20171044 Ver 1_Draft MP_2019_20191029

ID#* 20171044
Select Reviewer:*
Mac Haupt
Initial Review Completed Date 10/29/2019
Mitigation Project Submittal - 10/29/2019
Version* 1
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?*
Type of Mitigation Project:*
V Stream r Wetlands r Buffer r Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:*
Matthew Reid
Project Information
...................................................................................
ID#:* 20171044
Existing IDY
Project Type:
Project Name:
County:
F DMS r Mitigation Bank
Whittier Creek - Option D
Surry
Document Information
r Yes r No
Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Version:*1
Existing Version
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Plans
File Upload: WhittierCrk_100020_DraftMP_2019.pdf 46.11 MB
Rease upload only one RJF of the conplete file that needs to be subrritted...
Signature
Print Name:* Matthew Reid
Signature:*

Mitigation Plan — FINAL DRAFT
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation Project
Surry County, North Carolina
Yadkin River Basin: 03040101-110040
DMS Project ID No. 100020, DEQ Contract No. 7182, DEQ RFP #16-006993
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2018-00849
FS
aY •' 1
y
i
Prepared for:
NC Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)
NC Division of Mitigation Services (DMS)
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,North Carolina27699-1652
October 2019

Stream Mitigation Plan — FINAL DRAFT
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation Project
Surry County, North Carolina
Yadkin River Basin: 03040101-110040
DMS Project ID No. 100020, DEQ ContractNo. 7182, DEQ RFP #16-006993
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2018-00849
Prepared for:
NC Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ
NC Division of Mitigation Services (DMS)
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
Prepared by:
I N T E R N AT 1 0 N A L
This mitigation plan has been written in conformance with the requirements of the following :
• Federal Rule for compensatory mitigation project sites as described in the Federal
Register Title 33 Navigation and Navigable Waters Volume 3 Chapter 2 Section §
332.8 paragraphs (c)(2) through (c)(14).
• NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services In -Lieu Fee Instrument signed and dated
July 28, 2010.
These documents govern NCDMS operations and procedures for the delivery of
compensatory mitigation.
October 2019
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE II
WHITTIER CREEKSITE-OPTION D MITI GATON PROJECT, DMS NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
8000 Regency Parkway, Ste. 600 1 Cary, North Carolina 27518
INTERNATIONAL
October 21, 2019
Matthew Reid, PM
NCDENR, Division of Mitigation Services
5 Ravenscroft Dr. —Suite 102
Asheville, NC 28801
Office: 919.463.5488 1 Fax:[phone]
Subject: Response to DMS Comments for Draft Mitigation Plan Review (dated 8/14/19)
Whittier Creek — Option D Mitigation Project, Surry County
Yadkin River Basin: 03040101
DMS Project#100020, DEQContract #7182
Mr. Reid:
Please find enclosed our responses to the NC Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) review comments dated
August 14, 2019 in reference to the Whittier Creek — Option D Mitigation Project's Draft Stream Mitigation
Plan. We have revised the Draft document in response to the referenced review comments as outlined
below.
General Questions/Comments:
• Please QA/QC the document for typos, run on sentences and repetitive statements.
Response: The document was given a thorough reviewand QA/QCafter revisions were made.
Please review and revise Table 11.1 as necessary. Creditable footage column lengths for UT4b and UT5
do not match mitigation credits amounts. Please update report as necessary once project components
and mitigation credits and lengths have been verified.
Response: Table and report were revised as needed. The minor discrepancies notedwerethe result
of rounding issues.
• Page 1-1: For future reference, written directions are not required given maps and tech available.
Response: Written directionswill not be included in thefuture.
Page 1-1, last paragraph: Recommend changing "improve water quality" to "address local water quality
stressors". Actual improvement infers measureable outcomes in instream water quality, which is likely
undetectable given the size of the project relative to the watershed.
Response: Change made as recommended.
• Page 2-1, 2nd paragraph: Is the author trying to say that the project is addressing 5 of the 7 stressors
identified in the RBRP? Please clarify through revision or response.
Response: This section has been revised for clarity.

Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
8000 Regency Parkway, Ste. 600 1 Cary, North Carolina 27518
INTERNATIONAL
Office: 919.463.5488 1 Fax:[phone]
• Page 2-1, 4th paragraph: "self -identified management practices" — Is this referring to a specific
document? Please clarify.
Response: This statement was intended to refer to the recommended management practices found in
both the RBRPand LWPdocuments, but that was not made clear. This section has been revised
accordingly.
• Page 3-2, 1st paragraph: This information has been provided multiple times at this point in the
document. For future reference, consider consolidation to one location or two at most.
Response: This section has been revisedto remove much of the previously reported information.
Page 3-5, Ecological Community: Much of the information found in this section belongs in the previously
discussed Geology and Soils and/or Topography sections.
Response: The information fromthe Ecological Community section hasbeen consolidated within the
previous sections as recommended.
• Page3-6: Land cover percentages would be better displayed in a table.
Response: Given the simplicity of the table generated, it didn't appear to better inform or clarify
things for the reader and looked awkward when inserted into the text. Instead, the table was added
to Figure 6 (Drainage Area and Land Use Map), where the reader can observe an aerial photo of the
area being discussed.
Page 4-1: In project constraints, the plan states the principle constraints to achieve maximum uplift
potential is stream crossings and easement breaks. DMSdisagrees with this statement and instead
asserts that the principle constraints to maximum uplift is the upstream conditions supplying nutrients
and sediment tothe main stem Whittier Creek. This is mentioned in the last paragraph. The constraint
does not make this project a bad one, so please revise to emphasize what restoration can achieve.
Response: This section was revised as recommended.
Page 6-5, 3rd paragraph: Given the use of PII, the plan sheets or narrative should give the reviewer some
understanding as to the degree of bed lift versus bench excavation that is planned. If the degree to
which the bed can be raised relative to a comparable bed feature at a given point in the valley is
negligible, it should probably be mentioned. This used to be depicted in plan sheets with design cross
sections over the planned alignment to show the degree of cut/fill.
Response: Bench excavation as part of the PII restoration is certainly the primary means being
proposed to restore flood plain connectivity for the reach, the extent of which is shown in the plan
sheets. The overall degree of bed lift is quite slight. The narrative text has been revised to make it
clear that the benching is the dominant means of flood plain reestablishment. Additionally, several
cross -sections have been included in the plan sheets to help showthe degree of benching and of
cut/fill.
• Reach 7: Larger streams in this part of the state given the large bimodal sediment supplies have proven
problematic. The other projects mentioned in the document such as Hogan, Moores, Candiff and even
Beaver Creek are examples. Several reaches across these projects have required repair. In some cases, it
was extreme storm events. However, it is recommended that Baker consult with the designers for those
projects if they have not already, particularlyin relation tothe main stem reaches to understand the
outcomes there. While Candiff Creek did require repair, it was on reaches that were not restored and
were not subject to a detailed design evaluation to include stream power and the capacityof a design.

Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
8000 Regency Parkway, Ste. 600 1 Cary, North Carolina 27518
INTERNATIONAL
Office: 919.463.5488 1 Fax:[phone]
The reaches (e.g. M3) that were subject tothose analyses were not subject to repair and had little issues
during monitoring. DMS knows that Baker was involved in some of these projects, but those staff may
no longer be present, so if these projects and the iroutcomes were evaluated or repair assessments
were done by Baker staff members at the time, it would merit emphasizing this in the document.
Response: It is not unusual that we find a bimoda I sediment distributions when wed o particle size
distribution sampling. One mode is around the high number of samples that are sand/silt and the
other usually falls somewhere as larger gravel or small cobble, as based on the plots of sample count
by size classes. Baker does not believe that it is particularly unique forthis area of the state, as it is
typical anytime you have a lot of sand or silt on the stream bed surface. That might be caused by
reasons as different as along period of draught or especially high bankerosion. If larger stream
projects have had problems in the past, we do not believe it is attributable to the sediment
distribution as much as to the fact that projects on large streams are inherently riskier and often
require some degree of maintenance/repair. DMS acknowledges that some of the issues noted were
associated with extreme storm events, and as such would not necessarily indicate a failure in design.
This is particularly true if there are high water events before the site becomes well -stabilized. We
cannot speak to whatever issues might have arisen at most of the listed sites but would suspect those
issues would have their own individual causes. Baker was only involved with one of the cited projects
(Candiff Creek) and as mentioned in the comment the reaches that experienced problems (in this case
excess scour) were slated for Preservation (UT1)oronly enhanced atanE2level. Neitherwas
restored, and as such did not have any raised bed elevations or flood plain benches cut. This resulted
in excess scour and unstable banks. The later repair work involved floodplain benching, bank sloping,
and the installation of few in -stream structures. The reaches have subsequently stabilized. Baker
can't seethe implied linkage between a bi-modal sediment supply distribution and the specific post -
construction issues experienced at the site. Baker quantitatively assesses channel competencyand
qualitatively addressescapacityand sediment supply for all of our designs and these analyses
informed our design and decisions relative to what will be a stable project forth is site.
Page 6-5, 4th paragraph: "The entrenchment ratio will be greater than 2.2 as the adjacent flood -prone
width allows" —Does Baker have an idea of the proportion of R7 that will not permit an ER of 2.2?
Response: NoneofR7will haveanERoflessthan2.2. In fact, due to the significant floodplain
benching proposed for the reach, the ERfor the majority of R7 will range between 5.8 and 6.8. The
lowest ER value of 2.3 is only present in the lowermost transitional section where the reach ties back
into the existing off -project channel. The text has been revised to clarify this point.
Page6-5, 5th paragraph: Remove or revise "in -stream structures will most likely include..." The plan
sheets show exactly what structures will be used.
Response: Text revised as recommended.
Page 6-13, 1st paragraph: The lack of aggradation and significant bar formation justification for
conducting competency analysis only is expected in an incised channel and does not suggest the lack of
upstream sediment input. Please clarify.
Response: The lack of bar formation was not mentioned to imply that there is a lack of upstream
sediment input, only as an example that clear signs of aggradation were not observed on the site. The
qualitative sediment supply analysis in this section included discussion of upstream sediment
sources and inputfrom field assessments. The restoration should reduce the on -site sediment supply
from existing eroding streambanks; however, there will continue to be a sediment input from
upstream, thus it is important to ensure the project will transportthe load. Sediment competency

Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
8000 Regency Parkway, Ste. 600 1 Cary, North Carolina 27518
INTERNATIONAL
Office: 919.463.5488 1 Fax:[phone]
determines potential aegradation, degradation, and channel enlargement by comparing the required
depth and slope necessary to transport the largest size sediment available. The text was revised some
to clarify these points.
Page 6-14, Sediment Analysis: Reference to "figure below" showing design shear stress plotted against
measured D100 is not in document.
Response: This figure had been erroneously removed but has been replaced in the document.
Sediment Analysis: The sub -pavement size range cited in the narrative does not seem to match the
table.
Response: The size ranges were checked again and revised accordingly.
• Sediment Analysis: No capacity or continuity analysis was performed. Why were these analyses not
considered?
Response: No long-term study required to build a sediment -transport ratingcurve has been
conducted forth is site or its general region. Without this, neither quantified capacity analysis nor
continuity/mass balance analysis can be accurately performed. Instead, as is commonly done, the
primary emphasis of the project's sediment transport analysis was focused on competency, with a
qualified sediment supply analysis described in Section 6.4.
Page 7-1, Bankfull Events and Flooding Functions: Please use the term continuous stage recorder instead
of transducers for consistency.
Response: The text was revised to include the new terminology, but'pressuretransducer'was also
kept to clearly identify the specific hardware device being used to record the data.
Bankfull Events and Flooding Functions: Highly recommend installing the stage recorders on R7 and
UT4b below bankfull to capture thefrequency and duration of events capable of doing work to provide
context to channel change.
Response: Afterdiscussion with DMS staff, continuous stage recorders(using pressure transducers)
will be installed in lieu of crestgauges in thechannels ofR7and UT4b. Thiswaywe can collect data
on significant flow events that occur at, or just below, ban kfull elevation, in addition to capturingdata
on overbankflood events. Thetextwas revised to includethis change.
Page 7-1, Cross Sections: DMS asserts that additional cross sections are needed for UT4 and R7. UT4a
currently has no cross sections. Another riffle cross section would be desirable on UT4b upstream of
confluence with UT5. Additional cross sections need to be added at both ends of R7. A cross section at
the upstream part of R7 will monitor the effect of high discharge and velocity as the flow transitions
from an unrestored incised condition to a restored benched condition. A cross section at the
downstream end of R7 will monitor the discharge and velocity as the flow transitions from the gradual
narrowing bench condition to the unrestored incised condition. Given the P2 approach for R7, bank and
toe erosion are possible.
Response: The numberof cross sections has been revised as requested (1 additional on UT4a, 1
additional on UT4b, and 2 additional on 117), and atthe locations described.
• Cross Sections: Please indicatethatthe channel change measurements will follow those identified by
the industry technical workgroup.
Response: This section was revised as recommended.

Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
8000 Regency Parkway, Ste. 600 1 Cary, North Carolina 27518
INTERNATIONAL
Office: 919.463.5488 1 Fax:[phone]
Page 7-2, Visual Assessment: Please indicate that the visual assessment method in DMSguidance will be
used. CCPV etc.
Response: This section was revised as recommended.
Table 11.1: Is L1 a typo for Reach UT4a approach level?
Response: No, the L1 stands for Level 1. However, the number'1' was changed hereto the Latin
numeral'I'to be consistent with the Restoration approach terminology. The table was created from
the DMS template which has columns for both the general Restoration Level (e.g. Rfor Restoration or
E for Enhancement) and the specific Approach Priority Level (e.g. PI for Priority I Restoration, or LI for
Level I Enhancement).
• Plan Sheets: Please explain the large meander at the downstream end of UT4bas it enters R7.
Response: This meander falls on the cut flood plain of the new mainstem and crosses the existing old
(verywide) channel where it will befilled. The slope here will be relatively flat ascomparedtothe
upstream section (as is appropriate) and will therefore need to meander more. The riffle of the
previous meander on UT4b ends directed at the meander on R7 in the area of Station —17+00. Thisis
not a preferred confluence spot given the awkward alignment required, so the more viable option
was to add an additional meander to UT4b within the space that the flood plain provided and to turn it
downstream into the next riffle on R7 at Station—18+50. This riffle is the preferable location to
construct a confluence. The outer (pool) bend of UT4b at Station —20+25 has also been aligned
perpendicularto the old filled channel and will have a geo-lift structure installed for increased
stability at this important location. The distance along the lower two meanders of UT4b also allows
for the stable dropping of the channel to the existing elevation of the newly aligned R7, all while
maintaining its appropriately flatter slope as compared to the upper section.
• Rock Cross Vane: DMS recommends the use of footers on sills.
Response: Footer rocks will be used on the sills for the Rock Cross Vane structure. The notes in the
structure drawing on Sheet2 have been amended to clearly state that.
Log Jam Structure: Has Baker used the logjam structure on other projects? Note 3 on logjam detail
indicates vertical posts will be driven into ground, but the posts are not shown on the detail.
Response: Baker has successfully implemented the Log Jam Structure on several previous projects
including the Brown Creek Tribs (currently in MY5), Thomas Creek (MY4), Browns Summit (MY2), and
UTto Mill Swamp (MY6) projects. Note 3is relic text from a much older structure design arrangement
and has been removed.
Channel Plug: Please include soil material type to be used in channel plug.
Response: Channel plug soil material description was added to plans as requested.
Sheet 4: Please reviewthe geometryof the first meander which appears to cut across the valley gradient
and could become a stability concern. The alignment and amplitude relative to the valley do not appear
consistent with the rest of the design.
Response: The upper half ofthis first meander consists largely of the existing off -project stream
channelwith its current alignment, which is located within a powerline easement and outside of the
conservation easement where the credited reach begins. Significant benchingand two in -stream
structures are still proposed to stabilize this short section and to help hold grade, whilethe outside

Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
8000 Regency Parkway, Ste. 600 1 Cary, North Carolina 27518
INTERNATIONAL
Office: 919.463.5488 1 Fax:[phone]
bend ofthe first turn (—Station 11+40) is where new stream con structiontruly beginsby laying back
the right bank and starting the newstream alignment and pattern. There is also fill being placed into
the old channel along the left bank of this meanderto narrow its geometry, though given the extent
of benching being cut here, that fill is not as significant as the plan view might imply. And most of this
fill will be part ofa point barfeature, which naturally evolve (i.e. degrade/aggrade) over time. Baker
is confident this first meanderwill remain stable, especially with the significant benching being
proposed. It's just located within a tie-in transitional section, where the existing channel merges into
the new channel, and which by necessity often cannot completely conform to the design parameters
of the rest of the new channel.
• Sheet 4: Will the break in easement be fenced? High tensile is shown around the perimeter, but not
through the break/crossing.
Response: The break in the easement on R7 (shown on Sheet4)will not befenced. The landowner
much prefers to set up temporary fencing just prior to periodic cattle pasture rotation. Hethinks that
the maintence of any permanent fencing in the break will simply be more hassle. We have promised
to clearly mark the break boundary and even install inserts in the ground along the break to make
placement of temporary fence posts easier to put in and takeout.
Sheet 7: Add grade control if necessary to prevent perching of the culvert immediately upstream.
Response: Wh ile we certainly do not want to have a perched cu Ivert on the project, the existing DOT
culvert under the road at the very top of Reach UT4a is not currently perched to any degree and we
are not proposing with this E1 level approach to do any work upstream or in the immediate vicinity of
the culvert. Plus, the outfall of the culvert appears stable and well protected with large, existing rock.
Thus, we feel it's extremely unlikely the culvert would become perched in the future, especially given
the extreme rainfall the site has experienced the past year without any apparent scouring or channel
bed elevation changes.
• Sheets 13 and 14: Consider changingthe sheet nameto Planting Plan to be consistent with Section 6.5
of the report.
Response: Revision made as recommended.
• Please submit full digital submission following DMStemplate for final submittal.
Response: Final submittal will include digital submission following DMStemplate.
Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions regarding our response submittal.
Sincerely,
141#- 14-
Scott King, LSS, PWS
Project Manager

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 PROJECT INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................1-1
2.0 WATERSHED APPROACH AND SITE SELECTION............................................................................2-1
3.0 BASELINEAND EXISTING CONDITIONS..............................................................................................3-1
3.1 WATERSHED PROCESSES AND RESOURCE C,ONDITIONS.................................................................................3-2
3.1.1 Landscape Characteristics........................................................................................................................
3-2
3.1.2 Land Use /Land Cover Impacts, Historic, Current and Future............................................................
3-5
3.1.3 Watershed Disturbance and Response.....................................................................................................
3-6
3.2 REGULATORY REVIEW.....................................................................................................................................3-7
3.2.1 Categorical Exclusion...............................................................................................................................3-7
3.2.2 FEMA Regulated Floodplain Compliance...............................................................................................
3-7
3.2.3 Section 4041401 Permitting.....................................................................................................................
3-7
4.0 FUNCTIONAL UPLIFT POTENTIAL........................................................................................................4-1
4.1 PROJECT CONSTRAINTS...................................................................................................................................4-1
4.2 FUNCTIONAL UPLIFT SUMMARY.....................................................................................................................4-2
5.0 MITIGATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES..........................................................................5-1
6.0 DESIGN APPROACH AND MITIGATION WORK PLAN ....................................................................6-1
6.1 PROJECT DESIGN APPROACH...........................................................................................................................6-1
6.2 DESIGN MORPHOLOGICAL PARAMETERS........................................................................................................6-4
6.3 DESIGN DISCHARGE ANALYSIS.....................................................................................................................6-11
6.3.1 Bankfull Stage Discharge........................................................................................................................
6-11
6.3.2 Bankfull Hydraulic Geometry Relationships (Regional Curve Predictions).......................................6-11
6.3.3 Bankfull Discharge Summary and Conclusions....................................................................................
6-12
6.4 SEDIMENT TRANSPORT ANALYSIS................................................................................................................6-13
6.4.1 Sediment ConpetencyAnalysis ..............................................................................................................6-13
6.5 VEGETATION AND PLANTING PLAN..............................................................................................................6-16
6.5.1 Existing Vegetation and Plant Community Characterization...............................................................
6-16
6.5.2 Proposed Riparian Vegetation Plantings..............................................................................................
6-16
6.6 PROJECT W ORK PLAN....................................................................................................................................
6-18
6.7 PROJECT RISKS AND UNCERTAINTIES...........................................................................................................6-19
7.0 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS...................................................................................................................7-1
7.1 STREAM MONITORING.....................................................................................................................................7-1
7.1.1 BankfullEvents andFloodingFunctions .................................................................................................7-1
7.1.2 Crass Sections............................................................................................................................................ 7-1
7.1.3 Longitudinal Profile and Pattern.............................................................................................................. 7-2
7.1.4 Visual Assessment...................................................................................................................................... 7-2
7.2 VEGETATION MONITORING.............................................................................................................................7-2
8.0 MONITORINGPLAN.....................................................................................................................................8-3
9.0 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN........................................................................................................... 9-1
10.0 LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN.....................................................................................................10-1
11.0 DETERMINATION OF CREDITS.............................................................................................................11-1
12.0 REFERENCES................................................................................................................................................12-1
MICHAELBAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE III
WHI TTI ER CREEK SITE - OPTI ON D MI TI GATON PROJ ECT, DMS N O. 100020
MI TI GATI ON PLAN (D RAFT)

APPENDIX A: (FIGURES, MAPS, AND SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION)
APPENDIX B: (SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT)
APPENDIX C: (CREDIT RELEASE SCHEDULE)
APPENDIX D: (FINANCIAL ASSURANCE)
APPENDIX E: (MAINTENANCE PLAN)
APPENDIX F: (DWR STREAM IDENTIFICATION FORMS)
APPENDIX G: (NC-SAM AND NC-WAM ASSESSMENT FORMS)
APPENDIX H: (APPROVED JD AND WETLAND FORMS)
APPENDIX L• (APPROVED FHWA CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION FORMS)
APPENDIX J: (IRT CORRESPONDENCE)
APPENDIX K (PLAN SHEETS)
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE IV
WHITTIER CREEKSITE-OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DIMS NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1 Project Attributes for Existing Conditions
Table 3.2 Summary of Field Investigations to Determine Intermittent/Perennial Status
Table 3.3 Summary of Field Investigations to Jurisdictional Wetlands
Table 3.4 Comparison of Monthly Rainfall Amounts for Project Site and Long-term Averages
Table 5.1 Mitigation Project Goals and Objectives
Tables 6. la-b Reference Reach Parameters Used to Inform Design
Tables 6.2a-d Stream Design Morphology Parameters
Table 6.3 NC Rural Regional Curve Equations
Table 6.4 Comparison of Bankfull Areas
Table 6.5 Bankfull Discharge Analysis Summary
Table 6.6 Competence Analysis
Table 6.7 Proposed Bare -Root and Live Stake Species
Table 6.8 Proposed Permanent Seed Mixture
Table 8.1 Monitoring Plan Overview
Table 8.2 Monitoring Requirements and Schedule
Table 11.1 Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table 11.2 Length and Area Summations by Mitigation Category
Table 11.3 Overall Assets Summary
Table B.1 Site Protection Instrument Summary
Table C.1 Stream Credit Release Schedule
Table E.1 Routine Maintenance Components
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE
WHI TTI ER CREEK SITE - OPTI ON D MI TI GATON PROJ ECT, DIMS N O. 100020
MI TI GATI ON PLAN (D RAFT)

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Project Vicinity Map
Figure 2. Watershed Planning Elements Map
Figure 3. Adjacent Planning Elements
Figure 4. Existing Conditions and Features
Figure 5. Geologic Map
Figure 6. Drainage Area and Land Use Map
Figure 7. Soils Map
Figure 8. FEMA Floodplain Map
Figure 9A Historical Aerial Image —1950
Figure 913. Historical Aerial Image —1976
Figure 9C. Historical Aerial Image —1993
Figure 10. LiDAR Map
Figure 11. USGS Topographic Map
Figure 12. Proposed Monitoring Features
Figure 13. Project Asset and Credit Map
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE VI
WHI TTI ER CREEK SITE -OPTION D MITI GATON PROJECT, DMS N O. 100020
MI TI GATI ON PLAN (D RAFT)

1.0 PROJECT INTRODUCTION
The Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation Project (project) is located on two abutting parcels of an
active cattle farm in Surry County, North Carolina, approximately 7 miles east of the Town of Dobson in
the Ararat community as shown on the Project Vicinity Map (Figure 1). To access the site from Raleigh,
take Interstate I-40 West to Winston-Salem. Take Exit 206 for I-40 Business/US 421 N toward
Kernersville/Winston-Salem Downtown. Continue to follow I-40 Business/US 421 N toward
Kernersville/Winston-Salem Downtown 12.4 miles. Take Exit 613. Merge onto NC-8 N/US- I IN/US-52
N toward Mount Airy/Smith Reynolds/Airport. Continue to follow US-52 N for 25.1 miles. Take Exit 134
toward S Key Street. At the first traffic circle, take the 3rd exit onto S Key Street. At the next traffic circle,
take the 1st exit onto NC-268 W/S Key Street. Continue to follow NC-268 W for 6.4 miles. Turn right
onto Eldora Road. Follow Eldora Road for 0.6 miles and turn left onto Nurse Road. Follow Nurse Road
for 1.8 miles and turn right onto Rock Hill Church Road. The project site will be located immediately on
the right just past the intersection on Rock Hill Church Road. Coordinates for the center of the project are
36.3779 N Latitude,-80.5999 W Longitude.
The project area lies within the Yadkin River Basin, Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03040101-110040
(named the Bull Creek -Ararat River Watershed), which is identified as a Targeted Local Watershed (TLW)
in the NC Division of Mitigation Services'(DMS) 2009 Upper Yadkin Pee -Dee River Basin Restoration
Priorities(RBRP) report (Figure 2). The project is also located in the Division of Water Resources' (DWR)
Sub -basin 03-07-03. The project is located on the edge of the Piedmont Physiographic Region, within the
Northern Inner Piedmont ecoregion. The project watershed drains into Whittier Creek, which flows into
Bull Creek, then into the Ararat River, which ultimately empties into the Yadkin River, which is a major
drinking water source for downstream communities, counties, and urban areas. Whittier Creek and its
tributaries are classified by NCDWR as Class "C" waters (NCDWR, 2019).
The project will restore 3,073 linear feet (LF) of existing stream and enhance 328 LF of existing stream
along a section of Whittier Creek and Unnamed Tributaries (UTs) to Whittier Creek in the Yadkin River
Watershed.
Historic agricultural use on the project site has been predominantly cattle and crop production. These
activities have negatively impacted both water quality and streambank stability along the project stream
and its tributaries. The resulting observed stressors include excess nutrient input, streambank erosion,
sedimentation, livestock access to streams, channel modification, and the loss of riparian buffers.
The outcomes of this project include:
• Establishment of geomorphically stable conditions along all project reaches,
• Address local water quality stressors by reducing nutrient and sediment inputs,
• Restoration of natural stream and floodplain interactions,
• Enhancement of riparian wetland functions,
• Restoration and protection of riparian buffer functions and corridor habitat,
• Improvement of in -stream aquatic habitat, and
• Establishment of a permanent conservation easement on the entire project.
The project is anticipated to generate a total of 3,060 stream mitigation credits (contracted for 3,000) and
the site will be protected by a 6.97-acre permanent conservation easement (Appendix B).
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 1-1
WHI TTI ER CREEK SITE -OPTION D MI TI GATON PROJECT, DIMS NO. 100020
MI TI GATI ON PLAN (D RAFT)

2.0 WATERSHED APPROACH AND SITE SELECTION
The Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation project is located in Surry County within the Bull Creek - Ararat
River Watershed (03040101-110040) of the Yadkin River Basin (Figure 1), which is identified as a TLW (Figure
2) in DMS' 2009 Upper Yadkin Pee -Dee RBRP. The RBRP describes numerous aquatic stressors and habitat
degradation from environmental conditions within the watershed, including: naturally erodible soils, erosion from
land -disturbing activities (e.g. agriculture, logging, new home construction), excessive stormwater flow in urban
and suburban areas, turbidity and fecal coliform violations from agriculture, and nonexistent or degraded riparian
buffers along streams. The RBRP then outlines several primary watershed restoration goals to address these water
quality stressors and habitat degradation. The Whittier Creek project will address three of these stated goals: the
restoration of water quality and aquatic habitat in impaired stream segments; collaborative efforts with willing
landowners to implement new stream, riparian buffer, and wetland restoration, enhancement, and preservation
projects within TLWs; and the implementation of agricultural BMPs in order to limit inputs of sediment, nutrients
and fecal coliform to streams from active farming operations.
Additionally, the project is located within one of the ten watersheds identified in DMS' Ararat -Pilot Mountain Local
Watershed Plan (LWP). The 2013 Watershed Management Plan for the LWP identified five major stressors to
watershed functions: excess sediment in streams, lack of riparian buffers, excess stormwater runoff, excess nutrient
inputs, and fecal coliform bacteria. The report then provides a list of management recommendations for each
stressor. This project will implement several of those recommendations, including: stream, buffer, and wetlands
restoration/enhancement projects; implementation of agricultural BMPs (especially livestock exclusion); the
restoration and enhancement of riparian buffer corridors; and the protection of headwater streams.
Thus, the Whittier Creek project will directly and/or indirectly address several of the priority stressors identified in
the watershed planning documents discussed above, through the implementation of their recommended
management practices. The project will reduce erosion and sedimentation by stabilizing eroding stream banks and
reestablishing a floodplain to reduce scour pressure, will reduce nutrient and fecal coliform inputs through the
exclusion of all livestock from the streams, willimprove riparian buffer habitat with the establishment of a minimum
30-foot wide forested riparian corridor, and will enhance and preserve several wetland areas located within the
floodplain. The entire project area will then be permanently protected through the establishment of a 6.97-acre
conservation easement.
In addition, the protection and restoration of the Whittier Creek site will assist in providing a geographical
connection with three existing DMS projects, several other designated conservation areas, and numerous NC
Natural Heritage Program (NHP) Significant Natural Areas, including the biodiversity priority area Pilot Mountain
State Park (Figure 3).
Therefore, the proposed project location aligns well with the overall goals and implementation needs outlined in
DMS' RBRP and LWP planning documents.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 2-1
WHITTIER CREEKSITE-OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DMS NO.100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

3.0 BASELINE AND EXISTING CONDITIONS
The Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation Project is located in the Ararat community near the Town
of Dobson in Surry County, North Carolina, within the Upper Yadkin Pee -Dee River Basin. The following
sections will describe the existing conditions found on the project and include a description and history of
the surrounding landscape and overall watershed land use and conditions, as well as a discussion of the
specific environmental impacts and responses they have produced on the project.
Table 3.1 below provides a summary of the key project attributes and individual reach parameters for the
existing conditions on site. Existing stream lengths listed below include piped stream length.
Table 3.1. Project Attributes for Existing Conditions
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitig ation Pro ject— NCDM S Project No. 100020
Project Information
Project Name
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation Project
County
Surry
Project Area (acres)
6.97
Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude)
36.3779 N,-80.5999 W
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province
Northern Inner Piedmont
River Basin
Yadkin Pee -Dee
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit
1 03040101
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit
03040101-110040
DW R Sub -basin
03-07-03
Project Drainage Area (acres)
1,722 acres / 2.69 squaremiles (at downstream end ofR7)
Project Drainage Area Percentage of
Irn ervious Area
o
0.95 /o impervious area
USGS National Land CoverDatabase
(NLCD) for 2011
82% developed (predominantly rural residential), 41.6%
cultivated crops and hay, 6.9% grass/pasture, 4.8% shrub/scrub,
and 38.3% forested.
Reach Summary Information
Parameters
ReachR7
UT4a
UT4b
UT5
Existing length of reach (linear feet)
1,462
338
764
765
Valley confinement (Confined, moderately
confined,unconfined)
Unconfined
Moderately
Confined
Unconfined
Moderately
Confined
Drainage area (acres)
1,722
225
305
72
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral
Perennial
Perennial
Perennial
Perennial
NCDWR Water Quality Classification
C
C
C
C
Stream Classification(e)dsting/proposed)
G4 & F4/C4
E4b/E4b
E4 &
G4c/C4
B4 &
E4b/C4b
Evolutionary trend (Simon)
IV —
Degradation
and Widening
III—
Degradation
IV
Degradation
and
Widening
III —
Degrading
FEMA classification
Zone X
Zone X
Zone X
Zone X
Regulatory Considerations
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 3-1
WH I TTI ER CREEK SITE -OPTION D MI TI GATON PROJ ECT, D MS NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

Regulatory Considerations
Parameters
Applicable?
Resoled?
Supporting Does?
Water of the United States -Section 404
Yes
Yes
PCN
Water of the United States -Section 401
Yes
Yes
PCN
Endangered Species Act
Yes
Yes
Categorical Exclusion
Historic PreservationAct
Yes
Yes
Categorical Exclusion
CoastalZone Management Act (CZMA or
LAMA)
No
N/A
N/A
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
No
N/A
N/A
Essential Fisheries Habitat
No
N/A
N/A
Notes:
3.1 Watershed Processes and Resource Conditions
3.1.1 Landscape Characteristics
The Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation Project (project) is located on an active cattle farm in Surry
County within the Bull Creek — Ararat River watershed of the Yadkin River Basin. The project is situated
on the edge of the Piedmont Physiographic Region, within the EPXs Level IV Ecoregion 45e: Northern
Inner Piedmont ecoregion (Griffith et al., 2002). This ecoregion tends to have higher elevations, more
rugged topography, and more monadnocks than other areas of the Piedmont. Vegetation is dominated with
pine forests on old field sites and pine plantations and mixed oak forests in more natural/less disturbed
areas. Unlike nearby Ecoregions 45b and 45c, this region tends to contain more Virginia Pine (P.
virginiana) and Chestnut Oak (Q. montana) and fewer shortleaf pines (P. echinata). Streams in this region
also tend to have higher gradients and contain many mountain -type macroinvertebrate species than those
found in the outer Piedmont, with cobble and gravel substrates more commonly observed. Elevations vary
dramatically across this region, from 360 feet in the eastern portion to 2,035 feet along the westernboundary
with the Blue Ridge mountains, though this project is located in roughly the middle of that range at an
elevation of approximately 1,000 feet.
Field evaluations of intermittent/perennial stream status w ere c onducted in the winter of 2016 and the spring
of 2018. Wetland delineations were conducted on the site in April 2018. Results from these field reviews
indicate that there are 3,329 linear feet of jurisdictional stream and approximately 0.153 acres of
Jurisdictional wetland located within the project boundary and surrounding vicinity. Wetlands are classified
as either headwater forest or bottomland hardwood forest (NC Wetland Functional Assessment Team,
2010). Differences between the two types of classifications are the result of the first and second -order
nature of their adjacent streams. Wetlands are located in the floodplain and/or along the toe of adjacent
slopes. Further information on the jurisdictional features can be found in Section 3.2.3 and in Appendix H.
Field evaluations were based on the NCDWQ (now NCDWR) Methodology for Identification of
Intermittent and Perennial Streams and Their Origins (v 4.11), the Corps of Engineers Wetlands
Delineation Manual (1987), and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation
Manual: Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region (v2.0). Project Reach R7 is denoted as solid "blue -line"
stream on the USGS Topographic Map (Mount Airy South and Siloam Quadrangles). Due to the large
drainage area and obvious perennial status, a stream form was not completed for this reach. Table 3.2 and
3.3 present the assessed stream and wetland classifications for the project. See Figure 4 for a depiction of
the Jurisdictional Waters. Field assessments were confirmedby the USACE in the Preliminary JD received
on 6/27/2018 (See Appendix I). Copies of the completed classification forms are in Appendix F.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 3-2
WHI TTI ER CREEK SITE - OPTI ON D MITI GATON PROJ ECT, DIMS NO. 100020
MI TI GATI ON PLAN (D RAFT)

Table 3.2. Summary of Field Investigations to Determine Intermittent/Perennial Status
Whittier Creek Site -Option D Mitigation Project- NCDM S Project No.100020
Project Reach
Designation
fisting Project
Reach Length (ft)
NCDWRStream
Classification Score
Watershed Drainage
Area(acres)l
StreamStatus Based
on Field Analyses
R7
1,462
-
1,722
Perennial
UT4 (a & b)
1,102
38
305
Perennial
UT5
765
34.5
72
Perennial
Note': Watershed drainage area was estimated using the online USGS StreamStats program, as well as topographic and
DDAR information at the downstream endof each reach.
Table 3.3. Summary of Field Investigations to Jurisdictional Wetlands
Whittier Creek Site -Option D Mitigation Project- NCDM S Project No.100020
Project Wetland
Designation
Existing Wetland Area
Classification
Total (ac)
Within
Conservation
Easement (ac)
NC WAM Classification
Cowardin
W -A
0.068
0.016
Headwater Forest
PEM 1
W-B
0.041
0.039
Bottom land Hardwood Forest
PEM 1
W-C
0.039
0.029
BottomlandHardwood Forest
PEM1
W -D
0.006
0.006
Headwater Forest
PEM 1
C Wetland Functional Assessment Team 2010 & FGDC 2013
Climatic Conditions
The Mt Airy 2W (Station ID 315890) weather station in Surry County is located approximately 11.5
miles northwest of project site. This Station lists the average annual rainfall for the surrounding area
as 49.05 inches, based on data collected from 1998- 2018 as shown below in Table 3.4 along with the
monthly historic averages. This station, along with another nearby station (CoCoRaHS: NC-SR-2 -
Dobson 2.3 SE) will be used to determine departures from normal rainfall amounts throughout the
project. As reported in the Surry County Soil Survey, the growing season for the site is 200 days in
length and begins on April 8 and ends on October 26, using the 50% probability data for a temperature
of 28' F or higher (NRCS, 2007).
Table 3.4. Comparison of Monthly Rainfall Amounts for Project Site and Long-term Averages
Whittier Creek Site -Option D Mitigation Project- NCDM S Project No. 100020
Month-
Year
Mount Airy Station Average
Monthly Precipitation (in)
30% Probability
Precipitation is less than
(in)
30% Probability
Precipitation is more
than (in)
January
3.68
2.41
4.42
February
2.70
1.81
3.23
March
3.96
2.84
4.68
April
4.24
2.96
5.03
May
4.54
2.84
5.49
June
4.79
3.21
5.74
July
5.35
3.56
6.41
August
4.77
3.32
5.67
September
4.53
3.41
5.29
October
3.33
2.20
3.99
November
3.11
1.82
3.78
December
4.06
2.99
4.76
SUM
49.05
43.77
53.29
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 3-3
WHITTIER CREEKSITE- OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DIMS NO.100020
MI TI GATI ON PLAN (D RAFT)

Geoloav and Soils
Geologically, the Whittier Creek Site is located within the Sauratown Mountain Anticlinorium of the
Inner Piedmont Belt (NCGS, 1985) as shown in Figure 5. This inner belt is the most intensely deformed
and metamorphosed portion of the Piedmont and contains highly metamorphic rock formations that
have been bent and folded into synclines and anticlines, while the Sauratown Mountain Anticlinorium
is a northeast -trending foliation arch composed of several smaller formations. The Whittier Creek site
is underlain by a formation consisting of metagraywacke (biotite gneiss) interlayered and gradational
with amphibolite and kyanite schist, along with minor ultramafic and granitic rock intrusions. Deeper
below the site a banded gneiss formation can be found interlayered with calc-silicate rock,
metaconglomerate, amphibolite, sillimanite-mica schist, and granitic rock.
The geology underlying a stream can influence its chemical composition, as a significant volume of
stream discharge originates as groundwater, especially during periods of low precipitation. The
groundwater originating from the biotite gneiss found beneath the Whittier Creek Site is generally
expected to be slightly alkaline with moderate levels of dissolved solids from the minerals in the
formation (Daniel and Dahlen, 2002).
The project site is located within the Felsic Crystalline Soil System of the Piedmont Soil Region of
North Carolina (Daniels et al., 1999), formed primarily in residium saprolite from the underlying
bedrock metamorphic or igneous parent materials. In this northwestern portion of the Piedmont, silty
to clayey saprolite and micaceous -clay to silty -clay saprolite are commonly found from the weathered
gneiss, schists, and amphibolite of the underlying bedrock. Topographically, broad gently sloping
uplands are common in this region with moderately to steeply sloping areas with narrow convex ridges
and steep valley slopes along branching, dendritic stream patterns. Finer -textured soils typically
dominate the uplands, while more coarse -loamy soils are commonly found throughout the floodplains.
The specific soils located on the Whittier Creek Site as determined though the Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey for Surry County are dominated by Colvard fine sandy loam
(Typic Udifluvents) and Suches loam soils (Fluventic Dystrudepts) found throughout the floodplains
of the project (Figure 7). Both of these are common series consisting of very deep, well drained soils
more frequently found in the floodplains of the southern Appalachian Mountains, but certainly not
unusual to be found in the far western portion of the Piedmont. Neither series is an NRCS-listed hydric
soil for Surry County. The adjacent uplands are dominated by Fairview sandy clay loam soils (Typic
Kanhapludults), another common series consisting of very deep, well drained soils frequently
containing cobbles, found along the hills and ridges of the Piedmont uplands. Other upland soils found
adjacent to the site include the Rhodhiss-Bannertown complex and the Toast-Bannertown complex.
These soils are also deep, well drained loams or coarse sandy loams commonly found throughout the
Piedmont uplands.
Visual inspections of the stream substrate materials were conducted for the entire site, while bed
material sample collection and analysis was conducted along Reaches R7, UT4a, UT4b, and UT5 in
the locations of surveyed cross sections. The project streams consist primarily of a mix of fine to
medium sand to large cobble. The D50 values across the site range from 6.4 mm to 40.6 mm, with an
average D50 of 24.4 mm, as explained in further detail in Section 6.4. Due to channelization and the
resulting downcutting from headcut migration, Reach UT4a has bedrock knickpoint controlling the
channel grade and defines the reach break at UT4b.
Topography
The general topography within the project's 2.69 square mile drainage area is typical of much of the
western portion of the inner Piedmont. The surrounding terrain is rugged with steep hills and ridges
overlooking fairly narrow stream valleys. The average elevation of the drainage area is 1,130 feet,
with a minimum elevation of 987 feet and a maximum elevation of 1,310 feet. The topography of the
project site itself and its immediate surrounding area is very similar, with adjacent moderate to steeply -
sloped hills overlooking the project streams and floodplain. The project valley slope varies for each
reach valley as R7 (Whittier Creek) is fairly gentle with a 0.6% slope, while the valley slopes for UT4a,
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 3-4
WH I TTI ER CREEK SITE -OPTION D MI TI GATON PROJECT, DMS NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

UT4b, and UT5 are significantly steeper with 2.6%, 1.9% and 2.6% slopes respectively. The project
area within the easement has a high -point elevation of 1,016 feet and a low -point elevation of 987 feet.
Figures 10 and 11 depict the topography for the project site and the surrounding drainage area.
Existing Vegetation:
Vegetation on the project site itself has been heavily disturbed from years of use in agriculture.
Currently the site is predominantly managed as cattle pasture and some cropland and largely consists
of a range of typical pasture grasses (fescues and clovers) with scattered weeds and other common
herbaceous species presentsuch as bittercress (Cardamine hirsute), docks (Rumexspp. ), common violh
(Viola sororia), chickweed (Stellaria media), lyre sage (Salvia lyrata), plantains (Plantago spp. ), and
dandelions (Taraxacum officiniale), with soft rush (Juncus effusus) and jewelweed (Impatiens
capensis) found in wetter areas. Avery narrow buffer of trees is present along most of Reach R7
(Whittier Creek) and along a short section of Reach UT4b. The trees present on site consist primarily
of chinaberry (Melia azedarach), Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), sycamore (Platarm
occidentalis), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), black willow (Salix nigra), and tulip poplar
(Liriodendron tulipifera), along with some scattered black walnut (Juglans nigra), persimmon
(Diospyros virginiana), river birch (Betula nigra), red maple (Ater rubrum), red cedar (Juniperm
virginiana), and black cherry (Prunus serotina). Blackberry (Rubus spp.), multi -flora rose (Rosa
multiflora), and elderberry (Sambucus canadensis) are found scattered throughout the understory as
well.
Looking farther out at the entire project drainage area, the existing vegetative community outside the
cultivated agricultural land is dominated by Dry-Mesic Oak -Hickory Forest (Schafale and Weakley,
1990) comprised of a mixture of white oak (Quercus alba), northern red oak (Quercus rubra), black
oak (Quercus Velutina), mockemut hickory (Carya tomentosa), red hickory (Carya ovalis), and pignut
hickory (Carya glabra), with various pines (Pinus spp. ), tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), and
sweetgum (Liquidambarstyraciflua) also found. Common understory species includeRed maple (Ater
rubrum), American Holly (Ilex opaca), Blackgum (Nyssa sylvatica), sourwood (Oxydendrum
arboreum), and American beech (Fagus grandifolia), along with various Viburnums and Vaccinium
shrub species. Along the warmer and drier south -facing slopes in the area, additional species may also
be found, including post oak (Quercus stellata), Virginia pine (Pinus virginiana), shortleaf pine (Pinus
echinata), white ash (Fraxinus americana), and red cedar (Juniperus virginiana).
Notable invasive species present on the site include Chinaberry (Melia azedarach), Chinese privet
(Ligustrum sinense), and multi -flora rose (Rosa multiflora) found scattered along the banks and within
the riparian buffers of the project streams.
3.1.2 Land Use / Land Cover, Impacts, Historic, Current and Future
Relevant land use / land cover and their impacts were investigated for the project and surrounding
watershed through landowner discussions, a review of historic aerial photographs, GIS analysis using
historic datasets, and field reconnaissance.
Based on landowner conversations, historic agricultural uses on the project site itself included cattle
production and row crops. These activities have negatively impacted both water quality and streambank
stability along the project streams and their tributaries. The resulting stressors include excess nutrient
input, streambank erosion, sedimentation, livestock access to streams, channel modification, and the
loss of riparian buffers.
The USGS National Land Cover Database (NLCD) for 2011 shows that the entire 2.69 square mile
(1,722 acres) project drainage area was 8.2% developed (with 0.95% being impervious surface), 41.61/o
cultivated crops and hay, 6.9% grass/pasture, 4.8% shrub/scrub, and 38.3% forested as shown in Figure
6. The 1992 NLCD data states that the area was 43.7% cultivated crops and hay, and 56.1% forested
The percentage of all developed land -use categories combined was rated as 2.5%in the 1992 evaluation.
Thus, it appears that an increase in the clearing of forested land for development and agriculture
occurred over that 19-year period. For comparison, the 2009 Upper Yadkin Pee -Dee RBRP describes
MI CHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 3-5
WHITTIER CREEK SITE-OPTIOND MITIGATON PROJECT, DIMS N0.100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

the overall, Bull Creek —Ararat River watershed (16 square mile) as being similar with approximately
34% forested area and 44% in total agriculture, and 22% non -forested riparian areas. Thus, it appears
that the greater watershed is similar to the project drainage area, but with increased development at the
expense of forested land.
Historic aerial photographs from 1950, 1972, and 1993 were reviewed for the project and its
surrounding area (Figures 9A, 913, and 9C). They reveal a project area that has been cleared and streams
that have been straightened with consistent agricultural land use activities dating back to the earliest
photograph. The project area itself is readily identifiable in all historic aerials with little change over
the past sixty-nine years, other than R7 trying to reestablish a sinuous pattern and slight conversion of
various forested areas to individual agriculture fields. Based on these historical aerials, the lack of
sinuosity, and the level of channel incision throughout much of stream, it is highly likely that Reach
R7 (Whittier Creek) was channelized prior to 1950 and has lacked a wooded buffer since that time.
The tributaries to Reach R7 have also been historically impacted. These impacts range from the
removal of streambuffer, installation of culverts, and livestock impacts. Thesereaches have also likely
been straitened and moved to the edge of the valley. While the percent of forested land within the
watershed is decreasing and the percent of developed and agricultural lands are increasing, the
watershed as a whole did not show any dramatic changes in overall land use since the earliest photo
from 1950. It was, and remains, a predominantly rural area with slightly changing land uses over time.
The history of the land use and land cover of the site and surrounding watershed indicates that
significant impacts to water quality have occurred, certainly resulting in increases in erosion,
sedimentation, and nutrient inputs to the streams, and decreases in stream and riparian habitat and
function.
Currently, the project is an active farm with approximately 14.3 acres of crop production and 19 acres
of pasture. Livestock have unrestricted access to the entire length of UT5 and approximately 50% of
both R7 and UT4b. The upstream extents of each of the project reaches begins at a North Carolina
Department of Transportation culvert. Two overhead utility lines are located within the project area
One of them runs parallel to Nurse Road and crosses Reach R7 at the upstream extent. The other
crosses UT4 at the reach break between UT4a and UT4b and then midway along UT5. However, the
locations he either outside the easement boundary or within easement breaks and should not affect the
project.
The future for the project watershed will likely remain undeveloped and rural in nature with large
amounts of forested cover included in the agricultural landscape.
3.1.3 Watershed Disturbance and Response
The watershed disturbances are described above and include the removal of wooded buffers, livestock
impacts, channelization, ditching and installation of culverts. Whittier Creek (R7) has responded to
these disturbances by becoming severely incised and is laterally eroding as well. UT4 and UT5 have
also become unstable. The upstream extents of these reaches are not as incised as the downstream ends.
However, they still exhibit active bank erosion. Streambanks are mostly vertical with large areas of
scour and mass wasting exacerbated by cattle impacts. The lack of woody and deep rooting vegetation
along project reaches have allowed for accelerated bank migration. The channel incision and associated
decrease in overbank flooding frequency has likely resulted in a lowered water table.
The project reaches have been heavily impacted from historic land use practices, predominantly
livestock production and other agricultural uses. Within the project area, all of the reaches have
inadequate (less than 30 feet wide), low quality riparian buffers containing sparse, immature trees, and
invasive species. Figure 4 shows the most recent aerial photography with clearly narrow and/or absent
riparian buffers. Livestock hoof shear, lack of deep-rooted woody vegetation, and storm flow shear
stresses have severely impacted the stream banks along the project stream reaches. From visual
inspections both on the ground and from aerial photography, many of the streams within this watershed
are in a similar condition.
MI CHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 3-6
W H I TTI ER CREEK SITE -OPTION D MI TI GATON PROJ ECT, DIMS NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

3.2 Regulatory Review
3.2.1 Categorical Exclusion
The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) requires agencies to use an interdisciplinary
approach in planning and decision -making for actions that will have an impact on the environment. The
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT) have
determined that DMS projects will not involve significant impacts and therefore a Categorical
Exclusion (Cat Ex) is the appropriate type of environmental document for this project FHWAhas also
determined that stream restoration projects are considered land disturbing activities; therefore, Parts 2
and 3 of the DMS Cat Ex checklist and a summary of the findings applicable to the environmental
regulations associated for this project are included.
The Cat Ex for the Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation Project was approved by FHWA and
NCDMS on February 5, 2018. The Cat -Ex summarized impacts to natural, cultural, and historical
resources and documented coordination with stakeholders and federal and state agencies. All
documentation for the Cat Ex is included in Appendix I.
3.21 FEMA Regulated Floodplain Compliance
The Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation project is in FEMA Zone X as noted on the Suny
County Flood Insurance Rate Map Panels 3710592600J and 3710592400J (Figure 8). The topography
of the site and location in the upper watershed supports the design without creating the potential for
hydrologic trespass.
3.2.3 Section 404 / 401 Permitting
The proposed project area was reviewed for the presence of jurisdictional wetlands and waters of the
United States in accordance with the provisions of Executive Order 11990, the Clean Water Act, and
subsequent federal regulations and guidance. The areas in the project boundaries that displayed one or
more wetland characteristics were reviewed to determine the presence of wetlands. The wetland
characteristics include the prevalence of hydrophytic vegetation, permanent to periodic inundation or
saturation, and the presence of hydric soils.
Following a desktop review of the National Wetland Inventory (NWI), NRCS soil survey, and USGS
quadrangle maps, the project area was evaluated in the field for the presence of jurisdictional features.
Baker wetland scientists conducted field surveys of the project area on April 9, 2018 to investigate
potential wetlands, while field surveys had previously been conducted on December 12, 2016 to
confirm the perennial and intermittent status of jurisdictional streams in the project area. In total, the
field surveys confirmed the jurisdictional status of the three project streams (four reaches), along with
four separate jurisdictional wetland areas, which were subsequently flagged, surveyed, and mapped as
shown in the documentation found in Appendix R All wetland areas have had impacts to vegetation
and are almost entirely devoid of trees. These jurisdictional features were confirmed in the field by the
USACE in May of 2018, and a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) letter was received on
June 27, 2018. A copy of the PJD is provided in Appendix H, along with all the associated USACE
wetland data forms. The NCDWR stream identification forms are provided in Appendix F.
The proposed mitigation design will enhance the identified jurisdictional wetlands areas through the
restoration of a more natural flooding regime, planting native wetland vegetation, and by raising their
water table. The design will also avoid or minimize disturbance or impacts to the wetlands during
project construction wherever possible. Wetland credit is not being sought for this project. Any
ecological and/or hydrologic uplift to wetland features will be perceived solely as a positive outcome
for the overall project's success. A copy of the Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) will be provided
with the Final Mitigation Plan.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 3-7
WHI TTI ER CREEK SITE - OPTI ON D MITI GATON PROJ ECT, DMS NO. 100020
MI TI GATI ON PLAN (D RAFT)

4.0 FUNCTIONAL UPLIFT POTENTIAL
Current stream and watershed conditions within the project site as well as throughout the Whittier Creek
watershed described in previous sections allow for functional improvements at this site. Channel incision,
removal of riparian buffer, and livestock impacts are the predominant impairments within the project reaches
and have contributed to the overall degradation of the local ecosystem due to a lack of floodplain connectivity,
minimal bedform variation, and high amounts of sediment inputs from bank erosion.
The uplift for these project reaches will be achieved at the hydraulic and geomorphological functional levels.
Hydraulic improvements will come from reintroducing bankfull flows to the historic floodplain through Priority
I Restoration along UT4b and UT5, and by excavating a bankfull bench along R7 through a Priority II
Restoration. Reestablishing floodplain connectivity will allow stream flows to access the floodprone area more
frequently and return a hydraulic routing system through this stream corridor that will distribute flood flows
through a broader area instead of within a confined channel. Geomorphological functional uplift will be
achieved through channels sized to the bankfull flow, a planform and profile design emphasizing bedform
variation with high amounts of woody debris for bank protection and habitat, and the reestablishment of a
forested riparian corridor. As a result, bank migration and lateral stability will be restored to a sustainable level
and the banks and bed will accommodate design flows in a stable manner. Sediment inputs will decrease due
to reduced bank erosion and sediment transport can return to a stable level that will accommodate watershed
inputs. Riparian plantings will further support geomorphological functionality by increasing bank stability.
Consideration of future impacts to the area that could limit functional uplift opportunities is important when
assessing project potential. As mentioned in previous sections, the project exists within a rural area where
agriculture is the primary land use. Substantial changes to the surrounding area are not expected. The watershed
will experience minimal change in the future; therefore, the hydrology of the site will likely remain unchanged
as well.
4.1 Project Constraints
The principle constraints to achieving maximum uplift potential for the project are related to upstream and off -
site issues, as these existing upstream conditions within the project watershed will have significant impacts to
potential physicochemical and biological improvements. Examples of upstream water quality issues include
nutrient and sediment loading, and the presence of diverse biology near the site to repopulate the improved
habitat. Additional project constraints are the necessity of stream crossings and easement breaks. There are
two power line easements that transect the project. One crosses at the downstream extent ofUT4a and mid -way
along UT5. Conservation easement breaks will be incorporated in these areas to allow for the exclusion of the
power line easement. In orderto minimize additional breaks in the conservation easement, a culverted crossing
will be installed within the power line easement along UT5. This crossing will allow the landowners access to
different parts of their properties and rotate livestock without disturbing the restored stream or the riparian areas.
The other power line easement crosses R7 in the upstream extent just below Nurse Road and will be also
excluded from the conservation area. One ford crossing will be installed on R7 upstream of the confluence
with UT4b to allow for cattle rotation between pastures. Though no credit is being sought for any of these
breaks, restoration and enhancement measures will continue through these sections to ensure the long-term
success of the project. No additional crossings or conservation easement breaks are proposed.
Existing NCDOT culverts are located at the head of R7, UT4a, and UT5. In order to maintain aquatic passage
while allowing for the implementation of stabilization measures, Priority II transitions will be implemented to
tie the proposed streambed elevations into the existing elevations.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 4-1
WHITTIERCREEKSITE- OPTIONDMITIGATON PROJECT
DMS PROJECT N O. 100020
AUGUST2018 - DRAFT

4.2 Functional Uplift Summary
Substantial functional uplift for the Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation project is expected and is
described in detail above. Improvements to site hydraulics and geomorphology will be clear and measurable
post -construction, while improvements to other functions such as physicochemical and biological may not be
as easily determined and can be greatly affected by offsite conditions. Since only the hydraulics and
geomorphology of the project streams are being directly measured, project goals are primarily linked to these
functions. While project vegetation will also be monitored and can be linked to biological and physicochemical
uplift these parameters are more difficult to directly measure. Table 5.1 summarizes the project goals and
objectives that will lead to functional improvements and the monitoring tools that will be used to track these
changes to the site.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 4-2
WHITTIERCREEKSITE- OPTION D MITI GATON PROJECT
DMS PROJECT N O. 100020
AUGUST2018 - DRAFT

5.0 MITIGATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The goals and objectives for the Whittier Creek Site project are detailed below in Table 5.1. They represent the
logical conclusion to the previous discussions of current site conditions and historic use, watershed disturbance
and response, and the functional uplift potential for the project. The listed goals are broad statements about
intended project accomplishments and are consistent with the identified watershed priorities as outlined in the
Watershed Approach and Site Selection discussion in Section 2. By comparison, the objectives and outcomes
are intended to be more specific and measurable, and represent direct steps towards accomplishing the
associated goal. The project objectives will have performance standards and success criteria associated with
them as described later in Section 7 of this report and will be evaluated throughout the monitoring phase of the
project.
Table 5.1 Mitigation Project Goals and Objectives
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation Project — NCDMS Project No. 100020
Goals
Objectives
Functional Level
Monitoring Measurement
Tool
To raise channel beds or excavate
Reconnect
bankfullfloodplainsby utilizing
streamreaches
eitheraPriority I Restoration
Hydraulics
Flood Frequency
to their
approach, Priority II Restoration
floodplains
approach, or an Enhancement LevelI
approach.
To construct streams of appropriate
dimensions, pattern andprofile in
Improve stream
restored reaches, slope streambanks
Cross -Sectional Survey
stability
and provide bankfullbenches on
Geomorphology
Visual Inspection
enhanced streams, and utilize bio-
engineeringto provide long term
stability.
Construct an appropriate channel
morphology to all streams increasing
Improve
the number and depths of pools,
Cross -Sectional Survey
aquatic habitat
mcreasingthe amount of woody
Geomorphology
Visual Inspection
debris with structures including geo-
lifts with brush toe, log vanes/weirs,
root wads, and/or J-hooks.
Reestablish
Establish riparian buffers at a 30-ft
forested
minimum width along all stream
Geomorphology
Vegetation Plots
riparian buffers
reaches, planted with native tree and
Visual Inspection
shrub species.
Establish a permanent conservation
Permanently
easement restricting land use in
protectthe
perpetuity. This will prevent site
Geomorphology
Visual Inspection
project
disturbance andallowthe project to
mature and stabilize.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 5-1
WHITTIERCREEKSITE- OPTION D MITI GATON PROJECT
DMS PROJECT N O. 100020
AUGUST2018 - DRAFT

6.0 DESIGN APPROACH AND MITIGATION WORK PLAN
6.1 Project Design Appro ach
The selection of project design criteria was based on a combination of approaches, including a review of
applicable streams from a reference database, regime equations, evaluation of monitoring results from
numerous past projects, and best professional judgment. Evaluating data from previous reference reach
surveys and the monitoring results from multiple NC Foothills projects provided the most pertinent
background information to determine the appropriate design parameters given the existing conditions and
overall site functional uplift potential. The design parameters for the site also took into consideration current
guidelines from the USACE and NCDMS.
While reference reach data can be a useful aid in designing channel dimension, pattern, and profile, there are
limitations in smaller stream systems. The flow patterns and channel formation for most reference reach
quality streams is often controlled by slope, drainage areas, and larger trees and/or other deep-rooted
vegetation. Some meander geometry parameters, such as radius of curvature, are particularly affected by
vegetation control. Pattern ratios observed in reference reaches may not be applicable or are often adjusted n
the design criteria to create more conservative designs that are less likely to erode after construction, before
the permanent vegetation is established. Reference reach data was used to provide additional confidence in
the design parameters chosen but not used as the only basis for design parameter selection.
Baker selected reference reaches from the NCDOT database. These reference reaches have successfully been
used on similar stream restoration projects within the low mountains and foothills of North Carolina.
Additionally, reference parameters from Baker's internal database based on successful past projects were
consulted and analyzed. The data shown on Table 6.1 helped to provide a basis for evaluating the project site
and determining the stream systems that may have been present historically and/or how they may have been
influenced by changes within the watershed.
The reference sites used for the design of this project are similar in landscape setting as the Whittier Creek
Project site. As with the Whittier Creek site, both the Basin Creek and Big Branch sites are situated close to
the border between the Piedmont and Blue Ridge ecoregions. More specifically, both Whittier Creek and Big
Branch are located within the Northern Inner Piedmont ecoregion, while Basin Creek is within the Southern
Crystalline Ridges and Mountains ecoregion of the Blue Ridge. The Basin Creek site is in neighboring Wilkes
County and the Big Branch Site is in Surry County. These two reference sites were used to compare to the
Baker Composite Reference Data in determining design criteria for reaches R7, UT4b, and UT5.
Table 6.1a Reference Reach Parameters Used to Inform Design
Whittier Creek Site - Option D Mitigation Project - NCDMS Project No. 100020
Parameter
Basin
Creek
Big Branch
Baker Composite
Reference Data
1VIin
I Max
Nfin
I Max
Van
Max
County
Wilkes
Surry
Stream Type
C4
E4
C4
Drainage Area - square miles
7.2
1.9
Bankfull Width wbkf -feet
29.5
36.9
19.3
21.5
Bankfull Mean Depth dbkf - feet
1.9
2.2
1.8
2.1
Width/Depth Ratio w/d ratio
13.4
19.42
9.2
11.9
10.0 15.0
Cross sectional Area Abkf - SF
64.9
71.9
39.6
39.9
Bankfull Mean Velocity vbkf - fps
5.5
N/P
3.5 5.0
Bankfull Discharge kf -cfs
375
N/P
Bankfull Max Depth d,,,bkf - feet
3.0 T 3 2
1 2.5 1 2.7
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 6-1
WHITTI ER CREEK SITE -OPTION D MITIGATON PROJ ECT, DMS NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

Table 6.1a Reference Reach Parameters Used to Inform Design
Whittier Creek Site - Option D Mitigation Project - NCDMS Project No. 100020
Basin
Baker Composite
Parameter
Creek
Big Branch
Reference Data
N riin I Max
Main I Max
Main
Max
dr.bkf / dbkf ratio
N/P
N/P
1.2
1.5
Low Bank Height to dmbkf Ratio
N/P
N/P
1.0
Floodprone Area Width w a - feet
329
130
Entrenchment Ratio ER
8.92
6.05
6.74
Meander length (L.) - feet
350
185
260
Ratio of meander length to barMull width
(Lrn/Wbkf)
10.54
9.1
12.8
7.0
14.0
Radius of curvature (Rc) - feet
40.1 1 69.3
42.3
63.1
Ratio of radius of curvature to bankfull
width Re/ Wbkf
1.54
2.1
3.1
2.0
3.0
Belt width Wblt -feet
59
75
30.5
44
Meander Width Ratio (Wblt/Wbkf)
1.78
1 2.26
1.5
1 2.2
3.5
8.0
Sinuosity (1) Stream Length/ Valley
N/P
1.1
1.2
1.4
Distance
Valley Slope - feet per foot
N/P
N/P
0.005
0.015
Channel Sloe Schannel - feet per foot
.0144
0.009
Pool Slope (s ool)-feet per foot
.0019
N/P
Ratio of Pool Slope to Average Slope
0.13
N/P
0.00
0.20
(Spool/ Schannel
Maximum Pool Depth (d ool) - feet
4.1
5.2
3.5
4.1
Ratio of Pool Depth to Average Bankfull
Depth (d ool/dbkf)
2.0
2.54
1.79
2.1
1.5
3.5
Pool Width w ool -feet
35
68
19.7
18.5
Ratio of Pool Width to Bankfull Width
1.52
0.91
0.97
1.2
1.7
(W ool / Wbkf)
Pool Area ool - square feet
89.3
1132.5
51
54.5
Ratio of Pool Area to Bankfull Area
ool/Abkf
1.6
1.33
Pool -to -Pool Spacing - feet
271
334
97.5
179.8
Ratio of Pool -to -Pool Spacing to Bankfull
Width - /Wbkf
8.16
10.06
4.78
8.81
3.5
7.0
Riffle Slope (Sriffie) - feet per foot
0.02
0.015
0.019
Ratio of Riffle Slope to Average Slope
1.39
1.67
2.11
1.2
1.5
Sriffie/ Sbkf
d16 - mm
0.17
0.13
d35 -mm
29
0.3
dso -mm
58
1.9
dsa - mm
180
50
d95 -mm
300
1 100
Notes:
Basin Creek and Big Branch from NC Department of Transportation, Reference Reach Database
N/P: Data was not provided in the NCDOT reference reach database
Values in this chart were rounded and may differ very slightly from actual values.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 6-2
WHITTIER CREEKSITE- OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DIMS NO.100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

