20180785 Ver 1_FDMP_2019-12-06_20191212

ID#* 20180785 Version* 1
Select Reviewer:*
Mac Haupt
Initial Review Completed Date 12/12/2019
Mitigation Project Submittal - 12/12/2019
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?* r Yes r No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
V Stream Pr Wetlands r- Buffer r- Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:*
Jeremiah Dow
Project Information
..................................................................................................................................................................................
ID#:* 20180785
Existing IDY
Project Type: r DMS r Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site
County: Chatham
Document Information
Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Version:
*1
Existing Version
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Plans
File Upload: Hip Bone Creek 100059_FDMP_2019-12-06.pdf 16.48MB
Rease upload only one RDFcf the conplete file that needs to be subnitted...
Signature
Print Name:* Jeremiah Dow
Signature:* �
,ter

MITIGATION PLAN 

Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
Chatham County, North Carolina  
DMS Project Number 100059 
DMS Contract 7528  
USACE AID #: SAW 2017‐001160 
DWR #: 2018‐0785 

Cape Fear River Basin 
Cataloging Unit 03030003 

Prepared for: 

NC Department of Environmental Quality 
Division of Mitigation Services 
1652 Mail Service Center  
Raleigh, NC 27699  
December 6, 2019 

Prepared by: 

KCI Associates of North Carolina, PC 
4505 Falls of Neuse Rd, Suite 400 
Raleigh, NC 27609 
(919) 783‐9214 

KCI Project Staff: Tim Morris, Alex French, Adam Spiller, Joe Sullivan, Tommy Seelinger, and Kristin 
Knight‐Meng 

This mitigation plan has been written in conformance with the requirements of the following:  
 Federal rule for compensatory mitigation project sites as described in the Federal Register Title 33 
Navigation and Navigable Waters Volume 3 Chapter 2 Section § 332.8 paragraphs (c)(2) through 
(c)(14). 
 NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services In‐Lieu Fee Instrument signed and dated July 28, 2010  

These documents govern NCDMS operations and procedures for the delivery of compensatory mitigation. 

Date:                   12/6/2019 

To:    Jeremiah Dow, Project Manager 

From:  Tim Morris, Project Manager 
KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A. 

Subject:  Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
    Draft Mitigation Plan Review  
Cape Fear River Basin ‐ 03030003 
Chatham County, North Carolina 
Contract No. #7528 
DMS Project #97136 

Dear Mr. Dow,  
Please see the below responses to your comments from November 5, 2019 on the draft of the Hip Bone 
Creek Mitigation Plan. We have addressed your comments in the report, plus additional comments 
received November 25, and have outlined our changes. Following your acceptance of these changes, we 
will submit 3 hard copies of the final report along with a flash drive or CD with an electronic copy of the 
report and supporting digital files submission. 

1. Per Contract, specifically Sections 3.2 and 6.2 of RFP 16‐007331, DMS needs the final approved 
Financial Assurance (performance bond) before the Final Mitigation Plan can be approved or 
any payment made. 

Noted. 

2. Cover Page – please add the following:  
a. USACE#: 2017 001160   
b. DWR#: 2018‐0785 

We have added these.  

3. Table 1 – Verify total linear footage for stream Enhancement II. 

We verified 1,166 lf as the correct total amount for Enhancement II after adjusting the amounts for 
significant digits as requested. 

4. Figure 1 – site is not shown on figure. 

This has been corrected.  

5. Section 3.1.2, page 8 – The first paragraph references Figure 4 and should reference Figure 5. The 
current land use breakdown of the project watershed totals 339 acres, but the project watershed 
is defined as 158 acres. 

The figure number reference has been corrected. The breakdown acreages and percentages were 
incorrect and fixed; total project watershed acreage is 158 acres. 

6. Last paragraph, page 13 – the USACE jurisdictional determination is in Section 12.7 not 12.8. 

This has been corrected.  
7. Table 3 
a. Verify existing linear footage of T3 

2,202 lf is the correct value for T3; this includes the entire existing jurisdictional length through the 
uncredited stream section in the middle.  

b. Verify drainage areas for both T1 and T3. They add up to more than what was shown on Figure 
5. 

T1 is inclusive of the T3 drainage area. These are the drainage areas to the end of each reach.  

8. Section 6.1, page 20  
a. T1’s five reaches are depicted on both Figures 8 and 9.    

We have noted that it applies for both Figures 8 and 9 in the text.  

b. The 3rd paragraph, second sentence states that “T1 Reach 4 is a short section of restoration 
from STA 26+86 until STA 32+49…”  T1 Reach 4 is an Enhancement II reach. 

This actually should read “T1 Reach 3 is a short section of restoration from STA 26+86 until STA 
29+54…”. It has been corrected.  

9. Section 6.3, 
a. Methodology for wetland re‐establishment for portions of T2 is somewhat unclear in this 
section as there are no ditches being plugged and no discussion of bringing the “stream” bed 
up.  Please consider adding a brief explanation in this section. 

We have elaborated on this at the end of the second paragraph in this section: 
“Along T2 specifically, the existing eroding banks will be graded back to a stable angle and excess 
soil will be used to level out any remaining scour holes or deep spots. In addition, a combination of 
buried log sills and brush material will be used to stabilize the wetland grade and redistribute flow 
across the floodplain.” 

b. Briefly address how wetland re‐establishment along the left bank of T3 Reach 2 (an EII 
reach) will be achieved since the maps do not show ditches to be plugged, and presumably 
the groundwater gradient will not be significantly altered. 

We added:  
“Along T3 Reach 2, the re‐establishment wetland will have a small berm removed that runs parallel 
to the stream and have wetland microtopography redeveloped to retain the hillside drainage that is 
currently running off quickly to the stream at a downstream point.” 

10. Section 6.6 
a. Please clarify why it is appropriate to use existing or proposed D84 to estimate critical shear 
stress when D84 represents 1 data point in the distribution (T1 reach 2). 

For T1 Reach 2, the D84 values are representative of the spread shown in the pebble counts for the 
two assessment cross‐sections (XS T1C and T1D). While the D84 on XS T1D is higher than the rest of 
the site at 72 mm, the modified critical shear stress of 0.448 lb/sf is comparable to the average 
channel shear stress values. For XS T1B on T1 Reach 1, there was a large outlier particle that we took 
out, but the D84 only changed slightly from 7.3 to 7.1 mm, and the modified critical shear stress did 
not change (0.045 lb/sf).  

b. Please  explain and/or clarify  the increase in shear stress proposed for the restored stream 
conditions.  Describe the size distribution intended for the restored stream. Clarify if there is a 
difference in the distribution from upstream to downstream that may account for the proposed 
conditions discussed in the text. 

Regarding the increase in shear stress, there are certain parts of the stream that have become 
overwidened due to cattle impacts. The table below shows the relation of the overwidened sections 
to the increase in average shear stress.  

XS Existing  
W/D Ratio 
Existing Avg Shear 
Stress (lb/sf) 
Proposed Avg 
Shear Stress (lb/sf) 
Modif. Critical 
Shear Stress (lb/sf) 
T1 Reach 1 XS A  21.8 0.45 0.58 0.003 
T1 Reach 1 XS B  11.0 0.60 0.045 
T1 Reach 2 XS C  24.8 0.29 0.51 0.045 
T1 Reach 2 XS D  4.5 0.66 0.448 
T1 Reach 3 XS E  3.6 0.36 
0.34 
0.190 
T1 Reach 3 XS F  9.8 0.34 0.166 
T1 Reach 4 XS G  41.4 0.20 0.046 
T1 Reach 5 XS H  42.1 0.09 0.081 
T3 Reach 3 XS C  4.2 0.79 0.48 0.103 

We anticipate there to be smaller‐sized particles (small gravels with limited sand) at the heads of the 
project reaches, transitioning to larger gravels with limited cobble at the bottom of the site. However, 
we expect the upper reaches will be more vulnerable to bed degradation, because they will not be 
seeded as quickly as the lower reaches and will also have steeper slopes. As a result, we are proposing 
riffle stabilization to prevent bed degradation.  

We have updated the sediment section with these discussion points.  

11. Tables 7, 8, 9 and 10 
a. Verify drainage areas in each table, i.e., the drainage area for T1 Reach 2 is different for existing 
and proposed conditions, and T3 Reach 3 drainage area in Table 10 does not match the drainage  
are for T3 in Table 5. 

The drainage areas for T1 Reach 2 were incorrect and have been corrected. In addition, we went 
through and verified that all of the drainage areas shown in Tables 5, 7‐10 and the Morphological 
Criteria Table in Section 12.2 are in agreement. The drainage areas are all now set at the values used 
in design (top of reach) instead of some of the assessment values that were in the draft.  

b. Please explain how the valley width will increase from existing condition to proposed condition. 

In this type of project with small streams, we understand the valley to be the floodprone meander 
belt width. If the channel is extremely incised and either lateral or vertical changes are made in the 
proposed condition, then the valley width may change relative to the stream.  

Per  discussions  from  11/25/19,  we  have  changed  this  to  “floodprone  belt  width”  to  be  more 
representative of the measurement. 

c.  Please explain (Table 8) how the drainage area will decrease from existing condition to proposed 
condition. 

There can be slight variations in drainage area in the existing and proposed conditions depending on 
how the new stream alignments and confluences are designed. The one instance at this site where 
that occurs is at the confluence of T1 and T3. However, we have adjusted the drainage areas to what 
we used in design, which are now consistent between existing and proposed. 

12. Table 10 proposed parameters do not match the restored reach parameters in the Morphological 
Criteria table in Appendix 12.2. 

These tables have been corrected so that they have the same values. 

13. Section 6.8 – be advised that the IRT has been having concerns regarding the planting of green ash 
(Fraxinus pennsylvanica) due to issues with the emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis). KCI may 
want to look at an alternative species. 

We have removed green ash and substituted pin oak in its place. 

14. Table 11 
a. Please verify the stationing and restoration footage for T3 Reach 1. 

We have corrected the stationing shown for this reach to ending at STA 303+10. 

b. To better match DMS tracking of credits, please take stream credits out to three (3) decimals. 

We have changed all the stream linear footage to whole numbers and then calculated the credits to 
three decimals off of these whole numbers.  

15. Table 12 ‐ Verify total linear footage for stream Enhancement II. 

The linear footage is correct as shown for EII after adjustments were made per #14b.  

16. Table 13 – To better match DMS tracking of credits, please take stream credits out to three 
(3) decimals. 

Corrected to comply with #14b.  

17. Figure 8 
a. Please label T2. 

We have added a label to T2.  

b. Stream Enhancement II linear feet (lf) in the map legend is incorrect. 

This has been corrected to comply with #14b and the values are 1,166 lf and 466.400 stream 
credits.  

18. Section 8.0, Vegetation Monitoring ‐ The report states that “Vegetation monitoring will be 
conducted between July 1st and leaf drop.” DMS recommends adding language to indicate that 
vegetation monitoring will typically be done later in the growing season to capture any effects of 
climatic or other conditions that may adversely affect vegetation survival so that this more closely 
matches the IRT’s 2016 Monitoring Guidance. 

We added: “Monitoring should occur later in the growing season to capture any effects of climatic 
or other conditions that may adversely affect vegetation survival.” 

19. Table 14 – Please add wetland hydrologic monitoring to Table 14. 

We have added a row for wetland hydrology to shown the six proposed groundwater gauges.  

20. Section 9.0 – KCI must notify and work with DMS to develop any adaptive management strategy. 

We have added DMS to this section. 

21. Appendix 12.1 
a. Cover Sheet/Sheet 1 of 26 – Change DMS Project Manager to Jeremiah Dow 

This has been corrected.  

b. Sheet 13 of 26 – see comment for section 6.8 regarding green ash. 

As noted above, we have removed green ash and substituted pin oak in its place. 

22. Appendix 12.2 
a. In the Morphological Criteria table, there are numerous BHRs le ss than 1.0 for the existing 
channel.  Please elaborate on this. 

This has been corrected. In some of our analyses, we evaluated some of the lower elevations in the 
channel, but have now set them all equal to bankfull (1.0).  

b. In the Morphological Criteria table, please verify the valley slope and average water surface 
slope of T1 Reach 3. 

These have been corrected to 0.0093 and 0.0082 for valley and average water surface slopes, 
respectively.  

c. See comment 12 above. 

These tables have been adjusted so that they have the same values. 

23. Appendix 12.3 – DMS requires land acquisition to be completed and all required easement 
documentation be provided prior to submitting for permits. 

We  understand  that  the  easement acquisition  must  be  complete;  the  easement  is  currently  in 
progress.   

24. Appendix 12.6 – Please exclude (on the plot) particle size data that was not collected. For example, 
according to the XS T1a size dat a table, the largest particle observed was between 16‐22.2mm. The 
plot indicates data points up to 10,000 mm. 

We have removed points along then 100% line that did not represent any actual collected data. 

Please contact me if you have any questions or would like clarification concerning these responses.  

Sincerely, 

Tim Morris 
Project Manager 

Mitigation Plan    Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019        DMS Project Number 100059 
i 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1.0  PROJECT INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................ 1 
2.0  WATERSHED APPROACH AND SITE SELECTION .......................................................................... 3 
3.0  BASELINE AND EXISTING CONDITIONS ....................................................................................... 6  
3.1   Watershed Processes and Resource Conditions ........................................................................ 6 
3.1.1 Landscape Characteristics ..................................................................................................... 6 
3.1.2 Land Use/Land Cover and Chronology of Impacts ................................................................ 8 
3.1.3 Watershed Disturbance and Response ............................................................................... 12 
3.1.4 Site Photographs ................................................................................................................. 17 
4.0  FUNCTIONAL UPLIFT POTENTIAL .............................................................................................. 18 
5.0   MITIGATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ....................................................................... 19 
6.0  DESIGN APPROACH AND MITIGATION WORK PLAN................................................................. 20 
6.1   Tributary 1 (T1) ......................................................................................................................... 20 
6.2   Tributary 3 (T3) ......................................................................................................................... 20 
6.3   Riparian Wetland Mitigation .................................................................................................... 21 
6.4   Crossings ................................................................................................................................... 21 
6.5  Design Discharge Determination .............................................................................................. 22 
6.6  Sediment ................................................................................................................................... 22 
6.7   Morphological Essential Parameters Tables ............................................................................. 24 
6.8  Planting ..................................................................................................................................... 26 
6.9  Project Assets ........................................................................................................................... 26 
7.0  PERFORMANCE STANDARDS .................................................................................................... 30 
8.0  MONITORING PLAN .................................................................................................................. 31 
9.0  ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN ............................................................................................... 35 
10.0  LONG‐TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN ........................................................................................... 35 
11.0  REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................. 37 
12.0  APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................. 39 
12.1  Plan Sheets 
12.2  Data Analysis/Supplemental Information and Maps 
12.3  Site Protection Instrument 
12.4  Credit Release Schedule 
12.5  Financial Assurance 
12.6  DWR Stream Identification Forms, Wetland JD Forms, and NC SAM & WAM Forms 
12.7  Approved Jurisdictional Determination 
12.8  Approved FHWA Categorical Exclusion Form 
12.9  Agency Correspondence 

Mitigation Plan      Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059
   ii  
FIGURES 

Figure 1. Project Site Vicinity Map ................................................................................................................ 2 
Figure 2. Project Site Watershed Maps ........................................................................................................ 4 
Figure 3. Project Site / LWP Watershed Map ............................................................................................... 5 
Figure 4. Soil Survey Map .............................................................................................................................. 7 
Figure 5. Land Use/Land Cover Map ............................................................................................................. 9 
Figure 6A. Historic Aerials ........................................................................................................................... 10 
Figure 6B. Historic Aerials ........................................................................................................................... 11 
Figure 7. Current Conditions Plan View Map .............................................................................................. 16 
Figure 8. Project Asset Map ........................................................................................................................ 29 
Figure 9. Proposed Monitoring Plan ........................................................................................................... 34 

TABLES 

Table 1. Credit Summary ............................................................................................................................... 1 
Table 2. Existing Stream Bank Height and Entrenchment Ratios ............................................................... 12 
Table 3. Project Attribute Table .................................................................................................................. 14 
Table 4. Project Goals, Objectives, and Functional Outcomes ................................................................... 19 
Table 5. Summary of Project Discharge Values .......................................................................................... 22 
Table 6. Sediment Summary for Project Reaches ....................................................................................... 23 
Table 7. Morphological Essential Parameters for T1 Reach 1 .................................................................... 24 
Table 8. Morphological Essential Parameters for T1 Reach 2 .................................................................... 24 
Table 9. Morphological Essential Parameters for T1 Reaches 3 – 5 ........................................................... 25 
Table 10. Morphological Essential Parameters for T3 Reach 3 .................................................................. 25 
Table 11. Project Asset Table ...................................................................................................................... 27 
Table 12. Length and Summations by Mitigation Category ........................................................................ 28 
Table 13. Overall Assets Summary .............................................................................................................. 28 
Table 14. Monitoring Requirements ........................................................................................................... 33 

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059
  1  
1.0 PROJECT INTRODUCTION 

The Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site (HBCRS) is a full‐delivery stream and wetland mitigation project being 
developed for the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) in the Cape Fear River Basin 
(03030003 8‐digit cataloging unit) in Chatham County, North Carolina. The site’s natural hydrologic regime 
has been substantially modified by relocation and straightening, impacts from cattle, installation of field 
ditches, and other anthropogenic impacts. This site offers the chance to restore impacted agricultural 
lands to a stable stream and wetland ecosystem with a functional riparian buffer, floodplain access, and 
riparian wetlands.  

The HBCRS is situated in central Chatham County. HBCRS is located approximately 3.3 miles southeast of 
Siler City, North Carolina. Specifically, the site is on Carter Brooks Road just east of US‐421. The center of 
the site is at approximately 35.6804 N and –79.4018 W in the Siler City USGS Quadrangle. The site location 
is shown in Figure 1. 

The HBCRS will restore a stable stream and wetland ecosystem along an Unnamed Tributary to Meadow 
Creek (T1) and one of its tributaries (T3) with a combination of stream and wetland restoration and 
enhancement. A Priority 1 stream approach will be used to reconnect the streams to an active floodplain. 
Once site grading is complete, the wetlands and riparian buffer will be planted with native tree species. 
The site will be monitored for seven years or until the success criteria are met. 
Table 1. Credit Summary 
 Stream Riparian Wetland Non‐riparian 
Wetland Buffer 
Type R  RE  R  RE  R  RE  R  RE 
Linear Feet/Acres  2,860 lf  1,166 lf  4.528  1.495   
Credits 2,860.000  466.400  4.032  0.598   
TOTAL CREDITS 3,326.400 4.630   
               R=Restoration  RE=Restoration Equivalent        

Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan,
Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand),
NGCC, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community
Project Easement
Mitigation Plan
December 6, 2019 Hip Bone Creek Restoraiton SiteDMS Project Number 1000592
±0 0.50.25
Miles
FIGURE 1. PROJECT SITE VICINITY MAPHIP BONE CREEK RESTORATION SITECHATHAM COUNTY, NC Image Source: ESRIWorld Street Map
^_
Project Location:
Chatham County, NC

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059
  3  
2.0 WATERSHED APPROACH AND SITE SELECTION 
The HBCRS is located within the Deep River Cataloging Unit (CU) (03030003) of the Cape Fear River Basin, 
where  population  growth  and  rapid  development  have  produced  a  significant  need  for  restoration 
projects. The project 14‐digit CU 03030003070020 (Tick Creek/Rocky River) is included as a targeted local 
watershed (TLW) and is one of three 14‐digit hydrologic units (HU) in the DMS Upper and Middle Rocky 
River Local Watershed Plan (LWP). The Cape Fear 03 faces challenges such as a high percentage of 
agricultural land and animal operations, disturbed riparian buffer, and increasing impervious surface from 
development (NCDENR, EEP 2009). 

The 2009 Cape Fear River Basin Restoration Priorities in Unit 03030003 focus on restoring wetland and 
stream functions such as maintaining and enhancing water quality and improving fish and wildlife habitat 
(NCEEP 2009). The project goals for HBCRS are in line with the following TLW goals: 
‐ Reduce and control sediment inputs. 
‐ Reduce and manage nutrient inputs. 

The project will also address the following stressors and sources listed in the Upper and Middle Rocky 
River Local Watershed Plan (LWP): 
‐ Stream bank erosion 
‐ Lack of adequate forested buffer 
‐ Livestock access to streams 
‐ Fecal coliform bacteria 
‐ Nutrient inputs 
‐ Floodplain alteration 

The project aims to uphold the goals consistent with several CU‐wide watershed improvement objectives 
by restoring  channelized  and livestock‐impacted streams to a natural pattern within the landscape; 
reducing sediment impacts to the Cape Fear River and its tributaries from adjacent grazing and farming 
practices, and restoring riparian wetlands associated with the restored stream and the surrounding 
hillside seeps that contribute to these wetlands (NCEEP 2009). Restoring and enhancing the channelized 
and cattle impacted streams to C‐type channels will improve stream stability and reduce sediment loading 
by limiting channel erosion. These channels will be raised to restore and enhance the hydrology of riparian 
wetlands along these channels.  

The project watershed for the HBCRS is 0.25 square mile (158 acres). The confluence with Meadow Creek 
(17‐43‐12), the nearest named stream, is approximately 3,200 lf downstream of the project. Meadow 
Creek is rated by the Division of Water Resources (DWR) as a Class C water, and while it is not listed on 
the 2018 303(d) list, it did exceed the criteria for mercury found in fish tissue. Meadow Creek continues 
downstream until the confluence with the Rocky River. The project watershed is shown in a map in Figure 
2, and another map illustrating the project’s watershed location in relation to the 03030003070020 
watershed identified in the TLW and LWP is shown in Figure 3. 

There are no conservation or protected areas located adjacent to the project site, but it will connect with 
the forested area immediately downstream of the project and improve and restore the existing forested 
buffer on the site itself. DMS’s Tick Creek mitigation project is located approximately 2 miles to the east 
of HBCRS.  

