20120182 Ver 2_Year 5 Monitoring Report_20191107

ID#* 20120182
Select Reviewer:*
Mac Haupt
Initial Review Completed Date 11/07/2019
Mitigation Project Submittal-11/7/2019
Version* 2
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#:* 20120182
Existing IDY
Project Type:
Project Name:
County:
F DMS r Mitigation Bank
Hogan Creek
Surry
Document Information
r Yes r No
Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Version:*2
Existing Version
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: HoganCrk_94708_MY5_2019.pdf 60.43MB
Rease upload only one RDF of the conplete file that needs to be subrritted...
Signature
Print Name:* Matthew Reid
Signature:*

MONITORING YEAR 5
ANNUAL REPORT
Final
HOGAN CREEK STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT
Surry County, NC
DEQ Contract 6496
DMS Project Number 94708
DWR # 20120182
USACE Action ID SAW-2011-02268
Data Collection Period: March -September 2019
Final Submission Date: October 14, 2019
PREPARED FOR:
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652

PREPARED BY:
W
WILDLANDS
E N G I N E E R I NO
1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

kt�
WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
October 14, 2019
Mr. Matthew Reid
Western Project Manager
Division of Mitigation Services
5 Ravenscroft Dr., Suite 102
Asheville, NC 28801
RE: Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
Yadkin River Basin — CU# 03040101
Surry County, North Carolina
NCEEP Project # 94708
Contract No. 6496
Dear Mr. Reid:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) has reviewed the Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) comments
from the Draft Monitoring Year 5 report for the Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project. The following
Wildlands responses to DMS's report comments are noted in italics lettering.
DIMS comment; 1.2.2 Vegetation Areas of Concern and Management Activity: Please change July to
June in last sentence on page 1-2. Invasive treatments occurred in June and August of 2019.
Wildlands response, Text in Section 1.2.2 has been updated to indicate that invasive treatments occurred
in June and August of 2019.
DIMS comment; Table 2: Please update Invasive Species Treatment dates to Jun/Aug — 2019
Wildlands response, The dates in Table 2 have been updated to June/August — 2019.
DIMS comment; Please include the attached invasive species treatment log in the appendix.
Wildlands response, The invasive species treatment log has been included in the appendix.
Enclosed please find three (3) hard copies and one (1) electronic copy on CD of the Final Monitoring
Report. Please contact me at 704-941-9093 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Kirsten Y. Gimbert
Project Manager
[e-mail]
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. • phone [phone] • fax [phone] • 1430 S. Mint Street, # 104 • Charlotte, NC 28203

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) Division of Mitigation Services (DMS)
restored, enhanced, and preserved approximately 9,782 linear feet (LF) of stream channel at the Hogan
Creek Stream Mitigation Site (Site) in Surry County, North Carolina. The restoration project was
developed to fulfill stream mitigation requirements accepted by the DMS for the Upper Yadkin River
Basin 8-digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03040101. The Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project will net
4,994 stream mitigation credits through a combination of restoration, enhancement I and II, and
preservation.
The Site is within a Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) identified in the Upper Yadkin River Basin
Restoration Priority (RBRP) plan (NCDENR, 2009). The RBRP identified the Candiff Creek/Hogan Creek
14-digit HUC as a TLW due to water quality and habitat impacts from past and present agricultural
practices. Agriculture is the primary land use in the watershed (41% agriculture land cover) and the
RBRP identified non -forested buffers and livestock operations as major stressors to water quality. There
are twenty-six permitted animal operations, and twenty-five (25%) of the watershed has non -forested
riparian buffers. The site assessment phase of the project identified other stressors as well, including
bank erosion, sediment deposition, disconnection of the streams and floodplains, and exotic plant
species. The project was identified as an opportunity to improve water quality and aquatic and
terrestrial habitats within the TLW. In addition to being within an TLW, the upper Hogan Creek
subwatershed has been identified as a priority area for stream restoration and agricultural best
management practices (BMPs) as part of DMS's initial Ararat River Local Watershed Planning (LWP)
effort (EcoEngineering, 2008).
The final design was completed in November of 2012. Construction activities and as -built surveys were
completed in December of 2014. Planting of the Site took place in March of 2015. Baseline monitoring
efforts began in May of 2015, and monitoring year 1 efforts began in October of 2015. The region
experienced an unusually high amount of precipitation during fall/winter 2015. The storm events
damaged several areas on Hogan Creek Reach 1 and Reach 2 that were subsequently repaired in
December of 2015. Beginning in 2016, monitoring has been conducted annually with Monitoring Year
(MY) 5 activities completed in September of 2019.
To address previously noted areas of bank erosion, a repair along Hogan Creek was completed in March
2019. Approximately 980' of live lifts were installed and a constructed riffle was repaired on Hogan
Reach 2. Transplants were used where possible, and disturbed areas were replanted with bare roots,
live stakes and permanent/temporary seeding. Construction began in February 2019 and finished up
March 2019. Following the MY4 Interagency Review Team (IRT) credit release site walk, an additional
year of monitoring was requested to further assess the repairs.
The Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project is on track to meet monitoring success criteria for
vegetation, geomorphology, and hydrology performance standards. The MY5 vegetation survey resulted
in an average stem density of 391 planted stems per acre. The Site is meeting the final success criterion
of 260 stems per acre, with five out of six plots (83%) individually meeting this requirement. The MY5
vegetation monitoring and visual assessment revealed that the treatments are working to significantly
reduce the areas of invasive plant populations. The geomorphic surveys and visual assessments indicate
that project streams appear stable and functioning as intended. The hydrology performance standard of
two recorded bankfull events in separate monitoring years was met in MY2 for Hogan Creek and UT2.
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
W Monitoring Year 5 Annual Report - FINAL

HOGAN CREEK STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT
Year 5 Monitoring Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 1: PROJECT OVERVIEW.....................................................................................................1-1
1.1 Project Goals and Objectives.....................................................................................................1-1
1.2 Monitoring
Year 5 Data Assessment..........................................................................................1-2
1.2.1
Vegetation Assessment......................................................................................................1-2
1.2.2
Vegetation Areas of Concern and Management Activity..................................................1-2
1.2.3
Stream Assessment............................................................................................................1-3
1.2.4
Stream Areas of Concern and Management Activity.........................................................1-3
1.2.5
Hydrology Assessment.......................................................................................................1-3
1.3 Monitoring
Year 5 Summary ......................................................................................................1-3
Section2: METHODOLOGY
............................................................................................................2-1
Section3: REFERENCES.................................................................................................................3-1
APPENDICES
Appendix A
General Tables and Figures
Figure 1
Project Vicinity Map
Figure 2
Project Component/Asset Map
Table 1
Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table 2
Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3
Project Contacts Table
Table 4
Project Baseline Information and Attributes
Table 5
Monitoring Component Summary
Appendix B
Visual Assessment Data
Figures 3.0-3.3
Integrated Current Condition Plan View
Table 6a-d
Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Table 7
Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Stream Photographs
Stream Repair Photographs
Vegetation Photographs
Appendix C
Vegetation Plot Data
Table 8
Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Table 9
CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Table 10
Planted and Total Stem Counts
Appendix D
Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Table 11a-c
Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table 12
Morphology and Hydraulic Summary (Dimensional Parameters — Cross -Section)
Table 13a-c
Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Cross -Section Plots with Annual Overlays
Longitudinal Profiles with Annual Overlays
Pebble Count Plots with Annual Overlays
0Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
W. Monitoring Year 5 Annual Report -FINAL

Appendix E Hydrology Summary Data and Plots
Table 14 Verification of Bankfull Events
Monthly Rainfall Data
Appendix F Invasive Species Treatment Logs
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
W Monitoring Year 5 Annual Report -FINAL

Section 1: PROJECT OVERVIEW
The Site was implemented under a design -bid -build contract in Surry County, NC. The Site is located in
the Yadkin River Basin; eight -digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03040101 and the 14-digit HUC
03040101110060 (Figure 1). Located in the Piedmont physiographic province (NCGS 2004), the project
watershed primarily includes agricultural land cover. The drainage area for the lower end of Hogan
Creek is 1,514 acres. Hogan Creek is a main tributary to the Yadkin River in the Upper Yadkin River Basin.
The Site is located approximately 2 miles south of NC 268 on Miller Gap Road, which bisects the project
at the triple box culvert over Hogan Creek. A vicinity map is included in Appendix A as Figure 1.
The NCDEQ DMS restored, enhanced, and preserved approximately 9,782 LF of Hogan Creek and three
unnamed tributaries (UTs), provided livestock fencing and alternative water sources to keep livestock
out of the streams, removed invasive plant species across the project, established native riparian buffer,
and preserved relatively un-impacted forested streams. The restoration project was developed to fulfill
stream mitigation requirements accepted by the DMS for the Upper Yadkin River Basin.
Mitigation work within the Site included restoring and enhancing 4,109 LF and preserving 5,673 LF of
stream. The Hogan Creek Mitigation Project will net 4,994 stream mitigation credits through a
combination of restoration, enhancement I and 11, and preservation. The final design was completed in
November of 2012. Construction activities and as -built surveys were completed in December of 2014.
Planting of the Site took place in March of 2015. The baseline monitoring efforts began in May of 2015
and monitoring year 1 efforts began in October of 2015. The region experienced an unusually high
amount of precipitation during fall/winter 2015. The storm event damaged several areas on Hogan
Creek Reach 1 and Reach 2 that were repaired in December of 2015. The monitoring year 5 activities
were completed in September of 2019.
More detailed information related to the project activity, history, and contacts can be found in Appendix
A, Tables 1 and 2. Directions and a map of the Site are provided in Figure 1. Project components are
illustrated in the Project Component Map (Figure 2) while Table 1 outlines the project component and
mitigation credit information for the Site. This report documents the results of the MY5 efforts.
1.1 Project Goals and Objectives
Prior to construction activities, non -forested buffers and livestock operations were identified as major
stressors to water quality within the watershed. The site assessment phase of the project identified
other stressors as well, including bank erosion, sediment deposition, disconnection of the streams and
floodplains, and exotic plant species. The majority of the project area was utilized as a cattle operation
for over fifty years. Cattle accessed Hogan Creek and the downstream reach of UT2 exacerbating bank
erosion and allowing direct nutrient and fecal inputs to the streams. Deforested riparian buffers and
levee construction along Hogan Creek and UTs also contributed to channel degradation. Table 11 in
Appendix D present the pre -restoration conditions in detail.
This mitigation site is providing numerous ecological benefits within the Yadkin River Basin. The project
goals identified in the Mitigation Plan (Confluence, 2012) include:
• Improve water quality in Hogan Creek and the UTs through reductions in sediment and nutrient
inputs from local sources;
• Create conditions for dynamic equilibrium of water and sediment movement between the
supply reaches and project reaches;
• Promote floodwater attenuation and secondary functions associated with more frequent and
extensive floodwater contact times;
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
W Monitoring Year 5 Annual Report - FINAL 1-1

Improve in -stream habitat by increasing the diversity of bedform features;
Enhance and protect native riparian vegetation communities; and
Reduce fecal, nutrient, and sediment loads to project streams by promoting and implementing
livestock best management practices.
The project objectives have been defined as follows:
• Restoration of the dimension, pattern, profile of 684 LF of Hogan Creek Reach 1, 962 LF of
Hogan Creek Reach 2, 555 LF of UT2, and 292 LF of UT3;
• Restoration of the dimension and profile (Enhancement 1) of 1,200 LF of Hogan Creek Reach 1;
• Limited channel work coupled with livestock exclusion and/or invasive species control
(Enhancement 11) on 66 LF of UT1 and 350 LF of UT2;
• Livestock exclusion fencing and alternative water source installations;
• Invasive plant species control measures across the entire project wherever necessary; and
• Preservation of approximately 5,673 LF relatively un-impacted forested streams in a permanent
conservation easement.
1.2 Monitoring Year 5 Data Assessment
Annual monitoring was conducted from March to September of 2019 to assess the condition of the
project. The stream restoration success criteria for the Site follows the approved performance standards
presented in the Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Plan (Confluence, 2012).
1.2.1 Vegetation Assessment
A total of 6 vegetation monitoring plots were established during the baseline monitoring within the
project easement using standard 10 by 10 meter or 5 by 20 meter plots. Please refer to Figures 3.0-3.3
in Appendix B for the vegetation monitoring locations. The final vegetation success criterion is the
survival of 260 planted stems per acre in the riparian corridor along restored and enhanced reaches at
the end of year five of the monitoring period.
The MY5 vegetation survey was completed in August 2019. The data indicate an average stem density of
391 planted stems per acre for the Site. The Site is meeting the final requirement of 260 stems per acre,
with 5 out 6 plots (83%) individually meeting this requirement. Vegetation Plot 2 did not the
requirement with a density of 202 stems per acre.
A majority of the living planted stems (98%) scored a vigor of 3 or 4, indicating that they are likely to
survive. The planted stem mortality was approximately 9% of the MY4 stem count of 452 stems per
acre, some of which had occurred as a result of damage from the stream bank repair work.
Approximately 2% of the planted stems scored a vigor of 2, indicating fair plant health with some
damage present. Observed damage was from vine strangulation, suffocation from dense herbaceous
cover, or other unknown factors. The average stem height for all plots is approximately 11.6 feet. Please
refer to Appendix B for vegetation plot photographs and Appendix C for vegetation data tables.
1.2.2 Vegetation Areas of Concern and Management Activity
MY5 visual assessments indicate that some invasive plant populations continue to persist within the
riparian buffer. These species include: kudzu (Pueraria montana), Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense),
Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), and Lespedeza (Sericea
Lespedeza). DMS has contracted with a provider for ongoing invasive species treatments which will
continue through closeout. In MY5, invasive species treatment which occurred in June and August of
2019, significantly reduced areas of invasive plant populations along Hogan Creek and within the left
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
W Monitoring Year 5 Annual Report - FINAL 1-2

floodplain of UT2 and UT213. Approximately 1.3% of the easement acreage continues to be affected by
invasive species. Current vegetation areas of concern are shown in Figure 3.0-3.3 of Appendix B.
1.2.3 Stream Assessment
Morphological surveys for MY5 were conducted in July 2019. The surveyed longitudinal profile data
illustrates that bedform features are maintaining lateral and vertical stability for the majority of the
surveyed reaches. Though profile dimensions for Hogan Creek and UT2 show little change between MY4
and MY5. There is one area along Hogan Creek Reach 2 (station 37+25) that is experiencing some
localized bed scour downstream of a log vane and bank erosion within the meander bend. Please refer
to Appendix D for longitudinal profiles with annual overlays and Table 13a-c for stream reach data
summaries.
Overall cross-section data throughout the Site, including areas where recent bank repair work was
conducted along Hogan Creek, are displaying stable bankfull dimensions. When occurring, adjustments
are minor in comparison to baseline conditions and seem to be trending towards increased stability.
Changes include deposition in the floodplain, the formation of point bars, the deepening of pools, and
the narrowing of riffles. Visual observations conducted along UT2 indicate overall stability with some
sediment deposition observed downstream of the bridge. Similarly, UT1 and UT3 appear stable and
functioning as intended. Please refer to Appendix D for cross-section plots with annual overlays and
Table 12 for morphology and hydraulic summary.
The MY5 riffle pebble counts conducted for cross -sections 1, 5, and 6 indicate similar or coarser
sediment size distribution as compared to MYO. Additionally, sediment size for cross-section 3 has
returned to a coarser distribution similar to MY0-MY1 as a result of the stream repairs at the beginning
of MY5. Refer to Appendix D for pebble count plots with annual overlays.
1.2.4 Stream Areas of Concern and Management Activity
In previous monitoring years, several significant stream areas of concern were noted on Hogan Creek
Reach 1 and Reach 2 near stations 10+20, 10+80, 16+50, 20+10, 23+20, 26+70, 31+30, 34+00, and
37+70. To address previously noted areas of bank erosion, construction repairs on Hogan Creek began in
January 2019 and concluded in March 2019. The repairs appear to be performing well and livestake
vegetation already becoming well established on the banks. These repairs have decreased bank erosion
along Reach 1 of Hogan Creek from 9% in MY4 to 1% in MY5 and along Hogan Creek Reach 2, from 10%
in MY4 to 2% in MY5. Please refer to a photolog of the repair work in Appendix B. Additional areas of
concern are depicted on the current condition plan view Figures 3.0-3.3 and Table 6 in Appendix B.
1.2.5 Hydrology Assessment
A bankfull event was documented for Hogan Creek and UT2 on March 14, 2019 based on the visual
observation of wrack lines and crest gage measurements. Monthly rainfall data indicate higher than the
normal rainfall amounts occurred during the months of February and June 2019. Project performance
standards state that two bankfull flow events must be documented on restoration reaches within the
five-year monitoring period and must occur in separate years. Therefore, the performance standard has
been met in MY5 with at least five documented bankfull events for each reach. Refer to Appendix E for
hydrologic data and graphs.
1.3 Monitoring Year 5 Summary
The Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project is on track to meet monitoring success criteria for
vegetation, geomorphology, and hydrology performance standards. The MY5 vegetation survey resulted
in an average stem density of 391 planted stems per acre and is meeting the final success criterion of
260 stems per acre with five out of six plots (83%) individually meeting this requirement. The MY5
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
W Monitoring Year 5 Annual Report - FINAL 1-3

vegetation monitoring and visual assessment revealed that the treatments are working to significantly
reduce the areas of invasive plant populations. Geomorphic surveys and visual assessments indicate that
project streams including recently stabilized areas along Hogan Creek Reach 1 and Reach 2, appear
stable and functioning as intended. The hydrology performance standard of two recorded bankfull
events in separate monitoring years has been met for Hogan Creek and UT2. An additional year of
monitoring (MY6) will occur in 2020.
Summary information and data related to the performance of various project and monitoring elements
can be found in the tables and figures in the report appendices. Narrative background and supporting
information formerly found in these annual monitoring reports can be found in the Mitigation Plan
documents available on DMS's website. All raw data supporting the tables and figures in the appendices
are available from DMS upon request.
A Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
W Monitoring Year 5 Annual Report -FINAL 1-4