Additionally, some profile reference reach parameters were taken from the Micky Reach site, which is a 134
stream type. While no project reaches will be designed as strictly B stream types, UT5 is designed as a C4b
and the facet slopes and pool to pool spacing for a B stream type are appropriate to use for a C4b. The Micky
Reach site is a tributary to the Mitchell River located in Surry County. Like the Whittier Creek site, Micky
Reach is also within the Northern Inner Piedmont ecoregion. It was a restoration site constructed in 2003.
The as -built field surveys for Micky Reach were completed in 2003 and the site was visited annually for
monitoring purposes until 2007, though periodic field visits have been made since. It was determined that the
site has remained stable and is a viable reference reach site. The survey data shown here were used to evaluate
the natural channel parameters describing the dimension, pattern, and profile of the reach for design parameter
consideration purposes.
Table 6.1b Reference Reach Parameters Used to Inform Design
Whittier Creek Site - Option D Mitigation Project - NCDMS Project No. 100020
Parameter
Micky
Reach
Baker Composite Reference
Data
Min
I Max
Min
Max
County
Surry
Stream Type
134
134
Drainage Area - square miles
0.45
Bankfull Width Wbkf -feet
11.7
21.7
Bankfull Mean Depth (dbkf) - feet
0.6
1.0
Width/Depth Ratio w/d ratio
10.7
17.0
12.0 18.0
Cross sectional Area (Abkf) - SF
13.1
16.2
Bankfull Mean Velocity vbkf - fps
N/P
4.0 6.0
Bankfull Discharge (Qbkf) - cfs
N/P
Bankfull Max Depth dmbkf - feet
0.9
2.5
dn-bkf / dbkf ratio
1.1
1 3.1
1.2
1.3
Low Bank Height to dn,bkf Ratio
1.0
1.0
Floodprone Area Width w a - feet
20.0
410.0
Entrenchment Ratio ER
1.7
32.0
Meander length L„ - feet
N/A
N/A
Ratio of meander length to bankfull width l nVWbkf
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Radius of curvature Rc - feet
N/A
N/A
Ratio of radius of curvature to bankfull width (Rc /
Wbkf
N/A
N/A
N/A
Belt width (Wblt) -feet
N/A
N/A
Meander Width Ratio Wblt/Wbkf
N/A
I N/A
N/A
N/A
Sinuosity (K) Stream Length/ Valley Distance
1.19
1.1
1.3
Valley Slope - feet per foot
0.04
0.005
0.015
Channel Slope (Schannel) - feet per foot
0.033
Pool Slope (spool) -feet per foot
0.00
0.005
Ratio of Pool Slope to Average Sloe (Spool / Schannel)
0.0
0.15
0.00
0.40
Maximum Pool Depth d ool - feet
2.2
2.5
Ratio of Pool Depth to Average Bankfull Depth
(d ool/dbkf)
2.0
4.0
2.0
3.5
Pool Width w ool -feet
14.3
1 14.6
Ratio of Pool Width to Bankfull Width (w ool / Wbkf)
0.9
1 1.1 1.5
Pool Area ool - square feet
14.8
15.9
Ratio of Pool Area to Bankfull Area ( ool/Abkf)
1.1
1.2
Pool-to-Poo1Spacing -feet
48.0
231.0
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
WHITTI ER CREEK SITE -OPTION D MITI GATON PROJ ECT, DIMS NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)
PAGE 6-3

Table 6.1b Reference Reach Parameters Used to Inform Design
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation Project — NCDMS Project No. 100020
Mcky
Baker Composite Reference
Parameter
Reach
Data
N liin
I Max
Nliin
Max
Ratio of Pool -to -Pool Spacing to Bankfull Width (p-
/wbkf)
3.0
7.0
0.5
5.0
Riffle Sloe srif e — feet per foot
0.006
0.063
Ratio of Riffle Slope to Average Slope (srifHe/ sbkf)
0.2
1.9
1.1 1.8
d16 —mm
5.6
d35 — mm
14.3
dso —mm
30.8
d84 — mm
88.4
d95 — mm
110.0
Notes:
Micky Reach from NC Department of Transportation, Reference Reach Database
N/A: Channelhad minimal meander geometry -no patternmeasured
N/P: Data was not provided in the NCDOT reference reach database
Values in this chart were rounded and may differ very slightly from actual values.
After examining the assessment data collected at the site and exploring the potential for functional uplift,
specific approaches were developed for each reach that would address the restoration or enhancement of
stream functions within the project area. Prior to impacts from past channel manipulation, the topography,
vegetation, and soils on site indicate that the project area most likely functioned in the past as a Piedmonftow
Mountain Alluvial Forest. Therefore, design approaches were formulated to best restore and/or enhance this
type of system. First, an appropriate stream type for the valley type, slope, and desired stream functions was
selected and designed for each reach. Then a design plan was developed to improve the hydrology,
geomorphology, and habitat of the project streams.
6.2 Design Morphological Parameters
For design purposes, the stream channels were divided into reaches as described previously in Table 3.1. The
selected design approaches chosen for each reach were based on the maximum potential for functional uplift
as determined during the site field assessments as previously described in Section 4. The specific design
parameters were developed based on those approaches so that appropriate planform geometry, cross-section
dimensions, and reach profiles could be accurately described for developing construction plan documents.
The overall design philosophy is to use these design parameters as conservative values for the selected stream
types and to allow natural variability in stream dimension, facet slope, and bed features to form over longer
periods of time under the processes of flooding, re -colonization of vegetation, sediment deposition, and other
watershed influences.
The following tables present the design stream morphology parameters proposed for restoration and
Enhancement Level I reaches as needed. The proposed stream design values and design criteria were selected
using existing conditions surveys and bankfull identification, sediment collection and analysis, regional curve
analysis, NCDOT reference reach data, and Baker's internal reference ratios proven to be successful on
numerous past projects. Following the initial application of the design criteria, Baker staff made detailed
refinements to accommodate the existing valley and channel morphology. This step minimizes unnecessary
disturbance of the riparian area and wetlands, makes adjustments around specific features in the field,
maximizes the uplift to the ecological resources, and allows for some natural channel adjustment following
construction.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 6-4
WHITTIER CREEK SITE —OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DIMS NO.100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

Reach R7 Restoration
Reach R7 is on Whittier Creek proper at the southern extent of the project area. The reach runs easterly across
the valley floor at a slope of 0.6%. R7 begins at the western property boundary of the Holcomb parcel just
downstream of Nurse Road and an existing power right-of-way. It has been historically impacted and altered
through the removal of riparian vegetation, channelization, and agricultural activities. As a result, the channel
is experiencing active erosion for well over 50 percent of the streambank length and is an extremely incised
(BHR > 2) and highly unstable G4/174.
A Priority Level II Restoration approach was selected for R7 as there is not enough length along the reach to
raise the bed fully and reconnect to the historic floodplain. As such, bankfull benches will be excavated along
the entire length of R7 as the primary means of reestablishing an active floodplain. The stream bed itself will
only be very slightly raised. This reach is appropriate for a meandering riffle -pool morphology and will be
designed as a Rosgen C4 stream type. This reach lacks mature woody vegetation; however, any existing
isolated trees or shrubs will be protected or transplanted if possible. A new meandering channel will be
constructed, and the floodplain will consist of native hardwood species. The abandoned channel will be filled
and plugged using suitable fill material excavated from construction of the newly restored channels.
The design width -to -depth ratio for the channel will be 12, though over time the channel may narrow due to
deposition of sediment and streambank vegetation growth. Channel narrowing should not risk downcutting
because any narrowing would be in response to stabilizing processes (i.e., vegetation establishment, point bar
formation, etc.). The entrenchment ratio for the majority of R7 will range between 5.8 and 6.8 as the adjacent
flood -prone width allows, though in the lowermost transitional section where it connects back into the existing
channel that value lowers to 2.3. Channel banks will be graded to stable slopes, and bankfull benches will
provide floodplain access, promote stability, and provide sediment storage.
In -stream structures will be used to control grade, dissipate energy, protect stream banks, and eliminate the
potential for upstream channel incision. These structures will include rock cross vanes, grade control J-hook
vanes, grade control log jams, constructed riffles, and log/rock step pools for grade control and habitat, as we#
as rock and log vanes for increased bank stability and habitat diversity. Bioengineering techniques such as
geolifts, toe wood, brush layers, and live stakes will also be used to protect restored stream banks and to
promote woody vegetation growth along the stream banks.
Riparian buffers in excess of 30 feet will be restored and protected along all of R7. Invasive species found
scattered along the banks and within the riparian buffers of the reach will be removed and/or treated
Additionally, permanent fencing will be installed to exclude livestock and reduce sediment, fecal coliform,
and nutrient inputs.
Table 6.2a Reach R7 Stream Design Morphology Parameters
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation Project — NCDMS Project No. 100020
Parameter
Existing Stream
Values
Design Stream Values
Reference Data
XS-6 or
MIN
XS-7 or
I MAX
MIN
MAX
MIN
MAX
Drainage Area, DA (sq mi)
2.69
2.69
Stream Type (Rosgen)
G4\174
C4
C4
Bankfull Discharge, Qbkf (cfs)
190
190
Bankfull Riffle XSEC Area, Abkf (sq ft)
33.5
38.8
41.0
Bankfull Mean Velocity, Vbkf (ft/s)
5.7
4.9
4.6
3.5
5.0
Bankfull Riffle Width, Wbkf (ft)
18.5
21.7
22.2
Bankfull Riffle Mean Depth, Dbkf (ft)
1.8
1.8
1.8
Width to Depth Ratio, W/D (ft/ft)
10.2
12.1
12.3
12
15
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
WHITTI ER CREEK SITE -OPTION D MITI GATON PROJECT, DIMS NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)
PAGE 6-5

Width Floodprone Area, Wfpa (ft)
22.0
24.0
50
150
Entrenchment Ratio, Wfpa/Wbkf (ft/ft)
1.2
1.1
2.3
6.8
Riffle Max Depth @ bkf, Dmax (ft)
2.2
2.3
2.3
Riffle Max Depth Ratio, Dmax/Dbkf
1.2
1.3
1.3
1.2
1.5
Max Depth g tob, Dmaxtob (ft)
6.9
6.4
2.3
Bank Height Ratio, Dtob/Dmax (ft/ft)
3.2
2.8
1.0
1.0
1.1
Meander Length, Lin (ft)
61
188
160
200
Meander Length Ratio, Lm/Wbkf
2.8
8.0
6.3
12.6
7.0
14.0
Radius of Curvature, Re (ft)
25
53
36
60
Rc Ratio, Rc/Wbkf
1.2
2.3
1.6
3.1
2.0
3.0
Belt Width, Wblt (ft)
45
65
80
120
Meander Width Ratio, Wblt/Wbkf
2.1
2.8
3.6
5.4
3.5
8.0
Sinuosity, K Sva /Schap
1.29
1.17
Valley Slope, Sval (ft/ft)
0.0065
0.0065
0.0050
0.0150
Channel Slope
0.0051
0.0056
Slope Riffle, Srif (ft/ft)
0.0030
0.0120
0.0057
0.0089
Riffle Slope Ratio, Srif/Schan
0.59
2.37
1.03
1.6
1.2
1.5
Slope Pool, Spool (ft/ft)
0.0020
0.0060
0.0000
0.0010
Pool Slope Ratio, Spool/Schan
0.4
1.2
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.2
Pool Max Depth, Dmaxpool (ft)
3.3
5.0
4.0
Pool Max Depth Ratio, DmaxpooVDbkf
1.8
2.3
2.2
1.5
3.5
Pool Width, Wpool (ft)
17.0
26.0
30.0
Pool Width Ratio, WpooVWbkf
0.8
1.1
1.4
1.2
1.7
Pool -Pool Spacing, Lps (ft)
36
172
78
155
Pool -Pool Spacing Ratio, Lps/Wbkf
1.5
7.4
3.5
7.0
3.5
7.0
Note: The Existing Stream Values columns represent two separate cross -sections or min/maxvalues as applicable
Reach UT4a Enhancement Level I
Reach UT4a begins at an existing road side culvert along Rockhill Church Road within the Holcomb parcel
The reach runs southeast and down valley for approximately 328 feet to a bedrock knickpoint near the
upstream side of a 40-foot wide power line right-of-way. This reach is classified as a E4b stream type. It has
no woody buffer and is exhibiting erosion on approximately 25 percent of its streambanks.
Work conducted along UT4a will implement Enhancement Level I practices to improve the bank stability and
bedform diversity of the channel. Baker proposes to excavate bankfull benches, slope streambanks, install in -
stream structures to promote scour pool formation and protect streambanks, mat and live stake the stream
banks, and plant a riparian buffer. All existing trees along this reach will be preserved to the maximum extent
possible. There is one break in the easement at the downstream extent of Reach UT4a at an existing power
line right-of-way. While no credit will be generated through this area, enhancement and restoration activities
will continue throughout this area. The downstream bedrock knickpoint will serve as the bed elevation to
begin Priority I restoration downstream along UT4b.
Riparian buffers in excess of 30 feet will be restored and protected along all of UT4a and native vegetation
will be re-established in all disturbed areas. Permanent fencing will be installed to exclude livestock from the
project area. Invasive species treatment will also be conducted throughout the reach and the riparian buffer.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 6-6
WHITTIER CREEK SITE-OPTIOND MITIGATON PROJECT, DIMS NO.100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

A full table of design morphology parameters is provided below. These are for reference only as the channel
geometry will mostly be changed through bench excavation, bank sloping, and installation of in -stream
structures and features.
Table 6.2b Reach UT4a Stream Design Morphology Parameters
Whittier Creek Site - Option D Mitigation Protect -NCDMS Project No. 100020
Parameter
Existing Stream
Values
Design Stream
Values
Reference Data
MIN
I MAX
MIN
FMAX
MIN
MAX
Drainage Area, DA (sq mi)
0.35
0.35
Stream Type (Rosgen)
E4b
E4b
C4/B4'
Bankfull Discharge, Qbkf (cfs)
50
50
Bankfull Riffle XSEC Area, Abkf (sq ft)
9.9
10.0
Bankfull Mean Velocity, Vbkf (ft/s)
5.0
5.0
4.0
6.0
Bankfull Riffle Width, Wbkf (ft)
7.3
11.0
Bankfull Riffle Mean Depth, Dbkf (ft)
1.4
0.9
Width to Depth Ratio, W/D (ft/ft)
5.4
12.2
10
15
Width Floodprone Area, Wfpa (ft)
20.0
30.0
Entrenchment Ratio, Wfpa/Wbkf (ft/ft)
2.7
2.7
Riffle Max Depth @ bkf, Dmax (ft)
1.60
1.20
Riffle Max Depth Ratio, Dmax/Dbkf
1.2
1.3
1.2
1.5
Max Depth @ tob, Dmaxtob (ft)
2.1
1.2
Bank Height Ratio, Dtob/Dmax (ft/ft)
1.3
1.0
1.0
1.1
Meander Length, Lin (ft)
N/A
N/A
Meander Length Ratio, Lm/Wbkf
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Radius of Curvature, Re (ft)
N/A
N/A
Rc Ratio, Rc/Wbkf
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Belt Width, Wblt (ft)
N/A
N/A
Meander Width Ratio, Wblt/Wbkf
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Sinuosity, K Sval/Schan
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.2
Valley Slope, Sval (ft/ft)
0.0257
0.0257
0.0200
0.0390
Channel Slope, Schan (ft/ft)
0.0242
0.0242
Slope Riffle, Srif (ft/ft)
0.0260
0.0430
0.0260
0.0430
Riffle Slope Ratio, Srif/Schan
1.07
1.78
1.07
1.78
1.1
1.8
Slope Pool, Spool (ft/ft)
0.0000
0.0040
0.0000
0.0040
Pool Slope Ratio, Spool/Schan
0.00
0.17
0.00
0.17
0
0.4
Pool Max Depth, Dmaxpool (ft)
1.14
2.77
2.0
Pool Max Depth Ratio, Dmaxpool/Dbkf
0.84
2.04
2.2
2.0
3.5
Pool Width, Wpool (ft)
8.00
9.00
15.0
Pool Width Ratio, WpooUWbkf
1.10
1.23
1.4
1.1
1.5
Pool -Pool Spacing, Lps (ft)
35.00
80.00
38.0
77.0
Pool -Pool Spacing Ratio, Lps/Wbkf
4.79
10.96
3.5
7.0
3.5
7
Note: 'Cross sectional geometry parameters are fromC4 streamtypeswhde profile parameters are fromB4 stream
types.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 6-7
WHITTIER CREEKSITE-OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DIMS NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

Reach UT4b Restoration
Reach UT4b begins at a bedrock knickpoint at the downstream extent of UT4a within a power line right-of-
way. The reach continues down valley for approximately 764 linear feet to its confluence with Reach R7
(Whittier Creek). The reach has been historically impacted and altered through channelization, the removal
of riparian vegetation and agricultural activities, and is actively eroding with cattle access to more than fifty
percent of the reach. This reach is classified as an incised E4 stream type in its upper extent and a G4 stream
type towards its confluence with R7.
A Priority Level I Restoration approach was selected for this reach. The restored channel will be designed as
a Rosgen C4 stream type. The channel will tie to the existing bedrock knickpoint which will facilitate bringing
the bed elevation up and tying the channel to its historic floodplain. This reach is also appropriate for a
meandering riffle -pool morphology sequence and will incorporate similar structures as R7. Channel banks
will be graded to stable slopes and the adjacent floodplain will be re -connected to promote stability and
improve ground water hydrology. Bioengineering techniques such as geolifts, root wads, toe wood, brush
layers, and live stakes will also be used to protect restored stream banks and to promote woody vegetation
growth along the stream banks.
The design width -to -depth ratio for the channel will be approximately 13, though over time the channel may
narrow due to deposition of sediment and streambank vegetation growth. Channel narrowing should not risk
downcutting because any narrowing would be in response to stabilizing processes (i.e., vegetation
establishment, point bar formation, etc.). The entrenchment ratio will be greater than 2.2 as the adjacent flood -
prone width allows. Channel banks will be graded to stable, 2:1 or flatter slopes.
Riparian buffers in excess of 30 feet will be restored and protected along all of UT4b and native vegetation
will be re-established in all disturbed areas and in the adjacent open pasture within the easement. Invasive
species treatment will also be conducted along the reach and within the riparian buffer. Permanent fencing
will be installed to exclude livestock from the project area.
Table 6.2c Reach UT4b Stream Design Morphology Parameters
Whittier Creek Site - Option D Mitigation Project - NCDMS Pro*ect No. 100020
Parameter
Existing Stream
Values
Design Stream
Values
Reference Data
XS-3 or
MIN
I XS-4 or
MAX
MIN
MAX
MIN
MAX
Drainage Area, DA (sq mi)
0.48
0.48
Stream Type (Rosgen)
E4/G4
C4
C4
Bankfull Discharge, Qbkf (cfs)
65
65
Bankfull Riffle XSEC Area, Abkf (sq ft)
14.0
9.5
13.0
Bankfull Mean Velocity, Vbkf (ft/s)
4.7
6.9
5.0
3.5
5.0
Bankfull Riffle Width, Wbkf (ft)
10.1
9.5
12.7
Bankfull Riffle Mean Depth, Dbkf (ft)
1.4
1.0
1.0
Width to Depth Ratio, W/D (ft/ft)
7.3
9.6
12.7
12
15
Width Floodprone Area, Wfpa (ft)
23
13
30
60
Entrenchment Ratio, Wfpa/Wbkf (ft/ft)
2.27
1.33
2.4
4.7
Riffle Max Depth @ bkf, Dmax (ft)
2.21
1.21
1.2
Riffle Max Depth Ratio, Dmax/Dbkf
1.60
1.22
1.2
1.2
1.5
Max Depth (0 tob, Dmaxtob (ft)
4.71
2.40
1.2
Bank Height Ratio, Dtob/Dmax (ft/ft)
2.13
1.98
1.0
1.0
1.1
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
WHITTIER CREEK SITE-OPTIOND MITI GATON PROJECT, DIMS NO.100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)
PAGE 6-8

Meander Length, Lm (ft)
N/A
N/A
119
165
Meander Length Ratio, Lm/Wbkf
N/A
N/A
9.4
13.0
7.0
14.0
Radius of Curvature, Rc (ft)
N/A
N/A
25
77
Re Ratio, Rc/Wbkf
N/A
N/A
2.0
6.1
2.0
3.0
Belt Width, Wblt (ft)
N/A
N/A
45
50
Meander Width Ratio, Wblt/Wbkf
N/A
N/A
3.5
3.9
3.5
8.0
Sinuosity, K Sval/Schan
1.13
1.32
Valley Slope, Sval (ft/ft)
0.0186
0.0186
0.005
0.15
Channel Slope
0.0165
0.0141
Slope Riffle, Srif (ft/ft)
0.0150
0.0400
0.0114
0.0249
Riffle Slope Ratio, Srif/Schan
0.9
2.4
0.8
1.8
1.2
1.5
Slope Pool, Spool (ft/ft)
0.0000
0.0020
0.0000
0.0033
Pool Slope Ratio, Spool/Schan
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.2
Pool Max Depth, Dmaxpool (ft)
2.4
4.3
2.5
Pool Max Depth Ratio, DmaxpooVDbkf
2.4
4.3
2.5
1.5
3.5
Pool Width, Wpool (ft)
14.3
24.0
18.0
Pool Width Ratio, WpooUWbkf
1.5
2.5
1.4
1.2
1.7
Pool -Pool Spacing, Lps (ft)
30.0
90.0
45.0
89.0
Pool -Pool Spacing Ratio, Lps/Wbkf
3.0
9.5
3.5
7.0
3.5
7.0
Note: The Existing Stream Values columns represent two separate cross -sections or min/maxvalues as applicable
Reach UT5 Restoration
Reach UT5 begins at an existing culvert along Rockhill Church Road within the Meadow's parcel. The reach
runs southwest and down valley for approximately 765 feet to its confluence with Reach UT4b. Cattle have
access to this entire reach. In addition, the reach has no woody buffer and is exhibiting bank erosion on over
50 percent of its streambanks with multiple headcuts and areas of mass wasting. This reach is classified as a
134. An existing 40-foot power line right-of-way crosses this reach and a break in the conservation easement
has been incorporated at this location.
Like UT4b, a Priority Level I Restoration approach was selected for this reach, and the restored channel will
be designed as a Rosgen 134 stream type. However, as the stream nears its confluence with UT4b, the valley
opens up and the floodprone width increases which makes the entrenchment ratio higher than 2.2. This will
not cause any detrimental issues and the stream will function as designed. Due to the existing valley slope
and valley floor width, this reach will be restored with appropriate riffle -step -pool morphology. Pattern
adjustments will be incorporated to ensure stability and promoted diversity. A riffle -step -pool channel will
be constructed using boulder and log grade control structures and constructed riffles. Channel banks will be
graded to stable slopes and the adjacent floodplain will be re -connected to promote stability and improve
ground water hydrology. Bioengineering techniques such as geolifts, root wads, toe wood, brush layers, and
live stakes will also be used to protect restored stream banks and to promote woody vegetation growth along
the stream banks. One culvert stream crossing will be installed to coincide with the location of the power
easement along UT5.
Riparian buffers in excess of 30 feet will be restored and protected along all of UT5 and native vegetation will
be re-established in all disturbed areas. Permanent fencing will be installed to exclude livestock from the
project area. Invasive species treatment will also be conducted along the reach.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 6-9
WHITTIER CREEKSITE- OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DIMS NO.100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

Table 6.2d Reach UTS Stream Design Morphology Parameters
Whittier Creek Site - Option D Mitigation Project -NCDMS Pro*ect No. 100020
Parameter
Existing Stream
Values
Design Stream Values
Reference Data
XS-1 or
MIN
I XS-2 or
MAX
MIN
MAX
MIN
MAX
Drainage Area, DA (sq mi)
0.11
0.11
Stream Type (Rosgen)
B4
B4
B4
Bankfull Discharge, Qbkf (cfs)
20
20
Bankfull Riffle XSEC Area, Abkf (sq ft)
5.5
5.1
5.0
Bankfull Mean Velocity, Vbkf (ft/s)
3.6
3.9
4.0
4.0
6.0
Bankfull Riffle Width, Wbkf (ft)
8.0
7.8
8.1
Bankfull Riffle Mean Depth, Dbkf (ft)
0.7
0.7
0.6
Width to Depth Ratio, W/D (ft/ft)
11.8
11.8
13.0
12
18
Width Floodprone Area, Wfpa (ft)
19.1
15.4
14.0
1
20.0
Entrenchment Ratio, Wfpa/Wbkf (ft/ft)
2.4
2.0
1.7
2.5
Riffle Max Depth @ bkf, Dmax (ft)
1.3
1.6
1.2
Riffle Max Depth Ratio, Dmax/Dbkf
1.8
2.4
1.3
1.2
1.5
Max Depth g tob, Dmaxtob (ft)
2.8
2.3
0.8
Bank Height Ratio, Dtob/Dmax (ft/ft)
2.2
1.4
1.0
1.0
1.1
Meander Length, Lin (ft)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Meander Length Ratio, Lm/Wbkf
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Radius of Curvature, Rc (ft)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Re Ratio, Rc/Wbkf
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Belt Width, Wblt (ft)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Meander Width Ratio, Wblt/Wbkf
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Sinuosity, K Sval/Schan
1.03
1.05
1.10
1.2
Valley Slope, Sval (ft/ft)
0.0256
0.0256
0.02
0.03
Channel Slope
0.0250
0.0244
Slope Riffle, Srif (ft/ft)
0.0260
0.0410
0.0130
0.0370
Riffle Slope Ratio, Srif/Schan
1.0
1.6
0.5
1.5
1.2
1.5
Slope Pool, Spool (ft/ft)
0.0000
0.0030
0.0000
0.0090
Pool Slope Ratio, Spool/Schan
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.4
0.0
0.4
Pool Max Depth, Dmaxpool (ft)
1.6
2.3
1.5
Pool Max Depth Ratio, DmaxpooVDbkf
2.4
3.4
2.4
2.0
3.5
Pool Width, Wpool (ft)
8.0
14.0
10.5
Pool Width Ratio, WpooVWbkf
1.0
1.7
1.3
1.5
1.5
Pool -Pool Spacing, Lps (ft)
22.0
139.0
5.0
40.0
Pool -Pool Spacing Ratio, Lps/Wbkf
2.8
17.3
0.6
4.9
0.5
5.0
Note: The Existing Stream Values columns representtwo separate cross -sections or min/max values as applicable
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE6-10
WHITTIER CREEKSITE-OPTION D MITI GATON PROJECT, DIMS NO.100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

6.3 Design Discharge Analysis
6.3.1 Bankfull Stage Discharge
Upon completion of the geomorphic field survey, identification of bankfull stages and corresponding
discharges were made at various locations along Reaches R7, UT4a, UT4b, and UT5. However, on incised
streams such as these, discernible indicators can be difficult to obtain, and the reliability of the indicators can
be inconsistent due to the altered condition of the stream channels. For this reason, regional curve relationships
(based on drainage areas) were also used to develop the bankfull discharge estimates for the project reaches.
The curve relationships were compared to stable representative cross sections on site to confirm the bankfull
field calls and to ultimately select an appropriate design discharge estimate.
6.31 Bankfull Hydraulic Ge o me try Relationships (Regional Curve Predictions)
Regional curves are available for a range of stream types and physiographic provinces. The published NC
Piedmont Regional Curve (Harman, 1999) and the unpublished NC Rural Mountain and Piedmont Regional
Curve developed by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (Walker, 2012) were used for comparison
with other site -specific methods of estimating bankfull discharge. Baker has successfully implemented a
significant number of stream restoration projects in North Carolina using this curve data. The regional curve
equations developed from the studies are shown below in Table 6.3, while Table 6.4 compares the estimated
regional curve bankfull areas for the project reaches with those measured frombankfull indicators in the field
For these reaches, accurately estimating the bankfull discharge and associate bankfull cross sectional area was
crucial in designing the correct bankfull geometry.
Table 6.3 NC Rural Regional Curve Equations
Whittier Creek Site - Option D Mitigation Project -NCDMS Project No. 100020
NC Rural Piedmont Regional Curve Equations
Harman et al., 1999
NC Rural Mountain and Piedmont Regional
Curve Equations - Walker, 2012
Qbkf - 89.04 Aw 0.72
Qbkf = 55.32 Aw 0.79
Abkf - 21.43 Aw 0.68
Abkf - 19.13 Aw 0.65
Wbkf - 1 1.89 Aw 0.43
Wbkf - 17.41 Aw 0.37
Dbkf - 1.5 Aw 0.32
Dbkf - 1. 10 Aw 029
Table 6.4 Comparison of Bankfull Areas
Whittier Creek Site - Option D Mitigation Project - NCDMS Project No. 100020
Bankfull Area Estimates
Measured at Bankfull
Reach
DA (sq mi)
from 1999 / 2012 Regional
Indicator (sq ft)
Curves (sq ft)
R7
2.69
42.0 / 36.5
33.51, 38.82
UT4a
0.35
10.5 / 9.7
9.93
UT4b
0.48
12.9 / 11.8
9.53, 14.0
UT5
0.11
4.9 / 4.6
5.5, 5.1
Notes:
1. Cross section is above the confluence with UT4b.
2. Cross section is below the confluence with UT4b.
3. Cross section was taken above the confluence with UT5. This drainage area is closer to the drainage area for UT4a.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 6-11
WHITTIER CREEKSITE- OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DIMS NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

6.33 Bankfull Discharge Summary and Conclusions
As described above Rosgen's stream classification system (Rosgen, 1996) and Natural Channel Design
Methodologies depend on the proper field identification of consistent geomorphic features related to the active
floodplain. Although bankfull stage verification was sometimes challenging in the field for some sections of
the reaches under their current conditions, the cross-section data used for the above regional curve
comparisons are within an acceptable range of values and match closely with the regional curves.
Table 6.5 provides a bankfull discharge analysis based on the regional curves, the Manning's equation
discharges calculated from the representative cross sections for each reach, and the bankfull design discharge
estimation methods. Manning's roughness (n) was estimated using friction factor and relative roughness, and
by stream type (WARSSS, 2006). Design velocity estimates are based on the estimated bankfull discharge
and the design cross sectional area.
Table 6.5 Bankfull Discharge Analysis Summary
Whittier Creek Site— Option D Mitigation Project —NCDMS Project No. 100020
Estimating Method
Bankfull Velocity
(ft/sec)
Bankfull
I Discharge (cfs)
Reach R7
NC Rural Piedmont Regional Curve'
4.2
182
NRCS NC Rural Mountain and Piedmont Regional
Curvet
2.8
120
Friction Factor to Relative Roughness Ratio method'
4.7
203
Manning's "n" from friction factor and relative
roughness'
5.4
234
Mannin 's "n" from stream type3
2.9
125
Design Estimate
4.6
190
Reach UT4a
NC Rural Piedmont Regional Curve'
4.2
42
NRCS NC Rural Mountain and Piedmont Regional
Curvet
2.4
24
Friction Factor to Relative Roughness Ratio method'
5.3
53
Manning's "n" from friction factor and relative
roughness'
59
58
Mannin 's "n" from stream type3
4.8
47
Design Estimate
5.0
50
Reach UT4b
NC Rural Piedmont Regional Curve'
3.7
52
NRCS NC Rural Mountain and Piedmont Regional
Curvet
2.2
31
Friction Factor to Relative Roughness Ratio method'
4.7
66
Manning's "n" from friction factor and relative
roughness'
5.3
74
Mann in 's "n" from stream type3
4.2
59
Design Estimate
5
65
Reach UT5
NC Rural Piedmont Regional Curve'
3.4
18
NRCS NC Rural Mountain and Piedmont Regional
Curvet
1.8
10
Friction Factor to Relative Roughness Ratio method'
5.8
21
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 6-12
WHITTIER CREEK SITE - OPTIOND MITIGATON PROJECT, DIMS NO.100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

Table 6.5 Bankfull Discharge Analysis Summary
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation Project —NCDMS Project No. 100020
Estimating Method
Bankfull Velocity
Bankfull
(ft/sec)
Discharge (cfs)
Manning's "n" from friction factor and relative
59
21
roughness'
Mannin 's "n" from stream type3
1 4.3
1 15
Design Estimate
4.0
20
Notes:
1NC Rural Piedmont Regional Curve (Harman et al., 1999).
2 Revised NC Rural Piedmont and Mountain Regional Curve developed by NRCS (Walker, 2012).
3WARSSS, 2006 spreadsheet. Bankfull discharge estimates vary based on Manning's Equation for
the riffle cross section.
6.4 Sediment Transport Analysis
For this project, a qualitative sediment supply analysis was conducted fromvisual inspections of the project
reaches themselves, from inspections upstream of the project reaches, and from aerial photography. Current
supply appears to be from both localized bank erosion and transported from upstream. Some livestock
operations exist within the watershed that likely cause accelerated bank erosion. The condition of the streams
within the agricultural areas within the watershed are similar to the condition to the project streams. Field
conditions also show that aggradation is not a significant problem; for example, the project stream channels
do not exhibit significant bar formations. Once the project is complete, on -site sediment sources from bank
erosion will be stabilized. Stream power was calculated but does not provide significant useful information
since a sediment rating curve has not been developed for the site. The primary emphasis of this project's
sediment transport analysis will focus on competency.
6.4.1 Se dime nt Competency Analysis
To conduct the sediment competency analyses, pavement (pebble count) and subpavement sediment samples
were taken on reaches UT4b, UT5, and R7 at surveyed riffle cross sections (see Appendix A). The sediment
samples were weighed to generate cumulative frequency plots. The sediment competence analysis was
conducted using the methodologies presented in WARSSS (2006). Design mean depth and slope were
checked against the predicted required depths and slopes to provide confidence that the design streams willbe
able to transport their sediment supplies. Analysis was conducted using critical dimensionless shear stress
and dimensional shear stress methodologies where applicable. Dimensionless shear stress analysis provides
a critical depth and slope to entrain the largest particle in the sediment sample while the dimensional analysis
uses the Shield's curve to compare the shear stress value to the size particle able to be entrained by that shear
stress. The Modified Shield's curve based on Colorado field data (WARSSS, 2006) while the Shield's Curve
is based on laboratory and field data compiled from various sources (Leopold, Wohnan, and Miller, 1964).
The Results from the analysis are presented below in Table 6.6.
Table 6.6 Competence Analysis
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation Pr Ject —NCDMS Project No. 100020
Parameter
R7
UT4b
UT5
Design Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
0.0056
0.0141
0.0244
Design Mean Depth ft
1.8
1.0
0.6
D50 Pavement (mm)
25.6
26.4
20.5
D50 Subpavement mm
13.0
11.2
20.6
D 100 Subpavement (mm)
81.0
71.0
74.0
Critical Dimensionless Shear'
N/A
0.0160
N/A
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 6-13
WHITTIER CREEK SITE -OPTION D MITI GATON PROJECT, DMS NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

Table 6.6 Competence Analysis
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation Pro ect —NCDMS Project No. 100020
Parameter
R7
UT4b
UT5
Required Mean Depth from Dimensionless
N/A
0.43
N/A
Analysis ft
Required Slope from Dimensionless
Analysis (ft/ft)
N/A
0.0061
N/A
Dimensional Design Shear Stress lbs./s -ft
0.55
0.78
0.82
Largest Movable Particle (mm) (Mod.
98
127
131
Shields Curve)
Largest Movable Particle (mm) (Shield's
Curve)
42
60
63
Predicted Shear Stress to move D100
0.4
0.4
0.4
(lbs./s -ft) (Mod. Shield's Curve)
Predicted Shear Stress to move D100
lbs./s -ft Shield's Curve)1.0
09
1.0
Predicted mean depth to move D 100 (ft)
1.2
0.4
0.2
(Mod. Shield's Curve)
Predicted mean depth to move D100 (ft)
(Shield's Curve)
2.9
1.0
0.6
Predicted slope to move D 100 (ft/ft) (Mod.
0.0038
0.0057
0.0100
Shield's Curve
Predicted slope to move D 100 (ft/ft)
Shield's Curve
0.0092
0.0146
0.0254
'Listings of N/A means that the dimensionless shear equations were not valid based on
sediment size ratios.
The sediment transport analysis using the design geometry and profile matches well with the predicted values
lending confidence that the stream will move the bed load that is supplied. As can be seen from the figure
below, design shear stress values plotted against the measured D100 values match quite well within the scatter
of the data points. The results presented above in Table 6.6 show that the design bankfull slopes and mean
depth values generally fall between the predicted values from both the Shield's and Modified Shield's curves.
The design shear stress ranges from 0.55 to 0.82 pounds per square foot and the largest particles in the
subpavement samples range from 71 to 81 mm. The data points used to generate these individual curves have
significant scatter and overlap in these ranges of shear stress and particle size which can lend evidence that
the results that fall between the two curves applicable. These results show that the design values are within
an acceptable range to provide the correct sediment transport of the stream's sediment supply.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 6-14
WHITTIER CREEKSITE- OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DIMS NO.100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

1 0Q(
501
10(
Q 3
E
A!
i =
r�rr��orrar�--..rrr�_--om
���v��
�I�����IIIII�11■MENE1■
1��■■■�111�■■■111�P7■■■�111
�■■
I•��■WIC■■■11
Yl6�
�111
loll!
11
♦
_ 'I
11
���1��
+
��111
r
I���
1■■I1�111
1
1
r
��1�1
111■�1��r•X'
Power
0.9336
IIIIIII
■FW"
�
■■u■�r..r.Leopold,
lA■■L
` e= CRITICAL SHEAR STRESS (Ibslft2)
Laboratory and field data on critical shear stress required to initiate
movement of grains (Leopold, Wolman, & Miller, 1964). The solid line is the
Shields curve of the threshold of motion; transposed from the B versus Rg
form into the present form, in which critical shear stress is plotted as a
function of grain diameter.
i Leopold, Wolman & Miller (1964)
{; Colorado Data (Wildland Hydrology)
(Adapted from WARSSS, Figure 5-49, Rosgen 2009)
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 6-15
WHITTIER CREEKSITE—OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DIMS NO.100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

6.5 Vegetation and Planting Plan
6.5.1 Existing Vegetation and Plant Community Characterization
Vegetation on the project site itself has been heavily disturbed from years of use in agriculture. Currently the
site is predominantly managed as cattle pasture and largely consists of a range of typical pasture grasses
(fescues and clovers) with scatteredweeds and other common herbaceous species present such as bittercress
(Cardamine hirsute), docks (Rumex spp.), common violet (Viola sororia), chickweed (Stellaria media), lyre
sage (Salvia lyrata), plantains (Plantago spp.), and dandelions (Taraxacum officiniale), with soft rush (Juncos
effusus) and jewelweed (Impatiens capensis) found in wetter areas. A very narrow buffer of trees is present
along most of Reach R7 (Whittier Creek) and along a short section of Reach UT4b. The trees present on site
consist primarily of chinaberry (Melia azedarach), Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), sycamore (Platanos
occidentalis), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), black willow (Salix nigra), and tulip poplar (Liriodendron
tulipifera), along with some scattered black walnut (Juglans nigra), persimmon (Diospyros virginiana), river
birch (Betula nigra), red maple (Acer rubrum), red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), and black cherry (Prunus
serotina). Blackberry (Rubus spp.), multi -flora rose (Rosa multiflora), and elderberry (Sambucus canadensis)
are found scattered throughout the understory as well. Existing wetland vegetation is highly disturbed and
dominated by fescues interspersed with soft rush (Juncus effusus), a mix of sedges (Carex spp.), and
Jewelweed (Impatiens capensis).
However, the riparian areas along the project reaches and wetlands of the project would naturally consist of
species more consistent with those of a Piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest (Schafale and Weakley
1990). These communities often include a mixture of bottomland and mesophytic trees in the canopy,
including river birch (Betula nigra), sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera),
sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), American elm (Ulmus americana), southern sugarberry (Celtis
laevigata), black walnut (Juglans nigra), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), bitternut hickory (Carya
cordiformis), shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), shingle oak (Quercus imbricaria), red maple (Acer rubrum),
white ash (FraxinusAmericana), and silverbell (Halesia tetraptera). Understory trees may include boxelder
(Acer negundo), southern sugar maple (Acer floridanum), red maple (Acer rubrum), pawpaw (Asimina
triloba), American holly (Ilex opaca), and ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana). The shrub layer commonly
contains spicebush (Lindera benzoin), strawberry bush (EuonymusAmericana), painted buckeye (Aesculus
sylvatica), fetterbush (Leucothoe recurva), hazelnut (Corylus cornuta), and silky dogwood (Cornus amomum).
As such, the restoration approach for the planted riparian buffers for the project will target many of these
species.
Notable non-native invasive species present on the site include Chinaberry (Melia azedarach), Chinese privet
(Ligustrum sinense), and multi -flora rose (Rosa multiflora), found scattered along the banks and within the
riparian buffers of the project streams.
6.51 Proposed Riparian Vegetation Plantings
The vegetative components of this restoration project include streambank and riparian planting zones within
the buffer. These planting boundaries will be comprised of species found within native plant communities as
presented below in Table 6.7 and shown on the revegetation plan sheets in Appendix K In addition to the
riparian buffer zones noted above, any areas of the site that lack diversity or were disturbed or adversely
impacted by the construction process will also be planted.
Bare -root trees and live stakes will be planted within designated areas of the conservation easement, with the
objective of establishing a minimum 30-foot buffer along all proposed streambanks for all the stream reaches
within the project boundary. In many areas, the buffer width will be in excess of 30 feet along one or both
streambanks and will encompass adjacent jurisdictional wetland areas. In general, bare -root vegetation will
be planted at a total target density of 680 stems per acre. Planting will be conducted during the dormant
season, with all trees and shrubs installed between mid -November and late March.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 6-16
WHITTIER CREEKSITE-OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DIMS NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

Selected species for hardwood revegetationplanting are presented in Table 6.7. Riparian zone species wetness
tolerance will range from being at least somewhat tolerant of flooding (FACU) to tolerant (OBL).
Observations will be made during construction of the site regarding the relative wetness of areas to be planted
as compared to the revegetation plan, which will also incorporate the location of the jurisdictional wetlands to
facilitate the accurate planting of appropriate species in their correct planting zone.
Once the vegetative species are transported to the site, they will be planted within two days. Disturbed soils
across the sitewill be preparedby sufficiently loosening to a depth of four inches prior to planting as described
in the technical specifications. Heavily compacted soils (e.g., hardpans or areas that experienced heavy
equipment use) will be loosened to a depth of eight to ten inches by disking or ripping to prepare for tree
planting. In any areas where excavation depths exceed ten inches, topsoil shall be separated from rocks, brush,
or roots, stockpiled, and placed back over these areas to achieve design grades and create a soil base for
vegetation. Trees and shrubs will be planted by manual labor using a dibble bar, mattock, planting bar, or other
approved method. Planting holes for the trees will be sufficiently deep to allow the roots to spread out and
down without "J-rooting." Soil will be loosely compacted around trees once they have been planted to prevent
roots from drying out. Soil tests will be conducted in the riparian buffer areas at appropriate intervals, and
soil amendments such as fertilizer or lime may be added as recommended to improve growing conditions.
Live stakes will be installed at a minimum of 40 stakes per 1,000 square feet and stakes will be spaced two to
three feet apart in meander bends and six to eight feet apart in the riffle sections using triangular spacing along
the streambanks between the toe of the streambank and bankfull elevation. Site variations may require slightly
different spacing.
Permanent seed mixtures will be applied to all disturbed areas of the project site. Table 6.8 lists the species,
mixtures, and application rates that will beused. Amixture is provided that is suitable for streambank, riparian,
and wetland areas. Mixtures will also include temporary seeding (rye grain or browntop millet) to allow for
application with mechanical broadcast spreaders. To provide rapid growth of herbaceous ground cover and
biological habitat value, the permanent seed mixture specified will be applied to all areas within the
conservation easement from the toe of the stream banks to the easement boundary excluding areas that are
already forested. The species provided are deep-rooted and have been shown to proliferate along restored
stream channels, providing long-term stability.
Final species selection may change due to refinement or availability at the time of planting. If species
substitution is required, the planting Contractor will submit a revised planting list to for approval prior to the
procurement of plant stock.
Table 6.7 Proposed Bare -Root and Live Stake Species
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation Project —NCDMS Project No. 100020
Botanical Name
Common Name
% Planted by
Species
wetland Tolerance
All Buffer Plantings at 680 stems/acre using 8' X 8' spacing
Riparian Zone — Overstory Species
Betula nigra
River Birch
15%
FACW
Juglans nigra
Black Walnut
5%
FACU
Platanus occidentalis
Sycamore
15%
FACW
Liriodendron tulipifera
Tulip Poplar
15%
FACU
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green ash
10%
FACW
Quercus phellos
Willow oak
10%
FAC
Diospyros virginiana
Persimmon
10%
FAC
Riparian Zone — Understory/Shrub Species
Hamamelis virginiana
Witch Hazel
5%
FACU
Lindera henzoin
Spicebush
5%
FAC
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 6-17
WHITTIER CREEKSITE- OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DIMS NO.100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

Table 6.7 Proposed Bare -Root and Live Stake Species
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation Project — NCDMS Project No. 100020
Botanical Name
Common Name
% Planted by
Species
Wetland Tolerance
Carpinus caroliniana
American Hornbeam
5%
FAC
Acer negundo
Box Elder
5%
FAC
Streambank Live Stake Plantings
Salix sericea
Silky Willow
30%
OBL
Cornus amomum
Silky Dogwood
30%
FACW
Sambucus canadensis
Elderberry
20%
FACW
Salix nigra
Black Willow
20%
OBL
Table 6.8 Proposed Permanent Seed Mixture
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation Projec t — NCDMS Project No. 100020
Botanical Name
Common Name
% Planted by
Density
Wetland
Spec
(lbs/ac)
Tolerance
Agrostis alba
Redtop
10%
1.5
FACW
El mus virginicus
Virginia Wildr e
15%
2.25
FACW
Panicum virgatum
Switchgrass
15%
2.25
FAC
Tripsacum dactyloides
Eastern Gamma Grass
5%
0.75
FACW
Polygonum pennsylvanicum
Pennsylvania
5%
0.75
FACW
Smartweed
Schizachyrium scoparium
Little Blue Stem
5%
0.75
FACU
Juncus effusus
Soft Rush
5%
0.75
FACW
Bidens frondosa (or
Beggars Tick
5%
0.75
FACW
aristosa)
Coreopsis lanceolata
Lance -Leaved Tick
10%
1.5
FACU
Seed
Dichanthelium
Tioga Deer Tongue
15%
2.25
FAC
clandestinum
Andro o on erardii
Big Blue Stem
5%
0.75
FAC
Sorghastrum nutans
Indian Grass
5%
0.75
FACU
Total
100%
15.00
Note: Final species selection may change due to refinement or availability at the time of planting. If species
substitution is required, the planting Contractor will submit a revised planting fist to Baker for approval prior
to the procurement of plant stock.
6.6 Project Work Plan
The project work plan is included in the plan sheet set for the project and provides a detailed description of
proposed construction timing and sequencing, specific in -stream structure and other construction element
designs, as well as a description of all grading and planting activities. All work will be conducted using
common machinery, tools, equipment, and techniques for the successful implementation of the project. The
complete plan sheets can be found in Appendix K
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 6-18
WHITTIER CREEKSITE- OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DIMS NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

6.7 Project Risks and Uncertainties
Due to the rural and primarily forested nature of the project watershed, the project risk is low. Anticipated
potential project risk include future logging or development within the watershed. These risk and uncertainties
are out of the control of the provider.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 6-19
WHITTIER CREEKSITE- OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DIMS NO.100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

7.0 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
The performance standards and success criteria for the project will follow the NCIRT guidance document
Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update dated October 24, 2016.
Monitoring activities will be conducted for a period of 7 years unless otherwise noted.
Based on the design approaches, different monitoring methods are proposed for the project reaches. Reaches
R7, UT4b, and UT5 will implement a Restoration design approach, while Reach UT4a will implement an
Enhancement Level I design approach with stream bed/bank stabilization and structure installation. For these
reaches, geomorphic monitoring methods are described below. Specific success criteria components and
evaluation methods are described below and report documentation will follow the NCDMS's templates As -
Built Baseline Monitoring Report Format, Data Requirements, and Content Requirement (June 2017), and the
Annual Monitoring Report Format, Data Requirements, and Content Guidance (June 2017).
7.1 Stream Monitoring
Geomorphic monitoring of the proposed restoration reaches will be conducted annually following the
completion of construction to evaluate the effectiveness of the restoration practices. The methods used and
related success criteria for each monitored stream parameter are described below. Figure 12 shows the
approximate locations of the proposed monitoring devices throughout the project site.
7.1.1 Bankfull Events and Flooding Functions
The occurrence of bankfull events within the monitoring period will be documented using continuous stage
recorders (using pressure transducers) and photographs. The continuous stage recorders will be installed in
the channels of both Reach R7 and in the downstream portion of UT4b to collect flow depth and duration data
for near-overbank events as well as for overbank flood events. Additionally, an in -stream flow gauge will be
installed in Reach UT5 to record water depth and flow duration. Photographs will also be used to document
the occurrence of debris lines and sediment deposition on the floodplain during monitoring site visits.
Four bankfull events must be documented, in separate years, for Reach R7 within the seven-year monitoring
period. Otherwise, monitoring will continue until the required four bankfull events have been documented
Additionally, 30 days of consecutive flow must be documented annually by the flow gauge located within
UT5.
7.1.2 Cross Sections
Permanent cross sections will be installed at an approximate rate of one cross section per twenty bankfull
widths of restored stream, with approximately half of the cross sections located at riffles and half located at
pools. Eleven cross sections are proposed forthis project; five in Reach R7, one in UT4a, three in UT4b, and
two m UT5. Each cross section willbe marked on both streambanks with permanent monuments using rebar
cemented in place to establish the exact transect used. Acommon benchmark will be used for cross sections
and to facilitate easy comparison of year-to-year data. The cross section surveys will occur in years one, two,
three, five, and seven, and must include measurements of Bank Height Ratio (BHR) and Entrenchment Ratio
(ER). The monitoring survey will include points measured at all breaks in slope, including top of streambanks,
bankfull, inner berm, edge of water, and thalweg, if the features are present. Riffle cross sections will be
classified usingthe RosgenStream Classification System. The BHR cross section parameter willbe calculated
following the technical workgroup guidance memo `Standard Measurement of the BHR Parameter' provided
by DMS in 2018, which will apply the as -built bankfull cross sectional area to the current monitoring year
channel to determine bankfull elevation. The Low Top of Bank (LTOB) depth will also be provided in the
monitoring data table.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 7-1
WHITTIER CREEKSITE- OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DIMS NO.100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

There should be little change in as -built cross sections. If changes do take place, they will be documented in
the survey data and evaluated to determine if they represent a movement toward a more unstable condition
(e.g., down -cutting or erosion) or a movement toward increased stability (e.g., settling, vegetative changes,
deposition along the streambanks, or decrease in width/depth ratio). Using the Rosgen Stream Classification
System, allmonitored cross sections should fallwithin the quantitative parameters (i.e. BHR no more than 1.2
and ER no less than 2.2 for `C' stream types) defined for channels of the design stream type. Given the smaller
channel sizes and meander geometry of the proposed steams, bank pins will not be installed unless monitoring
results indicate active lateral erosion.
Reference photo transects will be taken at each permanent cross section. Lateral photos should not indicate
excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the streambanks. The survey tape will be centered in the
photographs of the streambanks. Photographers shall try to consistently maintain the same area in each photo
over time.
7.13 Longitudinal Profile and Pattern
A longitudinal profile will be surveyed for the entire length of constructed channel immediately after
construction to document as -built baseline conditions. The survey willbe tied to a permanent benchmark and
measurements will include thalweg, water surface, bankfull, and top of low bank. Each of these measurements
will be taken at the head of each feature (e.g., riffle, pool) and at the maximum pool depth. The longitudinal
profile should show that the bedform features installed are consistent with intended design stream type. The
longitudinal profile will not be taken during subsequent monitoring years unless vertical channel instability
has been documented or remedial actions/repairs are deemed necessary.
Pattern measurements such as sinuosity, radius of curvature, and meander width ratio will be calculated on
newly constructed meanders (R7) using the plan views from the as -built plan sheets and reported in the as -
built baseline document. Subsequent visual monitoring will be conducted annually, to document any changes
or excessive lateral movement in the plan view of the constructed channel.
7.1A Visual Assessment
Visual monitoring assessments of all stream sections will be conducted at least once per monitoring year
following the requirements described in the DMS monitoring guidance documents. Photographs will be used
to visually document system performance and any areas of concern related to streambank stability, condition
of in -stream structures, channel migration, headcuts, channel aggradation (bar formation) or degradation, live
stake mortality, impacts from invasive plant species or animal species, riparian vegetation success, the
condition of pools and riffles, and overall stream morphology assessment. All photo locations and any areas
of concern will be shown in the Current Condition Plan View (CCPV) figure in the baseline and annual
monitoring reports.
7.2 Vegetation Monitoring
Restoration of the riparian vegetation on a site is dependent upon the successful planting and establishment of
native woody species, along with the volunteer regeneration of the plant community. To determine if the
success criteria are achieved, vegetation monitoring plots will be installed andmonitored across therestoration
site in accordance with the CVS-DMS Protocol for Recording Vegetation, Version 4.2 (Lee at al., 2008).
These vegetation plots shall consist of both permanent and random plots, totaling a minimum of 2% of the
planted portion of the site established within the planted riparian buffer areas per CVS Monitoring Levels 1
and 2. Four fixed plots and one random plot are proposed to monitor vegetation for this project. The size of
each individual plot will be 100 square meters. No plots will be established within the undisturbed wooded
areas within the project boundary.
Vegetation monitoring will occur in the fall, prior to the loss of leaves. Data from the permanent vegetation
plots will include: species, height, planted vs. volunteer, and age (based on the year the stem was planted, or
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 7-2
WHITTIER CREEK SITE - OPTIOND MITIGATON PROJECT, DIMS NO.100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

first observed if a volunteer). Data from the random plots will include only the species and height. Plot
densities will also be calculated for each plot. Individual seedlings will be marked such that they can be found
in succeeding monitoring years in the permanent plots. Mortality will be determined from the difference
between the previous year's living, planted seedlings and the current year's living, planted seedlings.
At the end of the first full growing season from baseline (MYO), after a minimum of 180 days, species
composition, heights, stem density, and survival will be evaluated for monitoring year one (MYI). Vegetation
plots shall subsequently be monitored in years 2, 3, 5 and 7 or until the final success criteria are achieved The
interim measure of vegetative success for the site will require the survival of at least 320 stems per acre at the
end of the year 3 monitoring period. At year 5, density must be no less than 260 stems per acre. The final
vegetative success criteria will be the survival of 210 stems per acre at the end of the year 7 monitoring period.
However, if the performance standards are met by year 5 and stem densities are greater than 260 stem/acre,
then the vegetation monitoring may be terminated with approval by the USACE and the NCIRT.
Additionally, the average height of the vegetation at year 7 should range from 7 feet to 10 feet tall. Certain
native species, which are appropriate to plant on -site to provide a diverse vegetation community, do not
typically grow to these heights in 7 years and will be excluded from the height performance standard For this
project, these excluded species include all of the understory/shrub species presented in Table 6.7 and Quercm
phellos (willow oak) and Diospyros virginiana (persimmon).
While measuring species density and height is the current accepted methodology for evaluating vegetation
success on mitigation projects, species density and height alone may be inadequate for assessing plant
community health. Forthis reason, the vegetation monitoring plan may incorporate the evaluation of additional
plant community indices, native volunteer species, and the presence of invasive species vegetation to assess
overall vegetative success.
Required remedial action will be provided on a case -by -case basis, such as: replanting more wet/drought
tolerant species vegetation as appropriate, conducting beaver management/dam removal, and the treatment of
undesirable/invasive species vegetation, and will continue to monitor vegetation performance until the
corrective actions demonstrate that the site is trending towards or meeting the standard requirement. Existing
mature woody vegetation will be visually monitored during annual site visits to document any mortality, due
to construction activities or changes to the water table, that negatively impact existing forest cover or favorable
buffer vegetation.
Additionally, herbaceous vegetation, primarily native species grasses, will be seeded/planted throughout the
site. During and immediately following construction activities, all ground cover at the project site must follow
the NC Erosion and Sedimentation Control Ordinance.
8.0 MONITORING PLAN
The monitoring plan for the Whittier Creek Site — Option D project is outlined below in Table 8.1 and describes
the measurable connections between the previously stated goals and objectives to the performance standards
and expected functional uplift. The approximate post -construction monitoring feature locations can be found
in Figure 12.
Table 8.1 Monitoring Plan Overview
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation Project — NCDMS Proect No. 100020
Goal
Treatment
Performance
Monitoring
Outcome
Likely Functional
Standards
Metric
Uplift
Reconnect
Restore
Four bankfull
Continuous
Increased
A dissipation of
stream
streams with
events during
stage recorders
bankfull events,
damaging high
reaches to
appropriate
the 7-year
used to record
restoring a
flows during flood
channel
more natural
events, hydrologic
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 8-3
WHITTIER CREEK SITE - OPTIOND MITIGATON PROJECT, DIMS NO.100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

Table 8.1 Monitoring Plan Overview
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation Project — NCDMS Proect No. 100020
Goal
Treatment
Performance
Monitoring
Outcome
Likely Functional
Standards
Metric
Uplift
their
dimensions
monitoring
bankfull
flooding regime
improvement of
floodplains.
and raise
period.
events.
to the system.
adjacent wetlands,
stream bed
and increased
elevations.
floodplain access
for sediment
storage.
Restore
Restored
streams with
streams will
A reduction in
appropriate
maintain
bank -height -
sediment loss to
dimensions,
ratios of less
Cross section
Stable stream
streams from bank
pattern, and
than 1.2 and
surveys and
banks with
erosion, along with
Improve
profile,
entrenchment
visual
appropriate
the resulting
Stream
stabilize
inspections
channel
nutrient loss,
Stability.
streambanks,
ratios greater than 14
with
dimensions and
increased woody
provide
.
(provided
photographic
sediment
debris and organic
floodplain
visual
documentation.
transport.
material in stream
access, utilize
resulting in
bio-
inspections
also reveal
improved habitat.
engineering.
stabilization).
Install a
variety of in-
Inventory
Increased
stream
comparisons of
number of
structures,
in -stream
pools and
An increase in the
Improve
p
increasing the
structures and
wood y
quantity and
aquatic
woody debris
NN/Astructures
features from
and
quality of aquatic
habitat.
and the
existing
debris
habitat features for
number and
conditions and
compared to the
macro invertebrates
types of pools.
as -built project
and fish.
Reduce
surveys and
existing
sedimentation
assessments.
conditions.
within riffles.
Plant
At the end of
appropriate
Interim
monitoring, a
Improved riparian
native
survival rates
vegetated
corridor habitat for
hardwood tree
of 320Vegetation
riparian buffer
native species,
and shrub
stems/acre at
will be
improved
Reestablish
species on
MY3 and 260plots
monitoring
established at a
stabilization of
forested
streambanks
steams/acre atn
(100 m2
minimum 30-
stream floodplain
riparian
and ithe
MYS, with
each covering
foot width and
(reducing sediment
buffers.
riparian buffer
final rate of
2% of the total
at a minimum
loss), increased
at a 30-foot
210
planted area).
210 stems/acre
woody and organic
minimum
stems/acre at
of native
material in
width in all
MY�"
species,
buffer/stream
areas within
including
system.
the
volunteers.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 8-4
WHITTIER CREEK SITE -OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DMS NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

Table 8.1 Monitoring Plan Overview
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation Project — NCDMS Proect No. 100020
Goal
Treatment
Performance
Monitoring
Outcome
Likely Functional
Standards
Metric
Uplift
conservation
easement
where
established
native trees
and shrubs do
not exist.
Establish a
Restored
The functional
Visual
streams,
uplift
Permanently
permanent
Conservation
inspections to
wetlands, and
improvements from
protect the
Easement
N/A
confirm no
buffers
the project are
project.
(CE) for the
encroachments
protected from
maintained and
into CE.
damaging
protected in
entire project.
encroachments.
1 perpetuity-
The as -built / baseline report will be submitted within 90 days of the completion of project construction (to
include complete as -built record drawings with all vegetation planted and monitoring devices installed) and
will follow the NCDMS As -Built Baseline Monitoring Report Format, Data, and Content Requirement (June
2017). The annual monitoring reports will follow the Annual Monitoring Report Format, Data Requirements,
and Content Guidance (June 2017), while the closeout report will follow the Closeout Report Template — ver.
2.2 (January 2016). There will be at least a minimum of 6 months between the submission of the As -Built
Baseline Report and the Year 1 Annual Monitoring Report.
The annual monitoring reports will provide the information defined below within Table 8.2 and will be
submitted to NCDMS by December P' of the year during which the monitoring was conducted. The
monitoring reports will provide a project data chronology for NCDMS to document the project status and
trends, will assist with the population of NCDMS databases for analysis and research purposes, and will assist
in decision making regarding progress towards a successful project close-out Project success criteria must be
met by the final monitoring year prior to project closeout, or monitoring will continue until unmet criteria are
successfully met as directed by NCDMS and NCIRT.
Table 8.2 Monitoring Requirements and Schedule
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation Project — NCDMS Project No. 100020
Required
Parameter
Frequency
Number/Locations
Notes
Pattern measurements will be calculated
as part of the as-built/baseline report.
Baseline/As-
Additional pattern data, such as bank
X
Pattern
built (MYO)
Reach R7
erosion pins/arrays, will be collected
only if there are visual indications or
cross section survey data that suggest
significant changes have occurred.
11 cross sections. 5
Cross sections to be monitored over
Monitoring
within Reach R7, 1
seven (7) years and shall include
X
Dimension
Years 1, 2,
on UT4a, 3 on UT4b,
assessment of bank height ratio (BHR)
3, 5 and 7
2 on UT5. See
and entrenchment ratio (ER).
Figure 12
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 8-5
WHITTIER CREEKSITE- OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DIMS NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

Table 8.2 Monitoring Requirements and Schedule
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation Project — NCDMS Project No. 100020
Required
Parameter
Frequency
Number/Locations
Notes
For the Restoration and Enhancement I
X
Longitudinal
Baseline/As-
Reaches R7, UT4a,
components of this project, the entire
Profile
built (MYO)
UT4b, and UT5
channel length will be surveyed as part
of the as -built record drawings.
1 continuous stage
Surface
recorder in Reach R7
The devices will be inspected on a
X
Water
Annually
channel, 1 in UT4b
quarterly/semi-annual basis to document
Hydrology
channel, and 1 in-
the occurrence of bankfull events and
stream flow gauge on
flow duration (UT5) on the project.
Reach UT5
4 permanent
vegetation plots will
Monitoring
be established
Vegetation will be monitored using the
X
Vegetation
Years 1 2
throughout the
Carolina Vegetation Survey (CVS)
3 5 and 7
planted area, with 1
protocols. Plots will be 100 m2 in size
'
additional random
and total 2% of the planted area.
plot each year (5
lots total annually)
Locations of exotic and nuisance
Exotic and
wally
vegetation will be visually assessed,
X
Nuisance
and as
Project wide
photographed, and mapped. These areas
Vegetation
ed
needed
will be treated as needed. Beaver signs
and Animals
and damage will be noted and beaver
will be trapped if discovered.
Representative photographs will be taken
to capture the state of the restored
Annually
stream, wetland, and vegetated buffer
X
Visual
and as
Project wide
conditions. Stream photos will be
Assessment
needed
preferably taken in the same location
when the vegetation is minimal to
document any areas of concern or to
identify trends.
Project
Complete easement
Locations of fence damage, vegetation
X
Boundary
Annually
boundary
damage, boundary encroachments, etc.
will be photographed and mapped.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 8-6
WHITTIER CREEKSITE- OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DIMS NO.100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

9.0 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Upon completion of site construction, the post -construction monitoring protocols previously defined in this
document will be implemented. Project maintenance will be performed as previously described in this
document. If, during the course of annual monitoring it is determined the site's ability to achieve site
performance standards are jeopardized, DMS will be notified of the need to develop a Plan of Corrective
Action. The Plan of Corrective Action may be prepared using in-house technical staff or may require
engineering and consulting services. Once the Plan of Corrective Action is prepared and finalized Michael
Baker will:
1. Notify the USACE as required by the Nationwide 27 permit general conditions.
2. Notify the NCDWR.
3. Revise performance standards, maintenance requirements, and monitoring requirements as necessary
and/or required by the USACE.
4. Obtain other permits as necessary.
5. Implement the Corrective Action Plan.
6. Provide the USACE a Record Drawing of Corrective Actions. This document shall depict the extent and
nature of the work performed.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 9-1
WHITTIER CREEKSITE- OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DIMS NO.100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

10.0 LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN
The NC Department of Environmental Quality's Stewardship Program currently houses DMS stewardship
endowments within the non -reverting, interest -bearing Conservation Lands Stewardship Endowment
Account. The use of funds from the Endowment Account is governed by North Carolina General Statute GS
113A 232(d)(3). Interest gained by the endowment fund may be used only for the purpose of stewardship,
monitoring, stewardship administration, and land transaction costs, if applicable. The NCDEQ Stewardship
Program intends to manage the account as a non -wasting endowment. Only interest generated from the
endowment funds will be used to steward the compensatory mitigation sites. Interest finds not used for those
purposes will be re -invested in the Endowment Account to offset losses due to inflation. The site -protection
instrument for the site is included in Appendix B.
The project site will be protected and managed under the agreed upon terms outlined in the recorded
conservation easement. The appropriate signage will be installed to mark the conservation easement
boundary. The long-term manager/steward will be responsible for inspecting the site easement and signagq
and for taking any corrective maintenance actions as needed. The landowner shall contact the long-term
manager/steward regarding any clarification about easement restrictions and is responsible for maintaining all
livestock -excluding fencing and/or permanent crossings. Should land use change in the future, the landowner
will be responsible for the installation and maintain of any additional fencing that might be required to fulfill
the conditions of the conservation easement.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 10-1
WHITTIER CREEKSITE-OPTION D MITI GATON PROJECT, DMS NO.100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

11.0 DETERMINATION OF CREDITS
The determination of stream credits for the Whittier Creek Site —Option D Mitigation Project are detailed below in Tables 11.1, 11.2, and 11.3, and are
shown in Figure 13. They have been calculated according to all applicable DMS, IRT, and DEQ guidance documents. The Credit Release Table can
be found in Appendix C.
Table 11.1 Project Components and Mtigation Credits
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation Project —NCDMS Project No. 100020
Project
Wetland
Existing
Restored
Creditable
Approach
Component
Position
Footage
Stationing
Footage,
Footage,
Restoration
Priority
Ntigation
Ntigation
(reach ID, etc.)
and Hydro
or
Acreage,
Acreage or
Level
Level
Ratio (X:1)
Credits
Type
Acreage
or SF
SF'
Reach R7
1,462
10+00.00 —
1,484
1,332
R
PII
1
1,332
24+84.07
Reach UT4a
338
10+00.00 —
328
328
E
LI
1.5
219
13+28.44
Reach UT4b
764
13+28.44 —
21+29.12
801
761
R
PI
1
761
Reach UT5
765
10+00.00 —
788
748
R
PI
1
748
17+87.56
Notes:
1. Creditable Footage: The creditable lengths for each reach aller all exclusions are accounted for, such as easement breaks, utility impacts, stream crossings, etc.
WI
W2
W3
Buffer Group I
(BGI)
Buffer Group 2
(BG2)
Buffer Group 3
(BG3)
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 11-1
WHITTI ER CREEK SITE —OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DMS NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

Table 11.2 Length and Area Summations by Nliitigation Category
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation Project — NCDMS Project No. 100020
Riparian Wetland
Non-
Credited
Restoration
Stream
(AC)
riparian
Buffer
Riverine
Non-
Level
(LF)
Wetland
FT �
( �
Riverine
(AC)
Restoration
3,073
Enhancement
Enhancement I
328
Enhancement 11
Creation
Preservation
High Quality
Pres ervation
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
WHITTI ER CREEK SITE -OPTION D MITI GATON PROJECT, DMS NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)
Table 11.3 Overall Assets Summary
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation Project — NCDMS
Project No. 100020
Asset Category
Overall Credits
Stream
3,060
RP Wetland
NR Wetland
Buffer
PAGE 11-2

