a given years report submission a footnote in this should be included that states: "It is uncertain if the monitoring datum has been consistent over the monitoring history, which may influence calculated values.
Additional data from a prior performer is being acquired to provide confirmation. Values will be recalculated in a future submission based on a consistent datum if determined to be necessary."
Appendix D. Table 11 - Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary (Dimensional Parameters -
Cross Sections)
Project Name/Number: Muddy Run II Mitigation Project/95354
Cross Section 21 (Pool)
Cross Section 22 (Pool)
Cross Section 23 (Riffle)
Cross Section 24 (Riffle)
Cross Section 25 (Pool)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation'
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5
MY+ Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+ Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5 MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
50.3
50.3
50.3
49.0
49.0
49.0
49.3
49.3
49.3
48.8
48.8
48.8
48.7
48.7
48.7
Bankfull Width (ft)
11.7
9.1
10.0
9.3
9.3
9.9
7.8
7.7
7.7
11.7
11.8
11.3
14.1
13.9
13.8
Floodprone Width (ft)
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.7
0.9
0.8 1
1.3
1.6
1.2 1
1.1
1.0
0.9 1
1.5
1.4
1.2 1
1.8
1.7
1.7
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
1.7
1.7
1.9
2.2
2.4
2.1
1.7
1.8
1.6
2.1
2.0
1.8
3.1
2.8
2.6
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area L
8.6
8.1
7.9
12.3
14.5
12.1
8.3
7.9
6.9
18.0
17.1
13.7
25.0
24.3
22.9
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
16.0
10.2
12.8
7.0
6.0
8.0
7.4
7.5
8.6
7.6
8.2
9.3
7.9
8.0
803.0
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Cross Section 26 (Pool)
Cross Section 27 (Run)
Cross Section 28 (Pool)
Cross Section 29 (Run)
Cross Section 30 (Pool)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation'
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5
MY+ Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+ Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5 MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
48.6
48.6
48.6
48.8
48.8
48.8
48.4
48.4
48.4
48.3
48.3
48.3
47.4
47.4
47.4
Bankfull Width (11)
14.9
15.7
15.0
12.7
12.4
13.7
13.4
13.3
14.0
13.4
13.7
13.9
12.9
13.1
14.0
Floodprone Width (ft)
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.4
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.3
1.2
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
3.2
3.1
2.6
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.9
2.9
2.7
2.1
2.3
2.0
2.3
2.2
2.0
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area L
24.9
25.7
23.2
19.4
18.9
19.3
24.6
23.2
22.2
19.8
19.7
18.9
18.4
17.4
16.6
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
8.9
9.6
9.7
8.3
8.1
9.7
7.3
7.6
8.8
9.1
9.5
10.3
9.1
9.8
11.9
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Cross Section 31 (Run)
Cross Section 32 (Run)
Cross Section 33 (Pool)
Cross Section 34 (Pool)
Cross Section 35 (Run)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation'
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5
MY+ Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+ Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5 MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
47.5
47.5
47.5
47.7
47.7
47.7
47.7
47.7
47.7
47.2
47.2
47.2
46.9
46.9
46.9
Bankfull Width (ft)
13.7
14.2
14.3
10.5
10.7
11.3
11.5
12.0
13.5
10.4
10.5
9.9
9.5
8.8
9.0
Floodprone Width (ft)
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.2
1 1.0
1.0
1.3
1 1.3
1.2
1.7
1 1.6
1.3
2.1
1.9
1.8
1.3
1 1.3
1.2
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
2.1
1.9
1.7
2.2
2.0
2.1
3.1
2.9
2.6
3.1
3.0
2.8
2.0
1.9
1.9
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area flZ
15.8
14.6
13.8
13.8
13.4
13.5
19.5
19.0
17.3
21.4
20.5
18.2
12.1
11.7
11.1
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
11.9
13.8
14.8
8.0
8.5
9.5
6.8
7.6
10.5
5.0
5.4
5.4
7.4
6.7
7.4
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Cross Section 36 (Pool)
Cross Section 37 (Run)
Cross Section 38 (Pool)
Cross Section 39 (Run)
Cross Section 40 (Pool)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5
MY+ Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY + Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5 MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
45.6
45.6
45.6
45.5
45.5
45.5
45.4
45.4
45.4
45.2
45.2
45.2
45.0
45.0
45.0
Bankfull Width (ft)
9.3
9.0
8.6
12.4
11.9
9.7
10.0
8.8
9.6
8.2
7.2
8.2
10.3
10.3
9.7
Floodprone Width (ft)
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.9
1 0.9
0.8
0.5
0.5
0.5
1.3
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.8
1.4
1.1
1.0
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
1.7
1.5
1.3
1.0
1.1
1.1
2.0
1.8
1.8
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.5
2.0
1.5
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area L
8.7
8.1
6.7
6.1
5.8
4.8
12.6
9.2
9.6
7.6
6.5
6.9
14.3
11.7
9.5
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
9.9
10.1
11.0
25.4
24.4
19.4
7.9
8.4
9.7
8.7
7.9
9.7
7.4
9.0
9.9
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1 1.0
1.0
1.0
1 1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1 1.0
1 = Widths and depths for annual measurements will be based on the baseline bankfull datum regardless of dimensional/depositional development. Input the elevation used as the datum, which should be consistent and based on the baseline datum established. If the performer has inherited the project and cannot acquire the datum used
for prior years this must be discussed with EEP. If this cannot be resolved in time for a given years report submission a footnote in this should be included that states: "It is uncertain if the monitoring datum has been consistent over the monitoring history, which may influence calculated values.
Additional data from a prior performer is being acquired to provide confirmation. Values will be recalculated in a future submission based on a consistent datum if determined to be necessary."