Section 2: METHODOLOGY
The stream monitoring methodologies utilized in 2019 are based on standard guidance and procedures
documents (Rosgen 1996 and USACE 2003). Geomorphic data were collected following the standards
outlined in The Stream Channel Reference Site: An Illustrated Guide to Field Techniques (Harrelson et
al., 1994) and in the Stream Restoration: A Natural Channel Design Handbook (Doll et al., 2003). All
Integrated Current Condition Mapping was recorded using a Trimble handheld GPS with sub -meter
accuracy and processed using Pathfinder and ArcGIS. Planted woody vegetation is being monitored in
accordance with the guidelines and procedures developed by the Carolina Vegetation Survey-EEP Level
2 Protocol (Lee et al., 2008). Crest gages were installed near surveyed riffle cross -sections and
monitored semi-annually.
A Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
W Monitoring Year 5 Annual Report -FINAL 2-1

Section 3: REFERENCES
Confluence Engineering, PC. 2012. Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Plan. NCEEP, Raleigh, NC.
Doll, B.A., Grabow, G.L., Hall, K.A., Halley, J., Harman, W.A., Jennings, G.D., and Wise, D.E. 2003. Stream
Restoration A Natural Channel Design Handbook.
EcoEngineering. 2008. Technical Memorandum Task 2, Upper Yadkin Basin Local Watershed Plan.
Harrelson, Cheryl C; Rawlins, C.L.; Potyondy, John P. 1994. Stream Channel Reference Sites: An Illustrated
Guide to Field Technique. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-245. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 61 p.
Lee, Michael T., Peet, Robert K., Steven D., Wentworth, Thomas R. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation Version 4.2. Retrieved from: http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/protocol/cvs-eep-protocol-v4.2-lev1-
2.pdf
North Carolina Climate Retrieval and Observations Network of the Southeast Database (NCCRONOS).
2019. State Climate Office of North Carolina. Version 2.7.2. NC-SR-2-Dobson 2.3 SE. Station ID
Dobson 2.3 SE. Accessed September 2019.
NCDENR. 2009. Upper Yadkin River Basin Restoration Priorities. Retrieved from
https:Hdeq.nc.gov/about/divisions/mitigation-services/dms-planning/watershed-planning-
documents/yadkin-river-basin
North Carolina Geological Survey (NCGS). 2004. Physiography of North Carolina. Map compiled by the
Division of Land Resources. Raleigh.
Rosgen, D.L. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Pagosa Springs, CO: Wildland Hydrology Books.
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines. USACE, NCDENR-
DWQ, USEPA, NCWRC.
0. Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
lliMonitoring Year 5 Annual Report -FINAL 3-1

APPENDIX A. General Tables and Figures

l
t
Rd N■
r
r
� � 4ittic 08avrr Cr�� ��rr _
r
r CI ,.erp =ta
` 03040101090040
a
r �
r a�
r' n
i
r r
r
`r
a
t � �
r @ t
s r
• 03040101090050
i
r @
v
z 0 Project Location
R�k N+1l C i
� Whir Hydrologic Unit Code (14)
;�a a
Creek r
Tam f4 03040101110040 tr
%s ftd
The subject project site is an environmental restoration site of
the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)
Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) and is encompassed
by a recorded conservation easement, but is bordered
by land under private ownership. Accessing the site
may require traversing areas near or along the easement
boundary and therefore access by the general public is not
permitted. Access by authorized personnel of state and
federal agencies or their designees/contractors involved in
the development, oversight,and stewardship of the restoration
site is permitted within the terms and timeframes of their
defined roles. Any intended site visitation or activity by
any person outside of these previously sanctioned roles
and activites requires prior coordination with DMS.
0 r�I
o� -. 00�
r'
i
ti `p'*^4%►I
a68V
r
03040101110050
r
� � tr► 's4:y C agin G��K
� � 1
'fir ^ro �► ►
CI►s
�Oleo
�4°
aP rY
Itlf
•� .
03040101110060 "NI
P: `I
Caaa'i7 Creek
Directions: The Hogan Creek project site is
located southeast of Level Cross in Surry County,
North Carolina. The site is accessed from 1-77
north out of Statesville. Turn east off 1-77 at exit
85 (NC 268 Bypass) and travel approximately 3
miles to the intersection with NC 268. Turn east
and travel approximately 12 miles to a south turn
onto Miller Gap Road (SR2088). The site is
located approximately 2 miles south of NC 268 on
i Miller Gap Road, which bisects the project site at
the bridge over Hogan Creek. The project site is
bordered to the north by Trajan Trail, to the south
by Anderson Road, and to the west by Siloam
Road. Latitude and longitude for the site are
0 .&* 36.321609 N and 80.602389 W, respectively.
5
Figure 1 Project Vicinity Map
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
WILDLANDS , 0 0.5 1 Mile DMS Project No.94708
ENGINEERING 1
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Surry County, NC

'r,
ttr
sloop
....;Conservation Easement
—Stream Restoration
Stream Enhancement Level I
Stream Enhancement Level II
Stream Preservation
Non Project Streams
0 Existing Wetland
• r
♦
i ♦
i• i
r A
tt � ♦ i
1•
ktt•• ♦ 4 •R r
w ••Sr
0
a
Figure 2 Project Component/Asset Map
WHogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
W I L D L A N D S 1 0 I I I 400 Feet DMS Project No. 94708
ENGINEERING
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Surry County, NC

Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Stream
Mitigation Credit Summaries 1
Riparian Wetland Non -Riparian Buffer Nitrogen Nutrient Offset Phosphorous Nutrient Offset
Wetland
Overall Credit
Project Component
or Reach ID
4,994.000
Stationing
N/A N/A
Pre -project Restoration
Footage or Footage or
Acreage Acreage
N/A N/A N/A
Restoration or Mitigation Mitigation
Restoration Level Rest Equiv. Ratio Credits Notes
Hogan Reach 1
10+00 - 22+00
1,331
1,200
P2 El
1:1
1,200.000
-
Hogan Reach 1
22+00 - 28+84
797
694
P2 R
1:1
684.000
Crossing was removed from total
Hogan Reach 2
29+35 - 38+97
876
962
P2 R
1:1
962.000
-
UT1,1A, 1B
I Upstream of 10+00
1,485
1,485
Preservation P
5:1
297.000
-
UT1
10+00 - 10+66
66
66
P3 Ell
2.5:1
26.400
-
UT2, 2A, 2B,2C
Upstream of 6+50
3,225
3,225
Preservation P
5:1
645.000
-
UT2
6+50 - 10+00
370
350
P3 Ell
2.5:1
140.000
-
UT2
10+00 - 15+55
633
555
P2 R
1:1
555.000
Crossing was removed from total
UT3
Upstream of 9+40
963
963
Preservation P
5:1
192.600
-
UT3
Restoration Level
9+40-12+32
MLength
Stream (Linear Feet)
260 292
Riparian Wetland (acres)
P2 R 1 1:1
and Area Summations I
Non -riparian Buffer (Square feet)
Wetland (acres)
292.000 -
Upland (acres)
Riverine
Non-Riverine
Restoration
2,493
-
-
- -
-
-
-
Enhancement
I-
-
- -
-
-
-
Enhancement 1
1,200
Enhancement 11
416
Creation
-
-
-
-
-
Preservation
5,673
-
-
-
-
-
High Quality
-
-
-
-
-
-
Preservation
-
-
-
-
-
-
N/A - Not Applicable
' Project components and mitigation credits reverted back to Mitigation Plan asset totals as requested by IRT.

Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
ivity or Deliverable
Mitigation Plan
Data
October-2011
Delivery
February-2012
Final Design —Construction Plans
October-2011
November-2012
Construction
N/A
December-2014
Temporary S&E Mix Applied
N/A
December-2014
Permanent Seed Mix Applied
N/A
December-2014
Containerized, bare root and B&B plantings for reach/segments
N/A
March-2015
Baseline Monitoring Document (Year 0)
Vegetation Survey
May-2015
August-2015
Stream Survey
June-2015
Stream Repair/Maintenance
N/A
December-2015
Year 1 Monitoring
Vegetation Survey
October-2015
January-2016
Stream Survey
December-2015
Invasive Species Treatment
May-2016
May-2016
Supplemental Planting
N/A
January-2016
Invasive Species Treatment
September-2016
September-2016
Year 2 Monitoring
Vegetation Survey
October-2016
November-2016
Stream Survey
June-2016
Year 3 Monitoring
Vegetation Survey
August-2017
December-2017
Stream Survey
July-2017
Invasive Species Treatment
N/A
June/August-2018
Year Monitoring
Vegetation Survey
August-2018
November-2018
Stream Survey
June-2018
Stream Repair/Maintenance
N/A
March-2019
Invasive Species Treatment
N/A
June/August-2019
Year 5 Monitoring
Vegetation Survey
August-2019
November-2019
Stream Survey
July-2019
Year 6 Monitoring
Vegetation Survey
2020
2020
Stream Survey
2020
N/A- Not Applicable
Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Designer
Confluence Engineering, PC
16 Broad Street
Asheville, NC 28801
Primary Project Design POC
Andrew Bick 828-606-0306
Construction Contractor
Carolina Environmental Contracting, Inc.
150 Pine Ridge Road
Mount Airy, NC 27030
Construction Contractor POC
Wayne Taylor 336-341-6489
Survey Contractor
Turner Land Surveying, PLLC
PO Box 41023
Raleigh, NC 27629
Survey Contractor POC
David Turner 919-623-5095
Planting Contractor
Keller Environmental, LLC
7921 Haymarket Lane
Raleigh, NC 27615
Planting Contractor POC
Jay Keller 919-749-8259
Seeding Contractor
Carolina Environmental Contracting, Inc.
150 Pine Ridge Road
Mount Airy, NC 27030
Seeding Contractor POC
Wayne Taylor 336-341-6489
Seed Mix Sources
Green Resources 336-855-6363
Nursery Stock Suppliers
Foggy Mountain Nursery 336-384-5323
Monitoring Performers
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
1430 South Mint Street, Ste 104
Charlotte, NC 28205
704.332.7754
Monitoring POC
Kirsten Gimbert 704-332-7754

Table 4. Project Baseline Information and Attributes
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DIMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Project
Information
Project Name
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
County
Surry
Project Area (acres)
36
Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude)
Project Watershed
36.321609 N, 80.602389 W
Summary Information
Physiographic Province
Piedmont
River Basin
Yadkin
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit
03040101
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit
03040101110060
DWR Sub -basin
Pee Dee River Subbasin 03-07-02
Project Drainage Area (acres)
1,514 ac (2.37 mil)
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area
0.40%
GI CA Land Use Classification
Summary
Managed Herbaceous Cover, Broadleaf Deciduous Forest Land
Information
Parameters
MReach
Hogan Creek Reach 1
Hogan Creek Reach 2
Main Stem UT1
Main Stem UT2
UT3
Length of Reach Post Construction (LF)
1,961
992
1,442
2,869
1,227
Valley classification (Rosgen)
VIII
VIII
VI
VI
VI
Drainage area (acres)
1,479
1,514
60
81
18
NCDWQ stream identification score
40
37
31
31.5
32.5
NCDWQ Water Quality Classification
C
C
C
C
C
Morphological Description (Rosgen stream type)
C4
C4
E4b
E4b
G4
Evolutionary trend
C-F
C-F
Eb-G
Eb-G
Eb-G
Underlying mapped soils
CsA
CsA
CsA, FsE
FsE
FsE
Drainage class
well drained
well drained
well drained
well drained
well drained
Soil Hydric status
not hydric
not hydric
not hydric
not hydric
not hydric
Slope
0.007
0.005
0.031
0.021
0.030
FEMA classification
AE
AE
Not in SFHA
Not in SFHA
Not in SFHA
Native vegetation community
Felsic Mesic Forest
Felsic Mesic Forest
Felsic Mesic Forest
Felsic Mesic Forest
Felsic Mesic Forest
Percent composition of exotic invasive vegetation
0
Wetland
0
Summary Information
0
0
0
Parameters
Wetland 1
Wetland 2
Wetland 3
Wetland 4
Size of Wetland (acres)
0.09
0.02
0.13
0.10
Wetland Type
riparian non-riverine
riparian non-riverine
riparian non-riverine
riparian non-riverine
Mapped Soil Series
CsA
CsA and FsE
CsA and FsE
CsA and FsE
Drainage class
well drained
well drained
well drained
well drained
Soil Hydric Status
not hydric
not hydric
not hydric
not hydric
Source of Hydrology
Creek (oxbow)
Toe seep
Toe seep
Impoundment
Hydrologic Impairment
none
none
none
none
Native vegetation community
Dist. Small Stream/
Narrow FP Forest
Dist. Small Stream/
Narrow FP Forest
Dist. Small Stream/
Narrow FP Forest
Herbaceous
Percent composition of exotic invasive vegetation
0
0
0
0
Regulation
Applicable?
Resolved?
Supporting Documentation
Waters of the United States — Section 404
Y
Y
USACE Action ID # SAW-2011-02268
Waters of the United States — Section 401
Y
Y
NCDWR # 20120182
Endangered Species Act
Y
Y
CE Approved 9/30/11
Historic Preservation Act
N
N/A
-
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)/ Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA)
N
N/A
-
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
Y
Y
LOMR Submitted 5/2015
Essential Fisheries Habitat
N
N/A
-
N/A Not -applicable

Table S. Monitoring Component Summary
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DIMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Parameter
Monitoring Feature
Quantity Length By Reach (ft)
Frequency
Hogan Creek Reach 1
Hogan Creek Reach 2
UT1
UT2
UT3
Dimension
RiffleXS
2
2
2
Annual
Pool XS
1
1
1
Annual
Pattern/Profile
Longitudinal Profile
1500
1000
675
Annual
Substrate
100 Pebble Count
2
2
Annual
Hydrology
Crest Gage
1
1
Semi -Annual
Vegetation
Vegetation Plots
3
2
1
MIRAnnual
Visual Assessment
Project Site
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Semi -Annual
Reference Photos
Permanent Photo Points
18
6
3
10
4
Annual

APPENDIX B. Visual Assessment Data

L
Li Conservation Easement
.— —
r•, i
Stream Restoration
Stream Enhancement Level I
Stream Enhancement Level II
Stream Preservation
Non Project Streams
Existing Wetland
Photo Point
+ Crest Gage
Cross -Section
Vegetation Monitoring Plots (VP) - MY5
Criteria Met
- Criteria Not Met
Vegetation Areas of Concern - MY5
Chinese Privet
Japanese Honeysuckle
Kudzu
® Lespedeza
Mimosa
Multiflora Rose
Bare/Poor Herbaceous Cover
Stream Areas of Concern - MY5
'4dIIIII Scour/Erosion
Bed Aggradation
t
W�.WLW,
W I L D L A N D S 0 250 500 Feet
ENGINEERING rk�I
I t
Figure 3.0 Integrated Current Condition Plan View Map (Key)
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Surry County, NC

WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
Figure 3.1 Integrated Current Condition Plan View Map (Sheet 1 of 3)
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
rk� DMS Project No. 94708
0 125 250 Feet Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
I
Surry County, NC

.$D
• o
♦
�u
0
o
a + 0o {�
�o Wetla nd 4' M
i
T \ _ - -.
0 It
d
4 fp+oo • ° M . _
i Conservation Easement
Stream Restoration
Stream Enhancement Level
Stream Enhancement Level 11
IV Stream Preservation
Non Project Streams
--- Top of Bank
Structures
., ar Existing Wetland
°< Photo Point
! + Crest Gage
4 •; ;� s� ..i'j x I
Cross -Section
Vegetation Monitoring Plots (VP) -MY5
Criteria Met
Criteria Not Met
Vegetation Areas of Concern - MY5
r
Chinese Privet
Japanese Honeysuckle
Kudzu
Lespedeza
Mimosa
_.
Multiflora Rose
Bare/Poor Herbaceous Cover
Stream Areas of Concern - MY5
Scour/Erosion
Bed Aggradation
Figure 3.2 Integrated Current Condition Plan View Map (Sheet 2 of 3)
kv, Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 94708
W I L D L A N D S 0 150 300 Feet Monitoring Year 5- 2019
I
Surry County, NC

1
.f'
1i7
f' • • I' f I i 1 V :.f) 1 !I Y, � •� , � f/ "S � , t �� ry, A ��`I �:+
�- ii eta � �� '�'{,.��;�I- `.�3�I 1,�" .�t �° e< � •�' .�'+.. ��nl��'I'fi.. .�
j dL
I�d �i,' lY �•a�
M, rr , + .• r ! iy.1 All
Conservation Easement
Stream Restoration
��,,• ', � � � ,�, I. " � �� f ���,�}� , � Stream Enhancement Level
Stream Enhancement Level II
p> F Stream Preservation
Top of Bank
Structures
i,7. Existing Wetland
Photo Point
+ Crest Gage
-7'
I I.,! • Cross -Section
Vegetation Monitoring Plots (VP) - MY5
Criteria Met
i
Criteria Not Met
a;
t e ` Vegetation Areas of Concern - MY5
4 Chinese Privet
,a , I I�ia°'> Japanese Honeysuckle
Kudzu
Lespedeza
�4
_-, • .. ., . �,.... , ,, .. Mimosa
hid
��lar,af r � Multiflora Rose
h Bare/Poor Herbaceous Cover
;.
Stream Areas of Concern - MY5
Scour/Erosion
Bed Aggradation
Figure 3.3 Integrated Current Condition Plan View Map (Sheet 3 of 3)
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 94708
W I L D L A N D S 0 125 250 Feet Monitoring Year 5- 2019
C N G IN C ER ING I I I I I
Surry County, NC

Table6a. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Hogan Creek Reach 1 (Assessed Length : 1,961 feet)
Major Channel
Category
Channel Sub -Category
Metric
Number Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Total Number in
As -built
Number of
Unstable
Segments
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
%Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Number with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Footage with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Adjusted %for
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
1. Vertical Stability (Riffle and
1. Aegradation - Bar fonnation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include
point bars)
8
190
90%
Run units)
2. Degradation -Evidence of downcutting
0
0
100%
2. Riffle Condition
1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate
14
14
100%
1. Bed
1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6)
13
13
100%
3. Meander Pool Condition
2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of
downstrem riffle)
13
13
100%
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run)
13
13
100%
4.Thalweg Position
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide)
13
13
100%
1. Scoured/Eroding
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion
3
50
99%
0
0
N/A
2. Bank
2. Undercut
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears likely. Does NOT include
undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat.
0
0
100%
0
0
N/A
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
0
0
N/A
Totals
3
50
99%
0
0
N/A
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs.
15
15
100%
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill.
5
5
100%
3. Engineered
Structures
2a. Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms.
12
12
100%
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this
table in EEP monitoring guidance document)
15
15
100%
4. Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining — Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth ratio> 1.6
Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base -flow.
15
15
100%

Table 6b. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Hogan Creek Reach 2 (Assessed Length : 992 feet)
Major Channel
Category
Channel Sub -Category
Metric
Number Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Total Number in
As -built
Number of
Unstable
Segments
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
%Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Number with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Footage with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Adjusted %for
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
1. Vertical Stability (Riffle and
1. Aegradation - Bar fonnation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include
point bars)
2
30
97%
Run units)
2. Degradation -Evidence of downcutting
0
0
100%
2. Riffle Condition
1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate
4
6
67%
1. Bed
1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6)
4
5
80%
3. Meander Pool Condition
2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of
downstrem riffle)
4
'
80%
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run)
4
80%
4.Thalweg Position
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide)
4
5
80%
1. Scoured/Eroding
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion
2
36
98%
0
0
N/A
2. Bank
2. Undercut
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears likely. Does NOT include
undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat.
0
0
100%
0
0
N/A
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
0
0
N/A
Totals
2
36
98%
0
0
N/A
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs.
5
6
83%
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill.
1
1
100%
3. Engineered
Structures
2a. Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms.
4
5
80%
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this
table in EEP monitoring guidance document)
5
6
83%
4. Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining — Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth ratio> 1.6
Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base -flow.
5
6
83%

Table 6c. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
UT2 (Assessed Length : 930 feet)
Major Channel
Category
Channel Sub -Category
Metric
Number Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Total Number in
As -built
Number of
Unstable
Segments
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
%Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Number with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Footage with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Adjusted %for
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
1. Vertical Stability (Riffle and
1. Aggradation - Bar fonnation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include
point bars)
1
40
96%
Run units)
2. Degradation -Evidence of downcutting
0
0
100%
2. Riffle Condition
1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate
12
14
86%
1. Bed
1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6)
13
13
100%
3. Meander Pool Condition
2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of
downstrem riffle)
13
13
100%
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run)
13
13
4.Thalweg Position
il
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide)
13
13
1. Scoured/Eroding
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
2. Bank
2. Undercut
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears likely. Does NOT include
undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat.
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
Totals
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs.
6
6
100%
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill.
2
2
100%
3. Engineered
Structures
2a. Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms.
4
4
100%
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this
table in EEP monitoring guidance document)
6
6
100%
4. Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining — Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth ratio> 1.6
Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base -flow.
6
6
100%

Table 6d. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
UT3 (Assessed Length : 275 feet)
Major Channel
Category
Channel Sub -Category
Metric
Number Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Total Number in
As -built
Number of
Unstable
Segments
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
%Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Number with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Footage with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Adjusted %for
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
1. Vertical Stability (Riffle and
1. Aggradation - Bar fonnation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include
point bars)
0
0
100%
Run units)
2. Degradation -Evidence of downcutting
0
0
100%
2. Riffle Condition
1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate
4
4
100%
1. Bed
1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6)
4
4
100%
3. Meander Pool Condition
2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of
downstrem riffle)
4
4
100%
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run)
4
4
100%
4.Thalweg Position
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide)
4
4
100%
1. Scoured/Eroding
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
2. Bank
2. Undercut
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears likely. Does NOT include
undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are providing habitat.
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
Totals
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs.
1
1
100%
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill.
1
1
100%
3. Engineered
Structures
2a. Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms.
1
1
100%
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this
table in EEP monitoring guidance document)
1
1
100%
4. Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining — Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth ratio> 1.6
Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base -flow.
1
1
100%

Table 7. Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DIMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Planted Acreage 6.7
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Mapping
Threshold
CCPV Depiction
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
% of Planted
Acreage
1. Bare Areas
Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material.
0.1 acres
Cross Hatch
Yellow
2
0.01
0.1%
2. Low Stem Density Areas
Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on MY3, 4, or 5 stem count criteria.
0.1 acres
N/A
0
0.00
0.0%
Total
2
0.01
0.1%
3. Areas of Poor Growth Rates or Vigor
Areas with woody stems of a size class that are obviously small given the monitoring year.
0.25 acres
N/A
0
0.00
0.0%
Cumulative Total
0
0.01
0.1%
Easement Acreage
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Mapping
Threshold
CCPV Depiction
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
%of Easement
Acreage
4. Invasive Areas of Concern
Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale).
1000 SF
Cross Hatch
Green
15
0.45
1.3%
S. Easement Encroachment Areas
Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale).
none
N/A
0
0.00
0.0%

Stream Photographs

IN
'•
� ,. fir-'
} t
s r
r
r
4 ry
I
rF,
{
.
.ice
PP1— Main Stem UT2, looking downstream (611812019)
PP1A — Main Stem UT2, looking upstream (611812019)
e
�a
3 v S
0
S
y
PP1B — Main Stem UT2, looking downstream (611812019)
PP1C— Main Stem UT2, looking upstream (611812019)
w
Mom.
PP1D — Main Stem UT2, looking upstream (611812019)
PP2 — Main Stem UT2, looking downstream (611812019)

PP3— Main Stem UT2, looking upstream (611812019) 1 PP4— Main Stem UT2, looking upstream (611812019) 1
PP5 — Main Stem UT2, looking downstream (611812019) 1 PP6 — Main Stem UT2, looking downstream (811912019) 1
PP7— Main Stem UT2, looking downstream (811912019) 1 PP8— Reach 1 Hogan Creek, looking upstream (811912019) 1

PP9 — Reach 1 Hogan Creek, looking downstream (811912019) 1 PP10 — Reach 1 Hogan Creek, looking downstream (811912019) 1
PP11— Reach 1 Hogan Creek, looking downstream (811912019) 1 PP12 — Reach 1 Hogan Creek, looking downstream (811912019) 1
PP13 — Reach 1 Hogan Creek, looking downstream (811912019) 1 PP14 — Reach 1 Hogan Creek, looking downstream (811912019) 1

PP15 — Reach 1 Hogan Creek, looking downstream (811912019) 1 PP16 — Main Stem UT1, looking downstream (811912019) 1
PP16A— Main Stem UT1, looking upstream (811912019) 1 PP16B — Main Stem UT1, looking downstream (811912019) 1
PP17 — Reach 1 Hogan Creek, looking downstream (811912019) 1 PP18 — Reach 1 Hogan Creek, looking downstream (811912019) 1

PP19 — Reach 1 Hogan Creek, looking downstream (811912019) 1 PP20 — Reach 1 Hogan Creek, looking downstream (811912019) 1
PP21— Reach 1 Hogan Creek, looking downstream (811912019) 1 PP22 — Reach 1 Hogan Creek, looking downstream (811912019) 1
PP23 — Reach 1 Hogan Creek, looking downstream (811912019) 1 PP24 — Reach 1 Hogan Creek, looking downstream (811912019) 1

PT
11! II
r
q �
-
PP25 — Reach 1 Hogan Creek, looking upstream (811912019)
PP26 — Reach 2 Hogan Creek, looking downstream (811912019)
�� d �' ��
",� •�. A a
� � >• ilk. �� - ��a
.
I
W11
tom! wm �4 �g �'d4_ 'r � � Yy. �„7€`!•+�'-
7, �.
.� �
4
r �
fi
500
OF
• .,a
PP27 — Reach 2 Hogan Creek, looking downstream (611812019)
PP28 — UT3, looking upstream (611812019)
d
r_
x ,
WM
y
PP28A — UT3, looking upstream (611812019)
PP28B — UT3, looking downstream (611812019)

PP28C — UT3, looking upstream (611812019) 1 PP29 — Reach 2 Hogan Creek, looking downstream (611812019) 1
PP30 — Reach 2 Hogan Creek, looking downstream (611812019) I PP31— Reach 2 Hogan Creek, looking downstream (611812019)
PP32 — Reach 2 Hogan Creek, looking downstream (611812019)

Stream Repair Photographs

Hogan Creek Reach 1 STA 16+50 left bank repair — (311312019)
Hogan Creek Reach 1 STA 20+10 left bank repair— (311312019)
ICIF
Op
Hogan Creek Reach 1 STA 10+20 left bank and 10+80 right bank
repairs — (811912019)
Hogan Creek Reach 1 STA 16+50 left bank repair— (811912019)
Hogan Creek Reach 1 STA 20+10 left bank repair — (811912019)

L,.p
Hogan Creek Reach 2 STA 31+30 left bank repair— (311312019) Hogan Creek Reach 2 STA 31+30 left bank repair — (811912019)

�r-
\�
. ..�.
y
Hogan Creek Reach 2sA37+0right bank repair -//3219 Hogan Creek Reach 2sA37+0right bank repair -77921W

Vegetation Photographs

r
�c": �y
� y_�-,idr � ''Y•� � � yL"'F� 7�. ; 1 itPi' • �14 F F I
IT
' _ y y ors •M �'�,. i '� i'' Z
?. r
` 3
N 4 y
v e
°
01
"`
Ki
44
VI, kA
&j� r ' aow•
l
. i ;',A . ���6� . , � .., ��.m .� - .< �' -, s..,...� ,-. a` � r r• � �:Ydi� � .h I�It-.�,A �'a�►-(�.'a'"�rrii�'

APPENDIX C. Vegetation Plot Data

Table 8. Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Plot
MYS Success Criteria Met
Tract Mean
1
y
83
2
N
3
y
4
y
5
y
6
y
Table 9. CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Database Name
cvs-eep-entrytool-v2.3.1 Hogan MYS.mdb
Database Location
L:\Active Projects\005-02152 Hogan Monitoring\Monitoring\MY5 (2019)\Vegetation Assessment
Computer Name
MIMI-PC
File Size
61771776
DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN THIS DOCUMENT------------
Metadata
Description of database file, the report worksheets, and a summary of project(s) and project data.
Proj, planted
Each project is listed with its PLANTED stems per acre, for each year. This excludes live stakes.
Proj, total stems
Each project is listed with its TOTAL stems per acre, for each year. This includes live stakes, all planted stems, and all natural/volunteer stems.
Plots
List of plots surveyed with location and summary data (live stems, dead stems, missing, etc.).
Vigor
Frequency distribution of vigor classes for stems for all plots.
Vigor by Spp
Frequency distribution of vigor classes listed by species.
Damage
List of most frequent damage classes with number of occurrences and percent oftotal stems impacted by each.
Damage by Spp
Damage values tallied by type for each species.
Damage by Plot
Damage values tallied by type for each plot.
Planted Stems by Plot and Spp
A matrix of the count of PLANTED living stems of each species for each plot; dead and missing stems are excluded.
ALL Stems by Plot and spp
A matrix of the count of total living stems of each species (planted and natural volunteers combined) for each plot; dead and missing stems are excluded.
PROJECT SUMMARY -------------------------------------
Project Code
94708
Project Name
Hogan Creek
Description
River Basin
Length(ft)
Stream -to -edge Width (ft)
Area (sq m)
Required Plots (calculated)
Sampled Plots
6
Required Plots (calculated)
6
Sampled Plots
6