Project Easement (18.68 acres)
Project Watershed (158 ac / 0.25 sqmi)
Mitigation Plan
December 6, 2019 Hip Bone Creek Restoration SiteDMS Project Number 1000594
±0 1,000500
Feet
FIGURE 2. USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAPHIP BONE CREEK RESTORATION SITECHATHAM COUNTY, NC Image Source: USGS TopoSiler City Quadrangle
HU
03030003070020
HU
03030003070050
HU
03030003070030
HU
03030003070040
NC Center for Geographic Information & Analysis
Project Easement (18.68 acres)
Project Watershed (158 ac / 0.25 sq mi)
03030003070020 TLW
Upper and Middle Rocky River LWP
14 Digit HU Boundary
Mitigation Plan
December 6, 2019
Hip Bone Creek Restoration SiteDMS Project Number 1000595
±0 10.5
Miles
FIGURE 3. LWP WATERSHED MAPHIP BONE CREEK RESTORATION SITECHATHAM COUNTY, NC
Source: NC Statewide Orthoimagery, 2017.
Mitigation Plan  Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019    DMS Project Number 100059
  6
3.0 BASELINE AND EXISTING CONDITIONS 
3.1   Watershed Processes and Resource Conditions 
3.1.1 Landscape Characteristics 
The site lies within the Carolina Slate Belt (Level IV 45c) eco region of the Piedmont. The Carolina Slate Belt 
is characterized by mineral‐rich, metavolcanic and metasedimentary rocks with slatey cleavage that are 
finer‐grained and less metamorphosed than most Piedmont regions. Streams in this region tend to dry up 
and water yields to wells are low, as this region contains some of the lowest water‐yielding rock units in 
the Carolinas. The natural vegetation is typically made up of oak‐hickory‐pine forests (Griffith et al 2002).  
The geology of the site is mapped as Metamudstone and Meta‐Argillite (CZmd) in the upper southern half 
of the site and Mafic Metavolcanic Rock (CZmv) in the lower northern half. CZmd is noted as having 
bedding planes with axial‐planar cleavage, interbedded with metasandstone, meta‐conglomerate, and 
metavolcanic rock. CZmv is described as a metavolcanic rock having abundant dark‐colored minerals, 
typically feldspar, amphibole, and/or pyroxene, which are described as intrusive foliated to massive rocks 
(USGS 2019).  
The project streams begin as headwater systems on the site. At the upper origins, the streambeds are 
generally silt/clay with a portion of small gravel; by the end of the project, the streams are primarily 
dominated by small gravels. There are limited areas of bedrock throughout the site.   
According to the USDA (2016), the mapped soils at the site consist of the following: Chewacla and 
Wehadkee complex soils (ChA), which are frequently flooded, floodplain soils consisting of Chewacla 
(approximately 60%) and Wehadkee soils (approximately 35%); Georgeville silt clay loam (GeC2), which is 
moderately erodible to highly erodible upland soil found on broad ridges; and Georgeville‐Badin complex 
soils (GkD, GkE), which are very highly erodible upland soils consisting of Georgeville (approximately 55‐
65%) and Badin (approximately 20‐25%) soils. The soil survey for the project area is shown in Figure 4. 
GeC2
ChA
GkD
GeB2
GkE
GkD
GeC2
NaB
GkD
W
W
GeB2
GkD
W
PsB
GaC
GkD
ChA
CkC
GeC2
GkD
GeC2
GkD
GeC2
NC Center for Geographic Information & Anaylsis
Project Easement (18.68 acres)
Chatham County NRCS Soils
Mitigation Plan
December 6, 2019
Hip Bone Creek Restoration SiteDMS Project Number 1000597
±0 500250
Feet
FIGURE 4. NRCS SOILSHIP BONE CREEK RESTORATION SITECHATHAM COUNTY, NC
Image Source: SSURGO Soils for Chatham County, NRCS
Soils Key:
ChA: Chewacla and Wehadkee soils
CkC: Cid silt loam
CmB: Cid-Lignum complex
GaC: Georgeville silt loam
GeB2, GeC2: Georgeville silty clay loam
GkD, GkE: Georgeville-Badin comples
NaB: Nanford-Badin complex
PsB: Pittsboro-Iredell complex
W: Water
Mitigation Plan  Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019    DMS Project Number 100059
  8
3.1.2 Land Use/Land Cover and Chronology of Impacts 
The project watershed for the HBCRS is 0.25 square mile (158 acres). Current land use in the project 
watershed (Figure 5) was derived from the 2017 orthoimagery and consists of pasture/farmland (85% / 
133 ac), forest (9% / 14 ac), open water (5% / 9 acres), and rural development (1% / 2 ac). The current 
adjacent land use has a negative impact on water quality of the project streams. This is evidenced by 
livestock having direct access to all of the project reaches. KCI’s measurement of the total impervious area 
for the project watershed is less than 1%, which is based on the land use delineated from the 2017 
orthoimagery.  
The HBCRS has undergone significant modifications that have altered the site hydrology and vegetation. 
Historic aerials were examined for any information about how the site has changed over recent history 
and were obtained from the USGS EarthExplorer, NCDOT and NCOneMap for 1950, 1960, 1964, 1972, 
1993, 1998, 2002, and 2010. Selected historic aerials are presented in Figures 6A and 6B. 
The site has been systematically impacted by agriculture and grazing over the past 68 years. In the earliest 
aerial photo from 1950, the majority of the site is already cleared, with the exception of some areas 
around the edges of the project.  
By 1960, a thin forested buffer is present along most of the project reaches that was not noticeable in the 
1950 photo, and in 1964 the site continues the trend with reforestation along the upper and middle 
portions of T1 and the upper part of T3. In the 1972 photo, this buffer has expanded, especially along T1 
of the project.  
However, by 1993 the site is mostly cleared of vegetation again except along the top of T1. Additionally, 
most of the forested areas located adjacent to the project easement have been cleared. By 1998, no buffer 
is present anywhere along the project reaches and the site shows little change from this point on; only 
small areas of vegetation develop near the southern ends of T1 and T3. 
NC Center for Geographic Information & Anaylsis
Project Easement (18.68 ac)
Project Watershed (158 ac / 0.25 sq mi)
Agriculture/Pasture (85%)
Forest (9%)
Water (5%)
Rural Development (1%)
Mitigation Plan
December 6, 2019
Hip Bone Creek Restoration SiteDMS Project Number 1000599
±0 500250
Feet
FIGURE 5. PROJECT WATERSHED LAND USEHIP BONE CREEK RESTORATION SITECHATHAM COUNTY, NC Image Source: NC OneMap2017 Orthoimagery.
±0 1,000500
Feet
FIGURE 6A. HISTORIC AERIALSHIP BONE CREEK RESTORATION SITECHATHAM COUNTY, NC Image Source: USGSEarth Explorer.
1950 1960
1964 1972
Project Easement
Mitigation Plan
December 6, 2019 10 Hip Bone Creek Restoration SiteDMS Project Number 100059
NCCGIA
11
±0 1,000500
Feet
FIGURE 6B. HISTORIC AERIALSHIP BONE CREEK RESTORATION SITECHATHAM COUNTY, NC Image Source:NC OneMap
NCCGIA
NCCGIA NCCGIA
1993 1998
2002 2010
Project Easement
Mitigation Plan
December 6, 2019
Hip Bone Creek Restoration SiteDMS Project Number 100059
Mitigation Plan  Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019    DMS Project Number 100059
12 
3.1.3 Watershed Disturbance and Response 
The  project  has  experienced  landscape and vegetative modifications  to  maximize  the  potential  for 
agriculture and livestock on the site. As a result, stream adjustments have occurred as a response to these 
changes. Along the project streams of Tributary 1 (T1) and Tributary 3 (T3), the measured bank height 
ratios range up to 1.5 and 2.1, respectively, for the two streams, and show a high degree of channel 
incision. Additional existing conditions data are included in Section 12.2. 
Table 2. Existing Stream Bank Height and Entrenchment Ratios 
Stream  Existing Bank Height Ratio Existing Entrenchment Ratio 
T1 1.0 –1.5 1.6 –3.1
T3 1.0 –2.1 2.0 –5.4
The primary hydrologic feature at the site is T1, which has been impacted by channelization and cattle 
impacts. Primary flow for T1 begins at the project boundary, which is at the base of a farm pond dam. This 
stream receives hydrology from seepage at the bottom of the dam and from a small outlet pipe entering 
the upper slope of T1 on the eastern side. At the beginning of T1, the channel exists as a stream/wetland 
complex that has been severely degraded by cattle. The impacts from the livestock and pond upstream 
have caused there to be minimal stream form to the channel. There is an existing riparian buffer in this 
area, but it is comprised primarily of Chinese privet and other invasive species with a sparse canopy of 
native hardwoods. There are multiple seeps from the toe of the surrounding valley that contribute to the 
stream and wetland hydrology of T1 as the stream flows north. 
As T1 flows north out of the vegetated area after approximately 600 linear feet (lf), it leaves an old fence 
line and a headcut defines the start of a transition to a single‐thread channel. The stream becomes incised 
quickly and has a lack of distinct bed features. T1 turns northeast at the confluence with T2, a linear 
wetland  feature.  T2  also  originates  from  the  outlet  of  a  farm  pond,  but  much  of  its  hydrology  is 
groundwater from adjacent hillside springs and seeps.  
After the confluence with T2, T1 flows northeast and the channel becomes narrower and more incised. 
The stream was straightened historically and ditched to drain the  hillside  seepage  that  is  evident 
throughout the length of T1. Many of these former wetlands have been cleared of vegetation, trampled 
by cattle, and have historic surface ditches that are still functioning to drain to T1. Where T1 continues to 
flow northeast, the channel alternates between a narrow single‐thread channel and a poorly defined 
channel trampled by livestock.  
Approximately 750 lf downstream of the confluence with T2, T3 enters T1. T3 starts at an old spring box 
and  flows  north  for  approximately  2,200  lf  until  reaching  T1.  Like  the  other  project  streams,  the 
headwaters of this channel are poorly defined due to cattle impacts for the first 300 lf. Following this 
point, T3 enters an existing forested wetland. This area shows signs of having been previously fenced off 
from cattle, but the cattle currently have access to all of T3 and have significantly degraded both the 
stream and wetland. This wetland/stream area has a sparse riparian buffer of early successional trees and 
shrubs such as black willow and eastern baccharis. After approximately 775 lf, T3 exits the forested 
wetland and enters open pasture again. An existing piped farm crossing is holding grade for the stream, 
but is in disrepair and stream flow is going over and around this crossing. After the crossing, T3 begins to 
incise as it nears the confluence with T1.  There are spoil piles adjacent to the stream and other signs of 
past channelization as well.  
Mitigation Plan  Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019    DMS Project Number 100059
13 
After the confluence with T3, T1 continues to flow northeast until it meets the property line, after which 
it enters a forested property off‐site and flows downstream to join Meadow Creek.  
A jurisdictional determination for the project was submitted to the US Army Corps of Engineers and 
approved on November 16, 2018. The JD is included in Section 12.7. Gauge data from the existing wetland 
gauges in found in Section 12.2. 
Mitigation Plan  Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019    DMS Project Number 100059
14 
Table 3. Project Attribute Table 
Project Name   Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site  
County  Chatham County 
Project Area (acres)  18.68 ac 
Project Coordinates (lat. and 
long.)   35.6804 N, –79.4018 W 
Planted Acreage (Acres of 
Woody Stems Planted) 17.40 
Project Watershed Summary Information 
Physiographic Province  Piedmont 
River Basin  Cape Fear 
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8‐digit  03030003 USGS Hydrologic Unit 14‐digit 03030003070020 
DWR Sub‐basin   03‐06‐12 
Project Drainage Area (acres)  158 acres 
Project Drainage Area 
Percentage of Impervious Area   1% 
Land Use Classification Pasture/Farmland (85%), Forest (9%), Open Water (5%), and Rural Development (1%) 
Existing Reach Summary Information 
Parameters T1  T3 
Length of reach (linear feet) 2,439 2,202 
Valley  Confinement Unconfined Unconfined 
Drainage area (acres) 158 acres 43 acres 
Perennial, Intermittent, 
Ephemeral Intermittent  Intermittent 
NCDWQ Water Quality 
Classification C  C 
Rosgen Classification 
(Existing/Proposed) G4/C4 and C4b  G4/C4 
Evolutionary trend (Simon) Channelized, Stage III Channelized, Stage III 
FEMA classification None None 
Existing Wetland Summary Information 
Parameters 
Size of Wetland (acres)  2.52 ac (WA and WE) 0.99 ac (WB, WC, WD, WF, and WG) 
Wetland Type  Headwater Forest Headwater Forest 
Mapped Soil Series   Georgeville Chewacla/Wehadkee 
Drainage class   Well Drained Poorly Drained 
Soil Hydric Status   Non‐Hydric Hydric 
Source of Hydrology  Stream Floodplain Stream Floodplain 
Restoration or Enhancement 
Method Enhancement Re‐establishment, Rehabilitation, and 
Enhancement 
**Items addressed in the Categorical Exclusion in Appendix. 
Mitigation Plan  Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019    DMS Project Number 100059
15 
Table 3, continued 
Regulatory Considerations 
Regulation Applicable? Resolved? Supporting 
Documentation 
Waters of the United States – 
Section 404 Yes Applying for 
NWP 27 JD has been obtained. 
Waters of the United States – 
Section 401 Yes Applying for 
NWP 27 
Endangered Species Act** Yes Yes USFWS 
Historic Preservation Act** No Yes NCSHPO 
Coastal Zone Management Act ** 
(CZMA)/ Coastal Area 
Management Act (CAMA) 
No  N/A  N/A 
FEMA Floodplain Compliance No Yes N/A 
Essential Fisheries Habitat** No N/A N/A 
**Items addressed in the Categorical Exclusion in Appendix. 
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
!.
!.
!.
WA
WB
WC
WD
WE
WE
T3
T3
T1
T1
T1
WG
WF
WH
T3-1
T1-1
T2
T1 XS F
T3 XS A
T3 XS B
T3 XS C
T1 XS E
T1 XS G
T1 XS H
T1 XS D
T1 XS C
T2 XS A
T1 XS B
T1 XS A
GW 3
GW 2
GW 1
NC Center for Geographic Information & Anaylsis
Project Easement
")Assessment Cross-Sections
!.Groundwater Gauges
Streams
Existing Wetlands
Ditches
Spring Box
Cattle Wallows
Existing Culverts
Spoil Pile
Mitigation Plan
December 6, 2019
Hip Bone Creek Restoration SiteDMS Project Number 10005916
±0 300150
Feet
FIGURE 7. CURRENT CONDITIONSHIP BONE CREEK RESTORATION SITECHATHAM COUNTY, NC Image Source: NC OneMap2017 Orthoimagery.
Mitigation Plan  Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019    DMS Project Number 100059
17 
3.1.4 Site Photographs 
Photo 1: Degraded stream along beginning of T1. Photo 2: Eroded and cattle impacted channel T1. 
Photo 3: Drained wetland along T2. Photo 4: Wetland restoration area along T1. 
Photo 5: Cattle wallow on T1. Photo 6: Channel just downstream of spring box on 
T3.  
Mitigation Plan  Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019    DMS Project Number 100059
18 
4.0 FUNCTIONAL UPLIFT POTENTIAL 
Based on the current stream and watershed  conditions at the HBCRS, there is a high potential for 
functional improvements at this site. Hydraulic functions have been affected by the direct modifications 
to the channel such as ditching and unrestricted livestock access and by indirect watershed processes 
causing  incision  and  disconnection  from  the  floodplain.  These  alterations  have  compromised  the 
geomorphologic functions of the channel. This condition is exacerbated by the limited riparian buffer and 
sources of direct agricultural runoff. All of the stream channels have low functional values. This project 
offers a chance to restore these degraded streams and wetlands, which would bring functional uplift to 
this entire system. 
The  primary  uplift  for  the  HBCRS  will  be  achieved  at  the  hydraulic  and  geomorphological  levels. 
Reestablishing floodplain connectivity with a Priority 1 Restoration will allow stream flows to access the 
floodprone area more frequently, providing uplift of hydraulic functions within this system that will 
distribute flood flows through a wide area instead of within a confined channel and facilitating diffuse 
overland flow through the riparian buffers. Geomorphological functional uplift will be achieved through 
channels sized to the bankfull flow, a planform and profile design emphasizing bedform variation, and the 
reestablishment of a native riparian corridor with invasive species removed. As a result, bank migration 
and lateral stability will be restored to a sustainable level and the banks and bed will accommodate design 
flows in a stable manner. Sediment inputs will decrease due to reduced bank erosion and reduced 
livestock access to the stream channel and riparian areas, which will allow effective sediment transport 
to return to a stable level in equilibrium with watershed inputs. Riparian plantings will further support 
geomorphological functionality by increasing bank stability.  
Consideration of future impacts to the area that could limit functional uplift opportunities is important 
when assessing project potential. As mentioned above, the project will permanently protect the restored 
streams and wetlands and will connect forested headwater systems within the Deep River Watershed. 
The table below summarizes the project goals and objectives that will lead to functional improvements 
and specific parameters that will be addressed. 
Photo 7: Incised stream along T3. Photo 8: Cattle wallow and existing culvert along T3. 
Mitigation Plan  Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019    DMS Project Number 100059
19 
5.0   MITIGATION PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 
Table 4. Project Goals, Objectives, and Functional Outcomes 
Goals Objective Functional Level
Function‐Based 
Parameter Effects 
Restore a 
channelized stream 
to a meandering C‐
type channel with a 
floodplain 
Relocate 
channelized streams 
to historic landscape 
positions
Hydraulics Floodplain Connectivity 
Install a bankfull‐
sized channel cross‐
section 
Geomorphology Bank Migration/Lateral
Stability 
Install bedform 
diversity with pools, 
riffles, and habitat 
structures 
Geomorphology Bed Form Diversity 
Buffer and reduce 
sediment impacts to 
the project stream 
Demarcate the 
project easement 
boundaries and 
fence out livestock.
Geomorphology Bed Material 
Characterization 
Restore a forested 
riparian community 
Plant the site with 
native trees and 
shrubs and a 
herbaceous seed 
mix  
Geomorphology/ 
Wetland Species 
Composition 
Vegetation 
Restore a wetland 
hydroperiod to 
drained and/or 
livestock‐impacted 
land 
Reconnect streams 
to floodplain; 
redevelop wetland 
microtopography to 
slow the flow of 
surface and 
subsurface drainage
Wetland 
Hydrology 
Groundwater Saturation/ 
Surface Ponding 
Mitigation Plan  Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019    DMS Project Number 100059
20 
6.0  DESIGN APPROACH AND MITIGATION WORK PLAN 
The project streams and wetlands were designed using a modified reference reach approach developed 
from stable on‐site conditions. In addition to the data from the on‐site references, common reference 
values from Harmon et al. 2011 were also used to aid the development of the stream design criteria. The 
proposed channel design values have been adjusted as necessary to accommodate the existing site 
conditions, such as the ponds as the top of T1 and T2 (see Section 6.5). 
Certain streams on the project will not be included for credit: the upper portions of T1 and T3 that flow 
through existing wetlands with a diffuse channel and all of T2. All of these sections lack a distinct single‐
thread thalweg and will be improved instead through wetland mitigation actions.   
6.1   Tributary 1 (T1) 
T1 is the primary stream running through the project and its design will involve a combination of stream 
restoration and enhancement. This stream has been divided into five separate reaches as depicted in 
Figures 8 and 9. The uppermost portion of T1, directly below the pond and running through the existing 
forested wetland, will not be included for credit; the first reach will begin at STA 10+00 as it comes out of 
the treeline. Shortly after this point, there is a severe headcut. Restoration on this reach will focus on 
bringing the stream up from its current entrenched position and integrating it into a broad floodplain with 
a Priority 1 Approach and a meandering pattern. Soil lifts with live whips and offset step pool structures 
will provide habitat and grade control to this reach. Drained riparian wetlands will be restored along the 
first 200 feet of the reach.  
T1 Reach 2, from STA 17+80 to STA 26+86 at the confluence with T3, will continue with a similar 
restoration approach as the upstream reach. After approximately 200 feet, there is an area of hillside 
seepage entering from the northwest; 1.4 acres of riparian fringe wetlands will be redeveloped and 
integrated into the T1 floodplain in this location.  
After the confluence with T3, T1 continues with three separate reaches until the end of the project. T1 
Reach 3 is a short section of restoration from STA 26+86 until STA 29+54; this reach will transition the 
stream with a larger cross‐sectional area after T3 to a downstream Enhancement II reach, T1 Reach 4. This 
enhancement reach, from STA 29+54 to STA 32+49, has maintained an appropriately‐sized bankfull 
channel,  but  is  experiencing  bank  erosion,  particularly  on  the right  bank  that  is  vertical  in  places. 
Enhancement work will focus on sloping back and planting banks that connect to a restored floodplain.  A 
0.8‐acre area of wetland restoration runs along the left bank of T1 Reach 4, which will reconnect seepage 
flow from the northwestern hillside with the riparian zone of T1. The final reach of the stream, T1 Reach 
5, shows increased incision and bank erosion and will be restored from STA 32+49 until the end of the 
project at STA 37+01 where it will connect to an existing forested reach. This last reach will have a short 
transitional section of Priority 2 restoration at the end.  
6.2   Tributary 3 (T3) 
T3 consists of three separate reaches. Similar to T1, there is an approximately 800‐lf section of T3 that will 
not be included as credit, since the stream functions in concert with the forested wetland across a wide 
flowpath. 
The first reach, T3 Reach 1, begins at the start of the stream at STA 300+00 and ends at STA 303+10 where 
T3  enters  the  forested  wetland.  This  reach  starts  at  a  spring  box  and  will  be  improved  through 
Mitigation Plan  Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019    DMS Project Number 100059
21 
Enhancement II. The work will include removing invasive vegetation and the old pipes that are in the 
channel formerly connected to the spring box, excluding livestock, and replanting the riparian buffer.  
Once T3 emerges from the downstream end of the vegetated wetland, T3 Reach 2 starts at STA 311+10, 
continuing Enhancement II. This reach will have selective bank grading, riparian buffer plantings, and 
exclusion of cattle.   
T3 Reach 3, from STA 317+00 to STA 322+73, begins at the existing derelict culvert and ends at the 
confluence with T1. This reach will be restored in a manner similar to the lower reaches of T1 with riffle 
enhancement, step pools, and soil lifts providing grade control and bank protection in a newly‐established 
meandering pattern.  
6.3   Riparian Wetland Mitigation 
Riparian  mitigation  will  consist  of  a  combination  of  wetland  re‐establishment,  rehabilitation,  and 
enhancement across the site’s wetlands for a total of 6.023 acres. Wetland hydrology will be driven by 
seepage flow and overbank flooding that will support riparian wetlands along the restored streams. 
Wetland restoration (re‐establishment and rehabilitation) will improve 4.528 acres at HBCRS. Wetland re‐
establishment will restore wetland hydrology and vegetation to 3.040 acres of drained wetlands across 
the site, namely along the top of T1 Reach 1, throughout T2, a swale to the southeast of T3, and along the 
left bank of T1 Reach 2 and Reach 4. There are 1.488 acres of existing riparian wetland that will be 
improved as rehabilitation. These areas exist alongside the re‐establishment wetlands, but have managed 
to maintain minimal wetland hydrology and vegetation. There are rehabilitation wetlands along the top 
of T1 Reach 1, along T2, T1 Reach 2 and Reach 4, and T3 Reach 2. Overall, these wetland restoration areas 
will be redeveloped by plugging surface ditches and reconnecting the wetlands to the floodplains of the 
newly  restored  stream  channels.  Overbank  flooding  will  be  one  hydrologic  source  for  the  riparian 
wetlands in addition a shallow groundwater table, overland flow, and seepage from the adjacent uplands. 
Along T2 specifically, the existing eroding banks will be graded back to a stable angle and excess soil will 
be used to level out any remaining scour holes or deep spots. In addition, a combination of buried log sills 
and brush material will be used to stabilize the wetland grade and redistribute flow across the floodplain. 
Along T3 Reach 2, the re‐establishment wetland will have a small berm removed that runs parallel to the 
stream and have wetland microtopography redeveloped to retain the hillside drainage that is currently 
running off quickly to the stream at a downstream point.  
There will be 1.495 acres of wetland enhancement at the site located along the headwaters of T1 and 
along the forested section of T3. These wetlands have maintained woody vegetation and a more natural 
hydroperiod than other existing wetlands at the site, but will benefit from the treatment of invasive 
species and removal of debris and old fencing. Minor grading will remove spoil piles and flow obstructions 
into the enhanced wetlands.  
All of the project wetlands will have livestock exclusion fencing installed and be planted with a diverse 
riparian buffer as described in Section 6.8. 
6.4   Crossings 
There will be five culverted crossings at the HBCRS: two crossi ngs on T1, one crossing at the top of T2, and 
two crossings on T3. These crossings are not included in the project easement. 
Mitigation Plan  Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019    DMS Project Number 100059
22 
6.5  Design Discharge Determination 
KCI developed the design discharge values for the proposed streams by using a combination of on‐site 
stable cross‐sectional data and the Piedmont regional curve data (Harman et al 1999). Given that the 
timing and magnitude of the peak flows of two of the three headwater drainage areas (T1 and T2) are 
affected by upstream ponds, we adjusted the cross‐sectional areas down by approximately 30% using 
indicators seen at the site. Table 5 below shows a comparison of the selected design discharge values.   
Table 5. Summary of Project Discharge Values
Design  
Reach
Drainage Area 
(Acres) 
Drainage 
Area (Sq Mi)
Piedmont Regional Curve  Proposed Project Values 
XS Area (sf) Q (cfs)  XS Area (sf) Q (cfs) 
T1 Reach 1  37.1 0.058  3.1  11  2.2 8 
T1 Reach 2 76.4 0.119  5.1  19  4.0  14 
T1 Reaches 3 & 5 132.0 0.206  7.3  29  6.0  20 
T3 Reach 3 41.3 0.065  3.3  12  2.7 9 
6.6  Sediment 
The HBCRS project is fed by a series of headwater streams, two of which are ponded at the top. As a result, 
the sediment loading to the streams is limited in this portion of the watershed and the sediment regime 
will be supply‐limited. Pebble counts were performed across the project streams and determined that the 
predominant material ranges from silt/clay to small gravel (pebble count data are provided in Section 
12.2). Bank erosion is currently a contributing factor to the silt/clay and sand components of the streams. 
In general, the sediment range of the streams is expected to coarsen as there will be less fine material 
coming from the banks. At the heads of the project reaches, we anticipate there will be smaller‐sized 
particles (small gravels and some sand) transitioning to larger gravels with limited cobble at the bottom 
of the site.  
Based on the collected sediment and cross‐sectional data, shear stress values were calculated using both 
average channel boundary shear stress and a modified critical shear stress (USDA, Forest Service 2008). 
The modified shear stress was calculated using the D84 values from field samples and compared to the 
average channel boundary shear stress based on the existing and proposed channel dimensions and 
slopes. There are certain sections of the project streams that have become overwidened due to cattle 
impacts with width to depth ratios ranging from 22 to 42 as seen in Section 12.2; in these instances, there 
may be an increase in average shear stress from the existing to proposed condition to produce a higher‐
functioning stream form with a narrower cross‐section. The shear stress results are shown in the table 
below.   
Mitigation Plan  Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019    DMS Project Number 100059
23 
Table 6. Sediment Summary for Project Reaches 
XS Reach Avg Shear 
Stress (lb/sf) 
D50 
(mm) 
D84 
(mm) 
Sample 
Type 
Modif. 
Critical Shear 
Stress (lb/sf) 
Predicted Grain 
Size Movement 
(mm) 
Existing  T1 Reach 1 XS A   0.45  0.062  4.9  PC  0.003 
Existing  T1 Reach 1 XS B   0.60  2.5  7.1  PC  0.045 
Existing  T1 Reach 2 XS C   0.29  2.1  8.2  PC  0.045 
Existing  T1 Reach 2 XS D   0.66  19  72  PC  0.448 
Existing  T1 Reach 3 XS E  0.36  7.4  37  PC  0.190 
Existing  T1 Reach 3 XS F   0.34  8.5  20  PC  0.166 
Existing  T1 Reach 4 XS G  0.20  2.3  8.8  PC  0.046 
Existing  T1 Reach 5 XS H  0.09  4.5  9.9  PC  0.081 
Existing  T2 XS A  0.34  0.062  9.0  PC  0.004 
Existing  T3 Reach 1 XS A  0.33  0.062  0.062  PC  0.001 
Existing  T3 Reach 2 XS B  0.12  0.062  1.0  PC  0.002 
Existing  T3 Reach 3 XS C  0.79  4.7  19  PC  0.103 
Proposed  T1 Reach 1 0.58  2.5  7.1  PC  0.045 44 
Proposed  T1 Reach 2 0.51  19  72  PC  0.448 39 
Proposed  T1 Reaches 3 ‐ 5 0.34  4.5  9.9  PC  0.081 26 
Proposed  T3 Reach 3 0.48  4.7  19  PC  0.103 36 
Based on the calculated average channel boundary shear stress for the proposed channels, the stream 
will have adequate stream power to transport the existing D84 material during a bankfull event. However, 
since newly constructed, supply‐limited headwater streams do not have a quick seeding of their riffles, 
we will install riffle reinforcement to protect the newly constructed riffles from excessive scour in the 
immediate post‐construction period. Proposed riffle grade control structures have been designed with a 
mix of Class A, B, and 1 stone with 10% native stream material; Class A (the smallest among Classes A, B, 
and 1) has a modified critical shear stress that is large enough to withstand all of the predicted average 
channel boundary stresses. The last column in Table 6 provides a predicted grain size that will move at 
the calculated modified critical shear stress for the proposed channel. The largest grain size predicted to 
be mobilized is 44 mm (1.7 inches). Given the mix of the constructed riffle, 106 mm equates to the 
midrange of the Class A Stone (approximately 4 in.). It can be expected that approximately 85% of the 
constructed riffle stone will be greater than this diameter. Additionally, our experience has revealed 
minimal movement of constructed riffle material when it is well mixed and placed in the stream bed in 
similar design conditions.  
Mitigation Plan  Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019    DMS Project Number 100059
24 
6.7   Morphological Essential Parameters Tables 
Table 7. Morphological Essential Parameters for T1 Reach 1 
Parameter Existing Condition Reference 
Condition Proposed 
Floodprone Belt Width (ft) 15  N/A  35‐42 
Contributing Drainage Area (acres) 37  Variable  37 
Channel/Reach Classification G4c B4/C4 C4b 
Design Discharge Width (ft) 5.2 N/A 5.4 
Design Discharge Depth (ft) 0.5 N/A 0.4 
Design Discharge Area (ft2) 2.4 N/A 2.2 
Design Discharge Velocity (ft/s) 3.5 N/A 3.6 
Design Discharge (cfs) 8.6 N/A 8.0 
Water Surface Slope  0.025 N/A 0.024 
Sinuosity 1.0 1.1‐1.3 1.2 
Width/Depth Ratio 11.0 12‐18 13.0 
Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.0‐1.1 1.0 
Entrenchment Ratio 2.9 2.2+ 6.5‐7.8 
d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 / dip / disp (mm)  1.1/1.7/2.5/7.1/12/0.05/2.6  Gravel  Gravel 
Table 8. Morphological Essential Parameters for T1 Reach 2 
Parameter Existing Condition Reference 
Condition Proposed 
Floodprone Belt Width (ft) 12.6  N/A  42‐56 
Contributing Drainage Area (acres) 76  Variable  76 
Channel/Reach Classification G4 B4/C4 C4 
Design Discharge Width (ft) 4.2 N/A 7.0 
Design Discharge Depth (ft) 1.0 N/A 0.6 
Design Discharge Area (ft2) 4.2 N/A 4.0 
Design Discharge Velocity (ft/s) 3.5 N/A 3.4 
Design Discharge (cfs) 14.6 N/A 13.6 
Water Surface Slope  0.015 N/A 0.015 
Sinuosity 1.0 1.1‐1.3 1.2 
Width/Depth Ratio 4.5 12‐18 12.2 
Bank Height Ratio 1.2 1.0‐1.1 1.0 
Entrenchment Ratio 2.9 2.2+ 6.0‐8.0 
d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 / dip / disp (mm)  0.6/3.1/19/72/120/‐0.35/17.7  Gravel  Gravel 
Mitigation Plan  Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019    DMS Project Number 100059
25 
Table 9. Morphological Essential Parameters for T1 Reaches 3 – 5 
Parameter Existing Condition Reference Condition Proposed 
Floodprone Belt Width (ft) 34‐50  N/A  30‐58 
Contributing Drainage Area (acres) 132‐158  Variable  132‐158 
Channel/Reach Classification G4 B4/C4 C4 
Design Discharge Width (ft) 19.3 N/A 8.6 
Design Discharge Depth (ft) 0.5 N/A 0.7 
Design Discharge Area (ft2) 8.8 N/A 6.0 
Design Discharge Velocity (ft/s) 2.6 N/A 3.3 
Design Discharge (cfs) 22.7 N/A 19.8 
Water Surface Slope  0.0034 N/A 0.0082 
Sinuosity 1.0 1.1‐1.3 1.14 
Width/Depth Ratio 42.1 12‐18 12.4 
Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.0‐1.1 1.0 
Entrenchment Ratio 2.6 2.2+ 3.5‐6.7 
d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 / dip / disp (mm)  1.2/2/4.5/9.9/14/‐0.12/3.0  Gravel  Gravel 
Table 10. Morphological Essential Parameters for T3 Reach 3 
Parameter Existing Condition Reference Condition Proposed 
Floodprone Belt Width (ft) 40‐70  N/A  40‐70 
Contributing Drainage Area (acres) 41  Variable  41 
Channel/Reach Classification G4 C4 C4 
Design Discharge Width (ft) 3.0 N/A 5.8 
Design Discharge Depth (ft) 0.7 N/A 0.5 
Design Discharge Area (ft2) 2.1 N/A 2.7 
Design Discharge Velocity (ft/s) 4.2 N/A 3.3 
Design Discharge (cfs) 9.0 N/A 8.7 
Water Surface Slope  0.024 N/A 0.017 
Sinuosity 1.0 1.2‐1.4 1.13 
Width/Depth Ratio 4.2 10‐15 12.7 
Bank Height Ratio 1.3 1.0‐1.1 1.0 
Entrenchment Ratio 5.4 2.5+ 5.2‐6.9 
d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 / dip / disp (mm)  1.1/2.6/4.7/19/75/‐0.01/4.2  Gravel  Gravel 
Mitigation Plan  Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019    DMS Project Number 100059
26 
6.8  Planting 
All unforested portions of the project easement will be planted to establish a forested riparian buffer. At 
a minimum,  17.4 acres will be reforested, but additional plantings may  take place in the currently 
vegetated areas to ensure an adequate density across the site. The planting plan is shown in the attached 
project plan sheets (Section 12.1). Trees and shrubs will be planted at a density of 968 stems per acre (9 
feet x 5 feet spacing) to achieve a mature survivability of 210 stems per acre after seven years. Woody 
vegetation planting will be conducted during dormancy. Species to be planted may consist of the following 
and any substitutions from the planting plan will be taken from this list: 
Common Name  Scientific Name 
Wetland Status  
(Eastern Mts & Piedmont) 
River Birch Betula nigra FACW 
American Persimmon Diospyros virginiana FAC 
American Sycamore Platanus occidentalis FACW 
Southern Red Oak Quercus falcata FACU 
Swamp Chestnut Oak  Quercus michauxii FACW 
Pin Oak Quercus palustris FACW 
Willow Oak Quercus phellos FAC 
On the restored stream banks, live stakes will be used to provide natural stabilization. Species identified 
for live staking include:  
Common Name  Scientific Name 
Silky Dogwood  Cornus amomum 
Black Willow Salix nigra 
Silky Willow Salix sericea 
A custom herbaceous seed mix composed of native species will also be developed and used to further 
stabilize the easement area as needed. 
6.9  Project Assets 
The tables below outline the anticipated project assets that will be produced from the HBCRS project, and 
Figure 8 shows the proposed mitigation assets for the site. 
Mitigation Plan  Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site December 6, 2019 DMS Project Number 100059 27 Table 11. Project Asset Table Project Component  ‐or‐  Reach ID Existing Footage/ Acreage Stationing Restoration Footage  or Acreage Creditable Footage or Acreage Restoration Level Approach Priority LevelMitigation Ratio (X:1) MitigationCredits Notes/Comments T1 Reach 1 697 10+00 to 17+80 780  750  R  I  1:1  750.000 30' exception STA 13+12 to 13+42 T1 Reach 2 764 17+80 to 26+86 906  906  R  I  1:1  906.000 T1 Reach 3 283 26+86 to 29+54 269  209  R  I  1:1  209.000 60' exception STA 27+77 to 28+37 T1 Reach 4 295 29+54 to 32+49 295  295  EII  N/A  2.5:1  118.000 T1 Reach 5 400 32+49 to 37+01 452  452  R  I/II  1:1  452.000 T3 Reach 1 310 300+00 to 303+10 310  280  EII  N/A  2.5:1  112.000 30' exception STA 301+57 to301+87 T3 Reach 2 588 311+10 to 317+00 591  591  EII  N/A  2.5:1  236.400 T3 Reach 3 505 317+00 to 322+73 573  543  R  I  1:1  543.000 30' exception STA 317+98 to318+28 Riparian Enhancement 1.495  N/A  1.495  1.495  E  N/A  2.5:1  0.598  30' exception STA 13+12 to 13+42 Riparian Wetland Re‐establishment 0  N/A  3.040  3.040 R           (Re‐est.)  N/A  1:1  3.040  Riparian Wetland Rehabilitation 1.488  N/A  1.488  1.488 R (Rehab.)  N/A  1.5:1  0.992  

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059
28 
Table 12. Length and Summations by Mitigation Category 
Restoration Level Stream  
(linear feet) 
Riparian Wetland 
(acres) 
Non‐riparian 
Wetland 
(acres) 
Buffer (square feet) 
Restoration  2,860 4.528   
Enhancement   1.495   
Enhancement I      
Enhancement II  1,166    
Creation      
Preservation      
High Quality 
Preservation      

Table 13. Overall Assets Summary 
Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site (Project ID ‐ 100059) 
Overall Assets Summary 
Asset Category Overall Credits 
Stream 3,326.400 
RP Wetland 4.630 
NR Wetland  
Buffer  

T1 Reach 1
T1 Reach 2
T1 Reach 3
T3 Reach 3
T1 Reach 4
T1 Reach 5
T3 Reach 2
T3 Reach 1
T2
Project Easement (18.68 acres)
Stream Mitigation - 3,326.400 SMCs
Stream Restoration - 2,860 lf / 2,860.000 SMCs
Stream Enhancement II - 1,166 lf / 466.400 SMCs
Streams - No Credit
Riparian Wetland Mitigation - 4.630 WMCs
Wetland Re-establishment (3.040 ac / 3.040 WMCs)
Wetland Rehabilitation (1.488 ac / 0.992 WMCs)
Wetland Enhancement (1.495 ac / 0.598 WMCs)
Mitigation Plan
December 6, 2019 Hip Bone Creek Restoration SiteDMS Project Number 10005929
±0 300150
Feet
FIGURE 8. PROJECT ASSET MAPHIP BONE CREEK RESTORATION SITECHATHAM COUNTY, NC Image Source: NC OneMap2017 Orthoimagery.

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059
   30  
7.0 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS 

Monitoring of the site shall occur for a minimum of seven years following construction. The following 
performance standards for stream mitigation are based on the Wilmington District Stream and Wetland 
Compensatory Mitigation Update (NCIRT 2016) and will be used to judge site success.  

Vegetation Performance 
The site must achieve a woody stem density of 260 stems/acre after five years and 210 stems/acre after 
seven years to be considered successful. Trees in each plot must average 7 feet in height at Year 5 and 10 
feet at Year 7. A single species may not account for more than 50% of the required number of stems within 
any plot. Volunteers must be present for a minimum of two growing seasons before being included in 
performance standards in Year 5 and Year 7. If monitoring indicates that any of these standards are not 
being met, corrective actions will take place. 

Stream Hydrologic Performance 
During the monitoring period, a minimum of four bankfull events must be recorded. These bankfull events 
must  occur  in  separate  monitoring  years.  Bankfull  events  will  be  verified  using  a  minimum  of  two 
automatic stream monitoring gauges, one each on T1 and T3, to record daily stream depth readings. The 
project streams must also show a minimum of 30 continuous flow days within a calendar year (assuming 
normal precipitation). A “normal” year will be based on NRCS climatological data for Chatham County with 
the 30th to 70th percentile thresholds as the range of normal, as documented in the USACE Technical 
Report “Accessing and Using Meteorological Data to Evaluate Wetland Hydrology, April 2000.” 

Stream Geomorphology Performance 
The site’s geomorphology for all reaches will be monitored per the NCIRT 2016 monitoring guidelines. The 
bank height ratio (BHR) should not exceed 1.2 and the entrenchment ratio (ER) must not fall below 2.2 for 
C and E channels. BHR and ER at any measured riffle cross‐section should not change by more than 10% 
from the baseline condition during any given monitoring interval (e.g., no more than 10% between years 
1 and 2, 2 and 3, 3 and 5, or 5 and 7). There will be an overall assessment for each reach to distinguish 
localized  versus  systemic  concerns  for  that  stream.  Adjustment and  lateral  movement  following 
construction and as the channel settles over the monitoring period are to be expected. Geomorphological 
measurements of cross‐sections will be used to determine if any adjustments that occur are out of the 
range typically expected for this type of stream.  

Wetland Hydrologic Performance 
Wetland hydrology monitoring will be conducted to determine if the restored wetland areas meet the 
proposed performance criteria for wetland hydrology. The growing season for the project monitoring 
period will be April 2 through November 5 (217 days) based on the WETS table for Siler City 2 N Station in 
Siler City, NC. The site must present continuous saturated or inundated hydrologic conditions for at least 
12%  of  the  growing  season  (26  consecutive  days)  in  the  riparian  wetlands  during  normal  weather 
conditions. A “normal” year will be based on NRCS climatological data for Chatham County, and using the 
30th to 70th percentile thresholds as the range of normal, as documented in the USACE Technical Report 
“Accessing and Using Meteorological Data to Evaluate Wetland Hydrology, April 2000.”  

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059
   31  
8.0 MONITORING PLAN 

Monitoring of the HBCRS shall consist of the collection and analysis of stream and wetland hydrology, 
stream stability, and vegetation survivability data to support the evaluation of the project in meeting 
established performance standards described above. The Proposed Monitoring Plan in Figure 9 shows the 
proposed locations of monitoring features described below.  

Vegetation Monitoring 
Vegetation monitoring will take place between July 1st and leaf drop. Monitoring should occur later in the 
growing season to capture any effects of climatic or other conditions that may adversely affect vegetation 
survival. The success of the riparian and wetland plantings will be evaluated using eighteen 0.02‐acre 
square or rectangular plots within the planted stream buffer. Ten plots will be permanently installed, 
while the remaining eight will be randomly placed at the time of each monitoring visit. Vegetation must 
be planted and plots established at least 180 days prior to the start of the first year of monitoring. The 
first monitoring event may take place no sooner than 180 days (6 months) after planting during the first 
growing season.  

In the permanent plots, the plant’s height, species, location, and origin (planted versus volunteer) will be 
noted. In the random plots, species and height will be recorded. In all plots, invasive stems will also be 
recorded to determine the percentage of invasive stems present. Additionally, a photograph will be taken 
of each plot. The site’s vegetation will be monitored in years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7. 

Stream Hydrologic Monitoring 
Bankfull events on‐site will be verified using two automatic stream monitoring gauges on T1 Reach 5 and 
T3 Reach 3. A minimum of two additional gauges and/or recording devices such as cameras (set to record 
a photo or video a minimum of once per day) will be installed on the upper reaches of T1 and T3 to 
document the presence of flow. 

Stream Geomorphology Monitoring 
For stream monitoring, the purpose of monitoring is to evaluate the stability of the restored stream. 
Following the procedures established in the USDA Forest Service Manual, Stream Channel Reference Sites 
(Harrelson et al. 1994) and the methodologies utilized in the Rosgen stream assessment and classification 
system (1994 and 1996), data collected will consist of detailed dimension measurements, longitudinal 
profiles, and bed materials sampling. 

Dimension 
Sixteen permanent cross‐sections will be established at the HSCMB, two sets of riffle and pool cross‐
sections on T1 Reach 1, two sets on T1 Reach 2, 1 set on T1 Reach 3, 1 set on T1 Reach 5, and 2 sets on T3 
Reach 3. The extents of each cross‐section will be recorded by either conventional survey or survey‐grade 
GPS. The cross‐sectional surveys shall provide a detailed measurement of the stream and banks and will 
include points on the adjacent floodplain or valley, at the top of bank, bankfull, at all breaks in slope, the 
edge of water, and thalweg. Width/depth, bank height and entrenchment ratios, as well as bankfull cross‐
sectional area, width, max depth and mean depth will be calculated for each riffle cross‐section based on 
the survey data. The BHR will be measured by using a constant bankfull area over the monitoring period 
and adjusting the bankfull elevation each monitoring event based on how this area fits in the cross‐
sectional data. The revised bankfull elevation will then be used to calculate BHR along with the current 
low bank height. Width/depth ratios, bankfull cross‐sectional area, width, max depth and mean depth will 

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059
   32  
be calculated for each pool cross‐section. Cross‐section measurements will take place in Years 1, 2, 3, 5, 
and 7. 

Profile 
A detailed longitudinal profile will be conducted along the lengths of T1 Reach 1, T1 Reach 2, T1 Reach 3, 
T1 Reach 5, and T3 Reach 3 during the as‐built survey. Measurements will include slopes (average, pool, 
and riffle) as well as calculations of pool‐to‐pool spacing. No additional profile measurements will be taken 
during the monitoring period unless deemed necessary due to concerns about bed elevation adjustments. 

Wetland Hydrologic Monitoring 
Hydrologic  performance  will  be  determined  through  evaluation  of  automatic  recording  gauge  data 
supplemented by documentation of wetland hydrology indicators as defined in the 1987 USACE Wetland 
Delineation Manual. Daily data will be collected from 6 automatic wells over the 7‐year monitoring period 
following implementation. 

Visual Assessment 
An annual site walk will be conducted at the end of each monitoring period to document any problem 
areas. Specific problem areas could include low stem density or poor plant vigor, areas dominated by 
undesirable volunteer species, prolonged inundation, native and exotic invasive species, beaver activity, 
herbivory, encroachments, indicators of livestock access, or other areas of concern. The findings of the 
visual assessment as well as any recommended corrective actions for problem areas will be summarized 
in the monitoring reports by way of a Current Conditions Plan View (CCPV) figure.  

Photograph reference points (PRPs) will be established to assist in characterizing the site and to allow 
qualitative evaluation of the site conditions. The location of each photo point will be marked in the 
monitoring plan and the bearing/orientation of the photograph will be documented to allow for repeated 
use. 

Reporting 
Annual  monitoring  data  will  be  reported  using  the  most  current DMS  monitoring  template.  The 
monitoring report shall provide a project data chronology that will facilitate an understanding of project 
status and trends, population of DMS databases for analysis, research purposes, and assist in decision 
making regarding project close‐out. The report will document the monitored components and include all 
collected data, analyses, and photographs. The first scheduled monitoring will be conducted during the 
first  full  growing  season  following  project  completion.  The  site  will  be  monitored  for  performance 
standards for seven years as needed after completion of construction. Full monitoring reports will be 
completed in Years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7. Limited monitoring reports (CCPV, photos, gauge data, and site 
narrative) will be submitted in Years 4 and 6. 

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059
   33  
Table 14. Monitoring Requirements 

Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
Required  Parameter Quantity Frequency Notes 
Yes  Pattern and Profile 
T1 Reaches 1‐3 and 
Reach 5; T3 Reach 3 
Once, during as‐built 
survey 
Additional measurements in 
later years may be taken as 
necessary. 
Yes  Stream Dimension 
16 cross‐sections 
(8 riffles, 8 pools) 
Monitoring Years 
1, 2, 3, 5, and 7  
Yes  Stream Hydrology 
2 pressure transducer 
gauges 
Annual – throughout 
year 
Includes flow documentation 
on T1 Reach 1 and T3 Reach 1 
Yes  Wetland Hydrology 
6 pressure transducer 
gauges 
Annual – throughout 
year  
Yes Vegetation
10 permanent and 8 
random vegetation 
monitoring plots
Monitoring Years 
1, 2, 3, 5,  
and 7
Minimum size of 0.02 acre
Yes  Visual Assessment  Annual  
Yes Exotic and nuisance 
vegetation  Annual 
Locations of exotic and 
nuisance vegetation will be 
mapped 
Yes  Project boundary  Semi‐annual 
Locations of vegetation 
damage, boundary 
encroachments, etc. will be 
mapped 

")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
T1 Reach 1
T1 Reach 2
T1 Reach 3
T3 Reach 3
T1 Reach 4
T1 Reach 5
T3 Reach 2
T3 Reach 1
T2
Project Easement (18.68 acres)
!(Proposed Wetland Gauges (6)
!(Proposed Stream Gauges (2)
!(Proposed Stream Flow Documentation Station (2)
Proposed Stream Monitoring Cross-Sections (16)
")Proposed Vegetation Plots (10 permanent, 8 random)
Stream Mitigation
Stream Restoration
Stream Enhancement II
Streams - No Credit
Riparian Wetland Mitigation
Wetland Re-establishment
Wetland Rehabilitation
Wetland Enhancement
Mitigation Plan
December 6, 2019
Hip Bone Creek Restoration SiteDMS Project Number 10005934
±0 300150
Feet
FIGURE 9. PROPOSED MONITORINGHIP BONE CREEK RESTORATION SITECHATHAM COUNTY, NC Image Source: NC OneMap2017 Orthoimagery.

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059
   35  
9.0 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN 

In the event the mitigation site or a specific component of the mitigation site fails to achieve the necessary 
performance standards as specified in the mitigation plan, KCI shall notify DMS and members of the IRT 
and work with these two organizations to develop contingency plans and remedial actions. 