1 = Widths and depths for annual measurements will be based on the baseline bankfull datum regardless of dimensional/depositional development. Input the elevation used as the datum, which should be consistent and based on the baseline datum established. If the performer has inherited the project and cannot acquire the datum used
for prior years this must be discussed with EEP. If this cannot be resolved in time for a given years report submission a footnote in this should be included that states: "It is uncertain if the monitoring datum has been consistent over the monitoring history, which may influence calculated values.
Additional data from a prior performer is being acquired to provide confirmation. Values will be recalculated in a future submission based on a consistent datum if determined to be necessary."
Appendix D. Table 11 - Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross Sections)
Project Name/Number: Muddy Run II Mitigation Project/95354
Cross Section 41 (Run)
Cross Section 42 (Run)
Cross Section 43 (Run)
Cross Section 44 (Run)
Cross Section 45 (Run)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation'
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Base
MYl
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+ Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5
MY+ Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
45.1
45.1
45.1
44.0
44.0
44.0
41.3
41.3
41.3
41.5
41.5
41.5
41.4
41.4
41.4
Bankfull Width (ft)
8.9
8.5
8.6
23.5
24.1
28.1
9.4
9.2
10.6
13.723
13.5
13.2
11.8
11.5
11.2
Floodprone Width (ft)
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
29.0
29.0
15.0
22.0
22.0
20.0
35.3
35.3
30.0
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.1
1.1
1.0 1
1.7
1.5
1.4 1
1.4
0.7
0.4 1
1.4
1.3
1.2 1
1.2
1.2
1..0
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
1.9
1.8
1.8
3.8
3.7
3.6
2.2
0.9
0.6
2.0
2.0
1.7
1.9
2.0
1.7
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area flZ
10.2
9.0
8.8
39.7
35.7
38.3
13.2
6.5
4.7
19.6
18.0
15.2
14.6
13.8
11.3
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
7.8
8.0
8.3
13.9
16.2
20.6
6.7
13.2
23.9
9.6
10.1
11.0
9.5
9.6
11.1
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
2.1
2.1
1.8
>2.2
>2.2
1.4
1.6
1.6
1.5
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Cross Section 46 (Run)
Cross Section 47 (Pool)
Cross Section 48 (Riffle)
Cross Section 49 (Pool)
Cross Section 50 (Pool)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation'
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Base
MYl
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+ Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5
MY+ Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
49.3
49.3
49.3
48.2
48.2
48.2
41.0
41.0
41.0
40.5
40.5
40.5
40.0
40.0
40.0
Bankfull Width (fl)
8.4
7.2
7.8
6.7
6.3
8.6
15.1
15.0
15.1
16.6
17.0
19.3
18.5
17.7
21.6
Floodprone Width (ft)
42.5
42.5
42.5
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.9
0.8
0.5
1.7
1.7
1.6
1.7
1.7
1.4
1.8
1.7
1.5
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
1.5
1.2
1.1
1.8
1.5
0.9
2.6
2.7
2.6
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.2
3.1
3.2
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area LL
6.3
5.1
4.7
6.0
5.3
4.2
25.3
24.8
24.0
27.4
28.5
27.3
32.9
30.7
31.7
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
11.1
10.2
12.9
7.3
7.4
17.7
9.0
9.1
9.5
10.0
10.2
13.7
10.4
10.2
14.7
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
L0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Cross Section 51 (Riffle)
Cross Section 52 (Run)
Cross Section 53 (Pool)
Cross Section 54 (Pool)
Cross Section 55 (Riffle)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation'
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+ Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5
MY+ Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
40.0
40.0
40.0
39.8
39.8
39.8
39.7
39.7
39.7
38.8
38.8
38.8
38.0
38.0
38.0
Bankfull Width (ft)
16.2
16.1
16.3
17.7
17.8
19.3
17.4
17.9
18.1
15.7
16.7
20.3
9.7
14.8
20.8
Floodprone Width (ft)
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.5
1.4
1.5
1.8
2.1
2.7
1.9
2.1
2.2
1.7
2.0
2.2
1.4
2.2
2.1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
2.4
2.3
2.6
3.1
4.5
5.9
3.5
3.8
4.1
2.9
4.0
4.4
2.2
3.0
3.3
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftZ
24.7
23.2
23.7
31.8
36.9
52.3
33.8
37.1
39.0
26.1
32.7
45.2
13.6
33.3
44.4
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
10.6
11.2
11.2
9.9
8.6
7.1
9.0
8.6
8.4
9.5
8.5
9.1
7.0
6.6
9.7
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
1
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
1
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Cross Section 56 (Run)
Cross Section 57 (Run)
Cross Section 58 (Run)
Cross Section 59 (Run)
Based on fixed baseline bankfull elevation
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+ Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4
MY5
MY+ Base
MYI
MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
37.3
37.3
37.3
35.7
35.7
35.7
41.0
41.0
41.0
39.5
39.5
39.5
Bankfull Width (ft)
17.6
17.0
17.5
17.0
16.8
16.0
14.2
13.7
16.9
13.5
12.5
11.9
Floodprone Width (ft)
50.0
50.0
50.0
37.5
37.5
37.5
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
2.6
2.2
2.2
1.8
1.3
1.4
2.4
2.3
1.9
1.1
0.9
0.9
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
3.7
3.2
3.3
2.6
2.1
2.1
3.4
3.3
3.3
2.2
1.8
1.8
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftZ
45.3
38.0
37.9
30.7
22.4
22.7
33.9
31.7
32.3
15.2
11.3
11.1
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
6.9
7.6
8.0
9.4
12.5
11.2
6.0
6.0
8.9
11.9
13.8
12.7
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
2.2
2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
F>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1 = Widths and depths for annual measurements will be based on the baseline bankfull datum regardless of dimensional/depositional development. Input the elevation used as the datum, which should be consistent and based on the baseline datum established. If the performer has inherited the project and cannot acquire the datum used
for prior years this must be discussed with EEP. If this cannot be resolved in time for a given years report submission a footnote in this should be included that states: "It is uncertain if the monitoring datum has been consistent over the monitoring history, which may influence calculated values.
Additional data from a prior performer is being acquired to provide confirmation. Values will be recalculated in a future submission based on a consistent datum if determined to be necessary."

Table 12.Muddy Run II Bank Pin Array Summary_MY2
Year 1 Year 2 Year 1 Year 2
Cross Section Location Position Readinq Reading Cross Section Location Position Readinq Readinq
XS 2 @ Sta. 1+35
Reach 1
US
To
0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
DS
Top 0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
XS 3 @ Sta. 3+45
Reach 1
US
To
0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
DS
Top 0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
XS 8 @ Sta. 8+55
Reach 2
US
To
0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
DS
To 0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
XS 10 @ Sta. 11+70
Reach 2
US
To
0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
DS
To 0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
XS 12 @ Sta. 16+40
Reach 2
US
To
0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
DS
Top 0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
XS 18 @ Sta. 8+40
Reach 3A
US
To
0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
DS
Top 0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
XS 21 @ Sta. 11+20
Reach 3A
US
To
0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
DS
Top 0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
XS 25 @ Sta. 19+80
Reach 3A
US
To
0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
DS
Top 0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
XS 26 @ Sta. 25+90
Reach 3A
US
To
0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
DS
Top 0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
XS 28 @ Sta. 31+40
Reach 3A
US
To
0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
DS
Top 0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
Notes:
US - Upstream from cross section
DS - Downstream from cross section
XS 30 @ Sta.
35+60 Reach 3A
US
To
0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
DS
Top 0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
XS 33 @ Sta.
40+90 Reach 3B
US
To
0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
DS
Top 0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
XS 36 @ Sta.
48+90 Reach 3B
US
To
0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
DS
Top 0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
XS 38 @ Sta.
52+10 Reach 3B
US
To
0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
DS
To 0.0
0.0
Bottom 1 0.0
0.0
XS 40 @ Sta.
54+15 Reach 3B
US
To
0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
DS
Top 0.2
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
XS 47 @ Sta. 1+90
Reach 4
US
To
0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
DS
Top 0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
XS 49 @ Sta. 2+40
Reach 5A
US
To
0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
DS
Top 0.6
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
XS 50 @ Sta. 8+20
Reach 5A
US
To
0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
DS
Top 0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
XS 53 @ Sta.
13+90 Reach 5A
US
To
0.0
0.6 ft
Bottom 0.0
0.0
DS
To 0.0
0.0
Bottom 0.0
0.0
XS 54 @ Sta.
17+35 Reach 5A
US
To
0.0
missing
Bottom 0.0
missin
DS
To 0.0
missin
Bottom 1.0
missing

y
�• H
ik1 5 IS sr ...
T
Upstream
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 1 Cross Section 1 - Riffle
58
57
56
c
° 55
CO
°
LU 54
53
52
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 1 Cross Section 2 - Pool
57
56 —
55
C
0
is —
� 54
w
53
52
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

56
55
54
0
.7�
m 53
LU
52
51
Upstream
Muddy Run II Reach 1 Cross Section 3 - Pool
Downstream
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
50

Upstream
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 1 Cross Section 4 - Riffle
56
55.5
55
54.5
° 54
°
53.5
w
53
52.5
52
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

62
61
60
59
0
58
w
57
56
55
0
Upstream
Muddy Run II Reach 2 Cross Section 5 - Run
Downstream
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
50

E
C:
0
a�
LU
60
59
58
57
56
55
54
Upstream
Muddy Run II Reach 2 Cross Section 6 - Run
Downstream
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

58
57.5
57
56.5
° 56
°
w 55.5
55
54.5
54
0
Upstream
Muddy Run II Reach 2 Cross Section 7 - Riffle
Downstream
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
50

Upstream
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 2 Cross Section 8 - Pool
58
57.5
57
—
56.5
56
° 55.5
° 55
w
54.5
54
53.5
53
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Y
Upstream
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 2 Cross Section 9 - Riffle
58
•fir
57.5
�;. X46
57
56.5
56
° 55.5
° 55
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 2 Cross Section 9 - Riffle
58
57.5
57
56.5
56
° 55.5
° 55
w
54.5
54
53.5
53
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