Table 10. Planted and Total Stem Counts
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Current Plot Data (MYS 2019)
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
94708-01-0001
94708-01-0002
94708-01-0003
94708-01-0004
94708-01-0005
94708-01-0006
PnoLS
FP-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
no
P-all
T
Acerrubrum
red maple
Tree
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
3
3
143
11
1
1
3
4
4
4
1
Diospyros virginiana
common persimmon
Tree
3
3
3
5
5
5
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
1
1
1
luglans nigra
black walnut
Tree
2
Lindera benzoin
northern spicebush
Shrub
10
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
15
Nyssasylvatico
blackgum
Tree
2
2
2
Pinus taedo
loblolly pine
Tree
Platanus occidentolis
American sycamore
Tree
2
2
2
3
3
3
1
1
1
8
8
8
1
Prunus serotina
black cherry
Tree
Quercus alba
1white oak
Tree
Quercus tyro to
I overcup oak
Tree
1
1
1 1
4
4
4
1
1
1
3
3
3
5
5
5
Quercus phellos
1willow oak
Tree
2
2
2
Stem count
8
8
173
5
5
16
8
8
10
16
16
16
9
9
12
12
12
13
size (ares)
1
1
1
1
1
1
size (ACRES)
0.0247
0.0247
0.0247
0.0247
0.0247
0.0247
Species count
4
4
6
2
2
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
6
3
3
4
Stems per ACRE
324
324
7001
202
202
647
324
324
405
647
647
647
364
364
486
486
486
526
Annual Means
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
MYO(2015)
MY1(2015)
MY2(2016)
MY3(2017)
MY4(2018)
MYS(2019)
PnoLS
FP-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
Acerrubrum
red maple
Tree
1
7
1
5
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
10
10
10
10
10
149
10
10
169
10
10
165
10
10
193
8
8
162
Diospyros virginiono
common persimmon
Tree
11
11
11
9
9
9
10
10
10
8
8
8
Fraxinuspennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
17
17
17
14
14
14
15
15
15
13
13
13
13
13
13
10
10
10
luglans nigra
black walnut
Tree
1
2
3
2
Lindera benzoin
northern spicebush
Shrub
10
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
70
62
64
19
15
Nyssasylvatica
blackgum
Tree
12
12
12
12
12
12
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Pinus toedo
loblolly pine
Tree
3
2
15
Platanus occidentolis
American sycamore
Tree
13
13
13
14
14
17
14
14
20
14
14
15
14
14
31
14
14
15
Prunus serotina
black cherry
Tree
27
41
33
Quercus alba
1white oak
ITree
2
1
1
Quercus lyrata
I overcup oak
ITree
13
13
13
15
15
15
17
17
17
16
16
16
16
16
16
14
14
14
Quercus phellos
1willow oak
I Tree
6
6
6
4
4
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
Stem count
71
71
102
69
69
330
70
70
335
65
65
294
67
67
304
58
58
240
size (ares)
6
6
6
6
6
6
size (ACRES)
0.148
0.148
0.148
0.148
0.148
0.148
Species count
6
6
10
6
6
10
7
7
12
7
7
11
7
7
10
7
7
10
Stems per ACRE
479
1 479
688
1 465
465
2226
1 472
1 472
1 2259
1 438
1 438
1 1983
1 452
1 452
1 2050
391
391
1 1619
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Volunteer species included in total
PnoLS: Number of planted stems excluding live stakes
P-all: Number of planted stems including live stakes
T: Total stems

APPENDIX D. Morphological Summary Data and Plots

Table lla. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project No.94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Hoean Creek - Reach 1 (1.532 feet)
Parameter
Gage
Regional Curve
Pre -Existing Condition
Reference Reach Data
Design
Monitoring Baseline
ILL UL Eq.
Min
Mean Med Max SD
n
Min
Mean Med
Max SD
n
Min
Med
I Max
I Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
n
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle Only
Bankfull Width (ft)
N/A
21.5
25.7
29.7
27.2
30.4
33.6
22.5
23.3
24.0
22.8
24.2
24.2
25.6
2
Floodprone Width (ft)
178.0
220.0
246.0
72.1
72.3
72.5
100.0
150.0
200.0
>100
>100
>100
>100
2
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
2.0
1.9
2.1
1.9
2.0
2.2
1.8
1.9
2.2
1.7
1.8
1.8
1.8
2
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
2.5
2.7
3.2
2.4
2.5
2.7
2.5
2.6
2.8
2.7
2.8
2.8
2.9
2
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft)
45.1
48.6
59.3
50.8
61.6
72.4
40.6
44.1
47.6
41.4
42.7
42.7
43.9
2
Width/Depth Ratio
10.3
13.6
14.9
14.5
15.0
15.6
12.1
12.3
12.5
12.6
13.8
13.8
14.9
2
Entrenchment Ratio
8.3
8.6
8.3
2.7
2.7
2.7
4.4
6.5
8.3
>3.9
>4.2
>4.2
>4.4
2
Bank Height Ratio
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
2
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
37.17
58.9
-
98.4
8
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.010
0.024
0.055
0.0191
0.020
0.021
0.007
0.010
0.013
0.002
0.010
0.018
8
Pool Length (ft)
N/A
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
25.0
62.6
88.0
13
Pool Max depth (ft)
4.0
4.3
4.7
3.4
3.5
3.5
-
4.0
4.0
4.0
2.5
3.2
4.1
13
Pool Spacing (ft)
-
-
-
-
73.3
120.9
200.08
12
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
44.0
65.0
117.0
86.0
86.0
86.0
48.0
88.0
126.0
63.0
96.5
101.0
121.0
24.9
4
Radius of Curvature (ft)
20.0
29.0
52.0
19.6
22.7
25.8
67.0
73.0
101.0
70.0
76.5
75.0
86.0
6.8
4
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)
N/A
0.9
1.1
1.8
0.7
0.8
0.9
3.0
3.1
4.2
2.9
3.2
3.1
3.6
N/A
N/A
Meander Wavelength (ft)
133.0
297.0
479.0
81.0
81.0
81.0
133.0
311.0
325.0
165.0
263.7
306.0
320.0
185.7
3
Meander Width Ratio
2.0
2.5
3.9
3.2
3.2
3.2
2.1
3.8
5.3
2.6
4.0
4.2
5.0
1 N/A
N/A
Substrate, Bed, and Transport parameters
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
-
-
-
SC% / Sa% / G % / C% / B% / Be%
09/o,3.5%,96%,0.5%,0%,0%
d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm)
14,19,23,41,56
Reach Shear Stress (competency) Ib/f2
N/A
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
Stream Power (transport capacity) W/mz
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
N/A
C4
C4
C4
C4
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
-
-
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
-
Valley length (ft)
2,525
4,730
1,294
Channel Thalweg length (ft)
2,762
327
2,897
1,532
Sinuosity (ft)
1.12
1.26
1.15
1.18
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
0.0064
0.0127
0.0071
0.0063
BF slope (ft/ft)
0.0071
0.0101
0.0062
0.0067
Bankfull Floodplain Area (acres)
% of Reach with Eroding Banks
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
N/A - Not Applicable
- Information Unavailable

Table 11b. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project No.94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Hoean Creek - Reach 2 (1.085 feet)
Parameter
Gage
Regional Curve
Pre -Existing Condition
Reference Reach Data
Design
Monitoring Baseline
ILL UL Eq.
Min
Mean Med Max I SD
I n
I Min
Mean Med
Max SD
n
Min
Med
Max
Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
n
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle Only
Bankfull Width (ft)
N/A
21.5
25.7
29.7
27.2
30.4
33.6
22.5
23.3
24.0
24.2
24.5
24.5
24.7
2
Floodprone Width (ft)
178.0
220.0
246.0
72.1
72.3
72.5
100.0
150.0
200.0
>100
>100
>100
>100
2
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
2.0
1.9
2.1
1.9
2.0
2.2
1.8
1.9
2.2
1.9
2.1
2.1
2.3
2
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
2.5
2.7
3.2
2.4
2.5
2.7
2.5
2.6
2.8
3.2
3.4
3.4
3.6
2
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft)
45.1
48.6
59.3
50.8
61.6
72.4
40.6
44.1
47.6
45.2
50.9
50.9
56.6
2
Width/Depth Ratio
10.3
13.6
14.9
14.5
15.0
15.6
12.1
12.3
12.5
10.8
11.9
11.9
13.0
2
Entrenchment Ratio
8.3
8.6
8.3
2.7
2.7
2.7
4.4
6.5
8.3
>4.0
>4.1
>4.1
>4.1
2
Bank Height Ratio
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
2
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
95.63
111.62
-
130.25
5
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.010
0.024
0.055
0.019
0.020
0.021
0.007
0.010
0.013
0.004
0.005
0.007
5
Pool Length (ft)
N/A
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
43.7
68.8
117.1
5
Pool Max depth (ft)
4.0
4.3
4.7
3.4
3.5
3.5
4.0
4.0
4.0
3.80
4.73
5.8
5
Pool Spacing (ft)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
164.1
208.4
253.1
4
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
44.0
65.0
117.0
86.0
86.0
86.0
48.0
88.0
126.0
84.0
114.0
117.0
141.0
28.6
3
Radius of Curvature (ft)
20.0
29.0
52.0
19.6
22.7
25.8
67.0
73.0
101.0
69.0
73.3
74.0
75.0
2.8
5
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)
N/A
0.9
1.1
1.8
0.7
0.8
0.9
3.0
3.1
4.2
2.8
3.0
3.0
3.1
N/A
N/A
Meander Wavelength (ft)
133.0
297.0
479.0
81.0
81.0
81.0
133.0
311.0
325.0
292.0
307.0
301.0
328.0
18.7
3
Meander Width Ratio
2.0
2.5
3.9
3.2
3.2
3.2
2.1
3.8
5.3
3.4
4.7
4.8
5.8
N/A
N/A
Substrate, Bed, and Transport parameters
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
-
-
SC% / Sa% / G % / C% / B% / Be%
0%,3%,9%,89%, 09/o, 0%
d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm)
13,24,22,35,49
Reach Shear Stress (competency) Ib/f2
N/A
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
Stream Power (transport capacity) W/mz
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
N/A
C4
C4
C4
C4
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
-
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
-
Valley length (ft)
2,525
4,730
794
Channel Thalweg length (ft)
2,762
327
2,897
1,085
Sinuosity (ft)
1.12
1.26
1.15
1.37
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
0.0064
0.0127
0.0071
0.0050
BF slope (ft/ft)
0.0071
0.0101
0.0062
0.0053
Bankfull Floodplain Area (acres)
% of Reach with Eroding Banks
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
N/A - Not Applicable
- Information Unavailable

Table 11c. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project No.94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
UT2 (675 feet)
Parameter
Gage
Regional Curve
Pre -Existing Condition
Reference Reach Data
Design
Monitoring Baseline
ILL UL Eq.
Min
Mean Med Max SD
n
Min
Mean Med Max SD
n
Min
I Med
Max
Min Mean
Med Max
SD n
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle Only
Bankfull Width (ft)
N/A
-
-
-
-
-
8.2
-
-
-
-
-
7.1
-
-
-
-
9.0
-
6.5
7.1
7.1
7.6
-
2
Floodprone Width (ft)
66.0
15.0
30.0
21
24.9
24.9
28.8
2
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.5
0.9
0.7
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.7
2
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
2.1
1.2
1.0
0.9
1.1
1.1
1.2
2
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft)
12.1
6.6
6.5
4.0
4.4
4.4
4.7
2
Width/Depth Ratio
5.6
7.6
12.5
8.9
11.6
11.6
14.2
2
Entrenchment Ratio
8.0
2.1
3.3
3.2
3.5
3.5
3.8
2
Bank Height Ratio
1.6
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
2
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
14.3
34.4
-
67.3
-
11
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.030
0.033
0.056
0.023
0.033
0.036
0.027
0.032
0.038
0.014
0.028
0.052
11
Pool Length (ft)
N/A
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
4.2
11.0
-
27.1
-
12
Pool Max depth (ft)
2.7
1.5
1.6
1.2
2.0
3.2
12
Pool Spacing (ft)
-
-
-
-
13.1
54.8
151.0
11
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
28.0
42.0
56.0
62.0
67.5
73.0
17.0
26.0
49.0
26.0
38.0
39.0
54.0
2.7
5
Radius of Curvature (ft)
16.0
18.5
21.0
7.0
16.0
25.0
22.0
27.0
30.0
19.0
21.6
22.0
26.0
2.4
6
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)
N/A
2.0
2.3
2.6
1.0
2.3
3.5
2.4
3.0
3.3
2.7
3.0
3.1
3.7
N/A
N/A
Meander Wavelength (ft)
128.0
159.0
190.0
53.0
58.5
64.0
73.0
103.0
130.0
101.0
112.3
109.5
132.0
2.7
6
Meander Width Ratio
3.4
5.1
6.8
8.7
9.5
10.3
1.9
2.9
5.5
3.7
5.4
5.5
7.6
N/A
N/A
Substrate, Bed, and Transport parameters
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
-
-
-
SC% / Sa% / G % / C% / B% / Be%
N/A
d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm)
N/A
Reach Shear Stress (competency) Ib/f2
N/A
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
Stream Power (transport capacity) W/mz
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
N/A
E4b
E4b
B4
B4
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
- -
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
-
Valley length (ft)
641
1,350
544
Channel Thalweg length (ft)
568
1,980
555 675
Sinuosity (ft)
1.33
1.47
1.4 1.24
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
0.0235
0.0263
0.0223 0.0218
BF slope (ft/ft)
0.0312
0.0356
0.0312 0.0229
Bankfull Floodplain Area (acres)
% of Reach with Eroding Banks
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Ali
Biological or Other
N/A - Not Applicable
- Information Unavailable

Table12. Morphology and Hydraulic Summary(DimensionalParameters- Cross -Section)
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DIMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Hogan Reach 1 (1,532 feet)
Dimension and Substrate''
Base MYi
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 MY6
Base MY1
MY5 MY6
Base MY1
MY4 MY5 MY6
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY2
MY3
bankfull elevation (ft)
990.8
990.8
990.8
990.8
991.0
990.9
990.7
990.7
990.7
990.7
990.6
990.7
987.6
987.6
987.6
987.6
987.4
987.3
low bank elevation (ft)
990.8
990.8
990.9
990.9
990.8
990.8
990.7
990.7
990.7
990.6
990.6
990.7
987.6
987.6
987.7
987.9
987.9
987.4
Bankfull Width (ft)
25.6
25.4
25.6
22.7
24.0
23.5
29.1
30.6
26.2
25.8
23.7
25.1
22.8
22.9
22.9
22.4
23.5
22.9
Floodprone Width (ft)
>100
>100
>100
>100
>100
>100
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
>100
>100
>100
>100
>100
>100
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.7
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.6
1.7
2.0
2.2
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.4
1.8
2.0
2.4
2.5
2.2
1.9
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
2.9
2.9
3.2
3.3
3.2
3.4
4.5
4.9
4.9
4.4
4.6
4.2
2.7
3.6
4.0
4.0
3.9
3.5
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (W)
43.9
41.8
44.2
39.9
37.6
41.0
57.6
66.7
64.2
54.9
51.1
59.8
41.4
45.9
54.6
55.3
52.0
43.9
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio15.4
14.8
12.9
15.3
13.4
14.7
14.1
10.7
12.1
11.0
10.6
12.6
11.4
9.6
9.1
10.6
11.9
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>3.9
>3.9
>3.8
>4.4
>4.2
>4.3
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
>4.4
>4.4
>4.4
>4.5
>4.3
>4.4
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
<1.0
<1.0
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.0
d50 (mm)
19
23
17
41
42
52.1
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
26
29
6.9
1.0
7.1
32
Hogan Reach 2 (1.085 feet)
Dimension and Substrate''
Base MY1 MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5 MY6
Base
MY1
MY2'
MY3
MY4
MY5 MY6
Base
MY1 MY2
MY5 MY6
MY3
MY4
bankfull elevation (ft)
984.0
984.0
984.0
984.0
984.0
983.5
983.6
983.6
983.6
983.6
983.3
983.7
982.1
982.1
982.1
982.1
981.9
981.6
low bank elevation (ft)
984.0
984.0
984.0
984.0
984.0
983.5
983.6
983.6
983.7
983.8
983.8
983.6
982.1
982.1
982.0
981.9
981.9
981.7
Bankfull Width (ft)
44.6
45.5
44
43.2
32.1
25.5
24.2
24.8
23.6
24.7
26.1
26.2
24.7
28.1
28.2
28.7
26.1
29.0
Floodprone Width (ft)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
>100
>100
>100
>100
>100
>100
>100
>100
>100
>100
>100
>100
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
2.2
2.1
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
1.9
2.0
2.4
2.5
2.2
1.6
2.3
2.0
2.2
2.1
2.2
2.1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
4.2
4.3
4.2
4.6
4.0
3.3
1 3.2
3.6
3.9
1 3.6
1 3.4
2.7
3.6
3.8
3.9
3.8
4.1
1 3.2
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft 2)
98.9
95.4
69.1
72.5
58.6
48.5
45.2
49.2
56.6
61
58.2
42.7
56.6
56.5
1 61.1
61.4
56.5
60.1
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
20.1
21.7
28.1
25.7
17.5
13.4
13.0
12.5
9.8
10
11.7
16
10.8
14.0
13
13.4
12.0
14.0
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
>4.1
>4.0
>4.2
>4.0
>3.8
>3.8
>4.0
>3.6
>3.5
>3.5
>3.8
>3.4
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.2
<1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
<1.0
1.0
1.0
d50 (mm)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
27
32
6.4
41
29
47
31
30
0.18
64
56
63
UT2 (675 feet)
Dimension and Substrate''
Base
MY1
Cross -Section
MY2'
7
MY3
(Riffle)
MY4
_"&
MY5 MY6
Base
_111& Cross -Section
MY1 MY2
MY3
8 (Pool)
MY4
�111.
MY5 MY6
Base
MY1
Cross -Section
MY2
9
MY3
(Riffle)
MY4
MY5 MY6
bankfull elevation (ft)
989.4
989.4
989.4
989.4
989.7
989.5
988.2
988.2
988.2
988.2
988.4
988.3
986.4
986.4
986.4
986.4
986.9
987.0
low bank elevation (ft)
989.4
989.4
989.3
989.4
989.7
989.8
988.2
988.3
988.3
988.3
988.4
988.3
986.4
986.5
986.4
986.5
986.8
986.9
Bankfull Width (ft)
7.6
6.9
7.9
6.2
8.6
7.4
6.9
7.1
7.1
5.7
6.6
5.8
6.5
6.8
6.8
5.5
7.9
5.9
Floodprone Width (ft)
28.8
29.0
30
29.3
25.9
34.6
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
21.0
20.6
19.2
18.8
17.8
27.9
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.8
0.6
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.7
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.4
1
1 1.0
1.3
1 1.0
1 1.3
1.2
1 1.2
1
1.2
1 1.1
1 0.9
0.8
0
1 1I
11
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
4.0
3.5
4.9
3.5
4.3
5.8
4.4
5.1
4.7
4.3
4.0
4.2
4.7
4.6
4.1
2.7
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
14.2
13.6
12.8
10.8
17.2
9.5
10.7
9.8
10.8
7.7
10.7
8.0
8.9
10.3
11.3
11.2
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
3.8
4.2
3.8
4.7
3.0
4.7
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
3.2
3.0
2.8
3.4
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.3
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
d50(mm)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A - Not Applicable
'Adjustment in survey points included in bankfull calculations resulting in change to previous monitoring year bankfull dimensions.
Prior to MY4, bankfull dimensions were calculated using a fixed bankfull elevation.
'MY4-MY6 Bank Height Ratio is calculated based on the As -built (MYO) cross -sectional area as described in the Standard Measurement of the BHR Monitoring Parameter document provided by NCIRT and NCDMS (9/2018). The
remainder of the bankfull dimensions are calculated based on the current year's low bank height. MY4 dimensions were updated in MY5.