12.0 REFERENCES
Arcement, G.J., and V.R. Schneider. 1989. Guide for Selecting Manning's Roughness Coefficients for
Natural Channels and Floodplains. United States Geological Survey Water -Supply Paper 2339.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/wsp/2339/report.pdf
Bryant, Bruce and John C. Reed. 1970. Geology of the Grandfather Mountain Window and Vicinity, North
Carolina and Tennessee. Geological Survey Professional Paper 615. Dept. of the Interior —United
States Geological Survey.
Daniel III, Charles C. and Paul R. Dahlen. 2002. Preliminary Hydrogeologic Assessment and Study Plan for
a Regional Ground -Water Resource Investigation of the Blue Ridge and Piedmont Provinces ofNorth
Carolina (Report 02-4105). Dept. of the Interior —United States Geological Survey.
Daniels et al. 1999. Soils Systems of North Carolina. Technical Bulletin 314. North Carolina State
University, Dept. of Soil Science. Raleigh, NC.
Dunne, T. and L.B. Leopold. 1978. Water in Environmental Planning. W.H. Freeman and Company, New
York.
Espenshade, G.H., D.W. Rankin, K Wier Shaw, and R.B. Neuman. 1975. Geologic Map of the Est Half of
the Winston-Salem Quadrangle, North Carolina -Virginia (Map I-709-13). Dept. of the Interior —
United States Geological Survey.
Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC). 2013. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the
United States. FGDC-STD-004-2013. Second Edition. Wetlands Subcommittee, Federal Geographic
Data Committee and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC.
Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group (FISRWG). 1998 (revised 8/7/01). Stream corridor
restoration: Principles, processes and practices. National Technical Information Service.
Springfield, VA
Griffith, G.E., Omernik, J.M., Comstock,J.A, Schafale, M.P.,McNab, W.H., Lenat, D.R., MacPherson, T.F.,
Glover, J.B., and Shelburne, V.B. 2002. Ecoregions of North Carolina and South Carolina, (color
poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and photographs): Reston, Virginia, U.S.
Geological Survey (map scale 1:1,500,000).
Harman, W.H. et al. 1999. Bankfull Hydraulic Geometry Relationships for North Carolina Streams. AWRA
Wildland Hydrology Symposium Proceedings. Edited By: D.S. Olsen and J.P. Potyondy. AWRA
Summer Symposium. Bozeman, MT.
Harman, W., R. Starr, M. Carter, K Tweedy, M. Clemmons, K Suggs, C. Miller. 2012. A Function -Based
Framework for Stream Assessment and Restoration Projects. US Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC EPA 843-K 12-006.
Lane, E. W. 1955. Design of stable channels. Transactions of the American Society of Civil Engineers.
Paper No. 2776: 1234-1279.
Lee, M., Peet R., Roberts, S., Wentworth, T. 2008. CVS-DMS Protocol for Recording Vegetation, Version
4.2.
Leopold, L.B. 1994. A View of the River. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, MA
Leopold, L.B. and T. Maddock, Jr. 1953. The Hydraulic Geometry of Stream Channels and Some
Physiographic Implications. Geological Survey Professional Paper 252. US Dept of Interior,
Washington, D.C.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 12-1
WHITTIER CREEKSITE-OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DIMS NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

Leopold, L. B., M.G. Wolman, and J.P. Miller. 1964. Fluvial Processes in Geomorphology. San Francisco,
CA (151).
MRLC. 2011. National Land Cover Database. Available online at: https://www.mrlc.gov/nlcd2Ol Lphp.
National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). 2007. Soil Survey of Surry County, North Carolina.
https://www.nres.usda.gov/lntemet/FSE MANUSCRIPTS/north carolina/NC171/0/Surry.pdf
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA). 2018. Agricultural Applied Climate Information
System (AgACIS) for Surry County. WETS Station Mount Airy 2 W, NC FIP 37171. Website Cited
on April 5, 2018. http://agacis.rcc-acis.org/
North Carolina Division of Water Resources (DWR). 2008. Yadkin Pee -Dee River Basinwide Water Quality
Plan, North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Raleigh, NC. Available URL:
https ://deg . nc . g ov/about/ divis ions /water-resources/planning/bas in-planning/water-res ource-
plans/vadkin-pee-dee
2010. Methodology for Identification of Intermittent and Perennial Streams and their Origins, Version
4.11. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Water Resources. Raleigh,
NC.
Yadkin River Basin Classification Schedule. Viewed Sept. 2019. NC Department of Environmental
Quality. Raleigh, NC. Available at: https://deg.nc.goy/river-basin-classifcation-schedule
North Carolina Department of Transportation. 2003. Reference Reach Database. In publication.
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services. 2013. Ararat -Pilot Mountain Local Watershed Plan —
Watershed Management Plan. NC Department of Environmental Quality. Raleigh, NC.
2009. Upper Yadkin Pee -Dee River Basin Restoration Priorities. NC Department of Environmental
Quality. Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Program. 2018. [Online WWW]. Available URL:
www.ncfloodmaps.com Also available as ArcGIS Server feature at:
http://hazards.fema.gov/gis/nfhVservices.
North Carolina Geological Survey, 1985. Geologic Map of North Carolina. Raleigh, North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development, Geological Survey Section. Scale
1:500,000. Available for download as GIS feature at:
http://data.nconemap.gov/downloads/vector/geol. zip.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Data Explorer North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural
Resources, Natural Heritage Program. Raleigh, NC. September 2017. Data Explorer
(https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/)
North Carolina Wetland Functional Assessment Team. 2010. North Carolina Wetland Assessment Method
v4.1, October 2010.
Rosgen, D. L., 1994. A classification of natural rivers. Catena 22:169-199.
1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology Books, Pagosa Springs, Colo.
2001. A Stream Channel Stability Assessment Methodology. Proceedings of the Seventh Federal
Interagency Sedimentation Conference, Vol. 2, pp. II - 18-26, March 25-29, 2001, Reno, NV:
Subcommittee on Sedimentation.
2006. Watershed Assessment of River Stability and Sediment Supply (WARS SS). Wildland Hydrology
Books, Fort Collins, CO. (648).
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 12-2
WHITTIER CREEKSITE- OPTION D MITI GATON PROJECT, DIMS NO.100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

Schafale, M. P., and A S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina,
third approximation. North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Res ourc es, Natural Heritage
Program. Raleigh, NC.
Simon, A 1989. A model of channel response in disturbed alluvial channels. Earth Surface Processes and
Landforms 14(1):11-26.
United States Army Corps of Engineers. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical
Report Y-87-1. Environmental Laboratory. US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station.
Vicksburg, MS.
2016. Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update. North Carolina
Interagency Review Team — October 24, 2016. Wilmington District.
2012. Regional Supplement to the Corps ofEngineers WetlandDelineation Manual: Eastern Mountains
and Piedmont Region Version 2.0. ed. J.F. Berkowitz, J.S. Wakeley, R.W. Lichvar, C.V. Noble.
ERDC/EL TR-12-9. Vicksburg, MS: US Army Engineer Research and Development Center.
2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines, April 2003, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Wilmington District
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2017. Endangered Species, Threatened Species, Federal
Species of Concern and Candidate Species, Surry County, NC. Available online at:
http://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntvhst/sun-y.html
2017. Official Species List. Whittier Creek, NC. Asheville, NC. ECOS-IPaC website. September 18,
2017. Consultation Code: 04EN1000-2017-SLE-0596.
United States Geological Survey. 2012. The StreamStats web program for North Carolina. Available online
at: https://water.usji$.gov/osw/streamstats/north carolina.html.
Walker, A 2012. NC Rural Mountain and Piedmont Regional Curve. Unpublished, NRCS. Personal
Communication.
Wolman, W.G., and L.B. Leopold. 1957. River Flood -plains — Some Observations on their Formation. U.S.
Geological Survey Professional Paper 282C: 87-109
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 12-3
WHITTIER CREEKSITE -OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DIMS NO.100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

APPENDIX A: (FIGURES, MAPS, AND SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION)
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
WHITTIER CREEK SITE - OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DIMS PROJECT NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

1►'
77
Michael Baker

r
7A`>
%..,
k
te is ... . within
1, and within the
LWP
+, _ a
Michael Baker
x

' N
r y';
VIM—
tw, IL
•r
its. r '.l�l[ �'\f . •e�' �:
d f.
y
fir A;
fir. �1��r:. �9R�. ✓'�"�� �.-ri��; `�� i
A �¢¢
Beaver Creek Site
'.y V.L.\ ii"" '! F .G„ r.'-�•'�
r
fe
�l
Nq
IN
Ap
• * i - 7 IFO . • o ® • • • • . o o]a[l ]1L+� O�IYLtr91r �l�i'b�i
North Carolina
Michael Baker ' _ _ , , _ _ _ _ _

Project Streams
Restoration
Enhancement I
Crossing / No Credit
Q Bedrock
0 Headcut
0 Stream ID Form Locations
Exist Cond Cross Section
Exist Cond Pebble Counts
Jurisdictional Wetlands
- Parcel Boundaries
Proposed Conservation Easement
Powerlines
■1`AI[♦]IisLa■TYa1(=9i
I N T E R N AT 1 0 N A L
T
'R `pJ 4
UT4a 7 UT5, Rik Nill Church Ro
xs-1
•� O
l
%Q ' Xs-4 !
Watershed Drainage
• = Xs-2 Areas
UT4b
Reach Area
Q(sq. mi.
R7 2.69
UT5 0.11
xs-s UT4a 0.35
UT4b 0.48
b4t.
i
0 100 200 400
Feet
1 inch = 200 feet
R7 (Whittier Creek)
North Carolina Figure 4. Existing Conditions and Features
Division of Whittier Creek Mitigation Project - Opt. D
Mitigation Services Surry County, NC
DMS Project No. 100020

Mligator Back Formation
Zabs
Mica schist agcl phyllite
I
Metamorphic rocks
CZbb
Banded gneiss
Project Location
DI
Metamorphic rocks f
Metamorphic rocks CZms
CZma1 Mica schist /
_ Metagraywacke, amphibolite, and kyanite schist
- Metamorphic rocks
Urna1
- Metagraywacke, amphibolite, and kyanite schist r'
Streams '
Proposed Conservation Easement Metamorphic rocks
CZms
Geologic Belt . Mica schist
Blue Ridge
-. • Metamorphic rocks
Sauratown Mountains Anticlinorium Yg
' Granitic gneiss
- Smith RiverAllochthon
Service.L-ayer Credits: NC OneMap, NC Center for Geographic Informs ion JDna Is 11 oar
0 0.25 0.5 1 North Carolina Figure 5. Geologic Map
Michael Miles Division of Whittier Creek Mitigation Project - Opt. D
Mitigation Services Sur Count NC
INTERNATIONAL 1 inch = 1.5 mile DMS Project No. 100020 rY y'

Proposed Conservation Easement
Project Streams
UT413 (305 acres)
UT4A (225 acres)
y.....� UT5 (72 acres)
R7 (1,722 acres, or 2.69 SgMi)'
k ,eA
r..
Project Watershed Land Use " a - UT5
72 acres
(USGS National Land Cover Database 2011) UT4b (.11 sq. mi.)
Developed (impervious) 8.2% (0.95%),A .'. 305 acres
- (.48 sq. mi.) _..
Cultivated Crops/Hay 41.6%
Grass Pasture 6.9%
Shrub Scrub 4.8%
Forested 38.3% r
R7
1,722 acres
7 (2.69 sq. mi.)
0 800 1,600 3,200
Michael Baker Feet
INTERNATIONAL 1 inch = 1600 feet
NC`OrreM p, NC C n r for GeographiMIQzi.MwlRTMw 911
North Carolina
Division of Figure 6. Drainage Area and Land Use Map
Mitigation Services Whittier Creek Mitigation Project - Opt. D
DMS Project No. 100020 Surry County, NC

Proposed Conservation Easement
Project Streams
Jurisdictional Wetlands
Soil Mapping Units
CsA (Colvard and Suches soils, 0-3%)
FeB2 (Fairview sandy clay loam, 2-8%)
FeC2 (Fairview sandy clay loam, 8-15%)
FeD2 (Fairview sandy clay loam, 15-25%)
FfD (Fairview cobbly fine sandy loam, 15-25%)
FnB2 (Fairview cobbly sandy clay loam, 2-8%)
FnC2 (Fairview cobbly sandy clay loam, 8-15%)
FsE (Fairview -Stott Knob complex, 25-45%)
RbD (Rhodhiss-Bannertown complex, 15-25%)
:2
UT4a
FnB2
FnC2
CsA
\\ R7 (Whittier Creek)
UT5
f
FeC2
Al
_NC .OneMap;-NC.- nter for G KNOMMIXIIIIIIIIIIform i
North Carolina Figure 7. Soils Ma
0 100 200 400 g p
MichaelFeet Division of Whittier Creek Mitigation Project - Opt. D
Mitigation Services Surry County, NC
I N T E R N A T 1 0 N A L 1 inch = 200 feet DMS Project No. 100020

Not to Scale
I N T E R N A T 1 0 N A L
0
Approximate Conservation Easement
Note: The historic aerial photograph (USGS) is not
georeferenced, complicating the placement of the exact
easement boundary.
North Carolina Figure 9A. Historic Aerial Image - 1950
Division of Whittier Creek Mitigation Project - Opt. D
Mitigation Services Surry County, NC
DMS Project No. 100020

1P rr
i �I
r
■
IL
zIN
i
hL
• ,'
,:rM6r
r
I
Not to Scale
I N T E R N A T 1 0 N A L
� N
i
r}
i�
AL
r
F--
r
Approximate Conservation Easement
Note: The historic aerial photograph (USGS) is not
georeferenced, complicating the placement of the exact
easement boundary.
North Carolina
Division of
Mitigation Services
DMS Project No. 100020
Figure 9B. Historic Aerial Image - 1976
Whittier Creek Mitigation Project - Opt. D
Surry County, NC

I
IV
r
or
Approximate Conservation Easement
Note: The historic aerial photograph (USGS) is not
georeferenced, complicating the placement of the exact
easement boundary.
Michael Baker North Carolina Figure 9C. Historic Aerial Image - 1993 Whittier Creek Mitigation Project - O
Not to Scale Division of Opt. Mitigation Services D
INTERNATIONAL DMS Project No. 100020 Surry County, NC

200
I N T E R N A T 1 0 N A L
400
1 inch = 400 feet
800 North Carolina
Feet Division of
Mitigation Services
DMS Project No. 100020
0
Proposed Conservation Easement
LiDAR Elevation (ft.)
- High : 1171
Low: 943
Figure 10. LiDAR Map
Whittier Creek Mitigation Project - Opt. D
Surry County, NC

1100
I N T E R N A T 1 0 N A L
0
T]
0 200 400
1 inch = 400 feet
a
V/
a
T
Q Proposed Conservation Easement
800 North Carolina Figure 11. USGS Topographic Map
Feet Division of (Mount Airy South Quad, Siloam Quad)
Mitigation Services Whittier Creek Mitigation Project - Opt. D
DMS Project No. 100020 Surry County, NC

Conservation Easement N
❑ Permanent Vegetation Plot (4)
0 Random Vegetation Plot (1)
Continuous Stage Recorder UT4a UT5
�;- n cnUr�n Roaa
® In -Stream Flow Gauge -
Cross-Sectionsk
Proposed Stream Alignment n_
+ 7
.ate �;• '.�. " i`- _
'c..
s.. UT4b a�"f
.: .1•s'. N _'�,-/try: -.'� + �'k.•
i:�:
Ax
f ..`Sil i�' 5��,,,�.' ]• j,. f a - ...-.•1 ..4�.n .R4 •`-.4.- g
R7 (Whittier Creek)
lV _
f''
OMINE irk n rmn
North Carolina Figure 12. Proposed Monitoring Features
Michael Baker 0 100 200 400 Division of g p g
Feet Whittier Creek Mitigation Project - Opt. D
Mitigation Services Surry County, NC
I N T E R N A T 1 0 N A L 1 inch = 200 feet DMS Project No. 100020

= Conservation Easement
Stream Mitigation Type
Restoration (1:1)
Enhancement 1 (1.5:1)
No Credit
Mitigation Features - Opt. D
Reach
Mitigation
Approach
Length (ft)
Credits
R7
R
1,484
1,332
UT4a
El
328
219
UT4b
R
801
761
UT5
R
788
748
Total Design Footage
3,401
Restoration
3,073
2,841
Enhancement 1
328
219
Total Credits
3,060
I N T E R N AT 1 0 N A L
N
UT4a UT5; R°ck Nill Church Ro;
-:A
My�
_ a ;� R7 (Whittier Creek)
if •��
0 100 200 400
Feet
1 inch = 200 feet
F7
North Carolina Figure 13. Project Asset and Credit Map
Division of Whittier Creek Mitigation Project - Opt. D
Mitigation Services Surry County, NC
DMS Project No. 100020

Whittier Creek Cross -Section Graphs
Stream
BKF
Max BKF
Feature
Type
BKF Area
BKF Width
Depth
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
1
Riffle
I B4
1 5.49
1 8.05
0.68
1.26
1 11.8
2.2
2.38
92.62
93.17
Stream
BKF
Max BKF
Feature
Type
BKF Area
BKF Width
Depth
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
1
Riffle
I B4
1 5.12
1 7.76
0.66
1.6
1 11.76
1.4
1.99
91.89
92.46

Whittier Creek Cross -Section Graphs
Stream
BKF
Max BKF
Feature
Type
BKF Area
BKF Width
Depth
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Riffle
I E4
1 13.96
10.13
1.38
2.21
1 7.34
2.13
2.28
190.65
193.18
Stream
BKF
Max BKF
Feature
Type
BKF Area
BKF Width
Depth
Depth
W/D
B BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Riffle
G4
9.46
9.51
0.99
1.21
9.6
2.2 1.33 191.15
192.63

Whittier Creek Cross -Section Graphs
Stream
BKF
Max BKF
Feature
Type
BKF Area
BKF Width
Depth
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Riffle
I E4b
1 9.93
1 7.3
1.36
1.6
1 5.37
1.3
2.4
190.23
190.74
Feature
Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Riffle
I G4
1 33.49
1 18.46
1.8
2.2
10.2
3.1
1.19
89.05
93.58
Whittier Creek Site
Cross -Section 6 (R7)
96
95
94
93
92
c91
----------------------------------------
90
w89
----------------------------------
88 -
As -built
87
-- --- Bankfull
86
-- --- Floodprone
85
0 10 20 30
40 50
Station (ft)

Whittier Creek Cross -Section Graphs
Stream
BKF
Max BKF
Feature
Type
BKF Area
BKF Width
Depth
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Riffle
F4
38.77
21.68
1.79
2.3
1 12.11
3.0
1.11
189.71
194.39

Whittier Creek Existing Conditions Photographs
Upper UT5, upstream (8/3/18) Upper UT5 at XS-1, downstream (4/9/18)
Middle UT5, downstream (4/9/18) Lower UT5 at XS-2, upstream (4/9/18)
Lower UT5, upstream (12/12/17)
Lower UT5, downstream (12/12/17)

Whittier Creek Existing Conditions Photographs
Top of UT4a, downstream (12/12/17)
UT4a at XS-5, downstream (4/9/18)
Lower UT4a at bedrock, downstream (12/12/17)
UT4a, upstream (12/12/17)
UT4a, downstream (12/12/17)
Upper UT4b, left bank (12/12/17)

Whittier Creek Existing Conditions Photographs
Upper UT4b, downstream (12/12/17)
Lower UT4b, downstream (4/9/18)
Lower UT4b, downstream (4/9/18)
Middle UT4b, downstream (12/12/17)
Lower UT4b, upstream (4/9/18)
Upper R7, upstream (12/12/17)

Whittier Creek Existing Conditions Photographs
Upper R7, downstream (12/12/17)
Upper R7, downstream (12/12/17)
Middle R7, right bank (12/12/17)
Upper R7, downstream (12/12/17)
Upper R7, upstream (12/12/17)
Middle R7, downstream (12/12/17)

Whittier Creek Existing Conditions Photographs
Lower R7, downstream (4/9/18)
Lower R7, downstream (4/9/18)
Lower R7, downstream (4/9/18)
Lower R7, upstream (4/9/18)
Lower R7, left bank (4/9/18)

Pebble Count: Existing Conditions
Whittier Creek Mitigation Project, DMS# 100020
SITE OR PROJECT:
Whittier Creek
REACH/LOCATION:
XS-1 on UT5
FEATURE:
Riffle
DATE:
04/09/2018
ExCon 2018
Distribution
Plot Size (mm)
MATERIAL
PARTICLE
SIZE (mm)
Total
Class %
%Cum
Silt/Clay
Silt / Clay
<.063
3
3%
3%
0.063
Sand
Very Fine
.063 - .125
3%
0.125
Fine
.125 - .25
3
3%
6%
0.25
Medium
.25 - .50
2
2%
8%
0.50
Coarse
.50 - 1.0
6
6%
14%
1.0
Very Coarse
1.0 - 2.0
14%
2.0
Gravel
Very Fine
2.0 - 2.8
14%
2.8
Very Fine
2.8 - 4.0
14%
4.0
Fine
4.0 - 5.6
2
2%
16%
5.6
Fine
5.6 - 8.0
3
3%
19%
8.0
Medium
8.0 - 11.0
13
13%
32%
11.0
Medium
11.0 - 16.0
13
13%
45%
16.0
Coarse
16 - 22.6
7
7%
52%
22.6
Coarse
22.6 - 32
12
12%
64%
32
Very Coarse
32 - 45
16
16%
80%
45
Very Coarse
45 - 64
6
6%
86%
64
Cobble
Small
64 - 90
7
7%
93%
90
Small
90 - 128
5
5%
98%
128
Large
128 - 180
2
2%
100%
180
Large
180 - 256
100%
256
Boulder
Small
256 - 362
100%
362
Small
362 - 512
100%
512
Medium
512 - 1024
100%
1024
Large -Very Large
1024 - 2048
100%
2048
Bedrock
Bedrock
> 2048
100%
5000
Total % of whole count I 1 100 1 100% 1
Summary Data
Channel materials
D16 =
5.6
D84 =
56.9
D35 =
12.0
D95 =
103.6
D50 =
20.5
D100 =
128 - 180
Whittier Creek XS-1 on UT5
Pebble Count Particle Size Distribution
100%
90% fExCon 2018
80%
70%
60%
d
i 50%
d
y 40%
f[3 30%
E 20%
U
10%
0%
0.01 0.1
1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Size (mm)
Whittier Creek XS-1 on UT5
Pebble Count Size Class Distribution
100%
90%
■ ExCon 2018
80%
70%
60%
d
i
50%
d
a
y 40%
N
U 30%
20%
10%
0%
Particle Size Class (mm)

Pebble Count: Existing Conditions
Whittier Creek Mitigation Project, DMS# 100020
SITE OR PROJECT:
Whittier Creek
REACH/LOCATION:
XS-3 on UT4b
FEATURE:
Riffle
DATE:
04/09/2018
ExCon 2018
Distribution
Plot Size (mm)
MATERIAL
PARTICLE
SIZE (mm)
Total
Class %
%Cum
Silt Clay
Silt /Clay
<.063
0%
0.063
Sand
Very Fine
.063 - .125
0%
0.125
Fine
.125 - .25
2
2%
2%
0.25
Medium
.25 - .50
2%
0.50
Coarse
.50 - 1.0
7
7%
9%
1.0
Very Coarse
1.0 - 2.0
9%
2.0
Gravel
Very Fine
2.0 - 2.8
9%
2.8
Very Fine
2.8 - 4.0
9%
4.0
Fine
4.0 - 5.6
3
3%
12%
5.6
Fine
5.6 - 8.0
3
3%
15%
8.0
Medium
8.0 - 11.0
6
6%
21 %
11.0
Medium
11.0 - 16.0
14
14%
35%
16.0
Coarse
16 - 22.6
6
6%
41 %
22.6
Coarse
22.6 - 32
20
20%
61 %
32
Very Coarse
32 - 45
18
18%
79%
45
Very Coarse
45 - 64
13
13%
92%
64
Cobble
Small
64 - 90
6
6%
98%
90
Small
90 - 128
2
2%
100%
128
Large
128 - 180
100%
180
Large
180 - 256
100%
256
Boulder
Small
256 - 362
100%
362
Small
362 - 512
100%
512
Medium
512 - 1024
100%
1024
Large -Very Large
1024 - 2048
100%
2048
Bedrock
Bedrock
I > 2048
100%
5000
Total % of whole count I 1 100 1 100% 1
Summary Data
Channel materials
D16 =
8.4
D84 =
51.5
D35 =
16.0
D95 =
75.9
D50 =
26.4
D100 =
90 - 128
Whittier Creek XS-3 on UT4b
Pebble Count Particle Size Distribution
100%
90% tExCon 2018
80%
70%
60%
d
i 50%
d
a
y 40%
jp 30%
E 20%
U
10%
0%
0.01 0.1
1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Size (mm)
Whittier Creek XS-3 on UT4b
Pebble Count Size Class Distribution
100%
90%
ExCon 2018
80%
70%
60%
d
i 50%
d
y
40%
N
U 30%
20%
10%
0%
Particle Size Class (mm)

Pebble Count: Existing Conditions
Whittier Creek Mitigation Project, DMS# 100020
SITE OR PROJECT:
Whittier Creek
REACH/LOCATION:
XS-5 on UT4a
FEATURE:
Riffle
DATE:
04/09/2018
ExCon 2018
Distribution
Plot Size (mm)
MATERIAL
PARTICLE
SIZE (mm)
Total
Class %
%Cum
Silt/Clay
Silt / Clay
<.063
0%
0.063
Sand
Very Fine
.063 - .125
0%
0.125
Fine
.125 - .25
1
1 %
1 %
0.25
Medium
.25 - .50
1 %
0.50
Coarse
.50 - 1.0
1 %
1.0
Very Coarse
1.0 - 2.0
1 %
2.0
Gravel
Very Fine
2.0 - 2.8
1 %
2.8
Very Fine
2.8 - 4.0
1 %
4.0
Fine
4.0-5.6
1%
5.6
Fine
5.6 - 8.0
5
5%
6%
8.0
Medium
8.0 - 11.0
8
8%
14%
11.0
Medium
11.0 - 16.0
15
15%
29%
16.0
Coarse
16 - 22.6
15
15%
440
22.6
Coarse
22.6 - 32
13
13%
57%
32
Very Coarse
32 - 45
10
10%
67%
45
Very Coarse
45 - 64
11
11 %
78%
64
Cobble
Small
64 - 90
9
9%
87%
90
Small
90 - 128
8
8%
95%
128
Large
128 - 180
4
4%
99%
180
Large
180-256
1
1 %
100%
256
Boulder
Small
256 - 362
100%
362
Small
362 - 512
100%
512
Medium
512 - 1024
100%
1024
Large -Very Large
1024 - 2048
100%
2048
Bedrock
Bedrock
> 2048
100%
5000
Total % of whole count I 1 100 1 100% 1
Summary Data
Channel materials
D16 =
11.6
D84 =
80.3
D35 =
18.4
D95 =
128.0
D50 =
26.5
D100 =
180 - 256
Whittier Creek XS-5 on UT4a
Pebble Count Particle Size Distribution
100%
fExCon 2018
90%
80%
70%
60%
d
i 50%
d
a
40%
y
f[3 30%
E
20%
U
10%
0%
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Size (mm)
Whittier Creek XS-5 on UT4a
Pebble Count Size Class Distribution
100%
90% ■ ExCon 2018
80%
70%
60%
d
N 50%
EL
y 40o
N
U 30%
20%
10%
0%
Particle Size Class (mm)

Pebble Count: Existing Conditions
Whittier Creek Mitigation Project, DMS# 100020
SITE OR PROJECT:
Whittier Creek
REACH/LOCATION:
XS-6 on R7
FEATURE:
Riffle
DATE:
04/09/2018
ExCon 2018
Distribution
Plot Size (mm)
MATERIAL
PARTICLE
SIZE (mm)
Total
Class %
%Cum
Silt/Clay
Silt / Clay
< .063
1
1 %
1 %
0.063
Sand
Very Fine
.063 - .125
1 %
0.125
Fine
.125 - .25
11
11 %
12%
0.25
Medium
.25 - .50
16
16%
28%
0.50
Coarse
.50 - 1.0
15
15%
43%
1.0
Very Coarse
1.0 - 2.0
43%
2.0
Gravel
Very Fine
2.0 - 2.8
43%
2.8
Very Fine
2.8 - 4.0
43%
4.0
Fine
4.0 - 5.6
4
4%
47%
5.6
Fine
5.6 - 8.0
8
8%
55%
8.0
Medium
8.0 - 11.0
14
14%
69%
11.0
Medium
11.0 - 16.0
11
11 %
80%
16.0
Coarse
16 - 22.6
12
12%
92%
22.6
Coarse
22.6 - 32
3
3%
95%
32
Very Coarse
32 - 45
5
5%
100%
45
Very Coarse
45 - 64
100%
64
Cobble
Small
64 - 90
100%
90
Small
90 - 128
100%
128
Large
128 - 180
100%
180
Large
180 - 256
100%
256
Boulder
Small
256 - 362
100%
362
Small
362 - 512
100%
512
Medium
512 - 1024
100%
1024
Large -Very Large
1024 - 2048
100%
2048
Bedrock
Bedrock
> 2048
100%
5000
Total % of whole count I 1 100 1 100% 1
Summary Data
Channel materials
D16 =
0.3
D84 =
18.0
D35 =
0.7
D95 =
32.0
D50 =
6.4
D100 =
32 - 45
Whittier Creek XS-6 on R7
Pebble Count Particle Size Distribution
100%
fExCon 2018
90%
80%
70%
60%
d
i 50%
d
a
y 40%
f[3
30%
E
20%
U 10%
0%
0.01 0.1
1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Size (mm)
Whittier Creek XS-6 on R7
Pebble Count Size Class Distribution
100%
90%
■ ExCon 2018
80%
70%
60%
d
i 50%
d
y
40%
N
U 30%
20%
10%
0%
Particle Size Class (mm)

Pebble Count: Existing Conditions
Whittier Creek Mitigation Project, DMS# 100020
SITE OR PROJECT:
Whittier Creek
REACH/LOCATION:
XS-7 on R7
FEATURE:
Riffle
DATE:
04/09/2018
ExCon 2018
Distribution
Plot Size (mm)
MATERIAL
PARTICLE
SIZE (mm)
Total
Class %
%Cum
Silt/Clay
Silt / Clay
<.063
0%
0.063
Sand
Very Fine
.063 - .125
0%
0.125
Fine
.125 - .25
0%
0.25
Medium
.25 - .50
6
6%
6%
0.50
Coarse
.50 - 1.0
3
3%
9%
1.0
Very Coarse
1.0 - 2.0
9%
2.0
Gravel
Very Fine
2.0 - 2.8
9%
2.8
Very Fine
2.8 - 4.0
1
1 %
10%
4.0
Fine
4.0-5.6
1
1%
11%
5.6
Fine
5.6-8.0
11%
8.0
Medium
8.0 - 11.0
4
4%
15%
11.0
Medium
11.0 - 16.0
14
14%
29%
16.0
Coarse
16 - 22.6
15
15%
44%
22.6
Coarse
22.6 - 32
18
18%
61 %
32
Very Coarse
32 - 45
17
17%
78%
45
Very Coarse
45 - 64
17
17%
95%
64
Cobble
Small
64 - 90
4
4%
99%
90
Small
90 - 128
1
1 %
100%
128
Large
128 - 180
100%
180
Large
180 - 256
100%
256
Boulder
Small
256 - 362
100%
362
Small
362 - 512
100%
512
Medium
512 - 1024
100%
1024
Large -Very Large
1024 - 2048
100%
2048
Bedrock
Bedrock
> 2048
100%
5000
Total % of whole count I 1 101 1 100% 1
Summary Data
Channel materials
D16 =
11.3
D84 =
50.8
D35 =
18.5
D95 =
63.9
D50 =
25.6
D100 =
90 - 128
Whittier Creek XS-7 on R7
Pebble Count Particle Size Distribution
100%
90% fExCon 2018
80%
70%
60%
d
i 50%
d
y 40%
f[3 30%
E 20%
U
10%
0%
0.01 0.1
1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Size (mm)
Whittier Creek XS-7 on R7
Pebble Count Size Class Distribution
100%
90% ■ ExCon 2018
80%
70%
60%
d
50%
a
y 40%
N
U 30%
20%
10%
0%
Particle Size Class (mm)

APPENDIX B: (SITE PROTECTION INSTRUMENT)
The land required for the construction, management, and stewardship of this mitigation project includes
portions of the parcels listed below in Table B.1. The conservation easement boundaries are shown in Figure
B.1, and copies of the recorded survey plat are provided below.
Table B.1 Site Protection Instrument Summary
Whittier Creek Site — O tion D Mitigation Pro*ect — NCDMS Project No. 100020
Parcel
Site
Deed Book
Acreage
Landowners
PIN
County
Protection
and Page
Number
Instrument
Numbers
Protected
Charles D.
Holcomb, Michael
Conservation
Book 1655,
CE-A
G. Holcomb, Elmer
592600804164
Surry
Easement
Pages 43-57
0.67
E. Holcomb, and
Wilma F. Holcomb
Charles D.
Holcomb, Michael
Conservation
Book 1655,
CE-B
G. Holcomb, Elmer
592600804164
Surry
0.57
E. Holcomb, and
Easement
Pages 43-57
Wilma F. Holcomb
Charles D.
Holcomb, Michael
Conservation
Book 1655,
CE-C
G. Holcomb, Elmer
592600804164
Surry
Easement
Pages 43-57
0.34
E. Holcomb, and
Wilma F. Holcomb
Charles D.
Holcomb, Michael
Conservation
Book 1655,
CE-D
G. Holcomb, Elmer
592600804164
Surry
Easement
Pages 43-57
1.28
E. Holcomb, and
Wilma F. Holcomb
CE-E
Angela D. Key
592600901044
Surry
Conservation
Book 1655,
0.44
Easement
Pages 58-70
CE-F
Angela D. Key
592600901044
Surry
Conservation
Book 1655,
3.66
Easement
Pages 58-70
A conservation easement has been obtained and recorded from the current landowners for the entire project.
The easement and survey plat was reviewed and approved by NCDMS and State Property Office (SPO) and
is now held by the State of North Carolina. The easements were recorded into Deed Book 1655 Pages 43-70
and the surveyed plat was recorded into Plat Book 35 Page 166 at the Surry County Register of Deeds on
December 20, 2018. The secured conservation easement allows Baker to proceed with the restoration project
and restricts the land use in perpetuity.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
WHITTIER CREEK SITE - OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DMS PROJECT NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

Conservation Easement Parcel Boundaries
Surry County Parcel Boundaries 'Z A.rim-
-
o- CE-E
0.44 ac
ors
ly R
I N T E R N AT 1 0 N A L
MCE-A
0.67 ac Ai
7k..
Charles D. Holcomb,
Michael G. Holcomb, `.
Elmer E. Holcomb, and r '
Wilma F. Holcomb CE-B
PIN: 5926-00-80-4164 0.57 ac
�. Angela D. Key
PIN: 5926-00-90-1044
CE-C
0.34 ac
CE-D
EI*
0 100 200 400
Feet
1 inch = 200 feet
CE-F
3.66 ac
E
.r
North Carolina Figure B.1 Site Protection Instrument Map
Division of Whittier Creek Mitigation Project - Opt. D
Mitigation Services Surry County, NC
DMS Project No. 100020

PLAT BOOK: � PAGE / (,(--
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY AND ACCURACY:
1 HAMPTON JAMES LARK _ CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAT WAS
DRAWN UNDER MY SUPERVISION FROM AN ACTUAL SURVEY MADE
UNDER MY SUPERVISION FROM DEED DESCRIPTION(S) RECORDED IN
DB: 14.89 PG: 874 DB: 1153 PG: 78 , AND
PB: 9 PG: 64 ; THAT THE BOUNDARIES NOT SURVEYED
ARE INDICATED AS DRAWN FROM INFORMATION AS REFERENCED;
THAT THE RATIO OF PRECISION AS CALCULATED DOES NOT EXCEED
1:10,000 ;THAT THE GPS PORTION OF THIS PROJECT WAS TO
PERFORM A GRID TIE TO THE NC STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTE
AND INFORMATION USED IS SHOWN & NOTED HEREON; THAT THIS
PLAT WAS PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH G.S. 47-30 AS
AMENDED.
I ALSO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAT IS OF ONE OF THE
FOLLOWING: GS 47-30 F(11) D; THAT THE SURVEY IS OF ANOTHER
CATEGORY, SUCH AS THE RECOMBINATION OF EXISTING PARCELS, A
COURT -ORDERED SURVEY, OR OTHER EXCEPTION TO THE DEFINITIOP
OF SUBDIVISION.
GPS METADATA
CLASS OF SURVEY: HORIZONTAL: A VERTICAL: C
FIELD PROCEDURE: STATIC NETWORK
DATES: 01/17/18-01/18/18
DATUM: NAD83(2011) NAVD 88
EPOCH: 2010
GEOID: 128
AVERAGE COMBINED FACTOR:1.00002263
POSITIONAL ACCURACY: HORIZONTAL• 0.03 VERTICAL• 0.06
UNITS: USFT
CORS USED: DOBS, NCSR, NCWC, NCST
WITNESS MY ORIGINAL SIGNATURE, LICENSE NUMBER, AND SEAL THI
3RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2018, A.D.
SEAL
L-2865 °
®fie
�9U V�®®®® HAMPTO JAMES ARK, PLS L-286
'JA E, ®®®®®
SURVEYOR'S NOTES:
1. ALL DISTANCES AND COORDINATES ARE GROUND
MEASUREMENTS IN US SURVEY FEET UNLESS
OTHERWISE NOTED.
2. AREAS CALCULATED BY THE COORDINATE METHOD.
3. PROPERTY SUBJECT TO ALL EASEMENTS, RIGHT OF WAYS
AND RESTRICTIONS THAT ARE RECORDED, UNRECORDED,
WRITTEN AND UNWRITTEN.
4. SURRY COUNTY GIS WEBSITE USED TO IDENTIFY
ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS.
5. THE PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR HAS MADE NO
INVESTIGATION OR INDEPENDENT SEARCH FOR EASEMENTS,
RIGHT OF WAYS, ENCUMBRANCES, RESTRICTIVE
COVENANTS, CORRECT OWNERSHIP OR ANY OTHER FACTS
THAT AN ACCURATE AND CURRENT TITLE SEARCH MAY
DISCLOSE. A NC LICENSED ATTORNEY SHOULD BE
CONSULTED.
6. BY GRAPHIC DETERMINATION, NO PORTION OF THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY APPEARS TO LIE WITHIN A SPECIAL FLOOD HAZA
AREA (SFHA) AS DETERMINED BY THE F.E.M.A. MAP#
3710592600J & 3710592400J DATED 8/18/2009.
7. THE RIGHT OF WAY WIDTH REQUIRED FOR OVERHEAD
DISTRIBUTION POWER LINES OF ANY VOLTAGE IS NORMALLY
40-FOOT CORRIDOR (20 FEET ON EACH SIDE) PER
SURRY-YADKIN E.M.C. SEE DB: 295 PG: 917 IN WHICH NO
WIDTH IS GIVEN.
8. UTILITIES WERE LOCATED BASED ON VISIBLE ABOVE GROUND
STRUCTURES, THEREFORE THE LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND
UTILITIES ARE APPROXIMATE OR MAY BE PRESENT AND NOT
SHOWN HEREON. CALL 1-800-632-4949 BEFORE DIGGING.
9. PROPERTY IS ZONED RA. REFER TO SURRY COUNTY, NC CO
OF ORDINANCES.
10. ALL EXISTING FENCES WITHIN THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT
AREAS ARE TO BE REMOVED AND NEW FENCING INSTALLED
FOR LIVESTOCK EXCLUSION IS TO BE PLACED OUTSIDE OF TF
CONSERVATION EASEMENT.
0' 180' 360' 540'
ONE INCH = ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY FEET
SORRY COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP AND DEDICATION•
WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, CERTIFY THAT WE ARE THE OWNER OF THE
PROPERTY SHOWN AND DESCRIBED HEREON AND ACCEPT AND ADOPT
THIS PLAT AND THE CONSERVATION EASEMENTS WITH OUR FREE
CONSENT AND DEDICATE, GRANT AND CONVEY AN EASEMENT OVER
OUR ADJACENT PROPER FOR ACCESS TO AND FROM THE
C SER TitEASEM T SE FORTH HEREIN.
A S E HOLCOM ®DATE
MICHAEL GENE HOLCOMBDATE
ELMER f. HOLCOMB DATE
WILM HOLCOMB DA
��/ to A� /®/
IANGELA D. KEY DATE
5/8" RBC (1) POB
i 1
N:960891.43' FRANCES F. ATKINS, TRUSTEE
E: 1528553.05' CLAYTON FULK (LE)
N 78°46'01" W 603,89' I FRANCES F. ATKINS
FROM CONTROL POINT 1 PIN: 5926-00-91-0590 TOP OF 48" CMP INLET f PIN: 5926-00-9 I -7 192
f 48" CMP DB: 1354 PG: 825, TRACT 2 SE CORNER OF LOT 2 8, PORTION OF TRACT #3, DB: 33G PG:414
MICHAEL R. ATKINS * WIFE, REF.: DB: 1 218 PG: 345, TRACT 2 SW CORNER OF LOT ' PORTION OF LOT 3, PB 9: PG: 64
S FRANCES G. ATKINS 11b PB: 9 PG: 64, LOT 2 PB: 9 PG: G4
PIN: 5926-00-81-2417 Cky74
DB: 1 155 PG: 366 (? S 73°49'54" E
PB: 9 PG: 64, LOT I / * L�1 \/L4 yso, F �p O�/i4C, N 82 3427" E
�i �L \ ROeJ yR0 CONTROL 200 00 133 75' S 7349'54" E RAILROAD
178.18'
/ L7 (2) \ p q0 L25'L 6 L2 SPIKE
POINT 1 pp
CONTROL
POINT o�
n
50' Aaly��0� � \ \ O ] (30) O127) CONSERVATION
q518" RBC (25) POS �•• `3 EASEMENT AREA E: 50'
/ CONSERVATION c�j`d 5ne� @ gp N: 960838.9,C �� / `y _ 0.44 ACRE
5 EASEMENT AREA A: j E: 1529359.14' v cs`V y
0.67 ACRE c\ 0(3) N 73°02'57" E 223.47 yry
fs p FROM CONTROL POINT 1
o ^ ( Ls 1}� (4) N (29)L29 �O 1 N _ TOTAL CONSERVATION
.. ..-..-----------..-.------- GE( 1✓ - ---- - --- M (28)
i \ ow ow ow -ow ow- <� w ��((�( ��`n ow -ow ^4 yv °� - _ EASEMENT AREA:
- _
\ - - - .L10 �(ai - 6.96 ACRES
40' MAG NAIL (5) r N 26°47'10" E (34) L36 (3s)
SET IN ROCK 2 F �, co 93.11' '1 '�
\ \ \ SURRY-YADKIN E.M.C. UTILITY LINE d
�a o
O, �o (33) n �4 h O
SEE NOTE # 7 5/8" RBC (7) POB c� (`�((9) °� (� �,� h �p
N: 960573.46 O Co `f Co pp // si b �N ry x
>, ANGELA D. KEY
a� E: 1528743.09'
o ro a� ' I PIN: 5926-00-90-5577
a 2 S 63°31'35" W 449.41' R09
pFROM CONTROL POINT 1 �� of (i O) �i �, 3Q O� x DB: 1 332 PG: 199
(32) a° 1 PB: 24 PG: 57
\\ da o f�' S l;� 1/2" IP PORTION OF LOT 5, PB: 9 PG: 64
p 0- �► . - `• 0 CHARLES DEAN HOLCOMB 8� `rr �3 �' O S75° /
m w O MICHAEL GENE HOLCOMB °F10 k6 2 ��5"F •
//--11 1/2" IF,
O\ \ ELMER E. HOLCOMB &� WIFE CONSERVATION (i2)� v iy (31) 5� '� 30.16'
\ �\\ WILMA F. HOLCOMB (LE) EASEMENT AREA B: y oo (37) SHED
PIN: 5926-00-80-4164 0.57ACRE w"c
DB: 1489 PG: 874 c25( g$ ' BEVERLY A. FULK
\ PB: 9 PG: 64, LOT (1 1) ob• x PIN: 5926-00-90-901 O
\ , CONSERVATION (sa)O (n m� DB: 1199 PG: 867, TRACT TWO
EASEMENT AREA C: co _ O OARN PB: 9 PG: 64, LOT 4 * LOT 1-B
mac. O '
0.34 ACRE o
50' \' CONSERVATION ^� w N 85°5T59" E (40) S63°Co
/ o
RD EASEMENT AREA D: X �� 2`16 1 , I �7 2S?y°
1.28 ACRES (20) �l3 c17) t39) ,,SB��e, F\1)
S79.
5/8" RBC (18) POB 1 \ L17 4i (,4 0p56" E N
N: 959910.8T (19) 1 1>3 y > 157.5Q'
E: 1528343.43'
A FROM tANTROI POINT 1�; X� W H+�10 R� EEi - x 33 42) ro
CE
(44)00000
(I 5) CO Ce '• ` �"� W 385 14' (44) N 802550. VV CE � 4c)
L55 X (2� „< c�� S 83°03'00 W 271.
BOUNDARY LINES FOLLOWS THE L54 am fa /X N U 3$ t45) 7g 20
CENTER LINE OF WHITTIER CREEK \ L53 N /X �(14/14 CONSERVATION
FOR LINE CALLS L52-L55 L52 f o ' 1 EASEMENT AREA F:
L51 O fn. 49 W (23) t22) L24 5/8" RBC (13) POB 3.66 ACRES
DE \ W S 77° 83 N: 959864.73'
� - 1g7 • E- 1528790 01'
LINE
BEARING
DISTANCE
LINE
BEARING
DISTANCE
L1
S 79°55'20" E
28.55'
L29
N 89°20'29' W
78.08'
L2
S 72°05'51" E
40.33'
L30
N 20°47'52" E
178.17'
L3
S 66°37'03" E
36.02'
L31
N 25°51'04" E
70.68'
L4
S 64°12'23" E
14.53'
L32
S 24°34°23" W
43.76'
L5
S 25°27'35" E
53.61'
L33
S 26°47'10" W
44.55'
L6
N 89°35'55" W
103.92'
L34
S 28°39'05" E
101.72'
L7
N 03°57'02" W
39.64'
L35
N 57°20'40" E
105.70'
L8
S 33°55'42" E
48.44'
L36
S 89°20'29" E
79.96'
L9
S 25°27'35" E
44.46
L37
S 12'11'28" W
90.38'
L10
S 89°35'55" E
96.00'
L38
S 71°4845" W
63.48'
L11
S 36°05'33" E
100.02'
L39
N 63°54'33" E
100.00'
L12
1 S 28°39'05" E
99.87'
L40
N 55°34'27" E
100.09
L13
N 02°14'07" W
105.63'
L41
N 88°06'07" W
100.53'
L14
S 71°4845" W
94.28'
L42
N 88°06'07" W
27.58'
L15
N 19°31'56" W
46.50'
L43
N 88°06'07" W
9.79'
L16
N 32°09'33" E
158.12'
L44 I
N 24°55'36" W
34.39'
L17
N 78*50'11" E
68.96
L45 I
N 29°54'12" W
35.16'
L18
N 78'50'11" E
111AT
L46 I
N 34°08'54" W
36.08'
L19
S 32°09'33" W
152.61'
L47
N 37°15'36" W
41.16'
L20
S 19°31'56" E
52.03'
L48
N 40°01'49" W
37.7T
L21
S 71 °4845" W
93.23'
L49
N 41 °38'20" W
45.93'
L22
N 22°49'23" W
165.50'
L50
N 40°46'04" W
34.78'
L23
N 78*50'11" E
16A9'
L51
N 05°58'51" E
31.46'
L24
S 71 °4845" W
12.00'
L52
N 49°33'02" W
22.93'
L25
S 88°56'25" E
40.42'
L53
N 09*34'18" W
41.06'
L26
S 83°4244" E
21.64'
L54
N 44°54'18" W
32.59'
L27
S 80°2946" E 1
13.74'
L55
N 54°47'27" W
34 89'
L28
S 17°53'40" W I
91.5F
THIS PLAT DOES NOT CREATE A SUBDIVISION OF PROPERTY IN SURRY COUNTY.
THE PURPOSE OF THIS SURVEY IS TO IDENTIFY THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT
AREAS ONLY. NO TRANSFER OF PROPERTY IS TAKING PLACE.
I I -Ism" REVIEW OFFICER FOR SURRY COUNTY, CERTIFY THAT
THE MAP R PLAT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATION IS AFFIXED MEETS ALL
STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS FOR RECORDING FOR WHICH THE REVIEW OFFICER HAS
RESPONSIBILITY AS PROVIDED BY LAW.
♦.o!
REVIEW • •
J. DIXON BROWN 4 WIFE,
HARRIETTE C. BROWN
PIN: 5925-00-79-5737
DB: 1 104 PG: 407
L48
i L47 � � _
\1/2" RBR
L45
MICHAEL P. SIMMONS * WIFE, ( L4 - ' L41 •
FRANKIE R. 51MMON5 L43 ���R10�i \ 1/2" IP
PIN: 5925-00-89-312G iL42
DB: 395 PG: 740
"
i 1/2 RBR \ .
(IN EDGE OF
PAVEMENT) \
REGISTERED THIS THE ja DAY OF °
20 AT ( -__ 5' (" _ AND RECORDED IN
PLAT BOOK \35 PAGE_ BY:
D PU \j
M 1.
REGISTER OF DEEDS
S 22°26'21" W 808.68'
FROM CONTROL POINT 1
ANGELA D. KEY
PIN: 5926-00-90-1044
PORTION OF DB: 1153 PG: 678
PORTION OF LOT 5, PB: 9 PG: 64
/ N 88°06'07" W 769.06'
v
0
COORDINATE
TABLE
(USFT)
#
NORTHING
EASTING
#
NORTHING
EASTING
#
NORTHING
EASTING
1
960891.43
1598553.05
17
960026.34
1528836.70
33
960485.89
1529203.02
2
960853.42
1528665.68
18
959910.83
1528343.43
34
960569.01
1529244.98
3
960661.32
1528796.93
19
959988.27
1528643.81
35
960568.09
1529324.94
4
960612.91
1528819.97
20
960009.80
1528752.87
36
960429.35
1529261.49
5
960613.64
1528716.05
21
959880.60
1528671.64
37
960301.05
1529115.36
6
960851.89
1528555.78
22
959831.56
1528689.03
38
960202.93
1528978.28
7
960573.45
1528743.09
23
959802.46
1528600.46
39
960060.25
1529008.02
8
960572.78
1528839.08
24
959758.28
1528407.63
40
960075.45
1529223.61
9
960491.96
1528898.00
25
960838.94
1529359.14
41
960004.43
1529365.60
10
1 960404.32
1528945.89
26
1 960833.56
1529434.61
42
959974.39
1529520.30
11
960220.13
1528892.68
27
960746.40
1529406.47
43
959886.04
1529501.21
12
960325.68
1528888.56
28
960607.88
1529343.13
44
959931.22
1 1529233.22
13
959864.73
1528790.01
29
960608.78
1529265.06
45
1 59884.55
1 1528850.32
14
959835.31
1528700.44
30
960775.34
1529328.32
15
959879.13
1 1528684.89
31
960315.05
1 1528994.66
16
1 960012.99
1 1528769.05
32
960372.08
1 1529083.65
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
CORNER -NC DMS CAP (TYPICAL)
1/2" IP _ 3/4" IP
N 88`06'07" W 403.92
f
1
DONNIE F. SHOCKLEY>. WIFE
BEVERLY A. FULK DANA F. SHOCKLEY
PIN: 5925-00-89-9189 PIN: 5925-00-98-9869
PORTION OF DB: I G38 PG: 9 D13: 1530 PG: 744
PORTION OF LOT 7, PB: 9 PG: 64 PORTION OF LOT 7, PB: 9 PG: 64
GRID TIE INFORMATION
CONTROL POINT #1 CONTROL POINT #2
RBC "KEE" RBC "KEE"
STATE PLANE COORDINATES STATE PLANE COORDINATES
N: 960773.79' N: 960892.43'
E: 1529145.38' E: 1528483.52'
ELEV: 1033.76 ELEV: 1013.19'
CF: 1.00002209 CF: 1.00002317
*CONTROL POINT #1 BEING LOCATED S 79°50'14" E
A GRID DISTANCE OF 672.41 FEET FROM CONTROL
1
VICINITY MAP
(NOT TO SCALE)
zo
Rom`
3 p
C,
e �. SUBJECT
<� a PROPERTY
O
rn wz 4
LEGEND:
®
5/8" RBR W/CAP SET IN CONCRETE
•
UNMARKED POINT
O
SET 5/8" REBAR W/ "CE" CAP
OO
SET 1" IRON PIPE W/ "KEE" CAP
ASET
MAG NAIL
Q•
EXISTING IRON PIN (AS NOTED)
UTILITY POLE
QT
TELEPHONE PEDESTAL
NOT TO SCALE (NTS)
CIE
CONSERVATION EASEMENT LINE
BOUNDARY LINE NOT SURVEYED
BOUNDARY LINE SURVEYED
-
NCDOT RIGHT OF WAY (R/W) TYPICAL
- - - -
UTILITY RIGHT OF WAY (R/W) TYPICAL
- - - - - -
TIE LINE ONLY
- - - - -
ADJOINING DEED LINES
X
FENCE
OW
OVERHEAD WIRE
OASPHALT
GRAVEL
BRIDGE
STREAM
CONCRETE DRIVE
SOIL ROADBED
CONSERVATION EASEMENT AREA
PB:
PLAT BOOK
DB:
DEED BOOK
PG:
PAGE
RBR
REBAR
RBC
REBAR W1TH ID CAP
IP
IRON PIPE
PC
IRON PIPE WITH CAP
R/W
RIGHT OF WAY
NAD
NORTH AMERICAN DATUM 1983
NAVD
NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM
SPC
STATE PLANE COORDINATES
NGS
NATIONAL GEODETIC SURVEY
CF
COMBINED FACTOR
CE
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
POB
POINT OF BEGINNING
CMP
CORRUGATED METAL PIPE
A CONSERVATION EASEMENT SURVEY FOR
THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,
NCDEQ: DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
"WHITTIER CREEK"
SPO FILE NO'S. 86 BI & 86-BH DMS SITE ID NO. 100020
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION #'S.- 5926-00-80-4164 & 5926-00-90-1044
CURRENT OWNER(S) LISTED AS:
CHARLES DEAN HOLCOMB & MICHAEL GENE HOLCOMB,
ELMER E. HOLCOMB & WILMA F. HOLCOMB (LIFE ESTATE)
ANGELA D. MEADOWS
SITE ADDRESS: ROCK HILL CHURCH ROAD, ARARAT, NC 27007
DEED REFERENCES:
DEED BOOK: 1489 PAGE. 874 PLAT BOOK 9 PAGE 64, LOT 6
DEED BOOK: 115J PAGE. 678 PLAT BOOK 9 PAGE 64, LOT 5
ELDORA TOWNSHIP, SURRY COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SURVEY BY.- CB,JB,JN,DD DRAWN BY.• LDP/NH CHECKED BY. H✓L
SURVEY DATES: 04117118-1012JI18 JOB 1180104-CE
REVISION: DATE.•
SHEET SIZE. 18 X24" SHEET #: 1 OF 1 SCALE: 1 "=180'
N P.O. Box 2566
Asheville, NC 28802
_ (828) 575- 9021
z- www.keemap.com
. ; License # C- 3039

APPENDIX C: (CREDIT RELEASE SCHEDULE)
All credit releases will be based on the total credits generated as reported by the as -built survey of the mitigation
site. Under no circumstances shall any mitigation project be debited until the necessary Department of the
Army (DA) authorization has been received for its construction or the District Engineer (DE) has otherwise
provided written approval for the project in the case where no DA authorization is required for construction of
the mitigation project. The DE, in consultation with the NCIRT, will determine if performance standards have
been satisfied sufficiently to meet the requirements of the release schedules below. In cases where some
performance standards have not been met, credits may still be released depending on the specifics of the case.
Monitoring may be required to restart or be extended, depending on the extent to which the site fails to meet
the specified performance standard. The release of project credits will be subject to the criteria described in
Table C.I as follows:
Table C.1 Stream Credit Release Schedule
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation Project — NCDMS Project No. 100020
Credit
ILF/NCDMS
Interim
Total
Release
Release Activity
Milestone
Release
Released
1
Site Establishment
0%
0%
2
Completion of all initial physical and biological
30%
30%
improvements made pursuant to the Mitigation Plan
3
Year 1 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are
10%
40%
stable and interim performance standards have been met
4
Year 2 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are
°
10 /°
°
50/°
stable and interim performance standards have been met
5
Year 3 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are
°
10 /°
°
60/°
stable and interim performance standards have been met
*
Year 4 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are
°
5 /°
65%
6
stable and interim performance standards have been met
(75%**)
7
Year 5 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are
10%
75%*
stable and interim performance standards have been met
(85% )
*
Year 6 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are
°
5 /°
80%
8
stable and interim performance standards have been met
(90%**)
Year 7 monitoring report demonstrates that channels are
90%
9
stable, and performance standards have been met and
10%
project has been approved for closeout
(100% )
* Please note that vegetation data may not be required with monitoring reports submitted during these monitoring
ears unless otherwise required by the Mitigation Plan or directed by the NCIRT.
* * 10% reserve of credits to be held back until the bankfull event performance standard has been met.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
WHITTIER CREEK SITE - OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DMS PROJECT NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

The following conditions apply to all the credit release schedules:
a. A reserve of 10% of a site's total stream credits will be released after four bankfull events have occurred,
in separate years, provided the channel is stable and all other performance standards are met. In the event that
less than four bankfull events occur during the monitoring period, release of these reserve credits is at the
discretion of the NCIRT.
b. After the second milestone, the credit releases are scheduled to occur on an annual basis, assuming that the
annual monitoring report has been provided to the USACE in accordance with Section IV (General Monitoring
Requirements) of the 2016 Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update, and
that the monitoring report demonstrates that interim performance standards are being met and that no other
concerns have been identified on -site during the visual monitoring. All credit releases require written approval
from the USACE.
c. The credits associated with the final credit release milestone will be released only upon a determination by
the USACE, in consultation with the NCIRT, of functional success as defined in the Mitigation Plan.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
WHITTIER CREEK SITE - OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DMS PROJECT NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

APPENDIX D: (FINANCIAL ASSURANCE)
Pursuant to Section IV H and Appendix III of the NC Division of Mitigation Services' In -Lieu Fee Instrument
dated July 28, 2010, the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality has provided the USACE-
Wilmington District with a formal commitment to fund projects to satisfy mitigation requirements assumed by
NCDMS. This commitment provides financial assurance for all mitigation projects implemented by the
program.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
WHITTIER CREEK SITE - OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DMS PROJECT NO. 100020,
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

APPENDIX E: (MAINTENANCE PLAN)
The site will be monitored on a regular basis and a physical inspection of the site will be performed at least
once a year throughout the post -construction monitoring period until performance standards are met. These
site inspections may identify issues that require routine maintenance. Routine maintenance is most likely to
be expected in the first two years following site construction and may include the following components as
described below in Table E.1:
Table E.1 Routine Maintenance Components
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Mitigation Project —NCDMS Project No. 100020
Component/Feature
Maintenance through project close-out
Stream
Routine channel maintenance and repair activities may include modifying in -stream
structures to prevent piping, securing loose coir matting, and supplemental installations of
live stakes and other target vegetation along the project reaches. Areas of concentrated
stormwater and floodplain flows that intercept the channel may also require maintenance to
prevent streambank failures and head -cutting until vegetation becomes established.
Vegetation
Vegetation will be maintained to ensure the health and vigor of the targeted plant
community. Routine vegetation maintenance and repair activities may include supplemental
planting, pruning, and fertilizing. Exotic invasive plant species will be treated by mechanical
and/or chemical methods. Any invasive plant species control requiring herbicide application
will be performed in accordance with NC Department of Agriculture (NCDA) rules and
regulations.
Site Boundary
Site boundaries will be demarcated in the field to ensure clear distinction between the
mitigation site and adjacent properties. Boundaries shall be identified by fence, marker,
bollard, post, or other means as allowed by site conditions and/or conservation easement.
Boundary markers disturbed, damaged, or destroyed will be repaired and/or replaced on an
as needed basis.
Fann Road Crossing
The farm road crossings within the site may be maintained only as allowed by the recorded
Conservation Easement, deed restrictions, rights of way, or corridor agreements.
Beaver Management
Routine maintenance and repair activities caused by beaver activity may include
supplemental planting, pruning, and dam breeching, dewatering, and/or removal. Beaver
management will be performed in accordance with US Department of Agriculture (USDA)
rules and regulations using accepted trapping and removal techniques only within the project
boundary.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
WHITTIER CREEK SITE - OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DMS PROJECT NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

APPENDIX F: (DWR STREAM IDENTIFICATION FORMS)
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
WHITTIER CREEK SITE - OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DMS PROJECT NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

F�l44rN * I
(� UT S
NC DWO Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 >, vi".,-, pe."j
Date: `'Z �'� { ��
ProjecVSite: t, � [
Latitude: 2(p
Evaluator: V. t
County: 7 f
Longitude: 8 0, Sl 8�
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent { (
Stream Determination (circle
Ephemeral Intermittent erenni
t
Other /N �1
Quad Name:
ifa 19 or perennial if? 30" `
e.g.
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = L� - 5 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1" Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
,
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex, riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
2
3
9. Grade control
D
z5Z5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
=
Yes = 3
- artiticial Mches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = q. c- )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
Cn
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
es = 3
U. Bioloav (Subtotal = 1113
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks o
0
1
2
3
22. Fish �,,;hny „�, �� , ,,
0
1
1.5
23. Crayfish G t Lti„ �,� .,�
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
0_0
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
Pith& =
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:---
// (f
-=--�-�

2rA� UT�(
NC DWO Stream Identification Form VPrcinn 4.11
Date: Q l( Z (1 &
Project/Site: {
Latitude: 2( e . a
Evaluator: S K -
1
County: SJ fi
Longitude: _ ro l �
Total Points: `"
Stream is at least intermittent
3
Stream Determination (circle
Intermittent erennia
Other %� S�
Quad Name:
if? 19 or perennial if 2! 30"
IEphemeral
e.g.
A. Geornor holo (Subtotal = O }
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1 a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
3
8. Headcuts
1
2
3
9. Grade control ,�,�
0
0.5
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
es = 3
artinciai aucnes are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = 1
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
es =
C. Bioloov (Subtotal = 10
2 1 0
Lag 'J.,s�4
sty e s-
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 2 1 0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0 2 3
21. Aquatic Mollusks 0 1 3
22. Fish 0 1 1.5
23. Crayfish 0.5 1 1.5
24. Amphibians +J 0.5 1 1.5
25. Algae 0 1 1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Cher = 0
"perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: ((��
RO
Sketch: _� r
"SN! wt
UT L(

APPENDIX G: (NC-SAM AND NC-WAM ASSESSMENT FORMS)
(Included in electronic submittal only)
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
WHITTIER CREEK SITE - OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DMS PROJECT NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM R7 (Whittier Creek)
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Whittier Creek
3. Applicant/owner name: Baker Engineering
5. County: Surry
7. River basin: Yadkin
Date of evaluation: 4/9/2018
Assessor name/organization:
Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad:
Scott King / Kristi Suggs
Ararat River
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 36.3770,-80.5980
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): R7 (Whittier Creek) 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 1,598
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 6 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 21 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ®Perennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ❑AL 1 ®B
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mil) ®Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mil) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑l ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ®No
1. Channel Water —assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction — assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not
3. Feature Pattern — assessment reach metric
®A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
❑B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile — assessment reach metric
®A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
❑B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability — assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
®C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A
Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
❑B ❑B
Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
®C ®C
Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
Water Quality Stressors — assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
®A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
®B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes/Sketch"
section.
OF Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
®G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
❑I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
❑J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather — watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
®C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream — assessment reach metric
❑Yes ®No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types — assessment reach metric
10a. ®Yes ❑No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach)
(skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
❑A
Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses
F, W
❑F
5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
F CD
❑G
Submerged aquatic vegetation
®B
Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent
o Y
❑H
Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation
Y rC
❑1
Sand bottom
❑C
Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees)
r
❑J
5% vertical bank along the marsh
®D
5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots
❑K
Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E
Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate— assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11a. ❑Yes ®No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
®A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
❑B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach —whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare
(R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Gravel (2 — 64 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Sand (.062 — 2 mm)
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Detritus
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. ❑Yes ❑No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)

12
Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. ®Yes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ❑No Water ❑Other:
12b. ®Yes ❑No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ ❑Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ❑Beetles
❑ ®Caddisfly larvae (T)
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicula)
❑ ®Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ®Other fish
❑ ®Salamanders/tadpoles
❑ ®Snails
❑ ❑Stoneflylarvae (P)
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑B ❑B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
®C ®C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water >_ 6 inches deep
❑B ❑B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®C ®C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
❑Y ❑Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
®N ®N
16. Baseflow Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
®A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction passing flow during low -flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom -release dam, weir)
®D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
®E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
❑F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
❑C Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
❑D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
®E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
❑F None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
®A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
❑B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
❑C Stream shading is gone or largely absent

19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
®A ®A ❑A ❑A >_ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ®D ®D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
❑E ❑E ❑E ❑E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Mature forest
❑B ❑B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
®C ®C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D ❑D Maintained shrubs
❑E ❑E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22: ❑
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
®D ®D ®D ®D ®D ®D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ®A Medium to high stem density
❑B ❑B Low stem density
❑C ❑C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
®A ®A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
❑B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
®B ®B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
❑C ❑C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity —assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes ®No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. ❑No Water ❑Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E >_ 230
Notes/Sketch:

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Whittier Creek Date of Assessment
4/9/2018
Stream Category Pb3 Assessor Name/Organization
Scott King / Kristi Suggs
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NO
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary All
Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
LOW
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
LOW
(4) Floodplain Access
LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
MEDIUM
(4) Microtopography
NA
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
LOW
(4) Sediment Transport
HIGH
(4) Stream Geomorphology
LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(1) Water Quality
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
HIGH
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat
HIGH
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
(3) Substrate
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
(3) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall
MEDIUM

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM Reach UT4
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Whittier Creek
3. Applicant/owner name: Baker Engineering
5. County: Surry
7. River basin: Yadkin
Date of evaluation: 4/9/2018
Assessor name/organization:
Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad:
Scott King / Kristi Suggs
Ararat River
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 36.3773,-80.5995
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): UT4 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 1,101
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 4.5 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 12 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ®Perennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ❑AL 1 ®B
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mil) ®Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mil) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑l ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ®No
1. Channel Water —assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction — assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not
3. Feature Pattern — assessment reach metric
®A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
❑B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile — assessment reach metric
®A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
❑B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability — assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
®C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A
Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
®B ®B
Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
❑C ❑C
Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
Water Quality Stressors — assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
❑A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes/Sketch"
section.
OF Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
®G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
❑I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
❑J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather — watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
®C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream — assessment reach metric
❑Yes ®No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types — assessment reach metric
10a. ®Yes ❑No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach)
(skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
❑A
Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses
F, W
❑F
5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
F CD
❑G
Submerged aquatic vegetation
®B
Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent
o Y
❑H
Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation
Y rC
❑1
Sand bottom
❑C
Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees)
r
❑J
5% vertical bank along the marsh
❑D
5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots
❑K
Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E
Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate— assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11a. ❑Yes ®No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
®A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
❑B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach —whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare
(R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Gravel (2 — 64 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Sand (.062 — 2 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Detritus
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. ❑Yes ❑No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)