C
0
w
58
57
56
55
54
53
52
Upstream
Muddy Run II Reach 2 Cross Section 10 - Pool
Downstream
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
'4
Y
C
0
w
58
57
56
55
54
53
52
Upstream
Muddy Run II Reach 2 Cross Section 10 - Pool
Downstream
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 2 Cross Section 11 - Riffle
56
55
c
° 54
a�
LU
53
52
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 2 Cross Section 12 - Pool
58
57
56
-
55
c
0
> 54
0
W
53
52
-
51
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 2 Cross Section 13 - Riffle
56
55.5
55
— —
54.5
54
° 53.5
53
w
52.5
52
51.5
51
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

56
55
54
c
° 53
W 52
51
50
0
Upstream
Muddy Run II Reach 2 Cross Section 14 - Pool
Downstream
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
50

Upstream
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3A Cross Section 15 - Run
56
55.5
55
—
54.5
c
°
54
53.5
-
W
53
52.5
52
51.5
51
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3A Cross Section 16 - Run
55
54.5
—
54
53.5
53
c
° 52.5
� 52
w
51.5
51
50.5
50
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream
A
1 14 a
� � n
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3A Cross Section 17 - Run
54
53
52
c
° 51
a�
LU 50
49
48
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream
A t'
.. ,
Ako T'7
y4 �.
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3A Cross Section 18 - Pool
54
53
52
c
° 51
ami
LU 50
49
\NZN
48
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3A Cross Section 19 - Run
54
53
52
c
° 51
>
a�
LU 50
49
-
48
� �O04
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3A Cross Section 20 - Riffle
54
53
r
1 V
--per
52
c
° 51
5
ami
LU
f
50
49
48
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3A Cross Section 20 - Riffle
54
53
52
c
° 51
ami
LU
50
49
48
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3A Cross Section 21 - Pool
53
52.5
52
51.5
51
° 50.5
° 50 -
w
49.5
49
48.5
48
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

i
Upstream
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3A Cross Section 22 - Pool
52
51
50
c
° 49
a�
LU 48
47
46
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

f� M Ko -
4.
W q
w,e��M ,t p14••_ ice-'
%; f
p &. �FAl
E
�
r b
' d FeY
52
51
50
0
0
.7�
m 49
LU
48
47
0
Upstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3A Cross Section 23 - Riffle
Downstream
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
50

Upstream Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3A Cross Section 24 - Riffle
53
52
51
50
c
0
> 49
0
W
48
47 -
46
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

c
0
0
LU
53
52
51
50
49
48
47
46
45
Upstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3A Cross Section 25 - Pool
Downstream
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40. 45
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
50

Upstream
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3A Cross Section 26 - Pool
53
52
51
50
c
0 49
>
48
w ..
47
46
45
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40. 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

53
52
51
c
50
0
> 49
0
W
48
47
46
Upstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3A Cross Section 27 - Run
Downstream
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
50

Upstream
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3A Cross Section 28 - Pool
53
52
- -
51
50
49
0
48
0
W 47
46
45 -
44
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3A Cross Section 29 - Run
52
51
50
49
0
> 48
w
47
46 -
45
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3A Cross Section 30 - Pool
52
51
50
49
c
° 48
>
47
W ..
46
45
44
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40. 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

52
51
50
0
49
0
48
LU
47
46
45
Upstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3A Cross Section 31 - Run
Downstream
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

52
51
50
49
48
47
46
45
44
Upstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3A Cross Section 32 - Run
Downstream
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
50

52
51
50
49
48
47
46
45
44
Upstream
"4
t
Muddy Run II Reach 3A Cross Section 33 - Pool
Downstream
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
50

Upstream
� t���l'.• SCIS '� i'<`x\..
d �
J y-
Y
r -
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3A Cross Section 34 - Pool
52
51
50
49
48
C:
0
47
t
W 46
45
44
43
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

51
50
49
48
47
46
45
44
Upstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3A Cross Section 35 - Run
Downstream
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
50

Upstream Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 313 Cross Section 36 - Pool
50
49
48
c
47
0
> 46
0
W
45
44
43
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

49
48
47
C
0
LU
46
45
44
0
Upstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3B Cross Section 37 - Run
Downstream
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

49
48
47
46
45
44
43
42
Upstream
Muddy Run II Reach 313 Cross Section 38 - Pool
Downstream
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
50

Upstream Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3B Cross Section 39 - Run
48
47
46
c
0
ami 45 AV
LU
44
43
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 313 Cross Section 40 - Pool
48
47
46
45
C O
W 44
43
42
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3B Cross Section 41 - Run
48
47
46
° 45
"Ilk
00c
ami
LU 44
)%mot
43
42
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3C Cross Section 42 - Run
49
48
47
46
45
c
° 44
43
W
42
41
40
39
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3C Cross Section 43 - Run
46
45
44
-1
43
° 42
41
w
40
39
38
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3C Cross Section 44 - Run
48
47
46
45
-
44
c
° 43
42
W
41
40
39
38
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

47
46
45
44
° 43
w 42
41
40
39
Upstream
Muddy Run II Reach 3C Cross Section 45 - Run
Downstream
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 4 Cross Section 46 - Run
53
52
51
° 50
LU 49
48
47
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 4 Cross Section 47 - Pool
52
51
50
c
° 49
>
a)
LU 48
47
46
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

0
m
W
45
44
43
42
41
40
39
38
Upstream
Muddy Run II Reach 5A Cross Section 48 - Riffle
Downstream
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

C:
0
0
W
45
44
43
42
41
40
39
38
37
36
Upstream
Muddy Run II Reach 5A Cross Section 49 - Pool
Downstream
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
50

Upstream Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 5A Cross Section 50 - Pool
45
44
43
42
41 —
c
° 40
w
39
38
37 - 7
36
35
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

C:
0
0
w
45
44
43
42
41
40
39
38
37
36
Upstream
Muddy Run II Reach 5A Cross Section 51 - Riffle
Downstream
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
50

45
43
41
c
° 39
W 37
35
33
0
Upstream
Muddy Run II Reach 5A Cross Section 52 - Run
Downstream
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
50

Upstream
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 5A Cross Section 53 - Pool
45
44
43
42
41
c
° 40
>
a)
39
w
38
37
36
35
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Upstream
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 5A Cross Section 54 - Pool
43
42
41
40
39
0
38
W 37
36
35
34
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

Mimi 1W.7w;r1i Ir
i MF
loop
T f
-ow

Upstream
..................... :
Downstream
Muddy Run II Reach 5B Cross Section 56 - Run
43
42
41
40
39
C:
° 38
37
w
36
35
34
33
-
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area

41
40
39
38
37
36
35
34
33
32
Upstream
Muddy Run II Reach 5B Cross Section 57 - Run
Downstream
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Distance (ft)
Baseline Year 1 Year 2 Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
50

_ � i 4it
' �i.►fit '� , �' rf �� ' 1 �4 ��' }��'
[r i' � � � ^ � ii't � e
.f
.�;. '��
�, yy
4 i ,q
"'� � `CQi=�L
•4f � i '
�i
1
p�
�� n
��
� � fl
�
lTi�<�� �.4
l
� I�,r�i� �,
i� � 6
�' y�yg
�;t+ . ?41P
1 !
i++ r:
� 111
i' � � + �
s
��
' Ct
'
� i.
� ��.}.
�. g

ISO
i rry'
5

Appendix E
Hydrology Data
Table 13. Documentation of Geomorphologically Significant Flow Events
Table 14. Rainfall Summary
Table 15. Wetland Hydrology Criteria Attainment
Chart 1. 2014 Precipitation Data for Muddy Run II Site
Chart 2. 2014 Groundwater Monitoring Gauge Hydrographs
Crest Gauge Verification Photos