10.0 LONG‐TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN 

HBCRS will be transferred to the NCDEQ Stewardship Program. This party shall serve as conservation 
easement holder and long‐term steward for the property and will conduct periodic inspection of the site 
to ensure that restrictions required in the conservation easement are upheld. Funding will be supplied by 
the  responsible  party  on  a  yearly  basis  until  such  time  an  endowment  is  established.  The  NCDEQ 
Stewardship Program is developing an endowment system within the non‐reverting, interest‐bearing 
Conservation Lands Conservation Fund Account. The use of funds from the Endowment Account will be 
governed by North Carolina General Statue GS 113A‐232(d)(3). Interest gained by the endowment fund 
may  be  used  for  the  purpose  of  stewardship,  monitoring,  stewardship  administration,  and  land 
transaction costs, if applicable. The Stewardship Program will periodically install signage as needed to 
identify boundary markings as needed. Any fencing or permanent crossings will be the responsibility the 
owner of the underlying fee to maintain. 

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059
   36  

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059
   37  
11.0 REFERENCES 

Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report  
Y‐87‐1. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station. 

Griffith, G., J. Omernik, and J. Comstock. 2002. Ecoregions of North Carolina, Regional Descriptions. US  
E.P.A. Last accessed at: https://www.epa.gov/eco‐research/ecoregion‐download‐files‐state‐
region‐4#pane‐31 

Harman, W.A., G.D. Jennings, J.M. Patterson, D.R. Clinton, L.O. Slate, A.G. Jessup, J. R. Everhart, and 
R.E. Smith, 1999. Bankfull Hydraulic Geometry Relationships for North Carolina Streams. 
Wildland Hydrology. AWRA Symposium Proceedings. Edited by D.S. Olsen and J.P. Potyondy. 
American Water Resources Association. June 30 – July 2, 1999. Bozeman, MT. 

Harman, W. and R. Starr. 2011. Natural Channel Design Review Checklist. US Fish and Wildlife Service,  
Chesapeake Bay Field Office, Annapolis, MD and US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of 
Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Wetlands Division. Washington, D.C. EPA 843‐B‐12‐005 

Harman, W., R. Starr, M. Carter, K. Tweedy, M. Clemmons, K. Suggs, C. Miller. 2012. A Function‐Based 
Framework for Stream Assessment and Restoration Projects. US Environmental Protection 
Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC EPA 843‐K‐12‐006. 

NCDEQ, Division of Mitigation Services. 2009 Cape Fear 03030003 Priorities. Last accessed at  
  https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/mitigation‐services/dms‐planning/watershed‐planning‐
documents/cape‐fear‐river‐basin 

NCDEQ, Division of Water Resources. Final 2018 303(d) list. Raleigh, NC. Last accessed at:   
  https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Planning/TMDL/303d/2018/2018‐NC‐303‐d‐‐List‐
Final.pdf 

NCDEQ, Division of Water Resources. 2019. Surface Water Classifications map. Last accessed at:  
http://ncdenr.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=6e125ad7628f494694e259c
80dd64265 

North Carolina Interagency Review Team. 2016. Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory  
  Mitigation  Update.  Last  accessed  at:  http://saw‐reg.usace.army.mil/PN/2016/Wilmington‐
District‐Mitigation‐Update.pdf 

Shields, F.D., Jr. R.R. Copeland, P.C. Klingeman, M.W. Doyle, and A. Simon. 2003. Design for Stream  
Restoration. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 129 (8): 575‐584. 

Shields, Ing. A., W. P. Ott, and J. C. Van Uchelen. 1936. Application of Similarity Principles and Turbulence  
Research to Bed‐load Movement. Pasadena, CA: Soil Conservation Service, California Institute of 
Technology 

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059
   38  

Simon, A. and M. Rinaldi. 2006. Disturbance, stream incision, and channel evolution: The roles of excess  
transport capacity and boundary materials in controlling channel response. Geomorphology 79: 
361–383. 

Stream Mitigation Guidelines, April 2003, US Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District. 

USDA, Forest Service, National Technology and Development Program. 2008. Stream Simulation: An  
Ecological Approach to Providing Passage for Aquatic Organisms at Road‐Stream Crossings. 
Appendix E: Methods for Streambed Mobility/Stability Analysis. Last accessed 9/2016 at: 
http://www.fs.fed.us/eng/pubs/pdf/StreamSimulation/ 

USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2019. Web Soil Survey. Last accessed at:  
    http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx 

USGS. 2019a. Mafic metavolcanic rock. Last accessed at:  
https://mrdata.usgs.gov/geology/state/sgmc‐lith.php?text=mafic+metavolcanic+rock 

USGS. 2019b. Metamudstone and Meta‐Argillite. Last accessed at:  
https://mrdata.usgs.gov/geology/state/sgmc‐unit.php?unit=NCCAZmd%3B10 

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059

12.0 APPENDICES 

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059

12.1 Plan Sheets 

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059

Project Component  ‐or‐  Reach ID Existing Footage/ Acreage Stationing Restoration Footage  or Acreage Creditable Footage or Acreage Restoration Level Approach Priority Level Mitigation Ratio (X:1) Mitigation Credits Notes/CommentsT1 Reach 1 696.959 10+00 to 17+80 780.000  749.987  R  I  1:1  749.987 30' exception STA 13+12 to 13+42 T1 Reach 2 763.954 17+80 to 26+86 905.817  905.817  R  I  1:1  905.817  T1 Reach 3 283.241 26+86 to 29+54 268.612  208.612  R  I  1:1  208.612 60' exception STA 27+77 to 28+37 T1 Reach 4 294.852 29+54 to 32+49 294.852  294.852  EII  N/A  2.5:1  117.941  T1 Reach 5 399.929 32+49 to 37+01 452.085  452.085  R  I/II  1:1  452.085  T3 Reach 1 309.842 300+00 to 303+13 309.842  279.564  EII  N/A  2.5:1  111.825 30' exception STA 301+57 to 301+87T3 Reach 2 587.747 311+09 to 317+00 590.539  590.539  EII  N/A  2.5:1  236.215  T3 Reach 3 504.583 317+00 to 322+73 573.403  543.377  R  I  1:1  543.377 30' exception STA 317+98 to 318+28Riparian Enhancement 1.495  N/A  1.495  1.495  E  N/A  2.5:1  0.598  30' exception STA 13+12 to 13+42 Riparian Wetland Re‐establishment 0  N/A  3.040  3.040 R           (Re‐est.)  N/A  1:1  3.040    Riparian Wetland Rehabilitation 1.488  N/A  1.488  1.488 R (Rehab.)  N/A  1.5:1  0.992    
�1tliiiir��r
�o�` • FEssr'
.�o Oti9`�L�
GENERAL NOTES:
CONTROL POINTS:
:Q
SEAL -_
DESC.
NORTHING
EASTING
ELEV.
040899
BEARINGS AND DISTANCES:
KCI 1
701625.776
1879718.481
629.123
ALL BEARINGS ARE NAD 1983 GRID BEARINGS.
KCI 2
KCI 3
701712.510
704181.547
1879894.609
1880806.777
620.127
532.724
S
; �� •.NC��c.•' ��-
o
ALL DISTANCES AND COORDINATES SHOWN ARE HORIZONTAL
KC14
704181.547
1880806.777
532.724
%, S
LU
>
LU
(GROUND) VALUES.
KCI 202
702248.618
1880085.473
581.800
`••,TAN E.
KCI 2350
703084.707
1879381.782
593.723
fill
UTILITY/SUBSURFACE PLANS:
KCI 2351
703437.593
1879194.325
609.394
KCI 3435
703124.279
1880
562
557.758
NO SUBSURFACE PLANS ARE AVAILABLE ON THIS PROJECT.
KC13436
703124.279
29.116
1880429.116
557.758
EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES HAVE NOT BEEN VERIFIED.
KCI 6002
702695.204
1880923.665
577.314
THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING A UTILITY
KCI 6003
702695.185
1880923.664
577.213
LOCATOR AND ESTABLISHING THE EXACT LOCATION OF ANY AND
KCI#10
KCI#100
701885.646
701885.646
1879944.050
1879944.050
605.221
605.221
ALL EXISTING UTILITIES IN THE PROJECT REACH.
KCI#102
701794.917
1880025.244
589.289
KCI#103
702563.769
1880201.336
582.528
KCI#104
703216.841
1879915.611
548.797
KCI#200 702027.681 1879960.307 586.037
KCI#201
702237.354
1879919.112
573.010
LL
KCI#3663
703823.793
1880637.218
535.592
Zu
KCI#500
704124.913
1880920.594
530.633
s�
KCI#501
702059.895
1879526.613
602.454
>N
KCI#6004
NAI L
702240.237
702314.807
1881738.082
1881004.095
589.735
580.642
so
as
NAIL
702075.698
1881012.716
596.288
0�
NAI L
701963.876
1881026.834
598.080
U~
z�
NAIL
702358.703
1881777.430
582.919
0
co W
~= <Q
PROJECT LEGEND:
W
U
w
� QD
D
W OU
c
N Z =,_
Z
�
N
W
J Z �
Proposed Thalweg
a LLz
�_
w/Approximate Bankfull Limits
Minor Contour Line (lft.)
Z LLW
z o�
Major Contour Line
(5ft.)
W
Proposed Riffle Enhancement _______________
Proposed Riffle Grade Control .............�
Q
Proposed Step Pool
Z
J
Proposed Live Lift
UJ
or�
_________________________________
w
_
Floodplain Grading Extents _________________ - _.._•.�•
v O
°z
z<
Existing Channel to be Filled ________________
m O
7)
�y
o
= Lu
Q
U
NOV 2019
SCILE: N.T.S.
GENERAL
NOTES
&
PROJECT
LEGEND
SHEET 2
OF 26

Y
z
a m
LL
O
INSTALL SOIL FOR
WHIPS ON TOP OF
3' MINIMUM
FILTER FABRICS
BENCH
USE 70OG COIR MATTING BACKED WITH WESTERN
EXCEL CC-4 EROSION CONTROL BLANKET. BACKFILL
WITH SUITABLE GROWING MATERIAL.
INSTALL LIVE WHIPS ON TOP OF LAYER OF
SUITABLE SOIL (0.1'-0 2') WITH APPROX.
1 FOOT OF PLANT MATERIAL EXPOSED.
MINIMUM LENGTH OF CUTTINGS SHALL BE
4'. DISTANCE BETWEEN CUTTINGS SHALL BE 4"
III III— WOODOE
SED
BRUSH FILL Y 0 Y
BASEFLOW a m k m
z ------sz----
i OF o m o
CROSS LIMBS 5' MINIMUM
I� 1 6"' MIN. SEE CROSS-SECTION
SHEET FOR EXACT
SECTION (WOOD BASE) DIMENSIONS
STONE MIXTURE: SECTION
30% NATIVE SOIL
40% CLASS A STONE
NOTES: 30% CLASS B STONE
ALL LIFTS WILL BE BUILT WITH ONE LAYER.
THICKNESS OF LAYER DEPENDENT ON TYPICAL
CROSS-SECTION OF GIVEN REACH.
USE 1S'x1"x2" WOODEN STAKES ON 2' CENTERS.
STAKES SHALL HAVE A'ROOFING' NAIL AT TOP
TO KEEP FABRIC FROM SLIPPING OFF.
RIFFLE ENHANCEMENT
SCALE:NTS
LAY FILTER FABRIC OVER UPSTREAM
TOP EDGE OF SILL ROCK(S); BEHIND
FILTER FABRIC, BACKFILL CLASS A SEE PROFILE SHEETS FOR
AND NATURAL STREAM MATERIALS. STATIONS AND ELEVATIONS
W
PROPOSED
PROFILE W
FLOW —� 3
m a m
BASEFLOW LL LL
El I El I H I H FINISHED -- INSTALL CENTER BOULDER O o O J
IUI CIUI CIUI � el GRADE u� C SLIGHTLY LOWER THAN SIDE O O O LL
BOULDERS TO FORCE FLOW LL
�MI �I TO CENTER OF CHANNEL Of
II IIII II IIII II II I�II�II�II�II II�ll1 IIII�II�II
5FT
INSTALLSILLAT8"ANGLE MIN. 5FT
FILTER STONE, 18" NDM. THICKNESS MIX OF: FILTER FABRIC TO ENCOURAGE FLOW MIN.
FABRIC BOULDERS 20% CLASS A STONE (KEY IN UNDER AWAY FROM OUTER BANK
80% CLASS B STONE STREAM BED) ° O
O 6FT. MIN.
18" NOM. THICKNESS MIX OF: lO (SINGLE
20% CLASS A STONE Q Q/ STEP
PROFILE VIEW 80% CLASS B STONE Qo POOLS)
/
NOTES: STONE TOE: /
START ROCK 2FT /
FOR DOUBLE STEP POOLS, CONTINUE ROCK MIXTURE BELOW WATERS EDGE
FROM FIRST SILL ALL THE WAY TO THE SECOND SILL. AND EXTEND TO 0.5FT
DO NOT STOP AT THE 6FT MINIMUM AS SHOWN IN THE ABOVE WATERS EDGE
SINGLE STEP POOL PLAN VIEW. co
,� OO�r
BOULDERS SHOULD BE NATIVE STONES OR SHOT Q
ROCK, ANGULAR AND OBLONG, WITH AN AXIS
APPROXIMATELY 3' L x 2' W x 1.5' D.
BOULDER SILLS TO EXTEND 5' MINIMUM INTO STREAM
BANKS FOR STEP POOL STRUCTURES.
STONE INSTALLATION: START BY INSTALLING STONE
MIXTURE. THEN ADD SURGE STONE TO FILL IN VOIDS.
FINISH BY WASHING IN NATURAL STREAM MATERIAL
TO OBTAIN FINAL GRADE. RxFA-E
IF APPROVED BY DESIGNER, BOULDER SILLS CAN BE / PLAN VIEW
REPLACED WITH LIVE HARDWOOD LOGS FOUND ON O
SITE. LOGS MUST BE A MINIMUM OF 10" DIAMETER
AND STACKED IN A TRIANGLE FORMATION. O NAIL (WITH PLASTIC WASHER) FILTER FABRIC TO
THE TOP LOG AND CONTINUE DOWN AND UNDER
STRUCTURE AS SHOWN ON STEP POOL DETAIL. LOG SILL
STEP POOL
SCALE:NTS
.,W�Wtl lllll2��
CAR6C�f�':
�0 .oFssiaN. f?V
SEAL
040899
r1�Ee';���=
El 11��
7
O
am km
o m o SEE CROSS-SECTION SHEET
FOR EXACT DIMENSIONS
WRAP AND STAKE COIR
MATTING UNDER
CONSTRUCTED BANK
8" MIN
2'MIN.� STONE MIXTURE:
30% NATIVE SOIL
SECTION 30%CLASS B STONE
NOTE:
PER DESIGNER'S DIRECTION,
INTERSPERSE WITH WOODY
DEBRIS TO ENHANCE HABITAT.
zw w
c'l LL SEE PROFILE SHEETS FOR
m STATIONS AND ELEVATIONS w
FOR BEGIN AND END OF
RIFFLE
FLOW r TAPER STONE INTO
BASEFLOW _ _ _ EXISTING STREAM BED
— _ — — _ — -7— _
OV\OE O ".`d.�' u POOL
—11 I —I I I —I I I —I I I —III —III —III —III —III —III —I —I �I —I
I I 1=1 11=1 11=1 I I —III —III —III —III —III —III —III —III —III —III —I 11=1LI 1LI-ILI-L=
=1 1=1 1=1 1=1 1=1 1=1 1=1 1=1 1=1 1=11=1 1=111-1 1-111
PROFILE
STONE INSTALLATION:
START BY INSTALLING STONE MIXTURE. FINISH BY
WASHING IN NATURAL STREAM BED MATERIAL TO
FILL IN VODS AND OBTAIN FINAL GRADE.
BEFORE REINTRODUCING FLOW INTO STREAM,
ENSURE THAT ALL VOIDS ARE FILLED WITH NATIVE
SOIL TO ELIMINATE PIPING THROUGH STONE MIXTURE.
RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL
SCALE:NTS
Q
Z
J
O
W cr�
Y I— v
LLI U 2
U O o
Z
Z Q
(Y
m O
d (n U
ILL!
D' Q
2
Q
2
U
DETAILS

NOTES:
-MATTING SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR
TO THE INTRODUCTION OF WATER TO
A STREAM SECTION.
-MATTING SHALL BE INSTALLED ALONG
BOTH SIDES OF NEW STREAM LENGTH.
-MATTING SHALL EXTEND FROM TOE
OF SLOPE TO THE TOP OF BANK.
COIR MATTING
COIR MATTING
SCALE: NTS
Wbkf
1"x 2" NOTCHED
GRADE STAKE
ANCHORING
INSTALL TO ONLY HALF
TYPICAL RIFFLE
BANKFULL ON INNER
BENDS OF POOLS
Wbkf
— BANKFULL
— GROUND SURFACE
NOTE:
COIR MATTING SHALL BE
J`" "` WATER SURFACE
INSTALLED ALONG ENTIRE
TYPICAL POOL
BANK HEIGHT FOR STEP
COIR MATTING
POOLSTRUCTURES
EXAMPLE COIR MATTING PLACEMENT
SCALE: NTS
STABILIZED ROCK OUTLET
FINISHED (SEE DETAIL THIS SHEET)
GRADE
DETENTION AREA FLOW
DEPTH APPROX. 0.5'
SECTION A -A' (PROFILE SECTION A (PROFILE VIES
NOTES:
EXACT DEMENSIONS TO BE COORDINATED WITH DESIGN
REPRESENTATIVE AT TIME OF INSTALLATION.
ONCE TREATMENT AREA IS GRADED, LINE PONDED AREA
WITH A 2" LAYER OF MULCH AND TOPPED WITH 2" OF TOPSOIL.
WATER QUALITY TREATMENT AREA
SCALE:NTS
FILTER
FABRIC
2 3
114
0 0
S" NOM. THICKNESS MIX OF:
30% NATIVE SOIL
40% CLASS A STONE
STONE INSTALLATION:
30% CLASS STONE
(WASH IN NATURAL STONE AND
START BY INSTALLING STONE MIXTURE.
SOIL MATERIAL TO FILL IN VOIDS)
FINISH BY WASHING IN NATURAL STREAM
BED MATERIAL TO FILL IN VOIDS AND
OBTAIN FINAL GRADE.
STABILIZED ROCK OUTLET
SCALE: NTS
�55t 515111 f " I,
=o�OCAR
H -,
FEssro��.���,9
_ SEAL _
040899
='Ajs;�NG I ldE�e'Q�`r�;
LU
Y H
LU
LU Z
U 0
Lu
Z <
0O0 0O
07
= LU
DETAILS

T1-REACH 1 - STATION 10+00 TO 17+80
"C4" STREAM TYPE
SEE PLAN SHEETS
FOR FLOODPLAIN
EXTENTS
5.4'
1.7' 1' 1' 1.7' 1
o �o
TYPICAL RIFFLE
0 = THALWEG LOCATION
SEE PLAN SHEETS
FOR FLOODPLAIN
EXTENTS
7.6'
r t i
\ g: 4.9' 2.7' 1
I _
II 16' �I
TYPICAL POOL - RIGHT MEANDER
SEE PLAN SHEETS
FOR FLOODPLAIN
EXTENTS
zs'
t
_L___
ICI
TYPICAL POOL - LEFT MEANDER
T1-REACH 3 - STATION 26+86 TO 37+01
"C4" STREAM TYPE
SEE PLAN SHEETS
FOR FLOODPLAIN
EXTENTS
8.6'
\ g: 2.8' 1.5' 1.5' 2.8' 3../
TYPICAL RIFFLE
0 =THALWEG LOCATION
SEE PLAN SHEETS
FOR FLOODPLAIN
EXTENTS
t 12
7.7' 4.3' 1
+ _ - _ - _
II_ 2.5 _I N
TYPICAL POOL - RIGHT MEANDER
SEE PLAN SHEETS
FOR FLOODPLAIN
EXTENTS
t 12
\ q. 4.3' 7.T 1 q
I
N 1
TYPICAL POOL - LEFT MEANDER
T1-REACH 2 - STATION 17+80 TO 26+86
"C4" STREAM TYPE
SEE PLAN SHEETS
FOR FLOODPLAIN
EXTENTS
T
2.1' 1.4' 1.4' . 2.1' 1
o -- -- ,
TYPICAL RIFFLE
0 = THALWEG LOCATION
SEE PLAN SHEETS
FOR FLOODPLAIN
EXTENTS
\ s: 6.3' 3.5' I 1
` I g'.
I
21 -
TYPICAL POOL - RIGHT MEANDER
SEE PLAN SHEETS
FOR FLOODPLAIN
EXTENTS
9.8'
r N i
3.5' 6.3'
2'
r�-
TYPICAL POOL - LEFT MEANDER
T3 - STATION 315+22 TO 322+73
"C4" STREAM TYPE
NOTE:
RIFFLE CROSS-SECTION ONLY FROM STATION 315+22 TO 317+00
SEE PLAN SHEETS
FOR FLOODPLAIN
EXTENTS
1.6' 1.3' 1.3' 1.6'
I`
0
TYPICAL RIFFLE
0 = THALWEG LOCATION
SEE PLAN SHEETS
FOR FLOODPLAIN
EXTENTS
8.1'
� I 1
3'
I- "
1.7'.
TYPICAL POOL - RIGHT MEANDER
SEE PLAN SHEETS
FOR FLOODPLAIN
EXTENTS
8.1'
r t i
IL
I 3'.
1,,
TYPICAL POOL - LEFT MEANDER
r00
PTO OT
A
TYPICAL \
POOLWIDTH \
(SEE SHEET 5) \
\
START TO TAPER
INTO WIDER POOL
WIDTH
NOTE
55515111111f77,
RAH ss AFL,
.0F rONyfy9
Q
SEAL -
040899 =
rJ,T�I E5111L'',�'
-4' -2r 0' 4' 8
GRAPHIC SCALE
TYPICAL RIFFLE WIDTH
(SEE SHEET 5)
On
92� \\ �� ---/PTO
POOLWIDTH
(SEE SHEET 5)
GRADING TRANSITIONS FROM THE SMALLER
RIFFLE CROSS-SECTION WIDTH TO THE WIDER
POOL CROSS-SECTION WIDTH SHALL START
APPDXIMATLY 114 OF THE TOTAL LENGTH OF
THE RIFFLE AT THE INNER BENDS.
TYPICAL RIFFLE -POOL TRANSITION GUIDANCE
z
w
LU
Y �
LU
LU
U 0
Z Q
m O
� n
0
V
W 0 �
r�
� N
Q J
00
x U<X
W
m=
Lr
w�
z0
o?_
J
Q W
LL
0
v
a
z
J
0
a
U
0
z
H
z
D
0
U
a
2
a
U
TYPICAL
CROSS -
SECTIONS

EXISTING GRAVEL DRIVE \
CONTINUES TO CARTER
BROOKS ROAD
EXISTING WATER LINE TO
BARN BE RELOCATED THROUGH
TRIBUTARY 2 CROSSING
(APPROX. LOCATION)
TEMPORARY ACCESS PATH
TO BE ENHANCED AS NEEDED
�55i51511117rrr
1,,•��.oA CARo
:��04oF�ssio�gfy� ;
SEAL -
040899
N�
r�rrri11'." o
LL�
zu
Z�
VI W
%N
OZ
EXISTING
a�
GRAVEL DRIVE
o-
Ir
u�
I�
EXISTING
PROPOSED FLOODPLAIN
z g
WETLAND'WA' _ _
GRADING EXTENTS
EXISTING CONCRETE DEBRIS
AND ABANDONED MATERIALS
�- �� _--�, -
BEGIN
�m
TO BE REMOVED FROM EASEMENT
-- -
'�-.-�
TRIBUTARY 1
wm
r
�; il
PROPOSE
FILLEXISTINGCHANNEL
VpT1pN EASEMENT
``
SEE DETAIDL SHEET.
(TYPICAL AC�HATCH HATCHING)
o
Lu
���
-� -►
-�- `�
��
ION EASEMENT
a
,z
�� ��
��
CONSERVAT
�o
i i -
____ _ ��v
i �.. -►.. ��
O
Lu
?
Lu
W�
\ ,
\
CO NSERVATION
�.\�`
EASEMENT\'\
`�/ '�--� _ - -
-•
-. _ ----
�\. -•y
-'_
.......................2
N
STABILIZE INCOMING
EXISTING CATTLE PATH
DRAINAGE WITH
ROCK OUTLET.
TO BE FILLED AND GRADED
TO DISPERSE INCOMING
SEE DETAIL SHEET.
DRAINAGE THROUGHOUT
v v
_ '-�_
Q
WETLANDMENT�
EASEMEN
\ \ `
CONSERVATION
-
--_,
LU
Q
PROPOSED 12'
(1) 48" DIA. x 24' LONG HDPE STREAM
W
U
PROPOSED 'STEP POOL'.
WIDE ACCESS DRIVE
CULVERT - V EMBEDDED
W
SEE DETAIL SHEET.
(2) 12" DIA., 24' LONG FLOODPLAIN
CULVERTS (PEP)
(> O
O
PROPOSED'RIFFLE ENHANCEMENT.
z Q
Z
}
SEE DETAIL SHEET.
O 0_
z
N�
m O
D
�G83�
PROPOSED'RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL'.
OU
SEE DETAIL SHEET.
= W
2E
-40' -20' 0'
40' 80'
_
J
Q
GRAPHIC
SCALE
U
TEMPORARY ACCESS PATH -
TO BE ENHANCED AS NEEDED
SITE
PLAN

,yyyylyl 11++++.
:Q 9f•�
SEAL -_
040899
. 1a
-.�.. A, _ N
�N(31NE�e
�+�,. ��~ -40' -20' 0' 40' 80' FILL EXISTING DITCH AND a
I�� t GRADE PER DESIGNER
DIRECTION TO DISPERSE
GRAPHIC SCALE FLOW THROUGHOUT WETLAND.
IF NEEDED, STABILIZE STREAM
CONFLUENCE WITH ROCK OUTLET.
1�—
EXISTING EXISTING
CATTLE DRINKER WETLAND'WC'
ttt Hi
/ ----
EXISTING WATER LINE TO � _ -_,' /// �''►- - i
/ BE RELOCATED THROUGH wn
/ TRIBUTARY 2 CROSSING
�u
/ (APPROX. LOCATION) ii `� -_-- - 0>
EXISTING
/ WETLAND'WF' �n�i -- ,�� ��Ez
WIDEN EXISTING BANKS / PROPOSED'LIVE LIFT'.
BACK TO FLOODPLAIN / SEE DETAIL SHEET.
--
EXTENTS BOUNDARY AND
TIE OUT ATA3:1 SLOPE.
PROPOSED 12' USE EXCAVATED MATERIAL -
WIDE ACCESS DRIVE TO FILL IN EXCESSIVE VOIDS /
REDIRECT AND STABILIZE
THROUGHOUT WETLAND / INCOMING DRAINAGE WITH - -
PER DESIGNER DIRECTION. i i 'k Ap 0: / I r-
/ ROCK OUTLET. X /. - - o
SEE DETAIL SHEET/ --•-i _ -
(1) 36" DIA. x 24' LONG HDPE _ _ _ / w
STREAM CULVERT
- 1' EMBEDDEDXDN
-- . � •' _ �� = 5) w z i 6Z -
-- / - -
CONSERVATION EASEMENT -
_,-- -
w Lu
00
-- p \
�v
_ -
-/ - W
SEMzz0
�
_ — a
�� ��•. �_./� �• EP /'
��+,..._- •.___' DFLOODPLAIN w J
_ -- - _ - - - -•� GONS GRADING EXTENTS �5� N / z LLw
�
z
BEGIN
TRIBUTARY 2 / _ _ - % / w v
PROPOSED'RIFFLE ENHANCEMENT'.
SEE DETAIL SHEET.
JP
PROPOSED'STEP POOL'.
C� j
SEE DETAIL SHEET.
/
00+61P
/ EXISTING
/ WETLAND'WB'
j
PROPOSED'RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL'.
/
SEE DETAIL SHEET.
/ LOG SILLS AND BRUSH MATERIAL TO
/ BE INSTALLED EVERY 50' TO AID IN
% %
FILL EXISTING CHANNEL
STABILIZATION.
00+9 l �" %'
(TYPICAL ALL HATCHING) PROPOSED 12'
WIDE ACCESS DRIVE
-
BURIED LOG SILL
444
'
(10" DIA. MIN, 20' LONG)
TC
N�� �
FSNFFT6FOR
(1) 48" DIA. x 24' LONG HDPE STREAM
BURIED ATERIAL
2 G F OODPLAIN
(6' WIDEBRUSH 0' LONG)
(2)CULVIA., PO
CULVERTS(PEP)
I
TR/gOTgRy
j
I
,
i
i ► 1
1 1 1
i
I
EXISTING I
WETLAND 'WE'
0
MATCHLINE - SEE SHEETS 9 AND 10 FOR TRIBUTARY 3
Q
Z
J
Y H Q
W U
U o z
Z Q
Z
m 0 O
tl (n U
Q
2
U
SITE
PLAN

EXISTING
WETLAND 'WG'
FILL EXISTING DITCH AND
M - -- -- GRADE PER DESIGNER
>- y_ _ _ _ _ DIRECTION TO DISPERSE
-40' -20' 0' 40' 80'
GRAPHIC SCALE
CONFLUENCEIF NEEDED, STABILIZE STREAM VVU FILL EXISTING DITCHES AND
ROCK OUTLET.
CPONSiEF-
EAS ENT
clil•
' � � �rrr�.���ui��-fit �7:eei� ■■.
,i __,��`ow�� !�•�"`�� ems::
�'END
TRIBUTARY 3 _
00 '•• --t•OV
rr i �•'
LL
O
PROPOSED 15'
w WIDE ACCESS DRIVE
w
CIO
"i PROPOSED'STEP POOL'.
U) SEE DETAIL SHEET.
n
DIRECTION TO DISPERSE
FLOW THROUGHOUT WETLAND
����sirirrrrrr�
,•�n¢oF ss10...
.Q
SEAL -
040899
N�
i
EPSEMEN
VP11ON
_ SPOIL PILE
TO BE REMOVED
CONSER
PROPOSED'RIFFLE ENHANCEMENT'.
RESTORATION
.,�7).
h\`������
SEE DETAIL SHEET.
ANC
,•� ENH EMENT ••�j
_
�
\,
'���
�, 11 / _
--Jam,------- J______��
- - i �_ p \ - � I
ENHANC
PROPOSED'LIVELIFT'.
SEE DETAIL SHEET.
-
--\.
M
E ENT II
-
_�
-
/
RESTORATION
O
_...
_.
...................
Q--- -
__--
00
04
—CONSERVATION
(1) 60" DIA. x 30' LONG HDPE STREAM EASEMENT
_--_•..... = _
-
........... /_
CULVERT -V EMBEDDED
_ -
(2)CULDVIA., 3 FLOODPLAIN
"- ._.._-
CULVERTS(PEP)
_ \-- PROPOSED'RIFFLE GRADE CONTROL'.
v SEE DETAIL SHEET.
Q
i' END
i' TRIBUTARY 1
PROPOSED'WATER QUALITY
TREATMENT AREA'. FILL EXISTING CHANNEL
SEE DETAIL SHEET. (TYPICAL ALL HATCHING)
PROPOSED FLOODPLAIN
GRADING EXTENTS
Q
z
J
O
W IY
Y H
W � _
Z ~
U O o
z
Z Q
m O O
0- (n O
= W 75;
Q
x
H
a
U
SITE
PLAN

% t, i 11411 f 1 l+ III
\ \ PROPOSED 12' .CAt-yo
_ \
WIDE ACCESS DRIVE
4
(1) 36" DIA. x24' LONG HDPE STREAM �`Oe3ro SEAL
—CONS \\\\ CULVERT -1'EMBEDDED
- - - 040899
SPRING BOX ---- \\ �ATiONF
TO BE REMOVED i0------" FNT—_--- _—_----_--_ ���`•'c�j�Grl���e:
_ —
-40' -20' 0' 40' 80' ++s� ��..``
�v �v �� v��—�-�----- -�--------- GRAPHIC SCALE
BEGIN
TRIBUTARY 3 — — — — _ _ _ —_ _ _ _ _ _ = — PROPOSED 'STEP POOL'.
EXTEND SILL WITH TO
_ ,�°1� ,-- —�� _ MATCH WIDTH OF WEOTLAND
✓\\ - -
v'� AREA.
61
ow
EXISTING ELECTRICAL LINE — — — _ �o
TO BE RELOCATED THROUGH GRADE EXISTING TERRACE �` EXISTING pQ
TRIBUTARY 3 CROSSING BANKS BACK AT A 3:1 SLOPE, WETLAND 'WH' wu
(APPROX. LOCATION) BOTH SIDES OF VALLEY. 61 �` v�
coti yo
�53 71 FAS
FgsF \�� \`� ^x CONSERVA NTw in
`A,
+ p w U)co 00
a�
f + p `� ►� w W o
� z
zE
z
— •—
,L w o
N
Lu
�I- -� �� W W J a
••``�'�__`�.-_- W
W W a
z
� J
i
/ - F
EXISTING DITCH TO BE FILLED
AND GRADED TO DISPERSE FLOWTHROUAIN.�\Op1 EP _
LOG SILLS S AND BRUSHOUT H EMATERIAL L TO J P Z_
BE INSTALLED EVERY 50' ALONG DITCH Go
TO AID IN STABILIZATION. LLJ
W
Lu
Z
/
-
z
Lu
/
Z Q
0�
/ v
m 1
i✓— -
BURIED BRUSH MATERIAL
(6' WIDE, 20' LONG)
O
O (n U
2 W 2i
�� ��>
___��
BURIED LOG SILL
z
U
(10" DIA. MIN, 20' LONG)
EXISTING
Dare: NOV 2019
Le: GRAPHIC
WETLAND 'WH'
--------------
SITE
PLAN

-40' -20' 0' 40' 80'
GRAPHIC SCALE
TEMPORARY ACCESS PATH
TO BE ENHANCED AS NEEDED
MATCHLINE - SEE SHEETS 6-8 FOR TRIBUTARY 1
1 4.0' DIA. x 24' LONG HDPE
REAM CULVERT
-1'EMBEDDED
PROPOSED 12'
WIDE ACCESS
PROPOSED FLOODPLAIN
GRADING EXTENTS
CEMENT II RESTORATION
00
ENHAN
CONSERVATION EASEMENT-
O O
Op +
M'.
to--�--
- _ -----
EXISTING —
WETLAND 'WE'
BEGIN GRADING
NEW PATH FOR
TRIBUTARY 3
FILL EXISTING CHANNEL
(TYPICAL ALL HATCHING)
PROPOSED'STEP POOL'.
SEE DETAIL SHEET.
PROPOSED'RIFFLE ENHANCEMENT.
SEE DETAIL SHEET.
PROPOSED'LIVE LIFT'.
SEE DETAIL SHEET.
/OZ
m
D
m
m
K
m
z
-i
1 5.0' DIA. x 24' LONG HDPE
REAM CULVERT
1'EMBEDDED
PROPOSED 12'
WIDE ACCESS DRIVE
�ME
.11115111711 ��,
SEAL -_
040899
''f'�j •.c�NG � f��EF'' . �;
E.
�+7�1111L11
EXISTING
WETLAND 'WC'
\ I \
1
v v v r
xi
O
\ \ Z
m I
\
I
r�
y� II �a7 —�--�•--`� 1 I�TI 111
� 1
v a�i I 1 I
�I II 1 1 1 I
i
Ij
v I
1 ` v EXISTING
vv v WETLAND'WG'
1 �
2+00
I \
� 1
0
v
co w0
!=
Mmil z w N 'N <
a
O N Q J
�o w �a
Z =�
a Wx
Z
d LL Z
0
wfn
J
Z <
W
Q
z
J
O
Y H v
Lu W _
Z ~
U O o
LLJz
Z Q
m O
0_ (n U
= W 2E
2
Q
2
U
MATCHLINE - SEE SHEETS 6-8 FOR TRIBUTARY 1
SITE
PLAN