12
Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. ®Yes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ❑No Water ❑Other:
12b. ®Yes ❑No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ ❑Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ❑Beetles
® ❑Caddisfly larvae (T)
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicula)
❑ ❑Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ®Other fish
❑ ❑Sal a manders/tad poles
❑ ®Snails
❑ ❑Stoneflylarvae (P)
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
®B ❑B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑C ®C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water >_ 6 inches deep
❑B ❑B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®C ®C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
❑Y ®Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
ON ❑N
16. Baseflow Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
®A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction passing flow during low -flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom -release dam, weir)
❑D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
®E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
❑F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
❑C Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
❑D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
OF None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
❑A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
®B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
❑C Stream shading is gone or largely absent

19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
®A ®A ❑A ❑A >_ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ®D ❑D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
❑E ❑E ❑E ®E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Mature forest
❑B ®B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
®C ❑C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D ❑D Maintained shrubs
❑E ❑E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22: ❑
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ®A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
®C ®C ®C ®C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ®D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ®A Medium to high stem density
❑B ❑B Low stem density
❑C ❑C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
®A ®A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
❑B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
❑B ❑B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
®C ®C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity —assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes ®No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. ❑No Water ❑Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E >_ 230
Notes/Sketch:

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Whittier Creek Date of Assessment
4/9/2018
Stream Category Pb3 Assessor Name/Organization
Scott King / Kristi Suggs
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NO
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary All
Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
LOW
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
LOW
(4) Floodplain Access
MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
LOW
(4) Microtopography
NA
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
LOW
(4) Sediment Transport
HIGH
(4) Stream Geomorphology
LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(1) Water Quality
LOW
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
MEDIUM
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
MEDIUM
(2) In -stream Habitat
HIGH
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
(3) Substrate
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall
LOW

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM Reach UT5
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Whittier Creek
3. Applicant/owner name: Baker Engineering
5. County: Surry
7. River basin: Yadkin
Date of evaluation: 4/9/2018
Assessor name/organization:
Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad:
Scott King / Kristi Suggs
Ararat River
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 36.3779,-80.5999
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): UT5 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 765
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 2.5 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 11 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ®Perennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ❑AL 1 ®B
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) ®Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mil) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mil) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑l ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ®No
1. Channel Water — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction — assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not
3. Feature Pattern — assessment reach metric
®A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
❑B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile — assessment reach metric
®A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
❑B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability — assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
®B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
®A ®A
Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
❑B ❑B
Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
❑C ❑C
Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
Water Quality Stressors — assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
❑A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes/Sketch"
section.
OF Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
®G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
❑I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
❑J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather — watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
®C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream — assessment reach metric
❑Yes ®No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types — assessment reach metric
10a. ®Yes ❑No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach)
(skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
❑A
Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses
F, W
❑F
5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
F CD
❑G
Submerged aquatic vegetation
❑B
Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent
o Y
❑H
Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation
Y rC
❑1
Sand bottom
❑C
Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees)
r
❑J
5% vertical bank along the marsh
❑D
5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots
❑K
Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
®E
Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate— assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11a. ❑Yes ®No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
®A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
❑B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach —whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare
(R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Gravel (2 — 64 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Sand (.062 — 2 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Detritus
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. ❑Yes ❑No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)

12
Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. ®Yes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ❑No Water ❑Other:
12b. ®Yes ❑No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ ❑Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ❑Beetles
❑ ❑Caddisfly larvae (T)
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicula)
® ❑Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ®Other fish
❑ ❑Sal a manders/tad poles
❑ ®Snails
❑ ❑Stoneflylarvae (P)
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑B ❑B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
®C ®C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water >_ 6 inches deep
❑B ❑B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®C ®C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
®Y ®Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
❑N ❑N
16. Baseflow Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
®A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction passing flow during low -flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom -release dam, weir)
®D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
®E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
❑F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
❑C Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
❑D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
OF None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
❑A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
❑B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
®C Stream shading is gone or largely absent

19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
®A ®A ❑A ❑A >_ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
❑E ❑E ®E ®E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Mature forest
®B ®B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
❑C ❑C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D ❑D Maintained shrubs
❑E ❑E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22: ❑
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
®D ®D ®D ®D ®D ®D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Medium to high stem density
❑B ❑B Low stem density
®C ®C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
®A ®A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
❑B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
❑B ❑B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
®C ®C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity —assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes ®No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. ❑No Water ❑Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E >_ 230
Notes/Sketch:

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Whittier Creek Date of Assessment
4/9/2018
Stream Category Pb2 Assessor Name/Organization
Scott King / Kristi Suggs
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NO
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary All
Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
LOW
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
LOW
(4) Floodplain Access
HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
LOW
(4) Microtopography
NA
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
(4) Channel Stability
MEDIUM
(4) Sediment Transport
HIGH
(4) Stream Geomorphology
LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(1) Water Quality
LOW
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
MEDIUM
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
(3) Substrate
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall
LOW

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM W-B and W-C
Accompanies user manual version 5.0
USACE AID #
NCDWR#
Project Name
Whittier Creek
Date of Evaluation
4/9/2018
Applicant/Owner Name
Baker Engineering
Wetland Site Name
W-B and W-C
Wetland Type
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Scott Kin / Kristi Suggs
Level III Ecoregion
Piedmont
Nearest Named Water Body
Ararat River
River Basin
Yadkin -Pee Dee
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
03040101
County
Surry
NCDWR Region
Winston-Salem
I-1 Yes M No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Lonaitude (deci-dearees)
36.3791.-80.6009
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in
recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic
tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ® Yes ❑ No
Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑ Anadromous fish
❑ Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
❑ NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
❑ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
❑ Publicly owned property
❑ N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
❑ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
❑ Designated NCNHP reference community
❑ Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
❑ Blackwater
❑ Brownwater
❑ Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ❑ Lunar ❑ Wind ❑ Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? ❑ Yes ® No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? ® Yes ❑ No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition —assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the
assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment
area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
❑A ❑A Not severely altered
®B ®B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub).
Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot
deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
❑A ❑A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ❑B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
®C ®C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change)
(examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
Water Storage/Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
3a. ❑A ❑A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
❑B ❑B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
®C ®C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
❑D ❑D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. ❑A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
❑B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
®C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture/Structure — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature.
Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional
indicators.
4a. ❑A Sandy soil
®B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
❑C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
❑D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
❑E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. ®A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
❑B Soil ribbon >_ 1 inch
4c. ®A No peat or muck presence
❑B A peat or muck presence
5. Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub). Examples
of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
❑A ❑A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
❑B ®B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
®C ❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6. Land Use — opportunity metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources draining
to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (5M),
and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M).
WS 5M 2M
❑A ❑A ❑A > 10% impervious surfaces
❑B ❑B ❑B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants
®C ®C ®C >_ 20% coverage of pasture
❑D ❑D ❑D >_ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
❑E ❑E ❑E >_ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
❑F ❑F ❑F >_ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
❑G ❑G ❑G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent drainage and/or overbank flow from affecting the
assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer —assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the .water body. Make
buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
❑A >_ 50 feet
❑B From 30 to < 50 feet
❑C From 15 to < 30 feet
®D From 5 to < 15 feet
❑E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
®<_ 15-feet wide ❑> 15-feet wide ❑ Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
®Yes ❑No
7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed?
®Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
❑Exposed — adjacent open water with width >_ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes and
Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp Forest
only)
Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and
the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
❑A ❑A >_ 100 feet
❑B ❑B From 80 to < 100 feet
❑C ❑C From 50 to < 80 feet
❑D ❑D From 40 to < 50 feet
❑E ❑E From 30 to < 40 feet
❑F ❑F From 15 to < 30 feet
®G ❑G From 5 to < 15 feet
❑H ®H < 5 feet

9. Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
❑A Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
®B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
❑C Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
®A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
❑B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
❑C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
❑A ❑A ❑A >_ 500 acres
❑B ❑B ❑B From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C ❑C ❑C From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D ❑D ❑D From 25 to < 50 acres
❑E ❑E ❑E From 10 to < 25 acres
❑F ❑F ❑F From 5 to < 10 acres
❑G ❑G ❑G From 1 to < 5 acres
❑H ❑H ❑H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
❑I ❑I ❑I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
®J ®J ❑J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
❑K ❑K ®K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
❑A Pocosin is the full extent (>_ 90%) of its natural landscape size.
❑B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility line
corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300
feet wide.
Well Loosely
❑A
❑A
>_ 500 acres
❑B
❑B
From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C
❑C
From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D
❑D
From 10 to < 50 acres
❑E
❑E
< 10 acres
®F
®F
Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
❑Yes ❑No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non -forested areas >_ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors, and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directions? If the assessment area is clear cut,
select option "C."
❑A 0
❑ B 1 to 4
®C 5to8
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
❑A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
❑B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or clearing.
It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
®C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in at
least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
❑A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics).
❑B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
®C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
❑A >_ 25% coverage of vegetation
❑B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider
structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA WT
T
o ❑A ®A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
m ❑B ❑B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U ®C ❑C Canopy sparse or absent
T
o ❑A
❑A
Dense mid-story/sapling layer
❑B
®B
Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
®C
❑C
Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
❑A
t
❑A
Dense shrub layer
❑B
❑B
Moderate density shrub layer
U) ®C
®C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
®A
❑A
Dense herb layer
_ ❑B
❑B
Moderate density herb layer
❑C
®C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
❑B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
®C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
❑A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion — wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
❑A ❑B ❑C ❑D
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion,
man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
®A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
❑B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name W-B, W-C, W-E, and W-F Date of Assessment 4/9/2018
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest Assessor Name/Organization Scott King / Kristi Suggs
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO
Sub -function Ratina Summa
Function
Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -surface Storage and
Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Particulate Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Soluble Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Physical Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure Condition LOW
Landscape Patch Structure Condition LOW
Vegetation Composition Condition LOW
Function Ratina Summa
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
LOW
Water Quality
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM W-A and W-D
Accompanies user manual version 5.0
USACE AID #
NCDWR#
Project Name
Whittier Creek
Date of Evaluation
4/9/2018
Applicant/Owner Name
Baker Engineering
Wetland Site Name
W-A and W-D
Wetland Type
Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Scott Kin / Kristi Suggs
Level III Ecoregion
Piedmont
Nearest Named Water Body
Ararat River
River Basin
Yadkin -Pee Dee
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
03040101
County
Surry
NCDWR Region
Winston-Salem
I-1 Yes M No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Lonaitude (deci-dearees)
36.3783.-80.5991
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in
recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic
tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ® Yes ❑ No
Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑ Anadromous fish
❑ Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
❑ NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
❑ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
❑ Publicly owned property
❑ N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
❑ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
❑ Designated NCNHP reference community
❑ Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
❑ Blackwater
❑ Brownwater
❑ Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ❑ Lunar ❑ Wind ❑ Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? ❑ Yes ® No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? ® Yes ❑ No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition —assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the
assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment
area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
❑A ❑A Not severely altered
®B ®B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub).
Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot
deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
❑A ❑A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ®B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
®C ❑C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change)
(examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
Water Storage/Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
3a. ❑A ❑A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
❑B ❑B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
❑C ®C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®D ❑D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. ❑A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
❑B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
®C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture/Structure — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature.
Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional
indicators.
4a. ❑A Sandy soil
®B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
❑C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
❑D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
❑E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. ®A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
❑B Soil ribbon >_ 1 inch
4c. ®A No peat or muck presence
❑B A peat or muck presence
5. Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub). Examples
of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
❑A ❑A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
❑B ❑B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
®C ®C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6. Land Use — opportunity metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources draining
to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (5M),
and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M).
WS 5M 2M
❑A ❑A ❑A > 10% impervious surfaces
❑B ❑B ❑B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants
®C ®C ®C >_ 20% coverage of pasture
❑D ❑D ❑D >_ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
❑E ❑E ❑E >_ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
❑F ❑F ❑F >_ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
❑G ❑G ❑G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent drainage and/or overbank flow from affecting the
assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer —assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the .water body. Make
buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
❑A >_ 50 feet
❑B From 30 to < 50 feet
❑C From 15 to < 30 feet
®D From 5 to < 15 feet
❑E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
®<_ 15-feet wide ❑> 15-feet wide ❑ Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
❑Yes ®No
7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed?
®Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
❑Exposed — adjacent open water with width >_ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes and
Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp Forest
only)
Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and
the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
❑A ❑A >_ 100 feet
❑B ❑B From 80 to < 100 feet
❑C ❑C From 50 to < 80 feet
❑D ❑D From 40 to < 50 feet
❑E ❑E From 30 to < 40 feet
❑F ❑F From 15 to < 30 feet
®G ®G From 5 to < 15 feet
❑H ❑H < 5 feet

9. Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
❑A Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
®B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
❑C Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
®A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
❑B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
❑C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
❑A ❑A ❑A >_ 500 acres
❑B ❑B ❑B From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C ❑C ❑C From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D ❑D ❑D From 25 to < 50 acres
❑E ❑E ❑E From 10 to < 25 acres
❑F ❑F ❑F From 5 to < 10 acres
❑G ❑G ❑G From 1 to < 5 acres
®H ®H ❑H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
❑I ❑I ❑I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
❑J ❑J ❑J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
❑K ❑K ®K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
❑A Pocosin is the full extent (>_ 90%) of its natural landscape size.
❑B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility line
corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300
feet wide.
Well Loosely
❑A
❑A
>_ 500 acres
❑B
❑B
From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C
❑C
From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D
❑D
From 10 to < 50 acres
❑E
❑E
< 10 acres
®F
®F
Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
❑Yes ❑No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non -forested areas >_ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors, and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directions? If the assessment area is clear cut,
select option "C."
❑A 0
❑ B 1 to 4
®C 5to8
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
❑A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
❑B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or clearing.
It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
®C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in at
least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
❑A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics).
❑B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
®C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
❑A >_ 25% coverage of vegetation
❑B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider
structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA WT
T
o ❑A ®A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
m ❑B ❑B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U ®C ❑C Canopy sparse or absent
T
o ❑A
❑A
Dense mid-story/sapling layer
❑B
®B
Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
®C
❑C
Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
❑A
t
❑A
Dense shrub layer
❑B
❑B
Moderate density shrub layer
U) ®C
®C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
®A
❑A
Dense herb layer
_ ❑B
❑B
Moderate density herb layer
❑C
®C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
❑B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
®C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
❑A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion — wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
❑A ❑B ❑C ❑D
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion,
man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
®A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
❑B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name W-A, W-D, W-G, and W-H Date of Assessment 4/9/2018
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization Scott King / Kristi Suggs
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO
Sub -function Ratina Summa
Function
Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -surface Storage and
Retention
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Particulate Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Physical Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure Condition LOW
Landscape Patch Structure Condition LOW
Vegetation Composition Condition LOW
Function Ratina Summa
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

APPENDIX H: (APPROVED JD AND WETLAND FORMS)
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
WHITTIER CREEK SITE - OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DMS PROJECT NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action ID: SAW-2018-00849 County. Surry U.S.G.S. Quad: Mount Airy South
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Property Owner: Scott Mn
Address: 8000 Rel4ency Parkway -_Suite 60.0
Cary, NC 27518
Telephone Number: 919-481-5731
Size (acres): 6 acres Nearest Town: Ararat
Nearest Waterway: Beaver Branch
River Basin/ HUC: Upper Catawba
Coordinates: 36.3779,-80.5999
Location description: 948 Rock Hill Church Rd. Ararat North Carolina
Indicate Which of the Followiniz Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
X There are waters, including wetlands, on the above described project area, that may be subject to Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The
waters, including wetlands, have been delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently
accurate and reliable. Therefore this preliminary jurisdiction determination may be used in the permit evaluation process,
including determining compensatory mitigation. For purposes of computation of impacts, compensatory -mitigation
requirements, and other resource protection -measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat
all waters and wetlands that would be affected in any way by the permitted activity on the site as if they are jurisdictional
waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program
Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331). However, you -nay request an approved JD, which is an
appealable action, by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
There are wetlands on the above described property, that may be subject to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). However, since the
waters, including wetlands, have not been properly delineated, this preliminary jurisdiction determination may not be
used in the permit evaluation process. Without a verified wetland delineation, this preliminary determination is merely
an effective presumption of CWA/RHA jurisdiction overall of the waters, including wetlands, at the project area,
which is not sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable permit decision. We recommend that you have
the waters of the U.S, on your property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland
delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by the
Corps.
B. Approved Determination
There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described property subject to the permit requirements
of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33
USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for
a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
There are waters of the U.S, including wetlands on the above described property subject to the permit requirements of
Section 404 of the CIean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
We recommend you have the waters of the U.S. on your property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to
accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation
that can be verified by the Corps.
The waters of the U.S. including wetlands on your project area have been delineated and the delineation has been
verified by the Corps. If you wish to have the delineation surveyed, the Corps can review and verify the survey upon
completion. Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA and/or RHA

jurisdiction on your property which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied
upon for a period not to exceed five years.
_ The waters of the U.S. including wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat
signed by the Corps Regulatory Official identified below on . Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
_ There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
_ The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act
(LAMA). You should contact the Division of Coastal Management to determine their requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US and/or wetlands without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material,
construction or placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the
Army permit may constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). if
you have any questions regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact William Elliott at
828-271-7980, ext. 422S or [e-mail].
C. Basis for Determination:
See attached preliminary jurisdictional determination form.
The site contains wetlands as determined by the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and the
Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual: Eastern Mountain and Piedmont
Region (version 2.0). These wetlands are adjacent to stream channels located on the property that exhibit indicators
of ordinary high water marks. The stream channel on the property is an unnamed tributary (UT) to Beaver Branch
which flows into the Upper Catawba River.
D. Remarks: None
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the
particular site identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation
provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate
participation in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the
Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in
B. above)
This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to
this determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed you
will find a Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal
this determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Jason Steele, Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 10M15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria
for appeal under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the
NAP. Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by N/A (Preliminary -JD).

**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this
correspondence.*
Corps Regulatory Official:
William Elliott
Issue Date of JD: June 27, 2018 Expiration Date: NIA Preliminary JD
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure
we continue to do so, please complete our Customer Satisfaction Survey, located online at
http://comsmqpu.tTsace,arniy.mil/cm apex/P12=136:4:0.
Copy furnished:
Angela Key, 948 Rock Hill Church Road, Ararat NC, 27007,
Wilma & Elmer Holcomb, 172 Jane Sowers Rd, Stateville, NC 28625

Applicant: Scott King ( File Number: SAW-SAW-2018-00849 ( Date: June 27, 2018
Attached is: I See Section below
U
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
A
❑
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
B
❑
PERMIT DENIAL
C
❑
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
D
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
E
�-gv�.3`,'i�^a"
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature
on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the
permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that the
permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section 11 of this form and return the form to the district engineer. Your
objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right to appeal
the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a) modify the
permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify the permit
having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections, the district engineer
will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature
on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the
permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you
may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form
and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of
this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by
completing Section lI of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer
within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION. You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the date of
this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative
Appeal Process by completing Section 11 of this form and sending the Form to the district engineer. This form must be received by
the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice,
E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the preliminary JD.
The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps
district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD.

s
'�,^ "'`+.-=; "a'.'!s �" �`� �V ,-C� 'YkC.: � 3^� _''i,'a' Y � .4' " ✓,.' Emil
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial
proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or
objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the record
of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to clarify the
administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record. However, you may
provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative record.
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
appeal process you may contact:
also contact:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division,
Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
Attn: William Elliott
CESAD-PDO
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
60 Forsyth Street, Room 10MI5
828-271-7980, ext. 4232
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day
notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations.
Date:
Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or agent.
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to. -
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn.: William Elliott, 69 Darlington Avenue, Wilmington,
North Carolina 28403
For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:
Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, ,South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Jason Steele,
Administrative Appeal Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]

PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD) FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PRELIMINARY JD: June 27, 2018
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PRELIMINARY JD:
Scott King
8000 Regency Parkway - Suite 600
Cary, NC 27518
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
CESAW-RG-A, SAW-2018-00849,
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND 1ACKGROUND INFORMATION:
948 Rock Hill Church Rd. Ararat, North Carolina
State: NC County/parisb/borough: Surry City:.Ararat
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): 36.3779,-80.5999
Universal Transverse Mercator: NIA
Name ofnearestwaterbody: Bull Creek
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY). -
Office (Desk) Determination. Date: June 27, 2018
Field Determination, Date(s): 5/30/2018
Use the table below to document aquatic resources and/or aquatic resources at different sites
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES INREVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION
Site
Centered Coordinates
Estimated Amount
Type of Aquatic
Geographic
Number
(decimal degrees)
of Aquatic Resource
Resources
Authority to Which
in Review Area
Aquatic Resource
Latitude Longitude
(linear feet or acre)
"May Be" Subject
Wetland
[] Section 404
Non -wetland Waters
Q Section 10/404
Please see tables
attached for
El Wetland
Q Section 404
Aquatic
Ej Nan -wetland Waters
E] Section 10/404
Resources
Wetland
Ej Section 404
Non -wetland Waters
0 Section 10/404
Q Wetland
[� Section 404
Q Non -wetland Waters
0 Section 10/404
El Wetland
Q Section 404
ED Non -wetland Waters
0 Section 10/404
El Wetland
Q Section 404
[[ Non -wetland Waters
0 Section 10/404
Ej Wetland
E] Section 404
Q Non -wetland Waters
Q Section 10/404
Ri

1) The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in
the review area, and the requester of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option
to request and obtain an approved JD (AJD) for that review area based on an
informed decision after having discussed the various types of JDs and their
characteristics and circumstances when they may be appropriate.
2) In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an Individual permit, or a
Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring "pre -
construction notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non -reporting NWP, or
other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an AJD for the
activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit applicant has
elected to seek a permit authorization based on a PJD, which does not make an
official determination of jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the
option to request an AJD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit
authorization, and that basing a permit authorization on an AJD could possibly result
in less compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) the
applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting the terms
and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4) the applicant can
accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply with all the terms and
conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has
determined to be necessary; (5) undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject
permit authorization without requesting an AJD constitutes the applicant's acceptance
of the use of the PJD; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered
individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps permit
authorization based on a PJD constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the
review area affected in any way by that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and
waives any challenge to such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance
or enforcement action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7)
whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD or a PJD, the JD will be processed
as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered individual permit (and all terms
and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be administratively
appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it
becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether geographic
jurisdiction exists over aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an official
delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, the Corps will
provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable. This PJD finds
that there "may be"waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be" navigable waters of
the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the review
area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following
information:

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources
below where indicated for all checked items:
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map:Vicinity Map, USGS, Soils, NHD/NWI, UDAR, FEMA, Drainage Areas
on Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale;
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas: from GIS shapefiles
■❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUG maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Mt Airy South Quad
FEW Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Surry County, 2007
■❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: from GIS Shapefiles
❑ State/local wetland Inventory map(s):
0 FEMA/FIRM maps: (See FEMA map for FIRM ID number)
■❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: project outside of zone x (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: Q Aerial (Name & Date): NCOneMap Orthoimagery, 2014
or F] Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
Other Information (please specify): Surry County LiDAR map, Reach drainage area map
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily
been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for later lurisdictional
determinations.
Signature and date of
person requesting PJD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)'
' Districts may establish timeframes for requestor to return signed PJD forms. If the requestor does not respond
within the established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up Is
necessary prior to finalizing an action,

O
l�
V

ra -i u,
V N N
N m t.D
ry n a)
w _ n
n o
N Y 00
H V
� �
Q
-0 -0 -o
rD rD m
CD
ro (D rn ro
a a a
a a a
�a x ;;oI
U.) w w
w co cow w w
"' �'Iz "I�
z z z
O O 0
� O �
to Cn l!}
rD rD rD
q Iq Pl
o'
a a a
ra ti �
0 0 0
a � a
O O 0
a a a
rD rD rD
!:t rr rr
ni su w
a n a
CL rz CL
Is
v
GI
R
rD
w
a1
n
y
w
r+
-t
rD
w
c-
h
0
m
c�
a
W
LA
ro
O
C
n
rD
r)
m

\ / E
3 * z ID%
/ CL /
© > &
/ CL 2rD
J ) \ UJ )
/ e E / 7
° y CL® 7
/ 0- ° \
In
) \
& \ @ \ ƒ
° m ± n c
d % = k (A\/\�
h § /
/ k r ®
» _ D- &
\ \ C %
0 2 m
/ / / G
2 / } )
k 2
\ § -
7 / \
\
2ƒ/7
\ / \
0 c
� % e
E m =
q E
f /
\ / /
CL
w /
) ƒ R
E §
* m
M /
2 §
\ �
%
c
0 0 0 01/
E S / / �
e m w « n
)
0
\
\
I
9
I
/
\
CL/
2
�
k
/
Cu
&
E
\
»
2
/
§
0
n
tn
/
/
I
/
/
/
-
-
/
0
s 0
m m m m
2 E 2 « m
e e w w a
E
LU �
w
w
m m
R
@
'r;
w w
« «
w
«
w
w
_
-
& e
o
=
o
m
»
r
n
m
w e
�
#
rD
r+
Ln m
e
o
g
.
0
}
\
\ 00 o
\
\
0
01
G a
y
e■
« o
E o
o
o
E
m
-
r
m m
# »
CD0
o
«
CL
m
» a
#
»
¥
cr
fD
I%j
£
�
CD
n
�
�
2
/
m
0
�
M
�
\
k
_
MW

Whittier Creek Project Area
O Wetland Data Point Locations r$''
r.:
0 DEQ Stream Form Locationsk';
JD Wetland Areas
JD Streams W2
`Y UT5
W-C.
4•
UT4
W4'
W-B
(0.041 ac) "
,
,.: q
... A. "F
R W-A
(0.068 ac) z
AL
��
liti. _.+�"-_ ."-��`,_-;•gam
- •
Jr
4
17. R7 Whittier Creek)
)
aver Credits: NC OneMaw NC Center for Geographic Information and Analysis, NC 911 Board
Michael - 0 125 250 500 Jurisdictional Features Map
I N T E R N A T I O N A L Feet Whittier Creek Mitigation Project

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
ProjecUSite: _ r t CitylCounty: ��I �t� ^-mot `1 Sampling Date: 't 1
ApplicantlOwner: %rkiNJ
c .� ___64 ke., state: NC Sampling Point: in/ —
Investigator(s): i ra ru q !!!!!! '''�,,,,'''� Section, Township, Range: /
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): ov 4 ��S cal relief (concave, convex, none): i h� 4v,eo w Slope
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): l Lat: 3G . ,� Long: U . Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: v' NWI classification:
Are climatic I hydrolo is conditions on the site typical for t is time of year? Yes � No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes -1k- No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes �� No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes � No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes k No
Remarks: /
wI C rS k k a p�srtvrc ur � . AJj
1 i if.0 -�k i1.� p •rd f'. �/�'+�.J� S 1 it
o - de 74 A L. .16 4.e -.. - cL r e efti rl.fC'ia3is. �e LI
Wetland Hydrology indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two ree uired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that aooly)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
_ Surface Water (Al)"' _
_ High Water Table (A2) _
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
X Saturation (A3) _
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living
Roots (C3) _ Moss Trim Lines (1316)
Water Marks (B1) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (B3) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) _
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water -Stained Leaves (69)
_ Microtopographic Relief (134)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No � Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No le Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes —)!� No Depth (inches): 3 ``
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes .' No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
04J M 41 C -
.t �i T IR ✓. IL
/r� h ( ►1 t Li .�'�{
r fh.'ty
S P v
sue,, W,
A 14� 1.17
,, IAt�` i'e1�I�h
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: W
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: r� (A)
2. Total Number of Dominant !
3- Species Across All Strata: II! (B)
6.
50% of total cover:
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: — )
1.
4.
50% of total cover:
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: — }
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
= Total Cover
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: UU (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiplyb r:
20% of total cover:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B!A =
= Total Cover
20% of total cover: _ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size- S)
2. �� �,< f PA Cray
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11_
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Remarks: (tnclude photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine -All woody vines, regardless of height.
fGA it!>lyi MGfri $v ..
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont -Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: W — (
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color moist % Color (moist) % Toe Loc Texture Remarks
I iZ 3 3 f 09 - J 4>A Sv f {
5 10 Y R 5/1 140 3 4D _ _ice M c
'Type: C=Concentration, D=De letion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
,Y Stratified Layers (A5)
— 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
— Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Sandy Redox(S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
5�J $
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
— Other (Explain in Remarks)
31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

bw Pe>,�-t
�-2
` WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region (/ !
ProjecVSite: VN tt(V,- City/County: v (rk Sampling Date: ! !
Applicant/Owner; A, &i..1 Rw14,. Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): ; «; Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): LS IoJVw Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%): 4
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): — i Lat: 3 , 3 a Long: �� (oU(�(J Datum: N SPL 1
Soil Map Unit Name: C 0 VA, ,Su ix s C) `� v s S NWI classification: -- J
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (if no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Y, Soil or Hydrology �� significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes Z No
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
S�po-� has I i I dl-,�J d ;P51�j �j iy` 454.
cj
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondarxndicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apt)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_ Surface Water (Al)
High Water Table (A2)
_ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (BB)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
_ Saturation (A3)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living
Roots (C3) _ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (131)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ _ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soits (C6) _ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (B3)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (CO)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (65)
�f Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
_ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ FAG -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
h
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:iV^
ff
��tA4�, 4F
fl<
�;�• �� � �,,�,�„�,,, ,
�� � R,.,� -���
�5 sit � ,
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Sampling Point: A _ 2
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
% Cover Soecies? Status Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAG: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species �l
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (AIB)
= Total Cover Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: )
FACW species x 2 =
1.
FAC species x 3 =
2.
FACU species x 4 =
3.
LIPL species x 5 =
4.
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
50% of total cover:
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
= Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
20% of total cover: _ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is s3.0'
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
6. be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
= Total Cover Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
f � � Tree —Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1. erSl11C 50, (r ar✓ \ 43 C rA , (7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
2. h v S� Yr& Sapiing — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3._ cJ✓�.a c a Q(� L approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
! r than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
4. 5fs3t _K wet s-
5. Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
R approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
7.
9.
10,
11.
Herb —All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
[ 2 z = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: 2 ��
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: }
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
= Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ff
ra
Yes I No
ua IATMY Uorps oT tngineers tastem mountains ana rieamont — version 2.1J

SOIL
Sampling Point: � `2
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
(inches)
Matrix
Redox Features
Texture Remarks
-as4
Color moist %
Color (moist) % Tvpe Loc
D-�
0 412 /Oo
i6M
`(-- I U
Iv Y 2
G / A
Iy Y-
iUVL q(2
to L _/`1
_�A Azai.j J
{5, Y i,
L
.s
'Type: C=Concentration, D=De letion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (Al0) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (Al6)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
___. Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
— Thick Dark Surface (Al 2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
— Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil present? Yes—L No
Aj
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

[Data-3
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Lk 41eli �!Lp City/County: IS'lu _ Sampling Date: 4 1 { 8
ApplicantlOwner: { NJ State: NC— Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): 7 Kim SLX4r.1 Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etic�.): Local
ll}relief (concave, convex, none): J tsks6 E,h to K. Slope m:1 p ►�
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): I' 3 Lat: 26, 1�1'+ l Long: - 20- 066 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: AS.�u NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes —Oe�L No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks/ l j[f
9*, a. S i� � y,�� p !t �T S "rl! /�c r s V-.%Q -e IT t,r
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
— Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
— Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (1316)
Water Marks (131)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table {C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (CS)
Drift Deposits (133)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (B5)
_'j� Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (1217)
— Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
�
Water Table Present? Yes
No k Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes _-�' No Depth (inches):_
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
,
(
I p
/
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
5.
6.
Data Point
Sampling Point: W-3
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
% Cover Skies? Status Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: }
1.
2.
3.
4_
6.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
I. 4s4 Iw. f�i rk 5
3.
4.
5.
6.
S- = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
2. Zvyzw r, v �T V— rA
3. i Y
4.
5.
6.
7.
= Total Cover /fir
50% of totai cover: g 20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(AIB)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A)
(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Version 2.0

SOIL
Data Point
W-3
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Redox Features
finches) _
Color moist
%
Color (moist) % Tvoe
Loc _ Texture Remo-Eks_
rr
a
5U G
2— e
l v
A ., 4��.-� ...E�,'.k cr ct, `e
ICE L
c.�►, sa-.�.`
'Type C-Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. `Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_ Histosol (A1)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
,_,- 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Stratified Layers (A5)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Laver (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
w 4Y�l� �rQ
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
rLj:, 41�� I'd ;:� (0 11
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont -Version 2.0

Data Point
W-4
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site:
Applicant/Owner:
Investigator(s): '' L� gl­
S
Landform (hillslope, terrace, erg.): fnq c�
Subregion (LRR or All — - 114% Lat:
A. _
Soil Map Unit Name: ' v ( f
Are climatic 1 hydrologic conditions on the site typical for
Are Vegetation, Soil , or Hydrology
Are Vegetation Soil , or Hydrology
rty ounty. / Sampling Date:
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site trap showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes Now Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No_,V_ within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remar s:
L /I 14 541—e 4R
G Nil. c S S4 `AZ Gt �
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
— Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
_ High Water Table (A2)
— Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (1316)
_ Water Marks (91)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (62)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
, Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
i Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
— FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No c Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes
Saturation Present? Yes
No k Depth (inches):
No Depth
(inches):
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
I V v tv,/CiC�JfYrs
ay%4 b
II ��
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Data Point
W-4
Sampling Point:
Absolute Dominant indicator
dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: — }
°o Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3.
Species Across All Strata:
(B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species b
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: — )
FACW species x 2 =
1.
FAC species x 3 =
2.
FACU species x 4 =
3.
UPL species x 5 =
4.
Column Totals: (A)
(B)
5
U. Prevaience Index = B/A =
= Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: — ) —2 - Dominance Test is >50%
1 _ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
2. 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
3. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
6. be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
= Total Cover Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
2C> (o of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Htrb Stratum (Plot size:
1. F.tu r
)
�;
��
4C
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
2. ` `M-,
T
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3.
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
4. 'T
i
2
Al FA6U
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
5. C9p rAt/6n A^4e&�eA
vn; n
2
FAt u
Shrub -Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
R
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
I v K = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 52 20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: — )
1.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
rs here or on a separate sheet.)
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine -All woody vines, regardless of height.
l'C %mil I ole
i�IL,L (r(� fLL6 r
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No h
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont- Version 2.0

SOIL
to the depth needed to document the indicator or
Depth
(inches)
— �
Matrix
Color moist
j c> s f? 3 3
%
€ ty
_S-�
r
106)
2 - (2-
161 Y Q
l av
Imo? -If
5 Y (2
lad
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Redox Features
Color moist % Tvpe Loc
Data Point
W-4
Sampling Point:
the absence of indicators.)
Texture Remarks
f O�Grn r c>r•Z
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
— Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
— Sandy Redox(S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
1
Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (59) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
— Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_, Redox Depressions (F8)
___, Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
,4�
f/11014A,11r
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

APPENDIX L• (APPROVED FHWA CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION FORMS)
(Summary provided in hardcopy. Complete Categorical Exclusion forms included in electronic submittal)
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
WHITTIER CREEK SITE - OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DMS PROJECT NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

Appendix A
Categorical Exclusion Form for Ecosystem Enhancement
Program Projects
Version 1.4
Note: Only Appendix A should to be submitted (along with any supporting documentation) as the
environmental document.
Part
Project Name:
1: General Project Information
IWhittier Creek Site - Option D
County Name:
Surry
EEP Number:
100020
Project Sponsor:
FHWA
Project Contact Name:
Jake Byers, PE / Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
Project Contact Address:
797 Haywood Road, Suite 201, Asheville, NC
Project Contact E-mail:
JB ers mbakerintl.com
EEP Project Manager:
I Matthew Reid (matthew.reid(d)ncdenr.aov)
The Whittier Creek Site - Option D is located in Surry County near the town of Dobson, NC in the Ararat
community. The project site is located in the Yadkin River Basin (03040101) and the NC DMS Targeted
Local Watershed (TLW) 03040101110040. The site is located on two abutting parcels just southeast of
the intersection of Rockhill Church Road and Nurse Road.
The existing stream reaches and riparian wetlands within the project area have been significantly
impacted by past and present unrestricted livestock access and/or channelization used to promote
drainage and maximize agricultural acreage for cattle pastures. The project will involve the restoration
and enhancement of approximately 3,594 linear feet of perennial stream along Whittier Creek and
several UTs to Whittier Creek, which is a tributary to Bull Creek. A conservation easement will be
implemented along all project reaches with riparian buffers extending in an excess of 30 feet from the
top of bank. The conservation easement will protect the entire project area in perpetuity. Livestock
will be permanently excluded from the conservation easement with permanent fencing.
Reviewed By:
Date
Conditional Approved By:
Date
❑ Check this box if there are outstanding issues
Final Approval By:
EEP Project Manager
For Division Administrator
FHWA
For Division Adrnin
FHWA
6 \/Arcinn I A R/1 RInt;

2: All Projects
Regulation/QuestionPart
..
Coastal Zone Management Act CZMA
1. Is the project located in a CAMA county?
❑ Yes
® No
2. Does the project involve ground -disturbing activities within a CAMA Area of
❑ Yes
Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ No
® N/A
3. Has a CAMA permit been secured?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
4. Has NCDCM agreed that the project is consistent with the NC Coastal Management
❑ Yes
Program?
❑ No
® N/A
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liabilit Act CERCLA
1. Is this a "full -delivery" project?
® Yes
❑ No
2. Has the zoning/land use of the subject property and adjacent properties ever been
® Yes
designated as commercial or industrial?
❑ No
❑ N/A
3. As a result of a limited Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential
❑ Yes
hazardous waste sites within or adjacent to the project area?
® No
❑ N/A
4. As a result of a Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous
❑ Yes
waste sites within or adjacent to the project area?
❑ No
® N/A
5. As a result of a Phase 11 Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous
❑ Yes
waste sites within the project area?
❑ No
® N/A
6. Is there an approved hazardous mitigation plan?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
National Historic Preservation Act Section 106
1. Are there properties listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of
❑ Yes
Historic Places in the project area?
® No
2. Does the project affect such properties and does the SHPO/THPO concur?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
3. If the effects are adverse, have they been resolved?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act Uniform
Act
1. Is this a "full -delivery" project?
® Yes
❑ No
2. Does the project require the acquisition of real estate?
® Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
3. Was the property acquisition completed prior to the intent to use federal funds?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ N/A
4. Has the owner of the property been informed:
® Yes
* prior to making an offer that the agency does not have condemnation authority; and
❑ No
* what the fair market value is believed to be?
❑ N/A
Version 1.4, 8/16/05

3: Ground -Disturbing Activities
Regulation/QuestionPart
..
American Indian Religious Freedom Act AIRFA
1. Is the project located in a county claimed as "territory" by the Eastern Band of ❑ Yes
Cherokee Indians? ® No
2. Is the site of religious importance to American Indians?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
3. Is the project listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of Historic
❑ Yes
Places?
❑ No
® N/A
4. Have the effects of the project on this site been considered?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Antiquities Act AA
1. Is the project located on Federal lands?
❑ Yes
® No
2. Will there be loss or destruction of historic or prehistoric ruins, monuments or objects
❑ Yes
of antiquity?
❑ No
® N/A
3. Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
4. Has a permit been obtained?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Archaeological Resources Protection Act ARPA
1. Is the project located on federal or Indian lands (reservation)?
❑ Yes
® No
2. Will there be a loss or destruction of archaeological resources?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
3. Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
4. Has a permit been obtained?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Endangered Species Act ESA
1. Are federal Threatened and Endangered species and/or Designated Critical Habitat
® Yes
listed for the county?
❑ No
2. Is Designated Critical Habitat or suitable habitat present for listed species?
® Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
3. Are T&E species present or is the project being conducted in Designated Critical
❑ Yes
Habitat?
® No
❑ N/A
4. Is the project "likely to adversely affect" the specie and/or "likely to adversely modify"
❑ Yes
Designated Critical Habitat?
® No
❑ N/A
5. Does the USFWS/NOAA-Fisheries concur in the effects determination?
® Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
6. Has the USFWS/NOAA-Fisheries rendered a "jeopardy" determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Version 1.4, 8/16/05

Executive Order 13007 Indian Sacred Sites
1. Is the project located on Federal lands that are within a county claimed as "territory"
❑ Yes
by the EBCI?
® No
2. Has the EBCI indicated that Indian sacred sites may be impacted by the proposed
❑ Yes
project?
❑ No
® N/A
3. Have accommodations been made for access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred
❑ Yes
sites?
❑ No
® N/A
Farmland Protection Policy Act FPPA
1. Will real estate be acquired?
® Yes
❑ No
2. Has NRCS determined that the project contains prime, unique, statewide or locally
® Yes
important farmland?
❑ No
❑ N/A
3. Has the completed Form AD-1006 been submitted to NRCS?
® Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act FWCA
1. Will the project impound, divert, channel deepen, or otherwise control/modify any
® Yes
water body?
❑ No
2. Have the USFWS and the NCWRC been consulted?
® Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
Land and Water Conservation Fund Act Section 6
1. Will the project require the conversion of such property to a use other than public,
❑ Yes
outdoor recreation?
® No
2. Has the NPS approved of the conversion?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish
Habitat
1. Is the project located in an estuarine system?
❑ Yes
® No
2. Is suitable habitat present for EFH-protected species?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
3. Is sufficient design information available to make a determination of the effect of the
❑ Yes
project on EFH?
❑ No
® N/A
4. Will the project adversely affect EFH?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
5. Has consultation with NOAA-Fisheries occurred?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Migratory Bird Treat Act MBTA
1. Does the USFWS have any recommendations with the project relative to the MBTA?
❑ Yes
® No
2. Have the USFWS recommendations been incorporated?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® N/A
Wilderness Act
1. Is the project in a Wilderness area?
❑ Yes
® No
2. Has a special use permit and/or easement been obtained from the maintaining
❑ Yes
federal agency?
❑ No
® N/A
10 Version 1.4, 8/16/05

Whittier Creek Site — Option D / Categorical Exclusion — Summary
Yadkin River Basin — CU# 03040101 — Surry County, NC
NCDMS Project ID No. 100020; NCDEQ Contract No. 007182
Proiect Backeround
The Whittier Creek Site — Option D stream restoration project is proposing to restore, enhance, and protect
approximately 3,594 linear feet of existing perennial streams along Whittier Creek and several UTs to
Whittier Creek in Surry County, NC for the purpose of obtaining stream mitigation credit for the NC
Division of Mitigation Services (DMS). The existing stream reaches and riparian wetlands within the
project area have been significantly impacted by past and present unrestricted livestock access and/or
channelization used to promote drainage and maximize agricultural acreage for cattle pastures.
The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) requires agencies to use an interdisciplinary
approach in planning and decision -making for actions that will have an impact on the environment. The
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT) have
determined that DMS projects will not involve significant impacts and therefore a Categorical Exclusion
(CE) is the appropriate type of environmental document for this project. FHWA has also determined that
stream restoration projects are considered land disturbing activities; therefore, Parts 2 and 3 of the DMS
CE checklist and a summary of the findings applicable to the environmental regulations associated for this
project are included. Supporting documentation is included in the Appendix.
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA)
Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR) prepared the following reports: a Radius Map Report on
September 14, 2017. Based on this report, there are two properties on or adjacent to the project site had
been designated as commercial or industrial, John Flinchum's Grocery and Slate Sand Company, Inc.,
respectively.
John Flinchum's Grocery was located less than one-half mile from the project area and housed three on -
site underground storage tanks (UST) for fuel. In 1990, all three tanks were removed and the business was
closed; therefore, this property should not pose any hazardous waste risks to the project site.
The enclosed EDR report listed an active mining site located on one of the project parcels and is operated
by Slate Sand Company, Inc. However, these results did not concur with current county zoning parcel data,
historical aerial reviews, nor previous discussions with the current property owner. Based on these
investigations and discussions, the property in question has always been a zoned as rural and has been an
active farm since its purchase in 2006. Therefore, to verify these findings, Baker contacted Charles Turney,
the Vice President of Slate Sand Company, Inc., on October 2, 2017. On October 3, 2017, replied to our
request for verification about the project parcel stating that Slate Sand Company, Inc. has never done any
mining on the project site or within the surrounding town of Ararat, NC. A copy of this correspondence
and the EDR reports are included in the Appendix.
National Historic Preservation Act (Section 106)
DMS requested a review and comment from the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) on any possible
issues that might emerge with respect to architectural or archaeological resources from the restoration
project on August 9, 2017. SHPO's review of the project on August 23, 2017 found no historic resources
that would be affected by the project. All correspondence on this issue is included in the Appendix.
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Act
Prior to signing the Option Agreement for the Conservation Easement, each property owner of the land
involved in the restoration project was notified that Baker does not have condemnation authority and as to
the fair market value of the land involved. Copies of the Option Agreement are included in the Appendix.
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Restoration Project; DMS Project No. 100020
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
CE Summary

Endangered Species Act (ESA)
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc. (Baker) reviewed both the NC Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) and
the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists of federally protected animal and plant species and found
that the following four species are federally -listed in Surry County.
Scientific Name
Common Name
Federal Status
Glyptemys muhlenber ii
Bog Turtle
Threatened Similarity of Appearance (S/A)
M otis se tentrionalis
Northern long-eared bat
Threatened
Helianthus schweinitzii
Schweinitz's sunflower
Endangered
Isotria medeoloides
Small whorled pogonia
Threatened
Baker conducted a two-mile radius search using the NHP's Data Explorer (https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/)
on September 26, 2017 and found no known occurrences of the above referenced species within two miles
of the project site. However, the project is located within Surry County, a Northern long-eared bat (NLEB)
White Nose Syndrome (WNS) zone, and is therefore subject to the USFWS's Final 4(d) rule to maintain
section 7(a)(2) compliance. The following additional supporting documentation has been included for
reference: a Project Vicinity Map, a USGS Topographic Map, and a Project Site Map.
Based on our review, field surveys, and FHWA consultation, Baker has developed the following
determinations for the above referenced species.
Glyptemys muhlenbergii (Bog turtle) — Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Bog turtles live in the mud, grass and sphagnum mosses found in bogs, swamps, and marshy meadows
usually fed by cool surface springs. There are two distinct populations of the species, a northern population
and a southern population. The southern population which is found in western North Carolina, including
Alexander County, NC is listed as threated due to "similarity of appearance" as stated in the November 4,
1997, 62 FR 59605 59623. Because the southern population has not experienced the habitat loss of the
northern population, the southern population is not subject to Section 7 consultation requirements of the
Endangered Species Act. Therefore, the project will have 'No Effect".
Myotis septentrionalis (Northern long-eared bat)
In North Carolina, the NLEB occurs in the mountains, with scattered records in the Piedmont and coastal
plain. In western North Carolina, NLEB spend winter hibernating in caves and mines. Since this species is
not known to be a long-distance migrant, and caves and subterranean mines are extremely rare in eastern
North Carolina, it is uncertain whether or where NLEB hibernate in eastern NC. During the summer, NLEB
roost singly or in colonies underneath bark, in cavities, or in crevices of both live and dead trees (typically
>3 inches dbh). This bat also been found, rarely, roosting in structures like barns and sheds, under eaves
of buildings, behind window shutters, in bridges, and in bat houses. Pregnant females give birth from late
May to late July. Foraging occurs on forested hillsides and ridges, and occasionally over forest clearings,
over water, and along tree -lined corridors. Mature forests may be an important habitat type for foraging.
Forested habitats containing trees at least 3-inch dbh in the project area provide suitable habitat for NLEB.
Due to the decline of the NLEB population from the WNS, the USFWS has issued the finalization of a
special rule under section 4(d) of the ESA to addresses the effects to the NLEB resulting from purposeful
and incidental take based on the occurrence of WNS. Because the project is located within a WNS zone
and will include the removal/clearing of trees, it is subject to the final 4(d) ruling. As previously stated, a
review of NCNHP records did not indicate any known NLEB populations within 2.0 mile of the study area;
therefore, the project is eligible to use the NLEB 4(d) Rule Streamlined Consultation Form to meet
regulatory requirements for section 7(a)(2) compliance 4(d) consultation.
To meet regulatory requirements, a letter requesting comment from the USFWS was sent on September 26,
2017. No response from the USFWS was received within the 30-day response period. Therefore, the
signing of the NLEB 4(d) Rule Streamlined Consultation Form by the FHWA determines that this project
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Restoration Project; DMS Project No. 100020
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
CE Summary

may affect the NLEB, but that any resulting incidental take of the NLEB is not prohibited by the final 4(d)
rule. A FHWA signed 4(d) consultation form and the correspondence associated with this determination
are included in the Appendix.
Helianthus schweinitzii (Schweinitz's sunflower) — Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Schweinitz's sunflower is a rhizomatous perennial herb that grows approximately 6.5 feet in height with
purplish stems and produces small yellow flowers from late August until frost. This species is endemic to
the Piedmont of North and South Carolina, and the few sites where it occurs in relatively natural conditions
consist of Xeric Hardpan Forests. The species is also found along roadside rights -of -way, maintained power
lines and other utility rights -of -way, edges of thickets and old pastures, clearings and edges of upland oak -
pine -hickory woods and Piedmont longleaf pine forests, and other sunny or semi -sunny habitats where
disturbances (e.g., mowing, clearing, grazing, blow downs, storms, frequent fire) help create open or
partially open areas for sunlight. It is intolerant of full shade and excessive competition from other
vegetation. It is generally found growing on shallow sandy soils with high gravel content; shallow, poor,
clayey hardpans; or shallow rocky soils, especially those derived from mafic rocks. Because marginal to
suitable habitat for Schweinitz's sunflower occurs along field edges and utility easements adjacent to the
project area, Baker conducted a field survey on September 25t1i, 2017. No populations or individuals were
documented during the on -site review; therefore, the project will have 'No Effect" on the species.
Isotria medeoloides (Small whorled pogonia) — Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Small whorled pogonia is a member of the orchid family. It is named for the whorl of five or six leaves
near the top of a single stem and beneath the small greenish -yellow flower. The plant occurs in
predominantly mature (2"d or 31d successional growth) mixed -deciduous or mixed-deciduous/coniferous
forests with minimal ground cover and long persistent breaks in the forest canopy. The species prefers
moist, acidic soils that lack nutrient diversity. Primary threats to the small whorled pogonia include habitat
loss and degradation from urban expansion, forestry practices, recreational activities, and trampling. The
project site consists of open and active cattle pasture with a narrow line of predominantly first successional
woody vegetation along the top of the stream bank. Existing stream reaches, riparian corridors, and open
fields at the project site have been significantly impacted by past and present unrestricted livestock access.
Since habitat suitable for the species is not present within the project area, the project will have "No Effect"
on the species.
Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA)
On January 29, 2018, Baker submitted the AD-1006 form for the Whittier Creek Site — Option D to the
North Carolina State Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS) Office. The NRCS responded on
January 29, 2018 with the determination that implementation of this restoration project would result in the
conversion of 4.8 acres of prime farmland soils. Baker submitted the completed AD-1006 form to the
NRCS Assistant State Soil Scientist January 29, 2018. The completed AD-1006 form and all
correspondence on this issue is included in the Appendix.
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA)
A letter was sent by Baker to the NC Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) and the USFWS on
September 26, 2017 requesting their comment and review on the Whittier Creek Site — Option D Restoration
Project. As of January 29, 2018, Baker has not received any comments from either the NCWRC or the
USFWS. Copies of all correspondence are included in Appendix.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)
A letter was sent by Baker to the USFWS on September 26, 2017 requesting their comment and review on
the Whittier Creek Site — Option D Restoration Project in relation to migratory birds. As of January 29,
2018, Baker has not received any comments from the USFWS on this issue. All correspondence with the
USFWS is included in the Appendix.
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Restoration Project; DMS Project No. 100020
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
CE Summary

APPENDIX
Whittier Creek Site — Option D Restoration Project; DMS Project No. 100020
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
CE Summary

Whittier Creek Site - Option D
Rockhill Church Road / Nurse Road
Ararat, NC 27007
Inquiry Number: 5050221.2s
September 14, 2017
6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor
Shelton, CT 06484
(rEDW Toll Free: 800.352.0050
www.edrnet.com
FORM-LBF-CCA

TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
PAGE
Executive Summary-------------------------------------------------------
ES1
Overview Map
2
Detail Map
3
Map Findings Summary----------------------------------------------------
4
Map Findings
8
Orphan Summary---------------------------------------------------------
15
Government Records Searched/Data Currency Tracking
GR-1
GEOCHECK ADDENDUM
GeoCheck - Not Requested
Thank you for your business.
Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050
with any questions or comments.
Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data
Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from
other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL
DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION,
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE,
ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL,
CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY
LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings,
environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor
should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any
property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice.
Copyright 2017 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole
or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.
EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other
trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners.
TC5050221.2s

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A search of available environmental records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR).
The report was designed to assist parties seeking to meet the search requirements of EPA's Standards
and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312), the ASTM Standard Practice for
Environmental Site Assessments (E 1527-13) or custom requirements developed for the evaluation of
environmental risk associated with a parcel of real estate.
TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION
ADDRESS
ROCKHILL CHURCH ROAD / NURSE ROAD
ARARAT, NC 27007
COORDINATES
Latitude (North):
Longitude (West):
Universal Tranverse Mercator
UTM X (Meters):
UTM Y (Meters):
Elevation:
36.3789000 - 36' 22' 44.04"
80.6034000 - 80' 36' 12.24"
Zone 17
535573.8
4025846.8
1030 ft. above sea level
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH TARGET PROPERTY
Target Property Map:
Version Date:
Southeast Map:
Version Date:
Southwest Map:
Version Date:
Northwest Map:
Version Date:
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY IN THIS REPORT
6045899 MOUNT AIRY SOUTH, NC
2014
5947737 SILOAM, NC
2013
5947699 COPELAND, NC
2013
5947705 DOBSON, NC
2013
Portions of Photo from: 20140524
Source: USDA
TC5050221.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

F- MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:
ROCKHILL CHURCH ROAD / NURSE ROAD
ARARAT, NC 27007
Click on Map ID to see full detail.
MAP RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)
ID SITE NAME ADDRESS DATABASE ACRONYMS ELEVATION DIRECTION
1 SLATE SAND COMPANY I US MINES Lower 1 ft.
JOHN FLINCHUM'S GROC ROUTE 1 UST Higher 754, 0.143, NE
5050221.2s Page 2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TARGET PROPERTY SEARCH RESULTS
The target property was not listed in any of the databases searched by EDR.
DATABASES WITH NO MAPPED SITES
No mapped sites were found in EDR's search of available ("reasonably ascertainable ") government
records either on the target property or within the search radius around the target property for the
following databases:
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Federal NPL site list
NPL___________________________ National Priority List
Proposed NPL________________ Proposed National Priority List Sites
NPL LIENS -------------------- Federal Superfund Liens
Federal Delisted NPL site list
Delisted NPL__________________ National Priority List Deletions
Federal CERCLIS list
FEDERAL FACILITY__________ Federal Facility Site Information listing
SEMS_________________________ Superfund Enterprise Management System
Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site list
SEMS-ARCHIVE-------------- Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive
Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list
CORRACTS------------------ Corrective Action Report
Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list
RCRA-TSDF------------------ RCRA- Treatment, Storage and Disposal
Federal RCRA generators list
RCRA-LQG------------------- RCRA- Large Quantity Generators
RCRA-SQG------------------- RCRA- Small Quantity Generators
RCRA-CESQG---------------- RCRA- Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator
Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries
LUCIS_________________________ Land Use Control Information System
US ENG CONTROLS_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Engineering Controls Sites List
TC5050221.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
US INST CONTROL_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Sites with Institutional Controls
Federal ERNS list
ERNS_________________________ Emergency Response Notification System
State- and tribal - equivalent NPL
NC HSDS_____________________ Hazardous Substance Disposal Site
State- and tribal - equivalent CERCL/S
SHWS------------------------- Inactive Hazardous Sites Inventory
State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists
SWF/LF_______________________ List of Solid Waste Facilities
OLI____________________________ Old Landfill Inventory
State and tribal leaking storage tank lists
LAST__________________________ Leaking Aboveground Storage Tanks
LUST -------------------------- Regional UST Database
INDIAN LUST_________________ Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUST TRUST_________________ State Trust Fund Database
State and tribal registered storage tank lists
FEMA UST____________________ Underground Storage Tank Listing
AST___________________________ AST Database
INDIAN UST__________________ Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
State and tribal institutional control / engineering control registries
INST CONTROL_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ No Further Action Sites With Land Use Restrictions Monitoring
State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
INDIAN VCP__________________ Voluntary Cleanup Priority Listing
VCP___________________________ Responsible Party Voluntary Action Sites
State and tribal Brownfields sites
BROWNFIELDS______________ Brownfields Projects Inventory
ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Local Brownfield lists
US BROWNFIELDS----------- A Listing of Brownfields Sites
Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites
SWRCY_______________________ Recycling Center Listing
TC5050221.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
HIST LF_______________________ Solid Waste Facility Listing
INDIAN ODI___________________ Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands
DEBRIS REGION 9----------- Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations
ODI___________________________ Open Dump Inventory
IHS OPEN DUMPS___________ Open Dumps on Indian Land
Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites
US HIST CDL_________________ Delisted National Clandestine Laboratory Register
US CDL_______________________ National Clandestine Laboratory Register
Local Land Records
LIENS 2_______________________ CERCLA Lien Information
Records of Emergency Release Reports
HMIRS________________________
Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System
SPILLS________________________
Spills Incident Listing
IMD___________________________
Incident Management Database
SPILLS 90____________________
SPILLS 90 data from FirstSearch
SPILLS 80____________________
SPILLS 80 data from FirstSearch
Other Ascertainable Records
RCRA NonGen / NLR _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ RCRA - Non Generators / No Longer Regulated
FUDS_________________________
Formerly Used Defense Sites
DOD__________________________
Department of Defense Sites
SCRD DRYCLEANERS_______
State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Listing
US FIN ASSUR_______________
Financial Assurance Information
EPA WATCH LIST____________
EPA WATCH LIST
2020 COR ACTION_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ 2020 Corrective Action Program List
TSCA_________________________
Toxic Substances Control Act
TRIS__________________________
Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
SSTS--------------------------
Section 7 Tracking Systems
ROD__________________________
Records Of Decision
RMP__________________________
Risk Management Plans
RAATS________________________
RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
PRP___________________________
Potentially Responsible Parties
PADS_________________________
PCB Activity Database System
ICIS___________________________
Integrated Compliance Information System
FTTS__________________________
FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide
Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
MLTS_________________________
Material Licensing Tracking System
COAL ASH DOE_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ Steam -Electric Plant Operation Data
COAL ASH EPA______________
Coal Combustion Residues Surface Impoundments List
PCB TRANSFORMER_______
PCB Transformer Registration Database
RADINFO ---------------------
Radiation Information Database
HIST FTTS____________________
FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing
DOT OPS_____________________
Incident and Accident Data
CONSENT____________________
Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
INDIAN RESERV_____________
Indian Reservations
FUSRAP______________________
Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program
UMTRA_______________________
Uranium Mill Tailings Sites
LEAD SMELTERS____________
Lead Smelter Sites
TC5050221.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
US AIRS______________________
Aerometric Information Retrieval System Facility Subsystem
ABANDONED MINES ---------
Abandoned Mines
FINDS -------------------------
Facility Index System/Facility Registry System
DOCKET HWC----------------
Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket Listing
ECHO -------------------------
Enforcement & Compliance History Information
UXO ---------------------------
Unexploded Ordnance Sites
FUELS PROGRAM___________
EPA Fuels Program Registered Listing
COAL ASH____________________
Coal Ash Disposal Sites
DRYCLEANERS______________
Drycleaning Sites
Financial Assurance -----------
Financial Assurance Information Listing
NPDES------------------------
NPDES Facility Location Listing
UIC----------------------------
Underground Injection Wells Listing
EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS
EDR Exclusive Records
EDR MGP_____________________ EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants
EDR Hist Auto ----------------- EDR Exclusive Historic Gas Stations
EDR Hist Cleaner_____________ EDR Exclusive Historic Dry Cleaners
EDR RECOVERED GOVERNMENT ARCHIVES
Exclusive Recovered Govt. Archives
RGA HWS____________________ Recovered Government Archive State Hazardous Waste Facilities List
RGA LF_______________________ Recovered Government Archive Solid Waste Facilities List
RGA LUST____________________ Recovered Government Archive Leaking Underground Storage Tank
1,411N:TelUkiIQI.[C9k1:&�9NFA:0]1.1N*ffl0&1
Surrounding sites were identified in the following databases
Elevations have been determined from the USGS Digital Elevation Model and should be evaluated on
a relative (not an absolute) basis. Relative elevation information between sites of close proximity
should be field verified. Sites with an elevation equal to or higher than the target property have been
differentiated below from sites with an elevation lower than the target property.
Page numbers and map identification numbers refer to the EDR Radius Map report where detailed
data on individual sites can be reviewed.
Sites listed in bold italics are in multiple databases.
Unmappable (orphan) sites are not considered in the foregoing analysis.
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
State and tribal registered storage tank lists
UST: The Underground Storage Tank database contains registered USTs. USTs are regulated under
Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The data come from the Department of
Environment & Natural Resources' Petroleum Underground Storage Tank Database.
A review of the UST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 09/30/2016 has revealed that there is 1 UST
TC5050221.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
site within approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.
Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page
JOHN FLINCHUM'S GROC ROUTE 1 NE 1/8 - 1/4 (0.143 mi.) 2 12
Tank Status: Removed
Facility Id: 00-0-0000031662
ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Other Ascertainable Records
US MINES: Mines Master Index File. The source of this database is the Dept. of Labor, Mine Safety
and Health Administration.
A review of the US MINES list, as provided by EDR, has revealed that there is 1 US MINES site within
approximately 0.25 miles of the target property.
Lower Elevation Address Direction / Distance Map ID Page
SLATE SAND COMPANY 1 0 - 1/8 (0.000 mi.) 1 8
Database: US MINES, Date of Government Version: 02/08/2017
TC5050221.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
There were no unmapped sites in this report.
TC5050221.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 8

OVERVIEW MAP - 5050221.2S
Target Property
A
Sites at elevations higher than
or equal to the target property
♦
Sites at elevations lower than
the target property
1
Manufactured Gas Plants
National Priority List Sites
Dept. Defense Sites
0 1/4 1/2 1 Mlles
Indian Reservations BIA Upgradient Area
100-year flood zone Hazardous Substance
500-year flood zone Disposal Sites
National Wetland Inventory
El State Wetlands
This report includes Interactive Map Layers to
display and/or hide map information. The
legend includes only those icons for the
default map view.
SITE NAME: Whittier Creek Site - Option D CLIENT: Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
ADDRESS: Rockhill Church Road / Nurse Road CONTACT: Kristi Suggs
Ararat NC 27007 INQUIRY #: 5050221.2s
LAT/LONG: 36.3789 / 80.6034 DATE: September 14, 2017 4:15 pm
Copyright �o 2017 EDR, Inc.(,) 2015 Tom Tom Rel. 2015.

DETAIL MAP - 5050221.2S
Target Property
A
Sites at elevations higher than
or equal to the target property
♦
Sites at elevations lower than
the target property
1
Manufactured Gas Plants
i
Sensitive Receptors
National Priority List Sites
Dept. Defense Sites
0 1 /9 1 /4 1 /2 Mlles
Indian Reservations BIA Hazardous Substance
100-year flood zone Disposal Sites
500-year flood zone
National Wetland Inventory
El State Wetlands
This report includes Interactive Map Layers to
display and/or hide map information. The
legend includes only those icons for the
default map view.
SITE NAME: Whittier Creek Site - Option D CLIENT: Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
ADDRESS: Rockhill Church Road / Nurse Road CONTACT: Kristi Suggs
Ararat NC 27007 INQUIRY #: 5050221.2s
LAT/LONG: 36.3789 / 80.6034 DATE: September 14, 2017 4:23 pm
Copyright �o 2017 EDR, Inc.(,) 2015 Tom Tom Rel. 2015.

MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
Distance Target
Total
Database (Miles) Property
< 1/8
1/8-1/4
1/4-1/2
1/2 - 1
> 1
Plotted
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Federal NPL site list
NPL 1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
Proposed NPL 1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
NPL LIENS TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
Federal Delisted NPL site list
Delisted NPL 1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
Federal CERCLIS list
FEDERAL FACILITY 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
SEMS 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site list
SEMS-ARCHIVE 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list
CORRACTS 1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list
RCRA-TSDF 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
Federal RCRA generators list
RCRA-LQG 0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
RCRA-SQG 0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
RCRA-CESQG 0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
Federal institutional controls /
engineering controls registries
LUCIS 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
US ENG CONTROLS 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
US INST CONTROL 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
Federal ERNS list
ERNS TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
State- and tribal - equivalent NPL
NC HSDS 1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS
SHWS 1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
0
State and tribal landfill and/or
solid waste disposal site lists
SWF/LF 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
OLI 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
State and tribal leaking storage tank lists
LAST 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
TC5050221.2s Page 4

MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
Distance Target
Total
Database (Miles) Property
< 1 /8
1/8- 1 /4
1/4- 1 /2
1/2- 1
> 1
Plotted
LUST 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
INDIAN LUST 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
LUST TRUST 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
State and tribal registered storage tank lists
FEMA UST 0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
UST 0.250
0
1
NR
NR
NR
1
AST 0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
INDIAN UST 0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
State and tribal institutional
control / engineering control registries
INST CONTROL 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
INDIAN VCP 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
VCP 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
State and tribal Brownfields sites
BROWNFIELDS 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
M QQIN9us] ill Ie10=Iill 191:i67ill lkvil=11ill III ril00**Q0IR
Local Brownfield lists
US BROWNFIELDS 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
Local Lists of Landfill / Solid
Waste Disposal Sites
SWRCY 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
HIST LF 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
INDIAN ODI 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
DEBRIS REGION 9 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
ODI 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
IHS OPEN DUMPS 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
Local Lists of Hazardous waste /
Contaminated Sites
US HIST CDL TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
US CDL TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
Local Land Records
LIENS 2 TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
Records of Emergency Release Reports
HMIRS TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
SPILLS TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
IMD 0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
0
SPILLS 90 TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
SPILLS 80 TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
0
Other Ascertainable Records
RCRA NonGen / NLR 0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
0
TC5050221.2s Page 5

MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
Distance Target
Database
(Miles) Property
< 1 /8
1/8- 1 /4
1/4- 1 /2
1/2- 1
> 1
FUDS
1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
DOD
1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
SCRD DRYCLEANERS
0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
US FIN ASSUR
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
EPA WATCH LIST
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
2020 COR ACTION
0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
TSCA
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
TRIS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
SSTS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
ROD
1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
RMP
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
RAATS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
PRP
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
PADS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
ICIS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
FTTS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
MLTS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
COAL ASH DOE
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
COAL ASH EPA
0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
PCB TRANSFORMER
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
RADINFO
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
HIST FTTS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
DOT OPS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
CONSENT
1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
INDIAN RESERV
1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
FUSRAP
1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
UMTRA
0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
LEAD SMELTERS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
US AIRS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
US MINES
0.250
1
0
NR
NR
NR
ABANDONED MINES
0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
FINDS
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
DOCKET HWC
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
ECHO
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
UXO
1.000
0
0
0
0
NR
FUELS PROGRAM
0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
COAL ASH
0.500
0
0
0
NR
NR
DRYCLEANERS
0.250
0
0
NR
NR
NR
Financial Assurance
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NPDES
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
UIC
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS
EDR Exclusive Records
EDR MGP 1.000
EDR Hist Auto 0.125
EDR Hist Cleaner 0.125
EDR RECOVERED GOVERNMENT ARCHIVES
Exclusive Recovered Govt. Archives
RGA HWS TP
0 0 0 0 NR
0 NR NR NR NR
0 NR NR NR NR
Total
Plotted
Is
NR NR NR NR NR 0
TC5050221.2s Page 6

MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
Distance
Target
Total
Database
(Miles)
Property
< 1/8
1/8-1/4
1/4-1/2
1/2 - 1 > 1
Plotted
RGA LF
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR NR
0
RGA LUST
TP
NR
NR
NR
NR NR
0
- Totals --
0
1
1
0
0 0
2
NOTES:
TP = Target Property
NR = Not Requested at this Search Distance
Sites may be listed in more than one database
TC5050221.2s Page 7

Map ID
Direction
Distance
Elevation
Site
< 1/8
SURRY (County), NC
1 ft.
US MINES:
Relative:
Mine ID:
Lower
SIC code(s):
Entity name:
Actual:
Company:
996 ft.
Status:
Status date:
Operation Class:
Number of shops:
Number of plants:
Latitude:
Longitude:
MAP FINDINGS
3101989
144200 000000 000000 000000 000000 000000
SLATE SAND
SLATE SAND COMPANY INC
1
20031105
non -Coal Mining
0
0
36 22 44
080 35 57
Violations Details:
Violation Number:
6130886
Date Issued:
12/14/2006
Mine Status:
Active
Status Date:
11/05/2003
Action Type:
104(a)
Date Abated:
12/14/2006
Citation/Order:
Citation
Sig and Sub Designation:
N
Proposed Penalty:
60.00
Paid Penalty:
60.00
Assessment Status code:
Closed
Assess. Case Status code:
Proposed
Assessment Amount:
60.00
Year:
2006
Violation Number:
6130887
Date Issued:
12/14/2006
Mine Status:
Active
Status Date:
11/05/2003
Action Type:
104(a)
Date Abated:
12/27/2006
Citation/Order:
Citation
Sig and Sub Designation:
N
Proposed Penalty:
60.00
Paid Penalty:
60.00
Assessment Status code:
Closed
Assess. Case Status code:
Proposed
Assessment Amount:
60.00
Year:
2006
Violation Number:
6127810
Date Issued:
11/05/2003
Mine Status:
Active
Status Date:
11/05/2003
Action Type:
104(a)
Date Abated:
11/05/2003
Citation/Order:
Citation
Sig and Sub Designation:
N
Proposed Penalty:
60
Paid Penalty:
60
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
US MINES 1016953103
N/A
TC5050221.2s Page 8

Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
SLATE SAND COMPANY INC (Continued) 1016953103
Assessment Status code: Closed
Assess. Case Status code: Proposed
Assessment Amount: 60
Year: 2003
Violation Number:
6510618
Date Issued:
07/22/2009
Mine Status:
Active
Status Date:
11/05/2003
Action Type:
104(a)
Date Abated:
07/22/2009
Citation/Order:
Citation
Sig and Sub Designation:
N
Proposed Penalty:
100.00
Paid Penalty:
100.00
Assessment Status code:
Closed
Assess. Case Status code:
Proposed
Assessment Amount:
100.00
Year:
2009
Violation Number:
6510619
Date Issued:
07/22/2009
Mine Status:
Active
Status Date:
11/05/2003
Action Type:
104(a)
Date Abated:
07/23/2009
Citation/Order:
Citation
Sig and Sub Designation:
N
Proposed Penalty:
100.00
Paid Penalty:
100.00
Assessment Status code:
Closed
Assess. Case Status code:
Proposed
Assessment Amount:
100.00
Year:
2009
Violation Number:
6597163
Date Issued:
06/24/2010
Mine Status:
Active
Status Date:
11/05/2003
Action Type:
104(a)
Date Abated:
07/15/2010
Citation/Order:
Citation
Sig and Sub Designation:
N
Proposed Penalty:
100.00
Paid Penalty:
100.00
Assessment Status code:
Closed
Assess. Case Status code:
Proposed
Assessment Amount:
100.00
Year:
2010
Violation Number:
6130308
Date Issued:
06/20/2006
Mine Status:
Active
Status Date:
11/05/2003
Action Type:
104(a)
Date Abated:
06/22/2006
Citation/Order:
Citation
TC5050221.2s Page 9

Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
SLATE SAND COMPANY INC (Continued) 1016953103
Sig and Sub Designation: Y
Proposed Penalty: 107.00
Paid Penalty: 107.00
Assessment Status code: Closed
Assess. Case Status code: Proposed
Assessment Amount: 107.00
Year: 2006
Violation Number:
6130309
Date Issued:
06/20/2006
Mine Status:
Active
Status Date:
11/05/2003
Action Type:
104(a)
Date Abated:
06/20/2006
Citation/Order:
Citation
Sig and Sub Designation:
N
Proposed Penalty:
60.00
Paid Penalty:
60.00
Assessment Status code:
Closed
Assess. Case Status code:
Proposed
Assessment Amount:
60.00
Year:
2006
Violation Number:
6130307
Date Issued:
06/20/2006
Mine Status:
Active
Status Date:
11/05/2003
Action Type:
104(a)
Date Abated:
06/22/2006
Citation/Order:
Citation
Sig and Sub Designation:
Y
Proposed Penalty:
144.00
Paid Penalty:
144.00
Assessment Status code:
Closed
Assess. Case Status code:
Proposed
Assessment Amount:
144.00
Year:
2006
Violation Number:
8719431
Date Issued:
05/03/2012
Mine Status:
Active
Status Date:
11/05/2003
Action Type:
104(a)
Date Abated:
05/03/2012
Citation/Order:
Citation
Sig and Sub Designation:
N
Proposed Penalty:
100
Paid Penalty:
100
Assessment Status code:
Closed
Assess. Case Status code:
Proposed
Assessment Amount:
100
Year:
2012
Violation Number:
8637505
Date Issued:
04/28/2011
Mine Status:
Active
Status Date:
11/05/2003
TC5050221.2s Page 10

Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
SLATE SAND COMPANY INC (Continued) 1016953103
Action Type:
104(a)
Date Abated:
04/28/2011
Citation/Order:
Citation
Sig and Sub Designation:
N
Proposed Penalty:
100.00
Paid Penalty:
100.00
Assessment Status code:
Closed
Assess. Case Status code:
Proposed
Assessment Amount:
100.00
Year:
2011
Violation Number:
6084271
Date Issued:
04/17/2008
Mine Status:
Active
Status Date:
11/05/2003
Action Type:
104(a)
Date Abated:
04/17/2008
Citation/Order:
Citation
Sig and Sub Designation:
N
Proposed Penalty:
100.00
Paid Penalty:
100.00
Assessment Status code:
Closed
Assess. Case Status code:
Proposed
Assessment Amount:
100.00
Year:
2008
Violation Number:
6105500
Date Issued:
02/09/2009
Mine Status:
Active
Status Date:
11/05/2003
Action Type:
104(a)
Date Abated:
02/23/2009
Citation/Order:
Citation
Sig and Sub Designation:
N
Proposed Penalty:
100.00
Paid Penalty:
100.00
Assessment Status code:
Closed
Assess. Case Status code:
Proposed
Assessment Amount:
100.00
Year:
2009
Violation Number:
8725619
Date Issued:
01/28/2013
Mine Status:
Active
Status Date:
11/05/2003
Action Type:
104(a)
Date Abated:
02/12/2013
Citation/Order:
Citation
Sig and Sub Designation:
N
Proposed Penalty:
100
Paid Penalty:
100
Assessment Status code:
Closed
Assess. Case Status code:
Proposed
Assessment Amount:
100
Year:
2013
Violation Number: 6516905
TC5050221.2s Page 11

Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
SLATE SAND COMPANY INC (Continued) 1016953103
Date Issued:
01/19/2011
Mine Status:
Active
Status Date:
11/05/2003
Action Type:
104(a)
Date Abated:
01/19/2011
Citation/Order:
Citation
Sig and Sub Designation:
N
Proposed Penalty:
100.00
Paid Penalty:
100.00
Assessment Status code:
Closed
Assess. Case Status code:
Proposed
Assessment Amount:
100.00
Year:
2011
Violation Number:
8810454
Date Issued:
01/17/2014
Mine Status:
Active
Status Date:
11/05/2003
Action Type:
104(a)
Date Abated:
02/03/2014
Citation/Order:
Citation
Sig and Sub Designation:
N
Proposed Penalty:
100.00
Paid Penalty:
0.00
Assessment Status code:
Closed
Assess. Case Status code:
Vacated
Assessment Amount:
0.00
Year:
2014
2
JOHN FLINCHUM'S GROCERY
UST 0000831449
NE
ROUTE 1
N/A
1/8-1/4
ARARATI, NC 27007
0.143 mi.
754 ft.
Relative:
UST:
Higher
Facility Id:
00-0-0000031662
Contact:
HARRELL OIL CO OF MOUNT AIRY
Actual:
Contact Address1:
PO BOX 1947 / 814-16 FORREST DR
1079 ft.
Contact Address2:
Not reported
Contact City/State/Zip:
MOUNT AIRY, NC 27030-1947
FIPS County Desc:
Surry
Latitude:
0
Longitude:
0
Tank Id:
1
Tank Status:
Removed
Installed Date:
01/01/1964
Perm Close Date:
04/30/1990
Product Key:
3
Product Name:
Gasoline, Gas Mix
Tank Capacity:
550
Root Tank Id:
Not reported
Main Tank:
No
Compartment Tank:
No
Manifold Tank:
Not reported
Commercial:
Yes
Regulated:
Yes
TC5050221.2s Page 12

Map ID
MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance
EDR ID Number
Elevation
Site
Database(s) EPA ID Number
JOHN FLINCHUM'S GROCERY
(Continued) 0000831449
Tank Construction:
Single Wall Steel
Piping Construction:
Single Wall Steel
Piping System Key:
Unknown
Other CP Tank:
Not reported
Overfill Protection Key:
1
Overfill Protection Name:
Unknown
Spill Protection Key:
1
Spill Protection Name:
Unknown
Leak Detection Key:
-1
Leak Detection Name:
Unknown
Decode for TCONS_KEY:
Single Wall Steel
Decode for PCONS_KEY:
Single Wall Steel
Decode for PSYS KEY:
Unknown
Tank Id:
2
Tank Status:
Removed
Installed Date:
01/01/1964
Perm Close Date:
04/30/1990
Product Key:
3
Product Name:
Gasoline, Gas Mix
Tank Capacity:
550
Root Tank Id:
Not reported
Main Tank:
No
Compartment Tank:
No
Manifold Tank:
Not reported
Commercial:
Yes
Regulated:
Yes
Tank Construction:
Single Wall Steel
Piping Construction:
Single Wall Steel
Piping System Key:
Unknown
Other CP Tank:
Not reported
Overfill Protection Key:
1
Overfill Protection Name:
Unknown
Spill Protection Key:
1
Spill Protection Name:
Unknown
Leak Detection Key:
-1
Leak Detection Name:
Unknown
Decode for TCONS_KEY:
Single Wall Steel
Decode for PCONS_KEY:
Single Wall Steel
Decode for PSYS KEY:
Unknown
Tank Id:
3
Tank Status:
Removed
Installed Date:
01/01/1964
Perm Close Date:
04/30/1990
Product Key:
8
Product Name:
Kerosene, Kero Mix
Tank Capacity:
275
Root Tank Id:
Not reported
Main Tank:
No
Compartment Tank:
No
Manifold Tank:
Not reported
Commercial:
Yes
Regulated:
Yes
Tank Construction:
Single Wall Steel
TC5050221.2s Page 13

Map ID
Direction
Distance
Elevation
MAP FINDINGS
Site
JOHN FLINCHUM'S GROCERY (Continued)
Piping Construction:
Single Wall Steel
Piping System Key:
Unknown
Other CP Tank:
Not reported
Overfill Protection Key:
1
Overfill Protection Name:
Unknown
Spill Protection Key:
1
Spill Protection Name:
Unknown
Leak Detection Key:
-1
Leak Detection Name:
Unknown
Decode for TCONS_KEY:
Single Wall Steel
Decode for PCONS_KEY:
Single Wall Steel
Decode for PSYS KEY:
Unknown
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
0000831449
TC5050221.2s Page 14

Count: 0 records.
ORPHAN SUMMARY
City EDR ID Site Name Site Address Zip Database(s)
NO SITES FOUND
TC5050221.2s Page 15

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
To maintain currency of the following federal and state databases, EDR contacts the appropriate governmental agency
on a monthly or quarterly basis, as required.
Number of Days to Update: Provides confirmation that EDR is reporting records that have been updated within 90 days
from the date the government agency made the information available to the public.
STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Federal NPL site list
NPL: National Priority List
National Priorities List (Superfund). The NPL is a subset of CERCLIS and identifies over 1,200 sites for priority
cleanup under the Superfund Program. NPL sites may encompass relatively large areas. As such, EDR provides polygon
coverage for over 1,000 NPL site boundaries produced by EPA's Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center
(EPIC) and regional EPA offices.
Date of Government Version: 04/05/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/21/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/12/2017
Number of Days to Update: 21
NPL Site Boundaries
Source: EPA
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: 07/07/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/16/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
Sources:
EPA's Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)
Telephone: [phone]
EPA Region 1
Telephone [phone]
EPA Region 3
Telephone [phone]
EPA Region 4
Telephone [phone]
EPA Region 5
Telephone [phone]
EPA Region 10
Telephone [phone]
EPA Region 6
Telephone:[phone]
EPA Region 7
Telephone:[phone]
EPA Region 8
Telephone:[phone]
EPA Region 9
Telephone: [phone]
Proposed NPL: Proposed National Priority List Sites
A site that has been proposed for listing on the National Priorities List through the issuance of a proposed rule
in the Federal Register. EPA then accepts public comments on the site, responds to the comments, and places on
the NPL those sites that continue to meet the requirements for listing.
Date of Government Version: 04/05/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/21/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/12/2017
Number of Days to Update: 21
Source: EPA
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: 07/07/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/16/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
NPL LIENS: Federal Superfund Liens
Federal Superfund Liens. Under the authority granted the USEPA by CERCLA of 1980, the USEPA has the authority
to file liens against real property in order to recover remedial action expenditures or when the property owner
received notification of potential liability. USEPA compiles a listing of filed notices of Superfund Liens.
Date of Government Version: 10/15/1991
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/02/1994
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/30/1994
Number of Days to Update: 56
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/15/2011
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/28/2011
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
TC5050221.2s Page GR-1

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Federal Delisted NPL site list
Delisted NPL: National Priority List Deletions
The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) establishes the criteria that the
EPA uses to delete sites from the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425.(e), sites may be deleted from the
NPL where no further response is appropriate.
Date of Government Version: 04/05/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/21/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/12/2017
Number of Days to Update: 21
Federal CERCLIS list
Source: EPA
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: 07/07/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/16/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
FEDERAL FACILITY: Federal Facility Site Information listing
A listing of National Priority List (NPL) and Base Realignment and Closure (BRAG) sites found in the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) Database where EPA Federal Facilities
Restoration and Reuse Office is involved in cleanup activities.
Date of Government Version: 11/07/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/05/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/07/2017
Number of Days to Update: 92
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/07/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/16/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
SEMS: Superfund Enterprise Management System
SEMS (Superfund Enterprise Management System) tracks hazardous waste sites, potentially hazardous waste sites,
and remedial activities performed in support of EPA's Superfund Program across the United States. The list was
formerly know as CERCLIS, renamed to SEMS by the EPA in 2015. The list contains data on potentially hazardous
waste sites that have been reported to the USEPA by states, municipalities, private companies and private persons,
pursuant to Section 103 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA).
This dataset also contains sites which are either proposed to or on the National Priorities List (NPL) and the
sites which are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL.
Date of Government Version: 02/07/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/19/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 16
Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site list
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/21/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/30/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
SEMS-ARCHIVE: Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive
TC5050221.2s Page GR-2

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
SEMS-ARCHIVE (Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive) tracks sites that have no further interest under
the Federal Superfund Program based on available information. The list was formerly known as the CERCLIS-NFRAP,
renamed to SEMS ARCHIVE by the EPA in 2015. EPA may perform a minimal level of assessment work at a site while
it is archived if site conditions change and/or new information becomes available. Archived sites have been removed
and archived from the inventory of SEMS sites. Archived status indicates that, to the best of EPA's knowledge,
assessment at a site has been completed and that EPA has determined no further steps will be taken to list the
site on the National Priorities List (NPL), unless information indicates this decision was not appropriate or
other considerations require a recommendation for listing at a later time. The decision does not necessarily mean
that there is no hazard associated with a given site; it only means that. based upon available information, the
location is not judged to be potential NPL site.
Date of Government Version: 02/07/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/19/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 16
Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/30/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
CORRACTS: Corrective Action Report
CORRACTS identifies hazardous waste handlers with RCRA corrective action activity.
Date of Government Version: 12/12/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/28/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2017
Number of Days to Update: 44
Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/11/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
RCRA-TSDF: RCRA - Treatment, Storage and Disposal
RCRAInfo is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database
includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste
as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Transporters are individuals or entities that
move hazardous waste from the generator offsite to a facility that can recycle, treat, store, or dispose of the
waste. TSDFs treat, store, or dispose of the waste.
Date of Government Version: 12/12/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/28/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2017
Number of Days to Update: 44
Federal RCRA generators list
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/11/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
RCRA-LQG: RCRA - Large Quantity Generators
RCRAInfo is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database
includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste
as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Large quantity generators (LQGs) generate
over 1,000 kilograms (kg) of hazardous waste, or over 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month.
Date of Government Version: 12/12/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/28/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2017
Number of Days to Update: 44
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/11/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
TC5050221.2s Page GR-3

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
RCRA-SQG: RCRA - Small Quantity Generators
RCRAInfo is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database
includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste
as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Small quantity generators (SQGs) generate
between 100 kg and 1,000 kg of hazardous waste per month.
Date of Government Version: 12/12/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/28/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2017
Number of Days to Update: 44
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/11/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
RCRA-CESQG: RCRA - Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators
RCRAInfo is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database
includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste
as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Conditionally exempt small quantity generators
(CESQGs) generate less than 100 kg of hazardous waste, or less than 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month.
Date of Government Version: 12/12/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/28/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2017
Number of Days to Update: 44
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/11/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
Federal institutional controls /engineering controls registries
LUCIS: Land Use Control Information System
LUCIS contains records of land use control information pertaining to the former Navy Base Realignment and Closure
properties.
Date of Government Version: 12/28/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/04/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/07/2017
Number of Days to Update: 93
Source: Department of the Navy
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/10/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/27/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
US ENG CONTROLS: Engineering Controls Sites List
A listing of sites with engineering controls in place. Engineering controls include various forms of caps, building
foundations, liners, and treatment methods to create pathway elimination for regulated substances to enter environmental
media or effect human health.
Date of Government Version: 02/13/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/28/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 06/09/2017
Number of Days to Update: 101
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/30/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/11/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
US INST CONTROL: Sites with Institutional Controls
A listing of sites with institutional controls in place. Institutional controls include administrative measures,
such as groundwater use restrictions, construction restrictions, property use restrictions, and post remediation
care requirements intended to prevent exposure to contaminants remaining on site. Deed restrictions are generally
required as part of the institutional controls.
Date of Government Version: 02/13/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/28/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 06/09/2017
Number of Days to Update: 101
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/30/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/11/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
TC5050221.2s Page GR-4

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Federal ERNS list
ERNS: Emergency Response Notification System
Emergency Response Notification System. ERNS records and stores information on reported releases of oil and hazardous
substances.
Date of Government Version: 09/26/2016 Source: National Response Center, United States Coast Guard
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/29/2016 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 11/11/2016 Last EDR Contact: 06/28/2017
Number of Days to Update: 43 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Annually
State- and tribal - equivalent NPL
HSDS: Hazardous Substance Disposal Site
Locations of uncontrolled and unregulated hazardous waste sites. The file includes sites on the National Priority
List as well as those on the state priority list.
Date of Government Version: 08/09/2011 Source: North Carolina Center for Geographic Information and Analysis
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/08/2011 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 12/05/2011 Last EDR Contact: 07/26/2017
Number of Days to Update: 27 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2017
Data Release Frequency: Biennially
State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS
SHWS: Inactive Hazardous Sites Inventory
State Hazardous Waste Sites. State hazardous waste site records are the states' equivalent to CERCLIS. These sites
may or may not already be listed on the federal CERCLIS list. Priority sites planned for cleanup using state funds
(state equivalent of Superfund) are identified along with sites where cleanup will be paid for by potentially
responsible parties. Available information varies by state.
Date of Government Version: 10/07/2016 Source: Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/15/2016 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/06/2017 Last EDR Contact: 09/13/2017
Number of Days to Update: 81 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/25/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists
SWF/LF: List of Solid Waste Facilities
Solid Waste Facilities/Landfill Sites. SWF/LF type records typically contain an inventory of solid waste disposal
facilities or landfills in a particular state. Depending on the state, these may be active or inactive facilities
or open dumps that failed to meet RCRA Subtitle D Section 4004 criteria for solid waste landfills or disposal
sites.
Date of Government Version: 11/17/2016 Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/28/2016 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/08/2017 Last EDR Contact: 06/29/2017
Number of Days to Update: 70 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Semi -Annually
OLI: Old Landfill Inventory
Old landfill inventory location information. (Does not include no further action sites and other agency lead
sites).
Date of Government Version: 08/08/2016 Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/17/2017 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/08/2017 Last EDR Contact: 04/14/2017
Number of Days to Update: 50 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/24/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
TC5050221.2s Page GR-5

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
State and tribal leaking storage tank lists
LAST: Leaking Aboveground Storage Tanks
A listing of leaking aboveground storage tank site locations.
Date of Government Version: 10/07/2016 Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/09/2016 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/06/2017 Last EDR Contact: 08/10/2017
Number of Days to Update: 117 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/20/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
LUST: Regional UST Database
This database contains information obtained from the Regional Offices. It provides a more detailed explanation
of current and historic activity for individual sites, as well as what was previously found in the Incident Management
Database. Sites in this database with Incident Numbers are considered LUSTs.
Date of Government Version: 11/07/2016 Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/09/2016 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/06/2017 Last EDR Contact: 08/10/2017
Number of Days to Update: 117 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/20/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
INDIAN LUST R5: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
Leaking underground storage tanks located on Indian Land in Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin.
Date of Government Version: 11/14/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: EPA, Region 5
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/27/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN LUST R1: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
A listing of leaking underground storage tank locations on Indian Land.
Date of Government Version: 11/14/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: EPA Region 1
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/27/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN LUST R4: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUSTs on Indian land in Florida, Mississippi and North Carolina.
Date of Government Version: 10/14/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/27/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 98
Source: EPA Region 4
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2017
Data Release Frequency: Semi -Annually
INDIAN LUST R10: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUSTs on Indian land in Alaska, Idaho, Oregon and Washington.
Date of Government Version: 10/07/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: EPA Region 10
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/27/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
INDIAN LUST R9: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUSTs on Indian land in Arizona, California, New Mexico and Nevada
TC5050221.2s Page GR-6

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 10/06/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/27/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
INDIAN LUST R6: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUSTs on Indian land in New Mexico and Oklahoma.
Date of Government Version: 10/01/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: EPA Region 6
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/27/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN LUST R7: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUSTs on Indian land in Iowa, Kansas, and Nebraska
Date of Government Version: 09/01/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: EPA Region 7
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/27/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN LUST R8: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUSTs on Indian land in Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming.
Date of Government Version: 10/17/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: EPA Region 8
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/27/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
LUST TRUST: State Trust Fund Database
This database contains information about claims against the State Trust Funds for reimbursements for expenses
incurred while remediating Leaking USTs.
Date of Government Version: 01/06/2017 Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/12/2017 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/06/2017 Last EDR Contact: 07/13/2017
Number of Days to Update: 53 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/23/2017
Data Release Frequency: Semi -Annually
State and tribal registered storage tank lists
FEMA UST: Underground Storage Tank Listing
A listing of all FEMA owned underground storage tanks.
Date of Government Version: 01/01/2010
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/16/2010
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010
Number of Days to Update: 55
Source: FEMA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/14/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/23/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
UST: Petroleum Underground Storage Tank Database
Registered Underground Storage Tanks. UST's are regulated under Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) and must be registered with the state department responsible for administering the UST program. Available
information varies by state program.
TC5050221.2s Page GR-7

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 09/30/2016 Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/09/2016 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/06/2017 Last EDR Contact: 08/10/2017
Number of Days to Update: 117 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/20/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
AST: AST Database
Facilities with aboveground storage tanks that have a capacity greater than 21,000 gallons.
Date of Government Version: 09/26/2016 Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/30/2016 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/06/2017 Last EDR Contact: 06/19/2017
Number of Days to Update: 66 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/02/2017
Data Release Frequency: Semi -Annually
INDIAN UST R10: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian
land in EPA Region 10 (Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington, and Tribal Nations).
Date of Government Version: 10/07/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: EPA Region 10
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/27/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
INDIAN UST R8: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian
land in EPA Region 8 (Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming and 27 Tribal Nations).
Date of Government Version: 10/17/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: EPA Region 8
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/27/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
INDIAN UST R7: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian
land in EPA Region 7 (Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, and 9 Tribal Nations).
Date of Government Version: 09/01/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: EPA Region 7
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/27/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN UST R6: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian
land in EPA Region 6 (Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Texas and 65 Tribes).
Date of Government Version: 10/01/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: EPA Region 6
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/27/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2017
Data Release Frequency: Semi -Annually
INDIAN UST R5: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian
land in EPA Region 5 (Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin and Tribal Nations).
TC5050221.2s Page GR-8

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 01/14/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: EPA Region 5
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/27/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN UST R4: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian
land in EPA Region 4 (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee
and Tribal Nations)
Date of Government Version: 10/14/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/27/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 98
Source: EPA Region 4
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2017
Data Release Frequency: Semi -Annually
INDIAN UST R1: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian
land in EPA Region 1 (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont and ten Tribal
Nations).
Date of Government Version: 11/14/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: EPA, Region 1
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/27/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN UST R9: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian
land in EPA Region 9 (Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, the Pacific Islands, and Tribal Nations).
Date of Government Version: 10/06/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/26/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/05/2017
Number of Days to Update: 99
Source: EPA Region 9
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/27/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
State and tribal institutional control / engineering control registries
INST CONTROL: No Further Action Sites With Land Use Restrictions Monitoring
A land use restricted site is a property where there are limits or requirements on future use of the property
due to varying levels of cleanup possible, practical, or necessary at the site.
Date of Government Version: 10/07/2016 Source: Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/15/2016 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/06/2017 Last EDR Contact: 09/13/2017
Number of Days to Update: 81 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/25/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites
INDIAN VCP R7: Voluntary Cleanup Priority Lisitng
A listing of voluntary cleanup priority sites located on Indian Land located in Region 7.
Date of Government Version: 03/20/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/22/2008
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/19/2008
Number of Days to Update: 27
Source: EPA, Region 7
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 04/20/2009
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/20/2009
Data Release Frequency: Varies
TC5050221.2s Page GR-9

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
INDIAN VCP R1: Voluntary Cleanup Priority Listing
A listing of voluntary cleanup priority sites located on Indian Land located in Region 1.
Date of Government Version: 07/27/2015
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/29/2015
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/18/2016
Number of Days to Update: 142
Source: EPA, Region 1
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/27/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
VCP: Responsible Party Voluntary Action Sites
Responsible Party Voluntary Action site locations.
Date of Government Version: 10/07/2016 Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/15/2016 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/08/2017 Last EDR Contact: 09/13/2017
Number of Days to Update: 83 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/25/2017
Data Release Frequency: Semi -Annually
State and tribal Brownfields sites
BROWNFIELDS: Brownfields Projects Inventory
A brownfield site is an abandoned, idled, or underused property where the threat of environmental contamination
has hindered its redevelopment. All of the sites in the inventory are working toward a brownfield agreement for
cleanup and liabitliy control.
Date of Government Version: 01/03/2017 Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/06/2017 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/06/2017 Last EDR Contact: 07/07/2017
Number of Days to Update: 59 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/16/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS
Local Brownfield lists
US BROWNFIELDS: A Listing of Brownfields Sites
Brownfields are real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence
or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant. Cleaning up and reinvesting in these
properties takes development pressures off of undeveloped, open land, and both improves and protects the environment.
Assessment, Cleanup and Redevelopment Exchange System (ACRES) stores information reported by EPA Brownfields
grant recipients on brownfields properties assessed or cleaned up with grant funding as well as information on
Targeted Brownfields Assessments performed by EPA Regions. A listing of ACRES Brownfield sites is obtained from
Cleanups in My Community. Cleanups in My Community provides information on Brownfields properties for which information
is reported back to EPA, as well as areas served by Brownfields grant programs.
Date of Government Version: 03/02/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/02/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/07/2017
Number of Days to Update: 36
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/20/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/02/2017
Data Release Frequency: Semi -Annually
Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites
SWRCY: Recycling Center Listing
A listing of recycling center locations.
Date of Government Version: 11/30/2016 Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/05/2016 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/08/2017 Last EDR Contact: 05/01/2017
Number of Days to Update: 93 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 08/14/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
TC5050221.2s Page GR-10

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
HIST LF: Solid Waste Facility Listing
A listing of solid waste facilities.
Date of Government Version: 11/06/2006 Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/13/2007 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/02/2007 Last EDR Contact: 01/19/2009
Number of Days to Update: 17 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
INDIAN ODI: Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands
Location of open dumps on Indian land.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/1998
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/03/2007
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/24/2008
Number of Days to Update: 52
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/01/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/13/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
DEBRIS REGION 9: Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations
A listing of illegal dump sites location on the Torres Martinez Indian Reservation located in eastern Riverside
County and northern Imperial County, California.
Date of Government Version: 01/12/2009
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 05/07/2009
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/21/2009
Number of Days to Update: 137
Source: EPA, Region 9
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/24/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2017
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
ODI: Open Dump Inventory
An open dump is defined as a disposal facility that does not comply with one or more of the Part 257 or Part 258
Subtitle D Criteria.
Date of Government Version: 06/30/1985
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/09/2004
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/17/2004
Number of Days to Update: 39
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/09/2004
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
IHS OPEN DUMPS: Open Dumps on Indian Land
A listing of all open dumps located on Indian Land in the United States.
Date of Government Version: 04/01/2014 Source: Department of Health & Human Serivices, Indian Health Service
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/06/2014 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/29/2015 Last EDR Contact: 08/29/2017
Number of Days to Update: 176 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/13/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites
US HIST CDL: National Clandestine Laboratory Register
A listing of clandestine drug lab locations that have been removed from the DEAs National Clandestine Laboratory
Register.
Date of Government Version: 02/09/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/08/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 06/09/2017
Number of Days to Update: 93
Source: Drug Enforcement Administration
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/30/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/11/2017
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
TC5050221.2s Page GR-11

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
US CDL: Clandestine Drug Labs
A listing of clandestine drug lab locations. The U.S. Department of Justice ("the Department") provides this
web site as a public service. It contains addresses of some locations where law enforcement agencies reported
they found chemicals or other items that indicated the presence of either clandestine drug laboratories or dumpsites.
In most cases, the source of the entries is not the Department, and the Department has not verified the entry
and does not guarantee its accuracy. Members of the public must verify the accuracy of all entries by, for example,
contacting local law enforcement and local health departments.
Date of Government Version: 02/09/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/08/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 06/09/2017
Number of Days to Update: 93
Local Land Records
Source: Drug Enforcement Administration
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/30/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/11/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
LIENS 2: CERCLA Lien Information
A Federal CERCLA ('Superfund') lien can exist by operation of law at any site or property at which EPA has spent
Superfund monies. These monies are spent to investigate and address releases and threatened releases of contamination.
CERCLIS provides information as to the identity of these sites and properties.
Date of Government Version: 02/18/2014
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/18/2014
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/24/2014
Number of Days to Update: 37
Records of Emergency Release Reports
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/26/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
HMIRS: Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System
Hazardous Materials Incident Report System. HMIRS contains hazardous material spill incidents reported to DOT.
Date of Government Version: 12/28/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/28/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/03/2017
Number of Days to Update: 37
Source: U.S. Department of Transportation
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Annually
SPILLS: Spills Incident Listing
A listing spills, hazardous material releases, sanitary sewer overflows, wastewater treatment plant bypasses and
upsets, citizen complaints, and any other environmental emergency calls reported to the agency.
Date of Government Version: 12/14/2016 Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/16/2016 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/08/2017 Last EDR Contact: 09/08/2017
Number of Days to Update: 82 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/25/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
IMD: Incident Management Database
Groundwater and/or soil contamination incidents
Date of Government Version: 07/21/2006 Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/01/2006 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 08/23/2006 Last EDR Contact: 07/01/2011
Number of Days to Update: 22 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/17/2011
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
SPILLS 90: SPILLS90 data from FirstSearch
Spills 90 includes those spill and release records available exclusively from FirstSearch databases. Typically,
they may include chemical, oil and/or hazardous substance spills recorded after 1990. Duplicate records that are
already included in EDR incident and release records are not included in Spills 90.
TC5050221.2s Page GR-12

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 09/27/2012
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/03/2013
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/06/2013
Number of Days to Update: 62
Source: FirstSearch
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: 01/03/2013
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
SPILLS 80: SPILLS80 data from FirstSearch
Spills 80 includes those spill and release records available from FirstSearch databases prior to 1990. Typically,
they may include chemical, oil and/or hazardous substance spills recorded before 1990. Duplicate records that
are already included in EDR incident and release records are not included in Spills 80.
Date of Government Version: 06/14/2001
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/03/2013
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/06/2013
Number of Days to Update: 62
Other Ascertainable Records
Source: FirstSearch
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: 01/03/2013
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
RCRA NonGen / NLR: RCRA - Non Generators / No Longer Regulated
RCRAInfo is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database
includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste
as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Non -Generators do not presently generate hazardous
waste.
Date of Government Version: 12/12/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/28/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2017
Number of Days to Update: 44
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/11/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
FUDS: Formerly Used Defense Sites
The listing includes locations of Formerly Used Defense Sites properties where the US Army Corps of Engineers
is actively working or will take necessary cleanup actions.
Date of Government Version: 01/31/2015
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/08/2015
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/13/2015
Number of Days to Update: 97
Source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/25/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/04/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
DOD: Department of Defense Sites
This data set consists of federally owned or administered lands, administered by the Department of Defense, that
have any area equal to or greater than 640 acres of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2005
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/10/2006
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/11/2007
Number of Days to Update: 62
Source: USGS
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/12/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/23/2017
Data Release Frequency: Semi -Annually
FEDLAND: Federal and Indian Lands
Federally and Indian administrated lands of the United States. Lands included are administrated by: Army Corps
of Engineers, Bureau of Reclamation, National Wild and Scenic River, National Wildlife Refuge, Public Domain Land,
Wilderness, Wilderness Study Area, Wildlife Management Area, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Land Management,
Department of Justice, Forest Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2005
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/06/2006
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/11/2007
Number of Days to Update: 339
Source: U.S. Geological Survey
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/14/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/23/2017
Data Release Frequency: N/A
TC5050221.2s Page GR-13

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
SCRD DRYCLEANERS: State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Listing
The State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners was established in 1998, with support from the U.S. EPA Office
of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation. It is comprised of representatives of states with established
drycleaner remediation programs. Currently the member states are Alabama, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Kansas,
Minnesota, Missouri, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin.
Date of Government Version: 01/01/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/03/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/07/2017
Number of Days to Update: 63
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/18/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/27/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
US FIN ASSUR: Financial Assurance Information
All owners and operators of facilities that treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste are required to provide
proof that they will have sufficient funds to pay for the clean up, closure, and post -closure care of their facilities.
Date of Government Version: 02/13/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/15/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/12/2017
Number of Days to Update: 86
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/11/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
EPA WATCH LIST: EPA WATCH LIST
EPA maintains a "Watch List' to facilitate dialogue between EPA, state and local environmental agencies on enforcement
matters relating to facilities with alleged violations identified as either significant or high priority. Being
on the Watch List does not mean that the facility has actually violated the law only that an investigation by
EPA or a state or local environmental agency has led those organizations to allege that an unproven violation
has in fact occurred. Being on the Watch List does not represent a higher level of concern regarding the alleged
violations that were detected, but instead indicates cases requiring additional dialogue between EPA, state and
local agencies - primarily because of the length of time the alleged violation has gone unaddressed or unresolved.
Date of Government Version: 08/30/2013
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/21/2014
Date Made Active in Reports: 06/17/2014
Number of Days to Update: 88
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/07/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/20/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
2020 COR ACTION: 2020 Corrective Action Program List
The EPA has set ambitious goals for the RCRA Corrective Action program by creating the 2020 Corrective Action
Universe. This RCRA cleanup baseline includes facilities expected to need corrective action. The 2020 universe
contains a wide variety of sites. Some properties are heavily contaminated while others were contaminated but
have since been cleaned up. Still others have not been fully investigated yet, and may require little or no remediation.
Inclusion in the 2020 Universe does not necessarily imply failure on the part of a facility to meet its RCRA obligations.
Date of Government Version: 04/22/2013
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/03/2015
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/09/2015
Number of Days to Update: 6
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/24/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/20/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
TSCA: Toxic Substances Control Act
Toxic Substances Control Act. TSCA identifies manufacturers and importers of chemical substances included on the
TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory list. It includes data on the production volume of these substances by plant
site.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2012
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/15/2015
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/29/2015
Number of Days to Update: 14
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/21/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/02/2017
Data Release Frequency: Every 4 Years
TC5050221.2s Page GR-14

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
TRIS: Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
Toxic Release Inventory System. TRIS identifies facilities which release toxic chemicals to the air, water and
land in reportable quantities under SARA Title III Section 313.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2014
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/24/2015
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/05/2016
Number of Days to Update: 133
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/23/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/04/2017
Data Release Frequency: Annually
SSTS: Section 7 Tracking Systems
Section 7 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, as amended (92 Stat. 829) requires all
registered pesticide -producing establishments to submit a report to the Environmental Protection Agency by March
1st each year. Each establishment must report the types and amounts of pesticides, active ingredients and devices
being produced, and those having been produced and sold or distributed in the past year.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2009
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/10/2010
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/25/2011
Number of Days to Update: 77
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2017
Data Release Frequency: Annually
ROD: Records Of Decision
Record of Decision. ROD documents mandate a permanent remedy at an NPL (Superfund) site containing technical
and health information to aid in the cleanup.
Date of Government Version: 11/25/2013
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/12/2013
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/24/2014
Number of Days to Update: 74
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 09/08/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/18/2017
Data Release Frequency: Annually
RMP: Risk Management Plans
When Congress passed the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, it required EPA to publish regulations and guidance
for chemical accident prevention at facilities using extremely hazardous substances. The Risk Management Program
Rule (RMP Rule) was written to implement Section 112(r) of these amendments. The rule, which built upon existing
industry codes and standards, requires companies of all sizes that use certain flammable and toxic substances
to develop a Risk Management Program, which includes a(n): Hazard assessment that details the potential effects
of an accidental release, an accident history of the last five years, and an evaluation of worst -case and alternative
accidental releases; Prevention program that includes safety precautions and maintenance, monitoring, and employee
training measures; and Emergency response program that spells out emergency health care, employee training measures
and procedures for informing the public and response agencies (e.g the fire department) should an accident occur.
Date of Government Version: 02/01/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/09/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/07/2017
Number of Days to Update: 57
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/24/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
RAATS: RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
RCRA Administration Action Tracking System. RAATS contains records based on enforcement actions issued under RCRA
pertaining to major violators and includes administrative and civil actions brought by the EPA. For administration
actions after September 30, 1995, data entry in the RAATS database was discontinued. EPA will retain a copy of
the database for historical records. It was necessary to terminate RAATS because a decrease in agency resources
made it impossible to continue to update the information contained in the database.
Date of Government Version: 04/17/1995
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/03/1995
Date Made Active in Reports: 08/07/1995
Number of Days to Update: 35
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 06/02/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 09/01/2008
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
TC5050221.2s Page GR-15

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
PRP: Potentially Responsible Parties
A listing of verified Potentially Responsible Parties
Date of Government Version: 10/25/2013
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/17/2014
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/20/2014
Number of Days to Update: 3
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/08/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/20/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
PADS: PCB Activity Database System
PCB Activity Database. PADS Identifies generators, transporters, commercial storers and/or brokers and disposers
of PCB's who are required to notify the EPA of such activities.
Date of Government Version: 01/20/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/28/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/02/2016
Number of Days to Update: 127
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 04/10/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/24/2017
Data Release Frequency: Annually
ICIS: Integrated Compliance Information System
The Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) supports the information needs of the national enforcement
and compliance program as well as the unique needs of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
program.
Date of Government Version: 11/18/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/23/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2017
Number of Days to Update: 79
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/23/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
FTTS: FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
FTTS tracks administrative cases and pesticide enforcement actions and compliance activities related to FIFRA,
TSCA and EPCRA (Emergency Planning and Community Right -to -Know Act). To maintain currency, EDR contacts the
Agency on a quarterly basis.
Date of Government Version: 04/09/2009 Source: EPA/Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/16/2009 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/11/2009 Last EDR Contact: 08/18/2017
Number of Days to Update: 25 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/04/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
FTTS INSP: FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
A listing of FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) inspections and enforcements.
Date of Government Version: 04/09/2009
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/16/2009
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/11/2009
Number of Days to Update: 25
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/18/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/04/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
MLTS: Material Licensing Tracking System
MLTS is maintained by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and contains a list of approximately 8,100 sites which
possess or use radioactive materials and which are subject to NRC licensing requirements. To maintain currency,
EDR contacts the Agency on a quarterly basis.
Date of Government Version: 08/30/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/08/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/21/2016
Number of Days to Update: 43
Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/01/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/20/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
TC5050221.2s Page GR-16

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
COAL ASH DOE: Steam -Electric Plant Operation Data
A listing of power plants that store ash in surface ponds.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2005
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/07/2009
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/22/2009
Number of Days to Update: 76
Source: Department of Energy
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 09/08/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/18/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
COAL ASH EPA: Coal Combustion Residues Surface Impoundments List
A listing of coal combustion residues surface impoundments with high hazard potential ratings.
Date of Government Version: 07/01/2014
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/10/2014
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/20/2014
Number of Days to Update: 40
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: 09/08/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/18/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
PCB TRANSFORMER: PCB Transformer Registration Database
The database of PCB transformer registrations that includes all PCB registration submittals.
Date of Government Version: 02/01/2011
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/19/2011
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/10/2012
Number of Days to Update: 83
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/28/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/08/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
RADINFO: Radiation Information Database
The Radiation Information Database (RADINFO) contains information about facilities that are regulated by U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations for radiation and radioactivity.
Date of Government Version: 01/04/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/06/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2017
Number of Days to Update: 35
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/12/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/16/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
HIST FTTS: FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing
A complete administrative case listing from the FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) for all ten EPA regions. The
information was obtained from the National Compliance Database (NCDB). NCDB supports the implementation of FI FRA
(Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act) and TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act). Some EPA regions
are now closing out records. Because of that, and the fact that some EPA regions are not providing EPA Headquarters
with updated records, it was decided to create a HIST FTTS database. It included records that may not be included
in the newer FTTS database updates. This database is no longer updated.
Date of Government Version: 10/19/2006
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/01/2007
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/10/2007
Number of Days to Update: 40
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 12/17/2007
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/17/2008
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
HIST FTTS INSP: FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Inspection & Enforcement Case Listing
A complete inspection and enforcement case listing from the FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) for all ten EPA
regions. The information was obtained from the National Compliance Database (NCDB). NCDB supports the implementation
of FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act) and TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act). Some
EPA regions are now closing out records. Because of that, and the fact that some EPA regions are not providing
EPA Headquarters with updated records, it was decided to create a HIST FTTS database. It included records that
may not be included in the newer FTTS database updates. This database is no longer updated.
TC5050221.2s Page GR-17

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 10/19/2006
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/01/2007
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/10/2007
Number of Days to Update: 40
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 12/17/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/17/2008
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
DOT OPS: Incident and Accident Data
Department of Transporation, Office of Pipeline Safety Incident and Accident data.
Date of Government Version: 07/31/2012 Source: Department of Transporation, Office of Pipeline Safety
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/07/2012 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/18/2012 Last EDR Contact: 08/01/2017
Number of Days to Update: 42 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/13/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
CONSENT: Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
Major legal settlements that establish responsibility and standards for cleanup at NPL (Superfund) sites. Released
periodically by United States District Courts after settlement by parties to litigation matters.
Date of Government Version: 09/30/2016 Source: Department of Justice, Consent Decree Library
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/18/2016 Telephone: Varies
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/03/2017 Last EDR Contact: 06/21/2017
Number of Days to Update: 77 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
BRS: Biennial Reporting System
The Biennial Reporting System is a national system administered by the EPA that collects data on the generation
and management of hazardous waste. BRS captures detailed data from two groups: Large Quantity Generators (LQG)
and Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2013
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/24/2015
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/30/2015
Number of Days to Update: 218
Source: EPA/NTIS
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/25/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/04/2017
Data Release Frequency: Biennially
INDIAN RESERV: Indian Reservations
This map layer portrays Indian administered lands of the United States that have any area equal to or greater
than 640 acres.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2014
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/14/2015
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/10/2017
Number of Days to Update: 546
Source: USGS
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/11/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/23/2017
Data Release Frequency: Semi -Annually
FUSRAP: Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program
DOE established the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) in 1974 to remediate sites where
radioactive contamination remained from Manhattan Project and early U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) operations.
Date of Government Version: 12/23/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/27/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/17/2017
Number of Days to Update: 52
Source: Department of Energy
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/03/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/20/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
UMTRA: Uranium Mill Tailings Sites
Uranium ore was mined by private companies for federal government use in national defense programs. When the mills
shut down, large piles of the sand -like material (mill tailings) remain after uranium has been extracted from
the ore. Levels of human exposure to radioactive materials from the piles are low; however, in some cases tailings
were used as construction materials before the potential health hazards of the tailings were recognized.
TC5050221.2s Page GR-18

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 09/14/2010
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/07/2011
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/01/2012
Number of Days to Update: 146
LEAD SMELTER 1: Lead Smelter Sites
A listing of former lead smelter site locations.
Date of Government Version: 12/05/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/05/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/10/2017
Number of Days to Update: 36
Source: Department of Energy
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/22/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/04/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/07/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/16/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
LEAD SMELTER 2: Lead Smelter Sites
A list of several hundred sites in the U.S. where secondary lead smelting was done from 1931and 1964. These sites
may pose a threat to public health through ingestion or inhalation of contaminated soil or dust
Date of Government Version: 04/05/2001
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/27/2010
Date Made Active in Reports: 12/02/2010
Number of Days to Update: 36
Source: American Journal of Public Health
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 12/02/2009
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
US AIRS (AFS): Aerometric Information Retrieval System Facility Subsystem (AFS)
The database is a sub -system of Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS). AFS contains compliance data
on air pollution point sources regulated by the U.S. EPA and/or state and local air regulatory agencies. This
information comes from source reports by various stationary sources of air pollution, such as electric power plants,
steel mills, factories, and universities, and provides information about the air pollutants they produce. Action,
air program, air program pollutant, and general level plant data. It is used to track emissions and compliance
data from industrial plants.
Date of Government Version: 10/12/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/26/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/03/2017
Number of Days to Update: 100
US AIRS MINOR: Air Facility System Data
A listing of minor source facilities.
Date of Government Version: 10/12/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/26/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/03/2017
Number of Days to Update: 100
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/11/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Annually
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/11/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Annually
US MINES: Mines Master Index File
Contains all mine identification numbers issued for mines active or opened since 1971. The data also includes
violation information.
Date of Government Version: 02/08/2017 Source: Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/28/2017 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/07/2017 Last EDR Contact: 08/30/2017
Number of Days to Update: 38 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/11/2017
Data Release Frequency: Semi -Annually
US MINES 2: Ferrous and Nonferrous Metal Mines Database Listing
This map layer includes ferrous (ferrous metal mines are facilities that extract ferrous metals, such as iron
ore or molybdenum) and nonferrous (Nonferrous metal mines are facilities that extract nonferrous metals, such
as gold, silver, copper, zinc, and lead) metal mines in the United States.
TC5050221.2s Page GR-19

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 12/05/2005
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/29/2008
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/18/2008
Number of Days to Update: 49
Source: USGS
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 09/01/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/11/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
US MINES 3: Active Mines & Mineral Plants Database Listing
Active Mines and Mineral Processing Plant operations for commodities monitored by the Minerals Information Team
of the USGS.
Date of Government Version: 04/14/2011
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/08/2011
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/13/2011
Number of Days to Update: 97
Source: USGS
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 09/01/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/11/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
ABANDONED MINES: Abandoned Mines
An inventory of land and water impacted by past mining (primarily coal mining) is maintained by OSMRE to provide
information needed to implement the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA). The inventory
contains information on the location, type, and extent of AML impacts, as well as, information on the cost associated
with the reclamation of those problems. The inventory is based upon field surveys by State, Tribal, and OSMRE
program officials. It is dynamic to the extent that it is modified as new problems are identified and existing
problems are reclaimed.
Date of Government Version: 03/14/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/17/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/07/2017
Number of Days to Update: 21
Source: Department of Interior
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 09/07/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/25/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
FINDS: Facility Index System/Facility Registry System
Facility Index System. FINDS contains both facility information and 'pointers' to other sources that contain more
detail. EDR includes the following FINDS databases in this report: PCS (Permit Compliance System), AIRS (Aerometric
Information Retrieval System), DOCKET (Enforcement Docket used to manage and track information on civil judicial
enforcement cases for all environmental statutes), FURS (Federal Underground Injection Control), C-DOCKET (Criminal
Docket System used to track criminal enforcement actions for all environmental statutes), FFIS (Federal Facilities
Information System), STATE (State Environmental Laws and Statutes), and PADS (PCB Activity Data System).
Date of Government Version: 04/04/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/07/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/12/2017
Number of Days to Update: 35
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 09/06/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/18/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
DOCKET HWC: Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket Listing
A complete list of the Federal Agency Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket Facilities.
Date of Government Version: 06/02/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/03/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 09/02/2016
Number of Days to Update: 91
UXO: Unexploded Ordnance Sites
A listing of unexploded ordnance site locations
Date of Government Version: 10/25/2015
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/29/2016
Date Made Active in Reports: 04/05/2016
Number of Days to Update: 67
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/24/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/11/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
Source: Department of Defense
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/17/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/30/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
TC5050221.2s Page GR-20

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
ECHO: Enforcement & Compliance History Information
ECHO provides integrated compliance and enforcement information for about 800,000 regulated facilities nationwide.
Date of Government Version: 03/19/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 03/21/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/12/2017
Number of Days to Update: 52
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 09/06/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/18/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
FUELS PROGRAM: EPA Fuels Program Registered Listing
This listing includes facilities that are registered under the Part 80 (Code of Federal Regulations) EPA Fuels
Programs. All companies now are required to submit new and updated registrations.
Date of Government Version: 02/22/2017
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/22/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/12/2017
Number of Days to Update: 79
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/17/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/04/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
COAL ASH: Coal Ash Disposal Sites
A listing of coal combustion products distribution permits issued by the Division for the treatment, storage,
transportation, use and disposal of coal combustion products.
Date of Government Version: 12/14/2015 Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/23/2016 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/18/2016 Last EDR Contact: 07/31/2017
Number of Days to Update: 85 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/13/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
DRYCLEANERS: Drycleaning Sites
Potential and known drycleaning sites, active and abandoned, that the Drycleaning Solvent Cleanup Program has
knowledge of and entered into this database.
Date of Government Version: 04/04/2017 Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/20/2017 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 08/10/2017 Last EDR Contact: 06/20/2017
Number of Days to Update: 51 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/02/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
Financial Assurance 1: Financial Assurance Information Listing
A listing of financial assurance information for underground storage tank facilities. Financial assurance is intended
to ensure that resources are available to pay for the cost of closure, post -closure care, and corrective measures
if the owner or operator of a regulated facility is unable or unwilling to pay.
Date of Government Version: 09/30/2016 Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/09/2016 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/06/2017 Last EDR Contact: 08/10/2017
Number of Days to Update: 117 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/20/2017
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
Financial Assurance 2: Financial Assurance Information Listing
Information for solid waste facilities. Financial assurance is intended to ensure that resources are available
to pay for the cost of closure, post -closure care, and corrective measures if the owner or operator of a regulated
facility is unable or unwilling to pay.
Date of Government Version: 10/02/2012 Source: Department of Environmental & Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/03/2012 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/26/2012 Last EDR Contact: 06/23/2017
Number of Days to Update: 23 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/09/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
TC5050221.2s Page GR-21

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Financial Assurance 3: Financial Assurance Information
Hazardous waste financial assurance information.
Date of Government Version: 09/14/2016 Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/16/2016 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/05/2016 Last EDR Contact: 09/08/2017
Number of Days to Update: 19 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/25/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
NPDES: NPDES Facility Location Listing
General information regarding NPDES(National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) permits.
Date of Government Version: 02/17/2016 Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/19/2016 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 05/03/2016 Last EDR Contact: 08/03/2017
Number of Days to Update: 74 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/13/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
UIC: Underground Injection Wells Listing
A listing of uncerground injection wells locations.
Date of Government Version: 12/07/2016 Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12/09/2016 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/08/2017 Last EDR Contact: 08/31/2017
Number of Days to Update: 89 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/18/2017
Data Release Frequency: Varies
EDR HIGH RISK HISTORICAL RECORDS
EDR Exclusive Records
EDR MGP: EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants
The EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plant Database includes records of coal gas plants (manufactured gas plants)
compiled by EDR's researchers. Manufactured gas sites were used in the United States from the 1800's to 1950's
to produce a gas that could be distributed and used as fuel. These plants used whale oil, rosin, coal, or a mixture
of coal, oil, and water that also produced a significant amount of waste. Many of the byproducts of the gas production,
such as coal tar (oily waste containing volatile and non-volatile chemicals), sludges, oils and other compounds
are potentially hazardous to human health and the environment. The byproduct from this process was frequently
disposed of directly at the plant site and can remain or spread slowly, serving as a continuous source of soil
and groundwater contamination.
Date of Government Version: N/A Source: EDR, Inc.
Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A Telephone: N/A
Date Made Active in Reports: N/A Last EDR Contact: N/A
Number of Days to Update: N/A Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
EDR Hist Auto: EDR Exclusive Historic Gas Stations
EDR has searched selected national collections of business directories and has collected listings of potential
gas station/filling station/service station sites that were available to EDR researchers. EDR's review was limited
to those categories of sources that might, in EDR's opinion, include gas station/filling station/service station
establishments. The categories reviewed included, but were not limited to gas, gas station, gasoline station,
filling station, auto, automobile repair, auto service station, service station, etc. This database falls within
a category of information EDR classifies as "High Risk Historical Records", or HRHR. EDR's HRHR effort presents
unique and sometimes proprietary data about past sites and operations that typically create environmental concerns,
but may not show up in current government records searches.
Date of Government Version: N/A
Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A
Date Made Active in Reports: N/A
Number of Days to Update: N/A
Source: EDR, Inc.
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: N/A
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: Varies
TC5050221.2s Page GR-22

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
EDR Hist Cleaner: EDR Exclusive Historic Dry Cleaners
EDR has searched selected national collections of business directories and has collected listings of potential
dry cleaner sites that were available to EDR researchers. EDR's review was limited to those categories of sources
that might, in EDR's opinion, include dry cleaning establishments. The categories reviewed included, but were
not limited to dry cleaners, cleaners, laundry, laundromat, cleaning/laundry, wash & dry etc. This database falls
within a category of information EDR classifies as "High Risk Historical Records", or HRHR. EDR's HRHR effort
presents unique and sometimes proprietary data about past sites and operations that typically create environmental
concerns, but may not show up in current government records searches.
Date of Government Version: N/A Source: EDR, Inc.
Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A Telephone: N/A
Date Made Active in Reports: N/A Last EDR Contact: N/A
Number of Days to Update: N/A Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: Varies
EDR RECOVERED GOVERNMENT ARCHIVES
Exclusive Recovered Govt. Archives
RGA HWS: Recovered Government Archive State Hazardous Waste Facilities List
The EDR Recovered Government Archive State Hazardous Waste database provides a list of SHWS incidents derived
from historical databases and includes many records that no longer appear in current government lists. Compiled
from Records formerly available from the Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources in North Carolina.
Date of Government Version: N/A Source: Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/01/2013 Telephone: N/A
Date Made Active in Reports: 12/24/2013 Last EDR Contact: 06/01/2012
Number of Days to Update: 176 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: Varies
RGA LF: Recovered Government Archive Solid Waste Facilities List
The EDR Recovered Government Archive Landfill database provides a list of landfills derived from historical databases
and includes many records that no longer appear in current government lists. Compiled from Records formerly available
from the Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources in North Carolina.
Date of Government Version: N/A Source: Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/01/2013 Telephone: N/A
Date Made Active in Reports: 01/13/2014 Last EDR Contact: 06/01/2012
Number of Days to Update: 196 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: Varies
RGA LUST: Recovered Government Archive Leaking Underground Storage Tank
The EDR Recovered Government Archive Leaking Underground Storage Tank database provides a list of LUST incidents
derived from historical databases and includes many records that no longer appear in current government lists.
Compiled from Records formerly available from the Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources in North
Carolina.
Date of Government Version: N/A Source: Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/01/2013 Telephone: N/A
Date Made Active in Reports: 12/20/2013 Last EDR Contact: 06/01/2012
Number of Days to Update: 172 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A
Data Release Frequency: Varies
OTHER DATABASE(S)
Depending on the geographic area covered by this report, the data provided in these specialty databases may or may not be
complete. For example, the existence of wetlands information data in a specific report does not mean that all wetlands in the
area covered by the report are included. Moreover, the absence of any reported wetlands information does not necessarily
mean that wetlands do not exist in the area covered by the report.
TC5050221.2s Page GR-23

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
CT MANIFEST: Hazardous Waste Manifest Data
Facility and manifest data. Manifest is a document that lists and tracks hazardous waste from the generator through
transporters to a tsd facility.
Date of Government Version: 07/30/2013 Source: Department of Energy & Environmental Protection
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/19/2013 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/03/2013 Last EDR Contact: 08/18/2017
Number of Days to Update: 45 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/27/2017
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
NJ MANIFEST: Manifest Information
Hazardous waste manifest information.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2016 Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/11/2017 Telephone: N/A
Date Made Active in Reports: 07/27/2017 Last EDR Contact: 07/10/2017
Number of Days to Update: 107 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/23/2017
Data Release Frequency: Annually
NY MANIFEST: Facility and Manifest Data
Manifest is a document that lists and tracks hazardous waste from the generator through transporters to a TSD
facility.
Date of Government Version: 01/30/2017 Source: Department of Environmental Conservation
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02/01/2017 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 02/13/2017 Last EDR Contact: 08/03/2017
Number of Days to Update: 12 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/13/2017
Data Release Frequency: Annually
PA MANIFEST: Manifest Information
Hazardous waste manifest information.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2015 Source: Department of Environmental Protection
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07/22/2016 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 11/22/2016 Last EDR Contact: 07/17/2017
Number of Days to Update: 123 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/30/2017
Data Release Frequency: Annually
RI MANIFEST: Manifest information
Hazardous waste manifest information
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2013 Source: Department of Environmental Management
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/19/2015 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 07/15/2015 Last EDR Contact: 08/21/2017
Number of Days to Update: 26 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/04/2017
Data Release Frequency: Annually
WI MANIFEST: Manifest Information
Hazardous waste manifest information.
Date of Government Version: 12/31/2016
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/13/2017
Date Made Active in Reports: 07/14/2017
Number of Days to Update: 92
Source: Department of Natural Resources
Telephone: N/A
Last EDR Contact: 09/11/2017
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/25/2017
Data Release Frequency: Annually
Oil/Gas Pipelines
Source: PennWell Corporation
Petroleum Bundle (Crude Oil, Refined Products, Petrochemicals, Gas Liquids (LPG/NGL), and Specialty
Gases (Miscellaneous)) N = Natural Gas Bundle (Natural Gas, Gas Liquids (LPG/NGL), and Specialty Gases
(Miscellaneous)). This map includes information copyrighted by PennWell Corporation. This information
is provided on a best effort basis and PennWell Corporation does not guarantee its accuracy nor warrant
its fitness for any particular purpose. Such information has been reprinted with the permission of PennWell.
Electric Power Transmission Line Data
Source: PennWell Corporation
This map includes information copyrighted by PennWell Corporation. This information is provided on a best
effort basis and PennWell Corporation does not guarantee its accuracy nor warrant its fitness for any
particular purpose. Such information has been reprinted with the permission of PennWell.
TC5050221.2s Page GR-24

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Sensitive Receptors: There are individuals deemed sensitive receptors due to their fragile immune systems and special sensitivity
to environmental discharges. These sensitive receptors typically include the elderly, the sick, and children. While the location of all
sensitive receptors cannot be determined, EDR indicates those buildings and facilities - schools, daycares, hospitals, medical centers,
and nursing homes - where individuals who are sensitive receptors are likely to be located.
AHA Hospitals:
Source: American Hospital Association, Inc.
Telephone: [phone]
The database includes a listing of hospitals based on the American Hospital Association's annual survey of hospitals.
Medical Centers: Provider of Services Listing
Source: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
Telephone: [phone]
A listing of hospitals with Medicare provider number, produced by Centers of Medicare & Medicaid Services,
a federal agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Nursing Homes
Source: National Institutes of Health
Telephone: [phone]
Information on Medicare and Medicaid certified nursing homes in the United States.
Public Schools
Source: National Center for Education Statistics
Telephone: [phone]
The National Center for Education Statistics' primary database on elementary
and secondary public education in the United States. It is a comprehensive, annual, national statistical
database of all public elementary and secondary schools and school districts, which contains data that are
comparable across all states.
Private Schools
Source: National Center for Education Statistics
Telephone: [phone]
The National Center for Education Statistics' primary database on private school locations in the United States.
Daycare Centers: Child Care Facility List
Source: Department of Health & Human Services
Telephone: [phone]
Flood Zone Data: This data was obtained from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). It depicts 100-year and
500-year flood zones as defined by FEMA. It includes the National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL) which incorporates Flood
Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) data and Q3 data from FEMA in areas not covered by NFHL.
Source: FEMA
Telephone: [phone]
Date of Government Version: 2003, 2015
NWI: National Wetlands Inventory. This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR
in 2002, 2005 and 2010 from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
State Wetlands Data: Wetland Inventory
Source: US Fish & Wildlife Service
Telephone: [phone]
Current USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map
Source: U.S. Geological Survey
TC5050221.2s Page GR-25

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
STREET AND ADDRESS INFORMATION
© 2015 TomTom North America, Inc. All rights reserved. This material is proprietary and the subject of copyright protection
and other intellectual property rights owned by or licensed to Tele Atlas North America, Inc. The use of this material is subject
to the terms of a license agreement. You will be held liable for any unauthorized copying or disclosure of this material.
TC5050221.2s Page GR-26

Suggs, Kristi
From: Charles Turney <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2017 1:18 PM
To: Suggs, Kristi
Subject: Re: Slate Sand Company, Inc. - Location Verification for Sand Mine in Surry County, NC
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
We have never done any mining in Ararat, N.C.
You can not mine a creek with a dredge and pipe line.
Please to not contact us over this again.
Thank You,
Charles Turney VP
Slate Sand Inc.
Office:336-325-2182
Cell:336-374-0769
On Monday, October 2, 2017 2:07 PM, "Suggs, Kristi" <[e-mail]> wrote:
Dear Mr. Turney,
Last week I spoke with Beverly Largen, an employee at Slate Sand Company, Inc., in regards to a
land use data search that I had conducted on properties located within 1-mile of a current stream
restoration project on Whittier Creek, located off Rockhill Church Road in Surry County, NC. Results
from that data search listed the geographic coordinates (36.378889N,-80.599444W) of Slate Sand
Company, Inc. within one of the project parcels. Because these results did not concur with previous
discussions of from the current property owner nor coincide with historical aerial reviews, Baker
decided to contact Slate Sand Company and verify if the geographic coordinates from land use data
search were accurate. Upon discussion with Beverly Largen on 9/25/17, on your behalf, she stated
that Slate Sand Company, Inc. does not currently, nor in the past, has owned or operated the
company off Rockhill Church Road (36.378889N,-80.599444W) in Surry County, NC. In order for
me document this conversation, I am requesting an email reply from you to verify whether or not I
have correctly recorded the results from that conversation. Please confirm/or refute. Thank you very
much for your assistance!
Sincerely,
Kristi Suggs
Kristi Suggs I Environmental Specialist II 1 Michael Baker Engineering, Inc. a Michael Baker
International Company
9716-B Rea Road #56 Charlotte NC 28277 [O] 704-665-2206 [C] 704-579-4828
ksuggs(a�mbakerintl.com I www.mbakerintl.com

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Banos, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper
secretary Susi H. Hamilton
August 23, 2017
Office of Archives and History
Deputy secretary Kevin Cherry
Kimberly Browning [e-mail]
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403
Re: Whittier Creek Mitigation Site, Surry County, ER 17-1506
Dear Ms. Browning:
Thank you for your letter of August 9, 2017, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected by the
project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment, please
contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579 or renee. leg dhill-
[e-mail]-v_. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above -referenced
tracking number.
Sincerely,
QLlu&-"
�r mona M. Banos
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 flail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599

Suggs, Kristi
From: Suggs, Kristi
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2017 2:58 PM
To: Marella Buncick ([e-mail])
Subject: Request for Comment for Categorical Exclusion on the Whittier Creek Site - Option D (DMS Full
Delivery Project #100020)
Attachments: 162039_WhittierCreek_USFWS_SubmittalPackage_09262017.pdf
Dear Ms. Buncick,
I have included the attached letter and supporting documentation requesting comment from the USFWS about the
above referenced project. Please let me know if you need any additional information.
Thank you in advance for your assistance!
Kristi Suggs
Kristi Suggs I Environmental Specialist II 1 Michael Baker Engineering, Inc. a Michael Baker International Company
9716-B Rea Road #56 1 Charlotte I NC 28277 [O] 704-665-2206 [C] 704-579-4828
[e-mail] I www.mbakerintl.com
INTERNATI0NAL
N V 12 WREM
Fff �rna +� a
1

