20020492 Ver 1_Mitigation Evaluation_20090501

Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
Date of Office Review: - Evaluator's Name(s): II
Date of Report: ,,2 2009 COCCCA Report for Monitoring Year:
Date of Field Review: ®x-hed -fDV- `Jlt/ Evaluator's Name(s): t--ki 1 Ear
Other Individuals/Agencies Present:S {?(? rti q0?1 c1 y?C _? 4f2, i uYl (?' >T?1-LQ? I L ( ???
Weather Conditions (today & recent): 4u;-C tr_ r" rY r;?. 04 ` EW4--F )2c?L? e t-3
Directions to Site:
1. Office Review Information: 00 q z
Project Number: 20020492a
Project Name: Berger Bank: Second Creek
County(ies) Rowan
Basin & subbasin: Yadkin 03040102
Nearest Stream: Second Creek
Water Quality Class of Nearest Stream:
Mitigator Type: Full-Delivery
DOT Status: non-DOT
Total Mitigation on Site
Wetland: 40 acres
Stream: 3135 linear feet
Proiect Histo
Event Event Date
Report Review - Wetlands
Report Review - Streams
Site Visit - Wetlands
Site Visit - Streams
Report Review - Streams
Report Review - Wetlands
Site Visit - Wetlands
Site Visit - Streams
Report Receipt: Monitoring
2/16/2007
3/12/2007
3/16/2007
3/16/2007
2/5/2008
4/1/2008
4/10/2008
4/10/2008
2/13/2009
Buffer:
Approved mitigation plan available? Yes No
Monitoring reports available. Yes No
Problem areas identified in reports? Yes No
Problem areas addressed on site? Yes No
I Mitigation required on site: *Add significant project-related events: reports,
Associated impacts (if known): received, construction, planting, repairs, etc.
---- -- - --- - - - - - - - - -__- - - _ i
During office review, note success criteria and evaluate each component based on monitoring report
results. Record relevant data in Sections II and III.
- On back of sheet, note other information found during office review and/or to be obtained during site visit
II. Summary of Results:
Monitoring Success Success
Mitigation Component Year (report) (field) Resolved
20020492a-6 1567.5 linear feet Stream (Perennial) Restoration 6
20020492a-1 1.8 acres Wetland (Riparian) Restoration 6
20020492a-2 0.2 acres Wetland (Riparian) Enhancement 6
20020492a-3 36.4 acres Wetland (Riparian) Creation 6
20020492a-4 1.6 acres Wetland (Riparian) Preservation 6
20020492a-5 1567.5 linear feet Stream (Perennial) Restoration 6
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 1 of 2
e
Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
MITIGATION SUCCESS:
Compared to the approved mitigation plan, this project is: successful
List specific reasons for lack of success for this project:
pa ally succe sful unsuccessful
Additional comments (e.g. DWQ follow-up actions, recommendations, etc.):
f g1?er -??C?-vim S
"QCGeS'S
n mac, maj cue
QCC'Ca6 SI-fC 4 RC, OCQ. ?
2D CN?'kGL- c_O?Aion _m c?"n &22b e?
tJ? _ . ?? ed ??c?l' c?'oo.J on
rck
?k ct C -? CL, Cy-z. CTS-tf (61?_.? C rli x'\ bt rc l '- 0- "- -0- Cur 1) -?Cf Q?
\ p iL c tv1( hit.
a5 S??fe? 15 - 2C,' ) 4- n cA 4e-w
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 2 of 2
0-Sk cc-)(--- C??A
Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
Component: 1.8 acres Wetland (Riparian) Restoration Component ID: 20020492a-1
Description:
Location within project:
III. Success Criteria Evaluation:
HYDROLOGY - Approved Success Criteria:
within 12" of surface continually for at least 5 to 12.5% of growing
season (assuming normal precipitation) C 2cl & uw
Monitoring report indicates success No_ ?`
Observational field data agrees? Ye No
based on mitigation plan? Yes No
based on wetland type? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
? Inundated pc'CAU'?n
Saturated in upper 12 inches
Drift lines
Drainage patterns in wetlands
Sediment deposits
Water marks

List any remaining hydrology issues to address (e.g. remaining ditches, excessive water, etc.):
47 tr??" 3G.3
t -aC1 _ _ Pre_c,P - ^J (Lo ( - _ can 2pU$-
SOILS - Approved Success Criteria: NA
i Are soils hydric or becoming hydric? Yes No
List indicators of hydric soils:
List any remaining soil issues to address (e.g. erosion, upland areas, etc.):
VEGETATION - Approved Success Criteria: Dominant Plant Species
native woody species/acre: 320 thru year 3, 288 @ year 4, at Species Story TPA/'* cover
least 90% of forested portions achieve 260 @ end of year 5;
herbaceous >85% cover by native species
I
Monitoring report indicates success? Yes No
Average TPA for entire site (per report):
Observational field data agrees? Yes No
j based on community composition? Yes No
based on TPA and/or % cover? Yes No
Vegetation planted on site? Yes No
Date of last planting:
Vegetation growing successfully? Yes No
Specific vegetation plots or site locations with little to no vegetation:
Cl 'D 271^1 TPA
Estimated acreage or site percentage of unvegetated areas:
In ive s,Pecie on site species, location(s), and % cover):
?lU? J??' C??", ????clt u?n+? qp ., c -CIA c?Le i+? its ?s?