REACH: TRIBUTARY
1
578
EXISTING
EXIST
PROP
PROPOSEDULVERT
PROPOSED
l"
RESTORATION
RATION
--r----- ---- ----
---��--;-
,GRADE
-
-----------
---- -
- --CULVERT--;
--'r ----
-----,-- --,,
---- -- --,-- --
---- -- ----
--------------------------
-------------
-------------
------ ---- --
-------------
------- ---- --
■11,f1VA I!!/
�-�N RdCf
n a.
o
;--��--'----PROFILE;--���
r
---
-
\\\1
m
574
o.
w>n
W.---
_
d•
~ --;r
b-�
m---4D -n
o -
------- -- ----
-- ---- --
---- -- ----
-- ---
------�--
-------
------------------------
----�-------
-- ---- -- ----
---------
--------------
------- --
---- -- ----
-- ---- -- ----
-- ---- --
m>;
--
-- -_
-
---r
¢-
o; N
---- -
-qg-
-- - --
-- - --- --
---- -- ----
-- ---
---------
-------
-
--
- - -
-- ---- -- ----
-- ---- --
--------------
------- --
---- -- ----
-- ---- -- ----
-- ---- --
SEAL -_
044899
g
> - -
am; l
�
�o:o
- -
�N - -
m�
570
v1
_ ____
\;
__
__ __
__
____ __
___
a
a.
~
a
r
N
tp [p
z N
z -
o
p
m„
- -
'�•
---- --;---
- ---- -- -
- -- ---- -
------ ---
-------- -
--- -- ---
- ---- -- -
- -- ---- -
t�•••�1
/� •.N OC
E •�`.
41�
m
m N W
w� m
•�
>w�>.w
t-Q
w_a_
W
�__
Q
r
Oro
Q
¢
F M
¢__;_�
Z F
o,
m
;+_,�
rn
�
�
� �
�
/ G
/\
///�
N
>
w
4
m
n
/
----?
-
a
W -
J a
W
J r
¢r
� o
�o_M,�M
C
z o
N
�\
�{f
! l
•Y E'
-
566
I 1
++riflllf+
p zo ao
--� i
m mm
m
z z
m
r
__
n-
J-
/
`-'\-
___ �_
---
-
a_
¢
�,Q'
g
o
N
n, M
rn H
---------------
-----------
------------
------------------
--------
¢ ¢
N j
m- w
-O-a'�Z
w n
R
a mom
m m�:N
m
�
W
w
w
+
^
rn of rn.m
in
_
rn� •
_ __
��z
>--
- J'Q
o- --
©- +
J. +
z
z, - o
m
w
m
1./
'I
- ___
__
__
- -a
w
-
> w-
w
> _ �
w�
rwl
-
-------------
---- --
--------------
------- --
---- -- ----
-- ---- -- ----
-- ---- --
562
• '__
Q a
r r
>ww
r
z'�
z N
-_
m- P,ter
�'
- �\
J7;z
'�\J'a
_ r',
W d
> wln
Q. H
_>,-(q
Q; p�
w-•-F, ¢H
°
~_
+
- O
z__N-
-rmS vl-m-m
a-:-----------------------_
_
J�
a N
z z
Q 4
-
;
w, a
�' w 4
F
m
--
?
w :>
w
O F
O
* `vNir
`
°� 1
`\
/
I
\ :
>' w>
w
'u yi
a
¢ ++
rQ
Z rQ
p558
'
�
/
\
w
N
a
•.
2
N �; N
R
> w >
'
- -
> 7
F �r
-
m
o m•
_V-TFFM
tmyM
\
*
�a
7
w
WN
a
W_:_f_Q:Q
w
-
O
-
r
n zR
� pc
a
p n
umi •;
an
n:
r
--•--•--•----
------�-------------�--
w w
>-•wj wta,O
-
O
_
N
Nm
p�
o
^
/
W>
W -
r
J•w
W ?>
¢
'n>r-
`J
qq
y >r
r -,<
-
O<
-
0--�-
M
ra-o,^
ti°ii
��
��
w
v
z'T
Ov'�
ro m
m v ur N'N
$ ry
W
a a
> w>
w
K
w; f
a
q m
r
+n
z'�m `f or
N rn
N
o
a
w
W
+ m
a
>
Ja
w>
�
W'
a
5510+00 11 +00 12+00
' '4
> W> w a w w Or- } o �' z :um e n\ y > h a_-- �-
13+00
w� wrn� w Q' _ a •z N •z� z ___ _______ ____ ___ _ ___ ____ _� ________ _�_�d__;__� a -W ,a �ir ;w
_ _ w ' 1�
...; W. W---- �. Q O a-v v -- -
>� w a 4 yya-,
rn, v; - --\7 ;�-----+�-w
�
r
> w
__ W
>
r
>•
W
w'
O o
`"
�
z
°,
r,
z� *
O M
r
• N
y___ c
O
N'
�_'___,,_$
^
N
Z V
Oj
d
�nw
PROPOSED
__
w W - w - w-;� ;ww W+. O--•-. O _�, �,-a-N____,__ '_ _• ir-'��_�;__
$$i--$$__•___
-
EXISTING - >, 3 >- >
_I\
-'
1•__: _
_W F�
w..,.N-----vN---
_
ROFILE
558 P
GRADE a a a a z
5514 -
>
w'
w
-
>
-
-
y
•
--
__•__-__-__•__ __-__•________________•__ �'__ -- _•_----
OO 15 00 - - voa v voi /•
-- -- __'_ ___•__ ______ __ __ - - __ ___ ______ _ ________
> w > m r H Ji
W W I-.
Q ¢`r° + 1n + m w W
a
lu a•wr-4 �F O,.F O.. �. z.^-.z.. . .m . .... .
�. %....:.
\�!
t>u O z � z , � ;
- - __ _______ >� W Wl to J�N �___ ON-:�N
• � •
554
•N_K� d__
546 - - _ > r n m e
;
m-Z��•Z�
w,� ,n
`Q -W
R .r
f
n
d
N
o
O�
^ m,
+
M R` m
m M
+ > wT w m w: d a m;zm a
---- -- ---- --r 16 00 w> w" r ° °
-V1-L> Q;F¢
O V �p m
-'N m-- 'm -•- -•--� - ---- •--•-
'_______
^
fi
..
M
N O�__�r_z __'
w d w w
_-_ ___________ __ __,__ >-,�- w-- ____
uri
->'>'_
a N 'a
O __
O ____
+
-o
+:
z-N-z�-------
_+ __
o
o
N M---
F ¢; N z ,1' z m N
; N�-
;
J,;J
Q y
Q
Oa
O'.
0 M O
N Wo
•M
550 w ¢ ¢ Q -:a - H o a
- _ - __•Vr >_•w > ____
_ __ __ _ _A_ __ __ _ ___________ _______________ __ ____ __ ____ __ ____
---
r �' w M r 5417+00 18+00
gi
�~ LL w IIn w
___ __ ___
_ __
w-
a s W
7 _J_ _
r> a
r w r O
w a
-_��E �r-dQ > ;w W- -F` ate¢-+----s[-O
> w •> W J x
M Z' 2m A
_
� PI Z � M- CY ¢ '� Q � Q -
�3
w W;_
a a
O _ Z
U
fA J
g Vj___>_W_ w__y_
546 > w
�'�� �
af,_�'� _If _.alp _Q !=_'� _ POSE
> w or - o M o A o ad '� Mo CULLVERT D
��
x w N
-
a a
w
""?
-
>
> r
w
-
- r
- ry
¢ r
:>'�
z
_
N 'z w,
�i of
� m
M
538
19 +
00
20 +
00
21 +
00
¢ Z
a
-- - '--�' -'-
-'--`--'--'--
---- --------
----------
a
-
w >
---- ---
-
'E
- ----
-
- ----- --
r -
Z'
--------
- -
------
- - -- --
-- - -
----------- --
---- -- ----
zO
n mR Yi
s�_vm--Q--'----'--'- -,- -;-
W
> •W -
EL
'>
-
a.� -w'
---
a
�i r-
--,--r
N
--.
ZO'
_• : :+-z'-N=•--'---�n-
m� N• m� l
N M
------------
0Z
N
.. m m rn
v
: : :
,__
,_
>
Y
-
w w
¢-
H
¢;---•--,N
O_: a:
us-----------------
n z'� z
x
W JU
542
N
¢
zN
-¢
rr
a
r
+
•N
m
m +
? N
N
�+
a
N
;
o'�
_ _
_
:`\\,�
a•
/
rA > 1(
:
:N
�G
z
z
r
Ll
_
aw-
>
¢--•--
.O
--•--'a .M-?C
r
r
N
-•--'.
Q
z
0--�.
-
N yy
-tY--
Q
a
W
-----.-
v
M
N
w m
-N-Oi. [V
O�
-- W
--
N----'--
N
----
- -
- --------� --
-- -
---�-----�
-------�---
- ------- - -
- - -----
-:--',--f
w\
>'
-----
-)/ -
w' I
> w •a
- -
> W
-
---------- -
-
'a
II
-------
o : m+:
H
-- -
z
-------------------
z-'
---------------
----------------
---�----
----------r--
w v
FL
>w
W
-w--�
w
-
• w •Q
--*--•-¢ •w-a
w
--•- +�
r
5-
N
--�.
N
°- - „-O
$
+ m
z-N, z
a
+
,N„
w
- ----',--' -
------- --',--
-- -- --',--
-----,-- -1,
-- *-'-'----;`�--:--�:--
•>
------
`�'
----------•w_-y-
F
N
>--I-:--
N
F --¢-r-
--:- --
-----------
----------------------------
-----'r----
----------F--
•> :W
>
a
w
F
r. a
r
N
�. o o
ry
i-•+
z: N
w
z M
M
'�
1
W
W/ r
Q
538
• :__._ :
._ : -
w
__'_ -
a w w
> ;ai
wGw'�
_Gm_a', J
r r r
¢-' -¢-__
-
r o?
Q-
v
Q
_________+
o ED m
_"_""__'__'ry
N
is .
w +
OM1__i__j__
�P N
- '
m
-�__.-___
-: __________
__ ______
- V.
__; '�__
_____________�_____,____
----'--r--,--
------'--'----,--
--.- -',--
--'---- -- ----
> >
; r W W
-- ---- --
-
--'-- j w d
w
r
- -- -
-� �-
--- --
N
- p'
m
- N -m
N
-
m.-- ---
m• -- -
- - --
--
- - -
-- -----
- -
-- -
----
- - -
--- - -
--------- -
- - --
-- \+`---:--
------------
- ---
----------
--------------
-----------
-----------
- -
!W
>
2+m
d dW�°M°
J�>'
a��:
^^
m:mmm
534+
21 00
22 +
00
23
+ 00
' -
ZJ
- w
:
:
a :
:a- -�
N
A
l--,--
M
'
-
-
`-------------
,-----,�
W � W
-;y
m�
wM
-
--•- --
l
- ----- -1
-i --'-----
-------_-------_--'--
-1
-
a::a
>:
W:>
:w :
______
:W :
¢
:m :�
- __
y
__________ -
o
wmp
N
N
- __
z'
o
_ o o• v•
- - _____
N m
- _______-----
C9:
d w •
__________
_______________�____-__________�_______
J
0
542
LLJ d'
=- = '----
--
- - -- -
530
24 +
00
+
25 00
26
+ 00
a
a w
d ¢_
= _
W ~ U
. . .
o�
- -
'.
EXISTING
GRADE
PROPOSED
PROFILE
------------------
---------
--------
W > W:
-
(i z d'
538
- -
-
,N----•--
—
w O Z
Mnv
m-
-'
5227 +00
28+00 29+00 30+00 31+00 32+00
---- -- ----
----M.
Q'rM
O_NIm
-z----?--m--•--
°
M
Z 'M
-
2
--'�?.N'--
-----•-•--
-pmj --
w•
-q K[i�- -- -
N
l-�
--Nj
--•-----•-------•--'----•--
Z
----1----'--
•
- -'
w•
- -----
a
-
r d
r
---
--
-- -�
m -- -
N.
m - --
- --Q
- - - --- -
-- -----
M---
N
m---N
,•
- m---
N-p - Q.
z
O Z
O
•
534
-
W w
r
.r
�¢
a
.�
K.
O
uI Z
M
N m N
m•
z
M N
o
m
W> w ----
'
_
s ^>
1i
a
-;--'-
-•-r? r
r•
Q
w
Q, r
.--a
>>
--,M•m
---M-�--°
m
_wN
W
:
---
:
----
-'
----
-
>
--� --
w
a
---- w'
-
W', _ G1
J
-> W'�
N.>
a •W---`\
'�
_• ¢: _ a ---w
O. `�
>:-�
: :
--� --•--
: : : :
--�--•---•--r--
= W
•
-:--
•'
'--•--•--
-
--, /; -•
---`�-
W 0. W
J W
> w
a s W
_fn�
•
530
- .
> r
-Nzw
_
•
yn -0•
\ /
-----------------------
U
rS +,
M
: : • w
526
z �
N•
N .zof
of . � m
^
� m
a n
� lt; a: 0
' 'Q
>
° �
a w
----- a.
>
a Z-
Z-;--' --- .V
d O
fI5
r� Z
� -
m
N N N
� � M
"'
m
--'--'--'--'--
•
_
W�a-.
J-
>. W
>'W
w
w-$-
J-
r
--'� ---'- ua
a. ai
>. _
J--
-a.-- r
>. `--'a
w y
�;--
r
Y
°
r '--
¢ Fz.
m O
?i-.�-F
m.N
.m-�
M +-M-
"'
---- -- ----
-- ---- -- --
on.e- NOV 2019
_
----;-------
- --*-----•----
--
- ----
w;
J--
w' ---'>
--',-----
w `a
a--�-----fin
�-w---•--
-> >
-waw
--N Q w Q'� -----,Q.
d-
rFrr
------------
-------------
522
j y
a.W �
•�
--'-
-.--•--.--•
-�
W
> wl
PROFILES
518
33+00
34+00
32+00
35+00
36+00
37+00
38+00
SHEET 11 OF zs

tttltlrllr+�+��
•�P-�H CARO -
�0¢oFssroryIv.�y'-
z.
SEAL -
040899 tt
,���1111117ttt•
REACH: TRIBUTARY 3
ENHANCEMENT II RESTORATION PROPOSED EXISTING PROPOSED
562 CULVERT GRADE PROFILE WOW
Z O�j
V1 W
>^
�Z
558 12
() F
Z
r
Z
>

RIPARIAN FOREST PLANTING:
CAROB
PLANTING ZONE 1 = 17.4 ACRES
12" - 18" BARE ROOT MATERIAL
968 STEMS/ACRE (9' X 5' SPACING), RANDOM SPECIES PLACEMENT
SEAL
040$99
COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME
STATUS
% OF TOTAL
# OF PLANTS
AMERICAN SYCAMORE PLATANUS OCCIDENTALIS
SWAMP CHESTNUT OAK QUERCUS MICHAUXII
FACW
FACW
20
20
3,380
3,380
V)
•NGJ�yEE•''�`Z'�.'�
PIN OAK QUERCUS PALUSTRIS
FACW
5
845
', S 1 .`
�`f, �//v'
RIVER BIRCH BETULA NIGRA
FACW
25
4,225
E;'
WILLOW OAK QUERCUS PHELLOS
FAC
15
2,535
1�`N�•`�
SOUTHERN RED OAK QUERCUS FALCATA
FACU
10
1,690
AMERICAN PERSIMMON DIOSPYROS VIRGINIANA
FAC
5
845
16,900
STREAM ZONE:
STREAM ZONE
/
LIVE STAKES: 1.5' TO 2' LENGTHS, 1/2' TO 2" DIAMETER,
PLANT ONE ROW PER BANK AT 3' SPACING, RANDOM
SPECIES PLACEMENT.
pU
COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME
0�
BLACK WILLOW SALIX NIGRA
00
SILKY WILLOW SALIX SERICEA
oQ
SILKY DOGWOOD CORNUS AMOMUM
of
-70 0' 70' 140'
zg
NOTE: NO SINGLE LIVE STAKING SPECIES
' ' '
SHALL COMPOSE MORE THAN 40% OF THE TOTAL GRAPHIC SCALE
NUMBER OF LIVE STAKES TO BE INSTALLED.
v
w�
z Z 7N
W (q Q
W QJ
00
x of
�W w0
¢ Z �F
3 Zx
a LLo
0
Y
u) u)m:
Q
m
w aQw
= LL K
p SQUARE CUT
w a
o Z BUDS
m (FACING UPWARD)'
~
m O
LIVE CUTTING `o
(0.5" TO 2" DIAMETER) W
w
Q
�
Z
J
[1
LIVE STAKE
LLI
o
Y H
ANGLE CUT 30°-45°_
W
STREAIWSANA'OROSS-SECT/ON
�
Lu Z
_
cU O
0
Lu F—
z
Z Q
m 0
O
PLANTING NOTES:
�
v
RIFFLES - 1 ROW OF LIVE STAKES ON BOTH SIDES OF CHANNEL.
= LU
POOLS - NO LIVE STAKES ON INNER BENDS, 1 ROW ON OUTER BENDS.
12�
_
(INSTALL TWO ROWS OF LIVE STAKES ALONG BANKS OF
Q
I
JAW
ENHANCEMENT AREA, STATION 31+38 TO STATION 47+51)
v
Ld
LIVE STAKES
SCALE: NTS
DATE: NOV 2019
scncE: GRAPHIC
PLANTING
PLAN
MATCHLINE -
SEE SHEET 14
SHEET 13
OF 26

MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 13
CA
�p FEssi
SEAL
= 040899 -
'�'pj•'�NGlN��e'.`Z�.
PLANTING ZONE 1 0>
VI W
pZ
0
as
pV
uE
STREAM ZONE z5
*NOTE: SEE SHEET 13 FOR PLANTING QUANTITIES o
co a�
I� n WE.
1"1 z Z N
LL W NQ
U
w to Q Q
�w W -U
�¢ Z =H
W
J Z0
d W z
Itco
Lu
Z_ LLW
z 0
Z
W y
ANY AREAS WITHIN THE
ANY AREAS WITHIN THE FORESTED AREA DEEMED
FORESTED AREA DEEMED LOW DENSITY SHALL ALSO
LOW DENSITY SHALL ALSO BE PLANTED PER DESIGN
BE PLANTED PER DESIGN REPRESENTATIVE GUIDANCE
REPRESENTATIVE GUIDANCE Q
z
J
O
LLI oc�
Y 1-- v
Lu
W _
U O o
Fz z
Z Q
d O a
= LU 2i
Q
Q
-70 0' 70' 140'
GRAPHIC SCALE
NOV 2019
GRAPHIC
PLANTING
PLAN
SHEET 14 OF 26

EASEMENT BOUNDARY MARKING
THE EASEMENT BOUNDARY WILL BE MARKED
WITH METAL OR SALT TREATED WOOD POSTS
AND CONSERVATION EASEMENT SIGNS AT THE
CORNERS AND AT A MINIMUM OF 1 00'INTERVALS
ALONG THE BOUNDARY.
WHEN APPROPRIATE, PROVIDER SHALL MARK EXISTING TREES WITH CONSERVATION
EASEMENT SIGNS AND / OR BLAZE PROPERTY LINES AT APPROXIMATELY EYE LEVEL.
O 6-FOOT TALL DURABLE WITNESS POSTS AND 5/8"
REBAR 30" IN LENGTH WITH 3-1/4" ALUMINUM CAPS
ON ALL EASEMENT CORNERS CAPS SHALL MEET DIMS
SPECIFICATIONS ((BERNSTEN RBD5325 IMPRINTED WITH
NC STATE LOGO #B9087 OR EQUIVALENT). AFTER
INSTALLATIONCAPS SHALL BE STAMPED WITH THE
CORRESPONDING NUMBER.
• 6-FOOT TALL DURABLE WITNESS POST ALONG BOUNDARY
OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT. POSTS SHALL BE MADE
OF MATERIAL THAT WILL LAST A MINIMUM OF 20 YEARS.
THE PROVIDER SHALL ATTACH A CONSERVATION EASEMENT
SIGN TO EACH WITNESS POST AND PLACE ADDITIONAL SIGNS
AT NO MORE THAN 100-FOOT INTERVALS ON BOUNDARY LINES.
INSTALL WOVEN WIRE FENCE
I, It,",
CARo''•.
OP io (�,lv
SEAL -_
040899
NG r svE'��'��:
E . N
'��r711111111 ��
Ow
Z
O� �
v� w
I zm >2
0 Z
oz i0 f
as
o
-70 0' 70' 140' Za
GRAPHIC SCALE
Q
Z
J
O
LLI x
Y H v
Lu
Lu
U O O
Lu z
Z Q }
F-
00 O0 o
d U) U
= LU
Of _
Q
U
Ill—, NOV 2019
BOUNDARY
MARKING
PLAN
MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 16

MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 15
+ Q
f
+
f
f
X
X-�X�
f
x
x f
X
I x
-70 0' 70' 140'
X X
GRAPHIC SCALE
f X
-7` x
EASEMENT BOUNDARY MARKING
THE EASEMENT BOUNDARY WILL BE MARKED
WITH METAL OR SALT TREATED WOOD POSTS f
AND CONSERVATION EASEMENT SIGNS AT THE X
CORNERS AND AT A MINIMUM OF 100' INTERVALS
ALONG THE BOUNDARY.
WHEN APPROPRIATE, PROVIDER SHALL MARK EXISTING TREES WITH CONSERVATION
EASEMENT SIGNS AND / OR BLAZE PROPERTY LINES AT APPROXIMATELY EYE LEVEL.
x f
i— X -�
*-
X
• 6-FOOT TALL DURABLE WITNESS POST ALONG BOUNDARY
OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT. POSTS SHALL BE MADE
OF MATERIAL THAT WILL LAST A MINIMUM OF 20 YEARS.
THE PROVIDER SHALL ATTACH A CONSERVATION EASEMENT
SIGN TO EACH WITNESS POST AND PLACE ADDITIONAL SIGNS
AT NO MORE THAN 100-FOOT INTERVALS ON BOUNDARY LINES.
— X — INSTALL WOVEN WIRE FENCE
F vm
m w�
u H �r
z Z �N
O
Q J
w OU
z �H
w
J Z �
0z
Of J U
z wQ
w ��
a
z
J
O
w Q�
Y t: v
Lu W _
Lu
Z ~
U O z
Z Q
tY
00 0 o
LU
a
U
BOUNDARY
MARKING
PLAN

SEDIMENTATION AND EROSION CONTROL NOTES:
1. IT IS THE INTENT OF THESE PLANS THAT AS SOON AS AN AREA OF GRADING IS COMPLETE IT
SHALL BE STABILIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE EROSION CONTROL PRACTICES DESCRIBED
IN THESE PLANS.DUE TO THE ANTICIPATED DURATION AND SEQUENCE OF THE CONSTRUCTION
ACTIVITIES, THE CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO MINIMIZE, AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, THE AMOUNT
OF THE AREA THAT IS DISTURBED AT ONE TIME.
2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL EXERCISE EVERY REASONABLE PRECAUTION THROUGHOUT THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT TO PREVENT EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION. EROSION
CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE INSTALLED AND MAINTAINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
PROJECT PLANS, NORTH CAROLINA SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL GUIDELINES AND AS
DIRECTED BY THE DESIGNER.
3. IN THE EVENT OF A STORM, THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR REMOVAL OR
PROTECTION OF ANY EQUIPMENT, TOOLS, MATERIALS OR OTHER ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE
THE WORK THAT COULD BE AFFECTED BY STORMWATER.
4. EACH SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICE WILL BE REMOVED AFTER ALL WORK IN THE CORRESPONDING
CONSTRUCTION PHASE HAS BEEN COMPLETED AND ADEQUATE PERMANENT GROUND COVER HAS
BEEN RE-ESTABLISHED ON THE DISTURBED AREAS, AS DETERMINED BY THE DESIGNER.
5. THE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES AND STAGING AREAS IDENTIFIED ON THE PLANS PROVIDE THE
ONLY ACCESS POINTS INTO THE LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE. NO ADDITIONAL ACCESS POINTS SHALL
BE USED WITHOUT APPROVAL OF THE DESIGNER.
6. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL SHALL BE STOCKPILED WITHIN THE LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE FOR
LATER USE AS FILL MATERIAL. SILT FENCE SHALL BE INSTALLED ON THE LOW SIDE OF ANY
TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT SPOIL AND TOPSOIL PILES. THESE SPOIL PILES SHALL ALSO BE SEEDED
AND MULCHED FOR VEGETATIVE STABILIZATION WITHIN 7 DAYS THAT THEY ARE CREATED. ALL SPOIL
MATERIAL SHALL STAY ON THE SITE AND SHALL NOT BE REMOVED FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
WITHOUT DESIGNER APPROVAL.
7. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES WILL BE CHECKED FOR STABILITY AND FUNCTIONAL
OPERATION FOLLOWING EVERY RUNOFF PRODUCING RAIN EVENT AND/OR AT LEAST ONCE PER WEEK.
ANY NEEDED MAINTENANCE OR REPAIRS SHALL BE MADE IMMEDIATELY TO MAINTAIN ALL MEASURES
AS DESIGNED. ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT SHALL BE REMOVED FROM CONTROL MEASURES WHEN THEY
REACH APPROXIMATELY 50% OF THEIR FUNCTIONAL CAPACITY. THESE MEASURES SHALL BE REPAIRED
IF DISTURBED DURING MAINTENANCE. ALL SEEDED AREAS SHALL BE FERTILIZED, RESEEDED AND
MULCHED, AS NECESSARY, TO PROMOTE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF VEGETATION COVER.
8. THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AND EROSION CONTROL CONTACT FOR THIS SITE IS TIM MORRIS.
OFFICE PHONE [phone] / CELL PHONE [phone].
9. ALL EXCESS WASTE MATERIAL SHALL BE DISPOSED OF AT A PERMITTED FACILITY OR SITE.
(15A NCAC 04B .0110)
SEDIMENTATION &EROSION
CONTROL PLAN LEGEND
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE - LOD
SEEDING AND PLANTING NOTES:
TEMPORARY SEED MIX
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL UTILIZE THE FOLLOWING SEED/FERTILIZER
MIX IN SEEDING ALL DISTURBED AREAS WITHIN THE PROJECT LIMITS:
SUMMER MIX (MAY 15 - AUGUST 15)
GERMAN MILLET _ _ _ _ _ _ SETARIA ITALICA _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 20 LBS / ACRE
BROWNTOP MILLET - - - UROCHLOA RAMOSA ---- 20 LBS / ACRE
WINTER MIX (AUGUST 15 - MAY 15)
RYE GRAIN............ SECALE CEREALE-------- 120 LBS / ACRE
PERMANENT RIPARIAN SEED MIX
SUMMER MIX (MAY 15 -- AUGUST 15)
APPLICATION RATE (IN MIX)
SPECIES % OF MIX
LBS / ACRE
VIRGINIA WILDRYE -- ELYMUS VIRGINICUS
15
4.6
BIG BLUESTEM -- ANDROPOGON GERARDII
8
2.3
SWITCHGRASS -- PANICUM VIRGATUM
11
3.3
AUTUMN BENTGRASS-- AGROSTIS PERENNANS
11
3.3
BLACK-EYED SUSAN -- RUDBECKIA HIRTA
8
2.3
LANCELEAF COREOPSIS -- COREOPSIS LANCEOLATA
8
2.3
SOFT RUSH -- JUNCUS EFFUSUS
4
1.1
LITTLE BLUESTEM -- SCHIZACHYRIUM SCOPARIUM
4
1.1
INDIAN GRASS -- SORGHASTRUM NUTANS
4
1.1
EASTERN GAMMA -- TRI PSACUM DACTYLOI DES
4
1.1
PEARL MILLET -- PENNISETUM GLAUCOMA
25
7.5
TOTALS
100
30
WINTER MIX (AUGUST 15 - MAY 15)
APPLICATION RATE (IN MIX)
SPECIES % OF MIX
LBS / ACRE
VIRGINIA WILDRYE -- ELYMUS VIRGINICUS
15
4.6
BIG BLUESTEM - ANDROPOGON GERARDII
8
2.3
SWITCHGRASS -- PANICUM VIRGATUM
11
3.3
AUTUMN BENTGRASS-- AGROSTIS PERENNANS
11
3.3
BLACK-EYED SUSAN - RUDBECKIA HIRTA
8
2.3
LANCELEAF COREOPSIS -- COREOPSIS LANCEOLATA
8
2.3
SOFT RUSH -- JUNCUS EFFUSUS
4
1.1
LITTLE BLUESTEM -- SCHIZACHYRIUM SCOPARIUM
4
1.1
INDIAN GRASS -- SORGHASTRUM NUTANS
4
1.1
EASTERN GAMMA -- TRI PSACUM DACTYLOIDES
4
1.1
RYE GRAIN -- SECALE CEREALE
25
7.5
TOTALS
100
30
FERTILIZER______________________________________ 750LBS/ACRE
LIMESTONE-------------------------------------- 2000LBS/ACRE
FERTILIZER SHALL BE 10-10-10 ANALYSIS. UPON SOIL ANALYSIS
A DIFFERENT RATIO OF FERTILIZER MAY BE USED.
SEEDBED PREPARATION
■`''SN''I'
CAR'�,
�04oF�ssrpN���i9
SEAL
040899 -
0
a
N w0
Z
~ Z coN
LL w coa
W : aJ
00
XX
a NU w
z LUF
Z 3 0�
LLz
0
x J (D
Lu
o LL
W
THE SEEDBED SHALL BE COMPRISED OF LOOSE SOIL AND NOT COMPACTED. THIS MAY
Q
SILT FENCE
REQUIRE MECHANICAL LOOSENING OF THE SOIL. SOIL AMENDMENTS SHOULD FOLLOW
------------- ------------------------------------
SF
THE FERTILIZER AND LIMING DESCRIPTION IN THE ABOVE SECTIONS. FOLLOWING SEEDING,
:3
MULCHING SHALL FOLLOW THE BELOW APPLICATION METHODS AND AMOUNTS. AREAS
O
CONTAINING SEVERE SOIL COMPACTION WILL BE SCARIFIED TO A DEPTH OF 8 INCHES.
LLI
STRAW WADDLE
W
- cap
MULCHING
LYL.I
=
SEEDED AREAS ARE TO BE PROTECTED BY SPREADING STRAW MULCH UNIFORMLY TO
LLI ~
Q� Z cr
TEMPORARY BRIDGE MAT STREAM CROSSING
®
FORM A CONTINUOUS BLANKET (75% COVERAGE = 2 TONS/ACRE).
() O O
z
NOTE: FERTILIZER IS ONLY TO BE APPLIED ONCE. IF TEMPORARY SEED AND FERTILIZER IS
APPLIED PRIOR TO PERMANENT SEED, THEN FERTILIZER SHALL NOT BE APPLIED WITH THE
O cl� Z
STREAM TO BE FILLED ------------------------------------
PERMANENTSEED.
m O z
tl (n U
STAGING AREA
I
= LU 2i
I
Q
STOCK PILE
(�
=
J
h
U
TEMPORARY CHANNEL DIVERSION
TCD
EROSION
CONTROL
PLAN