We Make a Difference
INTERNATIONAL
September 26, 2017
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Asheville Ecological Services Field Office
Atlas: Marella Buncick, Endangered Species Biologist
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801
RE: Categorical Exclusion for Whittier Creek Site — Option D Stream Mitigation Project,
NCDEQ DMS Full -Delivery Project ID 9100020, Surry County, NC
Yadkin River Basin Cataloging Unit 03040101
Dear Ms. Buncick:
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc. (Baker) respectfully requests review and comment from the US Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) on any possible concerns they may have with regards to the implementation
oftheWhittier Creek Site — Option D Stream Mitigation Project. Please note that this request is
in support of the development of the Categorical Exclusion (CE) for the referenced project.
The Whittier Creek Site — Option D is a full -delivery project for the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation
Services (DMS) identified and contracted to provide stream mitigation credits for permitted, unavoidable
impacts in the Yadkin River Basin, Cataloging Unit 03040101. The project is located in Surry County and
the NC DMS Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) 03040101-110040. The site is located in the Ararat
community on two abutting parcels southeast of the intersection of Rockhill Church Road and Nurse Road,
approximately 7 miles east of Dobson, NC.
The project will involve the restoration and enhancement of approximately 3,130 linear feet of existing
perennial streams along Whittier Creek and several UTs to Whittier Creek, which is a tributary to Bull
Creek. In addition, a conservation easement will be implemented along all project reaches with riparian
buffers extending in an excess of 30 feet from the top of bank of the restored channel and will protected in
perpetuity by the State of North Carolina.
The existing stream reaches and riparian wetlands within the project area have been significantly impacted
by past and present unrestricted livestock access and/or channelization used to promote drainage and
maximize agricultural acreage for cattle pastures. The proposed restoration project not only has the
potential to provide stream mitigation credits, but will also provide significant ecological improvements
and functional uplift through habitat restoration, and through decreasing nutrient and sediment loads
from the project watershed.
Based on review of the most current information from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) website(hiips://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cniylist/sgLry.html and the North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) the following species are considered federally -listed species
in Surry County:
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
MBAKERINTL.CDM
9716-B Rea Road #56
Charlotte, NC 282771 Office:704.665.2200

We Moke o Difference
Scientific Name
Common Name
Federal Status
M otis se tentrionalis
Northern long-eared bat
Threatened
Glyptemys muhlenber ii
Bog Turtle
Threatened Similarity of Appearance S/A
Helianthus schweinitzii
Schweinitz's sunflower
Endangered
Isotria medeoloides
Small whorled pogonia
Threatened
Data Review and Analysis
Baker conducted a two-mile radius search using the Natural Heritage Program's Data Explorer
(hiips://ncnhde.natureserve.org) on September 26, 2017 and found no known occurrences of the above
referenced species within two miles of the Project site. However, the Project is located within Surry County,
a Northern long-eared bat (NLEB) White Nose Syndrome (WNS) zone, and is therefore subject to the US
Fish and Wildlife Service's Final 4(d) rule to maintain section 7(a)(2) compliance.
Myotis septentrionalis (Northern long-eared bat) — Threatened
In North Carolina, the NLEB occurs in the mountains, with scattered records in the Piedmont and coastal
plain. In western North Carolina, NLEB spend winter hibernating in caves and mines. Since this species is
not known to be a long-distance migrant, and caves and subterranean mines are extremely rare in eastern
North Carolina, it is uncertain whether or where NLEB hibernate in eastern NC. During the summer, NLEB
roost singly or in colonies underneath bark, in cavities, or in crevices of both live and dead trees (typically
>3 inches dbh). This bat also been found, rarely, roosting in structures like barns and sheds, under eaves
of buildings, behind window shutters, in bridges, and in bat houses. Pregnant females give birth from late
May to late July. Foraging occurs on forested hillsides and ridges, and occasionally over forest clearings,
over water, and along tree -lined corridors. Mature forests may be an important habitat type for foraging.
Forested habitats containing trees at least 3-inch dbh in the project area provide suitable habitat for NLEB.
Due to the decline of the NLEB population from the WNS, the USFWS has issued the finalization of a
special rule under section 4(d) of the ESA to addresses the effects to the NLEB resulting from purposeful
and incidental take based on the occurrence of WNS. Because the project is located within a WNS zone
and will include the removal/clearing of trees, it is subject to the final 4(d) ruling. As previously stated, a
review of NCNHP records did not indicate any known NLEB populations within 2.0 mile of the study area;
therefore, the project is eligible to use the NLEB 4(d) Rule Streamlined Consultation Form to meet
regulatory requirements for section 7(a)(2) compliance 4(d) consultation.
Glyptemys muhlenbergii (Bog turtle) - Threatened Similarity of Appearance (S/A)
Bog turtles live in the mud, grass and sphagnum mosses found in bogs, swamps, and marshy meadows
usually fed by cool surface springs. There are two distinct populations of the species, a northern population
and a southern population. The southern population which is found in western North Carolina, including
Alexander County, NC is listed as threated due to "similarity of appearance" as stated in the November 4,
1997, 62 FR 59605 59623. Because the southern population has not experienced the habitat loss of the
northern population, the southern population is not subject to Section 7 consultation requirements of the
Endangered Species Act.
Helianthus schweinitzii (Schweinitz's sunflower) — Endangered
Schweinitz's sunflower is a rhizomatous perennial herb that grows approximately 6.5 feet in height with
purplish stems and produces small yellow flowers from late August until frost. This species is endemic to
the Piedmont of North and South Carolina, and the few sites where it occurs in relatively natural conditions
consist of Xeric Hardpan Forests. The species is also found along roadside rights -of -way, maintained power
lines and other utility rights -of -way, edges of thickets and old pastures, clearings and edges of upland oak -
pine -hickory woods and Piedmont longleaf pine forests, and other sunny or semi -sunny habitats where

We Moke o Difference
disturbances (e.g., mowing, clearing, grazing, blow downs, storms, frequent fire) help create open or
partially open areas for sunlight. It is intolerant of full shade and excessive competition from other
vegetation. It is generally found growing on shallow sandy soils with high gravel content; shallow, poor,
clayey hardpans; or shallow rocky soils, especially those derived from mafic rocks. Because marginal to
suitable habitat for Schweinitz's sunflower occurs along field edges and utility easements adjacent to the
project area, Baker conducted a field survey on September 25t1i, 2017. No populations or individuals were
documented during the on -site review.
Isotria medeoloides (Small whorled pogonia) — Threatened
Small whorled pogonia is a member of the orchid family. It is named for the whorl of five or six leaves
near the top of a single stem and beneath the small greenish -yellow flower. The plant occurs in
predominantly mature (2"d or 31d successional growth) mixed -deciduous or mixed-deciduous/coniferous
forests with minimal ground cover and long persistent breaks in the forest canopy. The species prefers
moist, acidic soils that lack nutrient diversity. Primary threats to the small whorled pogonia include habitat
loss and degradation from urban expansion, forestry practices, recreational activities, and trampling. The
project site consists of open and active cattle pasture with a narrow line of predominantly first successional
woody vegetation along the top of the stream bank. Existing stream reaches, riparian corridors, and open
fields at the project site have been significantly impacted by past and present unrestricted livestock access;
therefore, habitat suitable for the species is not present within the project site.
Please provide comments on any possible issues that may arise with respect to the endangered species,
migratory birds or other natural resources from the construction of the proposed Project. The following
additional supporting documentation has been included for reference: Vicinity Map, USGS Topographic
Map, and Project Site Map. If Baker has not received response from you within 30 days, we will assume
that the USFWS does not have any comment or information relevant to the implementation of this project
at the current time.
We thank you in advance for your timely response, input, and cooperation. Please contact me if you have
any further questions or comments. I can be reached at [phone] or via my email address at
ksuaas(a,mbakerintl.com.
Sincerely,
Kristi Suggs
Cc: Matthew Reid, NCDMS
File
Enclosures

0
10 1 002
Ararat
Rd.
z
Project Locaton
(36.3789,-80.6034) `, 0304 1
0 0
a
03040 1090
030401011
0
304010 0900 0
2
NC268
S RRY
304 1
03040 01 1006
304010109
Major Roads
Road
Streams
i
Q HU
---
SURRY
3 4 101 \ 070
YA D
North Carolina
Vicinity Map
Michael-
Division of
Mitigation Services
1 N T E R N A T 1 0 N A L
o o.s =Miles
Whittier Creek Site - Option
D
DMS Project No. 100020
1" = 1 Mile
(Surry County, NC)

C
i000w�
..
Proposed Conservation Easement
3
North Carolina USGS Topographic Map
Michael Baker Division Of (Mount Airy South Quad, Siloam Quad)
N T E R N A T I O N A L Mitigation Services 0 200 400eet Whittier Creek Site - Option D
(Burry County, NC)
DMS Project No. 100020 1"=400

Proposed Conservation Easement
Proposed Mitigation Features a'
None 1
Enhancement I'
Restoration "' " d
North Carolina Project Site Map
Michael Baker Division of
INTERNATIONAL Mitigation Services 0 150 300eet Whittier Creek Site - Option D
(Burry County, NC)
D MS Project No. 100020 1„ = 300'

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
Natural Heritage Program
Dovemor Ray Cooper Secretary Susi H. Hamilton
September 26, 2017
Kristi Suggs
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
9716 - B Rea Rd., 56
Charlotte, NC 28277
RE: Whittier Creek Site - Option D; 162039
Dear Kristi Suggs:
NCNHDE-4393
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide information
about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
A query of the NCNHP database, based on the project area mapped with your request, indicates that there are
no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, or conservation/managed areas
within the proposed project boundary, or within a one -mile radius of the project boundary.
Please note that although there may be no documentation of natural heritage elements within or near the project
boundary, it does not imply or confirm their absence; the area may not have been surveyed. The results of this
query should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists. In the event that rare species are
found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may update our records.
Please also note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation planning,
project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria for regulatory
decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published without prior written notification
to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information source in these publications. Maps of
NCNHP data may also not be redistributed without permission.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance, please
contact Rodney A. Butler at rodney.butlerQncdcr.gov or 919.707.8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
MAILING ADDRESS: Telephone: (919) 7D7-8107 LOCATION:
1651 Mai l Service Center www.ncnhp.org 121 West Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 Raleigh, NC 276D3

NCNHDE-4393: Whittier Creek Site - Option D
Rd
Y Dlxe it
s
a
_ o
Troutman
�ln
z x
a n
e
e � n e ary do
o°
3�r a
G
0
ch hii
h
!aU
B �l1inT
Glory Bourd LA 1-41
C�
227tt
n z4
Bulllll Hollow Lo
�a�nLn
Tom loges � _:
I .,w0-
rc N 1
SrevP �. Ln �ti
W+E
Tom ions �°�
S`
September 26, 2017
Project Boundary
Buffered Project Boundary
1:22,400
0 0.175 0.35 0.7 mi
0 0.3 0.6 1.2 km
Sources' Fsri, HERE, DeLorme, Intermap, increment P Corp_, GFBCO,, USGS,
FAO, NIPS
NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NIL Ordnance Survey, Fsri Japan,
METI, Es" China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, Mapmylndia, © OpenStreetMap
contributors, and the GIS User Community
Page 2 of 2

Suggs, Kristi
From: Brew, Donnie (FHWA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2018 4:39 PM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: Wiesner, Paul; Reid, Matthew; Suggs, Kristi
Subject: EXTERNAL: Whittier Creek Mit Prcj_NLEB 4(d) rule consultation
Attachments: Whittier Creek NLEB 4(d) rule form 2-2-18.pdf, Whittier Creek project maps.pdf
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Good afternoon Marella,
The purpose of this message is to notify your office that FHWA will use the streamlined consultation
framework for the Whittier Creek Mitigation Site in Surry County, NC.
Attached is a completed NLEB 4(d) Rule Streamlined Consultation form, in addition site maps/figures.
Thank you and have a great weekend,
Donnie
Notifying the Service Under the Framework
Northern Long -Eared Bat 4(d) Rule Streamlined Consultation Form
Federal agencies (or designated non-federal representatives) should use the Northern Long -Eared Bat
4(d) Rule Streamlined Consultation form to notify the Service of their project and meet the
requirements of the framework.
Northern Lona-Eared Bat 4(d) Rule Streamlined Consultation Form (Word document)
Information requested in the Northern Long -Eared Bat 4(d) Rule Streamlined Consultation Form serves
to
(1) notify the field office that an action agency will use the streamlined framework;
(2) describe the project with sufficient detail to support the required determination; and
(3) enable the USFWS to track effects and determine if reinitiation of consultation for the
4(d) rule is required. This form requests the minimum amount of information required for
the Service to be able to track this information.
Providing information in the Streamlined Consultation Form does not address section 7(a)(2)
compliance for any other listed species.
Donnie Brew
Preconstruction & Environment Engineer
1

Federal Highway Administration
310 New Bern Ave, Suite 410
Raleigh, NC 27601
[e-mail]
919-747-7017
***Please consider the environment before printing this email.***

Northern Lone -Eared Bat 4(d) Rule Streamlined Consultation Form
Federal agencies should use this form for the optional streamlined consultation framework for the northern long-
eared bat (NLEB). This framework allows federal agencies to rely upon the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's
(USFWS) January 5, 2016, intra-Service Programmatic Biological Opinion (BO) on the final 4(d) rule for the NLEB
for section 7(a)(2) compliance by: (1) notifying the USFWS that an action agency will use the streamlined
framework; (2) describing the project with sufficient detail to support the required determination; and (3) enabling
the USFWS to track effects and determine if reinitiation of consultation is required per 50 CFR 402.16.
This form is not necessary if an agency determines that a proposed action will have no effect to the NLEB or if the
USFWS has concurred in writing with an agency's determination that a proposed action may affect, but is not likely
to adversely affect the NLEB (i.e., the standard informal consultation process). Actions that may cause prohibited
incidental take require separate formal consultation. Providing this information does not address section 7(a)(2)
compliance for any other listed species.
Information to Determine 4(d) Rule Compliance: YES NO
1. Does the project occur wholly outside of the WNS Zone'?
❑
❑X
2. Have you contacted the appropriate agency2 to determine if your project is near
❑X
❑
known hibernacula or maternity roost trees?
3. Could the project disturb hibernating NLEBs in a known hibernaculum?
❑
❑X
4. Could the project alter the entrance or interior environment of a known
❑
❑X
hibernaculum?
5. Does the project remove any trees within 0.25 miles of a known hibernaculum at
❑
❑X
any time of ear?
6. Would the project cut or destroy known occupied maternity roost trees, or any
❑
❑X
other trees within a 150-foot radius from the maternity roost tree from June 1
through July 31.
You are eligible to use this form if you have answered yes to question 41 or yes to question #2 and no to questions
3, 4, 5 and 6. The remainder of the form will be used by the USFWS to track our assumptions in the BO.
Agency and Applicant3 (Name, Email, Phone No.): Donnie Brew, Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA), Donnie.Brew2dot.gov, 919-747-7017 & Kristi Suggs, Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.,
ksuggs2mbakerintl.com, 704-579-4828
Project Name: Whittier Creek Site — Option D
Project Location (include coordinates if known): The project site is located in Surry County, North Carolina,
near the Town of Dobson, in the Ararat community. The project site is located in the Yadkin River Basin
(03040101) and the NC DMS Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) 03040101110040. The site is located on two
abutting parcels just southeast of the intersection of Rockhill Church Road and Nurse Road. The coordinates at the
intersection of Rockhill Church Road and Nurse Road are (36.3789,-80.6034).
Basic Project Description (provide narrative below or attach additional information):
1 http://www.fws.gov/"dwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/pdVWNSZone.pdf
'See http://www.fws.gov/"dwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/nhisites.html
s If applicable - only needed for federal actions with applicants (e.g., for a permit, etc.) who are party to the consultation.

The Whittier Creek Site is a full -delivery project for the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS)
identified and contracted to provide stream mitigation credits for permitted, unavoidable impacts in the Yadkin
River Basin, Cataloging Unit 03040101. The project will involve the restoration and enhancement and permanent
protection of approximately 3,130 linear feet of existing perennial stream along Whittier Creek and several UTs to
Whittier Creek, which is a tributary to Bull Creek. In addition, a conservation easement will be implemented along
all project reaches with riparian buffers extending in an excess of 30 feet from the top of bank and will protected
in perpetuity by the State of North Carolina.
The existing stream reaches and riparian wetlands within the project area have been significantly impacted by
past and present unrestricted livestock access and/or channelization used to promote drainage and maximize
agricultural acreage for cattle pastures. The proposed restoration project not only has the potential to provide stream
mitigation credits, but will also provide significant ecological improvements and functional uplift through habitat
restoration, and through decreasing nutrient and sediment loads from the project watershed.
The following additional supporting documentation has been included for reference: a Project Vicinity Map, a
USGS Topographic Map, and a Project Site Map.
YES NO
General Project Information
Does the project occur within 0.25 miles of a known hibernaculum?
❑
❑X
Does the project occur within 150 feet of a known maternity roost tree?
❑
❑X
Does the project include forest conversion4? (if yes, report acreage below)
❑X
❑
Estimated total acres of forest conversion
3.0
If known, estimated acres5 of forest conversion from April 1 to October 31
3.0
If known, estimated acres of forest conversion from June I to July 316
0.0
Does the project include timber harvest? (if yes, report acreage below)
❑
❑X
Estimated total acres of timber harvest
If known, estimated acres of timber harvest from April I to October 31
If known, estimated acres of timber harvest from June I to July 31
Does the project include prescribed fire? (if yes, report acreage below)
❑
❑X
Estimated total acres of prescribed fire
If known, estimated acres of prescribed fire from April I to October 31
If known, estimated acres of prescribed fire from June I to July 31
Does the project install new wind turbines? (if yes, report capacity in MW below)
❑
❑X
Estimated wind capacity (MW)
Agency Determination:
By signing this form, the action agency determines that this project may affect the NLEB, but that any
resulting incidental take of the NLEB is not prohibited by the final 4(d) rule.
If the USFWS does not respond within 30 days from submittal of this form, the action agency may
presume that its determination is informed by the best available information and that its project
responsibilities under 7(a)(2) with respect to the NLEB are fulfilled through the USFWS January 5,
2016, Programmatic BO. The action agency will update this determination annually for multi -year
activities.
4 Any activity that temporarily or permanently removes suitable forested habitat, including, but not limited to, tree removal
from development, energy production and transmission, mining, agriculture, etc. (see page 48 of the BO).
s If the project removes less than 10 trees and the acreage is unknown, report the acreage as less than 0.1 acre.
6 If the activity includes tree clearing in June and July, also include those acreage in April to October.

The action agency understands that the USFWS presumes that all activities are implemented as
described herein. The action agency will promptly report any departures from the described activities to
the appropriate USFWS Field Office. The action agency will provide the appropriate USFWS Field
Office with the results of any surveys conducted for the NLEB. Involved parties will promptly notify the
appropriate USFWS Field Office upon finding a dead, injured, or sick NLEB.
Signature: Date Submitted: 2 + 2 r / g

We Make a Difference
INTERNATIONAL
January 29, 2018
Mr. Milton Cortes
Assistant State Soil Scientist
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service
4407 Bland Rd., Suite 117
Raleigh, NC 27609
RE: Prime and Important Farmland Soils
NCDMS, Whittier Creek Site — Option D, Stream Mitigation Project
Surry County, NC
Dear Mr. Cortes:
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc. (Baker) is contracted by the North Carolina Division of Mitigation
Services (NCDMS) to conduct stream restoration/enhancement activities for the above -referenced project.
The project area is located in Surry County, North Carolina approximately 7 miles east of Dobson, NC.
The project is located on both the Mount Airy and Siloam, North Carolina 7.5-minute topographic maps
from the United States Geological Survey (USGS). The center of the project area is located at 36.3779N,
-80.59988W. The site is located on two abutting parcels southeast of the intersection of Rockhill Church
Road and Nurse Road in Ararat, NC. Please see the enclosed USGS Topographic Map for a depiction of
the project site location.
The majority of the site has historically been disturbed due to past and current management for pasture
grazing and livestock rearing. Baker conducted a review of the project area using the US Department of
Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service's (USDA NRCS) Web Soil Survey. The following
table outlines the soils that are present within the proposed conservation. Based on the data determined
from this review, there are a total of 4.8 acres of Prime Farmland within the project area.
The enclosed Soils Maps depicts their locations within the easement.
Farmland Classification— Summary by Map Unit — Surry County, North Carolina (NC171)
Map unit Acres in Percent of Area
symbol Map unit name Rating Conservation in Conservation
Easement Easement
Colvard and Suches soils, 0
CsA to 3 percent slopes, Prime farmland
4.8 83.4%
occasionally flooded
Fairview cobbly fine sandy
Ff) loam, 15 to 25 percent Not prime farmland
1.0 16.6%
slopes, stony
Totals for Area of Interest
5.8 100.00%
MBAKERINTL.COM
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
Ballantyne One,1572o Brixham Hill Avenue
Suite 300, Room 318
Charlotte, NC 282771 Office: 704.665.2200

We Make a Difference
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions regarding this project or need any additional
information. I can be reached at [phone] or via my email address at ksugg`kmbakerintl.com.
Sincerely,
Kristi Suggs
Cc: Matthew Reid, NCDMS
File

U.S. Department of Agriculture
FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING
PART I (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Date Of Land Evaluation Request Septembre 22, 2017
Name of Project Whittler Creek Site - Option D
Federal Agency Involved FHWA
Proposed Land Use Stream Mitigation
County and State Surry County, North Carolina
PART II (To be completed by NRCS)
Date Request Received By
NRCS January 29, 2018
P rson Co pleting For
IV�ilton tortes NRCS NC
Does the site contain Prime, Unique, Statewide or Local Important Farmland?
(If no, the FPPA does not apply - do not complete additional parts of this form)
YES NO
Z
Acres Irrigated
none
Average Farm Size
101 acres
Major Crop(s)
CORN
Farmable Land In Govt. Jurisdiction
Acres:54 % % 187,236 acres
Amount of Farmland As Defined in FPPA
Acres: 44.8 0/do 155,337 acres
Name of Land Evaluation System Used
Surry County, NC LESA
Name of State or Local Site Assessment System
N/A
Date Land Evaluation Returned by NRCS
January 29, 2018 by entail
PART III (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Alternative Site Rating
Site A
Site B
Site C
I Site D
A. Total Acres To Be Converted Directly
rJ 8
B. Total Acres To Be Converted Indirectly
0
C. Total Acres In Site
rJ 8
PART IV (To be completed by NRCS) Land Evaluation Information
A. Total Acres Prime And Unique Farmland
4.8
B. Total Acres Statewide Important or Local Important Farmland
0
C. Percentage Of Farmland in County Or Local Govt. Unit To Be Converted
0.0031
D. Percentage Of Farmland in Govt. Jurisdiction With Same Or Higher Relative Value
6.6%
PART V (To be completed by NRCS) Land Evaluation Criterion
Relative Value of Farmland To Be Converted Scale of 0 to 100 Points
74
PART VI (To be completed by Federal Agency) Site Assessment Criteria
Criteria are explained in 7 CFR 658.5 b. For Corridor ro ect use form NRCS-CPA-106
Maximum
Points
Site A
Site B
Site C
Site D
1. Area In Non -urban Use
(15)
15
2. Perimeter In Non -urban Use
(10)
10
3. Percent Of Site Being Farmed
(20)
20
4. Protection Provided By State and Local Government
(20)
20
5. Distance From Urban Built-up Area
(15)
15
6. Distance To Urban Support Services
(15)
15
7. Size Of Present Farm Unit Compared To Average
(10)
0
8. Creation Of Non-farmable Farmland
(10)
0
9. Availability Of Farm Support Services
(5)
4
10. On -Farm Investments
(20)
10
11. Effects Of Conversion On Farm Support Services
(10)
0
12. Compatibility With Existing Agricultural Use
(10)
0
TOTAL SITE ASSESSMENT POINTS
160
109
0
0
0
PART VII (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Relative Value Of Farmland (From Part V)
100
74
0
0
0
Total Site Assessment (From Part VI above or local site assessment)
160
109
0
0
0
TOTAL POINTS (Total of above 2 lines)
260
183
0
0
0
Site Selected:
Date Of Selection
Was A Local Site Assessment Used?
YES❑ NO ❑
Reason For Selection:
Name of Federal agency representative completing this form: ANTHONY W. HIGH SEC - USDA RD Date: 1 1/27/2017
(See Instructions on reverse side) Form AD-1006 (03-02)

Suggs, Kristi
From: Cortes, Milton - NRCS, Raleigh, NC <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2018 3:08 PM
To: Suggs, Kristi
Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: RE: Farmland Conversion Impact Rating Submittal - Whittier Creek Site Option D,
Surry County, NC
Thank you very much!!
w
From: Suggs, Kristi [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2018 3:06 PM
To: Cortes, Milton - NRCS, Raleigh, NC <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: RE: Farmland Conversion Impact Rating Submittal - Whittier Creek Site Option D, Surry County,
NC
Mr. Cortes,
Attached is the completed AD1006 Form for the Whittier Creek Site Option D Mitigation Project. Please let me know if
you need any additional information. Thank you!
Kristi Suggs
PLEASE NOTE MY CHANGE OF ADDRESS BELOW IN THE SIGNATURE LINE.
Kristi Suggs I Environmental Specialist II 1 Michael Baker International
Ballantyne One,15720 Brixham Hill Avenue, Suite 300, Office 318 1 Charlotte I NC 128277 1 [O] 704-665-2206 1 [C]
704-579-4828
[e-mail] I www.mbakerintl.com
Michael
. -` We Moke a Difference
INTERNATIONAL
Connect with us- V Mrlw&M
From: Cortes, Milton - NRCS, Raleigh, NC[mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2018 1:37 PM
To: Suggs, Kristi <[e-mail]>
Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: Farmland Conversion Impact Rating Submittal - Whittier Creek Site Option D, Surry County, NC
Importance: High
Kristi;
Please find attached the Farmland Conversion Impact Rating evaluation for NCDMS, Whittier Creek Site — Option D,
Stream Mitigation Project Surry County, NC.
If I can be of further assistance please let us know.

Cordially;
Assistant State Soil Scientist
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service
4407 Bland Rd, Suite 117
Raleigh, NC 27609
Phone:[phone]
milton.cortes(@nc.usda.eov
USDA
From: Suggs, Kristi [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2018 10:33 AM
To: Cortes, Milton - NRCS, Raleigh, NC <MiIto [e-mail]>
Subject: Farmland Conversion Impact Rating Submittal - Whittier Creek Site Option D, Surry County, NC
Dear Mr. Cortes,
Please see the attached submittal package for the Farmland Protection Policy Act. Please let me know if you have any
questions or need any additional information. Thank you very much!
Sincerely,
Kristi Suggs
PLEASE NOTE MY CHANGE OF ADDRESS BELOW IN THE SIGNATURE LINE.
Kristi Suggs I Environmental Specialist II 1 Michael Baker International
Ballantyne One, 15720 Brixham Hill Avenue, Suite 300, Office 318 Charlotte I INC 28277 [O] 704-665-2206 1 [C]
704-579-4828
[e-mail] I www.mbakerintl.com
Michael
We Moke a Difference
114T�CRHATIONAL
Connect warn us: V Ijii 1113 7alM T.
This electronic message contains information generated by the USDA solely for the intended recipients. Any
unauthorized interception of this message or the use or disclosure of the information it contains may violate the law and
subject the violator to civil or criminal penalties. If you believe you have received this message in error, please notify the
sender and delete the email immediately.
Q

Suggs, Kristi
From: Suggs, Kristi
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2017 2:59 PM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Request for Comment for Categorical Exclusion on the Whittier Creek Site - Option D (DMS Full
Delivery Project #100020)
Attachments: 162039_WhittierCreek_NCWRC_SubmittalPackage_09262017.pdf
Dear Ms. Deaton,
I have included the attached letter and supporting documentation requesting comment from the NC WRC about the
above referenced project. Please let me know if you need any additional information.
Thank you in advance for your assistance!
Kristi Suggs
Kristi Suggs I Environmental Specialist II 1 Michael Baker Engineering, Inc. a Michael Baker International Company
9716-B Rea Road #56 1 Charlotte I NC 28277 [O] 704-665-2206 [C] 704-579-4828
[e-mail] I www.mbakerintl.com
INTERNATI0NAL
N V 12 WREM
Fff �rna +� a
1

We Make a Difference
INTERNATIONAL
September 26, 2017
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Division of Inland Fisheries
Attn: Shannon Deaton
Shannon.deaton&ncwildlife.org
RE: Categorical Exclusion for Whittier Creek Site — Option D Stream Mitigation Project,
NCDEQ DMS Full -Delivery Project ID 9100020, Surry County, NC
Yadkin River Basin Cataloging Unit 03 040 101
Dear Ms. Deaton:
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc. (Baker) respectfully requests review and comment from the NC Wildlife
Resource Commission (WRC) on any possible concerns they may have with regards to the
implementation of the Whittier Creek Site — Option D Stream Mitigation Project. Please note
that this request is in support of the development of the Categorical Exclusion (CE) for the referenced project.
The Whittier Creek Site — Option D is a full -delivery project for the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation
Services (DMS) identified and contracted to provide stream mitigation credits for permitted, unavoidable
impacts in the Yadkin River Basin, Cataloging Unit 03040101. The project is located in Surry County and
the NC DMS Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) 03040101-110040. The site is located in the Ararat
community on two abutting parcels southeast of the intersection of Rockhill Church Road and Nurse Road,
approximately 7 miles east of Dobson, NC.
The project will involve the restoration and enhancement of approximately 3,130 linear feet of existing
perennial streams along Whittier Creek and several UTs to Whittier Creek, which is a tributary to Bull
Creek. In addition, a conservation easement will be implemented along all project reaches with riparian
buffers extending in an excess of 30 feet from the top of bank of the restored channel and will protected in
perpetuity by the State of North Carolina.
The existing stream reaches and riparian wetlands within the project area have been significantly impacted
by past and present unrestricted livestock access and/or channelization used to promote drainage and
maximize agricultural acreage for cattle pastures. The proposed restoration project not only has the
potential to provide stream mitigation credits, but will also provide significant ecological improvements
and functional uplift through habitat restoration, and through decreasing nutrient and sediment loads
from the project watershed.
Based on review of the most current information from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) website hilps://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cniylist/siva.html and the North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) the following species are considered federally -listed species
in Surry County:
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
MBAKERINTL.CDM
9716-B Rea Road #56
Charlotte, NC 282771 Office:704.665.2200

We Moke o Difference
Scientific Name
Common Name
Federal Status
M otis se tentrionalis
Northern long-eared bat
Threatened
Glyptemys muhlenber ii
Bog Turtle
Threatened Similarity of Appearance S/A
Helianthus schweinitzii
Schweinitz's sunflower
Endangered
Isotria medeoloides
Small whorled pogonia
Threatened
Data Review and Analysis
Baker conducted a two-mile radius search using the Natural Heritage Program's Data Explorer
(hiips://ncnhde.natureserve.org) on September 26, 2017 and found no known occurrences of the above
referenced species within two miles of the Project site. However, the Project is located within Surry County,
a Northern long-eared bat (NLEB) White Nose Syndrome (WNS) zone, and is therefore subject to the US
Fish and Wildlife Service's Final 4(d) rule to maintain section 7(a)(2) compliance.
Myotis septentrionalis (Northern long-eared bat) — Threatened
In North Carolina, the NLEB occurs in the mountains, with scattered records in the Piedmont and coastal
plain. In western North Carolina, NLEB spend winter hibernating in caves and mines. Since this species is
not known to be a long-distance migrant, and caves and subterranean mines are extremely rare in eastern
North Carolina, it is uncertain whether or where NLEB hibernate in eastern NC. During the summer, NLEB
roost singly or in colonies underneath bark, in cavities, or in crevices of both live and dead trees (typically
>3 inches dbh). This bat also been found, rarely, roosting in structures like barns and sheds, under eaves
of buildings, behind window shutters, in bridges, and in bat houses. Pregnant females give birth from late
May to late July. Foraging occurs on forested hillsides and ridges, and occasionally over forest clearings,
over water, and along tree -lined corridors. Mature forests may be an important habitat type for foraging.
Forested habitats containing trees at least 3-inch dbh in the project area provide suitable habitat for NLEB.
Due to the decline of the NLEB population from the WNS, the USFWS has issued the finalization of a
special rule under section 4(d) of the ESA to addresses the effects to the NLEB resulting from purposeful
and incidental take based on the occurrence of WNS. Because the project is located within a WNS zone
and will include the removal/clearing of trees, it is subject to the final 4(d) ruling. As previously stated, a
review of NCNHP records did not indicate any known NLEB populations within 2.0 mile of the study area;
therefore, the project is eligible to use the NLEB 4(d) Rule Streamlined Consultation Form to meet
regulatory requirements for section 7(a)(2) compliance 4(d) consultation.
Glyptemys muhlenbergii (Bog turtle) - Threatened Similarity of Appearance (S/A)
Bog turtles live in the mud, grass and sphagnum mosses found in bogs, swamps, and marshy meadows
usually fed by cool surface springs. There are two distinct populations of the species, a northern population
and a southern population. The southern population which is found in western North Carolina, including
Alexander County, NC is listed as threated due to "similarity of appearance" as stated in the November 4,
1997, 62 FR 59605 59623. Because the southern population has not experienced the habitat loss of the
northern population, the southern population is not subject to Section 7 consultation requirements of the
Endangered Species Act.
Helianthus schweinitzii (Schweinitz's sunflower) — Endangered
Schweinitz's sunflower is a rhizomatous perennial herb that grows approximately 6.5 feet in height with
purplish stems and produces small yellow flowers from late August until frost. This species is endemic to
the Piedmont of North and South Carolina, and the few sites where it occurs in relatively natural conditions
consist of Xeric Hardpan Forests. The species is also found along roadside rights -of -way, maintained power
lines and other utility rights -of -way, edges of thickets and old pastures, clearings and edges of upland oak -
pine -hickory woods and Piedmont longleaf pine forests, and other sunny or semi -sunny habitats where

We Moke o Difference
disturbances (e.g., mowing, clearing, grazing, blow downs, storms, frequent fire) help create open or
partially open areas for sunlight. It is intolerant of full shade and excessive competition from other
vegetation. It is generally found growing on shallow sandy soils with high gravel content; shallow, poor,
clayey hardpans; or shallow rocky soils, especially those derived from mafic rocks. Because marginal to
suitable habitat for Schweinitz's sunflower occurs along field edges and utility easements adjacent to the
project area, Baker conducted a field survey on September 25t1i, 2017. No populations or individuals were
documented during the on -site review.
Isotria medeoloides (Small whorled pogonia) — Threatened
Small whorled pogonia is a member of the orchid family. It is named for the whorl of five or six leaves
near the top of a single stem and beneath the small greenish -yellow flower. The plant occurs in
predominantly mature (2"d or 31d successional growth) mixed -deciduous or mixed-deciduous/coniferous
forests with minimal ground cover and long persistent breaks in the forest canopy. The species prefers
moist, acidic soils that lack nutrient diversity. Primary threats to the small whorled pogonia include habitat
loss and degradation from urban expansion, forestry practices, recreational activities, and trampling. The
project site consists of open and active cattle pasture with a narrow line of predominantly first successional
woody vegetation along the top of the stream bank. Existing stream reaches, riparian corridors, and open
fields at the project site have been significantly impacted by past and present unrestricted livestock access;
therefore, habitat suitable for the species is not present within the project site.
Please provide comments on any possible issues that may arise with respect to the endangered species,
migratory birds or other natural resources from the construction of the proposed Project. The following
additional supporting documentation has been included for reference: Vicinity Map, USGS Topographic
Map, and Project Site Map. If Baker has not received response from you within 30 days, we will assume
that the NC WRC does not have any comment or information relevant to the implementation of this project
at the current time.
We thank you in advance for your timely response, input, and cooperation. Please contact me if you have
any further questions or comments. I can be reached at [phone] or via my email address at
ksuggs&mbakerintl.com.
Sincerely,
Kristi Suggs
Cc: Matthew Reid, NCDMS
File
Enclosures

0
10 1 002
Ararat
Rd.
z
Project Locaton
(36.3789,-80.6034) `, 0304 1
0 0
a
03040 1090
030401011
0
304010 0900 0
2
NC268
S RRY
304 1
03040 01 1006
304010109
Major Roads
Road
Streams
i
Q HU
---
SURRY
3 4 101 \ 070
YA D
North Carolina
Vicinity Map
Michael-
Division of
Mitigation Services
1 N T E R N A T 1 0 N A L
o o.s =Miles
Whittier Creek Site - Option
D
DMS Project No. 100020
1" = 1 Mile
(Surry County, NC)

C
i000w�
..
Proposed Conservation Easement
3
North Carolina USGS Topographic Map
Michael Baker Division Of (Mount Airy South Quad, Siloam Quad)
N T E R N A T I O N A L Mitigation Services 0 200 400eet Whittier Creek Site - Option D
(Burry County, NC)
DMS Project No. 100020 1"=400

Proposed Conservation Easement
Proposed Mitigation Features a'
None 1
Enhancement I'
Restoration "' " d
North Carolina Project Site Map
Michael Baker Division of
INTERNATIONAL Mitigation Services 0 150 300eet Whittier Creek Site - Option D
(Burry County, NC)
D MS Project No. 100020 1„ = 300'

APPENDIX J: (IRT CORRESPONDENCE)
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
WHITTIER CREEK SITE - OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DMS PROJECT NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

I N T E R N A T 1 0 N A L
Memo Regarding Whittier Creek Post Contract IRT Field Meeting
Memo Date: 8/15/17
This memo will be included in the Mitigation Plan to serve as a record of field discussions including
crediting ratios and approaches.
Meeting Held: 8/14/17 from 10:00 to 12:00
Attendees: Jake Byers and Russell Myers (Baker); Todd Tugwell (Corps of Engineers); Paul Wiesner and
Matthew Reid (DMS), Mac Haupt (DWR), and Andrea Leslie (WRC)
The originally proposed approaches and ratios for each Reach are provided in the following Tables in
addition to the revised approaches and credits as applicable. Any modifications and discussions are
noted in the text below.
Reach
Name
Original
Approach
Length
Ratio
Original
Credits
Revised
Approach
Revised
Credits
R7
R
1389
1:1
1389
N/A
N/A
The group suggested that maintaining a sufficient bench and access to the floodplain throughout R7
would be a design priority to make sure it could handle flashy flows. Bioengineering should be used
where feasible, IRT agreed that this was suitable. This would be particularly important where UT4
intersects with R7. It was also mentioned that suppressing privet would be a priority along this reach.
No other comments along this reach — Group consensus of approach is accepted as proposed.
Reach Name
Original
Approach
Length
Ratio
Original
Credits
Revised
Approach
Revised
Credits
UT5
R
735
1:1
735
N/A
N/A
Group consensus was to accept proposed approach and ratio
Todd inquired about the possibility of moving the powerline to parallel the road and eliminate the need
for the two crossings along UT4 and UT5. It would be preferable if there were no crossings. Jake said he
would look into the possibility of moving the line.
Andrea commented that the culvert at the top of the reach under Rock Hill Church Road might not allow
sufficient water to pass through to support fish populations. She raised the possibility of backwatering
the culvert to increase the water depth through the pipe. Concerns were raised about how this might
impact the culvert in the long run and affect the stability of the road.

It was mentioned that UT5 was not particularly incised, at least in the upper section. Jake pointed out
that incision increases downstream and said we would relocate the stream to match the valley
topography and increase sinuosity. Group consensus of this approach is acceptable as proposed.
Reach
Name
Original
Approach
Length
Ratio
Original
Credits
Revised
Approach
Revised
Credits
UT4a
El
315
1.5:1
210
N/A
N/A
The group note that UT4 as a whole was difficult to define in regard to mitigation approach. Some
sections are much more incised and eroded than others. It was noted by both Todd and Mac that UT4a
(and upstream of UT4b) have areas that could be proposed as restoration, El, or Ell. UT4a is proposed as
El, and the group agreed that this was acceptable so long as the work that is proposed matches what is
actually done in the field and is justified in the mitigation plan. However, if during analysis and design, it
is determined that improved functional lift can be obtained through the implementation of a priority I
restoration approach by moving the stream to the low part of the valley, then this reach would be
acceptable as a restoration reach at a 1:1 ratio. As of now, the El approach will remain. If restoration is
proposed, it will be well documented and justified in the mitigation plan. It was noted that the culvert
at the top of this reach also has the same issue as the culvert on UT5.
Reach
Name
Original
Approach
Length
Ratio
Original
Credits
Revised
Approach
Revised
Credits
UT4b
R
735
1:1
735
N/A
N/A
It was noted that the short upstream section of this reach already has some buffer, although there is
also a good bit of privet. A short section through the buffer was mostly stable but it would be necessary
to raise the bed to connect to a knickpoint at the break between UT4a and UT4b. The group agreed,
and the approach is accepted as proposed.
Please let me know if any of the above information is not presented as discussed in the field.
Sincerely,
Jake Byers

From: Leslie, Andrea J
To: Haunt. Mac; Tuawell. Todd J CIV USARMY CESAW (LS); Byers. Jake
Cc: Wiesner. Paul; Reid. Matthew
Subject: RE: Whittier Creek Full Delivery Project Post Contract IRT Field Meeting Minutes
Date: Friday, September 08, 2017 8:28:18 AM
All --
I also agree that the notes cover what was discussed.
Thank you,
Andrea
Andrea Leslie
Mountain Habitat Conservation Coordinator
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
20830 Great Smoky Mountain Expressway
Waynesville, NC 28786
828-558-6011; 828-400-4223 (cell)
www.ncwildlife.org
Get NC Wildlife Update delivered to your inbox from the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission.
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to
third parties.
-----Original Message -----
From: Haupt, Mac
Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2017 3:07 PM
To: Tugwell, Todd J CIV USARMY CESAW (US) <[e-mail]>; Byers, Jake
<[e-mail]>; Leslie, Andrea J <[e-mail]>
Cc: Wiesner, Paul <[e-mail]>; Reid, Matthew <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Whittier Creek Full Delivery Project Post Contract IRT Field Meeting Minutes
Jake, Paul,
Notes covered what was discussed,
Thanks,
Mac
-----Original Message -----
From: Tugwell, Todd J CIV USARMY CESAW (US)[mailto:Todd.Tu,[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2017 9:55 AM
To: Byers, Jake <[e-mail]>; Haupt, Mac <[e-mail]>; Leslie, Andrea J
<[e-mail]>
Cc: Wiesner, Paul <[e-mail]>; Reid, Matthew <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Whittier Creek Full Delivery Project Post Contract IRT Field Meeting Minutes
Jake, the notes look good to me.
Thanks,
Todd

-----Original Message -----
From: Byers, Jake [mailto:JByers(&_mbakerintl.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2017 4:09 PM
To: Tugwell, Todd J CIV USARMY CESAW (US) <[e-mail]>; Haupt, Mac
<[e-mail]>; Andrea. leslie@wildlife. org ([e-mail])
<[e-mail]>
Cc: NCDENR NCEEP ([e-mail]) <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Whittier Creek Full Delivery Project Post Contract IRT Field Meeting Minutes
Please find attached the meeting minutes from the post contract IRT field visit. Please let me know if there is any
disagreement with the minutes as presented.
Thanks,
-Jake
Jacob "Jake" Byers, PE I NC Ecosystem Services Manager I Michael Baker Engineering, Inc., a unit of Michael
Baker International
797 Haywood Road, Suite 2011 Asheville, North Carolina 28806 1 [O] 828-412-6101 1 [M] 919-259-4814
[e-mail] <mailto:jb, ersgmbakerintl.com> I Blockedwww.mbakerintl.com
<Blockedhttp://www.mbakeiintl.com/>
<Blockedhttp://www.mbakerintl.com/>

APPENDIX K: (PLAN SHEETS)
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
WHITTIER CREEK SITE - OPTION D MITIGATON PROJECT, DMS PROJECT NO. 100020
MITIGATION PLAN (DRAFT)

Soo
w
(zr*N
O
N
Ew
(410)
W
0
NOR TH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
S URR Y CO UNTY
LOCATION: ROCK HILL CHURCH ROAD & NURSE ROAD
TYPE OF WORK: STREAM RESTORATION & ENHANCEMENT
9
ITY MAP
,4
NDEX OF SHEETS
I
1 . . . . . TITLE SHEET
1-A . . . . . STREAM CONVENTIONAL SYMBOLS
GENERALNOTES
STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS
VEGETATION SELECTION
1-B . . . . . NCDOT CONVENTIONAL SYMBOLS
2 - 2F DETAILS
3 . . . . . GENERAL CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE
4-9 ..... PLAN VIEW
10 - 12 ..... PROFILES
13 - 14 ..... REACH 7 CROSS -SECTIONS
15 - 16 ..... PLANTING PLAN
EC-1 - EC-4 ..... EROSION & SEDIMENTATION CONTROL PLAN
STATE
BAKER PROJECT REFERENCE NO.
SHEET
NO.
TOTAL
SHEETS
ETC
162®39
1
32
NCDMS ID NO. 100020
GRAPHIC SCALES
20 0 20 40
REACH SUMMARY
1 REACH DESIGN LENGTH *
UT4A 328 LF
UT4B 801 LF
UT5 788 LF
R7 1,484 LF
* DOES NOT EXCLUDE EASEMENT BREAKS
PREPARED FOR THE OFFICE OF:
NCDEQ
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NC 27699-1652
Michael Baker Engineering Inc.
8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 600
_ _ 4
Cary, NORTH CAROLINA 27518
Phone: [phone]
Fax:
I N T E R N A T 1 0 N A L Lcense#:F-10 40
PROJECT ENGINEER
KATHLEEN M. MCKEITHAN, PE
PLANS
20 0 20 40
PROGRESS E;SS DRAWING
FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLY
DO NOT USE FOR CONSTRUCTION
P.E.
PROFILE (HORIZONTAL)
5 0 10 20
LETTING DATE.
PROJECT ENGINEER
CONTACT: MATTH EW RE I D
PROJECT MANAGER
PROFILE (VERTICAL)
SIGNATURE:

C
is
Q
cn
CV
C
C
0
L
i
STREAM CONVENTIONAL SYMBOLS
SUPERCEDES SHEET I-B
° ROCK J-HOOK FP 100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN
00
0= ROCK VANE
OUTLET PROTECTION
ROCK CROSS VANE
jgfk
DOUBLE DROP ROCK CROSS VANE
SINGLE WING DEFLECTOR
DOUBLE WING DEFLECTOR
TEMPORARY SILT CHECK
ROOT WAD
®
GRADE CONTROL LOG J-HOOK
® LOG VANE
LOG WEIR
/'\ LOG CROSS VANE
o LOG ROLLER
GRADE CONTROL LOG JAM
og 80
ao CONSTRUCTED RIFFLE
BOULDER CLUSTER
`8 o ROCK STEP POOL
c0 o�
0 SAFETY FENCE
cE CONSERVATION EASEMENT
----435----EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR
EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR
- - - - - LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
PROPERTY LINE
® FOOT BRIDGE
--� TEMPORARY STREAM CROSSING
PERMANENT STREAM CROSSING
TRANSPLANTED VEGETATION
TREE REMOVAL
NORTH CAROLINA
EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLANNING AND DESIGN MANUAL
MARCH 2O09 (REV 20 13)
6.06 TEMPORARY GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
6.24 RIPARIAN AREA SEEDING
6.60 TEMPORARY SEDIMENT TRAP
6.62 TEMPORARY SILT FENCE
6.63 TEMPORARY ROCK DAM
6.70 TEMPORARY STREAM CROSSING
PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
162039 1-A
]PROGRESS DRAWING
FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLY
ADO NOT USE FOR CONSTRUCTION
Michael Baker Engineering Inc.
Michael Baker 8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 600
Cary, NORTH CAROLINA 27518
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
1 N T E R N A T 1 0 N A L License #: F-1084
NCDMS ID NO. 100020
1. THE CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO INSTALL IN -STREAM STRUCTURES USING A TRACK HOE WITH A HYDRAULIC THUMB OF
SUFFICIENT SIZE TO PLACE BOULDERS (3'x2'x2'), LOGS AND ROOTWADS.
2. WORK IS BEING PERFORMED AS AN ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION PLAN. THE CONTRACTOR SHOULD MAKE ALL REASONABLE
EFFORTS TO REDUCE SEDIMENT LOSS AND MINIMIZE DISTURBANCE OF THE SITE WHILE PERFORMING THE CONSTRUCTION WORK.
3. CONSTRUCTION IS SCHEDULED FOR THE SPRING OF 2019.
TREE PROTECTION
4.
CONTRACTOR SHOULD CALL NORTH CAROLINA "ONE -CALL" BEFORE EXCAVATION STARTS. (1-800-632-4949)
DITCH PLUG
5.
BOULDER SIZES FOR IN -STREAM STRUCTURES SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 3'x2'x1' AND CAN BE CHANGED PER STRUCTURE OR THE
CHANNEL FILL
DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER.
BRUSH TOE WITH LIVE STAKES
6.
ALL ON -SITE ALLUVIUM SHALL BE HARVESTED AND STOCKPILED PRIOR TO FILLING ABANDONED CHANNELS.
7.
TOPSOIL SHALL BE EXCAVATED TO A DEPTH OF 8" AND STOCKPILED SEPARATELY FROM UNDERCUT SOIL. 6" OF TOPSOIL SHALL
GEOLIFT WITH BRUSH TOE
BE PLACED ON ALL BANKFULL BENCHES AND AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
PROPOSED WETLAND RESTORATION
8.
ALL DISTURBED EMBANKMENTS SHALL BE MATTED WITH COIR FIBER MATTING OR AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
9.
ALL STREAM BANKS SHALL BE LIVE STAKED.
PROPOSED WETLAND ENHANCEMENT
- -WEB- -JURISDICTIONAL WETLAND BOUNDARY
10. UNLESS THE ALIGNMENT IS BEING ALTERED, THE EXISTING CHANNEL DIMENSIONS ARE TO REMAIN UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
TF TAPE FENCE 11. CONTRACTOR WILL ENSURE THAT FENCING IS INSTALLED ON OR OUTSIDE THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT AS SHOWN ON THE
PLANS BUT NO MORE THAN 1' OUTSIDE.
"NOTE: ALL ITEMS ABOVE MAY NOT BE USED ON THIS PROJECT
Total Planted Area = 5.60 ac.
All Buffer Plantings at 680 stems/acre using 8' x 8' spacing
Scientific Name
Common Name
Percent Planted by
Species
Wetness
Tolerance
Riparian Zone - Overstory Species
Betula nigra
River Birch
15%
FACW
Juglans nigra
Black Walnut
5%
FACU
Platanus occidentalis
Sycamore
15%
FACW
Liriodendron tulipifera
Tulip Poplar
15%
FACU
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green ash
10%
FACW
Quercus phellos
Willow Oak
10%
FAC
Diospyros virginiana
Persimmon
10%
FAC
12. WHERE PROPOSED FENCE CROSSES EXISTING STREAMS, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL UTILIZE A SECTION OF BREAK AWAY FENCE,
A FLOOD GATE, OR ELECTRIFIED CHAINS AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
PLANTING PLAN VEGETATION SELECTION
Riparian Zone - Understory/Shrub Species
Hamamelis virginiana
Witch Hazel
5%
FACU
Lindera benzoin
Spicebush
5%
FAC
Carpinus caroliniana
American Hornbeam
5%
FAC
Acer negundo
Box Elder
5%
FAC
Scientific Name
Common Name
Percent Planted by
Species
Wetness
Tolerance
Streambank Live Stake Planting
Salix sericea
Silky Willow
30%
OBL
Cornus amomum
Silky Dogwood
30%
FACW
Sambucus canadensis
Elderberry
20%
FACW
Salix nigra
Black Willow
20%
OBL
Permanent seed mixtures for the project site shall be planted throughout the floodplain and riparian buffer areas
except the vernal pools. Permanent seed mixtures shall be applied with temporary seed, as defined in the
construction specifications.
Scientific Name
Common Name
Percent
of
Mixture
Seeding Density
(Ibs/acre)
Wetness
Tolerance
Agrostis alba
Redtop
10%
1.5
FACW
Elymus virginicus
Virginia Wildrye
15%
2.25
FACW
Panicum virgatum
Switchgrass
15%
2.25
FAC
Tripsacum dactyloides
Eastern Gamma Grass
5%
0.75
FACW
Polygonum pennsylvanicum
Pennsylvania Smartweed
5%
0.75
FACW
Schizachyrium scoparium
Little Blue Stem
5%
0.75
FACU
Juncus effusus
Soft Rush
5%
0.75
FACW
Bidens frondosa (or aristosa)
Beggars Tick
5%
0.75
FACW
Coreopsis lanceolate
Lance -Leaved Tick Seed
10%
1.5
FACU
Dichanthelium clandestinum
Tioga Deer Tongue
15%
2.25
FAC
Andropogon gerardii
Big Blue Stem
5%
0.75
FAC
rs-o-rghastrum nutans
Indian Grass
5%
1 0.75
FACU
TEMPORARY SEEDING SELECTION AND APPLICATION RATES
Common Name
Scientific Name
Application Time
Application
Rate
Total (Ibs/acre)
Cereal rye
Secale cereale
Sept - March
3 Ib/1,000 sq ft.
130 Ibs/acre
Browntop millet
Panicum ramosum
April - Aug
1 Ib/1,000 sq ft.
44 Ibs/acre

cr
Qc
n
m6'
o�
CVN
\CV
�9(_0
Or�!
:s°l[°.'1°l[°lE OF NORTH CAROLINA
'S.U.E = SUBSURFACE UTILITY ENGINEER DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CONVENTIONAL SYMBOLS
BOUNDARIES AND PROPERTY.•
RAILROADS:
State Line
_____
County Line
--- ----
Standard Gauge � CsX
TRANSPORTATION
Township Line
-- --
RR Signal Milepost MILEPOST 35
City Line
- -
Switch
0
SWITCH
Reservation Line
- -
RR Abandoned
Property Line
RR Dismantled --------
Existing Iron Pin
o
RIGHT OF FLAY.-
Property Corner
Baseline Control Point
Property Monument
0
Existing Right of Way Marker
0
Parcel/Sequence Number
123
Existing Right of Way Line
-
Existing Fence Line
—x x x—
Proposed Right of Way Line
R
Proposed Woven Wire Fence
Proposed Right of Way Line with R
Iron Pin and Cap Marker
Proposed Chain Link Fence
El
Proposed Right of Way Line with
R
Proposed Barbed Wire Fence
0
Concrete or Granite Marker
Existing Wetland Boundary
- - - -WEB- - - -
Existing Control of Access
Proposed Wetland Boundary
WLB
Proposed Control of Access
Existing Endangered Animal Boundary
—EAB-
Existing Easement Line
E
Existing Endangered Plant Boundary
EPB
Proposed Temporary Construction Easement -
E
BUILDINGS AND OTHER
CULTURE:
Proposed Temporary Drainage Easement
TDE
Gas Pump Vent or U/G Tank Cap
O
Proposed Permanent Drainage Easement
PDE
Sign
O
Proposed Permanent Utility Easement
PUE
Well
0
Proposed Temporary Utility Easement
TUE
Proposed Permanent Easement with
Small Mine
Iron Pin and Cap Marker
0
Foundation
ROADS AND RELATED FEATURES:
Area Outline
Existing Edge of Pavement
Cemetery
T
Existing Curb
—
Building
Proposed Slope Stakes Cut - -
- C - - -
School
Proposed Slope Stakes Fill - -
- F - - -
Church
Proposed Wheel Chair Ramp
0
Dam
Existing Metal Guardrail T
T T
HYDROLOGY.-
Proposed Guardrail T
T T T
Stream or Body of Water
--- ---
Existing Cable Guiderail n
n n
Hydro, Pool or Reservoir
F__ -1
Proposed Cable Guiderail n
n n n
Jurisdictional Stream
Equality Symbol
—is —
Buffer Zone 1
BZ ,
Pavement Removal
Buffer Zone 2
BZ 2
F EGETATION.-
Flow Arrow
<-- ---
Single Tree3
Disappearing Stream
>--- ---
Single Shrub
Spring
Hedge
Wetland
Woods Line
Proposed Lateral, Tail, Head Ditch
Orchard
FLOW
False Sump
<>
Vineyard
Vineyard
EXISTING STRUCTURES:
MAJOR:
Bridge, Tunnel or Box Culvert
Bridge Wing Wall, Head Wall and End Wall -
MINOR:
Head and End Wall
Pipe Culvert
Footbridge
Drainage Box: Catch Basin, DI or JB
Paved Ditch Gutter
Storm Sewer Manhole
Storm Sewer
UTILITIES:
POWER:
Existing Power Pole
Proposed Power Pole
Existing Joint Use Pole
Proposed Joint Use Pole
Power Manhole
Power Line Tower
Power Transformer
U/G Power Cable Hand Hole
H-Frame Pole
Recorded U/G Power Line
Designated U/G Power Line (S.U.E.*)
CONC
) CONC WW
CON_CH W
>----------<
11 CB
AA47
S
-P-
- - - -P- - - -
TELEPHONE:
Existing Telephone Pole
Proposed Telephone Pole
-0-
Telephone Manhole
O
Telephone Booth
❑�
Telephone Pedestal
❑T
Telephone Cell Tower
U/G Telephone Cable Hand Hole
HH
Recorded U/G Telephone Cable
T
Designated U/G Telephone Cable (S.U.E.*) - -
- - -T- - - -
Recorded U/G Telephone Conduit
TC
Designated U/G Telephone Conduit (S.U.E.*y -
- - -TC- - - -
Recorded U/G Fiber Optics Cable
T Fo
Designated U/G Fiber Optics Cable (S.U.E.*'r -
- - -T FO- - -
WATER:
Water Manhole
Water Meter o
Water Valve
Water Hydrant <�
Recorded U/G Water Line W
Designated U/G Water Line (S.U.E.* - - - -W- - - -
Above Ground Water Line A/G Water
TV:
TV Satellite Dish C�
TV Pedestal
TV Towe r
U/G TV Cable Hand Hole HH
Recorded U/G TV Cable TV
Designated U/G TV Cable (S.U.E.*) - - - -TV- - - -
Recorded U/G Fiber Optic Cable TV Fo
Designated U/G Fiber Optic Cable (S.U.E.*r - - - -TV FO- - -
GAS:
Gas Valve
Gas Meter
Recorded U/G Gas Line
Designated U/G Gas Line (S.U.E.*)
Above Ground Gas Line
SANITARY SEWER:
Sanitary Sewer Manhole
Sanitary Sewer Cleanout
U/G Sanitary Sewer Line
Above Ground Sanitary Sewer
Recorded SS Forced Main Line
Designated SS Forced Main Line (S.U.E.*) —
MISCELLANEOUS:
Utility Pole
Utility Pole with Base
Utility Located Object
Utility Traffic Signal Box
Utility Unknown U/G Line
U/G Tank; Water, Gas, Oil
AIG Tank; Water, Gas, Oil
U/G Test Hole (S.U.E.*)
Abandoned According to Utility Records
End of Information
----G-
A/G Gas
OO
O
SS
A/G Sanitary Sewer
FSS
FSS
•
0
0
❑S
m
AATUR
E.O.I.

cr
Qc
TYPICAL RIFFLE. POOL. AND BANKFULL BENCH CROSS SECTIONS
PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
162039 2
C
CV
i
cn
C�
CV
C0
C
n
Cm
V �
C0
aD
0
/
L
i
C_
3
m6'
O�
CVO
ACV
or�!
-40 Wbkf No
00
�0
GRADE CONTROL
LOG J-HOOK VAN[
(SEE SHEET 2-D)
TOP OF BANK
SRO D-Max
�S, OAF
Wb
Wbkf
TYPICAL STRUCTURE PLACEMENT
ROOT WADS
COVERLOGS
VLVLII 1 VV1111 UI\V V11 1 VL
(SEE SHEET 2-D)
STRUCTURE NOTES:
1. GENERALLY CONSTRUCTED RIFFLES, ROOT WADS, LOG VANES AND COIR FIBER
MATTING WILL BE INSTALLED IN THE LOCATION AND SEQUENCE AS SHOWN.
2. ANY CHANGES TO NUMBER OR LOCATION OF STRUCTURES DURING
CONSTRUCTION MUST BE APPROVED BY THE DESIGN ENGINEER.
3. COIR FIBER MATTING TO BE INSTALLED ON ALL RESTORED STREAMBANKS,
FLOODPLAIN BENCHING, AND TERRACE SLOPES AS DESCRIBED IN THE
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS.
4. ROOTWADS MAY BE REPLACED WITH GEOLIFT.
PROGRESS ESS DRAWING
TOP OF TERRACE FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLY
VARIES Wbkf VARIES DO NOT USE FOR CONSTRUCTION
but z 30' but z 30'
� 3.1
D-Max
Wb
RIFFLE WITH BANKFULL BENCH
TOP OF TERRACE
VARIES Wbkf VARIES
but z 30' but >- 30'
Oi
Wh
POOL WITH BANKFULL BENCH
S1
- B
NCH LIMITS
BENCH LIMITS
FLOW
1
1/3 BOTTOM WIDTH
C
B GRADE
�� POINT
?sF-
�/ A I \-\i
VANE
ARMS(
j SCOUR
POOL j
NO GAPS
VANE ANGLE
BETWEEN
20' TO 30'
BOULDERS
C
PLAN VIEW
Y
Z
Q
m
u-
0
w
0
I-
WIDTH OF BANI<FULL (Wbkf)
MAXIMUM DETPH (Dmax)
W/D (Wbkf/Dbkf)
BAN I<FULL AREA (Abkf)
BOTTOM WIDTH (Wb)
RIFFLE SIDE SLOPE (X:1)
INSIDE POOL SIDE SLOPE
OUTSIDE POOL SIDE SLOPE
Michael Baker Engineering Inc.
Michael Bake 8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 600
Cary, NORTH CAROLINA 27518
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
N T E R N A T I O N A L License #: F-1084
N C DMS ID NO. 100020
UT4a
UT4b
UT5
R7
RIFFLE
POOL
RIFFLE
POOL
RIFFLE
POOL
RIFFLE
POOL
11.0
15.0
12.7
18.0
8.0
10.5
22.2
30.0
1.2
2.0
1.2
2.5
0.8
1.5
2.3
4.0
12.0
N/A
12.7
N/A
13.0
N/A
12.0
N/A
10.0
18.0
12.5
26.3
5.0
9.0
41.0
1 75.0
6.3
3.0
7.9
3.0
5.0
1.5
12.8
6.0
2.0
N/A
2.0
N/A
2.0
N/A
2.0
N/A
N/A
3.0
N/A
3.0
N/A
3.0
N/A
4.0
3.0
N/A
3.0
N/A
3.0
N/A
2.0
N/A
ROCK CROSS VANE
NOTES FOR ALL VANE STRUCTURES:
1. INSTALL FILTER FABRIC FOR DRAINAGE BEGINNING AT THE MIDDLE OF THE HEADER
ROCKS AND EXTEND DOWNWARD TO THE DEPTH OF THE BOTTOM FOOTER ROCK, AND
THEN UPSTREAM TO A MINIMUM OF SIX FEET.
2. DIG A TRENCH BELOW THE BED FOR FOOTER ROCKS AND PLACE FILL ON UPSTREAM
SIDE OF VANE ARM, BETWEEN THE ARM AND STREAMBANK.
3. CONSTRUCT ANGLE AND SLOPE SPECIFICATIONS AS SHOWN.
4. BACKFILL VANE ARMS AND INVERT WITH A WELL GRADED MIX OF CLASS B, A, AND
#57 STONE.
5. ON -SITE ALLUVIUM SHALL BE INCORPORATED INTO THE STONE BACKFILL WHERE
AVAILABLE.
6. BOULDER SILL MUST BE A MINIMUM OF 6' AND WILL INCLUDE FOOTER ROCKS.
7. BOULDERS FOR UT 7 MUST BE AT LEAST 2'x3'x4'; WHILE BOULDERS FOR UT4 AND UT5
SHOULD BE 1'x2'x3'.
TOE OF BANK
BANKFULL STAGE
FLOW -
STREAM BED
ELEVATION -
FLOW
FLOW
FILTER FABRIC 2
�MIN�
CHANNEL BED CHANNEL BED
O00 O \
WELL GRADED MIX
6' MINIMUM
SECTION A - A'
4% TO 7% VANt
PROFILE VIEW B - B'
VANE ARM
CROSS VANE INVERT/GRADE POINT
FILTER FABIC� PROFILE VIEW C - C
HEADER ROCK
/-- STREAM BANK
FOOTER ROCK
i�IE7