List any remaining vegetation issues to address (e.g. plant survival, concerns, etc.):
SUJUA- CP-CX-CAL. - u caY ?;?n}, ` ` of L„?
? ? ? ?o?rc?n -fur ? ckS? r?
-' a 5? 32°/a O cOrnppSi?J oYl?
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 1 of 8
Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
NCWAM - Approved Success Criteria or Evaluative Techniques: NCWAM Type on Site:
NA Coastal
Riverine
Monitoring report indicates success? Yes No Riparian
Observational field data agrees? Yes No Non-riparian (wetter)
Attach NCWAM analysis results to this report. Non-riparian (drier)
List any remaining NCWAM issues to address (e.g. functionality, developing wetland type, etc.):
MITIGATION SUCCESS:
Compared to the approved mitigation plan, this component is: ccessf I
List specific reasons for lack of success for this component:
partially successful unsuccessful
Additional comments (e.g. DWQ follow-up actions, recommendations, etc.):
During site visit, document representative conditions and areas of concern. Observe preservation and
enhancement areas that may not have specific success criteria. Label and attach photos to this report.
Attach maps showing photo locations, areas of concern, and important field observations.
Additional notes related to evaluation of this component:
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 2 of 8
Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
Component: 0.2 acres Wetland (Riparian) Enhancement Component ID: 20020492a-2
Description:
Location within project:
III. Success Criteria Evaluation:
HYDROLOGY - Approved Success Criteria: Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
within 12" of surface continually for at least 5 to 12.5% of growing Inundated
season (assuming normal precipitation)
Saturated in upper 12 inches
j Monitoring report indicates success Yes No Drift lines
Observational field data agrees? Yes No Drainage patterns in wetlands
based on mitigation plan? Yes No Sediment deposits
based on wetland type? Yes No Water marks
List any remaining hydrology issues to address (e.g. remaining ditches, excessive water, etc.):
SOILS - Approved Success Criteria: NA
Are soils hydric or becoming hydric? Yes No
List indicators of hydric soils:
List any remaining soil issues to address (e.g. erosion, upland areas, etc.):
VEGETATION - Approved Success Criteria: Dominant Plant Species
native woody species/acre: 320 thru year 3, 288 @ year 4, at Species Story TPA/11% cover
least 90% of forested portions achieve 260 @ end of year 5,-
herbaceous >85% cover by native species
I
Monitoring report indicates success? Yes No
Average TPA for entire site (per report):
Observational field data agrees? Yes No
based on community composition? Yes No
based on TPA and/or % cover? Yes No
Vegetation planted on site? Yes No
Date of last planting:
Vegetation growing successfully? Yes No
Specific vegetation plots or site locations with little to no vegetation
Estimated acreage or site percentage of unvegetated areas:
Invasive species on site (species, location(s), and % cover):
List any remaining vegetation issues to address (e.g. plant survival, concerns, etc.):
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007)
Page 3 of 8
Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
NCWAM -Approved Success Criteria or Evaluative Techniques: NCWAM Type on Site:
NA Coastal
i
Riverine
Monitoring report indicates success? Yes No Riparian
Observational field data agrees? Yes No Non-riparian (wetter)
Attach NCWAM analysis results to this report. Non-riparian (drier)
List any remaining NCWAM issues to address (e.g. functionality, developing wetland type, etc.):
MITIGATION SUCCESS:
Compared to the approved mitigation plan, this component is: successful partially successful unsuccessful
List specific reasons for lack of success for this component:
Additional comments (e.g. DWQ follow-up actions, recommendations, etc.):
During site visit, document representative conditions and areas of concern. Observe preservation and
enhancement areas that may not have specific success criteria. Label and attach photos to this report.
Attach maps showing photo locations, areas of concern, and important field observations.