Table 13. Documentation of Geomorphically Significant Flow Events
Crest Gauge
Stream Reach
Number of
Bankfull
Events
Date of Highest
Bankfull Event
Maximum
Bankfull Height
(ft.)
Photo
Number
Crest Gauge 1
Reach 2
1
10/2/2015
0.6
1
Crest Gauge 2
Reach 3A
19
11/19/2015
2
2
Crest Gauge 3
Reach 3B
4
2/26/2015
0.20
3
Crest Gauge 4
Reach 5B
1
2/26/2015
0.4
4
Table 14. Rainfall Summary
Month
Average
Normal Limits
Wallace
Station
Precipitation
On -Site Auto
Rain Gauge
30
Percent
70 Percent
January
4.33
3.32
5.03
4.19
---
February
3.23
2.14
3.87
5.57
---
March
4.50
3.23
5.32
4.11
---
April
3.16
1.70
3.85
3.23
4.69
May
3.68
2.69
4.34
2.53
5.54
June
4.49
3.11
5.34
4.99
9.35
July
6.06
4.16
7.22
3.52
4.13
August
5.40
3.12
6.56
5.91
5.64
September
5.00
2.04
6.07
4.56
2.77
October
3.21
1.62
3.92
8.15
---
November
2.89
1.83
3.49
9.47
---
December
3.24
2.14
3.88
6.63
---
Total
49.19
31.10
58.89
62.86
32.12

Table 15. Wetland Hydrology Criteria Attainment
2015 Max Hydroperiod (Growing Season 17 -Mar through 14 -Nov, 242 days)
Well Data for 17 -Mar through 14 -November
Success Criterion 9% = 22 Consecutive Days
Gauge
Consecutive
Cumulative
Occurrences
Days
Percent of
growing
Season
Days
Percent of
growing
Season
AW1
63
26
149
62
10
AW2
41
17
134
55
11
AW3
38
16
137
57
16
AW4
77
32
170
70
5
AW5
38
16
120
50
17
AW6
65
27
161
67
10
AW7
72
30
157
65
12
RAW1
49
20
105
43
9
RAW2
19
8
56
23
10
RAW3
41
17
96
40
9
Chart 1. 2015 Precipitation Data for Muddy Run II Site
2015 Precipitation Data for Muddy Run II Site
0.00
TOO
5-00--
❑
.40
4.00
4.00-1
340
• L
2.04
L y�
_
7.00
0:00
J F
M A M J J A 5 O N D
Months
� Wallet¢ Oa7p Rainfall
� G wnq 5eeson On-site Auto Ran Gauge mer Wallace Mo„ Ihy Randal ____._ 30h 70th Percentile

Chart 2. Muddv Run II Groundwater Monitoring Gauge Hvdroi!ranhs

iW.11.ne DAY P -T.11 —MRII RFFA4."1 —MRII RF1' AW? —MRII RFFAW3
10.0
9.0
8.0
7.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
2015 Muddy Run II Groundwater Gauges
10
Growing rt oson
0
Y `l
U
C
.20
1
C
O
R)
W
_30
I
'�-
W
�
m
R.
c
-a0
7
0
c�
_50
-60
—
-70
J
F M A M J J A 5 0
N D
Months
iW.11.ne DAY P -T.11 —MRII RFFA4."1 —MRII RF1' AW? —MRII RFFAW3
10.0
9.0
8.0
7.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0

Appendix E — Crest Gauge Verification Photos
Photo 1. Crest Gauge 1 (Reach 2 - 0.6 ft. — 2/10/16)
Photo 2. Crest Gauge 2 (Reach 3A — 2.0 ft. — 2/10/16)
Photo 3. Crest Gauge 3 (Reach 3B — Wrack Lines. — Photo 4. Crest Gauge 4 (Reach 5A - 0.08 ft. —
2/10/2016) 10/09/2015)

Appendix F
Adaptive Management Plan
Muddy Run II Adaptive Management Plan For Reach 3B and 5A