OUTLET PROTECTION
ROCK VANE
PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
162039 2A
c
Q
CV
cn
i
c�
CV
�0
i
c
ro
n
c
CO
aD
0
i
a�
L
i
+)
3
w
CO
J
J
LL
V
z
Q
m
M
N
N
1/3 BOTTOM
WIDTH OF
CHANNEL
STORMWATER OUTLET
HEADER ROCK
FOOTER ROCK
FLU
STONE BACKFILL
PROFILE VIEW
0.5' MAX (TYP)
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
2:1 SLOPE
COIR FIBER MATTING AND VEGETATION
PLAN VIEW
oo/>//xce /,
1/3 BOTTOM
WIDTH OF
CHANNEL
FLOW
GRADE CONTROL J-HOOK VANE
STONE BACKFILL
FOOTER ROCK 0
c�
Co
/ \ J
/ Y
z
/ \ m
/ SCOUR \
/ POOL \ '
M
I I
SCOUR POOL (EXCAVATED)
PER DIRECTION OF ENGINEER
ENO GAPS BETWEEN ROCKS
HEADER ROCK
PLAN VIEW
NOTES FOR ALL VANE STRUCTURES:
1. INSTALL FILTER FABRIC FOR DRAINAGE BEGINNING AT THE MIDDLE OF THE HEADER
ROCKS AND EXTEND DOWNWARD TO THE DEPTH OF THE BOTTOM FOOTER ROCK, AND
THEN UPSTREAM TO A MINIMUM OF SIX FEET.
2. DIG A TRENCH BELOW THE BED FOR FOOTER ROCKS AND PLACE FILL ON UPSTREAM
SIDE OF VANE ARM, BETWEEN THE ARM AND STREAMBANK.
3. CONSTRUCT ANGLE AND SLOPE SPECIFICATIONS AS SHOWN.
4. BACKFILL VANE ARMS AND INVERT WITH A WELL GRADED MIX OF CLASS B, A, AND
#57 STONE.
5. ON -SITE ALLUVIUM SHALL BE INCORPORATED INTO THE STONE BACKFILL WHERE
AVAILABLE.
6. BOULDER SILL MUST BE A MINIMUM OF 6'.
7. BOULDERS FOR UT 7 MUST BE AT LEAST 2'x3'x4'; WHILE BOULDERS FOR UT4 AND UT5
SHOULD BE 1'x2'x3'.
STREAM BED ELEVATION
BANKFULL-
FLOW —�
STONE BACKFILL—
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
STREAP '---
STONE BACKFILL
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
CROSS SECTION A - A
4% TO 70/b SLOPE
PROFILE VIEW
10' MINIMUM
SECTION A - A
HEADER ROCK
FOOTER ROCK
rvv i u_r< r-\OCK
STONE BACKFILL
HEADER ROCK
FOOTER ROCK
1/3
BOTTOM
WIDTH
OF
CHANNEL
FLOW
1
N 20' TO 30'
ao
PPF A NO GAPS BETWEEN ROCKS
i
(SCOUR POOL
/
SCOUR POOL (EXCAVATED)
PER DIRECTION OF ENGINEER
BOTTOM WIDTH
PLAN VIEW
PROGRESS ESS DRAWING
FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLY
DO NOT USE FOR CONSTRUCTION
Mir_ Michael Baker Engineering Inc.
8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 600
Cary, NORTH CAROLINA 27518
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
N T E R N A T I O N A L License #: F-1084
STREAM BED ELEVATION N C DMS ID NO. 100020
BANKFULL
HEADER ROCK
FLOW
4%O 7% SLOPE
T
STONE BACKFILL
FOOTER ROCK
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC SCOUR POOL (EXCAVATED)
PROFILE VIEW
STREAP '---
STONE BACKFILL
NOTES FOR ALL VANE STRUCTURES:
1. INSTALL GEOTEXTILE FABRIC BEGINNING AT THE TOP OF THE HEADER ROCKS AND EXTEND
DOWNWARD TO THE DEPTH OF THE BOTTOM FOOTER ROCK, AND THEN UPSTREAM TO A
MINIMUM OF TEN FEET.
2. DIG A TRENCH BELOW THE BED FOR FOOTER ROCKS AND PLACE FILL ON UPSTREAM SIDE
OF VANE ARM, BETWEEN THE ARM AND STREAMBANK. GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
3. START AT BANK AND PLACE FOOTER ROCKS FIRST AND THEN HEADER (TOP) ROCK.
4. CONTINUE WITH STRUCTURE, FOLLOWING ANGLE AND SLOPE SPECIFICATIONS.
5. AN EXTRA ROCK CAN BE PLACED IN SCOUR POOL FOR HABITAT IMPROVEMENT.
6. USE HAND PLACED STONE TO FILL GAPS ON UPSTREAM SIDE OF HEADER AND FOOTER ROCKS.
7. AFTER ALL STONE BACKFILL HAS BEEN PLACED, FILL IN THE UPSTREAM SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE
WITH WELL GRADED MIX OF CLASS B, CLASS A, & #57 STONE TO THE ELEVATION OF THE TOP OF
THE HEADER ROCK. INCORPORATE ON -SITE ALLUVIUM WHERE AVAILABLE.
8. START SLOPE AT 2/3 TO 3/4 TIMES THE BANKFULL STAGE.
9. BOULDERS FOF UT7 MUST BE AT LEAST 2' x 3' x 4', WHILE BOULDERS FOR UT4 AND UT5 SHOULD
BE AT LEAST I'x2'x3'.
1/3 BOTTOM
WIDTH OF
CHANNEL
20° TO
STONE BACKFILL
J-HOOK VANE
1/3 BOTTOM
WIDTH OF
CHANNEL
FLOW LEAVE GAPS (OPTIONAL)
/ PER DIRECTION OF ENGINEER
A
goo FOOTER ROCK
r
Q
a
Do
SCOUR \ SCOUR POOL (EXCAVATED)
/ POOL \ PER DIRECTION OF ENGINEER
1 I
NO GAPS BETWEEN ROCKS
HEADER ROCK
PLAN VIEW
NOTES FOR ALL VANE STRUCTURES:
IT lNINNING AT THE TOP OF THE HEADER ROCKS AND EXTEND
DOWNWARD TO THE DEPTH OF THE BOTTOM FOOTER ROCK, AND THEN UPSTREAM TO A
MINIMUM OF TEN FEET.
2. DIG A TRENCH BELOW THE BED FOR FOOTER ROCKS AND PLACE FILL ON UPSTREAM SIDE
OF VANE ARM, BETWEEN THE ARM AND STREAMBANK.
3. START AT BANK AND PLACE FOOTER ROCKS FIRST AND THEN HEADER (TOP) ROCK.
4. CONTINUE WITH STRUCTURE, FOLLOWING ANGLE AND SLOPE SPECIFICATIONS.
5. AN EXTRA ROCK CAN BE PLACED IN SCOUR POOL FOR HABITAT IMPROVEMENT.
6. USE HAND PLACED STONE TO FILL GAPS ON UPSTREAM SIDE OF HEADER AND FOOTER ROCKS.
7. AFTER ALL STONE BACKFILL HAS BEEN PLACED, FILL IN THE UPSTREAM SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE
WITH ON -SITE ALLUVIUM TO THE ELEVATION OF THE TOP OF THE HEADER ROCK.
8. BOULDERS FOF UT7 MUST BE AT LEAST 2' x 3' x 4', WHILE BOULDERS FOR UT4 AND UT5 SHOULD
BE AT LEAST 1' x 2' x 3'.
STREAM BED ELEVATION
BANKFULL
FLOW-- ON-
STONE BACKFILL
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
STREAP '---
STONE BACKFILL
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
d 10' MINIMUM
SECTION A - A
4% TO 7% SLOPE
HEADER ROCK
FOOTER ROCK
SCOUR POOL (EXCAVATED)
PROFILE VIEW
10' MINIMUM
SECTION A - A
ter. r.00K
Lr\ r.00K

A
LOG AND ROCK STEP / POOL
BOULDER STEP
PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
162039 2B
c
m
CV
cn
i
c�
CV
�0
i
n
r
C0
0
i
L
i
4-)
3
m6'
O(n
CVE)
ACV
C9�
or�!
PROTECT BANK
USING TRANSPLANTS
PROTECT BANK
USING GEOLIFT
A'
PLAN VIEW
LOG BURIED
BELOW STREAM
i
A
PROTECT BANK USING
ROOT WADS
BANKFULL
IN
NOTES:
(,
FLOw
STONE BACKFILL
Sam
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
SECTION A - A'
BASE FLOW
SECTION B - B'
'LEADER LOG
"ER LOG
1. LOGS SHOULD BE AT LEAST 10" IN DIAMETER, RELATIVELY STRAIGHT, HARDWOOD, AND RECENTLY HARVESTED
AND EXTENDING INTO THE BANK 5' ON EACH SIDE.
2. SOIL SHOULD BE COMPACTED WELL AROUND BURIED PORTIONS OF LOG.
3. GEOTEXTILE FABRIC SHOULD BE NAILED TO THE LOG BELOW THE BACKFILL.
4. BOULDERS SHOULD BE 3' X 2' X 2' AND PLACED ON TOP OF HEADER LOG FOR ANCHORING.
5. TRANSPLANTS CAN BE USED INSTEAD OF BOUDERS, PER DIRECTION OF ENGINEER.
6. AFTER ALL STONE BACKFILL HAS BEEN PLACED, FILL IN THE UPSTREAM SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE WITH WELL
GRADED MIX OF CLASS B, CLASS A, & #57 STONE TO THE ELEVATION OF THE TOP OF THE HEADER ROCK.
INCORPORATE ON -SITE ALLUVIUM WHERE AVAILABLE.
GRADE CONTROL LOG J-HOOK VANE
TER FABRIC
STONE BACKFILL
1/2 - 2/3 BANKFULL
ROOTWAD
GEOTEXTILE
FABRIC
FLOW
STREAMBED
Au
FOOTER LOG
HEADER LOG
ANY GAPS BETWEEN LOGS MUST BE FILLED WITH OTHER
RECENTLY HARVETED BRANCHES BEFORE INSTALLING
NOTES: FILTER FABRIC AND BACK FILLING ARM
1. LOGS SHOULD BE AT LEAST 10" IN DIAMETER, RELATIVELY STRAIGHT, HARDWOOD, RECENTLY HARVESTED, AND FOOTERED.
2. BOULDERS MUST BE AT LEAST 2' x 2' x 1'.
3. SOIL SHOULD BE COMPACTED WELL AROUND BURIED PORTIONS OF LOG.
4. ROOTWADS SHOULD BE PLACED BENEATH THE HEADER LOG AND PLACED SO THAT IT LOCKS THE HEADER LOG INTO THE
BANK. SEE ROOTWAD DETAIL.
5. BOULDERS SHOULD BE PLACED ON TOP OF HEADER LOG FOR ACHORING.
6. HEADER BOULDERS TO BE PLACED 0.5 TO 0.75 FEET APART.
7. FILTER FABRIC SHOULD BE NAILED TO THE LOG BELOW THE BACKFILL.
8. TRANSPLANTS OR BOULDERS CAN BE USED INSTEAD OF ROOWADS, PER DIRECTION OF ENGINEER.
9. BOULDER SILL MUST BE A MINIMUM OF 6'.
10. AFTER ALL STONE BACKFILL HAS BEEN PLACED, FILL IN THE UPSTREAM SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE WITH WELL GRADED MIX
OF CLASS B, CLASS A, & #57 STONE TO THE ELEVATION OF THE TOP OF THE HEADER ROCK. INCORPORATE ON -SITE ALLUVIUM
WHERE AVAILABLE.
PLAN VIEW
ROOTWAD
3URIED IN
STREAMBANK
AT LEAST 6'.
BOULDERS CAN
ALSO BE USED.
A'
LOG BURIED
BELOW STREAMBED
TOP A
OF BANK 0
O
J
LL
'111,4
°��0 °O B�
° °® o�ocbo
o
B o� �0O°°80
° OO000O ooq$®
ro-000 oo_ o O 9 P
BOULDERS
LN
PLAN VIEW
NOTES:
1. HEADER AND FOOTER BOULDERS MUST BE AT LEAST 3' X 2' X 1'.
2. FOOTERS SHALL BE INSTALLED SUCH THAT 1/4 TO 1/3 OF THE LENGTH IS DOWNSTREAM OF
THE HEADER.
3. SOIL SHALL BE WELL COMPACTED AROUND BURIED PORTION OF FOOTERS WITH THE BUCKET
OF EXCAVATOR.
4. INSTALL NON -WOVEN FILTER FABRIC UNDERNEATH FOOTER BOULDERS.
5. UNDERCUT THE RIFFLE ELEVATION 12 INCHES TO ALLOW FOR A LAYER OF STONE.
6. INSTALL EROSION CONTROL MATTING ALONG COMPLETED BANKS SUCH THAT THE EROSION
CONTROL MATTING AT THE TOE OF THE BANK EXTENDS DOWN TO THE UNDERCUT ELEVATION.
7. FILL TRENCH WITH GRADED MIX OF CLASS A, CLASS B, AND #57 STONE TO THE BED ELEVATION
OF THE CHANNEL.
8. BOULDER STEPS MUST BE EXTENDED TO A MINIMUM OF 2' INTO THE BANK. USE SILL BOULDERS
IF NECESSARY.
9. THALWEG AND STEP INVERT WILL BE CONCAVE AND SHAPED PER DIRECTION OF THE DESIGNER.
TOE
HEAD OF R'--' -
2/3
BANKFULL
jEXCAVATE!
\ POOL
O
PLAN VIEW
LOG VANE
1/3
BANKFULL
STONE BACKFILL
HEADER LOG
FOOTER LOG
PROGRESS DRAWING
FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLY
DO NOT USE FOR CONSTRUCTION
fr Michael Baker Engineering Inc.
8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 600
Cary, NORTH CAROLINA 27518
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
N T E R N A T 1 0 N A L License #: F-1084
N C DMS ID NO. 100020
PROFILE A - A'
GEOTEXTILE
FABRIC
. 6' MINIMUM
SECTION A - Al
20°-30°
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC ROOTWAD
1/2 - 2/3 BANKFULL
FLOW
STREAMBED ` J
BOULDER
ROOTWAD
----- - / / / / �
.sue
FOOTER LOG
j
LOG BURIED IN�/ s� /
HEADER LOG
STREAMBANK AT LEAST 5'
PROFILE VIEW
NOTES:
1. LOGS SHOULD BE AT LEAST 10" IN DIAMETER, RELATIVELY STRAIGHT, HARDWOOD, AND RECENTLY HARVESTED.
2. BOULDERS MUST BE OF SUFFICIENT SIZE TO ANCHOR LOGS.
PROFILE VIEW 3. SOIL SHOULD BE COMPACTED WELL AROUND BURIED PORTIONS OF LOGS.
4. ROOTWADS SHOULD BE PLACED BENEATH THE HEADER LOG AND PLACED SO THAT IT LOCKS THE HEADER LOG
INTO THE BANK. SEE ROOTWAD DETAIL.
5. BOULDER SHOULD BE PLACED ON TOP OF HEADER LOG FOR ANCHORING.
6. GEOTEXTILE FABRIC SHOULD BE NAILED TO THE LOG BELOW THE BACKFILL.
7. TRANSPLANTS CAN BE USED INSTEAD OF ROOTWADS, PER DIRECTION OF ENGINEER.
8. AFTER ALL STONE BACKFILL HAS BEEN PLACED, FILL IN THE UPSTREAM SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE WITH WELL
GRADED MIX OF CLASS B, CLASS A, & #57 STONE TO THE ELEVATION OF THE TOP OF THE HEADER ROCK.
INCORPORATE ON -SITE ALLUVIUM WHERE AVAILABLE.

is
Qc
C
CV
cn
c�
CV
CD'
C
C
CO
aD
0
i
L
i
C_
3
m6'
o�
CVO
"IN
C9�
Or;:
6'-8' SPACING
2'-3' SPACING
PLAN VIEW
PLAN VIEW
SQUARE CUT TOP
BUDS FACING UPWARD
LIVE CUTTING
MIN. 1/2" DIA
2'- 3' LENGTH
ANGLE CUT
30 - 45 DEGR
LIVE STAKE DETAIL
NOTES:
1. STAKES SHOULD BE CUT AND INSTALLED ON THE SAME DAY.
2. DO NOT INSTALL STAKES THAT HAVE BEEN SPLIT.
3. STAKES MUST BE INSTALLED WITH BUDS POINTING UPWARDS.
4. STAKES SHOULD BE INSTALLED PERPENDICULAR TO BANK.
5. STAKES SHOULD BE 1/2 TO 2 INCHES IN DIAMETER AND 2 TO 3 FT LONG.
6. STAKES SHOULD BE INSTALLED LEAVING 1/5 OF STAKE ABOVE GROUND.
PLANTINGS PLANTING SPECIFICATIONS
NOTES:
1. PLANT BARE ROOT SHRUBS AND TREES TO THE WIDTH OF THE
BUFFER AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS.
2. LOOSEN COMPACTED SOIL.
TOP OF STREAMBANK 3. PLANT IN HOLES MADE BY A MATTOCK, DIBBLE, PLANTING BAR,
OR OTHER APPROVED MEANS.
4. PLANT IN HOLES DEEP AND WIDE ENOUGH TO ALLOW THE ROOTS
TO SPREAD OUT AND DOWN WITHOUT J-ROOTING.
5. KEEP ROOTS MOIST WHILE DISTRIBUTING OR WAITING TO PLANT
BY MEANS OF WET CANVAS, BURLAP, OR STRAW.
6. HEEL -IN PLANTS IN MOIST SOIL OR SAWDUST IF NOT PROMPTLY
PLANTED UPON ARRIVAL TO PROJECT SITE.
BOTTOM OF CHANNEL
CROSS SECTION VIEW OF BARE ROOT PLANTING
kNTINGS
NOTES:
1. WHEN PREPARING THE HOLE FOR A POTTED PLANT OR SHRUB
Q DIG THE HOLE 8 -12 INCHES LARGER THAN THE DIAMETER OF THE
POT AND THE SAME DEPTH AS THE POT.
2. REMOVE THE PLANT FROM THE POT. LAY THE PLANT ON ITS SIDE
TOP OF STREAMBANK IF NECESSARY TO REMOVE THE POT.
3. IF THE PLANT IS ROOTBOUND (ROOTS GROWING IN A SPIRAL
AROUND THE ROOT BALL), MAKE VERTICAL CUTS WITH A KNIFE
OR SPADE JUST DEEP ENOUGH TO CUT THE NET OF ROOTS.
ALSO MAKE A CRISS-CROSS CUT ACROSS THE BOTTOM OF THE BALL.
4. PLACE THE PLANT IN THE HOLE.
5. FILL HALF OF THE HOLE WITH SOIL (SAME SOIL REMOVED FOR BACKFILL).
6. WATER THE SOIL TO REMOVE AIR POCKETS AND FILL THE REST
OF THE HOLE WITH THE REMAINING SOIL.
BOTTOM OF CHANNEL
CROSS SECTION VIEW OF CONTAINER PLANTING
1
TRENCH
TRANSPLANTED VEGETATION
TRANSPLANTED VEGETATION, ROOTMASS, AND SOIL MATERIAL
CROSS SECTION VIEW
TRANSPLANTED VEGETATION AND ROOTMASS
.I
.I
J �
----------------------------- (D
PLAN VIEW
PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
162039 2C
PROGRESS ESS DRAWING
FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLY
DO NOT USE FOR CONSTRUCTION
Michael Baker Engineering Inc.
8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 600
�TERIAL Cary, NORTH CAROLINA 27518
4 Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
1 N T E R N A T 1 0 N A L License #: F-1084
N C DMS ID NO. 100020
NOTES:
1. EXCAVATE A HOLE IN THE BANK TO BE STABILIZED THAT WILL
ACCOMMODATE THE SIZE OF TRANSPLANT TO BE PLACED.
BEGIN EXCAVATION AT THE TOE OF THE BANK.
2. EXCAVATE TRANSPLANT USING A FRONT END LOADER.
EXCAVATE THE ENTIRE ROOT MASS AND AS MUCH ADDITIONAL
SOIL MATERIAL AS POSSIBLE. IF ENTIRE ROOT MASS CAN NOT BE
EXCAVATE IN ONE BUCKET LOAD, THE TRANSPLANT IS TOO LARGE
AND ANOTHER SHOULD BE SELECTED.
3. PLACE TRANSPLANT IN THE BANK TO BE STABILIZED SO THAT
VEGETATION IS ORIENTATED VERTICALLY.
4. FILL IN ANY HOLES AROUND THE TRANSPLANT AND COMPACT.
5. ANY LOOSE SOIL LEFT IN THE STREAM SHOULD BE REMOVED.
6. PLACE MULTIPLE TRANSPLANTS CLOSE TOGETHER SUCH THAT
THEY TOUCH.
TOP OF BANK
TOE OF BANK
COIR FIBER MATTING
PLACE COIR FIBER MATTING IN 6 INCH DEEP
TRENCH, STAKE, BACKFILL, AND COMPACT NOTES:
1. BANKS SHOULD BE SEEDED PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF MATTING.
TOP OF STREAMBANK 2. INSTALL COIR FIBER MATTING PER SPECIFICATIONS ALONG STREAM
BANKS OR IN OTHERS LOCATIONS SPECIFIED BY ENGINEER.
3. LARGE STAKES SHOULD NOT BE SPACED FURTHER THAN 36" APART.
4. PLACE LARGE STAKES ALONG ALL SEAMS, IN THE CENTER OF BANK,
AND TOE OF SLOPE.
5. MATTING SHALL BE PLACED ON BANKS, STAKED, AND TRENCHED PRIOR
TO INSTALLING CONSTRUCTED RIFFLE MATERIAL.
TOE OF SLOPE
BOTTOM OF CHANNEL
PLACE,COIR,FIBER MATTING AT TOE OF SLOPE.
SECURE MATTING WITH LARGE MATTING STAKE
CROSS SECTION VIEW
• _'*1 • • • • • • • • • • • 'p-
TOP OF --�--------------�--- ----� ----------� --- -C -
STREAMBANK
• • • • • • • • • • • •
TRENCH
TOP OF STREAMBANK
LARGE
STAKES • • • • • • STAKES
• • • • • • • • • • •
PLAN VIEW LARGE
STAKES
COIR FIBER MATTING
TO BE EXTENDED TO
TOE OF SLOPE
2.5 INCH
ROOFING
NAIL
TYPICAL LARGE MATTING STAKE
LEG LENGTH
17.00 IN (43.18 CM) (TAPERED TO POINT)
WIDTH
1.5IN 3.81 CM
THICKNESS
1.5IN 3.81 CM
TYPICAL SMALL MATTING STAKE
LEG LENGTH
11.00 IN
27.94 CM
HEAD WIDTH
1.25 IN
3.18 CM
HEAD THICKNESS
0.40 IN
1.02 CM
LEG WIDTH
0.60 IN 1.52 CM
TAPERED TO POINT
LEG THICKNESS
0.40 IN
1.02 CM
TOTAL LENGTH
12.00 IN
30.48 CM

C
0
CV
cn
c�
CV
�0
i
C
i
C
CO
0
i
aD
L
m6'
o�
CVO
\CV
oCE
TYPICAL PUMP AROUND OPERATION
GEOLIFT WITH BRUSH TOE PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
162039 2D
NOTES:
1. LIVE BRANCH CUTTINGS SHALL BE THE SAME SPECIES AS THE LIVE STAKES
AND SHALL BE INSTALLED DURING VEGETATION DORMANCY.
2. LIVE BRANCH CUTTINGS SHALL BE INSTALLED AT A DENSITY OF 20-30 CUTTINGS PROGRESS DRAWING
PER LINEAR FOOT AND A MAXIMUM DIAMETER OF 2.5 INCHES. FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLY
3 NUMBER OF TOP OF BANK OSOIL
R BANKFULL STAGE. Y VARY IN GENERAL LIFTS SHALL EXTEND TO THE DO NOT USE FOR CONSTRUCTION
STABILIZED INLET
STAKE TOP LAYER 4' DEEP (TYP) TOP OF BANK / BANKFULL STAGE
PUMP -AROUND PUMP
OF MATTING IN 6" TRENCH
(SEE MATTING DETAIL) Michael Baker Engineering Inc.
ROCKDAM
Michael Bake 4 8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 600
Cary, NORTH CAROLINA 27518
Phone: [phone]
COIR FIBER MATTING Fax: [phone]
ENCOMPASSES LIFT IN T E R N A T I O N A L License #: F-1084
FLOODPLAIN
UNDISTURBED N C DMS ID NO. 100020
EARTH LIVE BRANCH CUTTINGS (SEE
PLANTING PLAN FOR SPECIES)
1.0' LIFT OF
COMPACTED
ON -SITE SOIL (TYP)
BASEFLOW
FINISHED BED
ELEVATION
TEMPORARY FLEXIBLE HOSE
FOUNDATION APPROX. 1 FT
BELOW FINISHED BED ELEVATION
O�
k" W
Q
NOTES:
_Z
c
1. WHEN GEOLIFTS ARE BUILT ABOVE ROOTWAD CLUSTER, USE LARGE STONE BACKFILL BEHIND
0
BRUSH CAN BE LIMBS, BRANCHES, ROOTS OR ANY OTHER ROOT MASS TO BUILT FOUNDATION.
WOODY VEGETATION APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER. 2. CLASS I STONE MAY BE USED AT THE DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER TO BUILD THE FOUNDATION
IN LIEU OF BRUSH MATERIAL.
ROCK DAM
EXISTING CHANNEL
FLOW
TEMPORARY
FLEXIBLE HOSE
Y z
m m
w w
ROCK DAM
O
CONSTRUCTION AREA UPSTREAM C/)
2'
1.
� FLOW #57 STONE 00°�0° 2
STILLING BASIN 2 �QOOo
DEWATERING PUMP
(2 FT. MAX DEPTH) 1 0 1 1/2 BANKFULL
\ / �°0 °
�° MAXIMUM DEPTH
\ — — — i FABRIC �0�08
00
GEOTEXTILE
0 0
0,QQO
O �OUO OUO GD LlO Jb C LlO �O �O J1) y0b �OUO
U U
0.00o
0
OO0 0�
g00 SPECIAL STILLING BASIN
STONE BACKFILL GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
STABILIZED OUTLET: (SEE PROJECT SPECIAL PROVISIONS)
�7=ZD
CONSTRUCT WITH A MIX OF STONE
BACKFILL TO STABILIZE STREAM
CLASS B STONE
AT PUMP AROUND OUTLET
EXISTING CHANNEL
CROSS SECTION
NOTES:
1. EXCAVATION SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ONLY DRY SECTIONS OF CHANNEL.
PLAN VIEW
2. IMPERVIOUS DIKES SHOULD BE USED TO ISOLATE WORK AREAS FROM STREAM FLOW.
3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT DISTURB MORE AREA THAN CAN BE STABILIZED IN ONE
NOTES:
WORKING DAY.
CLEAN OUT STILLING BASIN OF TRAPPED SEDIMENT PRIOR TO REMOVAL.
4. THE PUMP -AROUND PUMP SHOULD ADEQUATELY CONVEY 1 CFS (450 GALLONS PER MINUTE).
PERMANENT STREAM CROSSING
SPECIAL STILLING BASIN
INSTALL 2 INCH PAD OF WASHED #57
STONE BETWEEN SPECIAL STILLING
BASIN AND COIR FIBER MATTING
EXISTING GROUND
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC COVER FILL MATERIAL
C
WITH 6 INCHES #57 STONE
60 3
0 0
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
°
�MvM / //\i/\\i/\\i/\\i/ ;//\\i/�i/\\i/\\//\ 0 8
p,X Q� /\\�\\/\\/\\/\\/\\/� \\/\\/\\/\\/\\/\\�\\ \ O� Mq 2' //\//\//\//\//\//\//\// X/
15 - 20 FT
8 _ ° ° MU SLOPES MAY VARY
//\//\//\//\//\//\//\//\//\//\//\//\//\//\//\//\//\//\//\//\ / M
/ /
\//\//\//\//\// //\//\ a
°
\��jX//X/j�/j\�/j\�/j�
SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION FOR TYPICAL PUMP AROUND
o /\//�/j�/��/��/j\�/j\/� �/ j�����j�/j�/j�/j\�/j D
1.
INSTALL STABILIZED OUTLET AT THE DOWNSTREAM END OF THE DESIGNATED PROJECT WORKING AREA.
�i��i�� �i��%
2.
THE CONTRACTOR WILL INSTALL THE PUMP AROUND PUMP AND THE TEMPORARY FLEXIBLE HOSE THAT
6„
WILL CONVEY THE BASE FLOW FROM UPSTREAM OF THE WORK SITE TO THE SPECIAL STILLING BASIN
OR STABILIZED OUTLET.
FILL MATERIAL
3.
INSTALL UPSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKE AND BEGIN PUMPING OPERATIONS FOR STREAM DIVERSION.
4.
INSTALL THE DOWNSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKE AND PUMPING APPARATUS IF NEEDED TO DEWATER THE
STREAM CHANNEL CULVERT
ENTRAPPED AREA. THE PUMP AND HOSE FOR THIS PURPOSE SHALL BE OF SUFFICIENT SIZE TO DEWATER
(SEE PLANS FOR TYPE / SIZE) EXISTING
THE WORK AREA. THIS WATER WILL FLOW INTO A SPECIAL STILLING BASIN.
GROUND
5.
THE CONTRACTOR WILL PERFORM STREAM RESTORATION WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAN AND
FOLLOWING THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE.
CROSS SECTION VIEW
6.
THE CONTRACTOR WILL EXCAVATE ANY ACCUMULATED SILT AND DEWATER BEFORE REMOVAL OF THE
NOTES:
IMPERVIOUS DIKE. REMOVE IMPERVIOUS DIKES, PUMPS, AND TEMPORARY FLEXIBLE HOSE STARTING
WITH THE DOWNSTREAM DIKE FIRST.
1. SIZE DIMENSIONS SHOWN ON PLANS.
7.
THE CONTRACTOR WILL COMPLETE ALL GRADING AND STABILIZATION IN ONE DAY WITHIN THE PUMP
2. APPLY SUFFICIENT FILL (2' MIN) OVER CULVERT TO PREVENT COLLAPSE.
AROUND AREA BETWEEN THE IMPERVIOUS DIKES.
3. STABILIZE SIDE SLOPES WITH EROSION CONTROL MATTING AND FILL AROUND CULVERTS
8.
ONCE THE WORKING AREA IS COMPLETED, REMOVE THE SPECIAL STILLING BASIN AND STABILIZED OUTLET
WITH CLASS II STONE.
AND STABILIZE DISTURBED AREAS WITH SEED AND MULCH.
4. INSTALL HEADWALLS AND ENDWALLS AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS.

C
LLJ
CV
i
cn
c�
CV
CD
i
C
C
T
CO
0
i
L
m6'
o�
CVO
\CV
C9�
oCE
BARB WIRE FIELD FENCE
4 STRAND - HIGH TENSILE FENCING PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
162039 2E
END POST
6 INCH DIAMETER BY 8 FOOT LONG BRACE POST
�6 INCH DIAMETER BY 8 FOOT LONG
PROGRESS DRAWING
BARB WIRE
3 INCHES (TYP.)
CORNER POST FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLY
BRACE POST 4" X 4" TIMBER BRACES (TYP)
X X X X X X X
5" DIA. MIN. 6" DIA. MIN. BRACE POST 5" DIA. MIN. DO NOT USE FOR CONSTRUCTION
GRADUATED IN SIZE FROM TOP TO BOTTOM
GETTING LARGER IN SIZE TOWARD THE TOP.
48INCHES X X X X X X X
o z
Michael Baker Engineering Inc.
HIGH O
Michael 8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 600
X X X X X X X
TENSILE WIRE cD Cary, NORTH CAROLINA 27518
o0
Phone:[phone]
Fax: [phone]
z I N T E R N A T I O N A L License #: F-1084
x x x x x x X
NCDMS ID NO. 100020
VARIES BARB WIRE GROUND LINE
CROSS BRACE WIRES DOUBLE
1
I I i
24 INCHES (TYP.)
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
STRAND HIGH TENSILE WIRE GROUND LINE
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1
..'
CORNER AND VERICAL CHANGE BRACING
INSTALL AT ALL POINTS WHERE FENCE ALIGNMENT CHANGES 15 DEGREES OR MORE
NOTE:
1. END POSTS SHALL BE INSTALLED AT A SPACING OF 10-15 FEET.
4" X 4" TIMBER BRACE
OR 2" DIA. GALVANIZED IN -LINE STRAINER OR
STEEL TUBING TWITCH STICK (1-1/2" X 2" X 2')
WOVEN WIRE FENCE
STAY SPACING - CENTER (25' MAX)
END POST BRACE POST - 5" DIA. MIN .
6" DIA. MIN. LINE POST - 4" DIA. MIN.
HIGH TENSILE OR FIBERGLASS POST
WIRE
1'-0"
BRACE WIRE
-
END POST (2 STRAPS OF 9 GAUGE WIRE) BRACE POST
o
6 INCH DIAMETER BY 8 FOOT LONG 6 INCH DIAMETER BY 8 FOOT LONG
o
0
1 STRAND BARB WIRE
CD � z
10 GAUGE WIRE 3 INCHES (TYP.)
o
GROUND LINE o0
z
IF
X X X X X X X
\ TENSION INDICATOR-
0
CROSS BRACE WIRES
GRAUATED IN SIZE FROMTOP TO
nTOWARD BOTTOM
O AND IN -LINE STRAINER
GETTING LARGER IN SIZE HE TOP.
48INCHES X X X X X X
HDIGHBTENSILE WIRE
8'-0" 100'-0" MAX. SPAN
END PANEL ONE PANEL OF LINE FENCE
X X X X X X
END ASSEMBLY AND LINE FENCE SECTION
X X --X--X-- X X X
VARIES 10 GAUGE WIRE 12.5 GAUGE WIRE GROUND LINE
8'-0"
BRACE POST 6" MIN. BRACE POST 6" MIN.
I I i
4" X 4" TIMBER
BRACE INSULATED WIRE
24 INCHES (TYP.)
`�' \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ? V'
/ /
DOWEL
r
BRACE POST
(D
z BRACE WIRE
NOTE:
- DOUBLE STRAND
WIRE N
1. END POSTS SHALL BE INSTALLED AT A SPACING OF 10-15 FEET.
o co BRACE BLOCK
00 - 4"x8"x18"
STEEL GATES
GROUND LINE DOUBLE STRAND 6"
/ HIGH TENSILE WIRE o
TIE ALL WIRES AT i0
ONE BRACE POST
EXISTING GROUND
PULL POST ASSEMBLY CORNER OR END BRACE ASSEMBLY
SEE PLANS FOR SPECIFIC LENGTH
4"
PLACE IN FENCE LINE SO THAT MAXIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN BRACED POSTS DOES NOT EXCEED 1320 FEET OPTIONAL FIGURE 4
r r
Nn
1. NOTCH POSTS 3/4" FOR 4" X 4" TIMBER BRACES.
a
2. DOWELS TO BE 1/2" DIA. X 5" PLAIN STEEL RODS. DRIVE DOWELS IN 7/16" DIA. HOLES,
g z z0
2-1/2" INTO EACH POST AND TIMBER BRACE.
Q Lu Q w
3. STAPLE CROSS -BRACE WIRES TO BRACE AND CORNER POSTS AT QUARTER POINTS
> cwn > rw
OF THE POSTS.
4. HIGH TENSILE WIRE WILL BE NEW AND SMOOTH AND WILL MEET THE FOLLOWING
1) TENSILE STRENGTH - 110,000 PSI 2) GALVANIZING -TYPE III 3) GAGE - 12-1/2.
TREATED. PRESSURE TREATMENT SHALL CONFORM TO FEDERAL SPECIFICATION TT-W-571.
19 STEEL FRAME GATE -
(1-1/4" LONG FOR HARD WOODS).
6. AT CORNER POSTS, STAPLE EACH WIRE AT QUARTER POINTS OF POSTS. AT BRACE POSTS,
LJ
DOUBLE STAPLE EACH WIRE. AT LINE POSTS, SECURE EACH WIRE WITH STANDARD CLAMPS.
1
7. FIBERGLASS MAY BE USED FOR LINE POSTS. THESE WILL CONSIST OF MARBLE, FIBERGLASS,
LJ
AND POLYMER RESINS WHICH HAVE BEEN TREATED BY THERMOSETTINGS (HEAT TREATMENT).
POSTS MUST BE DRIVEN IN THE SOIL AT LEAST 18 INCHES.
8. 2" DIAMETER PIPE DIAGONAL BRACE MAY BE USED IN PLACE OF HORIZONTAL TIMBER BRACE
AND DIAGONAL WIRES.
9. MINIMUM NET RETENTION OF CHROMATED COPPER ARSENATE (CCA) FOR WOOD FENCE POSTS
SHALL BE 0.40 POUNDS PER CUBIC FOOT.
10. A SINGLE 12 FOOT LONG, 6 INCH MINIMUM DIAMETER POST MAY BE SUBSTITUTED FOR
END PANEL, CORNER AND VERTICAL CHANGE BRACING, AND PULL POST ASSEMBLY.
NOTES:
THE 12 FOOT LONG POSTS SHALL EXTEND A MINIMUM OF 7.5 FEET INTO THE GROUND
AND BE BACKFILLED WITH GRAVEL.
1. POST HEIGHT DIMENSION SHALL BE THE SAME AS REQUIRED FOR THE ADJACENT FENCE.
11. FOR FURTHER DETAILS ON APPROVED METHODS OF FENCE INSTALLATION, SEE NATURAL
2. CONSTRUCT AN END OR STRESS PANEL, AS REQUIRED IN THE SPECIFICATION, ON EACH SIDE OF GATE.
RESOURCE SERVICE'S CONSERVATION PRACTICE MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION
3. HINGES AND LOCKS SHALL BE INSTALLED AS SPECIFIED BY GATE MANUFACTURER.
SPECIFICATIONS FOR FENCING (CODE 382) BY NRCS NORTH CAROLINA (FEBRUARY 2008).

LOG DROP
CONSTRUCTED RIFFLE
PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
162039 2F
5'
COIR LOG
A
B
LOG WEIR
A'
(D
SCOUR
POOL
TRANSPLANTS
J
L.L
SECONDARY
LOGS
c
LL
CV
cn
c�
CV
CD,
C
0
i
CO
a)
0
i
a�
L
i
a�
C_
3
BANKFULL
PLAN VIEW
rMANICIMI A"ITc
CROSS SECTION VIEW B - B'
5'
TRANSPLANTS
TOP OF STREAMBANK
FLOW
STREAMBED
OUR PO
STONE BACKFILL
HEADER LOG
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC COIR.LOG
FOOTERLOG
4' MINIMUM
SECTION A - A'
NOTES:
1. LOGS SHOULD BE AT LEAST 10 INCHES IN DIAMETER, RELATIVELY STRAIGHT,
HARDWOOD, AND RECENTLY HARVESTED.
LOG 2. TOP OF HEADER LOG SHOULD BE SET AT SAME ELEVATION AS THE STREAMBED.
3. DIAMETER OF COIR LOG SHOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 112 DIAMETER OF LOGS.
4. USE GEOTEXTILE FABRIC WITH COIR LOGS TO SEAL GAPS BETWEEN LOGS.
5. PLACE TRANSPLANTS ALONG BANKS TO PROTECT AGAINST BANK EROSION.
6. THE HEADER LOG SHOULD BE NOTCHED 2 - 3 INCHES DEEP IN THE CENTER AND
FOR 20 - 30% OF THE CHANNEL WIDTH.
O
A U-
BEGIN INVERT ELEVATION
if
B'
BACKFILL WITH
ON -SITE ALLUVIUM
FILTER FABRIC
(TYPICAL)
HEADER LOG
\—END INVERT ELEVATION
A'
PLAN VIEW
GRADE CONTROL LOG JAM
HEADER LOG
A
BEGIN HEAD OF RIFFLE INVERT
ELEVATION AND STA—
TOP OF BANK
0
BEGIN TAIL OF RIFFLE INVERT
ELEVATION AND STATION
PLAN VIEW
RGER STONE MAY BE PLACED
REDIRECT LOW FLOW AT
ZECTION OF ENGINEER
TONE BACKFILL
COIR FIBER
"RATTING
RIFFLE D-max
--------
TOE
J I VIVL LJ/"�V f\I ILL
SECTION B - B'
PROGRESS DRAWING
BANKFULL FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLY
DO NOT USE FOR CONSTRUCTION
1/4 OF BEGIN HEAD OF RIFFLE INVERT
GLIDE ELEVATION AND STATION
LENGTH
� STONE BACKFILL
C,L1DE
v�
NOTES:
1. UNDERCUT CHANNEL BED ELEVATION AS NEEDED TO ALLOW FOR LAYERS OF STONE TO
ACHIEVE FINAL GRADE.
2. INSTALL COIR FIBER MATTING ALONG COMPLETED BANKS SUCH THAT THE EROSION CONTROL
MATTING AT THE TOE OF THE BANK EXTENDS DOWN TO THE UNDERCUT ELEVATION.
3. INSTALL STONE BACKFILL, COMPACTED TO GRADE. PROFILE A - A'
4. FINAL CHANNEL BED SHAPE SHOULD BE ROUNDED, SMOOTH, AND CONCAVE, WITH THE
ELEVATION OF THE BED 0.2 FT DEEPER IN THE CENTER THAN AT THE EDGES.
5. STONE BACKFILL SHALL CONSIST OF 10% CLASS I, 20% CLASS B, 40% CLASS A, AND 30%
ON -SITE ALLUVIUM BY VOLUME OR #57 STONE.
6. CONSTRUCTED RIFFLES SHALL BE 12" THICK.
7. BOULDERS FOR UT 7 MUST BE AT LEAST 2' x 3' x 4'; WHILE BOULDERS FOR UT4 AND UT5
SHOULD BE 1' x 2' x 3'.
8. SATURATED WOODY DEBRIS THAT IS EXISTING WITHIN THE CHANNEL CAN BE RELOCATED
INTO THE NEW RIFFLE AREAS.
PRIMARY LOGS
SECONDARY LOGS AND WOODY DEBRIS
Michael Baker Engineering Inc.
FFA "TIMM 8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 600
Cary, NORTH CAROLINA 27518
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
N T E R N A T I O N A L License #: F-1084
N C DMS ID NO. 100020
1/4 OF RUN LENGTH
0
R00 0 POOL
�0
CHANNEL PLUG
BEGIN TAIL OF RIFFLE INVERT
ELEVATION AND STATION
Ir
00,
�� NOTE:
O J / �� HEADER LOG
b a O H = 0.1 - 0.3 BACKFILL CONSISTING OF ON -SITE CLAY MATERIAL WILL BE
© . ® ®.DR .Q 0 COMPACTED USING HEAVY EQUIPMENT IN 10 INCH LIFTS
uo
5' MINIMUM ® O
Q O Q ®O CHANNEL PLUG
� STREAM
(® ��,, IR eFo
SANDY SOIL BACKFILL U
SECTION A - A'
S MINIMUM
FILTER FABRIC PLAN VIEW
(TYPICAL)
r TRANSPLANTS OR LIVE STAKES
PRIMARY LOGS
SPACE EVERY 5-7
HEADER LOG
5' MINIMUM
BURIED INTO
BANK
NOTES
SECTION B - B'
5' MINIMUM
BURIED INTO
BANK
1. PRIMARY LOGS SHOULD BE AT LEAST 10" OR MORE IN DIAMETER, RELATIVELY STRAIGHT, HARDWOOD PREFERRED, AND RECENTLY
HARVESTED AND EXTENDING INTO THE BANK SON EACH SIDE.
2. SECONDARY LOGS SHOULD BE AT LEAST 1" IN DIAMETER AND NO LARGER THAN 10", AND EXTEND INTO THE BANK 2 FEET ON EACH
SIDE. WOOD MATERIAL SHALL BE VARYING DIAMETER TO ALLOW MATERIAL TO BE COMPACTED.
3. FILTER FABRIC SHOULD BE NAILED TO THE HEADER LOG BELOW THE BACKFILL.
4. ROOTWADS AND COIR FIBER MATTING CAN BE USED INSTEAD OF TRANSPLANTS OR LIVE STAKES, PER DIRECTION OF ENGINEER.
5. AFTER TRENCH HAS BEEN EXCAVATED A LAYER OF SECONDARY LOGS AND WOODY DEBRIS SHOULD BE PLACED WITH MINIMAL
GAPS. A LAYER OF ON -SITE ALLUVIUM SHOULD BE APPLIED TO FILL VOIDS BETWEEN SECONDARY LOGS BEFORE ADDITIONAL
LAYERS ARE PLACED.
i BANKFULL ELEVATION
1
HEADER LOG
FOOTER LOG
UNCOMPACTED BACKFILL
1.S MINIMUM
BACKFILL CONSISTING OF ON -SITE CLAY
MATERIAL WILL BE COMPACTED USING
HEAVY EQUIPMENT IN 10 INCH LIFTS
SECTION A - A'

GENERAL CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE
A general construction sequence is provided below for the Whittier Creek Mitigation Project. The site construction, including
grading and planting activities, will be conducted using common machinery, tools, equipment and techniques for successfully
implementing the project.
1. Contractor shall contact North Carolina "One Call" Center (1.800.632.4949) before any excavation.
2. Contractor shall prepare stabilized construction entrances and haul roads as indicated on the plans.
3. The Contractor shall mobilize equipment, materials, prepare staging area(s) and stockpile area(s) as shown on the
plans.
4. Construction traffic shall be restricted to the area denoted as "Limits of Disturbance" or "Haul Roads" on the plans.
5. The Contractor shall install temporary rock dams at locations indicated on the plans.
6. The Contractor shall install temporary silt fence around the staging area(s). Temporary silt fencing will also be placed
around the temporary stockpile areas as material is stockpiled throughout the construction period.
7.
The Contractor shall install all temporary and permanent stream crossings as shown on the plans in accordance with the
MAINTENANCE PLAN
NC Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual. The existing channel and ditches on site will remain
open during the initial stages of construction to allow for drainage and to maintain site accessibility.
8.
The Contractor shall construct only the portion of channel that can be completed and stabilized within the same day.
1.
Qualified personnel, on a daily basis will evaluate all temporary erosion and sedimentation control practices for
9.
The Contractor shall apply temporary seed and mulch to all disturbed areas at the end of each work day.
stability and operation.
2.
Inspect and maintain all erosion control measures every 7 days and after each significant rainfall (0.5 inches or greater)
10.
The Contractor shall clear and grub, where necessary, an area adequate to construct the stream channel and grading
and document with inspection reports and written logs will be kept.
operations after all Sedimentation and Erosion Control practices have been installed and approved. In general, the
3.
A rain gauge will also be kept on -site and daily rainfall amounts will be recorded.
Contractor shall work from upstream to downstream and construction in a live channel shall utilize a pump -around or
4.
Any repairs needed will be performed immediately to maintain all practices as designed.
flow diversion measure as shown on the plans.
5.
The contractor shall be responsible for the maintenance of temporary on -site erosion control and sedimentation control
11.
Contractor shall begin construction upstream and proceed in a downstream direction until the reach is completed. The
measures.
Contractor may concurrently work on separate reaches as long as no more is disturbed than can be stabilized in that
6.
The contractor shall be responsible for implementing and following the approved sedimentation and erosion control
same day.
plan.
7.
A copy of the combined self -inspection monitoring form can be found on the DEMLR website at:
12.
After excavating the channel to design grades, installing in -stream structures, applying seed and mulch, matting, and
(http://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/energy-mineral-land-resources/erosion-sediment-control/forms).
installing transplants, the new channel can receive flow after approval by the Engineer.
13. Water will be turned into the constructed channel once the area in and around the new channel has been stabilized.
Immediately begin plugging, filling, and grading the abandoned channel, as indicated on plans, moving in a
downstream direction to allow for drainage of the old channels. No water shall be turned into any section of channel
prior to the channel being completely stabilized with all structures installed.
14. Any grading activities adjacent to the stream channel shall be completed prior to turning water into the new stream
channel segments. The Contractor shall not grade or roughen any areas where excavation activities have not been
completed.
15. Once a stream work phase is complete, apply temporary seeding, permanent seeding, and mulching to any areas
disturbed during construction. Apply permanent seeding mixtures, as shown on the vegetation plan. Temporary seeding
shall be applied in all disturbed areas such that ground cover is established within 15 working days following
completion of any phase of grading. Permanent ground cover shall be established for all disturbed areas within 15
working days or 90 calendar days (whichever is shorter) following completion of construction.
16. Contractor shall improve and construct the farm roads and crossings by installing culverts, stabilizing side slopes, and
modifying any farm roads according to the plans and specifications.
17. All disturbed areas should be seeded and mulched before leaving the project. Remove temporary stream crossings and
any in -stream temporary rock dams.
18. The Contractor shall treat areas of invasive species vegetation throughout the project area according to the plans and
specifications prior to demobilization.
19. The Contractor shall plant woody vegetation and live stakes, according to planting details and specifications. The
Contractor shall complete the live staking and reforestation (bare -root planting) phase of the project and apply
permanent seeding at the appropriate time of the year.
20. The Contractor shall ensure that the site is free of trash and leftover materials prior to demobilization of equipment
from the site.

I
1005--------
ni
— — — \
II ITI AT J A rn1 rrn P1 r�­A H I 1 1r\1 n An A AIP1 R AI!1I I A rl !1rN lr 1 1t--. lI-%n An
BEGIN REACH 7
STA. 10+00.00
I
I
I
I
I
J. DIXON BROWN & WIFE,
HARRIETTE C. BROWN I
PIN: 5925-00-79-5737 I
DB: 1104 PG: 407 I
I
BENCH LIMIT (TYP.)
CONSERVATION EASE
STA. 11
ELECTRIC FENCE (TYP.)
ANY HARDWOOD TREES REMOVED MUST BE INCORPORATED
WITHIN THE STRUCTURES BEING INSTALLED.
2. EXCAVATE STREAMBED MATERIAL BEFORE FILLING IN THE
OLD CHANNEL AND USE STREAMBED MATERIAL WITHIN THE
NEWLY CONSTRUCTED CHANNEL.
3. CONTRACTOR CAN USE BRUSH MATERIAL TO INCORPORATE
WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTED RIFFLES AND BRUSH TOES
ALONG MEANDER BENDS.
4. FENCING INSIDE EASEMENT WILL BE REMOVED AND HAULED
OFF -SITE BY THE CONTRACTOR.
6. AREAS OF BENCHING: CONTRACTOR WILL EXCAVATE THE
TOPSOIL, STOCKPILE IT, AND THEN ADD THE TOPSOIL AS TOP
LAYER OF BENCH TO A DEPTH OF AT LEAST 8 INCHES.
7. CONTRACTOR WILL CONTROL ANY INVASIVE SPECIES WITHIN
EASEMENT.
LOCATIONS OF BOULDER STEPS AND GRADE CONTROL
STRUCTURES ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED ON FIELD
CONDITIONS AND BY THE DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER.
BANKS SHALL BE SLOPED AT 2:1 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
END HIGH TENSILE ELECTRIC FEN
BEGIN BARB WIRE FEN
FILL EXISTING CHANNEL
CHANNEL PLUG
Lo
W
W
t)
W
V)
z
J
oG'
CVO
\N
�9�
Or;:
5. ANY AREA THAT HAS BEEN GRADED MUST HAVE POSITIVE
DRAINAGE, UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY ENGINEER.

NOTES:
1. ANY HARDWOOD TREES REMOVED MUST BE INCORPORATED 6. AREAS OF BENCHING: CONTRACTOR WILL EXCAVATE THE
WITHIN THE STRUCTURES BEING INSTALLED. TOPSOIL, STOCKPILE IT, AND THEN ADD THE TOPSOIL AS TOP
LAYER OF BENCH TO A DEPTH OF AT LEAST 8 INCHES.
2. EXCAVATE STREAMBED MATERIAL BEFORE FILLING IN THE
OLD CHANNEL AND USE STREAMBED MATERIAL WITHIN THE
NEWLY CONSTRUCTED CHANNEL.
3. CONTRACTOR CAN USE BRUSH MATERIAL TO INCORPORATE
WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTED RIFFLES AND BRUSH TOES
ALONG MEANDER BENDS.
4. FENCING INSIDE EASEMENT WILL BE REMOVED AND HAULED
OFF -SITE BY THE CONTRACTOR.
5. ANY AREA THAT HAS BEEN GRADED MUST HAVE POSITIVE
DRAINAGE, UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY ENGINEER.
1
CHAR ES DEAN I410LC MB ND
� MIC AEL GENL HOLCOM
ELM R E. HOLtOMB I& WI E
WILMA F. HOLCOMB (LE�
RN: 5926-QO-80-41164
T DB: 1489)PG: 874
FHB: 9 PG, 64, LO/T 6
STALL HIGH TENSILE
LECT�fC FENCE (TYP.)/
7. CONTRACTOR WILL CONTROL ANY INVASIVE SPECIES WITHIN
EASEMENT.
8. LOCATIONS OF BOULDER STEPS AND GRADE CONTROL
STRUCTURES ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED ON FIELD
CONDITIONS AND BY THE DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER.
9. BANKS SHALL BE SLOPED AT 2:1 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
MATCH LINE - SEE SHEET 8
ANGELA D. MEADOWS
PIN: 5926-00-90-1044
PORTION OF DB: 1153 PG: 678
PORTION OF LOT 5, PB: 9 PG: 64
Q
z
ANGELA_ D. MEADOWS
9-9
CHANNEL PLUG
FILL EXISTING CHANNEL
0
H
w
w
cn
w
z
J
_
V
Q
m6'
O�
CVN
\N
Or;:
rci-4uc k I r r.)

cr
Qc
n
NOTES: I
1. ANY HARDWOOD TREES REMOVED MUST BE INCORPORATED
6. AREAS OF BENCHING: CONTRACTOR WILL EXCAVATE THE
WITHIN THE STRUCTURES BEING INSTALLED.
TOPSOIL, STOCKPILE IT, AND THEN ADD THE TOPSOIL AS TOP
LAYER OF BENCH TO A DEPTH OF AT LEAST 8 INCHES.
2. EXCAVATE STREAMBED MATERIAL BEFORE FILLING IN THE
OLD CHANNEL AND USE STREAMBED MATERIAL WITHIN THE
7. CONTRACTOR WILL CONTROL ANY INVASIVE SPECIES WITHIN
NEWLY CONSTRUCTED CHANNEL.
EASEMENT.
3. CONTRACTOR CAN USE BRUSH MATERIAL TO INCORPORATE
8. LOCATIONS OF BOULDER STEPS AND GRADE CONTROL
WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTED RIFFLES AND BRUSH TOES
STRUCTURES ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED ON FIELD
ALONG MEANDER BENDS.
CONDITIONS AND BY THE DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER.
4. FENCING INSIDE EASEMENT WILL BE REMOVED AND HAULED
9. BANKS SHALL BE SLOPED AT 2:1 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
OFF -SITE BY THE CONTRACTOR.
5. ANY AREA THAT HAS BEEN GRADED MUST HAVE POSITIVE
DRAINAGE, UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY ENGINEER.
ANGELA D. MEADOWS
PIN: 5926-00-90-1044
PORTION OF DB: 1153 PG: 678
` \ PORTION OF LOT 5, PB: 9 PG: 64
BENCH LIMIT (TYP.) �� \ \
INSTALL4RB WIRE 733
\\ \\
FENCE (TYP.)
A� E 'S L CgNTRrn\\
Lo
x� ROCK J-HbOK V T
�NSTALL 6 TL `� _ REMOVE EXIS--�FENC-E_VITHIN - -
w R�OTECTI N ( P.� CONSERVATfON ELA,SEMENT-(TYP.) - _ -
Lu,- \max x \ _ - _
c= \�_�_ k �� `� `_`\\TA�L-ROCK
w
_>= =���\ " �,�`X - - -CROSS VANE-{TYP.y \
Lu
=— _—_------ �'
Ity
INSTALL CONST UCTEEr- -
__ko�
-RIFFLE (TYP.)
12" WALNUT
LIMIT (TYP.)
y _ J
L INSTALL GEOLIFT WITH
BRUSH TOE (TYP.)
i
i
INSTALL BARB WIgE' �zx
FENCE TY-P.
x
CONTROL POINT 4356 I
N: 15
E: 529275.19275.12'
ELEV: 990.34'
ANGELA D. MEADOWS
PIN: 5926-00-90-1044
PORTION OF DB: 1153 PG: 678
PORTION OF LOT 5, PB: 9 PG: 64
END REACH 7
STA. 24+84.07
CONTROL POINT #35'1
N: 959857.42'
E: 1528946.04'
ELEV: 989.18'
M
00
Q
Iz
BEVERLY A. FULK
PIN: 5926-00-90-1044
DB: 1199 PG: 867, TRACT TWO
PB: 9 PG: 64, LOT 4 & LOT 1-B
FILL EXISTING CHANNEL
CHANNEL PLUG
m6'
O�
CVO
\N
�9�
Or;:

1. ANY HARDWOOD TREES REMOVED MUST BE INCORPORATED
WITHIN THE STRUCTURES BEING INSTALLED.
NOTES:
6. AREAS OF BENCHING: CONTRACTOR WILL EXCAVATE THE
TOPSOIL, STOCKPILE IT, AND THEN ADD THE TOPSOIL AS TOP
LAYER OF BENCH TO A DEPTH OF AT LEAST 8 INCHES.
48" CMP
INV IN:1007.
INV OUT 100 82'
\ I
CONTRO� POINT #501I
N:960892.43' \
/ E:1528483\53'
ELEV: 1013.7 \
2. EXCAVATE STREAMBED MATERIAL BEFORE FILLING IN THE
OLD CHANNEL AND USE STREAMBED MATERIAL WITHIN THE
NEWLY CONSTRUCTED CHANNEL.
3. CONTRACTOR CAN USE BRUSH MATERIAL TO INCORPORATE
WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTED RIFFLES AND BRUSH TOES
ALONG MEANDER BENDS.
/ 4. FENCING INSIDE EASEMENT WILL BE REMOVED AND HAULED
OFF -SITE BY THE CONTRACTOR.
5. ANY AREA THAT HAS BEEN GRADED MUST HAVE POSITIVE
/ DRAINAGE, UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY ENGINEER.
7. CONTRACTOR WILL CONTROL ANY INVASIVE SPECIES WITHIN
EASEMENT.
8. LOCATIONS OF BOULDER STEPS AND GRADE CONTROL
STRUCTURES ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED ON FIELD
CONDITIONS AND BY THE DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER.
9. BANKS SHALL BE SLOPED AT 2:1 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
FRANCES F. ATKINS ?'oPo 656
CLAYTON FULK (LE) c� 65
PIN: 5926-00-91-0590 A Po'
1218 PG: 345, TRACT 2 ���, 0 Zo3 a5�
PB: 9 PG: 64, LOT 2 Roc` PAR oo:
50
CHARLES DEAN HOLCOMB AND MICHAEL GENE HOLCOMB
ELMER E. HOLCOMB & WIFE WILMA F. HOLCOMB (LE)
P I N 59-2-6-00-80-41-64—
__------_DB: 1489 PG: 874
P B: -9 P-G: 64,-LO-TS--
LOPE BAN_KS-AT'3 1 — — — — / / USE BOULDERS AND EXISTI
/ BEDROCK TO CREATE A S
INSTALL BOULDER TOE
IN.S"`fALL- 6OULDER, 30 30 —
/ 3� TE 30 /
/100c
/XAB'�E," //
10+00 00
CHAR /ES DEAN HCILCOMB AND MICHAEL GENE OOLCOMB
E /MER E. HOLCOMB & WIFE WILMA F. HOLCOMB (LE)
PIN: 5926-00-80�4164
/ DB: 1489 PG:,874
APB: 9 PG: 64, I OT 6
CONTROL POINT—#30.1_
N: 960656.92'-'
E: 1_528fr466.29' — — —
/ E-LEV: 1006.49,
--
W
W
TZ
V)
Lu
W
N
Lu
Z
J
V
H
2
FILL EXISTING CHANNEL
CHANNEL PLUG
m6'
O�
CVO
\N
�9�
Or;:

NOTES:
Qc
C
00
(,n
CV
CD'
C
C
T
C0
0
i
L
i
C_
3
m6'
o�
CVO
"IN
C9�
or;:
1. ANY HARDWOOD TREES REMOVED MUST BE INCORPORATED
WITHIN THE STRUCTURES BEING INSTALLED.
2. EXCAVATE STREAMBED MATERIAL BEFORE FILLING IN THE
OLD CHANNEL AND USE STREAMBED MATERIAL WITHIN THE
NEWLY CONSTRUCTED CHANNEL.
6. AREAS OF BENCHING: CONTRACTOR WILL EXCAVATE THE
TOPSOIL, STOCKPILE IT, AND THEN ADD THE TOPSOIL AS TOP
LAYER OF BENCH TO A DEPTH OF AT LEAST 8 INCHES.
7. CONTRACTOR WILL CONTROL ANY INVASIVE SPECIES WITHIN
EASEMENT.
SHEE1 9 �
E -SEE '� � ,/// / / / / � //
rs
3' W�THIN THE 0 STRUCTEDNTRACTOR CAN USE UR FFLES ANDSH L BRTO USH �OEORATE 8. LOCATISTRUCTONS URE� ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED ON BOULDER STEPS AND GRADE FOIELD / INSIAL"`L'C/K�(5S �AN�
(l�\YP.�
I r� 0
ALONG MEANDER BENDS. CONDITIONS AND BY THE DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER. I 1 ,�
4. FENCING INSIDE EASEMENT WILL BE REMOVED AND HAULED 9. BANKS SHALL BE SLOPED AT 2:1 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. I \ 1
OFF -SITE BY THE CONTRACTOR. O 1 \ ��l I I
1 I O \ \ I \ \ \ NO NOR9 L POINT #300
5. ANY AREA THAT HAS BEEN GRADED MUST HAVE POSITIVE \ o \ \ E: 1529217.20'
DRAINAGE, UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY ENGINEER. I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ELEV: 1010.47'
INSTALL LOG � ND ROCK 1�'CEDA ? \ 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ CAN RACTOR SHALL HARVEST BED
STEP PIOOL (\TYP.) \ I I I 1 \ \ MTE IAL TO PLACE IN NEW CHANNEL
INSTALL LOG DROP (TYP.)
// / / \ \ ,�4NG D. MEADOWS
P1.N:5926-00-90-1044
O 110 OF\DB: 1153 PG: 678
INSTALL BAR W,YRE P TI�QN F LOT 5, PB: 9 PG: 64
C) \
INST�CLL OAK RDE_o ' �• \ \ \ \ \ \
C) C T OL�J-WOK a/�rPVE — \ CD \ \ \ \\ \
CHARLES DEAN HOLCOMB AND // / // �ANGELA 1f MEAD;BWS /� �/ / /1 \ INSTAL G)EO IFT WITH \
MICHAEL GENE HOLCOMB i PA. . W26 9�Y1044 � — � I I BRUSH O(T P. \ \
ELMER E. HOLCOMB & WIFE �� , FI OR�ION OF B: 1153 PGf-678
WILMA F. HOLCOMB (LE) P/QR�TIfD"N OF/LOT-8, PB;/9 PG: 64/ J \ \ 1
/ PIN: 5926-00-80-4164 / / / / i'I INS�AL� L(?G VANI E (TYP)
DB: 1489 PG: 874
PB: 9 PG: 64, LOT 6
�— 24' POPLAR / II I I I I \ \
00" PO R / X \ / i /' 18"POPLAR I II � \
24" POPLAR —_ \ / I-, INSTALL B ��ULQflR\ \
INSTALL ROCK / / / 15"MAPLE I \ I/ ; \ STEP (T)� P.)
CROSS VANFf (T/Y(PLAhI / 18"MAPICE \ / / / // II �\ \\ \ \ \
30" POPLAR 3' POP AR/ / / 2 -POPLAR — __ INSTALL G EO L I FT WITH/ -
BRUSH TOE (TYP'.)—
I \ \
LJJ OPLAR 18` POPS R / 3C ��_ \ it I I I I N STALE R j�
w - / �18` BLLI / _'OPLAR \ — — -EE-N C E
_ PAR/ / ��' / q i, \\
cn _ — / IN ALL LOG DROP (TYP`.) INSTALL ROCK GRAD �,�
w \18"POPLA i / / P / CONTROL J-HOOK VA YAP. / _' j I I� �` -)C:) ANGELA D. MEA y�5
��
w — — i � / / � ��` �` �`� / I I � � � P11tC'S�26-00-90-�1�044
N _ = i CHERRY / _ ( 4"POPLAR — — '�� / ',I I ,11 _ _ PORTION OF : 1153 PG',678\
LU
_15"POPLA PORTION OF LOT�5 PB: 9 P 6a
Ir
= 15" WALNUT 15" POPLAR
U C)0 24' PO LAR " —_ _ A
Q12,\\ -
66
IN�TALL ROCK VAiVE
\ INSTALL LOG & ROCK \
cE I CE STEP POOL (TYP.) Q �oo0 o
CE �
l7°
INSTALL ROCK J-HOOK VANE (TYP.)
\\ \CHARLES DEAN HOL6QMB AND MICHAEL GENE HOLCOMB\
\ ELMER E. HOLCOMB &WIFE WILMA F. HOLCOMB (LE) \
PIN: 59I`2MO-80-4164 \
\� \\ DB: 1489 PG:-74 END UT
\ \ � PB: 9 PG: 64, L0�6_ � — \ \ �
CONTROL POINT #302 \
STA. 17+87.56 �\
N: 960463.27' \ \\ INSTALL CONSTRUCTED
E: 1528735.15'
ELEV:1001.42' RIFFLE (TYP.)
- — --
/
I �
COTROL POINT #30:
N:960229 .16'
j E: 1 28902.99'
ELEV/. 994.85'
II
BAKER PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
162039 8
PROGRESS ESS DRAWING
FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLY
ISO NOT USE FOR CONSTRUCTION
Michael Baker Engineering Inc.
Michael Baker 8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 600
Cary, NORTH CAROLINA 27518
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
1 N T E R N A T 1 0 N A L License* F-1084
FILL EXISTING CHANNEL
CHANNEL PLUG
WHITTIER CREEK
PLAN VIEW
20 0 20 40
SCALE (FT)

Qc
CV
T
C0
0
i
C_
3
m6'
O�
CVO
\CV
�9�
Or;:
\\ DWELLING I ANGELA D. MEADOWS
\ \ PIN: 5926-00-90-5577
\� DB: 1332 PG: 199
PB: 24 PG: 57 PROGRESS
Dl[$A��%IN�u
I FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLY
PORTION OF LOT 5, PB: 9 PG: 64 �P�
I I�® N®�° USE F®1� CONSTRUCTION
I
8000 Regency Parkway, Suite E
\ CONCRETE Michael Baker Engineer!
\ PP Michael Baker Cary, NORTH CAROLINA 2751
Phone: [phone]
P I N T E R N A T I O N A L License #4 F310840
�X ' T-ROLPOINT #35Q/
X960577.74 �i \
� E:15294J2.%' � � i /---- —� �/0/ ��__P
\
\ N EL 14.58'\0� \ \
1015
EL INV IN: 1027.68'
INV OUT. UNKNOWN \ / — \
\ ROAD \ � � E /
SOIL � E FE
�/ ROAD ��X / / i/ �/ �� Ci/� / �/ / / / "5
/ / // /�X� j��, —_ �_��/ �� �/ // 2 IWTACL 16' GATE,
ANG L� D. MEADOWS
EL
El
_P : 5926-0,040-1044
q WARE F NC / I -PORTION OF DB: 1153 PG ��8— v
STALL ROCK GRADE INSTALL B RS PORTION O / tOT 5, PBi9�G: 64 / �� ��
/020 - -
- -- � / / INSTALL GEOLIFT WITH / �' �� � � �
o / / / E BARP WIRE FENCE CONTROL J HOOK VANE (TYP.) INSTALL ROCK I INSTALL 16 -48 RCP / ( ) / �-
/ IpdfO/E'XISTjNG FENCE - CROSS VANE(TYP.) I , / BRUSH TOE TYP. /
\ X x—Q / j
LINE PLUNGE POOL
lolp' / WITH CLASS B STONE ��
o, j I / / --- x ��`TA. 12+90.40 --�'
� III , — — 14,11
411
11+00 / � � - - -- --- =goo = o _ --_
xI\\\\ I
LU FIBS 0+---_
CABLE KE 3o"POPLAR _-
STA. 12+45.53 X
-_INSTALL- ROCK
%ice J-HOOKK VANE /TYP. \ \ \s \
\ \ RIP P \ � \ � � — l ) 0
CONCR TES \ \ \ \ \ \ \ o\
HEADWALL \\ \\ \ \ \ \ — _ _ — - - — _ _ I NTyA�L CONSTRUCTED _ ono - — — — — — \ \ \
� OUTL—
_ _ _ _ — — _ _ INSTA L BARB WIRE FENCE \ \ \
INV IN: of Mo \\ -- -RTF_FLE-CTYP.,;,—
INV OUT: 1 0. \ \ \ \\ _ _ INSTALL BOULDER- — — — — \ — _ \ \ \
\ \ IOI — — — ——IN-STALC'I 66' - "AMP INSTAL 16_GAT \ \ \
- 36" RCP \ \ \ \ � � — — - — — — \
7-
INV 1N:1014.05' \ --_—_—---S-T-EP,(TYP.) �� —A� BF-tJCL ON EACI�-
lNV OUT:1012.93' \ \ \ \------- --- �101 ---- ��\ `�—_ --��
\ \ - _ & D-E O F 48 -RC
\ r ----- ANGELA D. MEADOWS
Jam— — — — PIN: 5926-00-90-1044
— \ B RB WIRE FENCE PORTION OF DB: 1153 PG: 678 \
\ \ I XISTING FENCE PORTION OF LOT 5, PB: 9 PG: 64
\ E G IN -UT
ST".+00.00 \
FILL EXISTING CHANNEL
\i�30 NOTES:
1. ANY HARDWOOD TREES REMOVED MUST BE INCORPORATED 6. AREAS OF BENCHING: CONTRACTOR WILL EXCAVATE THE CHANNEL PLUG
\ WITHIN THE STRUCTURES BEING INSTALLED. TOPSOIL, STOCKPILE IT, AND THEN ADD THE TOPSOIL AS TOP
LAYER OF BENCH TO A DEPTH OF AT LEAST 8 INCHES.
2. EXCAVATE STREAMBED MATERIAL BEFORE FILLING IN THE
\ \ OLD CHANNEL AND USE STREAMBED MATERIAL WITHIN THE 7. CONTRACTOR WILL CONTROL ANY INVASIVE SPECIES WITHIN
FRANCES F. ATKINS NEWLY CONSTRUCTED CHANNEL. EASEMENT.
CLAYTON FULK (LE) \ \
PIN: 5926-00-91-0590 3. CONTRACTOR CAN USE BRUSH MATERIAL TO INCORPORATE 8. LOCATIONS OF BOULDER STEPS AND GRADE CONTROL
DB: 1218 PG: 345, TRACT 2 \ \ WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTED RIFFLES AND BRUSH TOES STRUCTURES ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE BASED ON FIELD
PB: 9 PG: 64, LOT 2 \ \ ALONG MEANDER BENDS. CONDITIONS AND BY THE DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER.
4. FENCING INSIDE EASEMENT WILL BE REMOVED AND HAULED 9. BANKS SHALL BE SLOPED AT 2:1 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
OFF -SITE BY THE CONTRACTOR. WHITTIER CREEK
\ \ PLA1� VIEW 5. ANY AREA THAT HAS BEEN GRADED MUST HAVE POSITIVE
\ DRAINAGE, UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY ENGINEER.