Table 13a. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Hoean Creek -Reach 1(1.532 feet)
Baseline
Y3_J MY4
Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean I Med I Max SD n
Min Mean I Med I Max SD n Min Mean I Med I Max SD n Min Mean Med I Max SD I n Min Mean I Med I Max I SD I n
JMinJMeanJMedJMaxJ SDI n
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle only''Z
Bankfull Width (ft)
22.8
24.2
24.2
25.6
N/A
2
22.9
24.2
24.2
25.4
N/A
2
22.9
24.25
24.25
25.6
N/A
2
22.4
22.6
22.6
22.7
N/A
2
23.5
23.8
23.8
24.0
N/A
2
22.9
23.2
23.2
23.5
N/A
2
Floodprone Width (ft)
>100
>100
>100
>100
N/A
2
>100
>100
>100
>100
N/A
2
>100
>100
>100
>100
N/A
2
>100
>100
>100
>100
N/A
2
>100
>100
>100
>100
N/A
2
>100
>100
>100
>100
N/A
2
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.7
1.8
1.8
1.8
N/A
2
1.6
1.8
1.8
2.0
N/A
2
1.7
2.1
2.1
2.4
N/A
2
1.8
2.2
2.2
2.5
N/A
2
1.6
1.9
1.9
2.2
N/A
2
1.7
1.8
1.8
1.9
N/A
2
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
2.7
2.8
2.8
2.9
N/A
2
2.9
3.3
3.3
3.6
N/A
2
3.2
3.6
3.6
4
N/A
2
3.3
3.7
3.7
4.0
N/A
2
3.2
3.6
3.6
3.9
N/A
2
3.4
3.5
3.5
3.5
N/A
2
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
41.4
42.7
42.7
43.9
N/A
2
41.8
43.9
43.9
45.9
N/A
2
44.2
49.4
49.4
54.6
N/A
2
39.9
47.6
47.6
55.3
N/A
2
37.6
44.8
44.8
52.0
N/A
2
41.0
42.5
42.5
43.9
N/A
2
Width/Depth Ratio
12.6
13.8
13.8
14.9
N/A
2
11.4
13.4
13.4
15.4
N/A
2
9.6
12.2�12.#214.8
N/A
2
9.1
11.0
11.0
12.9
N/A
2
10.6
13.0
13.0
15.3
N/A
2
11.9
12.7
12.7
13.4
N/A
2
Entrenchment Ratio
>3.9
>4.2
>4.2
>4.4
N/A
2
>3.9
>4.2
>4.2
>4.4
N/A
2
>3.8
>4.1
N/A
2
>4.4
>4.45
>4.45
>4.5
N/A
2
>4.2
>4.25
>4.25
>4.3
N/A
2
>4.3
>4.35
>4.35
>4.4
N/A
2
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
N/A
2
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
N/A
2
1.0
1.0
1 N/A
1 2
1 1.0
1 1.1
1 1.1
1 1.1
N/A
1 2
1 <1.0
1 1.0
1 1.0
1 1.1
1 N/A
1 2
1 <1.0
1 1.0
1 1.0
1.0
1 N/A
1 2
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
37.17
58.9
N/A
98.4
N/A
8
15.0
62.1
73.5
98.0
N/A
8
11.7
23.2
23.6
38
N/A
10
10.1
29.0
26.1
53.3
N/A
10
16.6
43.0
37.4
97.6
N/A
11
11.0
71.0
64.0
193.0
N/A
9
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.002
0.010
N/A
0.018
N/A
8
0.006
0.013
0.011
0.020
N/A
8
0.011
0.05
0.022
0.057
N/A
10
0.011
0.029
0.022
0.072
N/A
10
0.007
0.023
0.021
0.051
N/A
11
0.006
0.022
0.013
0.080
N/A
9
Pool Length (ft)
25.0
62.6
N/A
88.0
N/A
13
20.0
67.1
76.0
105.0
N/A
13
30.87
85.3
89.5
140.8
N/A
13
32.4
100.7
115.4
170.7
N/A
12
13.8
98.1
99.7
172.0
N/A
11
67.0
170.0
103.0
170.0
N/A
9
Pool Max depth (ft)
2.5
3.2
N/A
4.1
N/A
13
2.8
3.7
3.4
4.8
N/A
13
2.3
3.7
3.6
5.1
N/A
13
2.4
3.8
3.8
5.8
N/A
12
3.2
4.0
3.9
5.6
N/A
11
3.0
4.2
4.0
6.3
N/A
9
Pool Spacing (ft)
73.3
120.9
N/A
200.1
N/A
12
52.0
112.8
111.0
148.0
N/A
12
57
110.1
103
204.0
N/A
12
46.9
122.5
120.9
180.5
N/A
11
61.5
132.0
129.1
230.6
N/A
10
104.0
162.0
134.0
372.0
N/A
8
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
63.0
96.5
101.0
121.0
24.9
4
Radius of Curvature (ft)
70.0
76.5
75.0
86.0
6.8
4
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)
2.9
3.2
3.1
3.6
N/A
N/A
Meander Wavelength (ft)
165.0
263.7
306.0
320.0
85.7
3
Meander Width Ratio 2.6 4.0 4.2 5.0 N/A N/A
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
C4
C4
C4 C4
C4
C4
Channel Thalweg length (ft)
1,532
1,530
1,532 1,532
1,532
1,532
Sinuosity (ft)
1.18
1.18
1.18 1.18
1.18
1.18
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
0.0063
0.0064
0.007 0.0064
0.0060
0.0062
BF slope (ft/ft)
0.0067
0.0069
0.0069 0.0068
0.0067
0.0066
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
-
-t
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- -
-
-
-
-
-
-
SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% / Be%
0%
3.5%
96%
0.5%
0�
0%
0.5%
98%
1.5%
0�
0%
13%
21.0%
64%
3.0�
0%
0% 12%
20%
53%
14.5%
0.5%
0%
5%
23%
58%
14.0%
0% 0%
0%
2%
72%
26%
0%
0%
d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 /
14
19
23
41
5613
21
27
44
62
0.19
6.1
10
33
1 50
0.20
5.6
21
1 63
139
0.40
7.5
17
61
105
19
31
42
75
90
of Reach with Eroding Banks
0%
7%
9% 9%
9%
1%
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
N/A - Not Applicable
- Information Unavailable
'Prior to MY4, bankfull dimensions were calculated using a fixed bankfull elevation.
2MY4-MY6 Bank Height Ratio is calculated based on the As -built (MYO) cross -sectional area as described in the Standard Measurement of the BHR Monitoring Parameter document provided by NCIRT and NCDMS (9/2018). The remainder of the bankfull dimensions are calculated based on the current year's low bank height. MY4 dimensions were updated in MY5

Table 13b. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Hogan Creek -Reach 2 (1,085 feet)
Min Mean Med I Max SD n Min Mean Med I Max SD n Min Mean Med I Max SD n Min Mean Med I Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med I Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle only "2
Bankfull Width (ft)
24.2
24.5
24.5
24.7
N/A
2
24.8
26.5
26.5
28.1
N/A
2
23.6
25.9
25.9
28.2
N/A
2
24.7
26.7
26.7
28.7
N/A
2
26.1
26.1
26.1
26.1
N/A
2
26.2
27.6
27.6
29.0
N/A
2
Floodprone Width (ft)
>100
>100
>100
>100
N/A
2
>100
>100
>100
>100
N/A
2
>100
>100
>100
>100
N/A
2
>100
>100
>100
>100
N/A
2
>100
>100
>100
>100
N/A
2
>100
>100
>100
>100
N/A
2
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.9
2.1
2.1
2.3
N/A
2
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
N/A
2
2.2
2.3
2.3
2.4
N/A
2
2.1
2.3
2.3
2.5
N/A
2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
N/A
2
1.6
1.9
1.9
2.1
N/A
2
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
3.2
3.4
3.4
3.6
N/A
2
3.6
3.7
3.7
3.8
N/A
2
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.9
N/A
2
3.6
3.7
3.7
3.8
N/A
2
3.4
3.8
3.8
4.1
N/A
2
2.7
3.0
3.0
3.2
N/A
2
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
45.2
50.9
50.9
56.6
N/A
2
49.2
52.9
52.9
56.5
N/A
2
56.6
58.9
58.9
61.1
N/A
2
61.0
61.2
61.2
61.4
N/A
2
56.5
57.4
57.4
58.2
N/A
2
42.7
51.4
51.4
60.1
N/A
2
Width/Depth Ratio
10.8
11.9
11.9
13.0
N/A
2
12.5
13.3
13.3
14.0
N/A
2
9.8
11.4
11.4
13.0
N/A
2
10.0
11.7
11.7
13.4
N/A
2
11.7
11.9
11.9
12.0
N/A
2
14.0
15.0
15.0
16.0
N/A
2
Entrenchment Ratio
>4.0
1 >4.1
1 >4.1
1 >4.
1 N/A
2
1 >3.6
>3.8
>3.8
>4.0
N/A
2
1 >3.5
1 >3.75
1 >3.75
>4.0
1 N/A
1 2
>3.5
>3.75
>3.75
1 >4.0
N/A
2
>3.8
>3.8
>3.8
>3.8
N/A
2
>3.4
>3.6
>3.6
>3.8
N/A
2
Bank Height Ratiol
1.0
1 1.0
1 1.0
1 1.0
1 N/A
1 2
1 1.0
1 1.0
1 1.0
1 1.0
1 N/A
1 2
1 1.0
1 1.0
1 1.0
1 1.0
1 N/A
1 2
1 0.9
1 1.0
1 1.0
1 1.0
1 N/A
1 2
1 1.0
1 1.1
1 1.1
1 1.2
1 N/A
1 2
1 <1.0
1 1.0
1 1.0
1 1.0
I N/A
1 2
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
95.6
111.6
N/A
130.3
N/A
5
56.0
91.0
101.0
125.0
N/A
5
24.7
51.8
46.9
97.6
N/A
5
19.6
46.3
43.2
68.2
N/A
5
51.5
94.0
69.9
151.2
N/A
5
69.0
110.0
107.0
157.0
N/A
5
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.004
0.005
N/A
0.007
N/A
5
0.004
0.009
0.007
0.018
N/A
5
0.008
0.012
0.01
0.017
N/A
5
0.006
0.009
0.007
0.014
N/A
5
0.004
0.0089
0.009
0.012
N/A
5
0.007
0.0077
0.007
0.010
N/A
5
Pool Length (ft)
43.7
68.8
N/A
117.1
N/A
5
60.0
87.3
64.0
135.0
N/A
5
29.91
74.4
75.4
107.0
N/A
5
54.0
71.1
58.1
117.1
N/A
5
42.3
98.1
87.5
184.11
N/A
5
45.0
118.0
86.0
118.0
N/A
5
Pool Max depth (ft)
3.8
4.7
N/A
5.8
N/A
5
4.0
4.8
4.6
5.7
N/A
5
3.77
4.4
4.4
5.4
N/A
5
3.5
4.5
4.4
6.0
N/A
5
4.2
4.9
Pool Spacing (ft)
164.1
208.4
N/A
253.1
N/A
4
169.0
196.5
189.5
238.0
N/A
4
93.7
134.2
129.4
201.0
N/A
4
76.8
140.8
142.E
201.3
N/A
4
188.1
202.1
203.0
214.4
N/A
4
162.0
198.0
203.0
222.0
N/A
4
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
84.0
114.0
117.0
141.0
28.6
3
Radius of Curvature (ft)
69.0
73.3
74.0
75.0
2.8
5
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)
2.8
3.0
3.0
3.1
N/A
N/A
Meander Wavelength (ft)
292.0
307.0
301.0
328.0
18.7
3
Meander Width Ratio 3.4 4.7 4.8 5.8 N/A N/A
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
C4 C4
C4
C4 C4 C4
Channel Thalweg length (ft)
1,085 1,085
1,085
1,085 1,085 1,085
Sinuosity (ft)
1.37 1.37
1.37
1.37 1.37 1.37
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
0.0050 0.0045
0.005
0.0054 0.0053 0.0052
BF slope (ft/ft)
0.0053 0.0053
0.0053
0.0057 0.0062 0.0067
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
-
-
-
- -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- -
-k�24
-
- -
-
-
-
SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be%
0%
3%
9%
89%
0%
0% 0%
0%
99%
1%
0%
0%
17%
50.0%
31%
2.0%
0%
0%
0%
[�!k"
4%
0% 0%
5.0%%
0% 0%
4%
53%
39%
d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 /
13
24
22
35
49
18
25
31
52
70
0.062
0.16
0.3
17
40
7.1
243
13
24
23
1 7
58
1 110
180
of Reach with Eroding Banks
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
0% 2%
13%
6% 10% 2%
N/A - Not Applicable
- Information Unavailable
'Prior to MY4, bankfull dimensions were calculated using a fixed bankfull elevation.
2MY4-MY6 Bank Height Ratio is calculated based on the As -built (MYO) cross -sectional area as described in the Standard Measurement of the BHR Monitoring Parameter document provided by NORT and NCDMS (9/2018). The remainder of the bankfull dimensions are calculated based on the current year's low bank height. MI dimensions were updated in MY5