Temporary Stabilization Permanent Stabilization  Temporary grass seed covered with straw or other mulches and tackifiers  Hydroseeding  Rolled erosion control products with or without temporary grass seed   Appropriately applied straw or other mulch  Plastic sheeting  Permanent grass seed covered with straw or other mulches and tackifiers  Geotextile fabrics such as permanent soil reinforcement matting  Hydroseeding   Shrubs or other permanent plantings covered with mulch  Uniform and evenly distributed ground cover sufficient to restrain erosion  Structural methods such as concrete, asphalt or retaining walls  Rolled erosion control products with grass seed  
Occurrence Reporting Timeframes (After Discovery) and Other Requirements(a) Visible sediment deposition in a stream or wetland    Within 24 hours, an oral or electronic notification.  Within 7 calendar days, a report that contains a description of the sediment and actions taken to address the cause of the deposition. Division staff may waive the requirement for a written report on a case‐by‐case basis.  If the stream is named on the NC 303(d) list as impaired for sediment‐related causes, the permittee may be required to perform additional monitoring, inspections or apply more stringent practices if staff determine that additional requirements are needed to assure compliance with the federal or state impaired‐waters conditions.   (b) Oil spills and release of hazardous substances per Item 1(b)‐(c) above  Within 24 hours, an oral or electronic notification.  The notification shall include information about the date, time, nature, volume and location of the spill or release. (c) Anticipated bypasses [40 CFR 122.41(m)(3)]  A report at least ten days before the date of the bypass, if possible.  The report shall include an evaluation of the anticipated quality and effect of the bypass. (d) Unanticipated bypasses [40 CFR 122.41(m)(3)]  Within 24 hours, an oral or electronic notification.    Within 7 calendar days, a report that includes an evaluation of the quality and effect of the bypass. (e) Noncompliance with the conditions of this permit that may endanger health or the environment[40 CFR 122.41(l)(7)]  Within 24 hours, an oral or electronic notification.  Within 7 calendar days, a report that contains a description of the noncompliance, and its causes; the period of noncompliance, including exact dates and times, and if the noncompliance has not been corrected, the anticipated time noncompliance is expected to continue; and steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent reoccurrence of the noncompliance. [40 CFR 122.41(l)(6).    Division staff may waive the requirement for a written report on a case‐by‐case basis.  Item to Document Documentation Requirements (a)  Each E&SC measure has been installed and does not significantly deviate from the locations, dimensions and relative elevations shown on the approved E&SC plan.  Initial and date each E&SC measure on a copy of the approved E&SC plan or complete, date and sign an inspection report that lists each E&SC measure shown on the approved E&SC plan.  This documentation is required upon the initial installation of the E&SC measures or if the E&SC measures are modified after initial installation.    (b)  A phase of grading has been completed. Initial and date a copy of the approved E&SC plan or complete, date and sign an inspection report to indicate completion of the construction phase.    (c)  Ground cover is located and installed in accordance with the approved E&SC plan. Initial and date a copy of the approved E&SC plan or complete, date and sign an inspection report to indicate compliance with approved ground cover specifications.    (d)   The maintenance and repair requirements for all E&SC measures have been performed. Complete, date and sign an inspection report. (e)   Corrective actions have been taken to E&SC measures. Initial and date a copy of the approved E&SC plan or complete, date and sign an inspection report to indicate the completion of the corrective action.      Inspect  Frequency (during normal business hours)  Inspection records must include: (1) Rain gauge maintained in good working order  Daily  Daily rainfall amounts.  If no daily rain gauge observations are made during weekend or holiday  periods,  and  no  individual‐day  rainfall  information  is available, record the cumulative rain measurement for those un‐attended days (and this will determine if a site inspection is needed).  Days on which no rainfall occurred shall be recorded as “zero.”  The permittee may use another rain‐monitoring device approved by the Division.  (2)  E&SC Measures At least once per 7 calendar days and within 24 hours of a rain event > 1.0 inch in 24 hours 1. Identification of the measures inspected,  2. Date and time of the inspection,  3. Name of the person performing the inspection,  4. Indication of whether the measures were operating properly, 5. Description of maintenance needs for the measure,  6. Description, evidence, and date of corrective actions taken.  (3) Stormwater discharge outfalls (SDOs) At least once per 7 calendar days and within 24 hours of a rain event > 1.0 inch in 24 hours  1. Identification of the discharge outfalls inspected,  2. Date and time of the inspection,  3. Name of the person performing the inspection,  4. Evidence of indicators of stormwater pollution such as oil sheen, floating or suspended solids or discoloration,  5. Indication of visible sediment leaving the site,  6. Description, evidence, and date of corrective actions taken.   (4) Perimeter of site At least once per 7 calendar days and within 24 hours of a rain event > 1.0 inch in 24 hours If visible sedimentation is found outside site limits, then a record of the following shall be made: 1. Actions taken to clean up or stabilize the sediment that has left the site limits, 2. Description, evidence, and date of corrective actions taken, and 3. An explanation as to the actions taken to control future releases. (5) Streams or wetlands onsite or offsite (where accessible) At least once per 7 calendar days and within 24 hours of a rain event > 1.0 inch in 24 hours If the stream or wetland has increased visible sedimentation or a stream has visible increased turbidity from the construction activity, then a record of the following shall be made:   1. Description, evidence and date of corrective actions taken, and 2. Records of the required reports to the appropriate Division Regional Office per Part III, Section C, Item (2)(a) of this permit. (6) Ground stabilization measures After each phase of grading    1. The phase of grading (installation of perimeter E&SC measures, clearing and grubbing, installation of storm drainage facilities, completion of all land‐disturbing activity, construction or redevelopment, permanent ground cover). 2. Documentation that the required ground stabilization measures have been provided within the required timeframe or an assurance that they will be provided as soon as possible. 
SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION:
THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR FOLLOWING THE SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS AND THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS, AS DIRECTED BY THE DESIGNER.
CONSTRUCTION SHALL PROCEED IN THE SPECIFIED MANNER UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED OR
APPROVED BY THE DESIGNER. THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS, ALONG WITH THE INSTRUCTIONS
CONTAINED IN THE PLANS, CONSTITUTE THE SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION.
GENERAL SITE NOTES:
1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ONLY CONDUCT STREAM WORK, INCLUDING ALL IN -STREAM STRUCTURES,
GRADING, STABILIZATION MEASURES, AND SEEDING, MULCHING, AND MATTING WORK, ON A SECTION OF
STREAM THAT SHALL BE ENTIRELY COMPLETED WITHIN A SINGLE DAY. EACH SECTION OF COMPLETED
STREAM MUST BE STABILIZED AND MATTED BEFORE FLOW CAN BE RETURNED INTO THE CHANNEL.
2. WHEN WORKING IN STREAMS WITH NO ACTIVE FLOW THE CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO HAVE
APPROPRIATELY SIZED PUMPS AND MATERIALS TO INSTALL AND MAINTAIN A TEMPORARY STREAM
DIVERSION IN ANTICIPATION OF PENDING STORM EVENTS. WORKING IN A DRY CHANNEL DOES NOT
PRECLUDE THE CONTRACTOR FROM HAVING TO COMPLY WITH NOTE 1 ABOVE.
3. UPON APPROVAL FROM THE DESIGNER, PHASES 2 THROUGH 9 MAY BE CONSTRUCTED IN A DIFFERENT
SEQUENCE THAN INDICATED BELOW OR CONCURRENTLY.
4. ALL CONSTRUCTION WORK SHALL BE DONE DURING PERIODS OF DRY WEATHER
5. ALL STREAM/DITCH CROSSINGS WILL BE LOCATED IN AREAS OF THE STREAM WHERE LEFT AND RIGHT
BANK HEIGHTS ARE SIMILAR OR CAN BE GRADED TO PROVIDE A LEVEL, OR NEAR LEVEL, CROSSING
SURFACE. BRIDGE MATS CAN BE MADE OF WOOD OR STEEL, BUT MUST BE CAPABLE OFSUPPORTING THE
GROUND PRESSURE OF THE EQUIPMENT THAT WILL BE UTILIZING THE CROSSING. UPON ENSURING A
LEVEL CROSSING SURFACE, THE BRIDGE MATS WILL BE LAID ACROSS THE CHANNEL IN A MANNER THAT
DOES NOT DISRUPT STREAM FLOW OR CAUSE EROSION IN THE CHANNEL. THIS IS TYPICALLY ACHIEVED
USING AN EXCAVATOR TO LIFT THE MATS ACROSS THE CHANNEL WITH CHAINS AND GUIDED AND SET BY
A GROUND CREW. THE MATS MUST BE CONTINUOUS ACROSS THE CHANNEL, WITH NO GAPS THAT COULD
ALLOW SEDIMENT TO ENTER THE STREAM. 4" WOODEN BARRIERS WILL BE INSTALLED ON THE OUTER
EDGE OF THE MATS TO PREVENT SOIL FROM SPILLING INTO THE CHANNEL DURING CROSSING.
ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT ON THE MATS WILL BE REMOVED ON A FREQUENT BASIS TO MINIMIZE
DISCHARGE OF SEDIMENT TO THE STREAM DURING USE. AFTER SETTING THE BRIDGE MATS, A CLASS 1
STONE APRON WILL BE APPLIED ON THE ENTRANCE AND EXIT OF THE BRIDGE AS PER THE DETAIL ON
SHEET 20 OF THE PLANS. THIS APRON WILL BE MAINTAINED AND REPLACED AS NEEDED TO MINIMIZE
SEDIMENT MOBILIZATION TO THE STREAM. PRIOR TO REMOVING THE CROSSINGS, THE MATS SHOULD BE
CLEANED OF SEDIMENT. SIMILAR TO INSTALLATION, THE MATS SHOULD BE REMOVED USING AN
EXCAVATOR AND CHAINS SO THEY CAN BE LIFTED UP AND OUT OF THE AREA WITHOUT DAMAGING THE
STREAM OR ENTERING THE STREAM FLOW.
6. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PERMIT MUST BE OBTAINED BEFORE ANY LAND DISTURBING
ACTIVITIES OCCUR. A COPY OF THIS PERMIT AND A HARD COPY OF THE PLAN MUST BE KEPT ON SITE,
PREFERABLY IN A PERMITS BOX, AND ACCESSIBLE DURING INSPECTION.
7. SELF -INSPECTIONS FOR EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MEASURES ARE TO BE PERFORMED
AT LEAST ONCE EVERY SEVEN CALENDAR DAYS AND WITHIN 24 HOURS OF EVERY RAIN EVENT OF
GREATER THAN 0.5 INCH. ANY NEEDED REPAIRS SHALL BE MADE IMMEDIATELY TO MAINTAIN MEASURES
AS DESIGNED. ALL ESC MEASURES SHALL BE MAINTAINED AS SPECIFIED IN THE CONSTRUCTION DETAILS.
B. AFTER SITE IS STABILIZED, REMOVE ALL TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AND PROVIDE
PERMANENT SEEDING WHERE TEMPORARY MEASURES HAVE BEEN REMOVED AND GROUND COVER IS
NOT ADEQUATE.
9. PER NPDES REQUIREMENTS, A RAIN GAUGE, SELF -INSPECTIONS RECORDS, PERMIT, AND S&E PLAN
ARE REQUIRED TO BE MAINTAINED ON SITE AND ACCESSIBLE DURING INSPECTION. IT IS RECOMMENDED
THAT THESE ITEMS BE PLACED IN A PERMITS BOX AT THE BEGINNING OR ENTRANCE OF PROJECT.
10. CONTACT THE DEMLR RALEIGH REGIONAL OFFICE AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO COMMENCING THE
LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITY 336-776-9800.
PHASE 1: INITIAL SITE PREPARATION
A. IDENTIFY PROJECT BOUNDARY, LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE, SENSITIVE AREAS, STAGING AREAS,
STABILIZED ENTRANCES, TEMPORARY CROSSINGS AND ACCESS POINTS WITH THE DESIGNER.
B. CONSTRUCT ENTRANCE AND STAGING AREAS AND THEIR ASSOCIATED SEDIMENT AND EROSION
CONTROL DEVICES IN A MANNER TO SUPPORT EXECUTION OF THE RESTORATION IN PHASES AS
INDICATED IN THE PLANS AND AS DIRECTED BY THE DESIGNER.
-----------------------
PHASE 2: TRIBUTARY 1 - STA. 10+00 TO 17+80
COMPLETE CHANNEL WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING PROCEDURES:
A. INSTALL SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL MEASURES ALONG EXISTING CHANNEL AS DEPICTED ON
THE PLANS.
PHASE 5: TRIBUTARY 1 - STA. 26+86 TO 37+01
COMPLETE CHANNEL WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING PROCEDURES:
A. INSTALL SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL MEASURES ALONG EXISTING CHANNEL AS DEPICTED ON
THE PLANS.
B. ESTABLISH AN ISOLATED WORK AREA BY INSTALLING IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND TEMPORARY CHANNEL
DIVERSION AND DIVERT FLOWS AROUND THE DESIGNATED WORK AREA (LENGTH OF ISOLATED WORK
AREA IS LEFT TO THE DISCRETION OF THE CONTRACTOR).
C. COMPLETE CHANNEL GRADING AS DIRECTED IN THE PLANS. INSTALL ANY BANK STABILIZATION
TREATMENTS AND IN -STREAM STRUCTURES.
D. SEED AND MULCH COMPLETED WORK AREAS ALONG COMPLETED STREAM BANKS.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PHASE 6: TRIBUTARY 3 - STA. 300+00 TO 303+10
COMPLETE CHANNEL WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING PROCEDURES:
A. INSTALL SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL MEASURES ALONG EXISTING CHANNEL AS DEPICTED ON
THE PLANS.
B. ESTABLISH AN ISOLATED WORK AREA BY INSTALLING IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND TEMPORARY CHANNEL
DIVERSION AND DIVERT FLOWS AROUND THE DESIGNATED WORK AREA (LENGTH OF ISOLATED WORK
AREA IS LEFT TO THE DISCRETION OF THE CONTRACTOR).
C. COMPLETE CHANNEL GRADING AS DIRECTED IN THE PLANS. INSTALL ANY BANK STABILIZATION
TREATMENTS AND IN -STREAM STRUCTURES.
D. SEED AND MULCH COMPLETED WORK AREAS ALONG COMPLETED STREAM
PHASE 7: TRIBUTARY 3 - STA. 315+22 TO 322+73
COMPLETE CHANNEL WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING PROCEDURES:
A. INSTALL SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL MEASURES ALONG EXISTING CHANNEL AS DEPICTED ON
THE PLANS.
B. ESTABLISH AN ISOLATED WORK AREA BY INSTALLING IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND TEMPORARY CHANNEL
DIVERSION AND DIVERT FLOWS AROUND THE DESIGNATED WORK AREA (LENGTH OF ISOLATED WORK
AREA IS LEFT TO THE DISCRETION OF THE CONTRACTOR).
C. COMPLETE CHANNEL GRADING AS DIRECTED IN THE PLANS. INSTALL ANY BANK STABILIZATION
TREATMENTS AND IN -STREAM STRUCTURES.
D. SEED AND MULCH COMPLETED WORK AREAS ALONG COMPLETED STREAM
PHASE 8: MISCELLANEOUS WETLAND GRADING AREAS
A. FILLING EXISTING DITCHES AND DEPRESSIONS:
i. ENSURE THAT ALL SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL MEASURES HAVE BEEN INSTALLED ALONG
EXISTING STREAM AND NEW CHANNEL AND ARE IN WORKING CONDITION.
ii. FILL EXISTING DITCHES AND DEPRESSIONS AS INDICATED IN THE PLANS USING ADJACENT SPOIL
MATERIAL; MAKING SURE TO DEWATER ANY AREAS WITH STANDING WATER, AS INDICATED ON THE
PLANS.
iii. SEED AND MULCH COMPLETED WORK AREAS. THIS SHALL BE DONE WITHIN 72 HOURS OF REACHING
FINAL GRADE WHEN FILLING ANY AREAS.
B. SURFACE ROUGHENING AND WATER DISPERSION
i. ROUGHEN THE SOIL TO AN APPROXIMATE DEPTH OF 8" TO ALLEVIATE COMPACTION AND MIMIC
NATURAL WETLAND MICROTOPOGRAPHY. THIS WILL INCREASE THE STORAGE OF SURFACE WATER IN
THE WETLAND AND PROMOTE VEGETATION ESTABLISHMENT.
ii. PER DESIGNERS DIRECTION, GRADE LOW SWALES IN A MANNER TO BEST DISPERSE INCOMING FLOWS
THROUGHOUT THE SURROUNDING WETLAND.
iii. SEED AND MULCH COMPLETED WORK AREAS. THIS SHALL BE DONE WITHIN 72 HOURS OF SURFACE
ROUGHENING.
PHASE 9: TREE PLANTING
A. PLANTS SHOULD BE PLANTED DURING THE DORMANT SEASON (NOVEMBER 17 - MARCH 17).
B. PREPARE AND PLANT TREES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANTING PLAN AND AS DIRECTED BY THE
DESIGNER.
PHASE 10: COMPLETION OF PROJECT SITE
A. PHASE 10 CAN BE INITIATED AFTER THE STREAM AND WETLAND GRADING WORK IS COMPLETED AND
AFTER THE SITE IS STABILIZED WITH REQUIRED VEGETATIVE COVER.
B. REMOVE ALL REMAINING WASTE MATERIALS, AND THE EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AND RESTORE
THE REMAINING STAGING AND STOCKPILING AREAS AND CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES TO THEIR PRIOR
CONDITION. SEED AND MULCH ALL DISTURBED AREAS UTILIZING THE SEED/MULCH MIXES SPECIFIED IN
THE PLANS.
�>>t%I t I I I Il l
.'',•P�H CA
SS
SEAL -
040899 _
IV E
Of
0
0
v
wo
y� r�
I� z Z 7 N
w �¢
W : QJ
0
�W NU
¢ Z 7F
3 Z0
d 0z
0
� J (�
0 Lu
w a
B. ESTABLISH AN ISOLATED WORK AREA BY INSTALLING IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND TEMPORARY CHANNEL
DIVERSION AND DIVERT FLOWS AROUND THE DESIGNATED WORK AREA (LENGTH OF ISOLATED WORK
AREA IS LEFT TO THE DISCRETION OF THE CONTRACTOR).
C. COMPLETE CHANNEL GRADING AS DIRECTED IN THE PLANS. INSTALL ANY BANK STABILIZATION
LLI
TREATMENTS AND IN -STREAM STRUCTURES.
Y
D. SEED AND MULCH COMPLETED WORK AREAS ALONG COMPLETED STREAM BANKS.
LLI
LLI
Z
PHASE 3: TRIBUTARY 2 (WETLAND AREA)
U O
COMPLETE WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING PROCEDURES:
A. INSTALL SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL MEASURES ALONG EXISTING CHANNEL AS DEPICTED ON
LLl I —
THE PLANS.
Z
<
B. ESTABLISH AN ISOLATED WORK AREA BY INSTALLING IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND TEMPORARY CHANNEL
m
DIVERSION AND DIVERT FLOWS AROUND THE DESIGNATED WORK AREA (LENGTH OF ISOLATED WORK
AREA IS LEFT TO THE DISCRETION OF THE CONTRACTOR).
11
C. COMPLETE CHANNEL GRADING AS DIRECTED IN THE PLANS. INSTALL ANY BANK STABILIZATION
= LU
TREATMENTS AND IN -STREAM STRUCTURES.
D. SEED AND MULCH COMPLETED WORK AREAS ALONG COMPLETED STREAM BANKS.
PHASE 4: TRIBUTARY 1 - STA. 17+80 TO 26+86
COMPLETE CHANNEL WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING PROCEDURES:
A. INSTALL SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL MEASURES ALONG EXISTING CHANNEL AS DEPICTED ON
THE PLANS.
B. ESTABLISH AN ISOLATED WORK AREA BY INSTALLING IMPERVIOUS DIKES AND TEMPORARY CHANNEL
DIVERSION AND DIVERT FLOWS AROUND THE DESIGNATED WORK AREA (LENGTH OF ISOLATED WORK
AREA IS LEFT TO THE DISCRETION OF THE CONTRACTOR).
C. COMPLETE CHANNEL GRADING AS DIRECTED IN THE PLANS. INSTALL ANY BANK STABILIZATION
TREATMENTS AND IN -STREAM STRUCTURES.
D. SEED AND MULCH COMPLETED WORK AREAS ALONG COMPLETED STREAM BANKS.
EROSION
CONTROL
PLAN

UTILIZE A STABILIZED OUTLET FOR
THE DISCHARGE OF CLEAN WATER
(SEE DETAIL THIS SHEET).
NOTE: DISCHARGE MAY OCCUR IN
BEDROCK LOCATIONS OR DEEP
POOLS IF BED DISTURBANCE CAN
BE ELIMINATED.
1
o I SILT BAG WITH
ROCK PAD
I(SEE DETAIL THIS SHEET)
/1
1 DEWATERING
IMPERVIOUS DIKE I 11
II PUMP
I
I 1
TEMPORARY
/ CHANING
NEL
I
' IMPERVIOUS DIKE
FLEXIBLE HOSE I I
I
I 1
1
CONTRACTOR SHALL UTILIZE I
11
SANDBAGS WITH POLYPROPYLENE
OR OTHER IMPERVIOUS FABRIC.
FLOW
I
INLET FOR CLEAN
T) (SEE DETAIL THIS SHEE
\ I
1
WATER TO BE RAISED
EARTH MATERIALS SHALL NOT BE
OFF OF STREAM
USED TO CONSTRUCT THE
I 1
`
BOTTOM. THIS MAY
IMPERVIOUS DIKES.
REQUIRE PLACEMENT
1 \
OF GRAVEL UNDER
INTAKE.
`.
PUMP -AROUND
PUMP
SEQUENCE OF DEWATERING OPERATIONS
* ANY DEVIATION FROM ABOVE DEWATERING PLAN
WILL REQUIRE DESIGNER APPROVAL.
1. INSTALL SILT BAGS(S) AND ROCK PAD(S) AND STABILIZED OUTLET.
2. INSTALL UPSTREAM PUMP AND TEMPORARY FLEXIBLE HOSE.
3. PLACE UPSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKE AND BEGIN PUMPING
OPERATIONS FOR STREAM DIVERSION.
4. PLACE DOWNSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKE AND PUMPING
APPARATUS. DEWATER ENTRAPPED AREA.
5. PERFORM REPAIR WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS.
6. EXCAVATE ANY ACCUMULATED SILT AND DEWATER BEFORE
REMOVAL OF IMPERVIOUS DIKES. REMOVE IMPERVIOUS
DIKES, PUMPS, AND TEMPORARY FLEXIBLE HOSE
(DOWNSTREAM IMPERVIOUS DIKES FIRST).
7. REMOVE SILT BAG(S) AND STABILIZE DISTURBED AREA WITH
SEED AND MULCH.
EXAMPLE OF PUMP -AROUND OPERATION
SCALE:NTS
STILLING BASIN MAINTENANCE:
1. SEDIMENT BAGS SHALL BE REPLACED AND DISPOSED OF WHEN IT
IS THREE-QUARTERS FULL OF SEDIMENT OR WHEN IT IS IMPRACTICAL
FOR THE BAG TO FILTER THE SEDIMENT OUT AT A REASONABLE
FLOW RATE.
2. ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT SHOULD BE DISPOSED OF IN A DESIGNATED
DISPOSAL AREA.
3. SPENT BAGS SHOULD BE DISPOSED OF PROPERLY AND NOT BURIED.
4. GRAVEL PADS SHOULD BE CHECKED DAILY DURING USE TO ENSURE THAT
GRAVEL HAS NOT BEEN WASHED AWAY OR BEEN CHOKED BY EXCESSIVE
SEDIMENTATION.
5. REPLACE PAD WITH CLEAN GRAVEL, AS NEEDED.
NOTE: PROVIDE STABILIZED OUTLET DOWN BANK TO STREAM
SPECIAL STILLING BASIN (SILT BAG) WITH ROCK PAD
SCALE:NTS
Al
I
Z
Z O
IMPERVIOUS
SHEETING
SAND BAGS
Ai
PLAN
SAND IMPERVIOUS
BAGS SHEETING
FLOW
STREAMBED
WRAP SHEETING
UNDER DIKE MATERIAL
SECTION AA
NOT TO SCALE
NOTES:
DIKE MATERIAL SHALL BE LARGE SANDBAGS.
WATERBAGS MAY BE USED UPON APPROVAL
OF THE DESIGNER.
DIKE MATERIAL MAY NOT BE EARTH OR DIRT
DIKE MATERIAL MUST CONFORM TO THE SHAPE
OF THE STREAM CHANNEL AND MUST BE HIGH
ENOUGH IN THE CHANNEL TO NOT ALLOW
FLOW TO OVERTOP THE DIKE.
IMPERVIOUS SHEETING SHOULD BE PLASTIC OR
RUBBER SHEETING THICK ENOUGH TO NOT BE
EASILY PUNCTURED GIVEN THE CONDITIONS OF
THE CHANNEL.
ROCKS, SANDBAGS, OR OTHER WEIGHTS (NOT
DIRT OR EARTH) MAY BE USED TO WEIGH DOWN
THE SHEETING TO ENSURE THAT THERE IS PROPER
CONTACT BETWEEN THE SHEETING AND THE BANKS
AND BED OF THE CHANNEL.
IMPERVIOUS DIKE DETAIL
SCALE:NTS
11111111111"I,
,•�`.�N CA1�O 'Il
D� FESSr' �i SEAL -
040899 -
NG I NS1e
rf, r//l E1Iy"*",�
a
Z
J
O
Lu Q�
Y t:
LLI
U O o
Z
LLJ
Z Q
m O O
= LU
10� a
a
2
U
EROSION
CONTROL
PLAN

STOCKPILED
\hX EARTH
X\T�/X\h/ X�'���\/`X/Y xi�XCX6' / \x
\\x\ 0.I/
SILT FENCE
�SF�
-------190------
NOTES:
TEMPORARY SEEDING MUST BE APPLIED TO STOCKPILES IF NOT
RELOCATED WITHIN 7 DAYS.
ALL STOCKPILES SHALL BE WITHIN LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE,
SILT FENCE SHALL BE INSTALLED DOWN GRADIENT OF ALL STOCK-
PILES.
STOCKPILE LOCATIONS DEPICTED ON SITE PLANS ARE APPROXIMATE
AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE DEPENDING ON THE AREA THAT IS BEING
WORKED UPON, EXACT LOCATION AND QUANTITY OF STOCKPILES WILL
BE DETERMINED BY DESIGN REPRESENTATIVE IN THE FIELD.
TEMPORARY STOCKPILE DETAIL
SCALE:NTS
FILTER FABRIC
SILT FENCE MAINTENANCE
1. INSPECT SEDIMENT FENCES WEEKLY
AND AFTER EACH RAINFALL EVENT.
2. SHOULD FABRIC TEAR, DECOMPOSE, OR IN
FILTER FABRIC —
ANY WAY BECOME INEFFECTIVE, REPLACE
IT IMMEDIATELY.
COMPACTED FILL-
3. REMOVE SEDIMENT DEPOSITS PROMPTLY TO
PROVIDE ADEQUATE STORAGE VOLUME FOR THE
NEXT RAIN AND TO REDUCE PRESSURE ON THE -
—
FENCE. TAKE CARE TO AVOID UNDERMININGFENCE
_
DU
4. REMOVE ALL FENCING MATERIALS AND
—
UNSTABLE SEDIMENT DEPOSITS AFTER THE
EXTEND FABRIC
CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA HAS BEEN
PROPERLY STABILIZED, INSPECTED AND
INTO TRENCH
APPROVED. BRING THE DISTURBED AREA TO
GRADE AND STABILIZE AS SHOWN IN THE
VEGETATION PLAN.
SILT FENCE DETAIL
SCALE:NTS
1 2'-0" DEPTH
I
I
I
L
Bin. -- Lori n
(OVER FILTER FABRIC)
777151r11r+J+��
-
�o¢oFEss'roti��'�iy
Q
SEAL
040899
WOODEN STAKE 12" STRAW ' ��,•.� ^ r �.•; . O
18"x1"x2" WATTLE V G.
��•.N lt� E.• � �'
E- FLOW DIRECTION y[ Ld
SOW 3" TRENCH OR C11r1i5+• -
BACKFILL UPSTREAM
SIDE WITH MULCH
NOTES:
WATTLES SHALL BE INSTALLED ACCORDING TO THE MANUFACTURERS
SPECIFICATIONS.
ALL WADDLE JUNCTIONS SHALL BE OVERLAPPED AND STAKED TO ENSURE
CONTINUOUS PROTECTION.
STAKES SHALL BE INSTALLED ALONG WADDLES AT 5 FEET SPACING.
STRAW WATTLE DETAIL
NOT TO SCALE
NOTES:
1. TURNING RADIUS SUFFICIENTTO ACCOMMODATE LARGE
TRUCKS SHALL BE PROVIDED.
2. ENTRANCE(S) SHOULD BE LOCATED TO PROVIDE FOR UTILIZATION
BY ALL CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES.
3. MUST BE MAINTAINED IN A CONDITION WHICH WILL PREVENT
TRACKING OR DIRECT FLOW OF MUD ONTO STREETS. PERIODIC
TOP DRESSING WITH STONE WILL BE NECESSARY.
4. ANY MATERIAL TRACKED ONTO THE ROADWAY MUST BE CLEANED
UP IMMEDIATELY.
5. GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE SHALL BE LOCATED AT ALL
POINTS OF INGRESS AND EGRESS UNTIL SITE IS STABILIZED.
FREQUENT CHECKS OF THE DEVICE AND TIMELY MAINTENANCE
MUST BE PROVIDED.
STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE DETAIL
SCALE:NTS
STREAM CROSSING MAINTENANCE:
1. INSPECT TEMPORARY CROSSING
AFTER EACH RAINFALL EVENT FOR
Al
ACCUMULATION OF DEBRIS,
BLOCKAGE, EROSION OF ABUTMENTS
AND OVERFLOW AREAS, CHANNEL
SCOUR, RIPRAP DISPLACEMENT, OR
PIPING ALONG CULVERTS. SF
_
2. REMOVE DEBRIS, REPAIR AND
REINFORCE DAMAGED AREAS --"
IMMEDIATELY TO PREVENT
DAMAGE TO THE INSTALLATION. STREAM
FLOW
EXISTING i
CHANNEL
/ DITCH FILTER FABRIC
FOR DRAINAGE
SECTION AA A
NOT TO SCALE
PLAN
1. BRIDGE LOCATIONS DEPICTED ON SITE PLANS ARE APPROXIMATE AND
ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE DEPENDING ON THE AREA THAT IS BEING
WORKED UPON. EXACT LOCATION AND QUANTITY OF STOCK PILES
WILL BE DETERMINED BY DESIGN REPRESENTATIVE IN THE FIELD.
2. WIDTH OF EACH MAT IS DEPENDENT ON THE SIZE OF THE EQUIPMENT
MEANT TO CROSS IT.
3. APPROACH STABILIZATION, COMPOSED OF CLASS 1 STONE, WILL BE
REQUIRED FOR EACH SECTION OF THE BRIDGE.
4. BRIDGE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OF A SOLID DECK.
TEMPORARY BRIDGE MAT CROSSING
BRIDGE MAT
(SOLID DECK)
CLASS "I"STONE
FOR APPROACH
STABILIZATION
LLI
Y F-
LU Cn
Lu z
U 0
Lu F-
Z Q
m 0
0-
= LLI
H
Z
D
O
U
a
a
U
EROSION
CONTROL
PLAN

LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE = 19.19 ACRES
= (GREY AREA)
' \
N/F / \
TIMOTHY H. CRAIG
& WENONAH CRAIG
PIN 0071676 `
OB 655, PG 719
DB 90, PG 373 \
\
\ N/F
\ JOSEPH RA Y JONES
` \ PIN 0014903 \
\ DB 2B, PG 7
n \ /
n \
TEMPORARY `h
\ \ STAGING \
AREAS
\
\ 9
N/F
EMIL Y S. GROSS &
ELIZABETH S MORIN \/ \
PIN 00746JO ` A
DB 07E, PG 76
\
\
\
-300' 0' 150' 300'
GRAPHIC SCALE
1
\
STABILIZED
' CONSTRUCTION
i, ENTRANCE
N/F
EMIL Y S. GROSS &
ELIZABETH S MORIN
PIN 0014650
DB 07E, PG 76
N/F
RICHARD A. CARTER, SR.
& BETTY P. CARTER
PIN 0011670
DB 342, PC 443
N/F
SEPH RA Y JONES
PIN 0014900
DB 30, PG 65
Ro 00
PRIER
G
�%'Atill1l" ,1,
�-�H CARO' •,.
Q¢ 9C 9 J
SEAL -
040899 =
S;
~� z
N/F
w
JOSEPH RA Y JONES
U
�
PIN 001490J
¢
DB 28, PG 7
o
Z
Y H
WLu
�
U O
LLJ
SITE ACCESS m
d
o� Ro
R2210,6
R0P0 S
EROSION
CONTROL
PLAN
-OVERVIEW-

r(
EXISTING GRAVEL DRIVE
CONTINUES TO CARTER
BROOKS ROAD
CLOD \
moo
34 STABILIZED
CONSTRUCTION
r--- ENTRANCE
BARN
EXISTING
GRAVEL DRIVE
EXISTING
WETLAND 'WA'
EXISTING CONCRETE DEBRIS
AND ABANDONED MATERIALS
-
�-
--- \- \
----_ _ _� _ _-
BEGIN
TRIBUTARY 1
hl i i
TO BE REMOVED-
Illlf
LOD I"I ��----_---_�.
Loa
OD
LOD
EXISTING ACCESS PATH
TO BE ENHANCED AS NEEDED
TEMPORARY STOCK PILE; TYP.
EXACT LOCATION AND QUANTITY
TO BE DETERMINED BY DESIGN
REPRESENTATIVE IN THE FIELD.
(SEE DETAIL ON SHEET 20) --\
LOD
LOD
%t %I III i fJ,, fl
''r��
110
'
=doFESSIp
:Q f
SEAL _
- 040899
E;+''''�,
PROPOSED CULVERT
ROAD CROSSING
(SEE SHEET 6)
TEMPORARY
STAGING AREA
LOD —
I I
- O1
STABILIZE INCOMING EXISTING CATTLE PATH LOp
DRAINAGE WITH TO BE FILLED AND GRADED -
ROCK OUTLET. TO DISPERSE INCOMING----
��� SEE DETAIL SHEET. DRAINAGE THROUGHOUT _
----- WETLAND
�o�
goo
Lop z
FILL EXISTING CHANNEL
(TYPICAL ALL HATCHING)
NA0 GRID
,99
-40' -20' 0' 40' 80' 0
GRAPHIC SCALE
TEMPORARY ACCESS PATH �
TO BE ENHANCED AS NEEDED
0
0
EXAMPLE OF PUMP AROUND OPERATION
EXACT LOCATION AND SETUP WILL BE
TCD DETERMINED BY HOW MUCH WORK THE
CONTRACTOR PLANS TO COMPLETE AT
THE TIME. TYPICAL ALL EROSION CONTROL
PLAN SHEETS. (SEE DETAIL ON SHEET 19).
LL
�v
z>
Qcc
0
v
uu U) r�
I� Z Z N
w in
0
�W W,U
¢ Z UJF
5 ZOf
a LL Z
O
w J (�
� LL
w a
Q
z
0
W 0�
Y H v
W � x
W
Lr Z ~
U O o
z
Z Q >-
00 0 O
o_ cn c>
2 LU 2i
LL Q
2
Q
x
U
EROSION
CONTROL
PLAN

`115151i1i!l���
oA
-' .�F 5S °OC,�� - -
:Q�`
SEAL
040899 -
GINSV \Z�:
S ' NO
E.
PROPOSED CULVERT
ROAD CROSSING
(SEE SHEET 7)
-40' -20' 0' 40' 80'
GRAPHIC SCALE
LOpLOD
LOD
O
BEGIN _ � _= _ --- _ � _-_-_'
TRIBUTARY 2 ----- 3 -
\ \
COD
` I
LOO LOD
EXISTING '
\NFTI AND'WB'
/ f 1 0-
EXISTING
/
,//ice I
WETLAND'WC'-
- - -
TEMPORARY BRIDGE MAT
_ \--------
STREAM CROSSING. EXACT
LOCATION AND QUANTITY
-- _
�bp _ - - - �/ - - -
OF CROSSINGS WILL BE
DETERMINED BY DESIGN
REPRESENTATIVE IN THE
FIELD.
/ /
EXISTING
/�9
�'//
/--------� _ ► ,'
1/
WETLAND'WF'
/'/ �1i
/
/----0
- —� —_
-'
oQ OQ \
00+91
MAT cH��NF.
SFF SNFFT 22 FO
R TRigUTARy,
FILL EXISTING CHANNEL
(TYPICAL ALL HATCHING)
LOp /
TEMPORARY
vog STAGING AREA
TEMPORARY STOCK PILE; TYP.
EXACT LOCATION AND QUANTII
TO BE DETERMINED BY DESIGN
REPRESENTATIVE IN THE FIELE
(SEE DETAIL ON SHEET 20)
PROPOSED CULVERT
ROAD CROSSING
(SEE SHEET 7)
EXISTING —
/ 00+61p
\
\
W
g'a
9
►L
E I
� \ V
I \ \ 4
II \
III \
0
MATCHLINE - SEE SHEETS 25 AND 26 FOR TRIBUTARY 3
O
O
O
N
M
%,
v
N
I-
W
W
2
W
w
U)
0
F- y
w�
~ z Z �N
w vi a
0
W NU
5 wz
a wZ
0
Jg
0 LL
w V
Q
Z
J
O
Y H Q
W
Z
U O z
Z Q }
00 0 O
d (n U
Q
2
Q
2
U
EROSION
CONTROL
PLAN

r
ry
m
O
LL
LO
N
U)
w
w
w
w
w
U)
}
H
ca
m
O
co
Li-
F-
w
w
w
w
O
w
z
J
U
Q
EXISTING
- WETLAND'WG'
EXISTING
WETLAND 'WD'
too
uOO
too
r
�J__---
---------- ----- - -J %'��� -�A I
0�x 00 O \"�X -- -- --
X ' - - -
_ O
D +
VO
Cp C:J
PROPOSED CULVERT LOD -�
ROAD CROSSING - -
(SEE SHEET 8) LOD
TEMPORARY BRIDGE MAT -
STREAM CROSSING. EXACT
LOCATION AND QUANTITY
OF CROSSINGS WILL BE
DETERMINED BY DESIGN
REPRESENTATIVE IN THE
FIELD.
-40' -20' 0' 40' 80'
GRAPHIC SCALE
551511171 l7��,
`��4¢pFESSIp�q�fJr9
.Q
SEAL -
040899 -
Al
f��rlr�rEi�i5+`55� -
ou
z�
�w
oz
as
l
uF
TEMPORARY STOCK PILE; TYP.
z�
EXACT LOCATION AND QUANTITY
TO BE DETERMINED BY DESIGN
REPRESENTATIVE IN THE FIELD.
(SEE DETAIL ON SHEET 20)
�CpD
N
0
w�
z Z
7N
0 LOD
LL W
M co
a
fn Q
O
N
W
�¢
x
WU
---- M p
z
"F
—
-- i o
O
3
a
w
Z�
LLO
en
---' - s,
J J—
xLu
0z
J(�
rl)
Lu
0
z
v
LOD
1
END
TRIBUTARY 1
LOD
Q
z
FILL EXISTING CHANNEL
JU
(TYPICAL ALL HATCHING)
W
Y � �
W
U O o
LLI z
Z Q
00 0 O
= W
Q
D'
2
H
Q
2
U
EROSION
CONTROL
PLAN

�4;
PROPOSED CULVERT
ROAD CROSSING
(SEE SHEET 9)
BEGIN
TRIBUTARY3,
vvvv �v vvv vvvv
v
�v v �v v vv v vvv v v
v vv v
v vv
�` `v `v vv vvvv vvv v v vv
`�v
\ \ \ \
\
\ \ \ \ \\
-40' -20' 0' 40' 80,
GRAPHIC SCALE
�>>i 111 17 f
CA
ooF
SEAL -
040899 -
Oil11151■
i` X v
\Z, \\\\ o
♦ EXISTING
\ ��` \ ♦ WETLAND 'WH'
� OOx ♦♦
�O v e,
i
co
vtee l 0) O♦♦
I �
7.
too
<p0 j
i VOID
` — EXISTING
`, �� ------ WETLAND'WH'
co
N
I-
W
w
2
N
W
w
w
z
J
2
F
Q
Y
W
W
D'
U
W
z
O
m
d
2
W
H
z
O
H
Q
O
F-
W
ow
zj
O�
�w
Ez
0
wu
o
zg
Q
z
O
Q
U
x
r
O
z
H
z
D
O
O
Q
a
U
EROSION
CONTROL
PLAN