Additional notes related to evaluation of this component:
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 4 of 8
Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
Com t• 36 4
ponen . . acres Wetland (Ripanan) Creation Component ID: 20020492a-3
Description:
Location within project:
III. Success Criteria Evaluation:
HYDROLOGY - Approved Success Criteria: Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
within 12" of surface continually for at least 5 to 12.5% of growing Inundated
season (assuming normal precipitation)
Saturated in upper 12 inches
Monitoring report indicates success Yes No Drift lines
Observational field data agrees? Yes No Drainage patterns in wetlands
based on mitigation plan? Yes No Sediment deposits
based on wetland type? Yes No Water marks
List any remaining hydrology issues to address (e.g. remaining ditches, excessive water, etc.):
?I
[SOILS - Approved Success Criteria: NA
Are soils hydric or becoming hydric? Yes No
List indicators of hydric soils:
List any remaining soil issues to address (e.g. erosion, upland areas, etc.):
VEGETATION - Approved Success Criteria:
native woody species/acre: 320 thru year 3, 288 @ year 4, at
least 90% of forested portions achieve 260 @ end of year 5;
herbaceous >85% cover by native species
Monitoring report indicates success? Yes No
Average TPA for entire site (per report):
Observational field data agrees? Yes No
based on community composition? Yes No
based on TPA and/or % cover? Yes No
Vegetation planted on site? Yes No
n t fl 1
Dominant Plant Species
Species Story TPA/'/ cover
a e o ast p antmg.
Vegetation growing successfully? Yes No
Specific vegetation plots or site locations with little to no vegetation:
Estimated acreage or site percentage of unvegetated areas:
Invasive species on site (species, location(s), and % cover): j
List any remaining vegetation issues to address (e.g. plant survival, concerns, etc.):
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 5 of 8
Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
NCWAM - Approved Success Criteria or Evaluative Techniques: NCWAM Type on Site:
NA Coastal
Riverine
Monitoring report indicates success? Yes No Riparian
Observational field data agrees? Yes No Non-riparian (wetter)
Attach NCWAM analysis results to this report. Non-riparian (drier)
List any remaining NCWAM issues to address (e.g. functionality, developing wetland type, etc.):
MITIGATION SUCCESS:
Compared to the approved mitigation plan, this component is: successful partially successful unsuccessful
List specific reasons for lack of success for this component:
Additional comments (e.g. DWQ follow-up actions, recommendations, etc.):
I
During site visit, document representative conditions and areas of concern. Observe preservation and
enhancement areas that may not have specific success criteria. Label and attach photos to this report.
Attach maps showing photo locations, areas of concern, and important field observations.
Additional notes related to evaluation of this component:
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 6 of 8
I ' . -
Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
Component: 1.6 acres Wetland (Riparian) Preservation Component ID: 20020492a-4
Description:
Location within project:
III. Success Criteria Evaluation:
HYDROLOGY - Approved Success Criteria: Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in upper 12 inches
Monitoring report indicates success Yes No Drift lines
Observational field data agrees? Yes No Drainage patterns in wetlands
based on mitigation plan? Yes No Sediment deposits
based on wetland type? Yes No Water marks
List any remaining hydrology issues to address(e.g. remaining ditches, excessive water, etc.):
SOILS - Approved Success Criteria: NA
Are soils hydric or becoming hydric? Yes No
List indicators of hydric soils:
List any remaining soil issues to address (e.g. erosion, upland areas, etc.):
VEGETATION - Approved Success Criteria: Dominant Plant Species
Species Story TPAcover
Monitoring report indicates success? Yes No
Average TPA for entire site (per report):
Observational field data agrees? Yes No
based on community composition? Yes No
based on TPA and/or % cover? Yes No
Vegetation planted on site? Yes No
Date of last planting:
Vegetation growing successfully? Yes No
Specific vegetation plots or site locations with little to no vegetation:
Estimated acreage or site percentage of unvegetated areas:
Invasive species on site (species, location(s), and % cover):
List any remaining vegetation issues to address (e.g. plant survival, concerns, etc.):
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 7 of 8
Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
NCWAM - Approved Success Criteria or Evaluative Techniques: NCWAM Type on Site:
NA Coastal
Riverine
Monitoring report indicates success? Yes No Riparian
Observational field data agrees? Yes No Non-riparian (wetter)
Attach NCWAM analysis results to this report. Non-riparian (drier)
List any remaining NCWAM issues to address (e.g. functionality, developing wetland type, etc.):
MITIGATION SUCCESS:
Compared to the approved mitigation plan, this component is: successful
List specific reasons for lack of success for this component:
partially successful unsuccessful
Additional comments (e.g. DWQ follow-up actions, recommendations, etc.):
During site visit, document representative conditions and areas of concern. Observe preservation and
enhancement areas that may not have specific success criteria. Label and attach photos to this report.
Attach maps showing photo locations, areas of concern, and important field observations.
Additional notes related to evaluation of this component:
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007)
Page 8 of 8