Table 13c. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
UT2 (675 feet)
Para meter Baseline Myl MY3 MY4 0
Min I Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med I Max SD n Min I Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n
Min Mean Med Max SD n
Min Mean Med Max SD n
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle only "2
Bankfull Width (ft)
6.5
7.1
7.1
7.6
N/A
2
6.8
6.9
6.9
6.9
N/A
2
6.8
7.4
7.4
7.9
N/A
2
5.5
5.85
5.85
6.2
N/A
2
7.9
8.3
8.3
8.6
N/A
2
5.9
6.7
6.7
7.4
N/A
2
Floodprone Width (ft)
21
24.9
24.9
28.8
N/A
2
20.6
24.8
24.8
29.0
N/A
2
19.2
24.6
24.6
30
N/A
2
18.8
24.05
24.05
29.3
N/A
2
17.8
21.9
21.9
25.9
N/A
2
27.9
31.3
31.3
34.6
N/A
2
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.7
N/A
2
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.7
N/A
2
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
N/A
2
0.5
0.55
0.55
0.6
N/A
2
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
N/A
2
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.8
N/A
2
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
0.9
1.1
1.1
1.2
N/A
2
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.1
N/A
2
0.9
1.0
1.0
1.1
N/A
2
0.8
0.9
0.9
1
N/A
2
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
N/A
2
1.1
1.3
1.3
1.4
N/A
2
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
4.0
4.4
4.4
4.7
N/A
2
3.5
4.1
4.1
4.6
N/A
2
4.1
4.5
4.5
4.9
N/A
2
2.7
3.1
3.1
3.5
N/A
2
4.2
4.3
4.3
4.3
N/A
2
4.0
4.9
4.9
5.8
N/A
2
Width/Depth Ratio
8.9
11.6
11.6
14.2
N/A
2
10.3
12.0
12.0
13.6
N/A
2
11.3
12.1
12.1
12.8
N/A
2
10.8
11
11
11.2
N/A
2
15.0
16.1
16.1
17.2
N/A
2
8.6
9.1
9.1
9.5
N/A
2
Entrenchment Ratiol
3.2
1 3.5
3.5
1 3.8
1 N/A
2
3.0
3.6
3.6
4.2
N/A
2
2.8
3.3
3.3
3.8
N/A
2
3.4
r 4.05
4.05
4.7
N/A
2
2.2
2.6
2.6
3.0
N/A
2
4.7
4.8
4.8
4.8
N/A
2
Bank Height Ratiol
1.0
1 1.0
1.0
1 1.0
1 N/A
1 2
1 1.0
1 1.0
1 1.0
1.0
1 N/A
1 2
1 1.0
1 1.0
1 1.0
1 1.0
N/A
2
1
1.05
1.05
1.1
N/A
2
<1.0
<1.0
<1.0
1.0
N/A
2
<1.0
1.1
1.1
1.3
N/A
2
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
14.3
34.4
N/A
67.3
N/A
11
12.0
28.9
29.0
62.0
N/A
11
7.88
29.3
25.6
69.8
N/A
11
12.4
26.8
24.4
45.9
N/A
11
5.2
19.7
16.6
55.4
N/A
16
6.0
34.0
21.0
178.0
N/A
11
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.014
0.028
N/A
0.052
N/A
11
0.014
0.026
0.024
0.050
N/A
11
0.012
0.041
0.030
0.099
N/A
11
0.011
0.036
0.032
0.071
N/A
11
0.023
0.050
0.044
0.130
N/A
16
0.008
0.049
0.047
0.135
N/A
11
Pool Length (ft)
4.2
11.0
N/A
27.1
N/A
12
7.0
13.3
12.0
28.0
N/A
13
7.07
17.2
13.7
50.4
N/A
13
7.9
19.5
19.4
35.6
N/A
10
10.0
18.8
18.0
39.8
N/A
16
14.0
37.0
22.0
37.0
N/A
9
Pool Max depth (ft)
1.2
2.0
N/A
3.2
N/A
12
1.1
1.7
1.7
2.4
N/A
13
1.14
1.7
1.7
2.3
N/A
13
1.0
1.8
1.9
2.8
N/A
10
0.8
1.6
1.6
2.6
N/A
15
1.1
1.8
1.8
2.7
N/A
9
Pool Spacing (ft)
13.1
54.8
N/A
151.0
N/A
11
8.0
50.4
43.5
145.0
N/A
12
11.9
47.8
35.9
137.8
N/A
12
22.1
57.6
48.6
134.3
N/A
9
14.6
42.0
36.8
142.0
N/A
14
19.0
73.0
47.0
241.0
N/A
8
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
26.0
38.0
39.0
54.0
2.7
5
Radius of Curvature (ft)
19.0
21.6
22.0
26.0
2.4
6
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)
2.7
3.0
3.1
3.7
N/A
N/A
Meander Wavelength (ft)
101.0
112.3
109.5
132.0
2.7
6
Meander Width Ratio 3.7 5.4 5.5 7.6 N/A N/A
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
B4
B4
B4
B4
B4
B4
Channel Thalweg length (ft)
675
670
675
675
675
675
Sinuosity (ft)
1.24
1.24
1.24
1.24
1.24
1.24
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
0.0218
0.0208
0.0215
0.0205
0.0199
0.0201
BF slope (ft/ft)
0.0229
0.0226
0.0224
0.0222
0.0224
0.0216
Ri% / Ru% / P% / G% / S%
SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% / Be%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95/
-
%of Reach with Eroding Banks
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
N/A - Not Applicable
- Information Unavailable
'Prior to MY4, bankfull dimensions were calculated using a fixed bankfull elevation.
2MY4-MY6 Bank Height Ratio is calculated based on the As -built (MYO) cross -sectional area as described in the Standard Measurement of the BHR Monitoring Parameter document provided by NCIRT and NCDMS (9/2018). The remainder of the bankfull dimensions are calculated based on the current year's low bank height. MY4 dimensions were updated in MY5

Cross -Section Plots
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
NCDMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Cross Section 1-Hogan Creek Reach 1
22+67 Riffle
995
994
993
992
x
0
990
v
w 989
988
987
0 10 20 30 40 50
Width (ft)
-MYO(6/2015) ---- MYO BKF XS Area Elevation - MY1 (12/2015)
-MY2 (6/2016) -MY3 (6/2017) -MY4 (7/2018)
+MY5 (7/2019) Bankfu II - Floodprone Area
Bank -full Dimensions
41.0
x-section area (ft.sq.)
23.5
width (ft)
1.7
mean depth (ft)
3.4
max depth (ft)
25.7
wetted perimeter (ft)
1.6
hydraulic radius (ft)
13.4
width -depth ratio
100.0
W flood prone area (ft)
4.3
entrenchment ratio
0.97
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 7/2019
Field Crew: Kee Mapping & Surveying
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
NCDMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Cross Section 2-Hogan Creek Reach 1
23+07 Pool
993
991
x
989
�
0
v
w 987
985
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Width (ft)
—MYO (6/2015) —MY1 (12/2015) —MY2 (6/2016) —MY3 (6/2017) —MY4 (7/2018) +MY5 (7/2019) —Bankfull
Bank -full Dimensions
59.8
x-section area (ft.sq.)
25.1
width (ft)
2.4
mean depth (ft)
4.2
max depth (ft)
27.3
wetted perimeter (ft)
2.2
hydraulic radius (ft)
10.6
width -depth ratio
Survey Date: 7/2019
Field Crew: Kee Mapping & Surveying
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
NCDMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Cross Section 3-Hogan Creek Reach 1
26+78 Riffle
991
990
989
988
987
---------------
-----
--------
--------------- - - - - -- - ----------------------
�
0
986
v
w 985
984
983
0 10 20 Width (ft) 30 40 50
-MYO(6/2015) - - -- MYO BKF XS Area Elevation - MY1 (12/2015)
-MY2 (6/2016) -MY3 (6/2017) -MY4 (7/2018)
--4-- MY5 (7/2019) - Bankfull - Floodprone Area
Bank -full Dimensions
43.9
x-section area (ft.sq.)
22.9
width (ft)
1.9
mean depth (ft)
3.5
max depth (ft)
24.5
wetted perimeter (ft)
1.8
hydraulic radius (ft)
11.9
width -depth ratio
100.0
W flood prone area (ft)
4.4
entrenchment ratio
1.03
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 7/2019
Field Crew: Kee Mapping & Surveying
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
NCDMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Cross Section 4-Hogan Creek Reach 2
33+68 Pool
987
985
x
983
�
0
v
w 981
If
979
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Width (ft)
-MYO (6/2015) -MY1 (12/2015) -MY2 (6/2016) -MY3 (6/2017) -MY4 (7/2018) +MY5 (7/2019) -Bankfull
Bank -full Dimensions
48.5
x-section area (ft.sq.)
25.5
width (ft)
1.9
mean depth (ft)
3.3
max depth (ft)
27.2
wetted perimeter (ft)
1.8
hydraulic radius (ft)
13.4
width -depth ratio
Survey Date: 7/2019
Field Crew: Kee Mapping & Surveying
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
NCDMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Cross Section 5-Hogan Creek Reach 2
34+49 Riffle
987
986
985
984
--------------
-------------
-- -- ---
-------------
x-------------
983
�
0
982
v
w 981
980
979
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Width (ft)
-MYO(6/2015) ---- MYO BKF XS Area Elevation - MY1 (12/2015)
-MY2 (6/2016) -MY3 (6/2017) -MY4 (7/2018)
+MY5 (7/2019) Bankfull - Floodprone Area
Bank -full Dimensions
42.7
x-section area (ft.sq.)
26.2
width (ft)
1.6
mean depth (ft)
2.7
max depth (ft)
27.4
wetted perimeter (ft)
1.6
hydraulic radius (ft)
16.0
width -depth ratio
100.0
W flood prone area (ft)
3.8
entrenchment ratio
0.97
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 7/2019
Field Crew: Kee Mapping & Surveying
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
NCDMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Cross Section 6-Hogan Creek Reach 2
37+95 Riffle
987
985
983
x
o-------------
981
-------- -
-------------
-------------
--- ----
-------------
v
979
977
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Width (ft)
- MYO (6/2015) - - - - MYO BKF XS Area Elevation - MY1 (12/2015)
- MY2 (6/2016) - MY3 (6/2017) - MY4 (7/2018)
t MY5 (7/2019) - Bankfull - Floodprone Area
Bank -full Dimensions
60.1
x-section area (ft.sq.)
29.0
width (ft)
2.1
mean depth (ft)
3.2
max depth (ft)
30.9
wetted perimeter (ft)
1.9
hydraulic radius (ft)
14.0
width -depth ratio
100.0
W flood prone area (ft)
3.4
entrenchment ratio
1.04
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 7/2019
Field Crew: Kee Mapping & Surveying
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
NCDMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Cross Section 7-UT2
13+25 Riffle
992
991
990
x
0
989
@
v
988
987
15 20 25 30 Width (ft) 35 40 45 50
- MYO (6/2015) - - - - MO BKF XS Area Elevation - MY1 (12/2015)
-MY2 (6/2016) -MY3 (6/2017) -MY4 (7/2018)
+ MY5 (7/2019) Bankfull - Floodprone Area
Bank -full Dimensions
5.8
x-section area (ft.sq.)
7.4
width (ft)
0.8
mean depth (ft)
1.4
max depth (ft)
8.1
wetted perimeter (ft)
0.7
hydraulic radius (ft)
9.5
width -depth ratio
34.6
W flood prone area (ft)
4.7
entrenchment ratio
1.3
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 7/2019
Field Crew: Kee Mapping & Surveying
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
NCDMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Cross Section 8-UT2
13+74 Pool
991
990
989
x
0
988
@
>
v
987
986
20
25 30 35 40 45
Width (ft)
—MYO (6/2015) —MY1 (12/2015) —MY2 (6/2016) —MY3 (6/2017) —MY4 (7/2018) +MY5 (7/2019) —Bankfull
Bank -full Dimensions
4.2
x-section area (ft.sq.)
5.8
width (ft)
0.7
mean depth (ft)
1.2
max depth (ft)
6.5
wetted perimeter (ft)
0.6
hydraulic radius (ft)
8.0
width -depth ratio
Survey Date: 7/2019
Field Crew: Kee Mapping & Surveying
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
NCDMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Cross Section 9-UT2
14+73 Riffle
989
988
x
987
0
_v
w 986
985
10 15 20 25 30
Width ft
-MYO(6/2015) ---- MYO BKF XS Area Elevation - MY1 (12/2015)
-MY2 (6/2016) -MY3 (6/2017) -MY4 (7/2018)
+MY5 (7/2019) Bankfull - Floodprone Area
Bank -full Dimensions
4.0
x-section area (ft.sq.)
5.9
width (ft)
0.7
mean depth (ft)
1.1
max depth (ft)
6.4
wetted perimeter (ft)
0.6
hydraulic radius (ft)
8.6
width -depth ratio
27.9
W flood prone area (ft)
4.8
entrenchment ratio
0.9
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 7/2019
Field Crew: Kee Mapping & Surveying
View Downstream

Longitudinal Profile Plots
Hogan Creek Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Hogan Creek Reach 1 (STA 14+29 - STA 29+61)
996
994
992
990
_
_
______________
_____„
--
"'----
__
____
988
986
1400 1450 1500 1550 1600 1650 1700 1750 1800 1850 1900 1950 2000 2050 2100 2150 2200
Station (feet)
- TW MYO 6/2015 - TW MYl 12/2015 - TW MY2 10/2016 - TW MY3 6/2017 - TW MY4 7/2018 - TW MY5 7/2019------- WSF MY5 7/2019 ♦ BKF MY5 7/2019 • StruRure MY5 7/2019
991
989
987
____
-----------------------
Reach
Break
L
985
a_------
w
983
1
XS 2
_-------------------
__________
Xs
9"
Xs 3
2200 2250 2300 2350 2400 2450 2500 2550 2600 2650 2700 2750 2800 2850 2900 2950 3000
Station (feet)
-TW MYO 6/2015 TW MYl 12/2015 -TW MY210/2016 - TW MY3 6/2017 -TW MY4 7/2018 -TW MY5 7/2019------- WSF MY5 7/2019 ♦ BKF MY5 7/2019 6 Stmaure MY5 7/2019

Longitudinal Profile Plots
Hogan Creek Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Hogan Creek Reach 2 (STA 30+11- STA 40+96)
987
985
983
X54
XSS
>"
981
-
- ---
c
m
979
_
_______
_________
♦
___
977
_____20
__________
_ __________
__________
_____
975
3000 3050 3100 3150 3200 3250 3300 3350 3400 3450 3500 3550 3600 3650 3700 3750 3800 3850 3900 3950 4000 4050 4100
Station (feet)
- TN MYO 6/2015 - TN MYl 12/2015 - TN MY2 10/2016 - TW MY3 6/2017 - TW MY4 7/2018 t TN MY5 7/2019------- WSF MY5 7/2019 ♦ eKF MY5 7/2019

Longitudinal Profile Plots
Hogan Creek Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 92343
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
UTT2 (SrA 8+70 - STA 15+45)
999
997
995
______________
_
m
L
O
0 993
W
991
989
850 900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200
Station (feet)
- TN MVO 6/2015 - TN MYl 12/2015 - TN MY2 10/2016 - TN MY3 6/2017 - TN MY4 7/2018 TN MY5 7/2019------- WSF MY5 7/2019 ♦ BKF MY5 7/2019
992
990
988
.7
X58
w
t
o
a 986
_ ___________
___ _____
XS9
994
982
1200 1250 1300 1350 1400 1450 1500 1550
Station (feet)
- TN MYO 6/2015 - TN MYl 12/2015 - TN MY2 10/2016 - TW MY3 6/2017 - TW MY4 7/2018 TW MY5 7/2019------- WSF MY5 7/2019 ♦ BKF MY5 7/2019

Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Hogan Reach 1, Cross -Section 1
Diameter (mm)
Riffle 100-
Summary
Particle Class
Class
Percent
Count
min
max
Percentage
Cumulative
SILT/CLAY
Silt/Clay
0.000
0.062
0
Very fine
0.062
0.125
0
Fine
0.125
0.250
0
5
Medium
0.25
0.50
1
0
Coarse
0.5
1.0
2
2
2
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
2
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
2
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
2
Fine
4.0
5.6
2
2
4
Fine
5.6
8.0
2
2
6
Medium
8.0
11.0
6
Medium
11.0
16.0
4
4
10
Coarse
16.0
22.6
2
2
12
Coarse
22.6
32
12
12
24
Very Coarse
32
45
16
16
40
Very Coarse
45
64 1
24
24
64
Small
64
90
26
26
90
Small
90
128
6
6
96
Large
128
180
2
2
98
Large
180
256
2
2
100
Small
256
362
100
Small
362
512
100
Medium
512
1024
100
Large/Very Large
1024
2048
100
BEDROCK
Bedrock
2048
>2048
100
Total
100
100
100
Cross -Section 1
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
25.4
D35 =
40.5
Ds =
52.1
D� =
83.2
D95 =
120.7
Dicc =
256.0
Hogan Reach 1, Cross -Section 1
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
100
send
90
gp
SiltlClay
bble
Gravel
Boulder
Bedrock
70
o^0
60
50
40
c 30
u
d 20
a
10
0.01 0.1
1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
--*—MYO-06/2015 --O--MY1-12/2015 --*—MY2-06/2016
--o—MY3-06/2017 --o—MY4-08/2018 --o—MY5-06/2019
Hogan Reach 1, Cross -Section 1
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
70
a
60
a
50
v�
io
40
v
30
v
2
20
'v
10
0
L I I EL
I
Obti ,Lh ,�h p5 1 'L ,LW
b I'6 W ,�1 ,y6 , 1
Particle Class Size (mm)
0 MY0-06/2015 ■ MYl-12/2015
■ MY2-06/2016 0 MY3-06/2017 0 MY4-08/2018 0 MY5-06/2019

Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Hogan Reach 1, Cross -Section 3
Diameter (mm)
Riffle 100-
Summary
Particle Class
Class
Percent
Count
min
max
Percentage
Cumulative
SILT/CLAY
Silt/Clay
0.000
0.062
0
Very fine
0.062
0.125
0
Fine
0.125
0.250
0
5
Medium
0.25
0.50
1
0
Coarse
0.5
1.0
2
2
2
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
2
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
2
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
2
Fine
4.0
5.6
2
Fine
5.6
8.0
2
Medium
8.0
11.0
4
4
6
Medium
11.0
16.0
12
12
18
Coarse
16.0
22.6
6
6
24
Coarse
22.6
32
26
26
50
Very Coarse
32
45
16
16
66
Very Coarse
45
64
18
18
84
Small
1 64
90 1
16
16
100
Small
90
128
100
Large
128
180
100
Large
180
256
100
Small
256
362
100
Small
362
512
100
Medium
512
1024
100
Large/Very Large
1024
2048
100
BEDROCK
Bedrock
2148
>2048
100
Total 1
100
100
100
Cross -Section 3
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
15.0
D35 =
26.2
Ds =
32.0
D� =
64.0
D9s =
80.9
Dicc =
90.0
Hogan Reach 1, Cross -Section 3
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
100
a
d
90
gp
SiltlClay
Boulder
Gravel
bble
Bedrock
70
o^0
60
50
rE 40
c 30
u
d 20
a
10
0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
--*—MYO-06/2015 --O--MY1-12/2015 --*—MY2-06/2016
--o—MY3-06/2017 --o—MY4-08/2018 --o—MY5-06/2019
Hogan Reach 1, Cross -Section 3
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
70
a
60
a
50
v�
io
40
v
30
v
2
20
'v
10
0
4�1
Particle Class Size (mm)
0 MY0-06/2015 ■ MYl-12/2015
■ MY2-06/2016 0 MY3-06/2017 0 MY4-08/2018 0 MY5-06/2019

Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Hogan Reach 2, Cross -Section 5
Diameter (mm)
Riffle 100-
Summary
Particle Class
Class
Percent
Count
min
max
Percentage
Cumulative
SILT/CLAY
Silt/Clay
0.000
0.062
0
Very fine
0.062
0.125
0
Fine
0.125
0.250
0
5
Medium
0.25
0.50
1
0
Coarse
0.5
1.0
6
6
6
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
6
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
6
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
6
Fine
4.0
5.6
6
Fine
5.6
8.0
6
Medium
8.0
11.0
6
6
12
Medium
11.0
16.0
4
4
16
Coarse
16.0
22.6
12
12
28
Coarse
22.6
32
8
8
36
Very Coarse
32
45
12
12
48
Very Coarse
45
64 1
14
14
62
Small
64
90
14
14
76
Small
90
128
14
14
90
Large
128
180
4
4
94
Large
180
256
2
2
96
Small
256
362
2
2
98
Small
362
512
2
2
100
Medium
512
1024
100
Large/Very Large
1024
2048
100
BEDROCK
Bedrock
2048
>2048
100
Total
100
100
100
Cross -Section 5
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
16.0
D35 =
30.6
Ds =
47.3
D� =
110.1
D95 =
214.7
Dicc =
512.0
Hogan Reach 2, Cross -Section 5
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
100
90
SiltlClay
send
Gravel
gp
ble
Boulder
Bedrock
70
o^0
60
50
E 40
c 30
u
d 20
a
10
0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
--*—MYO-06/2015 --O--MY1-12/2015 --*—MY2-06/2016
--o—MY3-06/2017 --o—MY4-08/2018 --o—MY5-06/2019
Hogan Reach 2, Cross -Section 5
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
70
a
60
a
50
v�
io
40
v
30
v
2
20
v
�
10
0
Obti ,Lh ,�h p5 1 'L ,LW
b I'6 W , 1 a`1
Particle Class Size (mm)
0 MY0-06/2015 ■ MYl-12/2015
■ MY2-06/2016 0 MY3-06/2017 0 MY4-08/2018 0 MY5-06/2019

Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Hogan Reach 2, Cross -Section 6
Diameter (mm)
Riffle 100-
Summary
Particle Class
Class
Percent
Count
min
max
Percentage
Cumulative
SILT/CLAY
Silt/Clay
0.000
0.062
0
Very fine
0.062
0.125
0
Fine
0.125
0.250
0
5
Medium
0.25
0.50
1
0
Coarse
0.5
1.0
2
2
2
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
2
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
2
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
2
Fine
4.0
5.6
2
Fine
1 5.6
8.0 1
2
Medium
8.0
11.0
2
Medium
11.0
16.0
2
Coarse
16.0
22.6
2
Coarse
22.6
32
10
10
12
Very Coarse
32
45
4
4
16
Very Coarse
45
64
36
36
52
Small
64
90
24
24
76
Small
90
128
14
14
90
Large
128
180
6
6
96
Large
180
256
96
Small
256
362
96
Small
362
512
96
Medium
512
1024
96
Large/Very Large
1 1024
2048
96
BEDROCK
Bedrock
2048 1
>2048
4
4
100
Total
100
100
100
Cross -Section 6
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
45.0
D35 =
54.2
DSo =
62.8
D� =
110.1
D95 =
170.1
Dicc =
>2048
Hogan Reach 2, Cross -Section 6
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
100
a
d
90
80
SiIVCIay
bl
Gravel
Boulder
Bedrock
70
o^0
60
i
50
E 40
c 30
u
d 20
Q.
10
0
--
0.01 0.1
1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
--*—MYO-06/2015 --*—MYl-12/2015 --*—MY2-06/2016
--o—MY3-06/2017 --o—MY4-08/2018 --o—MY5-06/2019
Hogan Reach 2, Cross -Section 6
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
70
a
60
a
50
v�
io
40
v
30
v
2
20
'v
10
0
pbti ,Lh ,�h p5 1 'L ,LW
pOp
b I'6 W ,�1 ,y6 , 1
�' ti ti h
Particle Class Size (mm)
0 MY0-06/2015 ■ MYl-12/2015
■ MY2-06/2016 0 MY3-06/2017 0 MY4-08/2018 0 MY5-06/2019

APPENDIX E. Hydrology Summary Data and Plots

Table 14. Verification of Bankfull Events
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
*Crest Gage was damaged from bankfull event

Monthly Rainfall Data
Hogan Creek Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 94708
Monitoring Year 5 - 2019
Hogan Creek 30-70 Percentile Graph for Rainfall in 2019 Slurry County, NC
12.00
10.00
2 8.00
0
0
m
Q 6.00
a`
4.00
2.00
0.00
Jan-19 Feb-19 Mar-19 Apr-19 May-19 Jun-19 Jul-19 Aug-19 Sep-19 Oct-19
Dobson 2.3 SE, NC Date
—70th percentile
—30th percentile
t 2019 rainfall collected from NC CRONOS Station Name: Dobson 2.3 SE, NC (NCSU, 2019)
30th and 70th percentile rainfall data collected from weather station ELKIN, NC (USDA, 2019)

APPENDIX F. Invasive Species Treatment Logs

HAR.P.—...%
T %f:_ '1%.7.0. 70 rW5 -4A.}
Habitat Assessment and Restoration Professionals
in►►as#Ve Species Management Division
j� Client Site Start Time �End Time
Crew Leader
Hours
!!Hours
Crew Members
t rim
i
WEATHER CON DIT ONS
Clear
P/C
Cloudy
Foggy
Rain
Start
-
End
WIND CONDITIONS
CALM 1-51VIPH 6.10MPH 11-1SMPH GUSTING
Start
End
PRIMARY REMOVAL METHOD ( Separate
hours per application method)
METHOD
# OF HOURS
CUT and PAINT
FOLIAR SPRAY APPLICATION
P CTOR w/tank/AN w/tank
HACK and SQUIRT
HAND PULL
CUT and CHIP
Other
AMHIENTTEMPERATURE
START
END 1516) j
SITE CONDITIONS INFESTATION AND TOPOGRAPHY
LIGHT 1
3
41
5
DENSE
FLAT 1
31
41
5
STEEP
AREA COMPLETED/COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FOLLOWUP TREATMENT/SPECIAL NOTES OF CONDITIONS

CHEMICAL
RATE OF APPLICATION
TOTAL CONCENTRATION
TOTAL SOLUTION
HERBICIDE
1r !C" /"„may
SURFACTANT
<`'(d`(r'
DYE
HERBICIDE
SURFACTANT
DYE
HERBICIDE
SURFACTANT
DYE
SPECIES TREATED (X species)
Autum Oliva Eleagnus u177be110ta
Burdock Arctium rninus
Ournitl6 Bush Flionymus alata
Nsh Honeysuckle Lonkeraspp.
Butte if ly Bush Ouddipiodavidii
Caiiery Pear Pyrus caller ana
China berry tree Melia ozedarach
Chinese tallow tree Madicosebifera
Chinese yam Moscoreaapposiriplia
Clernatis Clematris termifolia
Olmbing ferns Lygodium spp.
Cogon grass Imperato cyllndrica
Clown vetch Securigera varia
English Ivy Hedero helix
Five leaf akebia Akebia guinato
Garlic mustard AI#ario petioloter
Golden bamboo Phyllostarhys ouren
SPECIES TREATED (X species)
Ground Ivy Glerhama hederacea
Japanese Bar4trry fleffn i lhunbr.•.rurr
lap. Honeysuckle torikero japonica
Ja . Hop Humulus japonicus
lap.Hilot weedfolygnrmm easpidatuien
Jap. Spiraea Splraeo japonica
Jap.5kilr GrassMrcrabtegium Omni@um
Johnson Grass Sorghum haleperse
Kudzu puerariu inantana
Lespedeza Lespodeza cureato
Milt -A-Minute Vine Poly. perjoharurn
Mimosa Albizia juHiOssln
Multiflore Rose Rosa multiflora
Nandina Nandio dornestica
Orient.bittersweeS Celtrsrrusarblrairorus
PaperMulberry8ruuasnnctia papyrrlera
Perlwinkle Onto$pp.
SPECIES TREATED (X species)
Phragmites Phragrnites oustwhs
Porcellan Berry Ampelopsfs brev
Purple ioosestrlfe Lythrurn s ficaria
KNOW Qlive E'leagnw an pstrforia
5martweed polygonum spp.
Tamarisk I Tomarixspp,
Tree of Heaven Allonthus altisslma
Tropical Soda App. Sofanum viorurn
Viburnum Virburnum spp.
White Mulberry Mores alba
White Poplar popular albs
Willows Salixspp.
Wineherry Rubus hoenicolaslus
Winter Creeper fucnymus fprrnunei
Wisteria Wisteria spp.
+ i? %t+ e.

l
Habitat Assessment and Restoration Professionals
Invaslun Snacim AAanavamant nIxAcinn
Client
Site
Start Time
End Time
Crew Leader
Hours
,,1,J
G
Craw Members
Hours
s
L �
v
WEATHER CONDITIONS
Clear
P C
Cloudy
I Foggy
I Rain
Start
End
WIND CONDITIONS
CALM
1-SMPH
6-1pMPH
11-15MPH
GUSTING
Start
Cnd
PRIMARY REMOVAL METHOD ( Separate
hours per aEocation method)
METHOD
p OF HOURS
CUT and PAINT
FOLIAR SPRAY APPLICATION RtTRACTOR w/tank/ATV w/tank
HACK and SQUIRT
HAND PULL
CUT and CHIP
Other
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE
START
END
SITE CONDITIONS INFESTATION AND TOPOGRAPHY
LIGHT
1Ga
31
41
5
DENSE
FLAT
1
31
41
5
STEEP

CHEMICAL
RATE OF APPLICATION
TOTAL CONCENTRATION
TOTAL SOLUTION
HERBICIDE
j.
/ �[a
SURFACTANT
s
DYE
HERBICIDE
SURFACTANT
DYE
HERBICIDE
SURFACTANT
DYE
SPECIES TREATED (R species)
Autum Olive Eleo nus umbellate
Burdock Arctiam minus
Burning Bu5h Eluonymus elate
Bush Honeysuckle Lonicero spp.
Butterfly Bush fluddlejo davidu
Callery Pear Pyrus calleryana
China be rev tree iblella azedarach
Chinese tallow tree iriadiceseblfera
Chinese yam t)Jascorea oppositifolla
Clematis Clematrfs termifolia
Cllrnbfngferns tygodiumspp,
Cogon grass lmperota cylindr ca
Clown vetch 5ecudgera varia
English Ivy Hedero helix
Five leaf akebia Akebio quinata
Garlic mustard Allierria petiolate
Golden bamboo Phyllostachys aurea
SPECIES TREATED (fi species)
Groundlvy Glechomo hederocen
Japanese Barberry Berbodsthunbrrgtl
lap. Honeysuckle tonicero japonica
Jap. Hop Fiumrdus japonicas
Jap, Knot weedPolygonum cuspidaium
Jap. Spiraea Spiraeo japonica
},Ip-Stilt rsrassMicrosteglurrr vimnieam
Johnson Grass Sorghum haleperse
Kudzu Pueraria montane
Lespedeza Lespodezo cureato
Mile -A, Minute VIAe Poly. perfoirotunr
Mimosa Albizia julibrissin
MultifforaRose Rosamulfiflora
Nandlna Nandiadomestica
Drlew.blitersweet Celastrus orbreewonts
PoperMulberryBrowsanctia papyrifero
Periwinkle Vincospp.
SPECIES TREATED (X species)
Phragmites Phru mites oustrolls
Portelian Berry Ampelopsis brey
Purple loosestrife tythrum soutane
Russian Olive fleognas angustijolia
Smart weed Polyganutnspp.
Tamarisk Tamarix spp.
Tree of Heaven Allanthus altissirno
Tropical Soda App. Solanum viorum
Viburnum Wrburnumspp.
White Mulberry Morus olba
White Poplar populus alba
Willows Salix$pp.
Wineberry Rubus phoenfcolasJlls
Winter Creeper EuOnymas fortnunei
Wisteria Wisterlospp.