\ •\\\\.\\.\ rrll / ��ilii �„
301 IJ
301 T -3C1 3C1� —40—\ 101 IIIn��
-- _
\\ i ( \ ` \\\ 3D1•-3D1—��='3D1 1111 I I / 11 I I
-,41----Jl�30.1 301
r- \��\3D1� tr / 1111111 \ / 1111 1 /O
1 � \ \ � �` `�. -�� I . �� � 3.71 \ 1 1111 I I I II
LL / /'1 m cP.�;: 3 --------- - 1 - /' — 30l I '�� 11 11 \ �� fill 1 / O
\ I 1 \��— .9_��__--- '� / �` 371— /—�� II�Iit'll,
_-----� -- --- / �/ i I 30 / 1I II1 ✓ I1 I I
I - --- ------------ --------- — — � - ___--------- — — — -- of O \ I - 1 I I I I I , I 1 1 I
/ \ \ --_--- ---------------== '-----------_____ - - - — — _ — — — — — i
-------------------- -------------- I 10 O /- ---'"/ 1\I\ 111 1 /.
\ / REMOVE EXISTING --------=__ o I \X \:� = I \ /
----- \\ I — --
---
/
— — --���� p \\\� I I d — — — — — — I , xs \ , \ �/ /r
\
\\ �— / N STRUCTURE \0O / ��:�\ `\\\\ I —I r — —�— — — \ O \\ ''�-=�-,� 7+17.19 ____--- -
40
4+100 / \ \ / ,- " ,--------------
- / \ -------------------
_r_____/--
------ ---
---------------
ff
1b 4
\0 39
BEGIN GRADING
AT APPROX. STA 0+50—
LLJ
1
LCE ' n0 -L
REMOVE EXISTING
-A REMOVE EXISTING // STRUCTURE - \\ 40 �
\ STRUCTURE
w n/
- J m 41 -------
REMOVE EXISTING
ICC- _--------- \
- STRUCTURES
\tCf _ --- CE —LCE --_—LCE LC —LCE
\ /
LCE LCE LCE LCE LCE LCE LCE —�� LCE � LCE
\\ REMOVE EXISTING
STRUCTURES
1.4'
"rw
CL
TYPICAL SHALLOW CROSS SECTION
48 + I I I I I I
1EI
12.0'
q -
TYPICAL POOL CROSS SECTION
STRAIGHT REACH
12.0'
7.0' 2.5'
BANKFULL STAGE
2.1'
CL
TYPICAL RIGHT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
EXISTING GROUND ALONG PROPOSED ALIGNMENT
(AS -BUILT SURVEY DATED AUGUST 2014)
12.0'
CL
TYPICAL LEFT MEANDER CROSS SECTION
NOTES:
1. THE PROPOSED CHANNEL ALIGNMENT SHALL FOLLOW THE EXISTING ALIGNMENT (THALWEG) TO
THE EXTENT FEASIBLE.
2. RE -SHAPE ALL EXISTING BANKS (APPROXIMATELY FROM STA 0+50 TO 6+75) USING THE TYPICAL
SECTIONS THIS SHEET AS A TEMPLATE. CONTRACTOR IS NOT REQUIRED TO COMPLETELY
RECONSTRUCT THE CHANNEL, BUT IS TO RE -GRADE ALL BANKS TO STABILIZE ERODING AREAS.
CONTRACTOR SHALL TIE-IN TO EXISTING CHANNEL BANKS AND PROFILE WHERE POSSIBLE.
3. CONTRACTOR SHALL GRADE IN A FLOODPLAIN BENCH ALONG BOTH SIDES OF THE CHANNEL.
BENCH WIDTHS SHALL MAINTAIN A MINIMUM WIDTH OF 10' ALONG EACH BANK, WITH A CUMULATIVE
BENCH WIDTH > 25'. TIE BENCHES INTO EXISTING GROUND AT A MAX SLOPE OF 2.5H TO 1V.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL APPLY A 3" TO 4" LAYER OF TOPSOIL AND/OR FERTILIZER TO ALL AREAS
THAT ARE RE -GRADED AND STABILIZED. CONTRACTOR SHALL SEED AND MULCH DISTURBED
AREAS AFTER TOPSOIL/FERTILIZER HAS BEEN PLACED.
5. INSTALL COIR MATTING ALONG ALL RE -GRADED CHANNEL BANKS.
6. LOCATION AND ELEVATION OF PROPOSED STRUCTURES ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTRACTOR MAY
ADJUST LOCATION AND ELEVATION WITH APPROVAL FROM ENGINEER.
7. CONTRACTOR SHALL ADJUST THE PROFILE IN AREAS WHERE LOG STRUCTURES ARE PROPOSED
OR WHERE EXISTING STRUCTURES ARE TO BE REMOVED. ALL OTHER ADJUSTMENTS TO THE
PROFILE ARE TO BE MADE PER THE DIRECTION OF ENGINEER. AN OVERALL CHANNEL SLOPE OF
0.15% TO 0.20% SHOULD BE MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT THE REACH.
8. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, EXCESS FILL MATERIAL GENERATED FROM CHANNEL EXCAVATION
AND STABILIZATION SHALL BE PLACED WITHIN THE EASEMENT AT AN ELEVATION THAT PROVIDES
POSITIVE DRAINAGE TOWARDS THE PROPOSED CHANNEL.
9. IN -STREAM STRUCTURES PROPOSED ALONG THE OUTSIDE OF MEANDER BENDS (BRUSH TOES,
ROOT WADS, AND LOG TOES) MAY BE USED INTERCHANGEABLY THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT PER
APPROVAL FROM DESIGNER.
10. IN AREAS WHERE THE CHANNEL NEEDS TO BE NARROWED AND CHANNEL BANKS ARE
RECONSTRUCTED IN FILL, INSTALL COIR LOGS ALONG THE TOE PER DETAIL (SEE DWG 4).
11. SEE DWG 2 FOR EXISTING GRADE VERSUS APPROXIMATE PROPOSED GRADE CROSS-SECTIONS.
12. CONTRACTOR SHALL FOLLOW THE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLANS AS PROVIDED IN THE
MUDDY RUN ii MITIGATION PROJECT FINAL DESIGN PLANS DATED NOVEMBER 2013.
40 -
I LOG SILL
L
STA 0+79 OG SILL
I STA 2+67 LOG SILL
STA 4+07 LOG SILL LOG SILL LOG SILL
1\
STA 4+96
STA 6+19 / --��"�,, -
STA 6+50
PROPOSED CHANNEL SLOPE
--`- -0.20% /`--, \ �'- ,PROPOSED CHANNEL SLOPE i `\
\I/� `\-/1 \ / J,' `-----
' \ -_/ \ --------- -0.20%
'C%
28 -
APPROX. GROUND ALONG PROPOSED ALIGNMENT
(FIELD CONDITIONS IN AUGUST 2015)
SCALE: HOR 1 "=30'; VERT 1 "=3'
00
50
CO00
O
Lf)
�
Lf)
Cfl
00
720 Corporate Drive
(fl
fl
(V
co
�
LCE
Lr)
�
(fl
Lf)
(fl
fl
�?
00
lz�
co
O
co
00
FULL SCALE: 1 "=30
0)
M
1-
N
1
2" = FULL SCALE
00
O
0')00
M
Cfl
f�
co
CO
M
Il-
co
co
M
Cfl
co
Cfl
co
Cfl
co
LO
M
Cfl
co
00
co
(o
co
(0
M
Cfl
co
CO
co
(o
co
M
CD
M
CD
co
M
co
(.0
M
00
M
r-
co
LSA
co
LO
M
co
co
LC)
co
It
co
M
co
M
M
0+00
IGHT n. W
1+00
2+00
3+00
4+00
5+00
6+00
w"14
=EI
=[1]
W1
W36
m+z:
7+00 7+17.19
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR
50
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR
46
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
Raleigh, NC 27607
LIMITS
LCE
BRUSH TOE
EXISTING LOG STRUCTURE
LOG SILL
DOUBLE LOG DROP
LOG STRUCTURE
(PROFILE)
DOUBLE LOG DROP
(PROFILE)
INC- ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRnDLJCTInN nR L1SE nF THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT- ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS DnCLJMENT. IN WHOLE nR IN PART- WITHn1JT WRITTEN CONSENT nF W -K- DICKSnN & Cn-- INC-- IS PRnHIRITED- ONLY COPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL nF THIS DOCLIMFNT- MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL RE CONSIDERED TO RE VALID- TRLJE
FILE NAME: I:\Projects\EBX\2011017600RA\CADD\Adaptive Management\2012009000 ADAPTIVE MGMNT.dwg -
vw
DICKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(fl 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
NC. LICENSE NO. F-0374
FULL SCALE: 1 "=30
0 30
60
2" = FULL SCALE
1 " =HALF SCALE
I`
N
O
N
J
11
N
Z
O
i-
I—
U)
Z
0
Cr
0
I—
O
Z
O
H
z
o_
0
0
W
ai
W
w
CIo
w LL
o
Q
z
o z
O (n
Y W
J
I Q W W
�
U
J
J
Cn
z
O
Z In
LU O o
LLl
-j
LU < U
z
w
Q F O _
ZLU z�
J 0 -1
Q > oaC
LU Z w
m r
> Q Lu r
Z F-
Z
a0oU
() 11 Lu w
w
J
Q Lu
O
_ U7
CD
Z = Q z
z
Z U I- o
0
SOU � OvLu
LL
LO
LLI w Lu
--)
J
Cl)
G = N
z N M
�
0)
Cl
U Z cc CWW
W W w J
z OC Z
O Q o0 m
o O
a ¢IL2
PROJ. DATE: OCT 2015
Q.C.: SS
Q.C. DATE: FEB 2016
DRAWING NUMBER:
PROJ. NO.:
20150095.00. RA