N9p era l
-40' -20' 0' 40' 80'
GRAPHIC SCALE
o°
TEMPORARY BRIDGE MAT
STREAM CROSSING. EXACT - - -
LOCATION AND QUANTITY
OF CROSSINGS WILL BE
PROPOSED CULVERT
ROAD CROSSING
(SEE SHEET 10)
— LVU
_ LOD
/
DETERMINED BY DESIGN
REPRESENTATIVE IN THE 0 —
FIELD. Ox -
LOD / O en _
LOD �� +
0
0
o + M
m
0 // /
i
_�
+
———— ^^
/
en
Hclk
_ -
-_-
--
InLOD
Lu
Lu
Lu
W
Z
J
- - LOD
U
Q
EXISTING
FILL EXISTING CHANNEL
73
WETLAND'WE'
(TYPICAL ALL HATCHING)
Lou
555t 515111CA
Ro
10
:Q
SEAL -
040899
�/ rye E;
MATCHLINE - SEE SHEETS 22-24 FOR TRIBUTARY 1
EXISTING
WETLAND'WC'
i TEMPORARY
STAGING AREA01
---
rl
O of I
O
+ <O0 I
cn
I
I
TEMPORARY STOCK PILE; TYP.
EXACT LOCATION AND QUANTITY
TO BE DETERMINED BY DESIGN
REPRESENTATIVE IN THE FIELD.
(SEE DETAIL ON SHEET 20)
PROPOSED CULVERT
ROAD CROSSING
(SEE SHEET 10)
♦` \ LpD
\
ODi
\ \ 1
I
I I I
I
I v A �v 11111
1
11
�� `� � \1 I I► 1111
n
11 III
/l yil
�I
fl 1 1
p0 /I A°)
1 I
i /
I,1 vv i I
27.,,.O0
\
0
o
,I 1
II
I
I
I I
r
O
O
I
EXISTING
\
WETLAND 'WG'
ow
ou
z�
OW
5;z
�o
as
o�
zg
0
co
v
W.
!
11Z Z 7N
w N Q
O coco
Q J
�p K afQ
w w U
a z WF
z
LL0
O
ui w J
LL LU
w V
Q
z
O
Y H 0
W U _
Z ~
U O 0
Z Q
m O O
(n 0
= W 2i
a
Q
x
0
EROSION
CONTROL
PLAN
MATCHLINE - SEE SHEETS 22-24 FOR TRIBUTARY 1

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059

12.2 Data Analysis/Supplemental Information and Maps 
Existing Conditions Cross‐Sections 
Pebble Count Tables 
Stream Morphological Tables 
Soil Delineation and Borings 
Groundwater Data 

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059

Cross-Section PlotsStation Elevation0.00 567.89565.446.16 568.072.511.45 568.267.314.37 568.14566.315.50 567.6712.017.28 565.910.918.54 565.800.319.81 565.2121.820.29 565.231.620.48 565.451.221.28 565.0122.34 565.2923.51 564.7424.63 564.5625.02 565.4625.73 565.2426.32 565.2026.95 565.5728.45 565.6228.94 566.5431.28 567.4833.79 568.4340.18 568.4548.85 568.35Bankfull Width:Flood Prone Area Elevation:Flood Prone Width:Max Depth at Bankfull:Mean Depth at Bankfull:W / D Ratio:Entrenchment Ratio:Bank Height Ratio:SUMMARY DATACurrent Bankfull Elevation:Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:Date:2/5/2019Field Crew:T. Seelinger, J. SullivanDrainage Area (sq mi):0.06River Basin:Cape FearSite:Hip Bone CreekXS IDT1 XSa5645655665675685690 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45Elevation (feet)Station (feet)Hip Bone Creek, T1 XSaBankfullFlood Prone AreaSite Assessment
Cross-Section PlotsStation Elevation0.00 559.69556.205.57 559.282.412.57 558.955.217.48 558.48557.521.88 557.8314.824.83 557.081.326.96 556.720.527.15 556.4411.028.53 556.112.930.08 556.031.030.68 555.2131.08 554.9531.44 554.9031.88 555.2132.52 556.0033.67 556.2835.57 556.5637.54 557.0139.46 559.1146.18 559.4953.58 559.4357.80 559.58Entrenchment Ratio:Bank Height Ratio:W / D Ratio:SUMMARY DATACurrent Bankfull Elevation:Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:Bankfull Width:Flood Prone Area Elevation:Flood Prone Width:Max Depth at Bankfull:Mean Depth at Bankfull:Date:2/5/2019Field Crew:T. Seelinger, J. SullivanDrainage Area (sq mi):0.06River Basin:Cape FearSite:Hip Bone CreekXS IDT1 XSb5545555565575585595605610 1020304050Elevation (feet)Station (feet)Hip Bone Creek, T1 XSbBankfullFlood Prone AreaSite Assessment
Cross-Section PlotsStation Elevation0.00 550.99548.473.73 550.534.26.64 550.4210.28.24 550.21549.811.61 549.6328.215.23 548.971.418.61 548.600.421.28 548.2924.823.67 548.282.824.61 548.621.025.23 548.1225.94 548.0126.46 547.1826.92 547.1027.51 547.2528.14 547.4428.78 548.2430.13 548.3032.52 549.2233.67 549.4437.68 549.7644.14 550.2851.51 550.8160.27 551.21Entrenchment Ratio:Bank Height Ratio:W / D Ratio:SUMMARY DATACurrent Bankfull Elevation:Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:Bankfull Width:Flood Prone Area Elevation:Flood Prone Width:Max Depth at Bankfull:Mean Depth at Bankfull:Date:2/5/2019Field Crew:T. Seelinger, J. SullivanDrainage Area (sq mi):0.13River Basin:Cape FearSite:Hip Bone CreekXS IDT1 XSc5465475485495505515520 102030405060Elevation (feet)Station (feet)Hip Bone Creek, T1 XScBankfullFlood Prone AreaSite Assessment
Cross-Section PlotsStation Elevation0.00 546.17543.124.15 546.124.210.10 545.734.411.78 545.50544.616.88 545.0912.621.94 544.651.524.08 544.201.026.61 543.754.529.13 543.372.929.51 542.741.030.44 542.6030.83 541.8331.74 541.6932.56 541.6333.35 542.4033.95 543.8534.54 544.1634.87 544.9535.91 545.1537.88 545.3442.87 545.9848.05 546.2652.32 546.5258.30 546.61Entrenchment Ratio:Bank Height Ratio:W / D Ratio:SUMMARY DATACurrent Bankfull Elevation:Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:Bankfull Width:Flood Prone Area Elevation:Flood Prone Width:Max Depth at Bankfull:Mean Depth at Bankfull:Date:2/5/2019Field Crew:T. Seelinger, J. SullivanDrainage Area (sq mi):0.13River Basin:Cape FearSite:Hip Bone CreekXS IDT1 XSd5415425435445455465475480 1020304050Elevation (feet)Station (feet)Hip Bone Creek, T1 XSdBankfullFlood Prone AreaSite Assessment
Cross-Section PlotsStation Elevation0.00 545.10540.746.66 544.835.911.57 544.384.616.35 543.36542.622.87 542.6412.525.35 542.131.825.51 542.201.328.44 541.583.629.22 539.842.729.96 539.931.530.16 539.3631.08 539.0531.80 538.9132.57 539.1433.03 539.5333.51 540.9435.06 542.0235.87 542.6937.94 543.4841.06 543.7644.47 544.2948.48 544.6357.73 544.86Entrenchment Ratio:Bank Height Ratio:W / D Ratio:SUMMARY DATACurrent Bankfull Elevation:Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:Bankfull Width:Flood Prone Area Elevation:Flood Prone Width:Max Depth at Bankfull:Mean Depth at Bankfull:Date:2/5/2019Field Crew:T. Seelinger, J. SullivanDrainage Area (sq mi):0.14River Basin:Cape FearSite:Hip Bone CreekXS IDT1 XSe5385395405415425435445455460 1020304050Elevation (feet)Station (feet)Hip Bone Creek, T1 XSeBankfullFlood Prone AreaSite Assessment
Cross-Section PlotsStation Elevation0.00 542.18538.352.62 542.115.86.28 541.767.69.30 541.21540.112.08 540.3220.014.94 539.871.817.21 539.770.818.71 539.439.820.78 538.682.622.84 538.101.024.61 537.9425.43 537.8926.27 537.4326.41 536.9026.90 536.5827.50 536.6928.08 536.8028.48 536.8129.23 538.2530.66 538.7731.52 539.5832.77 539.6933.47 540.1834.57 540.3535.68 540.6337.41 540.5539.25 541.3140.76 541.5743.57 541.7545.53 541.8145.55 541.8148.55 541.74Entrenchment Ratio:Bank Height Ratio:W / D Ratio:SUMMARY DATACurrent Bankfull Elevation:Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:Bankfull Width:Flood Prone Area Elevation:Flood Prone Width:Max Depth at Bankfull:Mean Depth at Bankfull:Date:2/5/2019Field Crew:T. Seelinger, J. SullivanDrainage Area (sq mi):0.21River Basin:Cape FearSite:Hip Bone CreekXS IDT1 XSf536537538539540541542543051015202530354045Elevation (feet)Station (feet)Hip Bone Creek, T1 XSfBankfullFlood Prone AreaSite Assessment
Cross-Section PlotsStation Elevation0.00 537.30535.755.73 537.206.09.46 537.1415.712.40 536.79536.915.91 536.0330.717.48 535.641.119.09 535.580.422.11 535.5241.424.95 535.352.027.08 535.201.027.32 534.8827.82 534.6328.72 534.7229.18 534.9429.64 535.1730.74 535.4231.67 535.5932.72 536.0333.27 535.9133.88 535.6834.90 535.8336.42 536.0638.29 536.1040.57 536.4943.27 537.0745.12 537.5948.14 538.0450.99 537.89Entrenchment Ratio:Bank Height Ratio:W / D Ratio:SUMMARY DATACurrent Bankfull Elevation:Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:Bankfull Width:Flood Prone Area Elevation:Flood Prone Width:Max Depth at Bankfull:Mean Depth at Bankfull:Date:2/5/2019Field Crew:T. Seelinger, J. SullivanDrainage Area (sq mi):0.23River Basin:Cape FearSite:Hip Bone CreekXS IDT1 XSg5345355365375385390 1020304050Elevation (feet)Station (feet)Hip Bone Creek, T1 XSgBankfullFlood Prone AreaSite Assessment
Cross-Section PlotsStation Elevation0.00 531.92531.097.86 531.298.89.66 531.0719.312.22 530.83533.016.61 530.9249.921.41 530.921.923.29 530.810.523.88 530.4042.124.85 530.412.625.09 529.801.025.33 529.6125.81 529.2326.56 529.2027.15 529.4827.66 529.6628.65 531.0629.10 531.2230.47 531.3632.22 531.4833.67 531.7835.26 532.2537.44 532.0340.03 532.2243.53 532.2746.01 532.2549.93 532.27Entrenchment Ratio:Bank Height Ratio:W / D Ratio:SUMMARY DATACurrent Bankfull Elevation:Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:Bankfull Width:Flood Prone Area Elevation:Flood Prone Width:Max Depth at Bankfull:Mean Depth at Bankfull:Date:2/5/2019Field Crew:T. Seelinger, J. SullivanDrainage Area (sq mi):0.24River Basin:Cape FearSite:Hip Bone CreekXS IDT1 XSh5285295305315325335340 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50Elevation (feet)Station (feet)Hip Bone Creek, T1 XShBankfullFlood Prone AreaSite Assessment
Cross-Section PlotsStation Elevation0.00 556.62554.228.32 556.281.818.53 555.974.326.24 555.94555.428.74 555.6317.429.27 555.581.229.81 554.750.430.66 554.6710.031.20 554.164.131.99 553.982.232.54 554.0832.90 553.0733.20 553.1233.90 553.0534.10 554.0235.01 554.1536.08 554.3637.34 554.2738.93 554.4741.30 554.5643.36 554.7044.06 554.7344.73 554.1745.25 554.7145.83 554.8946.53 554.9247.00 555.6148.27 555.8450.30 556.1254.91 556.2960.23 556.7267.31 557.02Entrenchment Ratio:Bank Height Ratio:W / D Ratio:SUMMARY DATACurrent Bankfull Elevation:Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:Bankfull Width:Flood Prone Area Elevation:Flood Prone Width:Max Depth at Bankfull:Mean Depth at Bankfull:Date:2/5/2019Field Crew:T. Seelinger, J. SullivanDrainage Area (sq mi):0.05River Basin:Cape FearSite:Hip Bone CreekXS IDT2 XSa5525535545555565575580 102030405060Elevation (feet)Station (feet)Hip Bone Creek, T2 XSaBankfullFlood Prone AreaSite Assessment
Cross-Section PlotsStation Elevation0.00 589.77586.997.26 588.190.812.62 587.747.217.29 587.35587.219.53 587.1621.821.18 587.150.223.35 587.210.126.04 587.0265.027.41 586.893.029.61 586.782.131.22 587.0533.59 587.0935.60 587.2138.28 586.7841.08 587.1843.55 587.2444.75 587.1745.05 587.2045.66 587.3146.63 587.4947.72 587.7150.75 588.3053.86 588.6058.49 589.0265.77 589.6271.21 590.00Entrenchment Ratio:Bank Height Ratio:W / D Ratio:SUMMARY DATACurrent Bankfull Elevation:Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:Bankfull Width:Flood Prone Area Elevation:Flood Prone Width:Max Depth at Bankfull:Mean Depth at Bankfull:Date:2/5/2019Field Crew:T. Seelinger, J. SullivanDrainage Area (sq mi):0.01River Basin:Cape FearSite:Hip Bone CreekXS IDT3 XSa5865875885895905910 10203040506070Elevation (feet)Station (feet)Hip Bone Creek, T3 XSaBankfullFlood Prone AreaSite Assessment
Cross-Section PlotsStation Elevation0.00 558.26556.504.65 558.232.46.36 557.9918.78.80 557.86557.310.89 557.5336.213.19 557.070.814.46 556.680.116.50 556.38146.818.60 556.381.920.18 556.201.020.48 555.8021.06 555.7921.29 556.0821.46 556.1221.60 555.7321.86 555.7522.12 556.1522.63 556.5624.02 556.4827.28 556.4831.05 556.4434.92 556.3837.93 556.8440.68 557.0542.34 556.9345.74 557.0548.56 557.2749.89 557.4452.32 557.70Entrenchment Ratio:Bank Height Ratio:W / D Ratio:SUMMARY DATACurrent Bankfull Elevation:Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:Bankfull Width:Flood Prone Area Elevation:Flood Prone Width:Max Depth at Bankfull:Mean Depth at Bankfull:Date:2/5/2019Field Crew:T. Seelinger, J. SullivanDrainage Area (sq mi):0.05River Basin:Cape FearSite:Hip Bone CreekXS IDT3 XSb5555565575585590 1020304050Elevation (feet)Station (feet)Hip Bone Creek, T3 XSbBankfullFlood Prone AreaSite Assessment
Cross-Section PlotsStation Elevation0.00 545.63543.427.57 545.622.111.23 545.933.013.90 545.36544.515.40 545.109.817.23 544.121.119.22 543.710.719.78 543.724.220.71 542.513.221.08 542.321.321.41 542.3422.12 542.4722.66 543.1623.57 543.8124.97 544.2928.07 544.8031.58 545.2736.04 545.8038.78 546.1741.37 546.25Entrenchment Ratio:Bank Height Ratio:W / D Ratio:SUMMARY DATACurrent Bankfull Elevation:Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:Bankfull Width:Flood Prone Area Elevation:Flood Prone Width:Max Depth at Bankfull:Mean Depth at Bankfull:Date:2/5/2019Field Crew:T. Seelinger, J. SullivanDrainage Area (sq mi):0.06River Basin:Cape FearSite:Hip Bone CreekXS IDT3 XSc5415425435445455465470 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40Elevation (feet)Station (feet)Hip Bone Creek, T3 XScBankfullFlood Prone AreaSite Assessment
Particle Millimeter Count
Silt/Clay < 0.062 S/C 74
Very Fine .062 - .125 S
Fine .125 - .25 A
Medium .25 - .50 N
Coarse .50 - 1 D
Very Coarse 1 - 2 S
Very Fine 2 - 4 9
Fine 4 - 5.7 G 2
Fine 5.7 - 8 R 3
Medium 8 - 11.3 A 6
Medium 11.3 - 16 V 4
Coarse 16 - 22.6 E 2
Coarse 22.6 - 32 L
Very Coarse 32 - 45 S
Very Coarse 45 - 64
Small 64 - 90 C
Small 90 - 128 O
Large 128 - 180 B
Large 180 - 256 L
Small 256 - 362 B
Small 362 - 512 L D16 0.062 mean 0.6 silt/clay 74%
Medium 512 - 1024 D D35 0.062 dispersion 40.0 sand 0%
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 R D50 0.062 skewness 0.69 gravel 26%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK D65 0.062 cobble 0%
Total 100 D84 4.9 boulder 0%
D95 12 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%
Tributary 1 Cross-Section A
Size (mm)Size Distribution Type
Note:
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
1 10 100 1000 10000% Finer Than (Cumulative)Particle Size -Millimeters
Particle Size Distribution
Hip Bone Creek
XS T1a
Site Assessment
Particle Millimeter Count
Silt/Clay < 0.062 S/C 4
Very Fine .062 - .125 S 1
Fine .125 - .25 A 1
Medium .25 - .50 N 1
Coarse .50 - 1 D 7
Very Coarse 1 - 2 S 28
Very Fine 2 - 4 25
Fine 4 - 5.7 G 13
Fine 5.7 - 8 R 7
Medium 8 - 11.3 A 7
Medium 11.3 - 16 V 3
Coarse 16 - 22.6 E 2
Coarse 22.6 - 32 L
Very Coarse 32 - 45 S 1
Very Coarse 45 - 64
Small 64 - 90 C
Small 90 - 128 O
Large 128 - 180 B
Large 180 - 256 L
Small 256 - 362 B
Small 362 - 512 L D16 1.1 mean 2.8 silt/clay 4%
Medium 512 - 1024 D D35 1.7 dispersion 2.6 sand 38%
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 R D50 2.5 skewness 0.05 gravel 58%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK D65 3.8 cobble 0%
Total 100 D84 7.1 boulder 0%
D95 12 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%
Tributary 1 Cross-Section B
Size (mm)Size Distribution Type
Note: Removed outlier in 128-180 category
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000% Finer Than (Cumulative)Particle Size -Millimeters
Particle Size Distribution
Hip Bone Creek
XS T1b
Site
Assessment
Particle Millimeter Count
Silt/Clay < 0.062 S/C 15
Very Fine .062 - .125 S
Fine .125 - .25 A
Medium .25 - .50 N 4
Coarse .50 - 1 D 7
Very Coarse 1 - 2 S 14
Very Fine 2 - 4 11
Fine 4 - 5.7 G 4
Fine 5.7 - 8 R 12
Medium 8 - 11.3 A 8
Medium 11.3 - 16 V 3
Coarse 16 - 22.6 E 4
Coarse 22.6 - 32 L 2
Very Coarse 32 - 45 S 1
Very Coarse 45 - 64
Small 64 - 90 C
Small 90 - 128 O
Large 128 - 180 B
Large 180 - 256 L
Small 256 - 362 B
Small 362 - 512 L D16 0.35 mean 1.7 silt/clay 18%
Medium 512 - 1024 D D35 1.3 dispersion 5.0 sand 29%
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 R D50 2.1 skewness -0.08 gravel 53%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK D65 3.5 cobble 0%
Total 85 D84 8.2 boulder 0%
D95 18 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%
Tributary 1 Cross-Section C
Size (mm)Size Distribution Type
Note:
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000% Finer Than (Cumulative)Particle Size -Millimeters
Particle Size Distribution
Hip Bone Creek
XS T1c
Site Assessment
Particle Millimeter Count
Silt/Clay < 0.062 S/C 4
Very Fine .062 - .125 S 2
Fine .125 - .25 A 1
Medium .25 - .50 N 6
Coarse .50 - 1 D 13
Very Coarse 1 - 2 S 6
Very Fine 2 - 4 6
Fine 4 - 5.7 G 1
Fine 5.7 - 8 R
Medium 8 - 11.3 A 4
Medium 11.3 - 16 V 4
Coarse 16 - 22.6 E 8
Coarse 22.6 - 32 L 10
Very Coarse 32 - 45 S 9
Very Coarse 45 - 64 9
Small 64 - 90 C 8
Small 90 - 128 O 7
Large 128 - 180 B 3
Large 180 - 256 L 1
Small 256 - 362 B
Small 362 - 512 L D16 0.6 mean 6.6 silt/clay 4%
Medium 512 - 1024 D D35 3.1 dispersion 17.7 sand 27%
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 R D50 19 skewness -0.32 gravel 50%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK 1 D65 34 cobble 18%
Total 103 D84 72 boulder 0%
D95 120 bedrock 1%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%
Tributary 1 Cross-Section D
Size (mm)Size Distribution Type
Note:
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000% Finer Than (Cumulative)Particle Size -Millimeters
Particle Size Distribution
Hip Bone Creek
XS T1d
Site Assessment
Particle Millimeter Count
Silt/Clay < 0.062 S/C 12
Very Fine .062 - .125 S 3
Fine .125 - .25 A 3
Medium .25 - .50 N 7
Coarse .50 - 1 D 1
Very Coarse 1 - 2 S 6
Very Fine 2 - 4 8
Fine 4 - 5.7 G 3
Fine 5.7 - 8 R 4
Medium 8 - 11.3 A 3
Medium 11.3 - 16 V 4
Coarse 16 - 22.6 E 8
Coarse 22.6 - 32 L 12
Very Coarse 32 - 45 S 8
Very Coarse 45 - 64 6
Small 64 - 90 C 2
Small 90 - 128 O
Large 128 - 180 B 1
Large 180 - 256 L 1
Small 256 - 362 B
Small 362 - 512 L D16 0.12 mean 2.1 silt/clay 13%
Medium 512 - 1024 D D35 2 dispersion 33.3 sand 21%
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 R D50 7.4 skewness -0.35 gravel 58%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK 4 D65 20 cobble 4%
Total 96 D84 37 boulder 0%
D95 62 bedrock 4%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%
Size Distribution
Tributary 1 Cross-Section E
Size (mm)Type
Note:
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000% Finer Than (Cumulative)Particle Size -Millimeters
Particle Size Distribution
Hip Bone Creek
XS T1e
Site Assessment
Particle Millimeter Count
Silt/Clay < 0.062 S/C 2
Very Fine .062 - .125 S
Fine .125 - .25 A
Medium .25 - .50 N
Coarse .50 - 1 D 8
Very Coarse 1 - 2 S 26
Very Fine 2 - 4 11
Fine 4 - 5.7 G 17
Fine 5.7 - 8 R 12
Medium 8 - 11.3 A 15
Medium 11.3 - 16 V 9
Coarse 16 - 22.6 E 1
Coarse 22.6 - 32 L
Very Coarse 32 - 45 S
Very Coarse 45 - 64
Small 64 - 90 C
Small 90 - 128 O
Large 128 - 180 B 1
Large 180 - 256 L
Small 256 - 362 B
Small 362 - 512 L D16 2 mean 6.3 silt/clay 2%
Medium 512 - 1024 D D35 5 dispersion 3.3 sand 33%
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 R D50 8.5 skewness -0.13 gravel 64%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK D65 11 cobble 1%
Total 102 D84 20 boulder 0%
D95 32 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%
Tributary 1 Cross-Section F
Size (mm)Size Distribution Type
Note:
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000% Finer Than (Cumulative)Particle Size -Millimeters
Particle Size Distribution
Hip Bone Creek
XS T1f
Site Assessment
Particle Millimeter Count
Silt/Clay < 0.062 S/C 21
Very Fine .062 - .125 S
Fine .125 - .25 A
Medium .25 - .50 N 5
Coarse .50 - 1 D 6
Very Coarse 1 - 2 S 16
Very Fine 2 - 4 18
Fine 4 - 5.7 G 5
Fine 5.7 - 8 R 13
Medium 8 - 11.3 A 8
Medium 11.3 - 16 V 8
Coarse 16 - 22.6 E 3
Coarse 22.6 - 32 L
Very Coarse 32 - 45 S
Very Coarse 45 - 64
Small 64 - 90 C
Small 90 - 128 O
Large 128 - 180 B
Large 180 - 256 L
Small 256 - 362 B
Small 362 - 512 L D16 0.062 mean 0.7 silt/clay 20%
Medium 512 - 1024 D D35 1.2 dispersion 20.5 sand 26%
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 R D50 2.3 skewness -0.34 gravel 53%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK D65 4.3 cobble 0%
Total 103 D84 8.8 boulder 0%
D95 14 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%
Tributary 1 Cross-Section G
Size (mm)Size Distribution Type
Note:
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000% Finer Than (Cumulative)Particle Size -Millimeters
Particle Size Distribution
Hip Bone Creek
XS T1g
Site Assessment
Particle Millimeter Count
Silt/Clay < 0.062 S/C
Very Fine .062 - .125 S
Fine .125 - .25 A
Medium .25 - .50 N
Coarse .50 - 1 D 8
Very Coarse 1 - 2 S 27
Very Fine 2 - 4 11
Fine 4 - 5.7 G 17
Fine 5.7 - 8 R 12
Medium 8 - 11.3 A 15
Medium 11.3 - 16 V 9
Coarse 16 - 22.6 E 1
Coarse 22.6 - 32 L
Very Coarse 32 - 45 S
Very Coarse 45 - 64
Small 64 - 90 C
Small 90 - 128 O
Large 128 - 180 B 1
Large 180 - 256 L
Small 256 - 362 B
Small 362 - 512 L D16 1.2 mean 3.4 silt/clay 0%
Medium 512 - 1024 D D35 2 dispersion 3.0 sand 35%
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 R D50 4.5 skewness -0.12 gravel 64%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK D65 6.4 cobble 1%
Total 101 D84 9.9 boulder 0%
D95 14 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%
Tributary 1 Cross-Section H
Size (mm)Size Distribution Type
Note:
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000% Finer Than (Cumulative)Particle Size -Millimeters
Particle Size Distribution
Hip Bone Creek
XS T1h
Site
Assessment
Particle Millimeter Count
Silt/Clay < 0.062 S/C 70
Very Fine .062 - .125 S
Fine .125 - .25 A
Medium .25 - .50 N
Coarse .50 - 1 D
Very Coarse 1 - 2 S 3
Very Fine 2 - 4 15
Fine 4 - 5.7 G 3
Fine 5.7 - 8 R 3
Medium 8 - 11.3 A 6
Medium 11.3 - 16 V 4
Coarse 16 - 22.6 E
Coarse 22.6 - 32 L
Very Coarse 32 - 45 S 1
Very Coarse 45 - 64 1
Small 64 - 90 C
Small 90 - 128 O
Large 128 - 180 B
Large 180 - 256 L
Small 256 - 362 B
Small 362 - 512 L D16 0.062 mean 0.7 silt/clay 66%
Medium 512 - 1024 D D35 0.062 dispersion 73.1 sand 3%
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 R D50 0.062 skewness 0.74 gravel 31%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK D65 2.9 cobble 0%
Total 106 D84 9 boulder 0%
D95 12 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%
Tributary 2 Cross-Section A
Size (mm)Size Distribution Type
Note:
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000% Finer Than (Cumulative)Particle Size -Millimeters
Particle Size Distribution
Hip Bone Creek
XS T2a
Site
Assessment
Particle Millimeter Count
Silt/Clay < 0.062 S/C 96
Very Fine .062 - .125 S
Fine .125 - .25 A
Medium .25 - .50 N
Coarse .50 - 1 D
Very Coarse 1 - 2 S
Very Fine 2 - 4
Fine 4 - 5.7 G
Fine 5.7 - 8 R
Medium 8 - 11.3 A 1
Medium 11.3 - 16 V
Coarse 16 - 22.6 E 1
Coarse 22.6 - 32 L
Very Coarse 32 - 45 S 1
Very Coarse 45 - 64
Small 64 - 90 C
Small 90 - 128 O
Large 128 - 180 B 1
Large 180 - 256 L
Small 256 - 362 B
Small 362 - 512 L D16 0.062 mean 0.1 silt/clay 96%
Medium 512 - 1024 D D35 0.062 dispersion 1.0 sand 0%
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 R D50 0.062 skewness ---gravel 3%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK D65 0.062 cobble 1%
Total 100 D84 0.062 boulder 0%
D95 0.062 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%
Tributary 3 Cross-Section A
Size (mm)Size Distribution Type
Note:
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000% Finer Than (Cumulative)Particle Size -Millimeters
Particle Size Distribution
Hip Bone Creel
XS T3a
Site
Assessment
Particle Millimeter Count
Silt/Clay < 0.062 S/C 81
Very Fine .062 - .125 S
Fine .125 - .25 A
Medium .25 - .50 N 1
Coarse .50 - 1 D 2
Very Coarse 1 - 2 S 7
Very Fine 2 - 4 4
Fine 4 - 5.7 G 1
Fine 5.7 - 8 R 2
Medium 8 - 11.3 A 1
Medium 11.3 - 16 V
Coarse 16 - 22.6 E 1
Coarse 22.6 - 32 L
Very Coarse 32 - 45 S
Very Coarse 45 - 64
Small 64 - 90 C
Small 90 - 128 O
Large 128 - 180 B
Large 180 - 256 L
Small 256 - 362 B
Small 362 - 512 L D16 0.062 mean 0.2 silt/clay 81%
Medium 512 - 1024 D D35 0.062 dispersion 8.6 sand 10%
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 R D50 0.062 skewness 0.55 gravel 9%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK D65 0.062 cobble 0%
Total 100 D84 1 boulder 0%
D95 4 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%
Tributary 3 Cross-Section B
Size (mm)Size Distribution Type
Note:
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000% Finer Than (Cumulative)Particle Size -Millimeters
Particle Size Distribution
Hip Bone Creek
XS T3b
Site Assessment
Particle Millimeter Count
Silt/Clay < 0.062 S/C 6
Very Fine .062 - .125 S
Fine .125 - .25 A
Medium .25 - .50 N
Coarse .50 - 1 D 8
Very Coarse 1 - 2 S 13
Very Fine 2 - 4 21
Fine 4 - 5.7 G 6
Fine 5.7 - 8 R 8
Medium 8 - 11.3 A 9
Medium 11.3 - 16 V 9
Coarse 16 - 22.6 E 9
Coarse 22.6 - 32 L 2
Very Coarse 32 - 45 S 3
Very Coarse 45 - 64 1
Small 64 - 90 C 2
Small 90 - 128 O
Large 128 - 180 B 2
Large 180 - 256 L
Small 256 - 362 B 1
Small 362 - 512 L 1 D16 1.1 mean 4.6 silt/clay 6%
Medium 512 - 1024 D D35 2.6 dispersion 4.2 sand 21%
Lrg- Very Lrg 1024 - 2048 R D50 4.7 skewness -0.01 gravel 67%
Bedrock >2048 BDRK D65 9.1 cobble 4%
Total 101 D84 19 boulder 2%
D95 75 bedrock 0%
hardpan 0%
wood/det 0%
artificial 0%
Tributary 3 Cross-Section C
Size (mm)Size Distribution Type
Note:
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000% Finer Than (Cumulative)Particle Size -Millimeters
Particle Size Distribution
Hip Bone Creek
XS T3c
Site Assessment
Morphological CriteriaT1T3T1A-T1HT3A-T3CG4c/G4G4B4B4cC4C4bC4C4C40.06, 0.06, 0.13, 0.14, 0.21, 0.23, 0.24 0.01, 0.05, 0.06~~~0.0580.1190.2470.0657.3, 5.2, 10.2, 4.4, 4.6, 7.6, 15.7, 19.3 7.2, 18.7, 3.0~~~5.47.08.65.80.3, 0.5, 0.4, 1.0, 1.3, 0.8, 0.4, 0.50.1, 0.1, 0.7~~~0.40.60.70.52.5, 2.4, 4.2, 4.2, 5.9, 5.8, 6.0, 8.80.8, 2.4, 2.1~~~2.24.06.02.721.8, 11.0, 24.8, 4.5, 3.6, 9.8, 41.4, 42.1 65.0, 25.2, 4.2 12 -- 18 12 -- 18 10 -- 1513.012.212.412.70.9, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.8, 1.8, 1.1, 1.90.2, 0.8, 1.1~~~0.70.91.10.712.0, 14.8, 28.2, 12.6, 12.5, 23.8, 33.5, 49.9 27.2, 36.8, 16.1~~~35 -- 42 42 -- 56 30 -- 5830 - 401.6, 2.9, 2.8, 2.9, 2.7, 3.1, 2.1, 2.63.8, 2.0, 5.4 1.4 -- 2.2>2.2>2.26.5 -- 7.8 6.0 -- 8.0 3.5 -- 6.7 5.2 -- 6.91.01.01.1 -- 1.2 1.1 -- 1.3 1.2 -- 1.41.21.21.141.13Pool Mean Depth (ft)**~~~0.81.11.30.9Riffle Mean Depth (ft) (Dbkf)0.3, 0.5, 0.4, 1.0, 1.3, 0.8, 0.4, 0.50.1, 0.1, 0.7~~~0.40.60.70.5Pool Width (ft)**~~~7.89.812.08.1Riffle Width (ft)7.3, 5.2, 10.2, 4.4, 4.6, 7.6, 15.7, 19.3 7.2, 18.7, 3.0~~~5.47.08.65.8Pool XS Area (sf)**~~~6.410.616.06.9Riffle XS Area (sf)2.5, 2.4, 4.2, 4.2, 5.9, 5.8, 6.0, 8.80.8, 2.4, 2.1~~~2.24.06.02.7Pool Width / Riffle Width**1.1 -- 1.5 1.1 -- 1.5 1.2 -- 1.71.41.41.41.4Pool Max Depth / Dbkf**2.0 -- 3.5 2.0 -- 3.5 1.5 -- 3.53.53.03.12.8Bank Height Ratio1.2, 1.0, 1.0, 1.2, 1.5, 1.0, 1.0, 1.02.1, 1.0, 1.3 1.0 -- 1.1 1.0 -- 1.1 1.0 -- 1.11.01.01.01.0Mean Bankfull Velocity (V) (fps)3.3, 3.5, 3.3, 3.5, 2.6, 3.5, 3.6, 2.63.4, 4.7, 4.2 4.0 -- 6.0 4.0 -- 6.0 3.5 -- 5.03.63.43.33.3Bankfull Discharge (Q) (cfs)8.1, 8.6, 14.1, 14.6, 15.3, 20.3, 21.3, 22.7 2.7, 8.8, 9.0~~~8.013.619.88.7Radius of Curvature (Rc) (ft)**~~~11 -- 16 15 -- 18 17 -- 21 12 -- 16Belt Width (Wblt) (ft)**~~~22 -- 30 27 -- 43 33 -- 41 21 -- 29Meander Length (Lm) (ft)**~~~60 -- 76 80 -- 95 93 -- 99 67 -- 76Radius of Curvature / Bankfull Width**n/an/a2 -- 32.0 -- 3.0 2.1 -- 2.6 2.0 -- 2.4 2.1 -- 2.8Meander Width Ratio (Wblt / Wbkf)**n/an/a3.5 -- 8 4.1 -- 5.6 3.9 -- 6.1 3.8 -- 4.8 3.6 -- 5.0Meander Length / Bankfull Width**n/an/a7 -- 14 11.1 -- 14.1 11.4 -- 13.6 10.8 -- 11.5 11.6 -- 13.1Valley slope0.011 -- 0.0270.02 -- 0.039 0.020 -- 0.030 0.005 -- 0.015 0.005 -- 0.015 0.0280.0180.00930.019Average water surface slope0.003 -- 0.0250.047, 0.015, 0.024 ~~~0.0240.0150.00820.017Riffle slope**~~~ 0.021 -- 0.036 0.019 -- 0.020 0.013 -- 0.019 0.020 -- 0.021Pool slope**~~~0 0 00Pool to pool spacing**~~~33 -- 41 47 -- 54 48 -- 59 38 -- 41Pool length**~~~10 -- 21 17 -- 32 14 -- 31 10 -- 19Riffle Slope / Avg. Water Surface Slope**1.1 -- 1.8 1.1 -- 1.8 1.2 -- 1.5 0.9 -- 1.51.31.6 -- 2.31.2Pool Slope / Avg. Water Surface Slope**0 -- 0.40 -- 0.40 -- 0.20000Pool to Pool Spacing / Bankfull Width**0.5 -- 5.0 1.5 -- 6.0 3.5 -- 7 6.1 -- 7.6 6.7 -- 7.7 5.6 -- 6.8 6.6 -- 7.0* : no data shown for pools, radius of curvature or meanders in existing stream do to nature of channelProfilePatternDimensionEntrenchment Ratio (ER)Sinuosity (stream length/valley length) (K)Width of Flood Prone Area (Wfpa) (ft)Maximum Depth (dmbkf) (ft)Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area (Abkf) (ft2)Drainage Area (mi2)Width / Depth Ratio (Wbkf / Dbkf)Bankfull Width (Wbkf) (ft)Bankfull Mean Depth (Dbkf) (ft)Stream Type (Rosgen)Existing ChannelT1 Reaches3 and 5T1 Reach 1 Restored Reaches T3 Reach 3T1 Reach 2Stable Design RatiosStable Design RatiosStable Design Ratios
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
GeC2
GeC2
GkD
ChA
7a6b
6a
5a
4a
3b
3a
2c2b
2a 1b
1a
GeC2
ChAGkD
GeB2
GkD
W
W
GkD
NaB
W
PsB
GkD
NC Center for Geographic Information & Anaylsis
!Soil Boring Locations
Project Easement (18.68 ac)
NRCS Soils
Mitigation Plan November 14, 2019 Hip Bone Creek Restoration SiteDMS Project Number 100059
±0 400200
Feet
SOIL BORINGSHIP BONE CREEK RESTORATION SITECHATHAM COUNTY, NC
Image Source: SSURGO Soils for Chatham County, NRCS
Soils Key:
ChA: Chewacla and Wehadkee soils
CkC: Cid silt loam
CmB: Cid-Lignum complex
GaC: Georgeville silt loam
GeB2, GeC2: Georgeville silty clay loam
GkD, GkE: Georgeville-Badin comples
NaB: Nanford-Badin complex
PsB: Pittsboro-Iredell complex
W: Water
KC I
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAROIINA, PA
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Client:
KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A.
Project:
Hip Bone Creek
County:
Chatham
Location:
865 Carter -Brooks Road
Soil Series:
Wehadkee
Soil Classification:
AWT: 24"
Elevation:
Date: February 6, 2018
Project #: 161803280P
State: NC
Site/Lot: Boring # la
Fine -loamy, mixed , active, thennic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
SHWT: 6-12" Slope: 0-2% Aspect:
Drainage: Poorly drained Permeability: Moderate
Vegetation: Pasture
Borings terminated at 36 Inches
HORIZON
DEPTH (IN)
MATRIX
MOTTLES
TEXTURE
STRUCTURE
CONSISTENCE
BOUNDARY
NOTES
A
0-6
1OYR 4/3
1
I fgr
mfr
cs
Btl
6-11
1 OYR 511
10YR 4/3c2f
I
1 fsbk
mfr
cw
20% redox
10YR 4/6c2d
2%redox
1 OYR 2/2c2f
15% redox
Bt2
11-24
10YR5/2
1OYR 4/6cld
1
Ifsbk
mfr
v
10%redox
10YR2/2clf
2% redox
Bt3
24-36
1 OYR 4/1
7.5YR 4/6f1 d
cl
I fsbk
mfr
COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 2/6/201