HAR. P-7't&
Habitat Assessment and Restoration Professionals
Invasive Snecles Management Dluislon
Date , ! /
Ciife`nt
Site
Start Time
End Time
[ - "I
44/
A
Crew Leader
Hours
�
I
Crew Members
Hours
.ti
WEATHER CONDITIONS
Clear
P/C
Cloudy
Foggy
Rain
Start
/
End
WIND CONDITIONS
CALM
1-SMPH
I 0-l-OMPH
11-15MPH
GUSTING
Start
End
PRIMARY REMOVAL METHOD ( Separate
hours per applicatlon method)
METHOD
d OF HOURS
CUT and PAINT
FOLIAR SPRAY APPLICATION
RACTOR w/tank/ATV w tank
HACK and SQUIRT
HAND PULL
CUT and CHIP
Other
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE
START -71
END
SITE CONDITIONS INFE TATION AND TOPOGRAPHY
LIGHT
1&X -31
41 SIDE
FLAT
3 31
41 S
STEEP
AREA COMPLETED/COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FOLLOWUP TREATMENT/SPECIAL NOTES OF CONDITIONS

CHEMICAL
RATE OF APPLICATION
CONCENTRATION
TOTAL SOLUTION
HERBICIDE
D
%TOTAL
SURFACTANT
.rq��
�/r rJ�
fU Q 2-1
DYE
l/
HERBICIDE
SURFACTANT
DYE
HERBICIDE
SURFACTANT
DYE
SPECIES TREATED X s edesj
Autuin Olive PleagitusuntbeNata
Burdock Arctium minus
Burning Bush E'uonymus olato
Bush Honeysuckle Loniceraspp.
Butterfly Bush Suddleja davidii
Gallery Pear Pyrus calleryorno
China berry tree Melia azedor ach
Chinese tallow tree Trladica sebifero
Chinese yam Dioscoreo oppositifouil
Clematis Clematris termi olio
Climbing ferns Lygodium spp.
Cogon grass Imperata cylindrica
Clown vetch Secudgera varfa
English Ivy Hedera helix
Five leaf akebia AkebJo Qulnato
Garlic mustard AllJorio petiolota
Golden bamboo Phyllostachys ourea
SPECIES TREATED {X species)
Ground Ivy Clechotna hederocea
Japanese awberry aerheri+ owntwg#
lap. Honeysuckle Loeticera japonfru
Jap, Hop Humoluslaponicus
Jap.Knot weWPolyganum cuip!datu)n
1a . Spiraea Spiraea japonica
tap.Stllt GrassMlcrastegium vimnieum
Jolinson Grass Sorghum haleperse
Kudzu puerorra rnontartu
Lespedeza Lespodeza cureato
Mile•A-Minute Vine Pn!y. arrfollatum
✓
Mimosa Albizin ju'librissin
Multiflara Rase Rosa multJ}lara
Nandina Nandia domestica
Oriant.blttersweat Celastrus orblecufatus
PaperM u Iberry8ruussunerP;, loopyrfJera
Periwinkle Vincaspp.
SPECIES
TREATED SX species)
Phrogmites Phrogmites oustrolis
Porcelian Beny Ampelopsis brev
Purple loasestrife Lythrurn solicor!o
Russian Olive Ereatgnus unguatifolio
Smart weed Polygon um Spp.
Tamarisk Tcmanxspp.
Tree of Heaven Allan thus altissima
Troplcal Soda App. Salanum vlarum
Viburnum Virburnum spp.
White Mulberry Marus Alba
White Poplar Populus alba
Willows Salix app.
Wirseberry Rubusphaenicofosius
Winter Creeper Euonymus formunei
Wisteria Wisteria spp.

Date:
Habita# Assessment and Restoration Professionals
Invasive Snecias ManaeemPnt nivicinn
Client
Slue
Start Time
End Time
AIL
Crew Leader Hours
� 5
/ Crew Members Tours
WEATHER CONDITIONS
Clear
P/C
Cloudy
Foggy
Rain
Start
WIND CONDITIONS
CALM
1-SMPH
6-10MPH
11-15MPH
GUSTING
Start
End
PRIMARY REMOVAL METHOD ( Separate
hours perapplication meOwd)
METHOD
# OF HOURS
CUT and PAINT
FOLIAR SPRAY APPLICATION
QtRACTOR w/tank/AYV w/tank
HACK and SQUIRT
HAND PULL
CUT and CHIP
Other
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE
START
END ea I
SITE CONDITIONS INFESTATION AND TOPOGRAPHY
LIGHT 1 31 41 5 DENSE
FLAT 1 31 4 S STEEP
AREA COMPLETED/COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FOLLOWUP TREATMENTISPECIAL NOTES OF CONDITIONS

CHEMICAL
RATE OF APPLICATION
TOTAL CONCENTRATION
TOTAL SOLUTION
HERBICIDE
r1
I' 1 [`f d
0
/ D' 2-1
d? ,
SURFACTANT
D/
DYE
HERBICIDE
/72/44 1
/' a
Q '
, Ci
�1.��
G
SURFACTANT
rr r
� r �
p�
DYE
HERBICIDE
SURFACTANT
DYE
SPECIES TREATED (H species)
Auium OliveMagnus umbellato
Burdock Arctfum minus
Burning Bush Euonymus alum
Bush Honeysuckle Lonrcera spp.
Butterfly Bush SuddleJa dovidli
Callery Pear Pyrus cafleryona
China berry tree Melia azedaroch
Chinese tallow tree Triadica sebifera
Chinese yarn Dioscoren opposftfalio
Clematis Clemotris termifaJia
Climbing ferns Lygodium spp,
Cogon grass fmperato cyllndrica
Clown vetch Securigera varia
English Ivy Hedera helix
Five leaf akebia Akebia quinoto
Garlic mustard Aifiarlo petiolato
Golden bamboo Phyllostochys ourea
SPECIES TREATED (R species]
Groundlvy Gtechomahederorea
Japrrrese.Barberry Berheristhunbergii
Jap. HoneysuckleLoniceraJaportica
Jap. Hop HumulusJopanicus
Jap. Knot weeaPolygonum cuspidatum
Jap. Spiraea Spiraea joponrco
Jap.Stih Or mMicrostegiam virnnieum
Johnson Grass Sorghum haleperse
Kudzu Puerarla Montana
Lespedeza tespodeza cureato
Mile-A•Minute Vine Pafy. perJohervin
Mimosa Albiala juflbrissin
Multif fora Rose Rosa multiflorn
fyandina Nandia domestica
Orlartt.bittersweet Ceiosrruscrbieculatus
Pape rMlllberrygrmmmmerla papyri/era
Periwinkle Vinca spp.
SPECIES TREATED(X species)
Phragmitas Phrogmltes oustrolis
Porcelian Berry Am elopsis brev
Purple loosestrife tythrum saficoria
Russian Olive ffeailnus angusuJofia
Smart weed Polygonum spp.
Tamarisk Tomorix se .
%
Tree of Leaven ARmthus oltissima
Tropical Soda App. Solunum viorum
Viburnum Virburnumspp.
White Mulberry Morus d1ba
White Poplar Po ulus tribe
Willows Salix spp.
Wineberty Rubusphoenicolosius
Winter Creeper Evonymusfortnund
Wisteria Wisteria spp.

HARP.....
H,A�lfai hSSr :,S tr Carr L `ES':'-ue;.C�r. r£KfCy.:.a tr
Habitat Assessment and Restoration Professionals
invasive
Client
Q
Crew" Leader
Hours
w (%eJ
7
Crew Members
Hours
jez�Il,�'
L7. i
z
WEATHER COINDITIOM -
Clear
P/C
I Cioudy
Foggy
Rain
Start
End
-✓
WIND CONDITIONS
CALM
1-5MPH
6-10MPH
11-15MPH
GUSTI1f[G
Start
End
Division
Date-
— i h
Start Time End Time
5
PRIMARY REMOVAL METHOD (Separate
hours per application method)
METHOD
R OF HOURS
CUT and PAINT
FOLIAR SPRAY APPLICATION
SP ACTOR w/tank/ATV w/tank
HACK and SQUIRT
HAND PULL
CUT and CHIP
Other
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE
START
END
SITE CONDITIONS INFESTATION AND TOPOGRAPHY
LIGHT
1
2
3
41
5
DENSE
FLAT
1
3
4
5
STEEP

HERBICIDE
CHEMICAL
1 +tr/d %'
RATEOF APPLICATION
/
TOTAL CONCENTRATION
1
TOTAL SOLUTION
d
SURFACTANT
! f"lp
o.. p
DYE
HERBICIDE
SURFACTANT
DYE
HERBICIDE
SURFACTANT
DYE
SPECIES TREATED (X species)
Autum Clive Elcogaus umbellate
Burdock Arctlum minus
Burning Bush Etronymus alata
Bush Honeysuckle Lonlcera spp.
Butterfly Bush Buddle a davldil
Callery Pear Pyrus calleryana
China berry tree Melia azedarach
Chinese tallow tree Triadlca sebifera
Chineseyam Diosconmooppositifolie
Clematis Clemotris termljWfa
Climbingferns Lygodiumsp .
Cagon grass Jm erato cylindrlcer
Clown vetch Securigera varies
Engilsh Ivy Hedera helix
Five leaf akebia Akebla quinato
Garlic mustard Alliaria petiolata
Golden bamboo Phyllostachys aurea
SPECIES TREATED (X species)
Ground lvy Glechoma hedemcea
Japanese 9arberry aerberJs thunbergp
lap. Honeysuckle Lonicera japanica
lap, Hop Humulus joponicus
Jap.Knot weed ftygonum cuspldatum
Up. Splreea s iraeopponlca
Jap.Stilt GrsssMlcmveglum vimnleum
Johnson Grass Sorghum holeperse
Kudzu puerarla Montana
Lespedeza kespodezo cureato
Mlle•A•Mlaute Mns Poly. ped matum
Mlmosa Albizia jullbrissin
Multiflora Rose Rasa multijlara
Nandina Nondia domestica
Orlentbitlersweet Ceiastrusarbleculatus
PaperMulberryBroussonetia papyrifew
Periwinkle VJnca s
SPECIES TREATED (X ecies)
Phragmites Phrogmitesotutrolls
Porcellan Berry Ampelopsisbrev
Purple loomstrife Lythrum salicona
Russian alive t leagnus angustlfalia
Smart weed Palygonum spp.
Tamarlsk Tamorixspp.
Tree of Heave n Allanthus alNsslma
Tropical Soda App. Solarium viarum
Viburnum Virburaym spp.
White Mulberry MorusWho
White Poplar Po ulus albs
Willows SAX spp.
Wineberry Rubus hoenicolasius
Winter Creeper r:'uonyrnusfortnunei
Wisteria Wisteria spp,

r•
F
H--
,+., na5e55mnt-aat a xr;-:r,ar,-nr, •a::,� <.;r,•,:•;,,:
habitat Assessment and Restoration Professionals
Invasive Soecias Manaeempnt nivieinn
D.10— '1�1
Client
Site
Start Time
T End Time
rLO!
1
Crew Leader
Hours
feo J�It,[r
/
Cr w Members
Hours
C
WEATHER CONDITIONS
Clear
P/C
Cloudy
Fo
Rain
start
End
WIND CONDITIONS
CALM 1-SMPH I 6-10MPH 11-15MP14GUSTING
Start
dd I
PRIMARY REMOVAL METHOD ( Separate
hours per application method(
METHOD
# OF HOURS
CUT and PAINT
FOLIAR SPRAY APPLICATION
8 RACTOR w/tank/ATV w/tank
r�
�(
HACK and SQUIRT
HAND PULL
CUT and CHIP
Other
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE
START
END
�_ SITE CONDITIONS INFE,'STATION AND TOPOGRAPHY
LIGHT I l' 31�- 41 - i� IcT En I FLAT •—� / 31 aI C
AREA COMPLETED/COMMENTS/RECOMMEPIDATIONS FOR FOLLOWUP TREATMENT/SPECIAL NOTES OF CONDITIONS

HERBICIDE
CHEMICAL
1�/r Ao r
RATE OF APPLICATION
f
TOTAL CONCENTRATION
TOTAL SOLUTION
1149P1
SURFACTANT
G 1 " ela
DYE
HERBICIDE
SURFACTANT
DYE
HERBICIDE
SURFACTANT
DYE
SPECIES TREATED IX s ecies)
Autum Olive Eleagnus umbellate
Burdock ArcHum minus
Burning Bush Euon mus alata
Bush Honeysuckle Lonicem spp,
Butterfly Bush auddlefa davidil
Callery Pear Pyrus calleryano
China berry tree hnelia azederach
Chinese tallow tree Triadlca seb1pre
Chinese yam Dioscareo oppositi olio
Clernatis Oematris termifolla
Climbingferns Lygodlumsp .
Cogan grass fmperota cylindrica
Clown vetch Securigere varia
English Ivy Hedera hefix
Five leaf akebia Akebla gulnuta
Garlicmustard Alllarlopetiolato
Golden bamboo Phyllostochys aurea
SPECIES TREATED {X species)
Ground Ivy Glechama hederacea
Japanese Barberry nerberls thunberalf
Jap. Honeysuckle Lonicerajaponica
Ja . Hop 1-lumuluslapoolcus
Jap.Knot weedPolygortum ruspidatum
)op. Spiraea Spiraea amanita
Jap.stlit GrassMicrostegium vimnleum
Johnson Grass Sorghum haleperse
Kudzu Puerarla mantana
Lespedeza Lespodeza cureato
Mile -A -Minute Vlne Poly, a d wtum
Mimosa A1b1zJajufibr9sm
./
Multifiora Rose Rosa mull ore
Nandina Nandfa domestica
Orient.bittersweet cetastrusorbieculatus
Paperwherryaroussonetta papy4ero
Perlwinkle vfnca spp.
SPECIES
TREATED IX species)
Phragmites Phragmites austrolis
Parcelian Berry Ampelopsls brev
Purple loasestrife Lythmm saficaria
Russian Olive c'leognus anyustifolfa
Smart weed poly -mum s p.
Tamarisk TUMGrfK 28.
Tree of Heaven Ailonthus ofhssima
Tropical Soda App. 5olanum viarum
Viburnum vtrburttumspp.
White Mulberry Mora$ albs
White Poplar Papules alba
Willows 58IN spp.
Wineberry Rubus phoenicolaslus
Winter Creeper Ettoaymus fartnuneJ
Wisteria Wisteria spp.
r

HA �R-FP
Habitat Assessment and Restoration Professionals
Invasive Species Management Division
Date: O ~d:/ J
Client
Site
Start Time
End Time
/Vc('
' s
7
1
Crew Leader Hours
Peo b
Ale
Crew Members Hours
LZhat
WEATHER CONDITIONS
Clear
P/C
CloudV
Foggy
Rain
Start
End
WIND CONDITIONS
CALM
I 1-5MPH
6-10MPH
11-15MPH
GUSTING
Start
End
PRIMARY REMOVAL METHOD (Separate
hours per application method
METHOD
# OF HOURS
CUT and PAINT
F LIAR SPRAY APPLICATION
/TRACTOR witank/A'N w/tank
HACK and SQUIRT
HAND PULL
CUT and CHIP
Other
AMBIENT TEMPERATURE
START
END
SITE CONDITIONS INF STATION AND TOPOGRAPHY
LIGHT
I1
31
41 S
DENSE
FLAT
I1
31
41 5
STEEP
AREA COMPLETED/COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FOLLOWUP TREATMENT/SPECIAL NOTES OF CONDITIONS

CHEMICAL
RATE OF APPLICATION
TOTA�LgCONCENIRAT14N
TOTAL SOLUTION
HERBICIDE
IMF (� �( %�
�r(yL/
Q
I�
SURFACTANT
'ellq
0., /
6 O Z.
DYE
HERBICIDE
SURFACTANT
DYE
HERBICIDE
SURFACTANT
DYE
SPECIES
TREATED (X species)
Autum Olive Fleopnus umbellarc
Burdock Arctlum minus
Burning Bush Euortymus alaro
Bush Honeysuckle Lonicera spp.
Butted Bush ©uddlefa dovidii
Callery Pear Pyrus calleryana
01naberrytree ftdelia aredarach
Chinese tallow tree Triadice sebi era
Chinese yarn Wasconea appositffolia
Ciematls Clematris termifona
Cllmbing ferns tygodium spp.
Cogon grass lmperato cyllndrica
Clown vetch 5ecurigera varia
English Ivy Hedera helix
Five leaf akebia Akebla quinate
Garlic mustard Alllarla petfolato
Golden bamboo Phyllostachys aurea
SPECIES TREATED (X s ecies)
Ground ivy Glechoma hederacea
1apane5e Barberry Serberts Munbergn
Ja . Honeysuckle Lontcera joponica
Jap. Hop HUMUlus japanicus
Jap.Knot weedPolyganum Guspidatum
Jap. Spireee spiraeo Japonica
Jap.Stllt Gra%Mlcrosteglum vimnieum
Johnson Grass Sorghum haleperse
Kudzu Puerana montana
Lespedeza Lespadeia cureata
Mile•A•Mlnute Vine P*. perfallatum
Mimosa Albiriajulibrissin
Muitiflora Rose Rosa multoora
Nandina NandiadomesVca
orient.blttersweet Celastrusarbieculatus
PaperM ulberryBroussanettapapyrifem
Perlwinkle iraca spp.
SPECIES
TREATED (X species)
Phragmites Phragmites australis
Porcelian Berry Almpelopsis brew,
Purple toosestrife tythmmsalicarla
Russian Olive Eleagnus angustrfolio
Smart weed Po! ovum spp.
Tamarisk Toma& pp,
Tree of Heaven Allanthus altlssima
Tropical Soda App. Salanum viarum
Viburnum Virburnum spp.
White Mulberry Morus albs
White Poplar Populus alba
Wlliaws Salix spp.
Wineberry Rubusphoenicolasius
Winter Creeper Wonymus fortnunel
Wisteria Wisteria spp.