COPYRIGHT ©, W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC., IS PROHIBITED. ONLY COPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BE VALID, TRUE COPIES.
FILE NAME: I:\Projects\EBX\2011017600RA\CADD\Adaptive Management\2012009000 ADAPTIVE MGMNT.dwg -
vw
DICKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(fl 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
5+50
NC. LICENSE NO. F-0374
6+00
0 10
20
2" FULL SCALE
1 " = HALF SCALE
I`
ui
48
N
O
48 48
J
11
N
48
z
6+50
44
44 44
44
U)
44
z
0
44
40 -----
Cr
— — — — — — — 40 40 ------
---------
40
40
°
z
40
z
0
0
W
vU,
w
O
LL
o
Q
z
o z
O U)
36
Y W
J
w
Q w w
36 36
/
36
36
�.
36
32
LU O o
N
vJJ
zO
32 32
0 z Z Z
w
32
32
W co >
w o
Lu
32
28
a� M
ow
Q
28 28
Q w
o
28
c5
0
28
w
Q Q
28
-40
-30
-20 -10 0
10
20 30 40 -40 -30
-20 -10 0 10
20 30
40
O Q o0 m
o O
-40
-30 -20 -10 0
10 20 30
Q.C.: SS
40
Q.C. DATE: FEB 2016
4+00
DRAWING NUMBER:
4+50
2
PROJ. NO.:
20150095.00. RA
48
48 48
48
5+00
44
44 44
44
44
44
40 --------
--
---- --- 40 40 --
---- -- 40
40
40
—
---
36
36 36
36
36
36
32
32 32
32
32
32
28
28 28
28
28
28
-40
-30
-20 -10 0
10
20 30 40 -40 -30 -20
-10 0 10
20 30 40
-40
-30 -20 -10 0
10 20 30
40
2+50
3+00
3+50
48
48 48
48
48
48
44
44 44
44
44
44
40 --------
---
--- 40 40_____ ----
_���.-
-------
40
40 --------
___-- ------
40
—
--_�
---
36
36 36.�
36
36
/
36
32
32 32
32
32
32
28
28 28
28
28
28
-40
-30
-20 -10 0
10
20 30 40 -40 -30
-20 -10 0 10
20 30
40
-40
-30 -20 -10 0
10 20 30
40
1+00
1+50
2+00
48
48 48
48
48
48
44
44 44
44
44
44
40-----
--
------ 40 40 — — — — — — — — —
— —-- ��---------
40
40
---------
----
-- ��
40
36
36 36
36
36
S __
36
32
32 32
32
32
32
28
28 28
28
28
28
-40
-30
-20 -10 0
10
20 30 40 -40 -30 -20
-10 0 10
20 30 40
-40
-30 -20 -10 0
10 20 30
40
EXISTING GROUND (APPROXIMATE)
NOTES:
—�'i
(FIELD CONDITIONS IN AUGUST 2015)
THE PROPOSED GRADE SHOWN IN THE CROSS-SECTIONS IS APPROXIMATE.
THE EXACT LOCATION AND AMOUNT OF GRADING (CUT/FILL) MAY BE ADJUSTED
EXISTING GROUND
TO FIT FIELD CONDITIONS. CONTRACTOR SHALL TIE-IN TO THE EXISTING
(AS -BUILT SURVEY DATED AUGUST 2014)
CHANNEL BED WHERE FEASIBLE.
PROPOSED GRADE (APPROXIMATE)
COPYRIGHT ©, W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC., IS PROHIBITED. ONLY COPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BE VALID, TRUE COPIES.
FILE NAME: I:\Projects\EBX\2011017600RA\CADD\Adaptive Management\2012009000 ADAPTIVE MGMNT.dwg -
vw
DICKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(fl 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
NC. LICENSE NO. F-0374
FULL SCALE: 1 "=10
0 10
20
2" FULL SCALE
1 " = HALF SCALE
I`
ui
N
O
N
J
11
N
z
O
U)
z
0
Cr
0
°
z
o
z
0
0
W
vU,
w
O
LL
o
Q
z
o z
O U)
Y W
J
w
Q w w
U
J
J
C
Z
O
H �
Z J in
LU O o
N
vJJ
zO
0 z Z Z
w
Z LU z C3
U O w
w <
W co >
w o
Lu
Cb
z C/)c) LU
a� M
ow
Q
5-
Q w
o
-� L ��1_11_-
Cl)
c5
0
U
Z
w
Q Q
U W O L
C) M U LL
co
ctii ui CC w
G J = _-)
N
C I—
z N
0')
F__
UG \ U
Z cc CWw
W W w J
z OC Z
O Q o0 m
o O
a ¢IL2
PROJ. DATE: OCT 2015
Q.C.: SS
Q.C. DATE: FEB 2016
DRAWING NUMBER:
2
PROJ. NO.:
20150095.00. RA

Z -1
i
it ���� /
v A
III' / (p
IP ; e
I' l
/
-LCE I / 1 ��'f,M/ /
-LCE I ,I I;"/ 1
- LCE I/ -4;t CY) /�
-LCE I/ �� /
- LCE i/ D�
LCE
/
iljlil�/
4.
4co
56+00 t ' it I I
A
i i iii I i n
\ Ilii // ll�il lilt
111 111111111 I I I I 1 11 1 jl 111
III ItIIIII n
\\ 1 �\ l/�Ijlll 11 11'111 II111 �1 �'I
11111 It/ IIVI'I
ill 11j1 II 1 1
lllj
1 l ;I////
; 1 11 1'I
liiii /11
Illi' 1
'-45
\ 1111 Ill �
I I I I III / f`
30-1
7 I 1 1 /II /
ffil I I
u
I
It
r
L
r ral
rL
TYPICAL CROSS SECTION
roahTc1
ALI
b7:10:1:1910W
FILE NAME: 1:\Projects\EBX\2011017600RA\CADD\Adaptive Management\2012009000 ADAPTIVE MGMNT.dwg -
104RVA:rel 0:991:11101
Myj
IR
11.110
142
NOTES:
1. THE PROPOSED CHANNEL ALIGNMENT SHALL FOLLOW THE EXISTING ALIGNMENT
(THALWEG) TO THE EXTENT FEASIBLE.
2. REMOVE EXISTING LOG STRUCTURES FROM APPROXIMATE STA 57+25 TO STA 57+91. IF
FEASIBLE, SALVAGE LOGS TO USE IN THE INSTALLATION OF PROPOSED STRUCTURES.
3. RE -SHAPE ALL EXISTING BANKS (APPROXIMATELY FROM STA 57+25 TO 57+91) USING
THE TYPICAL SECTION THIS SHEET AS A TEMPLATE. CONTRACTOR IS NOT REQUIRED
TO COMPLETELY RECONSTRUCT THE CHANNEL, BUT IS TO RE -GRADE ALL BANKS TO
STABILIZE ERODING AREAS. CONTRACTOR SHALL TIE-IN TO EXISTING CHANNEL BANKS
AND PROFILE WHERE POSSIBLE.
4. INSTALL COIR MATTING ALONG ALL RE -GRADED CHANNEL BANKS.
5. LOCATION AND ELEVATION OF PROPOSED DOUBLE LOG DROP STRUCTURES ARE
APPROXIMATE. CONTRACTOR MAY ADJUST LOCATION AND ELEVATION WITH APPROVAL
FROM ENGINEER.
6. CONTRACTOR SHALL ADJUST THE PROFILE IN AREAS WHERE LOG STRUCTURES ARE
PROPOSED OR WHERE EXISTING STRUCTURES ARE TO BE REMOVED. ALL OTHER
ADJUSTMENTS TO THE PROFILE ARE TO BE MADE PER THE DIRECTION OF ENGINEER.
7. CONTRACTOR SHALL FOLLOW THE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLANS AS
PROVIDED IN THE MUDDY RUN II MITIGATION PROJECT FINAL DESIGN PLANS DATED
NOVEMBER 2013.
LEGEND
EXISTING CONTOUR MAJOR 50
EXISTING CONTOUR MINOR 46
PROPOSED TOP OF BANK
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
LIMITS
BRUSH TOE
EXISTING LOG STRUCTURE
LOG SILL
DOUBLE LOG DROP
LOG STRUCTURE
(PROFILE)
DOUBLE LOG DROP
(PROFILE)
ayMIui.9wilty:r90MCI OF111111910F.`1111a:1%oil :lweI0bin r:lna
LCE
vw
DICKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(fl 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
NC. LICENSE NO. F-0374
FULL SCALE: 1 "=30
0 30
60
2" = FULL SCALE
1 " = HALF SCALE
I`
w
N
O
N
J
11
N
Z
O
i -
U)
Z
O
Cr
O
LLI—
O
Z
O
H
z
a.
0
0
W
U)
LU
w
CIO
w LL
o
Q
z
o z
O U)
Y W
J
Q W w
Er
U
J
J
C
z
O
H �
Z In
LU O q
LU a' (0
JLL
0 z z z z z
LU
Q F O _
Z LU M z
J �LU
a
Q zoC
LU Z w
m r
Q w r
ZZ M tz
a0
oU
w
J
<_j
MM W
0
W 0
M 1-
Z
CD
C/)= Q z
Z) z0
�0
o
U Li oLu
LID
oOEr
LL
tii W Iz w
co
c
G J = --:)
C
Cl)
D
z C I- N
0')
UG \ C/
Z cc C/)w
LU w w w J
z OC Z
m
o O
a ¢IL2
PROJ. DATE: OCT 2015
Q.C.: SS
Q.C. DATE: FEB 2016
DRAWING NUMBER:
3
PROJ. NO.:
20150095.00. RA