KC I
ASSOCIATES OF
NOMB CAROLINA, PA
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Client:
KCI Associates o`North Carolina, P.A.
Project:
Hip Bone Creek
County:
Chatham
Location:
865 Carter -Brooks Road
Soil Series:
Wehadkee
Soil Classification:
AWT: 7"
Elevation:
Vegetation: Pasture
Borings terminated at
Date: February 6, 2018
Project#: 161803280P
State: NC
Site/Lot: Boring # lb
Pine -loamy, mixed , active, thennic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-2% Aspect:
Drainage: Poorly drained Permeability: Moderate
13 Inches
COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 2/6/2018

KC I
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAROUNA, PA
Client: KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A.
Project: Hip Bone Creek
County: Chatham
Location: 865 Carter -Brooks Road
Soil Series: Wehad
Soil Classification:
AWT: surface
Elevation:
Vegetation: Pasture
Borings terminated at
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Date: February 6, 2018
Project #: 161803280P
State: NC
Site/Lot: Boring # 2a
Fine -loamy, mixed , active, thermic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
SAWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-2% Aspect:
Drainage: Poorly drained Permeability: Moderate
30 Inches
COMMENTS:
,,too SOIL
DESCRIBED BY: SFS, KO
fi N
a� ti
NORTH G
DATE: 2/6/2018

mwmmmmr4b�
mmmwdb�
K C��
ASSOCIATES Of SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
NORTH CAROI.INA, PA
Client: KCl Associates of North Carolina, P.A.
Date: February 6, 2018
Project: Hip Bone Creek
Project #: 161803280P
County: Chatham
State: NC
Location: 865 Carter -Brooks Road
Site/Lot: Boring # 2b
Soil Series: Wehadkee
Soil Classification: Fine -loamy, mixed , active, thennic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
AWT: surface SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-2%
Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage: Poorly drained
Permeability: Moderate
Vegetation: Pasture
Borings terminated at 24 Inches
redox 40%, concretions in matrix
COMMENTS:
10 SOIL
F. l�
DESCRIBED BY: SFS, KO S DATE: 2/6/2018
40;& i GP

KC I
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAROLINA, PA
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Client: KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A. Date: February 6, 2018
Project: Hip Bone Creek Project #: .161803280P
County: Chatham State: NC
Location: 865 Carter -Brooks Road Site/Lot: Boring # 2c
Soil Series: Wehadkee
Soil Classification:
AWT: surface
Elevation:
Vegetation: Pasture
Borings terminated at
Fine -loamy, mixed, active, thennic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-2% Aspect:
Drainage: Poorly drained Permeability: Moderate
30 Inches
COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 2/6/2018

mw-*�
KC I
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAROLE11k PA
Client: KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A.
Project: Hip Bone Creek
County: Chatham
Location: 865 Carter -Brooks Road
Soil Series: Wehadkee
Soil Classification:
AWT: surface
Elevation:
Vegetation: Pasture
Borings terminated at
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Date: February 6, 2018
Project #: 161803280P
State: NC
Site/Lot: Boring # 3a
Fine -loamy, mixed , active, thermic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-2% Aspect:
Drainage: Poorly drained Permeability: Moderate
36 Inches
HORIZON
DEPTH (IN)
MATRIX
MOTTLES
TEXTURE
STRUCTURE
CONSISTENCE
BOUNDARY
NOTES
A
0-6
5YR5/2
2.5YR 4/6mId
I
Ifsbk
mfr
cs
redox ore linings and ed surfaces
Btl
6-12
10YR4/2
1
massive
mfi
ew
hoofcom action
Bt2
12-15
10YR4/1
7.5YR4/4fld
I
:passive
mfr
cw
orelinings
Bt3
15-24
2.5YR4/4
IOYR4/lfl
cl
Ifsbk
mfr
gw
Cg
24-36
10YR4/1
1 OYR5/4c2d
scl
massive
mfr
20% mottles
COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 2/6/2018

KCI
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAROUNA, PA
Client: KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A.
Project: Hip Bone Creek
County: Chatham
Location: 865 Carter -Brooks Road
Soil Series: Wehadkee
Soil Classification:
AWT: surface
Elevation:
Vegetation: Pasture
Borings terminated at
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Date: February 6, 2018
Project #: 161803280P
State: NC
Site/Lot: Boring # 3b
Fine -loamy, mixed , active, thennic Fluvaquenlic Endoaquepts
SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-2% Aspect:
Drainage: Poorly drained Permeability: Moderate
30 Inches
COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 2/6/2018

EMMMMME"b�
MMEEMW46�
mmmwla�
mmmmmm*-�
mmwmmm��
KC I
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAROUNA, PA
Client: KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A.
Project: Hip Bone Creek
County: Chatham
Location: 865 Carter -Brooks Road
Soil Series: Wehadkee
Soil Classification:
AWT: 8"
Elevation:
Vegetation: Pasture
Borings terminated at
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Date: February 6, 2018
Project #: 161803280P
State: NC
Site/Lot: Boring # 4a
Fine -loamy, mixed , active, thennic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-2% Aspect:
Drainage: Poorly drained Permeability: Moderate
45 Inches
HORIZON
DEPTHQN)
MATRIX
MOTTLES
CONSISTENCE
BOUNDARY
NOTES
A
0-4
10YR5/2
5YR4/4c2
!TE7XTURESTRUCTURE
1 f
mfr
cs
redox- ore linin s, ed surfaces
Btl
4-7
10YR5/2
5YR3/4c2
Ifsbk
mfr
cw
redox edsurfaces
10YR2/1c2f
Bt2
7-14
10YRS/I
5YR3/2m3
Ifsbk
mfr
cw
more than 30% pore linings, ped surfaces
Bt3
14-28
10YR5/1
5YR4/4c2p
cl
Ifsbk
mfr
9w
10%redox
C 1
28-36
1OYR4/1
]OYR2/lmld
Sc
massive
mfi
10YR5/6c2d
C 2
36-45
5/10B
IOYR4/4f2p
cl
massive
mfr
COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 2/6/2018

EMEWMMMW-Qw�
mmmmw4h�
mmmmwb�
mnwmmmdb�
mmmmmm,*�
KCI
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAROUNA, PA
Client: KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A.
Project: Hip Bone Creek
County: Chatham
Location: 865 Carter -Brooks Road
Soil Series: Wehadkee Variant
Soil Classification:
AWT: 2"
Elevation:
Vegetation: Pasture
Borings terminated at
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Date: February 6, 2018
Project #: 161803280P
State: NC
Site/Lot: Boring # 5a
Fine -loamy, mixed , active, thermic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-2% Aspect:
Drainage: Poorly drained Permeability: Moderate
38 Inches
HORIZON
DEPTH (IN)
MATRIX
MOTTLES
TEXTURE
STRUCTURE
CONSISTENCE
BOUNDARY
NOTES
A
0-3
10YR4/3
10YR5/2c2f
l
1 fgr
mfr
cs
20% redox, linings and ped surface
Btl
5YR3/4c2
mfr
cw
Dt2
3-7
10YR4/2
5YR3/4c2p
1
lfsbk
mfr
cw
pore linings and ped surfaces
Bt3
7-36
10YR4/1
10YR5/3
1
]msbk
mfr
9IN
depletiom
Bt4
36-38
10YR4/1
7.5YR5/8f2d
1
lmsbk
mfr
Gravelly, Auger Refusal
5YR4/4c3p
1
1 msbk
COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 2/6/2018

KT
ASSOCIATES of
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
NORTH CAROLUI A, PA
Client: KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A.
Date: February 6, 2018
Project: Hip Bone Creek
Project #: 161803280P
County: Chatham
State: NC
Location: 865 Carter -Brooks Road
Site/Lot: Boring # 6a
Soil Series: Wehadkee Variant
Soil Classification:
AWT: 10"
Elevation:
Vegetation: Pasture
Borings terminated at
Fine -loamy, mixed , active, they tic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-2% Aspect:
Drainage: Poorly drained Permeability: Moderate
30 Inches
HORIZON
DEPTH (IN)
MATRIX
MOTTLES
TEXTURE
STRUCTURE
CONSISTENCE
BOUNDARY
NOTES
A
0-2
i OYR 5/3
10YR5/2c2f
1
I fgr
mfr
cs
Btl
2-6
1 OYR 5/3
5YR4/4c2p
l
mfr
ew
redox- ore lirin s, ped surfaces
Bt2
6-9
1OYR 5/3
5YR4/3c2p
1
I fsbk
redox- ore linings, ped surfaces
Bt3
9-14
10YR4/1
5YR4/3c2p
1
I fsbk
mfr
aw
redox pore linings, ped surfaces
Bt4
14-30
1OYR4/1
5YR4/3c2p
el
Ifsbk
mfr
20%redox pore linings, ped surfaces
COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 2/6/2018

KCI
ASSOCIATES OF
NORTH CAROLINA, PA
Client:
Project:
County:
SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Date: February 6, 2018
Project #: 161803280P
State: NC
Location: 865 Carter -Brooks Road Site/Lot: Boring # 6b
Soil Series: Wehadkee Variant
Soil Classification: Fine -loamy, mixed , active, thennic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
AWT: 13" SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-2% Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage: Poorly drained Permeability: Moderate
Vegetation: Pasture
KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A.
Hip Bone Creek
Chatham
Borings terminated at 20 Inches
1
dox pore finings, . , surfaces
COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 2/6/2018

KCI
ASSOCIATES of SOIL PROFILE DESCRIPTION
NORTH CAROUNA PA
Client: KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A. Date: February 6, 2018
Project: Hip Bone Creek Project #: 161803280P
County: Chatham State: NC
Location: 865 Carter -Brooks Road Site/Lot: Boring # 7a
Soil Series: Wehadkee Variant
Soil Classification: Fine -loamy, mixed , active, thermic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
AWT: surface SHWT: 0-12" Slope: 0-2% Aspect:
Elevation: Drainage: Poorly drained Permeability: Moderate
Vegetation: Pasture
Borings terminated at 36 Inches
COMMENTS:
DESCRIBED BY:
DATE: 2/6/2018

Project:Hip Bone Creek
DMS Project ID: 100059
Wetland Component: Riparian Wetlands
Growing Season: April 2 through November 5 (217 days)
Units Feet
Gauge Type Groundwater
Gauge ID : 1 Gauge ID: 2 Gauge ID: 3
Offset: 0 Offset: 0 Offset: 0
Date
Depth below
surface
Depth below
surface
Depth below
surface
4/4/2019 18:00 1.10 0.84 0.71
4/5/2019 6:00 1.03 0.60 0.55
4/5/2019 18:00 0.85 0.25 0.14
4/6/2019 6:00 0.88 0.24 0.17
4/6/2019 18:00 0.98 0.22 0.24
4/7/2019 6:00 0.97 0.22 0.30
4/7/2019 18:00 0.98 0.22 0.37
4/8/2019 6:00 0.95 0.23 0.34
4/8/2019 18:00 0.79 0.27 0.12
4/9/2019 6:00 0.81 0.24 0.15
4/9/2019 18:00 0.83 0.24 0.19
4/10/2019 6:00 0.88 0.24 0.19
4/10/2019 18:00 1.00 0.13 0.49
4/11/2019 6:00 0.89 0.14 0.41
4/11/2019 18:00 1.00 0.15 0.81
4/12/2019 6:00 0.92 0.36 0.56
4/12/2019 18:00 0.75 0.27 0.13
4/13/2019 6:00 0.60 0.40 0.02
4/13/2019 18:00 0.77 0.23 0.17
4/14/2019 6:00 0.78 0.24 0.18
4/14/2019 18:00 1.05 0.23 0.18
4/15/2019 6:00 1.00 0.25 0.16
4/15/2019 18:00 1.17 0.19 0.40
4/16/2019 6:00 1.06 0.23 0.39
4/16/2019 18:00 1.20 0.06 0.83
4/17/2019 6:00 1.09 0.08 0.57
4/17/2019 18:00 1.20 0.45 1.06
4/18/2019 6:00 1.12 0.58 0.66
4/18/2019 18:00 1.30 1.02 1.25
4/19/2019 6:00 1.42 1.32 0.78
4/19/2019 18:00 1.25 0.29 0.18
4/20/2019 6:00 1.27 0.31 0.22
4/20/2019 18:00 1.32 0.31 0.25
4/21/2019 6:00 1.37 0.31 0.22
4/21/2019 18:00 1.44 0.34 0.35
4/22/2019 6:00 1.39 0.31 0.34
4/22/2019 18:00 1.51 0.45 0.69
4/23/2019 6:00 1.39 0.45 0.50
4/23/2019 18:00 1.53 0.79 1.06
4/24/2019 6:00 1.41 0.96 0.67
4/24/2019 18:00 1.54 1.19 1.29
4/25/2019 6:00 1.41 1.25 0.78
4/25/2019 18:00 1.48 1.33 1.05
4/26/2019 6:00 1.42 1.35 0.65
4/26/2019 18:00 1.30 1.24 0.32
4/27/2019 6:00 1.44 0.33 0.29
4/27/2019 18:00 1.58 0.57 0.68
4/28/2019 6:00 1.46 0.75 0.53
4/28/2019 18:00 1.64 1.02 1.10
4/29/2019 6:00 1.46 1.14 0.79
4/29/2019 18:00 1.26 0.76 1.23
4/30/2019 6:00 1.15 0.82 0.82
4/30/2019 18:00 1.34 0.91 2.04
5/1/2019 6:00 1.20 0.93 1.58
5/1/2019 18:00 1.40 1.01 2.13
5/2/2019 6:00 1.23 1.03 1.67
5/2/2019 18:00 1.48 1.08 2.20
5/3/2019 6:00 1.27 1.10 1.76
5/3/2019 18:00 1.43 1.14 2.13
5/4/2019 6:00 1.29 1.17 1.73
5/4/2019 18:00 2.36 1.19 2.15
5/5/2019 6:00 1.82 0.20 1.99
5/5/2019 18:00 1.81 0.18 2.00
5/6/2019 6:00 1.89 0.20 2.01
5/6/2019 18:00 2.13 0.07 2.23
5/7/2019 6:00 2.03 0.05 1.49
5/7/2019 18:00 2.26 0.20 1.92
5/8/2019 6:00 2.11 0.34 1.63
5/8/2019 18:00 2.38 0.53 2.29
5/9/2019 6:00 2.21 0.59 1.82
5/9/2019 18:00 2.30 0.72 2.31
5/10/2019 6:00 2.10 0.80 1.96
5/10/2019 18:00 2.53 0.90 2.27
5/11/2019 6:00 2.36 0.94 1.95
5/11/2019 18:00 1.84 0.75 1.27
5/12/2019 6:00 2.73 0.20 1.15
5/12/2019 18:00 2.73 0.16 1.22
5/13/2019 6:00 2.74 0.18 1.20
5/13/2019 18:00 2.75 0.16 1.22
5/14/2019 6:00 2.78 0.22 1.17
5/14/2019 18:00 2.75 0.06 1.47
5/15/2019 6:00 2.80 0.06 1.46
5/15/2019 18:00 2.74 0.30 2.08
5/16/2019 6:00 2.80 0.58 1.89
5/16/2019 18:00 2.75 0.64 2.32
5/17/2019 6:00 2.78 0.66 2.04
5/17/2019 18:00 2.75 0.82 2.45
5/18/2019 6:00 2.78 0.86 2.21
5/18/2019 18:00 2.74 0.97 2.58
5/19/2019 6:00 2.77 1.00 2.21
5/19/2019 18:00 2.74 1.08 2.51
5/20/2019 6:00 2.75 1.10 2.74
5/20/2019 18:00 2.74 1.16 2.91
5/21/2019 6:00 2.78 1.19 2.83
5/21/2019 18:00 2.76 1.27 3.02
5/22/2019 6:00 2.76 1.26 2.92
5/22/2019 18:00 2.74 1.32 3.01
5/23/2019 6:00 2.75 1.31 2.96
5/23/2019 18:00 2.74 1.37 3.03
5/24/2019 6:00 2.76 1.36 2.94
5/24/2019 18:00 2.53 1.40 2.26
5/25/2019 6:00 2.41 1.39 2.23
5/25/2019 18:00 2.59 1.43 2.32
5/26/2019 6:00 1.44 0.17 1.90
5/26/2019 18:00 1.91 0.30 1.73
5/27/2019 6:00 1.83 0.50 1.64
5/27/2019 18:00 2.26 0.70 1.87
5/28/2019 6:00 2.13 0.76 1.88
5/28/2019 18:00 2.48 0.87 2.09
5/29/2019 6:00 2.40 0.90 2.12
5/29/2019 18:00 2.60 1.01 2.31
5/30/2019 6:00 2.55 1.03 2.32
5/30/2019 18:00 2.64 1.12 2.42
5/31/2019 6:00 2.61 1.14 2.42
5/31/2019 18:00 2.66 1.21 2.48
6/1/2019 6:00 2.55 1.21 2.44
6/1/2019 18:00 2.63 1.28 2.50
6/2/2019 6:00 2.64 1.27 2.45
6/2/2019 18:00 2.71 1.34 2.54
6/3/2019 6:00 2.69 1.33 2.52
6/3/2019 18:00 2.75 1.40 2.60
6/4/2019 6:00 2.74 1.40 2.58
6/4/2019 18:00 2.79 1.48 2.66
6/5/2019 6:00 2.78 1.48 2.66
6/5/2019 18:00 2.80 1.51 2.70
6/6/2019 6:00 2.77 1.50 2.66
6/6/2019 18:00 2.78 1.53 2.70
6/7/2019 6:00 2.76 1.52 2.69
6/7/2019 18:00 2.71 1.41 2.66
6/8/2019 6:00 2.38 0.20 2.56
6/8/2019 18:00 2.22 0.10 2.38
6/9/2019 6:00 1.24 0.21 1.47
6/9/2019 18:00 1.41 0.18 1.07
6/10/2019 6:00 1.22 0.20 0.66
6/10/2019 18:00 1.65 0.06 1.15
6/11/2019 6:00 0.91 0.21 0.25
6/11/2019 18:00 1.35 0.03 0.63
6/12/2019 6:00 1.25 0.07 0.65
6/12/2019 18:00 1.25 0.14 0.70
6/13/2019 6:00 0.88 0.22 0.21
6/13/2019 18:00 1.14 0.15 0.41
6/14/2019 6:00 1.14 0.13 0.44
6/14/2019 18:00 1.56 0.25 1.09
6/15/2019 6:00 1.40 0.33 1.01
6/15/2019 18:00 1.82 0.59 1.50
6/16/2019 6:00 1.60 0.66 1.40
6/16/2019 18:00 2.06 0.80 1.70
6/17/2019 6:00 1.87 0.83 1.64
6/17/2019 18:00 2.18 0.93 1.85
6/18/2019 6:00 2.03 0.95 1.81
6/18/2019 18:00 2.29 1.02 1.95
6/19/2019 6:00 1.81 1.04 1.85
6/19/2019 18:00 2.02 1.09 1.84
6/20/2019 6:00 1.99 1.10 1.80
6/20/2019 18:00 1.36 0.26 1.55
6/21/2019 6:00 1.24 0.17 0.63
6/21/2019 18:00 1.70 0.19 1.29
6/22/2019 6:00 1.54 0.34 1.23
6/22/2019 18:00 1.84 0.62 1.52
6/23/2019 6:00 1.79 0.75 1.48
6/23/2019 18:00 2.00 0.86 1.68
6/24/2019 6:00 1.90 0.88 1.67
0.00.51.01.52.02.53.0-4-3-2-1012341-Jan-19
10-Jan-19
19-Jan-19
28-Jan-19
6-Feb-19
15-Feb-19
24-Feb-19
5-Mar-19
14-Mar-19
23-Mar-19
1-Apr-19
10-Apr-19
19-Apr-19
28-Apr-19
7-May-19
16-May-19
25-May-19
3-Jun-19
12-Jun-19
21-Jun-19
30-Jun-19
9-Jul-19
18-Jul-19
27-Jul-19
5-Aug-19
14-Aug-19
23-Aug-19
1-Sep-19
10-Sep-19
19-Sep-19
28-Sep-19
7-Oct-19
16-Oct-19
25-Oct-19
3-Nov-19
12-Nov-1921-Nov-1930-Nov-199-Dec-1918-Dec-1927-Dec-19Rainfall (in)Relative Groundwater Elevation (ft)DateHip Bone Creek Pre-ConstructionHydrographWetland Gauge 1RainfallGroundwater DepthGround Surface12 Inches Below Ground SurfaceSensor DepthBegin Growing SeasonApril 212" Below SurfaceSensor DepthGround SurfaceEnd Growing SeasonNovember 5
0.00.51.01.52.02.53.0-4-3-2-1012341-Jan-19
10-Jan-19
19-Jan-19
28-Jan-19
6-Feb-19
15-Feb-19
24-Feb-19
5-Mar-19
14-Mar-19
23-Mar-19
1-Apr-19
10-Apr-19
19-Apr-19
28-Apr-19
7-May-19
16-May-19
25-May-19
3-Jun-19
12-Jun-19
21-Jun-19
30-Jun-19
9-Jul-19
18-Jul-19
27-Jul-19
5-Aug-19
14-Aug-19
23-Aug-19
1-Sep-19
10-Sep-19
19-Sep-19
28-Sep-19
7-Oct-19
16-Oct-19
25-Oct-19
3-Nov-19
12-Nov-1921-Nov-1930-Nov-199-Dec-1918-Dec-1927-Dec-19Rainfall (in)Relative Groundwater Elevation (ft)DateHip Bone Creek Pre-ConstructionHydrographWetland Gauge 2RainfallGroundwater DepthGround Surface12 Inches Below Ground SurfaceSensor DepthBegin Growing SeasonApril 212" Below SurfaceSensor DepthGround SurfaceEnd Growing SeasonNovember 5
0.00.51.01.52.02.53.0-4-3-2-1012341-Jan-19
10-Jan-19
19-Jan-19
28-Jan-19
6-Feb-19
15-Feb-19
24-Feb-19
5-Mar-19
14-Mar-19
23-Mar-19
1-Apr-19
10-Apr-19
19-Apr-19
28-Apr-19
7-May-19
16-May-19
25-May-19
3-Jun-19
12-Jun-19
21-Jun-19
30-Jun-19
9-Jul-19
18-Jul-19
27-Jul-19
5-Aug-19
14-Aug-19
23-Aug-19
1-Sep-19
10-Sep-19
19-Sep-19
28-Sep-19
7-Oct-19
16-Oct-19
25-Oct-19
3-Nov-19
12-Nov-1921-Nov-1930-Nov-199-Dec-1918-Dec-1927-Dec-19Rainfall (in)Relative Groundwater Elevation (ft)DateHip Bone Creek Pre-ConstructionHydrographWetland Gauge 3 RainfallGroundwater DepthGround Surface12 Inches Below Ground SurfaceSensor DepthBegin Growing SeasonApril 212" Below SurfaceSensor DepthGround SurfaceEnd Growing SeasonNovember 5

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059

12.3 Site Protection Instrument 

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059

LINE TABLE
Line #
Length
Direction
L1
152.71'
N 36'05'49" W
L2
60.15'
S 57'54'51" W
L3
63.12'
S 51'02'47" W
L4
99.50'
S 10*35'32" E
L5
137.43'
S 68'54'01" W
L6
190.11'
N 10*48'47" W
L7
99.93'
S 53*15'07" W
L8
96.89'
S 12'30'42" E
L9
131.00'
S 76'56'45" W
L10
168.05'
S 37'28'40" W
L11
153.99'
S 57'32'33" W
L12
131.36'
N 28*13'55" W
L13
112.15'
N 52'41'32" E
L14
167.50'
N 26'28'00" E
L15
63.29'
N 53*34'41" W
L16
56.00'
N 36'25'19" E
1
L17
51.00'
S 53'34'41" E
FOUND IRON PIPE
N: 703657.32
E.• 1879005.03
(NAD 8312011)
0
N
N
LO
3
�O
00
NGS MON "HILLTOP"
(EZ2838)
N: 698478.05
E: 1787259.80
CSF.• 0.99987640
NIF
EMIL Y S. GROSS &
ELIZABETH S. MORIN
PARCEL ID: 00146JO
DB 07E, PG 76
LINE TABLE
Line #
Length
Direction
L18
183.41'
N 41'27'45" E
L19
83.90'
S 56'50'40" E
L20
150.94'
N 49'40'05" E
L21
146.12'
S 36'05'49" E
L22
60.05'
N 51'37'31" E
L23
31.48'
S 38*44'11" E
L24
96.88'
S 31*27'15" W
L25
254.78'
S 24'56'43" E
L26
122.23'
S 72*1541" W
L27
109.42'
N 26'29'32" W
L28
193.24'
N 11'31'23" W
L29
139.97'
N 19'52'08" W
L30
327.28'
N 44*18'01" W
L31
251.96'
N 34'33'40" W
L33
30.00'
N 21'05'59" W
L34
30.06'
S 21-14'55" E
L35
78.70'
S 20-34'26" E
R
� / � IF�PRGPFt116 0
\ R� � Q • p0 �p'S
NIF
JOSEPH RAY JONES
PARCEL
ID: 0014900
-A
DB 663, PG 619
PB 30, PG 65
O
V '
NIF
JOSEPH RAY JONES
PARCEL ID: 0014900\
DB 663, PG 619
PB 30, PG 65
N
O
CD
LINE TABLE
Line #
Length
Direction
L36
103.56'
S 11'54'15" E
L37
122.00'
S 78'05'45" W
L38
169.32'
N 15*46'18" W
L39
122.19'
N 72'1541" E
L40
30.06'
N 21*19'18" W
L41
30.00'
S 13'09'48" E
L42
126.75'
S 111510" W
L43
120.33'
S 33'00'51" E
L44
147.52'
S 83'28'24" W
L45
128.89'
N 0'29'47" W
L46
157.84'
N 11'34'09" W
L47
131.00'
N 76-56'45" E
L48
30.00'
N 13-09'48" W
LEGEND
• EXISTING PK NAIL
O• EXISTING IRON
QO 30"*5/8" REBAR SET W/ 3.25" ALUMINUM
CAP WITH STATE SEAL
NEW CONSERVATION &AILY S. GgEMjF
ROSS &
ELIZABETH S. MORIN
EXISTING WETLANDEPARCEL ID: 0014630
DB 07E, PG 76
EXISTING DITCH
BOUNDARY LINE SURVEYED
--------- LINE NOT SURVEYED
N ;77'4426" W #31 L17
868• 41. L16
DTI E)
#30 �7
CONSERVATION `S
EASEMENT #2
295,724 sq.ft.
6.79 ACRES v
#32
POB
CE#2
�O
4,79
#16
#2 V1#1 7
^N
iCO
#15
C
L33��
Y
to O #54
(0 j ^�ry
2 N
/
#27 co
#18
U)
/ #22 \,0.
#26
\
#25
/
N N0
#19
w
#23
1 �
#20
L�
L12
#21 � L41
#24
Js0
L48 �
N
#ss
N0�
CE#5 r U,
#�8 1
#61
W /
N
00
�r� J
#62
0
NIF
z o
JOSEPH RAY JONES
a #67 o
PARCEL ID: 0014903
r7
DB 663, PG 619
PB 2$ PG 7
\ - W
NN,
`p 00
LO
U
Q
Ln
\.
# #63
1. <Q
1-
5 L44
a?
a
FD IRON PIPE POC
N: 704325.75
E. 1880842.14
(NAD 83/2011)
MONUMENT TABLE
Corner #
Northing
Easting
5
704,250.72
1,880,885.07
6
704,117.65
1,880,961.20
7
703,590.83
1,880,371.72
8
703,714.23
1,880,281.75
9
703,879.47
1,880,374.58
Q. #5 POB
CE#1
#10 #6
#9
/ �00•
/ A\
Z ^ / C-)
/ CONSERVATION
/
/ #7
#11
EASEMENT # 1
136,541 sq.ft.
3.13 ACRES
i #12
3
I
n -0
I �
#13
4. #14 NIF
L23 JOSEPH RAY JONES
PARCEL ID: 0014903
#36 POB PIN. 8780 00 80 4795
85 CE#3 DB 663, PG 619
1 s `S0 2055 PB 28, PG 7
S�3
\ #37
s
#53
N 6 134. 87 ' 9 .�
8
#52 \ ��
\ 90' CONSERVATION
#38 EASEMENT #3
253,854 sq.ft.
5.83 ACRES
# 1.
#41 F
50 150.
�. N N 9i06-
CONSERVATION
EASEMENT #5
105,783 sq. ft.
2.43 ACRES
#64
#46
L40
REVIEW OFFICER CERTIFICATE
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, COUNTY OF CHATHAM
I, REVIEW OFFICER
OF CHATHAM COUNTY, CERTIFY THAT THE MAP
OR PLAT WHICH THIS CERTIFICATION IS AFFIXED
MEETS ALL STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS FOR
RECORDING.
BY:
#58
REVIEW OFFICER, DATE
TITLE:
� 1
L3-7
MONUMENT TABLE
Corner #
Northing
Easting
10
704,086.23
1,880,707.57
11
703, 558.89
1, 880, 320.76
12
703,519.20
1,880,271.67
13
703,284.14
1,880,251.76
14
703,186.34
1,880,270.05
15
703,136.87
1,880,141.83
16
703,323.60
1,880,106.17
17
703,263.81
1,880,026.10
18
702,935.72
1,879,869.10
19
702,692.17
1,879,979.36
20
702,597.57
1,880,000.35
21
702, 567.98
1, 879, 872.74
22
702,799.86
1,879,783.90
23
702,666.50
1,879,681.65
24
702,583.86
1,879,551.72
25
1 702,699.59
1,879,489.58
26
702,767.56
1,879,578.78
27
702,956.14
1,879,734.81
28
703,285.40
1,879,829.91
29
703,435.34
1,879,904.56
30
703,472.92
1,879,853.63
s
1pi0. NIF
Z61- TIMOTHY H. CRAIG
Q, & WENONAH CRAIG
PARCEL ID: 0011676
DB 655, PG 719
PB 90, PG 373
.i90
Q
9L
O
J
#39
v
MONUMENT TABLE
Corner #
Northing
Easting
31
703, 517.98
1, 879, 886.88
32
703,487.70
1,879,927.92
33
703,625.14
1,880,049.36
34
703,579.26
1,880,119.60
35
703,676.95
1,880,234.67
36
703,161.78
1,880,289.75
37
703,030.07
1,880,450.10
38
702,726.71
1,880,744.75
39
702,433.06
1,881,224.82
40
702,350.41
1,881,174.26
41
702, 557.61
1, 880, 835.54
42
702,308.30
1,880,925.14
43
702,099.59
1,880,931.87
45
701,868.57
1,881,039.33
46
701,831.33
1,880,922.91
47
701,929.27
1,880,874.10
48
702,118.61
1,880,835.49
49
702,410.17
1,880,789.64
50
702,487.15
1,880,697.56
51
702, 618.79
1, 880, 649.99
52
702,853.02
1,880,421.41
53
702,901.38
1,880,295.57
54
703,108.88
1,880,152.63
55
701,840.56
1,881,050.22
56
701,766.88
1,881,077.88
57
701,665.55
1,881,099.24
58
701,640.39
1,880,979.86
59
701,803.33
1,880,933.84
60
702,568.36
1,880,007.19
61
702, 374.16
1, 880, 082.59
62
702,249.85
1,880,057.85
63
701,889.01
1,880,098.18
64
701,788.11
1,880,163.74
65
701,771.35
1,880,017.18
66
701,900.23
1,880,016.07
67
702,158.79
1,879,909.81
68
702,384.14
1,879,911.23
69
702,538.77
1,879,879.57
FOUND
IRON
BAR
VICINITY MAP
SCALE: 1" = 1 mile
SURVEYOR NOTES
1. THIS PLAT DOES NOT REPRESENT A BOUNDARY SURVEY OF THE
PARENT TRACT. THE PARENT TRACT BOUNDARIES ADJACENT TO
THIS EASEMENT ARE NOT CHANGED BY THIS PLAT. BOUNDARY
INFORMATION SHOWN HEREON WAS DERIVED FROM DEEDS AND MAPS
OF RECORD IN CHATHAM COUNTY AND MONUMENTATION FOUND IN
THE FIELD.
2. DISTANCES SHOWN ARE HORIZONTAL GROUND DISTANCES IN U.S.
SURVEY FEET UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
3. AREA COMPUTED BY COORDINATE METHOD.
4. THE BASIS OF THE MERIDIANS AND COORDINATES FOR THIS PLAT IS
THE NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM, NORTH
AMERICAN DATUM 1983 (NAD 83), BASED ON DIFFERENTIAL GPS
OBSERVATIONS PERFORMED IN JULY 2018.
5. DEED REFERENCES: AS SHOWN HEREON.
6. SUBJECT PROPERTY KNOWN AS PARCEL NUMBER: 0014903.
7. SUBJECT EASEMENT LIES WITHIN THE AREA DESIGNATED AS ZONE
"X", BASED ON FEDERAL FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP 3710877000J
AND 3710878000J, EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 2, 2007.
8. NO UNDERGROUND UTILITY LOCATING PERFORMED DURING THE
COURSE OF THIS SURVEY.
9. THE STATE PLANE COORDINATES FOR THIS PROJECT WERE
DETERMINED USING REAL TIME KINEMATIC GPS OBSERVATIONS (VRS)
TAKEN IN JULY 2018 BASED ON THE CORDS ID "NCJL" IN CHATHAM
COUNTY.
10. EXISTING FENCING ON SITE WILL BE REMOVED.
OWNER CERTIFICATION
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I AM THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY SHOWN
AND DESCRIBED HEREON, WHICH IS LOCATED IN THE SUBDIVISION
JURISDICTION OF THE COUNTY OF CHATHAM AND THAT I HEREBY ADOPT
THIS PLAN OF SUBDIVISION WITH MY FREE CONSENT AND ESTABLISH
MINIMUM SETBACK LINES AS NOTED.
JOSEPH RAY JONES
SURVEYOR CERTIFICATION
I, JAMES M. GELLENTHIN, CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAT WAS DRAWN UNDER
MY SUPERVISION FROM AN ACTUAL SURVEY MADE UNDER MY
SUPERVISION (DEED DESCRIPTION RECORDED IN BOOK 663, PAGE 619);
THAT THE BOUNDARIES SURVEYED AND NOT SURVEYED ARE CLEARLY
INDICATED AS DRAWN FROM INFORMATION FOUND IN REFERENCES SHOWN
HEREON; THAT THE RATIO OF PRECISION OR POSITIONAL ACCURACY AS
CALCULATED IS GREATER THAN 1:10,000; THAT THE SURVEY IS OF
ANOTHER CATEGORY, SUCH AS THE RECOMBINATION OF EXISTING
PARCELS, A COURT -ORDERED SURVEY, OR OTHER EXEMPTION OR
EXCEPTION TO THE DEFINITION OF SUBDIVISION; THAT THIS PLAT WAS
PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH G.S. 47-30 AS AMENDED. WITNESS MY
ORIGINAL SIGNATURE, REGISTRATION LICENSE NUMBER AND SEAL THIS
27TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019.
-----------------------------------
NORTH CAROLINA REGISTRATION NUMBER L-3860
JAMES M. GELLENTHIN
FINAL PLAT
#45 CONSERVATION EASEMENT
FOR
055 POB STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
<W CE#4 DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
#56 PROJECT NAME: HIP BONE CREEK
CA DIMS PROJECT #: 100059
#57 SPO FILE NO. 19-BM
CONSERVATION MATTHEWS TOWNSHIP, CHATHAM COUNTY
EASEMENT #4 NORTH CAROLINA
22,016 sq.ft. DATE: SCALE: SHEET:
0.51 ACRES AAAY ?4 'J(11Q 1 1" _ ?nn' 1 1 r
GRAPHIC SCALE KCI ASSOCIATES OF N.C.
200 0 100 200 400 ENGINEERS, SURVEYORS AND PLANNERS
KC 1 4505 FALLS OF NEUSE ROAD, FLOOR 4
ASSOCIATES OF RALEIGH, NC 27607
1 INCH = 200 FEET NORTH CAROLINA PHONE [phone] * FAX [phone]
C-0764