■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
MENEM
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■rAL!�■C7L!■■■NJ■■■G7■■■!■■■!A■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■�L'vLJYWVJiJ\L't`WUJ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■LJL'�■R9F!■■Cd[7■G7■■YY■■i�l■■■[71■■■■■A7■■■■L1■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■Girl■FAvd■■C][�■w9L1WC�G7■�IC7■EMI■C■■■Ny■■■■■IRA■■■■\■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■Liir�1■EyLi�■■tyil9■HYYa[R[![iIC!■I�IL�■■■ri[�■■ILL'71■■■YJ■■■■[i!11■■■^n■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■Vvr��■l7L!W■■EiF�■Lt'it?7L?7■9[�Il�■RVI■i■■■V■[�■■ILIlqIL�■Cd[7■■[�Ilr!■�11■■■■■■■■■■■■\■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■N■■n■r■LAW■■LYr;�■R7[�iiF■■�IF�■YlIL��■■■4JRY■■'LIL?yl■�■G9C7■■llllhi■YIILi■■■■■■■■■`V■■■G7■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■�![�■f11■u■■Gi\h■�ya�L:ary[slr;:ti■RNIL1■■■Ltiiry■■I■i■ILr■Giw9■■■ill■iL'�IILi■■■■■■■■■`■[i■r7■\■■■■■C]■■■■■■■■■■■■■■\■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■G■nm■GNl�■■■la■h■L11•■tliih>iiil■h■!lILA■■■Vvr�■ttl■!�I[■L�ili�■■■�IlViisl:ll■■■■■■■■■■■GiC7■wAL'J■■■■■C]L!!■■■■■■■■■■■■J■■■■■■■■!n■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
1/ 1
1 1 1
■■■■■■■■■■■L'�L.'J■■C■nth■C!!J[u■A■WI■h■■AI■W■■■N■f■■li■!�I[Z■L]F:�■■lCllVi■�IIr7■■■■■■■■■G]!■■NV\M■■■■■C9Fr■■■■■■■■■■■`d[7■■■■■1:11■■■■■■■■C]■■■■■■�n■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■tilt■LlLJryMhl7lnM■C�IL�■■■Ni■n■ILI■■■I■W■Gifi■■l�11�■i'�IIr1■■■■■■■■■C■!y■■iL:7■■■■■f1Yb■■■■■■■■■■■F7[7■■■■■■R11[a■■■■■■C]L!!■■■■�il■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■rriiiCi��C�C�!!!■■■■■■■■rrrr■■I�r■L'AIL':■■■G■nn!■■e�I!_■v■■n■■■m11W■■�Ilm■■■■■■■■■■LJF.;ti■R7[�■■■■■lyvi■■■■■■■■■■■GJI�■■■■■■�11■■■■■■■■G9F:r■■■■■!IL■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■iiC�CClC7��C�!!■■I■■■■■■■■■r�■■[>lll�!■C■nth■■LS�IhilW11!!■■■■■■■■■Gifh■F![�■■■■■R7°
■■■■■■■■■■■LLivy■■■■■iKll�l■■■■■■h1Yb■■■■Y'71V■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■i\■■■■■■■ILiiEm■■■■IA■■■■1■■■riir■■ am -oil L'a[111m!■■■■■■■■■■1■■h■L11■■1!■■■■■riL:W■■■■■■■■■■■V■F:y■■■■■1Y11�i7■■■■■■[iGV■■■■JIRRIM■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■_■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ii■■■■■■I■■■■■■rii!!!■■I■■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■■C■dR■C1lJ■■■■■f11■u■■■■■■■■■■■Gifi■■■■■i!IIJ7■■■■■■N\L:W■■■■�■Iry■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■�_•�■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■I■■■■■■■■■■■■■i��■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■■rimr■LILiJ■■■■■�NiW■■■■■■■■■■■■Ja■h■■■■■■f>AIIW■■■■■■■r■L'W■■■■ailr7■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■►\■■■�\■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■I■i\■■■■■■■■11■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■L'�L"J■■■■■■■■■■■G■nR■■■■■1=11!J■■■■■■f11■u■■■■N■ILi■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■\`/ii■1\■■[!i,\■■■■■■■■■■■_■_■■■■■I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■I■■L1i■■■■■■■11■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■tilt■■■■■[ull!l■■■■■■l^�iW■■■■W■1�9■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■i`J■■■G1�i■■■\`��i�►\■■■�.■�����::\■■■■■■■■■■■■■I■■■■\'!■■■■■11■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■■L'�L"J■■■■7■Imn■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■Bann■r.�■a■■s•�a■■■f,�■L+��■■■■■■■■��■■■■�.■::�_.��■■■■■_�_:�■■11■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■1■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■!'7R7■N4L:J■■LYrN■!\�i■■■■■■■■■■■\■��■■■■■■■■■\1■■■�����=__1■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■■■G■■■i■ii�I��G�i�■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■Gil9■NavG■■G1rM■Ei■■■■■■■■■■■■■1:A■■■■■■■■■■■\\!59■■■■■■■\'■iewi!!*:m=
C"m■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■PN■■■■■■■■■I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■LLiF�■■VL77■■C7■b■rd[�■■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■■■■1!I■■■■■■■■■►\L!�■■■■■i■■■rC�■■i\■■■I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■C�1\■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■�iFy■■![�■■ElLW■L'YLyi■■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■1:I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■\!��■■II■■■■i.�
=\■ri��C�■■■■■■■■■Il:ii:i■IIY■■■■■v■■■■■■■■■■■I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■Yi\ti■Ny[�■■R1Y�■L"vnry■■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■\`i�!■AGrC\■■■■1\A■■■■■■■■L1isCii���CC!C��1■\\■■■■7■■■■■■■■■■■I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■1■■h■■1■[0■■GNLii■Liir�■■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■I■i�■■■■■C\■■!'■■■■■■■!�ii■\■II■■■■■■■■\■■A■■[■■■�!.��■■■■I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■CrhR■C!!J■■■11■N■L"yr�1■■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■1`===�ii■I\■■■!■■■■■■■■■■■►\■\,!7■[ii■■■■■■■■�i�
!!■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■riir■I:ILJ■■Fii�■Ni■t>■■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■�i■■■■r■■■■■■■■■■\�����ii■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■'\■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■CiC'J■Ni■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■■■r7■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■\1■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■[.]■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■see
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■s11La■■■■■■■■■l=11■■■■■■■
■■■NARNME■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■■��■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■n■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■L4\Ili■■■■■■■■■■■i11Li■■■■■■l:IIN■■■■■■■■L•JLJ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■■1\■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■1■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■iAI1F■■■■■■■■■■isll�i■■■■■■L}■Ilira■■■■■■■4vL'G■■■LY■■■■■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■■LI■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■wllf:;■■■■■■■■■■i[11■■■■■■■■L9lllii■■■■■■■Lilt:��■■■L'Jr1■■■■■■■■■■■.11■r1■■■■■■�■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■1\■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
moommommom moommommom MMMMMMMMMM MMMMMMMImllR I■■■■■■■■■■i11r7■■■■■■■blimm■■■■
CmrI-,I■■■■■■■■■■■i71irR■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■r7■■■r7■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■flA11Q■■■■■■■■■■i'�11r7■■■■■■■N11�m■■■■■■■Na■�■■■�7L+a■■■■■■■■■■■�a4�L+a�a■■■■►�■■■■■■■■■■■■I:i■■■1:1■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■L�■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■1W11!•■■■■■■■■■■1l11m■■■■■■■■iQIINBM■■■■■■PURaIU■■■Easy■■■■■■■■■■■a46a!■Nv1■■■■U■■■■■■■■■■■■maapi■maaN■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■[.•�11�i1■■■■■■■■■lW111•!■■■■■■■flA11w■■■■■■■■ranm■■■tz�a�■■■■■■■■■■■���Tm��n■■■■is���at�r,a■■■■s,�a�■m�a�■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■a■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■Y■■■■■■■■■■■[111mmommo■■l=11_i■■■■■■■■■■■■■■G2wmMM■■■■■■■■■pF.RR2mdC1■■■■■■QGGN&Ni■■■■[Armilmormo■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■I\!!A!rmsmeA■*C■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■Y■■■■■■■■[ull!'!■■■■■■■■■■■■■■Rl■N■■■■■■■■■■■��C�L+11yC1■■■■■■I■:12`IID/��IaC■■■lit:�1■lit:�1■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ILt:luJti33��Gi1JllE■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■Y■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■Fii�■■■■■■■■■■■MIIW■All■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■Yir��■Vir�m■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■rsa■■�ars■aa■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

cn
z
Q
i
O
cn
x
J
a_
X
6�
ED
N
CO
U
N
cn
x
/
T
0
/
i
U
0&
N
� 0 CS
0 5 10
REACH 7 CROSS -SECTIONS BAKER PROJ. REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
162039 13
130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
150 140
1000
989.72'
(Riffle)
1000
m 1J
9901
1
1
1
3'
990
980
13+25.00
980
1000
_
°''�
' -
1000
17
990
I
/
I
3_�
990
9
9801
1
1
1
1
1
1
(Pool)
980
14+00.00
1000
i.
1000
990
7
1 +
990
2
98
.69'
980
0.
0
Riffle)
980
1000
1000
1�;+=
�
�I•E
I
�;=
984.40'
(Pool)
�I _
990
41
990
980
980
16+00.00
1000
1000
'[%'
983.90'
10.00(Pgol),
990
3:1
_
990
980
980
17+
I
I
150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150

cn
z
i
O
cn
x
J
X
6�
r)
ED
N
CO
U
N
X
/
C
T
N
O
/
i
0 5 10
REACH 7 CROSS -SECTIONS BAKER PROJ. REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
162039 14
130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
150 140
1000
1000
�'. E
�iJ
981.59 2•
c
�i•
990
3: 7
990
I
I
�
• �
I
I
9801
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
17+75.00 (Riffle)
980
_
i�
E
990
990
I
I
I
I
•1
980
.30'
980
98
0+
0.
0
(Pqiol)
1000
1000
tE
'E
990
—
mLJ
—
----
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
— —
—
iJ
+-
— —
_
990
i3=�
9801
1
1
1
1
1
1
980
21+
0.
0(Rififle)
I
985.34'
22+25.00 (Riffle)
1
I
990
990
980
1980
970
1970
I
ci E
990
—
°'!-j
1
990
983.76'
980
— —
980
2
+
0.
0
Ri
le)
150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150

Qc
n
MATCH LINE - SEE SHEET 16
C
Ln
w
I
cn
I
N
CD
C
C
a1
co
0
/
N
N
L
(__l
i
3
m6'
O�
NG:)
\N
Or;:
w
w
V)
V)
LU
v)
LU
Z
J
V
a

F U
/ / C
i
/
/
i
MATCH LINE - SEE SHEET 15
17
� - 1
lzli�; V,
'--
7-7
°bAll
I II
�� I
m6'
O�
N�
\N
�9�
Or;:

Soo
w
Ew
(441)
W
0
MAINTENANCE PLAN:
1
2
3
5
6
7
EROSION
QUALIFIED PERSONNEL, ON A DAILY BASIS WILL EVALUATE ALL TEMPORARY EROSION AND
SEDIMENTATION CONTROL PRACTICES FOR STABILITY AND OPERATION.
INSPECT AND MAINTAIN ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES EVERY 7 DAYS AND AFTER
SIGNIFICANT RAINFALL (0.5 INCHES OR GREATER) AND DOCUMENT WITH INSPECTION R
A RAIN GAUGE WILL ALSO BE KEPT ON -SITE AND DAILY RAINFALL AMOUNTS WILL BE RE
ANY REPAIRS NEEDED WILL BE PERFORMED IMMEDIATELY TO MAINTAIN ALL PRACTICE
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF TEMPORARY 0
AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MEASURES.
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR IMPLEMENTING AND FOLLOWING THE
SEDIMENTATION AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN.
A COPY OF THE COMBINED SELF -INSPECTION MONITORING FORM CAN BE DOUND ON E
(http: //deq.nc. gov/about/divisions/energy-mineral-land-resources/erosion-sediment-control-forms)
RTn- NO -
DESCRIPTION
Sym 101.
0
6.06 TEMPORARY GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ACCESS
00000000
6.55 ROCK PIPE INLET PROTECTION o
°000Qo
6.60 TEMPORARY SEDIMENT TRAP ................................................ "
6.62 TEMPORARY SILT FENCE
6.63 TEMPORARY ROCK DAM .........................................................
TEMPORARY STREAM CROSSING
TEMPORARY WETLAND MAT ............................................. '
LIMITS OF DISTUR3ANCE............................................. — — — — — — —
NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
F� SEDIMENTA TION
STATE
BAKER PROJECT REFERENCE NO.
SHEET
NO.
TOTAL
SHEETS
NC
162®39
EC-1
CONTROL PLAN
LOCATION: ROCK HILL CHURCH ROAD & NURSE ROAD
TYPE OF WORK: STREAM RESTORATION & ENHANCEMENT
R
Z
D
v
19
NCDMS ID NO. 100020
GRAPHIC SCALES
THIS PROJECT CONTAINS
PROJECT STANDARDS
THE FOLLOWING STANDARDS AS THEY APPEAR IN THE "NC EROSION CONTROL
PLANNING AND DESIGN MANUAL" AND ARE APPLICA3LE TO THIS PROJECT AND
3Y REFERENCE HERE3Y ARE CONSIDERED PART OF THE PLANS.
PREPARED IN THE OFFICE OF:
Michael _ Michael Baker Engineering Inc.
8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 600
' Cary, NORTH 3.5488CARONA 27518
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
I N T E R N A T 1 0 N A L License #: F-1084
PROJECT E1�GII�EER
40 0 40 80
EROSION CONTROL PLANS
FOR ALL PHASES OF
CONSTRUCTION.
6.06 TEMPORARY GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ACCESS
6.24 RIPARIAN AREA SEEDING
PROGRESS DRAWING
FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLY
6.60 TEMPORARY SEDIMENT TRAP
KATHLEEN M. MCKEITHAN, PE
ISO NOT USE FOR CONSTRUCTION
PLANS
6.62 SILT FENCE
LETTING DATE.
PROJECT ENGINEER
TOTAL DISTURBED AREA = Acres
6.63 TEMPORARY ROCK DAM
6.55 ROCK PIPE INLET PROTECTION
P.E.
SIGNATURE:

C
Q
L)
w
I
cn
CTI
C
n
C
T
N
N
N
i
i
N
C_
3
GROUND STABILIZATION AND MATERIALS HANDLING PRACTICES FOR COMPLIANCE
WITH THE NCGO1 CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PERMIT
Implementing the details and specifications on this plan sheet will result in the construction
activity being considered compliant with the Ground Stabilization and Materials Handling
sections of the NCGO1 Construction General Permit (Sections E and F, respectively). The
permittee shall comply with the Erosion and Sediment Control plan approved by the delegated
authority having jurisdiction. All details and specifications shown on this sheet may not apply
depending on site conditions and the delegated authority having jurisdiction.
SECTION E: GROUND STABILIZATION
Required Ground Stabilization Timeframes
Stabilize within this
Site Area Description
many calendar
Timeframe variations
days after ceasing
land disturbance
(a) Perimeter dikes,
swales, ditches, and
7
None
perimeter slopes
(b) High Quality Water
(HQW) Zones
7
None
(c) Slopes steeper than
If slopes are 10' or less in length and are
3:1
7
not steeper than 2:1, 14 days are
allowed
-7 days for slopes greater than 50' in
length and with slopes steeper than 4:1
(d) Slopes 3:1 to 4:1
14
-7 days for perimeter dikes, swales,
ditches, perimeter slopes and HQW
Zones
-10 days for Falls Lake Watershed
-7 days for perimeter dikes, swales, ditches,
(e) Areas with slopes
perimeter slopes and HQW Zones
flatter than 4:1
14
-10 days for Falls Lake Watershed unless
there is zero slope
Note: After the permanent cessation of construction activities, any areas with temporary ground
stabilization shall be converted to permanent ground stabilization as soon as practicable but in
no case longer than 90 calendar days after the last land disturbing activity. Temporary ground
stabilization shall be maintained in a manner to render the surface stable against accelerated
erosion until permanent ground stabilization is achieved.
GROUND STABILIZATION SPECIFICATION
Stabilize the ground sufficiently so that rain will not dislodge the soil. Use one of the
techniques in the table below:
Temporary Stabilization
Permanent Stabilization
• Temporary grass seed covered with straw or
• Permanent grass seed covered with straw or
other mulches and tackifiers
other mulches and tackifiers
• Hydroseeding
• Geotextile fabrics such as permanent soil
• Rolled erosion control products with or
reinforcement matting
without temporary grass seed
• Hydroseeding
• Appropriately applied straw or other mulch
• Shrubs or other permanent plantings covered
• Plastic sheeting
with mulch
• Uniform and evenly distributed ground cover
sufficient to restrain erosion
• Structural methods such as concrete, asphalt or
retaining walls
• Rolled erosion control products with grass seed
POLYACRYLAMIDES (PAMS) AND FLOCCULANTS
1. Select flocculants that are appropriate for the soils being exposed during construction,
selecting from the NC DWR List of Approved PAMS/Flocculants.
2. Apply flocculants at or before the inlets to Erosion and Sediment Control Measures.
3. Apply flocculants at the concentrations specified in the NC DWR List of Approved
PAMS/Flocculants and in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions.
4. Provide ponding area for containment of treated Stormwater before discharging offsite.
5. Store flocculants in leak -proof containers that are kept under storm -resistant cover or
surrounded by secondary containment structures.
EQUIPMENT AND VEHICLE MAINTENANCE
1. Maintain vehicles and equipment to prevent discharge of fluids.
2. Provide drip pans under any stored equipment.
3. Identify leaks and repair as soon as feasible, or remove leaking equipment from the
project.
4. Collect all spent fluids, store in separate containers and properly dispose as hazardous
waste (recycle when possible).
5. Remove leaking vehicles and construction equipment from service until the problem has
been corrected.
6. Bring used fuels, lubricants, coolants, hydraulic fluids and other petroleum products to a
recycling or disposal center that handles these materials.
LITTER, BUILDING MATERIAL AND LAND CLEARING WASTE
1. Never bury or burn waste. Place litter and debris in approved waste containers.
2. Provide a sufficient number and size of waste containers (e.g dumpster, trash receptacle)
on site to contain construction and domestic wastes.
3. Locate waste containers at least 50 feet away from storm drain inlets and surface waters
unless no other alternatives are reasonably available.
4. Locate waste containers on areas that do not receive substantial amounts of runoff from
upland areas and does not drain directly to a storm drain, stream or wetland.
5. Cover waste containers at the end of each workday and before storm events or provide
secondary containment. Repair or replace damaged waste containers.
6. Anchor all lightweight items in waste containers during times of high winds.
7. Empty waste containers as needed to prevent overflow. Clean up immediately if
containers overflow.
8. Dispose waste off -site at an approved disposal facility.
9. On business days, clean up and dispose of waste in designated waste containers.
PAINT AND OTHER LIQUID WASTE
1. Do not dump paint and other liquid waste into storm drains, streams or wetlands.
2. Locate paint washouts at least 50 feet away from storm drain inlets and surface waters
unless no other alternatives are reasonably available.
3. Contain liquid wastes in a controlled area.
4. Containment must be labeled, sized and placed appropriately for the needs of site.
5. Prevent the discharge of soaps, solvents, detergents and other liquid wastes from
construction sites.
PORTABLE TOILETS
1. Install portable toilets on level ground, at least 50 feet away from storm drains, streams or
wetlands unless there is no alternative reasonably available. If 50 foot offset is not
attainable, provide relocation of portable toilet behind silt fence or place on a gravel pad
and surround with sand bags.
2. Provide staking or anchoring of portable toilets during periods of high winds or in high foot
traffic areas.
3. Monitor portable toilets for leaking and properly dispose of any leaked material. Utilize a
licensed sanitary waste hauler to remove leaking portable toilets and replace with properly
operating unit.
EARTHEN STOCKPILE MANAGEMENT
1. Show stockpile locations on plans. Locate earthen -material stockpile areas at least 50 feet
away from storm drain inlets, sediment basins, perimeter sediment controls and surface
waters unless it can be shown no other alternatives are reasonably available.
2. Protect stockpile with silt fence installed along toe of slope with a minimum offset of five
feet from the toe of stockpile.
3. Provide stable stone access point when feasible.
4. Stabilize stockpile within the timeframes provided on this sheet and in accordance with the
approved plan and any additional requirements. Soil stabilization is defined as vegetative,
physical or chemical coverage techniques that will restrain accelerated erosion on
disturbed soils for temporary or permanent control needs.
ONSITE CONCRETE WASHOUT
STRUCTURE WITH LINER
A
0 O O SANDBAGS(TYP.)
O O OR STAPLES
10 MIL PLASTIC
O SILT FENCE 1;1 LINING SANDBAGSCYP.)
SIDE SLOPE OR STAPLE
0 0 YP)
Oo 00
A
CLEARLY MARKED SIGNAGE
[�4�
NOTING DEVICE D SIG4" MIN.)
PLAN
SECTION A -A
NOTES'
1. ACTUAL LOCATION DETERMINED IN FIELD
2. THE CONCRETE WASHOUT STRUCTURES SHALL BE
MAINTAINED WHEN THE LIQUID AND/OR SOLID REACHES
75 % OF THE STRUCTURES CAPACITY.
&CONCRETE WASHOUT STRUCTURE NEEDS TO BE
CLEARY MARKED WITH SIGNAGE NOTING DEVICE.
BELOW GRADE WASHOUT STRUCTURE
NOT TO SCALE
CLEARLY MARKED SIGNAGE
CONCRETE NOTING DEVICE (18"X24" MIN.)
WASHOUT
PLAN
SANDBAGS (TYP.)
OR STAPLES
10 MIL PLASTIC
HIGH COHESIVE &
LINING
LOW FILTRATION
1:1 SIDE SLOPE
SOIL BERM
(TYP.)
SECTION B-B
NOTES:
1. ACTUAL LOCATION DETERMINED IN FIELD
2. THE CONCRETE WASHOUT STRUCTURES
SHALL BE MAINTAINED WHEN THE LIQUID
AND/OR SOLID REACHES 75 % OF THE
STRUCTURES CAPACITY TO PROVIDE
ADEQUATE HOLDING CAPACITY WITH A
MINIMUM 12 INCHES OF FREEBOARD.
3.CONCRETE WASHOUT STRUCTURE NEEDS
TO BE CLEARY MARKED WITH SIGNAGE
NOTING DEVICE.
ABOVE GRADE WASHOUT STRUCTURE
NOT TO SCALE
CONCRETE WASHOUTS
1. Do not discharge concrete or cement slurry from the site.
2. Dispose of, or recycle settled, hardened concrete residue in accordance with local and
state solid waste regulations and at an approved facility.
3. Manage washout from mortar mixers in accordance with the above item and in addition
place the mixer and associated materials on impervious barrier and within lot perimeter silt
fence.
4. Install temporary concrete washouts per local requirements, where applicable. If an
alternate method or product is to be used, contact your approval authority for review and
approval. If local standard details are not available, use one of the two types of temporary
concrete washouts provided on this detail.
5. Do not use concrete washouts for dewatering or storing defective curb or sidewalk
sections. Stormwater accumulated within the washout may not be pumped into or
discharged to the storm drain system or receiving surface waters. Liquid waste must be
pumped out and removed from project.
6. Locate washouts at least 50 feet from storm drain inlets and surface waters unless it can
be shown that no other alternatives are reasonably available. At a minimum, install
protection of storm drain inlet(s) closest to the washout which could receive spills or
overflow.
7. Locate washouts in an easily accessible area, on level ground and install a stone entrance
pad in front of the washout. Additional controls may be required by the approving
authority.
8. Install at least one sign directing concrete trucks to the washout within the project limits.
Post signage on the washout itself to identify this location.
9. Remove leavings from the washout when at approximately 75% capacity to limit overflow
events. Replace the tarp, sand bags or other temporary structural components when no
longer functional. When utilizing alternative or proprietary products, follow manufacturer's
instructions.
10. At the completion of the concrete work, remove remaining leavings and dispose of in an
approved disposal facility. Fill pit, if applicable, and stabilize any disturbance caused by
removal of washout.
HERBICIDES, PESTICIDES AND RODENTICIDES
1. Store and apply herbicides, pesticides and rodenticides in accordance with label
restrictions.
2. Store herbicides, pesticides and rodenticides in their original containers with the label,
which lists directions for use, ingredients and first aid steps in case of accidental
poisoning.
3. Do not store herbicides, pesticides and rodenticides in areas where flooding is possible or
where they may spill or leak into wells, stormwater drains, ground water or surface water.
If a spill occurs, clean area immediately.
4. Do not stockpile these materials onsite.
HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC WASTE
1. Create designated hazardous waste collection areas on -site.
2. Place hazardous waste containers under cover or in secondary containment.
3. Do not store hazardous chemicals, drums or bagged materials directly on the ground.
NCGO I GROUND STABILIZATION AND MATERIALS HANDLING
EFFECTIVE: 04/01/19

m
w
w
cn
N
CD
C
C
a1
CO
N
CJ
N
N
L
C�
i
C_
3
PART III
SELF -INSPECTION, RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING
SECTION A: SELF -INSPECTION
Self -inspections are required during normal business hours in accordance with the table below.
When adverse weather or site conditions would cause the safety of the inspection personnel to
be in jeopardy, the inspection may be delayed until the next business day on which it is safe to
perform the inspection. In addition, when a storm event of equal to or greater than 1.0 inch
occurs outside of normal business hours, the self -inspection shall be performed upon the
commencement of the next business day. Any time when inspections were delayed shall be
noted in the Inspection Record.
Frequency
Inspect
(during normal
Inspection records must include:
business hours)
(1) Rain gauge
Daily
Daily rainfall amounts.
maintained in
If no daily rain gauge observations are made during weekend or
good working
holiday periods, and no individual -day rainfall information is
order
available, record the cumulative rain measurement for those un-
attended days (and this will determine if a site inspection is
needed). Days on which no rainfall occurred shall be recorded as
"zero." The permittee may use another rain -monitoring device
approved by the Division.
(2) E&SC
At least once per
1. Identification of the measures inspected,
Measures
7 calendar days
2. Date and time of the inspection,
and within 24
3. Name of the person performing the inspection,
hours of a rain
4. Indication of whether the measures were operating
event > 1.0 inch in
properly,
24 hours
5. Description of maintenance needs for the measure,
6. Description, evidence, and date of corrective actions taken.
(3) Stormwater
At least once per
1. Identification of the discharge outfalls inspected,
discharge
7 calendar days
2. Date and time of the inspection,
outfalls (SDOs)
and within 24
3. Name of the person performing the inspection,
hours of a rain
4. Evidence of indicators of stormwater pollution such as oil
event > 1.0 inch in
sheen, floating or suspended solids or discoloration,
24 hours
5. Indication of visible sediment leaving the site,
6. Description, evidence, and date of corrective actions taken.
(4) Perimeter of
At least once per
If visible sedimentation is found outside site limits, then a record
site
7 calendar days
of the following shall be made:
and within 24
1. Actions taken to clean up or stabilize the sediment that has left
hours of a rain
the site limits,
event > 1.0 inch in
2. Description, evidence, and date of corrective actions taken, and
24 hours
3. An explanation as to the actions taken to control future
releases.
(5) Streams or
At least once per
If the stream or wetland has increased visible sedimentation or a
wetlands onsite
7 calendar days
stream has visible increased turbidity from the construction
or offsite
and within 24
activity, then a record of the following shall be made:
(where
hours of a rain
1. Description, evidence and date of corrective actions taken, and
accessible)
event > 1.0 inch in
2. Records of the required reports to the appropriate Division
24 hours
Regional Office per Part III, Section C, Item (2)(a) of this permit.
(6) Ground
After each phase
1. The phase of grading (installation of perimeter E&SC
stabilization
of grading
measures, clearing and grubbing, installation of storm
measures
drainage facilities, completion of all land -disturbing
activity, construction or redevelopment, permanent
ground cover).
2. Documentation that the required ground stabilization
measures have been provided within the required
timeframe or an assurance that they will be provided as
soon as possible.
NOTE: The rain inspection resets the required 7 calendar day inspection requirement.
PART III
SELF -INSPECTION, RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING
SECTION B: RECORDKEEPING
1. E&SC Plan Documentation
The approved E&SC plan as well as any approved deviation shall be kept on the site. The
approved E&SC plan must be kept up-to-date throughout the coverage under this permit.
The following items pertaining to the E&SC plan shall be kept on site and available for
inspection at all times during normal business hours.
Item to Document
Documentation Requirements
(a) Each E&SC measure has been installed
Initial and date each E&SC measure on a copy
and does not significantly deviate from the
of the approved E&SC plan or complete, date
locations, dimensions and relative elevations
and sign an inspection report that lists each
shown on the approved E&SC plan.
E&SC measure shown on the approved E&SC
plan. This documentation is required upon the
initial installation of the E&SC measures or if
the E&SC measures are modified after initial
installation.
(b) A phase of grading has been completed.
Initial and date a copy of the approved E&SC
plan or complete, date and sign an inspection
report to indicate completion of the
construction phase.
(c) Ground cover is located and installed
Initial and date a copy of the approved E&SC
in accordance with the approved E&SC
plan or complete, date and sign an inspection
plan.
report to indicate compliance with approved
ground cover specifications.
(d) The maintenance and repair
Complete, date and sign an inspection report.
requirements for all E&SC measures
have been performed.
(e) Corrective actions have been taken
Initial and date a copy of the approved E&SC
to E&SC measures.
plan or complete, date and sign an inspection
report to indicate the completion of the
corrective action.
2. Additional Documentation to be Kept on Site
In addition to the E&SC plan documents above, the following items shall be kept on the
site and available for inspectors at all times during normal business hours, unless the
Division provides a site -specific exemption based on unique site conditions that make
this requirement not practical:
(a) This General Permit as well as the Certificate of Coverage, after it is received.
(b) Records of inspections made during the previous twelve months. The permittee shall
record the required observations on the Inspection Record Form provided by the
Division or a similar inspection form that includes all the required elements. Use of
electronically -available records in lieu of the required paper copies will be allowed if
shown to provide equal access and utility as the hard -copy records.
3. Documentation to be Retained for Three Years
All data used to complete the e-NOI and all inspection records shall be maintained for a period
of three years after project completion and made available upon request. [40 CFR 122.41]
PART II, SECTION G, ITEM (4)
DRAW DOWN OF SEDIMENT BASINS FOR MAINTENANCE OR CLOSE OUT
Sediment basins and traps that receive runoff from drainage areas of one acre or more shall use outlet structures that withdraw water from the surface when these devices need to be drawn down for
maintenance or close out unless this is infeasible. The circumstances in which it is not feasible to withdraw water from the surface shall be rare (for example, times with extended cold weather).
Non -surface withdrawals from sediment basins shall be allowed only when all of the following criteria have been met:
(a) The E&SC plan authority has been provided with documentation of the non -surface withdrawal and the specific time periods or conditions in which it will occur. The non -surface withdrawal
shall not commence until the E&SC plan authority has approved these items,
(b) The non -surface withdrawal has been reported as an anticipated bypass in accordance with Part III, Section C, Item (2)(c) and (d) of this permit,
(c) Dewatering discharges are treated with controls to minimize discharges of pollutants from stormwater that is removed from the sediment basin. Examples of appropriate controls include
properly sited, designed and maintained dewatering tanks, weir tanks, and filtration systems,
(d) Vegetated, upland areas of the sites or a properly designed stone pad is used to the extent feasible at the outlet of the dewatering treatment devices described in Item (c) above,
(e) Velocity dissipation devices such as check dams, sediment traps, and riprap are provided at the discharge points of all dewatering devices, and
(f) Sediment removed from the dewatering treatment devices described in Item (c) above is disposed of in a manner that does not cause deposition of sediment into waters of the United States.
PART III
SELF -INSPECTION, RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING
SECTION C: REPORTING
1. Occurences that Must be Reported
Permittees shall report the following occurrences:
(a) Visible sediment deposition in a stream or wetland.
(b) Oil spills if:
• They are 25 gallons or more,
• They are less than 25 gallons but cannot be cleaned up within 24 hours,
• They cause sheen on surface waters (regardless of volume), or
• They are within 100 feet of surface waters (regardless of volume).
(c) Releases of hazardous substances in excess of reportable quantities under Section 311
of the Clean Water Act (Ref: 40 CFR 110.3 and 40 CFR 117.3) or Section 102 of CERCLA
(Ref: 40 CFR 302.4) or G.S. 143-215.85.
(d) Anticipated bypasses and unanticipated bypasses.
(e) Noncompliance with the conditions of this permit that may endanger health or the
environment.
2. Reporting Timeframes and Other Requirements
After a permittee becomes aware of an occurrence that must be reported, he shall contact
the appropriate Division regional office within the timeframes and in accordance with the
other requirements listed below. Occurrences outside normal business hours may also be
reported to the Department's Environmental Emergency Center personnel at [phone].
Occurrence
Reporting Timeframes (After Discovery) and Other Requirements
(a) Visible sediment
•
Within 24 hours, an oral or electronic notification.
deposition in a
•
Within 7 calendar days, a report that contains a description of the
stream or wetland
sediment and actions taken to address the cause of the deposition.
Division staff may waive the requirement for a written report on a
case -by -case basis.
•
If the stream is named on the NC 303(d) list as impaired for sediment -
related causes, the permittee may be required to perform additional
monitoring, inspections or apply more stringent practices if staff
determine that additional requirements are needed to assure compliance
with the federal or state impaired -waters conditions.
(b) Oil spills and
•
Within 24 hours, an oral or electronic notification. The notification
release of
shall include information about the date, time, nature, volume and
hazardous
location of the spill or release.
substances per Item
1(b)-(c) above
(c) Anticipated
•
A report at least ten days before the date of the bypass, if possible.
bypasses [40 CFR
The report shall include an evaluation of the anticipated quality and
122.41(m)(3)]
effect of the bypass.
(d) Unanticipated
•
Within 24 hours, an oral or electronic notification.
bypasses [40 CFR
•
Within 7 calendar days, a report that includes an evaluation of the
122.41(m)(3)]
quality and effect of the bypass.
(e) Noncompliance
•
Within 24 hours, an oral or electronic notification.
with the conditions
•
Within 7 calendar days, a report that contains a description of the
of this permit that
noncompliance, and its causes; the period of noncompliance,
may endanger
including exact dates and times, and if the noncompliance has not
health or the
been corrected, the anticipated time noncompliance is expected to
environment[40
continue; and steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and
CFR 122.41(I)(7)]
prevent reoccurrence of the noncompliance. [40 CFR 122.41(I)(6).
•
Division staff may waive the requirement for a written report on a
case -by -case basis.
o�
CVN
\N
�9(_0
Or�!
NCGO I SELF -INSPECTION, RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING
EFFECTIVE: 04/01/19

cr
Qc
TEMPORARY GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE /EXIT
TEMPORARY SILT FENCE
PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
162039 EC-2
m6'
o�
CVO
ACV
�9(_0
or�!
PUBLIC ROAD
PUBLIC ROAD
NOTES:
SPECIFICATION NO. 6.06 - CONSTRUCTION ACCESS "N.C. EROSION AND SEDIMENT
CONTROL PLANNING AND DESIGN MANUAL MARCH 2O09"
TEMPORARY ROCK DAM
FLOW
01 CONSTRUCTION AREA UPSTREAM
STILLING BASIN \
\ (2 FT. MAX DEPTH) /
i
EXISTING CHANNEL
PLAN VIEW
2'
1'
FLOW
10 77--
#57 STON
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
CROSS SECTION
Y
Z
a
m
Q
w
6" MINIMUM THICKNESS OF
WASHED CLASS A STONE
I II- I Ll I\ 1 rUl\IC
7 STONE
GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
CLASS B STONE
T
2/3 BANKFULL
MAXIMUM DEPTH
NOTES:
1. TEMPORARY ROCK CHECK DAMS SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE END OF THE REACH THAT IS UNDER
CONSTRUCTION WITHIN THE CURRENT PHASE OF CONSTRUCTION AND/OF AS DESIGNATED ON THE
EROSION CONTROL PLANS.
2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR INSPECTING THE TEMPORARY ROCK CHECK DAMS
ON A DAILY BASIS AND CLEANING OR REPAIRING THEM AS NEEDED.
3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE REQUIRED TO REMOVE SEDIMENT FROM THE CHECK DAMS ONCE THE
DEPTH OF SEDIMENT REACHES 12 INCHES.
WIRE OR PLASTIC ZIP TIES WITH 8' MAX. WITH WIRE T-POSTS SHALL BE 1.33 LB/LF STEEL WITH A MINIMUM PROGRESS DRAWING
(6' MAX. WITHOUT WIRE, FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLY
A MINIMUM TENSILE STRENGTH REQUIRES USE OF EXTRA LENGTH OF 5 FEET AND SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED SO
OF 50 LB SHALL BE USED TO STRENGTH FILTER FABRIC) AS TO ALLOW FOR FASTENING OF THE FABRIC ISO NOT USE FOR CONSTRUCTION
CONSTRUCT THE FENCE
(4' MAX. WITHOUT WIRE,
NORMAL STRENGTH
FILTER FABRIC)
MESH CONSISTING OF
14 GAGE WIRE AT MAX
SPACING OF 6"x6"
FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE STANDARD OR EXTRA
STRENGTH SYNTHETIC FIBER CERTIFIED BY THE
MANUFACTURER TO COMPLY WITH MATERIAL
REQUIREMENTS IN ASTM STANDARDS D 6461, 4632, 4491,
4751, AND 4355.
NOTES:
1. AVOID JOINTS, UNAVOIDABLE JOINTS MUST HAVE 4' OF CLOTH OVERLAP AND SHOULD TIE INTO
THE NEXT ADJACENT POST.
2. PLACE ON CONTOUR EXCEPT ENDS WHICH SHOULD BE 1' ABOVE GRADE TO PREVENT CUT AROUND.
3. WRAP APPROX. 6" OF FABRIC AROUND END POSTS AND SECURE WITH TIES.
4. REMOVE ONCE AREA IS STABLE.
5. CONTRACTOR SHALL SIDE CAST SPOIL MATERIAL FROM TRENCHING FOR SILT FENCE ONTO HIGH
GROUND OR ONTO THE PERMITTED
WETLAND IMPACT SIDE TO AVOID UNPERMITTED WETLAND IMPACTS.
MAINTENANCE NOTES:
1. INSPECT SEDIMENT FENCES AT LEAST ONCE A WEEK AND AFTER EACH RAINFALL. MAKE ANY REQUIRED
REPAIRS IMMEDIATELY.
2. SHOULD THE FABRIC OF A SEDIMENT FENCE COLLAPSE, TEAR, DECOMPOSE OR BECOME INEFFECTIVE,
REPLACE IT PROMPTLY.
3. REMOVE SEDIMENT DEPOSITS AS NECESSARY TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE STORAGE VOLUME FOR THE
NEXT RAIN AND TO REDUCE PRESSURE ON THE FENCE. TAKE CARE TO AVOID UNDERMINING THE FENCE
DURING CLEANOUT.
4. REMOVE ALL FENCING MATERIALS AND UNSTABLE SEDIMENT DEPOSITS AND BRING THE AREA TO GRADE
AND STABILIZE IT AFTER THE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA HAS BEEN PROPERLY STABILIZED.
WIRE MESH
FILTER FABRIC
MECHANICALLY COMPACTED FILL
2 PASSES OF A COMPACTION DEVICE
EXERTING AT LEAST 60 LB/IN2 ON
BOTH SIDES OF FENCE
RUNOFF
DIRECTION
III III � 8
FILTER FABRIC
TEMPORARY STREAM AND WETLAND CROSSING - WOOD MAT
WOOD MAT
CROSS SECTION
NOTES:
CLASS B STONE
I
BETWEI
Michael Baker Engineering Inc.
Michael Baker 11000 Regency Parkway, Suite 600
Cary, NORTH CAROLINA 27518
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
1 N T E R N A T 1 0 N A L License #: F-1084
NCDMS ID No. 100020
FENCE HEIGHT
MAX 24"
ABOVEGROUND
I II
POST DEPTH
24" MINIMUM
4"
SILT FENCE --\
nl ncc o crnnlE: onnnn
PLAN VIEW
1. CONSTRUCT STREAM CROSSING WHEN FLOW IS LOW.
2. HAVE ALL NECESSARY MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT ON -SITE BEFORE WORK BEGINS.
3. MINIMIZE CLEARING AND EXCAVATION OF STREAMBANKS. DO NOT EXCAVATE CHANNEL BOTTOM.
4. LINE STREAMBANK AND ACCESS RAMP AREA WITH NON -WOVEN FILTER FABRIC.
5. INSTALL STREAM CROSSING AT RIGHT ANGLE TO THE FLOW.
6. TRANSPLANT SOD FROM ORIGINAL STREAMBANK ONTO SIDE SLOPES FOR LATER USE.
7. MAINTAIN CROSSING SO THAT RUNOFF IN THE CONSTRUCTION ROAD DOES NOT ENTER EXISTING CHANNEL BY INSTALLING
SILT FENCE ON ALL FOUR CORNERS ADJACENT TO THE STREAM. SEE SILT FENCE DETAIL.
8. STABILIZE AN ACCESS RAMP OF CLASS B STONE TO THE EDGE OF THE MUD MAT.
9. THE WOOD MAT SHALL BE OF SUFFICIENT SIZE AND WIDTH TO SUPPORT THE LARGEST VEHICLE CROSSING THE CHANNEL.
10. CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE AN APPROPRIATE RAMP ANGLE ACCORDING TO EQUIPMENT UTILIZED, RECOMMENDED AT A 5:1 SLOPE.
TEMPORARY STREAM CROSSING MAINTENANCE NOTES:
1. INSPECT TEMPORARY STREAM CROSSINGS AFTER RUN-OFF PRODUCING RAINS TO CHECK FOR BLOCKAGE IN CHANNEL,
EROSION OF ABUTMENTS, CHANNEL SCOUR, RIPRAP DISPLACEMENT, OR PIPING. MAKE ALL REPAIRS IMMEDIATELY TO
PREVENT FURTHER DAMAGE TO THE INSTALLATION.

TYPICAL PUMP -AROUND OPERATION
DITCH PLUG
PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
162039 1 EC-2A
PROJECT ENGINEER
TEM
IMPERVIOUS DIKE
STABILIZED OUTLET -
CONSTRUCT WITH A MIX OF
BOULDERS AND CLASS B STI
TO STABILIZE STREAM AT
PUMP -AROUND OUTLET
EXISTING GROUND
FILTER FABRIC
SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION FOR TYPICAL PUMP -AROUND
1. INSTALL STABILIZED OUTLET AT THE DOWNSTREAM END OF THE DESIGNATED
PROJECT WORKING AREA.
2. THE CONTRACTOR WILL INSTALL THE PUMP -AROUND PUMP AND THE TEMPORARY
FLEXIBLE HOSE THAT WILL CONVEY THE BASE FLOW FROM UPSTREAM OF THE WORK
SITE TO THE SPECIAL STILLING BASIN OR STABILIZED OUTLET.
3. INSTALL UPSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKE AND BEGIN PUMPING OPERATIONS FOR
STREAM DIVERSION.
4. INSTALL THE DOWNSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKE AND PUMPING APPARATUS IF NEEDED
TO DEWATER THE ENTRAPPED AREA. THE PUMP AND HOSE FOR THIS PURPOSE SHALL
BE OF SUFFICIENT SIZE TO DEWATER THE WORK AREA. THIS WATER WILL FLOW INTO
A SPECIAL STILLING BASIN.
5. THE CONTRACTOR WILL PERFORM STREAM RESTORATION WORK IN ACCORDANCE
WITH THE PLAN AND FOLLOWING THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE.
6. THE CONTRACTOR WILL EXCAVATE ANY ACCUMULATED SILT AND DEWATER BEFORE
REMOVAL OF THE IMPERVIOUS DIKE. REMOVE IMPERVIOUS DIKES, PUMPS, AND
TEMPORARY FLEXIBLE HOSE STARTING WITH THE DOWNSTREAM DIKE FIRST.
7. THE CONTRACTOR WILL COMPLETE ALL GRADING AND STABILIZATION IN ONE DAY
WITHIN THE PUMP -AROUND AREA BETWEEN THE IMPERVIOUS DIKES.
8. ONCE THE WORKING AREA IS COMPLETED, REMOVE THE SPECIAL STILLING BASIN
AND STABILIZED OUTLET AND STABILIZE DISTURBED AREAS WITH SEED AND MULCH.
OCK DAM
SPECIAL STILLING BASIN
15 - 20 FT
NOTES:
INSTALL 2 INCH PAD OF
#57 STONE BETWEEN
SPECIAL STILLING BASIN
AND FILTER FABRIC
1. EXCAVATION SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ONLY DRY SECTIONS OF CHANNEL.
2. IMPERVIOUS DIKES SHOULD BE USED TO ISOLATE WORK AREAS FROM
STREAM FLOW.
3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT DISTURB MORE AREA THAN CAN BE STABILIZED
IN ONE WORKING DAY.
4. THE PUMP -AROUND PUMP SHOULD ADEQUATELY CONVEY BASEFLOW
CONDITIONS OF THE STREAM.
LARGE STAKES
TRENCH
rL/AIv VICVV
UNCOMPACTED BACKFILL
COMPACTED BACKFILL 1.5' MINIMUM
FINISH GRADE
COMPACTED BACKFILL-
SECTION A - Al
NOTES:
1. COMPACT BACKFILL USING ON -SITE HEAVY EQUIPMENT IN 10 INCH LIFTS.
2. FILL DITCH TO TOP OF BANKS OR AS DIRECTED BY ENGINEER.
COIR FIBER MATTING
PLACE COIR FIBER MATTING IN 6 INCH DEEP
TRENCH, STAKE, BACKFILL, AND COMPACT NOTES:
TOP OF STREAMBANK 1. BANKS SHOULD BE SEEDED PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF MATTING.
TOE OF SLOPE
PROGRESS ESS DRAWING
FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLY
ISO NOT USE FOR CONSTRUCTION
Michael Baker Engineering Inc.
Michael Baker 11000 Regency Parkway, Suite 600
Cary, NORTH CAROLINA 27518
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
1 N T E R N A T 1 0 N A L License #: F-1084
2. INSTALL COIR FIBER MATTING PER SPECIFICATIONS ALONG STREAM
BANKS OR IN OTHERS LOCATIONS SPECIFIED BY ENGINEER.
3. LARGE STAKES SHOULD NOT BE SPACED FURTHER THAN 36" APART.
4. PLACE LARGE STAKES ALONG ALL SEAMS, IN THE CENTER OF BANK,
AND TOE OF SLOPE.
BOTTOM OF CHANNEL
PLACE COIR FIBER MATTING AT TOE OF SLOPE.
SECURE MATTING WITH LARGE MATTING STAKE
CROSS SECTION VIEW
• '"41 • • • • • • • • • • • 'p-
TOP OF --�--------------�--- ----� ----------� --- -C -
STREAMBANK
LARGE -
STAKES
TRENCH
TOP OF STREAMBANK
STAKES
COIR FIBER MATTING
TO BE EXTENDED TO
TOE OF SLOPE
NCDMS ID No. 100020
2.5 INCH -
ROOFING
NAIL
TYPICAL LARGE MATTING STAKE
THE WOOD STAKE SHALL HAVE THE FOLLOWING DIMENSIONS:
LEG LENGTH
17.00 IN 43.18 CM
TAPERED TO POINT
WIDTH
1.5IN
3.81 CM
THICKNESS
1.5IN
3.81 CM
TYPICAL SMALL MATTING STAKE
THE WOOD STAKE SHALL HAVE THE FOLLOWING DIMENSIONS:
LEG LENGTH
11.00 IN
27.94 CM
HEAD WIDTH
1.25 IN
3.18 CM
HEAD THICKNESS
0.40 IN (1.02 CM)
LEG WIDTH
0.60 IN 1.52 CM
TAPERED TO POINT
LEG THICKNESS
0.40 IN
1.02 CM
TOTAL LENGTH
12.00 IN
30.48 CM
m6'
OE)
ACV
�(_0
or�!
PLAN VIEW LARGE
STAKES

DEWATERING PUMP
PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
162039 1 EC-2B
PROJECT ENGINEER
m6'
o�
CVN
ACV
C9(_0
or�!
TEMPOR
FLEXIBLI
HOSE
a
LU
Q
(D
z
Y
ry
O
G
EXISTING
GROUND
FILTEF
SPECIAL STILLING BASIN
IIVJ MILL G IIV VI I rllV VI
#57 STONE BETWEEN
SPECIAL STILLING BASIN
AND FILTER FABRIC
1. INSTALL SPECIAL SILLING BASIN OUTSIDE OF THE DESIGNATED
PROJECT WORKING AREA.
2. THE CONTRACTOR WILL INSTALL THE DEWATERING PUMP AND THE TEMPORARY
FLEXIBLE HOSE THAT WILL CONVEY THE WATER IN THE BMP TO THE SPECIAL
STILLING BASIN OR STABILIZED OUTLET.
3. THE CONTRACTOR WILL PERFORM WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLAN AND
FOLLOWING THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE.
4. THE CONTRACTOR WILL EXCAVATE ANY ACCUMULATED SILT, REMOVE PUMPS,
AND TEMPORARY FLEXIBLE HOSE.
5. ONCE THE WORKING AREA IS COMPLETED, REMOVE THE SPECIAL STILLING BASIN
AND STABILIZE DISTURBED AREAS WITH SEED AND MULCH.
�o
SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION FOR DEWATERING PUMP
SPECIAL STILLING BASIN 1. WHEN NECESSARY, INSTALL THE PUMPING APPARATUS TO DEWATER THE BMP WORK AREA.
THE PUMP AND HOSE SHALL BE OF SUFFICIENT SIZE TO DEWATER THE BMP WITHIN 24 HOURS.
THE WATER SHALL BE PUMPED FROM THE BMP TO THE SPECIAL STILLING BASIN.
2. THE CONTRACTOR MAY THEN FINISH GRADE AND PLANT THE BMP IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
PLAN AND THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE.
3. ONCE GRADING AND PLANTING ARE COMPLETE, REMOVE PUMP AND HOSE.
4. STABILIZE DISTURBED AREAS WITH TEMPORARY SEED AND MULCH.
ROCK PIPE INLET PROTECTION
0
CLASS 1 RIP RAP(SEE SECTI N THRLIBA INBELOW
�11
NVERT
W
\ PIPE
SEOlMFNT STORAGE AREA
o f
� r
I PERSPECTIVE VIEW
NO SCA-E
LASS 1 RIP RAP HEADWALL
#67 WASHED STONE. T THICK X 3' HIGH MIN.
NOTE'
GRAVEL 5 RIP RAP FILTER BERM BASIN DETAIL
IS DESIGNED TO PROTECT EXISTING PIPE INVERTS
AREASTO BE DISTURBED
(CUT, FILL, ETC.)-
SEDIMENT
STORAGE
PIPE INVERT
FLOOD STORAGE ZONE
RIP RAP HEADWALL
NATURAL GROUND
FLCw
1. 5'
FLOW
CLARIP-RAP S51
FILTER FABRIC
ti57 WASH ED $TO N E
DIMENSIDNS ARE MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE
UNLESS OTHERVASE NOTED.
MAX. SEDIMENT DEPTH(CLEAN CUT POINT)
SECTION THRU BASIN, FILTER AND CULVERT PIPE
NO SCALE
CONSTUCTION SPECIFICATIONS:
1. CLEAR THE AREA OF ALL DEBRIS THAT MIGHT HINDER EXCAVATION AND DISPOSE OF SPOIL.
2. INSTALL THE CLASS B OR CLASS I RIP RAP IN A SEMI -CIRCLE AROUND THE PIPE INLET. THE STONE SHOULD BE BUILT UP HIGHER ON EACH END WHERE IT TIES INTO THE
EMBANKMENT. THE MINIMUM CREST WIDTH OF THE RIP RAP SHOULD BE 3 FEET, WITH A MINIMUM BOTTOM WIDTH OF 11 FEET. THE MINIMUM HEIGHT SHOULD BE 2 FEET,
BUT ALSO 1 FOOT LOWER THAN THE SHOULDER OF THE EMBANKMENT OF DIVERSIONS.
3. 1 FOOT THICK LAYER OF NCDOT #5 OR #57 STONE SHOULD BE PLACED ON THE OUTSIDE SLOPE OF THE RIP RAP.
4. THE SEDIMENT STORAGE AREA SHOULD BE EXCAVATED AROUND THE OUSIDE OF THE STONE HORSESHOE 18 INCHES BELOW NATURAL GRADE.
5. WHEN CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA HAS BEEN STABILIZED, FILL DEPRESSION AND ESTABLISH FINAL GRADING ELEVATIONS, COMPACT AREA PROPERLY, AND STABILIZE
WITH GROUND COVER.
MAINTENANCE-
1 . INSPECT ROCK PIPE INLET PROTECTION AT LEAST WEEKLY AFTER EACH SIGNIFICANT (1/2 INCH OR GREATER) RAINFAL EVENT AND REPAIR IMMEDIATELY.
2. REMOVE SEDIMENT AND RESTORE THE SEDIMENT STORAGE AREA TO ITS ORIGINAL DIMENSIONS WHEN THE SEDIMENT HAS ACCUMULATED TO ON -HALF THE DESIGN DEPTH
OF THE TRAP.
3. PLACE THE SEDIMENT THAT IS REMOVED IN THE DESIGNATED DISPOSAL AREA AND REPLACE THE CONTAMINATED PART OF THE GRAVEL FACING.
4. CHECK THE STRUCTURE FOR DAMAGE. ANY RIP RAP DISPLACED FROM THE STONE HORSESHOE MUST BE REPLACED IMMEDIATELY.
5. AFTER ALL THE SEDIMENT -PRODUCING AREAS HAVE BEEN PERMANENTLY STABILIZED, REMOVE THE STRUCTURE AND ALL THE UNSTABLE SEDIMENT.
6. SMOOTH THE AREA TO BLEND WITH THE ADJOINING AREAS AND PROVIDE PERMANENT GROUND COVER,
TEMPORARY SEEDING SELECTION AND APPLICATION RATES
Common Name
Scientific Name
Application Time
Application
Rate
Total (Ibs/acre)
Cereal rye
Secale cereale
Sept - March
3 Ib/1,000 sq ft.
130 Ibs/acre
Browntop millet
Panicum ramosum
April - Aug
1 Ib/1,000 sq ft.
44 Ibs/acre
PROGRESS DRAWING
FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLY
ISO NOT USE FOR CONSTRUCTION
Michael Baker Engineering Inc.
Michael Baker 8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 600
Cary, NORTH CAROLINA 27518
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
1 N T E R N A T 1 0 N A L License #: F-1084
NCDMS ID No. 100020
TEMPORARY STABILIZATION TIMEFRAMES
SITE AREA DESCRIPTION
STABILIZATION
TIME FRAME EXCEPTIONS
PERIMITER DIKES, SWALE, DITCHES AND SLOPES
7 DAYS
NONE
HIGH QUALITY WATER (HQW) ZONES
7 DAYS
NONE
SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3:1
7 DAYS
If slopes are 10' or less in length and are
not steeper than 2:1, 14 days are allowed.
SLOPES 3:1 OR FLATTER
14 DAYS
7 days for slopes greater than 50' in length
ALL OTHER AREAS WITH SLOPES FLATTER THAN 4:1
14 DAYS
None, except for perimeters and HQW Zone
* ALL CHANNEL WORK MUST BE STABILIZED DAILY
o Mm 4 X ❑
�0 ��
H
n("o0 Zl~
�o,��(n
Imz�=y \ 0025M
J
2 a D n m Q Q o=
Zap U Cr C 3
=(nC)p------- Q III H
Z�0HTI c)HLOJ
H
Oy>n D I aQ��
— — — — — — — — r LU M
O �
z- - - - - - - 1 0
NOTE: 4 X D N
C FOR CALCULATION PURPOSES
~ - - - - - - - - - - GLASS `B' RIP RAP = 100 LBS . I FT3 LU
m GLASS I RIP RAP = 105 LBS.IFT3
z 2 X D o C
o LL-
I-
B ❑ B zW
li
N CL
Cn A Q
av z PLAN o a
EL
D SLOPE 1�2:1 OR FLATTER < �
a zW
o
DZ CD
1 H
H
m H 2
T P LAN CD o
C LL
GEOTEXTILE w
LU
m SECTION A -A T H
I PIPE OUTLET WITH DITCH
LIM CD
H= RIP RAP TO TOP OF PIPE (MAX. H = D + T) GEOTEXTILE
T= 15" CLASS I RIP RAP, UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON PLANS SECTION B - B
SHEET 1 OF 1 T= 12" GLASS `B' RIP RAP, UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON PLANS SHEET 1 OF 1
876.02 PIPE OUTLET WITHOUT DITCH $76-02
OUTLET
WI DITCH
OUTLET
W10 DITCH
D
CLASS `B' RIP RAP
CLASS I RIP RAP
CLASS `8' RIP RAP
CLASS I RIP RAP
TUNS
TFX VT l F
S.Y.
TONS
TF XTrTI F
TONS
TFXTY 1 F
S Y.
TONS
TFX YT l F
12"
2
5
5
2
5
1
4
2
1
4
15"
2
7
7
3
7
1
5
3
2
6
16"
3
10
9
4
1O
2
7
4
2
8
24"
5
14
15
7
15
3
11
7
4
12
30"
B
21
21
11
22
5
1fi
11
7
17
36"
11
28
29
15
30
7
22
16
10
23
42"
15
37
39
20
39
10
28
22
13
30
46"
-
-
49
26
5O
-
-
28
17
36
54"
-
-
fi0
33
62
-
-
36
21
47
fi0"
-
-
73
40
75
-
-
44
2fi
56
fib"
-
-
87
48
B9
-
-
54
32
B7
72"
-
-
102
57
1O4
-
-
64
38
7B

Qc
n
EROSION & SEDIMENTATION CONTROL NOTES
C
r�
L)
w
i
CV
CD
n
/
C0
N
N
L
i
C_
3
1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL THE EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MEASURES AS SHOWN ON
THE PLANS PRIOR TO ANY GRADING ACTIVITIES. SEE SHEET 3 FOR GENERAL CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE.
2. ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE SEEDED AND MULCHED PER THE PLANS AND TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS.
TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT SEEDING SHALL BE PLACED ON ALL DISTURBED AREAS BY THE END OF EACH
WORK DAY. SLOPES FLATTER THAN 3H:1V SHALL BE STABILIZED WITH GROUND COVER WITHIN FOURTEEN (14)
CALENDAR DAYS FROM THE LAST LAND -DISTURBING ACTIVITY. ALL SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3H:1V SHALL BE
STABILIZED AS SOON AS PRACTICABLE WITHIN SEVEN (7) CALENDAR DAYS. SEE SHEET 1-A FOR VEGETATION
AND PERMANENT SEED SELECTION. SEE EC-2B FOR TEMPORARY SEED SELECTION AND APPLICATION RATES.
3. CONTRACTOR SHALL MINIMIZE DISTURBANCE TO EXISTING BUFFER VEGETATION AND CONSTRUCTION
CORRIDOR TO THE EXTENT PRACTICAL. CLEARING AND GRUBBING ACTIVITIES SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE
MINIMAL AMOUNT NECESSARY FOR HAUL ROADS, CHANNEL RELOCATIONS, AND STOCKPILE AREAS.
MATCH LINE - SEE SHEET EC-4
4. ALL EXISTING ROADS OR FARM PATHS USED FOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES SUCH AS HAUL ROADS AND SITE
ACCESS SHALL BE REPAIRED, IF NECESSARY, TO THE PRE -CONSTRUCTION CONDITION OR BETTER. /
01)
5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL DEVICES IN ACCORDANCE WITH 00 /
THE APPROPRIATE EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL ORDINANCES. EROSION CONTROL MATTING
0
SHALL BE INSTALLED ON ALL RESTORED STREAMBANKS AND SIDE SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3:1 AS SHOWN IN
THE PLANS AND DETAILS. Z I /
6. THE CONTRACTOR MUST INSTALL TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT SEEDING, MULCHING, AND MATTING IN
ACCORDANCE
WITH
THE PLANS AND TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS BEFORE TURNING WATER INTO THE NEW
/ I / A
7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL WORK IN THE DRY AND UTILIZE A PUMP -AROUND OPERATION OR FLOW DIVERSION
MEASURE AS SHOWN ON THE PLAN SHEETS.
8. THE ENGINEER MUST APPROVE ALL GRADING ACTIVITIES AND GROUNDCOVER STABILIZATION PRIOR TO
RIPARIAN VEGETATION PLANTING.
9. ROCK DAMS SHALL BE INSTALLED BELOW ACTIVE WORK AS NEEDED TO UTILIZE PUMP AROUND OPERATION.
10. EXISTING CULVERTED CROSSING SHALL BE UTILIZED TO CROSS THE STREAM CHANNEL UNTIL SUCH TIME
THAT NEW PERMANENT STREAM CROSSINGS HAVE BEEN INSTALLED AS APPLICABLE.
u PIP1711pw D1Tp1Dq
D® NOT USE FOR C®NST RUC
Michael Baker E
\ \ \ \ \ 1 S 1 Michael Baker
8000 Regency Parkv
Cary, NORTH CARC
Phone:919.463.548'
Fax:[phone]
INTERNATIONAL License* F-1084 �
� � I
X
a _
LECTRIC f£NC .. XRaRR£D WIRE ENCE
_ w
18'WALNUT 12•wacNui\ � _
) 12 WADK T —
\ \ / / _ _ ti \/• _ _ _ \
0
°O Lu
Lu
cl v)
Ri
< /
For
or CIA
965
un
ftic
Lu
\ r X
\ l�
\
W
to
�k—
\ ' \ 23+00 I \ ESE
Lu
Lu
Lu
\ \ s J
Q41 WHITTIER CREEK
\ EROSION & SEDIMENTATI
CONTROL PLAN
\ - I
\ 40 0 40 81

C
L)
W
i
Cn
a'
c")
ED
N
CD
C
C
a1
N
O
N
U
i
i
3
EROSION & SEDIMENTATION CONTROL NOTES:
1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL THE EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MEASURES AS SHOWN ON
THE PLANS PRIOR TO ANY GRADING ACTIVITIES. SEE SHEET 3 FOR GENERAL CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE.
2. ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE SEEDED AND MULCHED PER THE PLANS AND TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS.
TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT SEEDING SHALL BE PLACED ON ALL DISTURBED AREAS BY THE END OF EACH
WORKDAY. SLOPES FLATTER THAN 3H:1V SHALL BE STABILIZED WITH GROUND COVER WITHIN FOURTEEN (14)
CALENDAR DAYS FROM THE LAST LAND —DISTURBING ACTIVITY. ALL SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3H:1V SHALL BE
STABILIZED AS SOON AS PRACTICABLE WITHIN SEVEN (7) CALENDAR DAYS. SEE SHEET 1—A FOR VEGETATION
AND PERMANENT SEED SELECTION. SEE EC-213 FOR TEMPORARY SEED SELECTION AND APPLICATION RATES.
3. CONTRACTOR SHALL MINIMIZE DISTURBANCE TO EXISTING BUFFER VEGETATION AND CONSTRUCTION
CORRIDOR TO THE EXTENT PRACTICAL. CLEARING AND GRUBBING ACTIVITIES SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE
MINIMAL AMOUNT NECESSARY FOR HAUL ROADS, CHANNEL RELOCATIONS, AND STOCKPILE AREAS.
4. ALL EXISTING ROADS OR FARM PATHS USED FOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES SUCH AS HAUL ROADS AND SITE
ACCESS SHALL BE REPAIRED, IF NECESSARY, TO THE PRE —CONSTRUCTION CONDITION OR BETTER.
5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL DEVICES IN ACCORDANCE WITH
THE APPROPRIATE EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL ORDINANCES. EROSION CONTROL MATTING
SHALL BE INSTALLED ON ALL RESTORED STREAMBANKS AND SIDE SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3:1 AS SHOWN IN
THE PLANS AND DETAILS.
6. THE CONTRACTOR MUST INSTALL TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT SEEDING, MULCHING, AND MATTING IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS AND TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS BEFORE TURNING WATER INTO THE NEW
STREAM CHANNEL SEGMENTS.
7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL WORK IN THE DRY AND UTILIZE A PUMP —AROUND OPERATION OR FLOW DIVERSION
MEASURE AS SHOWN ON THE PLAN SHEETS.
8. THE ENGINEER MUST APPROVE ALL GRADING ACTIVITIES AND GROUNDCOVER STABILIZATION PRIOR TO
RIPARIAN VEGETATION PLANTING.
9. ROCK DAMS SHALL BE INSTALLED BELOW ACTIVE WORK AS NEEDED TO UTILIZE PUMP AROUND OPERATION.
10. EXISTING CULVERTED CROSSING SHALL BE UTILIZED TO CROSS THE STREAM CHANNEL UNTIL SUCH TIME
THAT NEW PERMANENT STREAM CROSSINGS HAVE BEEN INSTALLED AS APPLICABLE.
MATCH LINE - SEE SHEET EC-3