O� O�
FLOOD
ROOT WAD
�
� ROOT WAD
FOOTER LOG
PLAN VIEW -TRENCHING METHOD PLAN VIEW -DRIVE POINT METHOD
DRIVE POINT METHOD: TRENCHING METHOD:
SHARPEN THE END OF THE LOG WITH A IF THE ROOT WAD CANNOT BE DRIVEN INTO THE
CHAINSAW BEFORE "DRIVING" IT INTO THE BANK. BANK OR THE BANK NEEDS TO BE
ORIENT ROOT WADS UPSTREAM SO THAT THE RECONSTRUCTED, THE TRENCHING METHOD
STREAM FLOW MEETS THE ROOT WAD ATA SHOULD BE USED. THIS METHOD REQUIRES THAT
90—DEGREE ANGLE, DEFLECTING THE WATER AWAY A TRENCH BE EXCAVATED FOR THE LOG PORTION
FROM THE BANK. A TRANSPLANT SHOULD BE OF THE ROOT WAD. IN THIS CASE, A FOOTER LOG
PLACED ON THE DOWNSTREAM SIDE OF THE ROOT SHOULD BE INSTALLED UNDERNEATH THE ROOT
WAD IF A BACK EDDY IS FORMED BY THE ROOT WAD IN A TRENCH EXCAVATED PARALLEL TO THE
WAD. DUCKBILL ANCHORS MAY BE USED IN PLACE BANK AND WELL BELOW THE STREAMBED.
OF BOULDERS. ONE—THIRD OF THE ROOT WAD SHOULD REMAIN
BELOW NORMAL BASE FLOW CONDITIONS. DUCKBILL
ANCHORS SHALL BE USED TO ANCHOR THE
ROOTWAD AND FOOTER LOGS.
IF ROOT WAD DOES NOT COVER
ENTIRE BANK &CONSTRUCTION
IS BETWEEN MID OCTOBER TO
MID MARCH, PROTECT BANK
SOD MATS OR WITH BRUSH LAYER.
COIR MATTING TOP OF BANK
PLAIN
BANKFULL STAGE
�
BASEFLOW
FOOTER LOG >10" DIAMETER
MINIMUM OF 1/2 OF DIAMETER
8-12 FEET LONG INSTALLED BELOW STREAM BED
>10" DIAMETER^FOOTER
CROSS SECTION VIEW
ROOTWAD
NTS
\BACKFILL
X
l0
BANKFULL
'
LOG BURIED IN
BANK MIN 5FT
POINT REFERENCED IN
PROFILE
MIN 5FT
COARSE AGGREGATE
(1" TO 5")
/ �B
� POINT REFERENCED IN
u PROFILE
COARSE AGGREGATE
BACKFILL (1" TO 5")
Q FOOTER
LOG
HEADER
LOG
Q C
LOG BURIED IN
BANK
MIN 5FT
A'
PLAN VIEW
MIN 5FT
HEADER LOG
INVERT ELEVATION
HEADER
5' TO 8' INVERT ELEVATION
COARSE AGGREGATE
BACKFILL (1" TO 5")
MAX ALLOWABLE
c DROP OF 0.5 FT
MAX DEPTH I Z OF LOG —
DIAMETER (TYP)
) V
LOG
COARSE AGGREGATE
NON -WOVEN BACKFILL (1" TO 5")
GEOTEXTILE
FABRIC (TYP.)
PROFILE A -A
MIN 5FT MIN 5FT
OVERLAP
UPSTREAM LOG
%
--------------
4%Tp6xX
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(fl 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
NC. LICENSE NO. F-0374
FULL SCALE: 1 "= NA
0 NA
NA
2" = FULL SCALE
BANKFULL
ELEVATION
I`
W
/
\\
H
N
O
IZ
N
PROFILE C -C'
\ /\�
1/4 TO 1/3 OF LOG
DIAMETER CAN BE EXPOSED
O
\�
PRIOR TO FINAL GRADING
\\/ OVERLAP OF
NOTES:
\
i -
DOWNSTREAM LOG
1. LOGS SHOULD BE RELATIVELY STRAIGHT HARDWOOD AND RECENTLY
HARVESTED.
�x
\
PROPOSED BED NOTES:
0
PROFILE B -B'
2. LOG DIMENSIONS:
cr
1. INSTALL STAKES ON 3' CENTERS ON
SHOULD NOT EXTEND ABOVE ROLL.
EACH SIDE OF ROLL. TOP OF STAKE
MIN DIAM. = 10", MIN LENGTH = 15'
3. NAIL FILTER FABRIC USING 3" 10D GALVANIZED COMMON NAIL EVERY 1.5'
\\/
2. EXCAVATE A SMALL TRENCH (DEPTH
APPROX 2 TO 3 OF LOG DIAM) FOR
Z
ALONG THE LOG
\j\\/
PLACEMENT OF ROLL.
3. COIR LOGS SHALL BE 10 FT LONG AND HAVE A DIAMETER OF 10 TO 12 IN.
0
0
W
ai
\� �
w
C1O
DOUBLE
LOG DROP
��
z
o U
NTS
J
MINIMUM OF 2 TO 3 OF LOG DIAMETER
�
IZ
U
J
J
WOOD
BEDDED BELOW CHANNEL INVERT
o_
H �
z in
STAKES
LU Oq
J N
~ z
0 z Z
10" TO 12" LOG DIAMETER
J0 Lu
Z
m Lu o
(TYP.)
CL
Q w o n
W
Q Cr w
Lu
o
COIR LOG (TOE PROTECTION)
O
CD
z C/)Q z>
M z0 z oc
o
COIR MATTING
coco
LL
W LU CC Lu
G J = --:)
FLOW
N
M
z N
�
0')
NTS COMPACTED SOIL
M
W
W
LU W W J
Z OC Z
m
0 O
PROPOSED REBAR OR DUCKBILL
PROJ. DATE: OCT 2015
Q.C.: SS
Q.C. DATE: FEB 2016
STREAM BED ANCHOR
LIVE STAKES
CHANNEL
COARSE AGGREGATE
FLOW MIN. 5.0' BACKFILL (1" TO 5")
PROJ. NO.:
BOTTOM OF
20150095.00. RA
i
LIVE CUTTINGS
SMALL BRANCHES �
BANK
_ PRECONSTRUCTED POOL;
j APPROX. 1' TO 1.5' DEEP
�\ r----------------- AND BRUSH \
------------ -...TOP OF BANK\
COARSE BACKFILL
A
\\� 4 0
\�
A
1/4 MAX POOL DEPTH
1/4 MAX POOL DEPTH
///
NOTES:
QV o oV o Qv oVC
��
GREOSGATE
BACKFILL (11" )
\\/
/ /
1. OVER EXCAVATE THE OUTSIDE BEND OF THE CHANNEL.
PLACE LARGER BRANCHES AND LOGS IN A CRISS-CROSS
C
,\
\�\\\�\\�\\�\\/\\/\\/\\
PATTERN. LOCK IN PLACE WITH FILL COVERING 6 IN TO 18/\/
IN OF THE LARGER BRANCHES/SMALL LOGS.\/\\
\\\
2. PLACE SMALLER BRANCHES AND BRUSH OVER THE
g\1
LARGER BRANCHES/SMALL LOGS AND COMPACT LIGHTLY
SMALL LOGS AND/OR
LARGE BRANCHES
TOGETHER. BACKFILL AND COMPACT TO LOCK IN PLACE.
3. ACCEPTABLE LIVE CUTTINGS SPECIES A INCLUDE BLACK
FILTER FABRIC
(804.2.11 CLASS 2)
SECTION A -A
TACK FABRIC
WILLOW (SALIX NIGRA) AND SILKY WILLOW (SALIX
TO LOG
A
SERICEA). WILLOW CUTTINGS SHOULD BE RINSED AT
�
CUTTING POINT TO ALLOW BETTER ROOTING.
5'O�
SECTION A -A
COIR MATTING
4. INSTALL EROSION CONTROL (COIR) MATTING OVER
MIN
COMPACTED SOIL AND KEY IN PER MANUFACTURER'S
INSTRUCTIONS.
5. INSTALL 1 TO 2 ROWS OF LIVE STAKES ABOVE THE LIVE
CHANNEL TOP--,,,
OF BANK
\ �
CUTTINGS LAYER PER DIRECTION OF ENGINEER.
i
PROPOSED STREAM BANK
CHANNEL TOP
t
j
A PRECONSTRUCTED
OF BANK
1.0' TO 1.5' J
POOL; 2' WIDE BY 4'
TYPICAL PLAN VIEW LONG (TYP)
HEADER LOG
O�
F�
NOTES:
,q
1. LOGS SHOULD BE RELATIVELY STRAIGHT
HARDWOOD AND RECENTLY HARVESTED.
FOOTER LOG
2. LOG DIMENSIONS:
CHANNEL
BOTTOM OF BANK
MIN DIAM. = 12", MIN LENGTH = 15'
NAIL FILTER FABRIC USING 3" 10D GALVANIZED
COMMON NAIL EVERY 1.5' ALONG THE LOG
REBAR (5/8" MIN. DIAMETER, 4' MIN.
3. DUCKBILL ANCHORS MAY BE USED IN PLACE OF
LENGTH) OR DUCKBILL ANCHORS
TYPICAL PLAN VIEW
REBAR.
INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURERS
INSTRUCTIONS (TYP.)
BRUSH TOE
LOG SILL SECTION B—B
NTS
NTS
;'OT[Ali[eP��yTY�:I�:TAT:7�TiI�L�i[iP►[�]int;Y3iT�i:13K�I���Y�I3Y�7�7Ii�I �I�Y�Tl�l��[il��Cifi:l��lZi7�I�li�iT► il<<�i�P.[�I�3i7il��J_1:iI�i:[il�i�l�i��[K�I�Y�i�il[�I:�Y�I�[:(�I��1�[9i�I:11I��ZiP►IA'LK�7JI�T7Ti7�iir:Ixi7dLNt�I��iT�iY�7�7f�i1T:T.�3i�i�i7\[i7:1[elt�l9Ce1�I�9��9:I���33K�I��i71�1rZilY3�/Al�ww��I�1xKiT�T
FILE NAME:
vw
DICKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(fl 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
NC. LICENSE NO. F-0374
FULL SCALE: 1 "= NA
0 NA
NA
2" = FULL SCALE
1 " = HALF SCALE
I`
W
N
H
N
O
IZ
N
z
O
i -
U)
z
0
cr
0
I—
O
Z
O
H
z
a.
0
0
W
ai
LU
w
C1O
LLQ
o z o
z
o U
Y D W
J
I Q W W
CE CE
�
IZ
U
J
J
C6
z
o_
H �
z in
LU Oq
J N
~ z
0 z Z
LU
Z LU z
J0 Lu
Z
m Lu o
J_ w
I— z Q (.) LU
LU
0
CL
Q w o n
W
Q Cr w
Lu
o
�
O
CD
z C/)Q z>
M z0 z oc
o
U LL LOLO
coco
LL
W LU CC Lu
G J = --:)
Cl)
N
M
z N
�
0')
66
U Z pc C/)LLI
M
W
W
LU W W J
Z OC Z
m
0 O
a ¢IL2
PROJ. DATE: OCT 2015
Q.C.: SS
Q.C. DATE: FEB 2016
DRAWING NUMBER:
4
PROJ. NO.:
20150095.00. RA

COPYRIGHT ©, W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC., IS PROHIBITED. ONLY COPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BE VALID, TRUE COPIES.
FILE NAME:
vw
DICKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
TOP OF RIFFLE
(v) 919.782.0495
HEADER LOG
www.wkdickson.com
NC. LICENSE NO. F-0374
A
I I
0 NA
NA
NOTCH IN LOG TO BE SET AT PROFILE
1 " =HALF SCALE
I`
DESIGN ELEVATION
N
O
N
J
11
SLOPE VARIES
(APPROXIMATELY 0.2' INTO LOG)
z
O
TOP OF BANK
COIR FIBER LOG
TOE PROTECTION
I I L6
Z
p p
`- -
CHANNEL BOTTOM FLOW 0.75' MI
i—
I
O��OOGn'LJw---
<Lw
O O O O O /10 O O O
0 0 0 0 0 0
BOTTOM OF BANK
���
O
LL
0
z
o
z
MI
1.75 1.0' IIN
FLOW
0
u; I i
GRAVEL SUBSTRATE
O
]12.5-3.0' Q#
w LL66
o
EQUAL MIX OF IN SITU SOIL,
5 STONE, AND COARSE
GRADE CONTROL ROCK
Y FJ5 W
J
I Q W W
AGGREGATE
50 / 50 MIX CLASS A/B 6.0' MIN—
RIP RAP
J
C
Z
GEOTEXTILE
H �
z in
LU O q
FABRIC
Z
V z Z Z
I
I
W
ZLU z�
PROFILE B -B
LOW FLOW NOTCH IN
I I
JLu
_ w
z Q F-
Q w o n
<
BOTTOM OF BANK
TOP LOG (SEE NOTE 1)
I I
o
MIN. HARDWOOD 12" DIA.
Q
Z)0 z�
I
U U LL
0
LO
LOGS (TYP.)
TOP OF BANK
z CV
C H N M
G
I
I I
I I
U
U Z pC C/)w
W W W W J
z OC Z
m
0 O
a-
¢IL2
PROJ. DATE: OCT 2015
Q.C.: SS
EROSION CONTROL
Q.C. DATE: FEB 2016
VARIES
DRAWING NUMBER:
MATTING
5
I
PROJ. NO.:
Wbkf
20150095.00. RA
I
I I
BANKFULL ELEVATION
A
INVERT SET AT PROFILE
GRADE
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL - PLAN VIEW
'
- �1.0' MIN.
_
NOTES
2.5'
1. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTCH IN GRADE CONTROL LOG IN CENTER OF CHANNEL.
COIR FIBER LOG TOE
TYP.
NOTCH SHALL BE APPROXIMATELY 0.2' DEEP AND 2.5'-3.0' WIDE.
PROTECTION
GRAVEL SUBSTRATE
GRADE CONTROL ROCK
2. SEE PROFILE FOR DESIGN
STATIONING AND ELEVATIONS.
EQUAL MIX OF IN SITU SOIL,
50 / 50 MIX CLASS A / B RIP RAP
3. GEOTEXTILE FABRIC SHALL MEET SPECIFICATIONS FOR TYPE 2 NCDOT.
# 5 STONE, AND COARSE
AGGREGATE (1" TO 4")
SECTION A -A
RIFFLE GRADE
CONTROL
NTS
COPYRIGHT ©, W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC., IS PROHIBITED. ONLY COPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BE VALID, TRUE COPIES.
FILE NAME:
vw
DICKSON
community infrastructure consultants
Transportation + Water Resources
Urban Development + Geomatics
720 Corporate Drive
Raleigh, NC 27607
(v) 919.782.0495
(fl 919.782.9672
www.wkdickson.com
NC. LICENSE NO. F-0374
FULL SCALE: 1 "= NA
0 NA
NA
2" = FULL SCALE
1 " =HALF SCALE
I`
N
O
N
J
11
N
z
O
i—
U)
z
O
Cr
O
LL
0
z
o
z
a.
O
0
C/)U)
W
O
w LL66
o
Q
z
o z
O U)
Y FJ5 W
J
I Q W W
�
U
J
J
C
Z
O
H �
z in
LU O q
J N
Z
V z Z Z
W
ZLU z�
J � -i
zoaC
m o
JLu
_ w
z Q F-
Q w o n
<
a� CrwLu
o
zci aZ
Q
Z)0 z�
o
U U LL
0
LO
ILLI 6i CC w
G J = --)
co
Cl)
z CV
C H N M
G
�
0')
U
U Z pC C/)w
W W W W J
z OC Z
m
0 O
a-
¢IL2
PROJ. DATE: OCT 2015
Q.C.: SS
Q.C. DATE: FEB 2016
DRAWING NUMBER:
5
PROJ. NO.:
20150095.00. RA