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059

12.4 Credit Release Schedule 

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059
All credit releases will be based on the total credit generated as reported in the final design plans unless 
otherwise documented and provided to the Interagency Review Team following construction. Under no 
circumstances shall any mitigation project be debited until the necessary DA authorization has been 
received for its construction or the District Engineer (DE) has otherwise provided written approval for the 
project in the case where no DA authorization is required for construction of the mitigation project. The 
DE, in consultation with the Interagency Review Team (IRT), will determine if performance standards have 
been satisfied sufficiently to meet the requirements of the release schedules below. In cases where some 
performance standards have not been met, credits may still be released depending on the specifics of the 
case. Monitoring may be required to restart or be extended, depending on the extent to which the site 
fails to meet the specified performance standard. The release of project credits will be subject to the 
criteria described as follows: 
Stream Credit Release Schedule 
Monitoring 
Year Credit Release Activity Interim 
Release 
Total 
Released 
0 Initial Allocation – see requirements below 30%  30% 
1 First year monitoring report demonstrates performance 
standards are being met 
10%  40% 
2 Second year monitoring report demonstrates performance 
standards are being met 
10%  50%  
3 Third year monitoring report demonstrates performance 
standards are being met 
10%  60%  
4 Fourth year monitoring report demonstrates performance 
standards are being met 
5%  65% (75%*) 
5 Fifth year monitoring report demonstrates performance 
standards are being met 
10%  75% (85%*) 
6 Sixth year monitoring report demonstrates performance 
standards are being met 
5%  80% (90%*) 
7 Seventh year monitoring report demonstrates performance standards are 
being met, and project has received close‐out approval from IRT 
10%  90% (100%*) 
*See Subsequent Credit Releases description below 

Wetland Credit Release Schedule 
Monitoring 
Year Credit Release Activity Interim 
Release 
Total 
Released 
0 Initial Allocation – see requirements below 30%  30% 
1 First year monitoring report demonstrates performance 
standards are being met 
10%  40% 
2 Second year monitoring report demonstrates performance 
standards are being met 
10%  50% 
3 Third year monitoring report demonstrates performance 
standards are being met 
15%  65% 
4 Fourth year monitoring report demonstrates performance 
standards are being met 
5%  70% 
5 Fifth year monitoring report demonstrates performance 
standards are being met 
15%  85% 
6 Sixth year monitoring report demonstrates performance 
standards are being met 
5%  90% 
7 Seventh year monitoring report demonstrates performance standards are 
being met, and project has received close‐out approval from IRT 
10%  100% 

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059
Initial Allocation of Released Credits 
The initial allocation of released credits, as specified in the mitigation plan can be released by the NCDMS 
without prior written approval of the DE upon satisfactory completion of the following activities: 
a. Approval of the final Mitigation Plan 
b. Recordation of the preservation mechanism, as well as a title opinion acceptable to the USACE 
covering the property 
c. Completion  of  project  construction  (the  initial  physical  and  biological  improvements  to  the 
mitigation site) pursuant to the mitigation plan; Per the NCDMS Instrument, construction means 
that a mitigation sit\e has been constructed in its entirety, to include planting, and an as‐built 
report has  been  produced. As‐built reports must be sealed by an engineer prior to project 
closeout, if appropriate but not prior to the initial allocation of released credits. 
d. Receipt of necessary DA permit authorization or written DA appr oval for projects where DA permit 
issuance is not required 

Subsequent Credit Releases 
All subsequent credit releases must be approved by the DE, in consultation with the IRT, based on a 
determination that required performance standards have been achieved. For stream project with a 7‐year 
monitoring period, a reserve of 10% of a site’s total stream credits shall be released after four bankfull 
events  have  occurred,  in  separate  years,  provided  the  channel  is  stable  and  all  other  performance 
standards are met. In the event that less than four bankfull events occur during the monitoring period, 
release of these reserve credits shall be at the discretion of the IRT. As projects approach milestones 
associated with credit release, the NCDMS will submit a request for credit release to the DE along with 
documentation substantiating achievement of criteria required for release to occur. This documentation 
will be included with the annual monitoring report.   

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059

12.5 Financial Assurance 

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059
Pursuant to Section IV H and Appendix III of the Division of Mitigation Service’s In‐Lieu Fee Instrument 
dated July 28, 2010, the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (formerly NCDENR) has 
provided the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District with a formal commitment to fund projects 
to satisfy mitigation requirements assumed by DMS. This commitment provides financial assurance for all 
mitigation projects implemented by the program. 

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059

12.6 DWR Stream Identification Forms, Wetland JD Forms, and NC SAM & WAM Forms 

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: Project/Site:Latitude:
Evaluator: County: Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
if • 19 or perennial if • 30*
Stream Determination (circle one)
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
Other
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =_________)Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1a.Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure: ex. riffle-pool, step-pool,
ripple-pool sequence 01 2 3
4. Particle size of stream substrate 0 1 2 3
5. Active/relict floodplain 0 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 1 2 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 2 3
8. Headcuts 0 1 2 3
9. Grade control 0 0.5 1 1.5
10. Natural valley 0 0.5 1 1.5
11. Second or greater order channel No = 0 Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = _________)
12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 2 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 0 1 2 3
14. Leaf litter 1.5 1 0.5 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles 0 0.5 1 1.5
17. Soil-based evidence of high water table?No = 0 Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = _________)
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3 2 1 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 3 2 1 0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)0123
21. Aquatic Mollusks 0 1 2 3
22. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5
24. Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Algae 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:
1/31/2018 Hip Bone Creek
T1
35.6792
-79.4041
23
Chatham
8
7.5
7.5
A. French
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: Project/Site:Latitude:
Evaluator: County: Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
if • 19 or perennial if • 30*
Stream Determination (circle one)
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
Other
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =_________)Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1a.Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure: ex. riffle-pool, step-pool,
ripple-pool sequence 01 2 3
4. Particle size of stream substrate 0 1 2 3
5. Active/relict floodplain 0 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 1 2 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 2 3
8. Headcuts 0 1 2 3
9. Grade control 0 0.5 1 1.5
10. Natural valley 0 0.5 1 1.5
11. Second or greater order channel No = 0 Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = _________)
12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 2 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 0 1 2 3
14. Leaf litter 1.5 1 0.5 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles 0 0.5 1 1.5
17. Soil-based evidence of high water table?No = 0 Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = _________)
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3 2 1 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 3 2 1 0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)0123
21. Aquatic Mollusks 0 1 2 3
22. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5
24. Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Algae 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:
5/9/18 Hip Bone Creek
T2
35.6083
-79.4052
19
Chatham
7
6.5
5.5
J. Sullivan
Many tadpoles, midges, and 2 backswimmers
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: Project/Site:Latitude:
Evaluator: County: Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
if • 19 or perennial if • 30*
Stream Determination (circle one)
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
Other
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =_________)Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1a.Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure: ex. riffle-pool, step-pool,
ripple-pool sequence 01 2 3
4. Particle size of stream substrate 0 1 2 3
5. Active/relict floodplain 0 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 1 2 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 2 3
8. Headcuts 0 1 2 3
9. Grade control 0 0.5 1 1.5
10. Natural valley 0 0.5 1 1.5
11. Second or greater order channel No = 0 Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = _________)
12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 2 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 0 1 2 3
14. Leaf litter 1.5 1 0.5 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles 0 0.5 1 1.5
17. Soil-based evidence of high water table?No = 0 Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = _________)
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3 2 1 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 3 2 1 0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)0123
21. Aquatic Mollusks 0 1 2 3
22. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5
24. Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Algae 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:
5/9/18 Hip Bone Creek 35.6811
-79.4031
19.5
Chatham
8
6.5
5
J. Sullivan
1 amphipod, midges
T3
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: <
-�-
Project/Site:;�
Latitude: �1
j
Evaluator:% qV
Count
Longitude: L[ ''
Total Points: '
Stream is at least intermittent
Atr"ea` m'Detgrmination (circle one)
Ephemeral I termittent Perennial
Other
e.g. Quad Name:
if >_ 19 or perennial if >_ 30*
r
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal
Absent
W ak
Moderate
Strong
1 a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1 }
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
��
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
i j
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1''
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1)
2
3
9. Grade control
0
.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0-51
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
artificial ditches are not rated; see f iscussions in manual
B.Hydrology (Subtotal= f;C• )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
(--A
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
�.�
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
i
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
h o2
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
(, O,,i
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
1
2`
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3)
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
is)
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
r 0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0'
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0•
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1. Other = l)
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 10
Project/Site: t •� } r (� �
Latitude: "I.)
Evaluator: V. 1V
� ��
County: C IV,
Longitude:
Total Points: /;
Stream is at least intermittent "� �
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other
if >_ 19 or perennial if >_ 30`
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0)
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
(�
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
2
3
9. Grade control
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
Vo _ 0
Yes = 3
artificial ditches are not rated; see dis ssions in manual �-
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = � )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
3
14. Leaf litter
1.
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0,
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Biology Subtotal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
Q
1
2
3
22. Fishy
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0.5
1 ,.: -,,
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL
= 1.5 Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
.....
Notes:
Sketch:

US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Surface Water (A1) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
High Water Table (A2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Saturation (A3) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (B1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (B3) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Other (Explain in Remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (B5) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Hip Bone Creek Chatham 5/9/18
KCI NC WAwet
J. Sullivan
Floodplain Concave 1%
P-136 35.6777 -79.4038 NAD83
PSSGeorgeville-Badin Complex
X
x
X
X
X
X
Cattle have access to floodplain
x
x
x
x
x
x x
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
VEGETATION (Four Strata) – Use scientific names of plants.Sampling Point:____________
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
WAwet
30
Acer rubrum 10 x FAC 4
5
80%
15
5
30
10
5 2
Ligustrum sinense
Acer rubrum
60
5
x
FAC
FACU
X
40
20 8
65
32.5 13
20
20
X
X
FACW
FACW
Juncus effusus
Carex sp.
Lonicera japonica 10 X FAC
10
5 2
X
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks

1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Dark Surface (S7) 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Black Histic (A3) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) (MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N, Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148) MLRA 136)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
WAwet
0-2
2-9
9-18+
10YR 4/3
10YR 5/3
10YR 5/1
100
90
90
10YR 5/6
7.5YR 5/6
10 C PL CL
L
CLPLC10
Oxidized rhizospeheres
Oxidized rhizospheres
X
X
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Surface Water (A1) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
High Water Table (A2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Saturation (A3) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (B1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (B3) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Other (Explain in Remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (B5) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Hip Bone Creek Chatham 5/9/18
WCwetNCKCI
J. Sullivan
Floodplain none 1%
P-136 35.6820 -79.4042 NAD83
Chewacla and Wehadkee soils PEM
X
X X
X
X
XX
Cattle pasture
X
X
X
X
X
X X
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
VEGETATION (Four Strata) – Use scientific names of plants.Sampling Point:____________
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
WCwet
30'
None
None
15'
1
1
100%
5'
Juncus effusus
Ranunculus sp.
Schedonorous arundinaceus
Trifollium repens
70
10
15
5
X FACW
NI
FACU
FACU
100
50 20
30'
None
X
Cattle are grazing in wetland
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks

1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Dark Surface (S7) 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Black Histic (A3) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) (MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N, Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148) MLRA 136)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
0-2
2-6
6-18+
10YR 5/3
10YR 5/2
7.5YR 4/6
10YR 5/3
90
80
90
10
7.5 YR 5/6
7.5 YR 5/6
10
20
C
C
PL
PL
CL
C
C
Oxidized rhizospheres
"
X
X
WCwet
Oxidized rhizospheres
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Surface Water (A1) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
High Water Table (A2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Saturation (A3) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (B1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (B3) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Other (Explain in Remarks) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (B5) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
WCup
5/9/18ChathamHip Bone Creek
KCI NC
J. Sullivan
terrace none 1%
P-136 35.6819 -79.4040 NAD83
Chewacla and Wehadkee Soils -
X
X X
X
X
X
X
Cattle pasture
X
X
X X
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
VEGETATION (Four Strata) – Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point:____________
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
WCup
0
1
0%
30
None
15
None
5
Schedonorus arundinaceus 95 x FACU
Ranunculus sp.5 NI
100
50 20
30
None
X
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks

1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Dark Surface (S7) 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Black Histic (A3) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) (MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N, Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148) MLRA 136)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
WCup
0-12
12-14
14-18+
10YR 4/6
10 YR 5/3
10 YR 5/5
100
90
100
7.5 YR 4/6 10 C PL
L
C
C
X
NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same prope rty, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the “Notes/Sketch” section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 2. Date of evaluation: 1/31/2018
3. Applicant/owner name: KCI 4. Assessor name/organization: J. Sullivan / KCI
5. County: Chatham 6. Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Meadow Creek 7. River basin: Cape Fear
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.6792 / -79.4041
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): T1 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 100
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 2 Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 3 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? Yes No
14. Feature type: Perennial flow Intermittent flow Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: Mountains (M) Piedmont (P) Inner Coastal Plain (I) Outer Coastal Plain (O)
16. Estimated geomorphic
19 valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream):
A B
(more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi2) Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi2) Size 4 (≥ 5 mi2)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
Section 10 water Classified Trout Waters Water Supply Watershed (I II III IV V)
Essential Fish Habitat Primary Nursery Area High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
Publicly owned property NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect Nutrient Sensitive Waters
Anadromous fish 303(d) List CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in “Notes/Sketch” section or attached? Yes No

1. Channel Water – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
A Water throughout assessment reach.
B No flow, water in pools only.
C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction – assessment reach metric
A At least 10% of assessment reach in-stream habitat or riffle-pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates , debris jams,
beaver dams).
B Not A
3. Feature Pattern – assessment reach metric
A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
B Not A
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile – assessment reach metric
A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability – assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down-cutting (head-cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip-rap).
A < 10% of channel unstable
B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction – streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
A A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
B B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down-cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access , disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
C C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors – assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in “Notes/Sketch”
section.
F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
I Other: (explain in “Notes/Sketch” section)
J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather – watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream – assessment reach metric
Yes No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In-stream Habitat Types – assessment reach metric
10a. Yes No Degraded in-stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in-stream hardening [for example, rip-rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent
vegetation
C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees)
D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
E Little or no habitat
F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
G Submerged aquatic vegetation
H Low-tide refugia (pools)
I Sand bottom
J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
K Little or no habitat

*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11a. Yes No Is assessment reach in a natural sand-bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
A Riffle-run section (evaluate 11c)
B Pool-glide section (evaluate 11d)
C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach – whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare
(R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) = > 10-40%, Abundant (A) = > 40-70%, Predominant (P) = > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
Bedrock/saprolite
Boulder (256 – 4096 mm)
Cobble (64 – 256 mm)
Gravel (2 – 64 mm)
Sand (.062 – 2 mm)
Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
Detritus
Artificial (rip-rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. Yes No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check for Tidal Marsh Streams Only
12. Aquatic Life – assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. Yes No Was an in-stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. No Water Other:
12b. Yes No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to “individuals” for Size 1 and 2 streams and “taxa” for Size 3 and 4 streams.
Adult frogs
Aquatic reptiles
Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
Beetles
Caddisfly larvae (T)
Asian clam (Corbicula)
Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
Dipterans
Mayfly larvae (E)
Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
Midges/mosquito larvae
Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
Other fish
Salamanders/tadpoles
Snails
Stonefly larvae (P)
Tipulid larvae
Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.
LB RB
A A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
B B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
C C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage – streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
A A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water ≥ 6 inches deep
B B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
C C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
Y Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
N N
16. Baseflow Contributors – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
C Obstruction passing flow during low-flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom-release dam, weir)
D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors – assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
B Obstruction not passing flow during low-flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
C Urban stream (≥ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting i n accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
F None of the above
18. Shading – assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider “leaf-on” condition.
A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
C Stream shading is gone or largely absent
19. Buffer Width – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider “vegetated buffer” and “wooded buffer” separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
A A A A ≥ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
B B B B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
C C C C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
D D D D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
E E E E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 (“Vegetated” Buffer Width).
LB RB
A A Mature forest
B B Non-mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
C C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
D D Maintained shrubs
E E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22:
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
A A A A A A Row crops
B B B B B B Maintained turf
C C C C C C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
D D D D D D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 (“Wooded” Buffer Width).
LB RB
A A Medium to high stem density
B B Low stem density
C C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
A A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
B B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
C C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contribute s to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
A A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
B B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
C C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proport ions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non-characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity – assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. Yes No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. No Water Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
A < 46 B 46 to < 67 C 67 to < 79 D 79 to < 230 E ≥ 230

Notes/Sketch:

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1

Stream Site Name Hip Bone Creek Restoration
Site Date of Assessment 1/31/2018
Stream Category Pb2 Assessor Name/Organization J. Sullivan / KCI

Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Intermittent

Function Class Rating Summary
USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology LOW LOW
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow LOW LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW LOW
(4) Floodplain Access MEDIUM MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer LOW LOW
(4) Microtopography NA NA
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM
(4) Channel Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM
(4) Sediment Transport HIGH HIGH
(4) Stream Geomorphology LOW LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA NA (2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA NA (2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA NA (3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA NA (3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA NA
(1) Water Quality LOW LOW
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation LOW LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration LOW LOW
(3) Thermoregulation LOW LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors YES YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance LOW NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA NA
(1) Habitat LOW LOW
(2) In-stream Habitat MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) Substrate HIGH HIGH
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) In-stream Habitat LOW LOW
(2) Stream-side Habitat LOW LOW
(3) Stream-side Habitat LOW LOW
(3) Thermoregulation LOW LOW
(2) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat
NA NA (3) Flow Restriction NA NA (3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA NA (4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA NA (4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA NA (3) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat
NA NA (2) Intertidal Zone
NA NA
Overall LOW LOW

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same prope rty, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the “Notes/Sketch” section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 2. Date of evaluation: 5/9/2018
3. Applicant/owner name: KCI 4. Assessor name/organization: J. Sullivan / KCI
5. County: Chatham 6. Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Meadow Creek 7. River basin: Cape Fear
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.6803 / -79.4052
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): T2 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 50
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 1 Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 4 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? Yes No
14. Feature type: Perennial flow Intermittent flow Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: Mountains (M) Piedmont (P) Inner Coastal Plain (I) Outer Coastal Plain (O)
16. Estimated geomorphic
19 valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream):
A B
(more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi2) Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi2) Size 4 (≥ 5 mi2)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
Section 10 water Classified Trout Waters Water Supply Watershed (I II III IV V)
Essential Fish Habitat Primary Nursery Area High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
Publicly owned property NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect Nutrient Sensitive Waters
Anadromous fish 303(d) List CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in “Notes/Sketch” section or attached? Yes No

1. Channel Water – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
A Water throughout assessment reach.
B No flow, water in pools only.
C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction – assessment reach metric
A At least 10% of assessment reach in-stream habitat or riffle-pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates , debris jams,
beaver dams).
B Not A
3. Feature Pattern – assessment reach metric
A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
B Not A
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile – assessment reach metric
A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability – assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down-cutting (head-cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip-rap).
A < 10% of channel unstable
B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction – streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
A A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
B B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down-cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access , disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
C C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors – assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in “Notes/Sketch”
section.
F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
I Other: (explain in “Notes/Sketch” section)
J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather – watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream – assessment reach metric
Yes No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In-stream Habitat Types – assessment reach metric
10a. Yes No Degraded in-stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in-stream hardening [for example, rip-rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent
vegetation
C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees)
D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
E Little or no habitat
F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
G Submerged aquatic vegetation
H Low-tide refugia (pools)
I Sand bottom
J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
K Little or no habitat

*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11a. Yes No Is assessment reach in a natural sand-bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
A Riffle-run section (evaluate 11c)
B Pool-glide section (evaluate 11d)
C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach – whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare
(R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) = > 10-40%, Abundant (A) = > 40-70%, Predominant (P) = > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
Bedrock/saprolite
Boulder (256 – 4096 mm)
Cobble (64 – 256 mm)
Gravel (2 – 64 mm)
Sand (.062 – 2 mm)
Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
Detritus
Artificial (rip-rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. Yes No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check for Tidal Marsh Streams Only
12. Aquatic Life – assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. Yes No Was an in-stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. No Water Other:
12b. Yes No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to “individuals” for Size 1 and 2 streams and “taxa” for Size 3 and 4 streams.
Adult frogs
Aquatic reptiles
Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
Beetles
Caddisfly larvae (T)
Asian clam (Corbicula)
Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
Dipterans
Mayfly larvae (E)
Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
Midges/mosquito larvae
Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
Other fish
Salamanders/tadpoles
Snails
Stonefly larvae (P)
Tipulid larvae
Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.
LB RB
A A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
B B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
C C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage – streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
A A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water ≥ 6 inches deep
B B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
C C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
Y Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
N N
16. Baseflow Contributors – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
C Obstruction passing flow during low-flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom-release dam, weir)
D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors – assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
B Obstruction not passing flow during low-flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
C Urban stream (≥ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting i n accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
F None of the above
18. Shading – assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider “leaf-on” condition.
A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
C Stream shading is gone or largely absent
19. Buffer Width – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider “vegetated buffer” and “wooded buffer” separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
A A A A ≥ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
B B B B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
C C C C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
D D D D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
E E E E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 (“Vegetated” Buffer Width).
LB RB
A A Mature forest
B B Non-mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
C C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
D D Maintained shrubs
E E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22:
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
A A A A A A Row crops
B B B B B B Maintained turf
C C C C C C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
D D D D D D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 (“Wooded” Buffer Width).
LB RB
A A Medium to high stem density
B B Low stem density
C C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
A A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
B B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
C C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contribute s to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
A A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
B B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
C C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proport ions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non-characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity – assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. Yes No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. No Water Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
A < 46 B 46 to < 67 C 67 to < 79 D 79 to < 230 E ≥ 230

Notes/Sketch:

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1

Stream Site Name Hip Bone Creek Restoration
Site Date of Assessment 5/9/2018
Stream Category Pb1 Assessor Name/Organization J. Sullivan / KCI

Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Intermittent

Function Class Rating Summary
USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation MEDIUM MEDIUM
(4) Floodplain Access HIGH HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer LOW LOW
(4) Microtopography NA NA
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM
(4) Channel Stability HIGH HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport HIGH HIGH
(4) Stream Geomorphology LOW LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA NA (2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA NA (2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA NA (3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA NA (3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA NA
(1) Water Quality LOW LOW
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation LOW LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration LOW LOW
(3) Thermoregulation LOW LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors YES YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance MEDIUM NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA NA
(1) Habitat LOW LOW
(2) In-stream Habitat LOW LOW
(3) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) Substrate LOW LOW
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) In-stream Habitat LOW LOW
(2) Stream-side Habitat LOW LOW
(3) Stream-side Habitat LOW LOW
(3) Thermoregulation LOW LOW
(2) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat
NA NA (3) Flow Restriction NA NA (3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA NA (4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA NA (4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA NA (3) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat
NA NA (2) Intertidal Zone
NA NA
Overall LOW LOW

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same prope rty, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the “Notes/Sketch” section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 2. Date of evaluation: 5/9/2018
3. Applicant/owner name: KCI 4. Assessor name/organization: J. Sullivan / KCI
5. County: Chatham 6. Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Meadow Creek 7. River basin: Cape Fear
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.6811 / -79.4031
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): T3 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 100
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 1 Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 3 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? Yes No
14. Feature type: Perennial flow Intermittent flow Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: Mountains (M) Piedmont (P) Inner Coastal Plain (I) Outer Coastal Plain (O)
16. Estimated geomorphic
19 valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream):
A B
(more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi2) Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi2) Size 4 (≥ 5 mi2)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
Section 10 water Classified Trout Waters Water Supply Watershed (I II III IV V)
Essential Fish Habitat Primary Nursery Area High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
Publicly owned property NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect Nutrient Sensitive Waters
Anadromous fish 303(d) List CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in “Notes/Sketch” section or attached? Yes No

1. Channel Water – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
A Water throughout assessment reach.
B No flow, water in pools only.
C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction – assessment reach metric
A At least 10% of assessment reach in-stream habitat or riffle-pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates , debris jams,
beaver dams).
B Not A
3. Feature Pattern – assessment reach metric
A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
B Not A
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile – assessment reach metric
A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability – assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down-cutting (head-cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip-rap).
A < 10% of channel unstable
B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction – streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
A A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
B B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down-cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access , disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
C C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors – assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in “Notes/Sketch”
section.
F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
I Other: (explain in “Notes/Sketch” section)
J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather – watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream – assessment reach metric
Yes No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In-stream Habitat Types – assessment reach metric
10a. Yes No Degraded in-stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in-stream hardening [for example, rip-rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent
vegetation
C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees)
D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
E Little or no habitat
F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
G Submerged aquatic vegetation
H Low-tide refugia (pools)
I Sand bottom
J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
K Little or no habitat

*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11a. Yes No Is assessment reach in a natural sand-bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
A Riffle-run section (evaluate 11c)
B Pool-glide section (evaluate 11d)
C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach – whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare
(R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) = > 10-40%, Abundant (A) = > 40-70%, Predominant (P) = > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
Bedrock/saprolite
Boulder (256 – 4096 mm)
Cobble (64 – 256 mm)
Gravel (2 – 64 mm)
Sand (.062 – 2 mm)
Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
Detritus
Artificial (rip-rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. Yes No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check for Tidal Marsh Streams Only
12. Aquatic Life – assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. Yes No Was an in-stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. No Water Other:
12b. Yes No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to “individuals” for Size 1 and 2 streams and “taxa” for Size 3 and 4 streams.
Adult frogs
Aquatic reptiles
Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
Beetles
Caddisfly larvae (T)
Asian clam (Corbicula)
Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
Dipterans
Mayfly larvae (E)
Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
Midges/mosquito larvae
Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
Other fish
Salamanders/tadpoles
Snails
Stonefly larvae (P)
Tipulid larvae
Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.
LB RB
A A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
B B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
C C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage – streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
A A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water ≥ 6 inches deep
B B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
C C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
Y Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
N N
16. Baseflow Contributors – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
C Obstruction passing flow during low-flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom-release dam, weir)
D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors – assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
B Obstruction not passing flow during low-flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
C Urban stream (≥ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting i n accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
F None of the above
18. Shading – assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider “leaf-on” condition.
A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
C Stream shading is gone or largely absent
19. Buffer Width – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider “vegetated buffer” and “wooded buffer” separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
A A A A ≥ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
B B B B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
C C C C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
D D D D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
E E E E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 (“Vegetated” Buffer Width).
LB RB
A A Mature forest
B B Non-mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
C C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
D D Maintained shrubs
E E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22:
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
A A A A A A Row crops
B B B B B B Maintained turf
C C C C C C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
D D D D D D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 (“Wooded” Buffer Width).
LB RB
A A Medium to high stem density
B B Low stem density
C C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
A A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
B B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
C C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contribute s to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
A A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
B B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
C C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proport ions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non-characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity – assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. Yes No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. No Water Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
A < 46 B 46 to < 67 C 67 to < 79 D 79 to < 230 E ≥ 230

Notes/Sketch:

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1

Stream Site Name Hip Bone Creek Restoration
Site Date of Assessment 5/9/2018
Stream Category Pb1 Assessor Name/Organization J. Sullivan / KCI

Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Intermittent

Function Class Rating Summary
USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology LOW LOW
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow LOW LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW LOW
(4) Floodplain Access MEDIUM MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer LOW LOW
(4) Microtopography NA NA
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM
(4) Channel Stability HIGH HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport HIGH HIGH
(4) Stream Geomorphology LOW LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA NA (2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA NA (2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA NA (3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA NA (3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA NA
(1) Water Quality LOW LOW
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation LOW LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration LOW LOW
(3) Thermoregulation LOW LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors YES YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance LOW NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA NA
(1) Habitat LOW LOW
(2) In-stream Habitat MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) Substrate HIGH HIGH
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) In-stream Habitat LOW LOW
(2) Stream-side Habitat LOW LOW
(3) Stream-side Habitat LOW LOW
(3) Thermoregulation LOW LOW
(2) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat
NA NA (3) Flow Restriction NA NA (3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA NA (4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA NA (4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA NA (3) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat
NA NA (2) Intertidal Zone
NA NA
Overall LOW LOW

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
USACE AID # NCDWR#
Project Name Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site Date of Evaluation 5/9/18
Applicant/Owner Name KCI Wetland Site Name WA, WE
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization J. Sullivan / KCI
Level III Ecoregion Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body Meadow Creek
River Basin Cape Fear USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit 03030003
County Chatham NCDWR Region Raleigh
Yes No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees) 35.6777 / -79.4038
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in
recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub-surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic
tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc .)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear-cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? Yes No

Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
Anadromous fish
Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
Publicly owned property
N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
Designated NCNHP reference community
Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
Blackwater
Brownwater
Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) Lunar Wind Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? Yes No
Is the assessment area’s surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? Yes No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? Yes No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition – assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the
assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment
area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
A A Not severely altered
B B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire-plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compact ion, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2. Surface and Sub-Surface Storage Capacity and Duration – assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub-surface storage capacity and duration (Sub).
Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch ≤ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot
deep is expected to affect both surface and sub-surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
A A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
B B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
C C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change )
(examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3. Water Storage/Surface Relief – assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
3a. A A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
B B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
C C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
D D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot
4. Soil Texture/Structure – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature.
Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional
indicators.
4a. A Sandy soil
B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
B Soil ribbon ≥ 1 inch
4c. A No peat or muck presence
B A peat or muck presence
5. Discharge into Wetland – opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub-surface pollutants or discharges (Sub). Examples
of sub-surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank , underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
C C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area a nd
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6. Land Use – opportunity metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources draining
to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (5M),
and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M).
WS 5M 2M
A A A > 10% impervious surfaces
B B B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants
C C C ≥ 20% coverage of pasture
D D D ≥ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
E E E ≥ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
F F F ≥ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
G G G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent drainage and/or overbank flow from affecting the
assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer – assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
Yes No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the .water body. Make
buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbe d.)
A ≥ 50 feet
B From 30 to < 50 feet
C From 15 to < 30 feet
D From 5 to < 15 feet
E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
≤ 15-feet wide > 15-feet wide Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
Yes No
7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed?
Sheltered – adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
Exposed – adjacent open water with width ≥ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes and
Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp Forest
only)
Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (W T) and
the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
A A ≥ 100 feet
B B From 80 to < 100 feet
C C From 50 to < 80 feet
D D From 40 to < 50 feet
E E From 30 to < 40 feet
F F From 15 to < 30 feet
G G From 5 to < 15 feet
H H < 5 feet

9. Inundation Duration – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
A Evidence of short-duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
C Evidence of long-duration inundation or very long-duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable , see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear -cut, select “K” for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
A A A ≥ 500 acres
B B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D D From 25 to < 50 acres
E E E From 10 to < 25 acres
F F F From 5 to < 10 acres
G G G From 1 to < 5 acres
H H H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
I I I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
J J J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
K K K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness – wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
A Pocosin is the full extent (≥ 90%) of its natural landscape size.
B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas – landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contigu ous
naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility line
corridors the width of a four-lane road or wider, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300
feet wide.

Well Loosely
A A ≥ 500 acres
B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D From 10 to < 50 acres
E E < 10 acres
F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats

13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
Yes No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands .
14. Edge Effect – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificia l edges include
non-forested areas ≥ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors, and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directions? If the assessment area is c lear cut,
select option ”C.”
A 0
B 1 to 4
C 5 to 8
15. Vegetative Composition – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata compo sed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions , but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or clearing.
It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non-
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in at
least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non-tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics).
B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics).
17. Vegetative Structure – assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
Yes No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.

17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non-marsh wetlands.
A ≥ 25% coverage of vegetation
B < 25% coverage of vegetation

17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non-marsh wetlands. Consider
structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA WT
A A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
B B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
C C Canopy sparse or absent

A A Dense mid-story/sapling layer
B B Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
C C Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent

A A Dense shrub layer
B B Moderate density shrub layer
C C Shrub layer sparse or absent

A A Dense herb layer
B B Moderate density herb layer
C C Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
B Not A
19. Diameter Class Distribution – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man-placed natural debris.
A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
B Not A
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion – wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non-Tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. P atterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
A B C D

22. Hydrologic Connectivity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion,
man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes

Canopy Mid-Story Shrub Herb
NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0

Wetland Site Name WA, WE Date of Assessment 5/9/18
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization J. Sullivan / KCI

Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO

Sub-function Rating Summary
Function Sub-function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition MEDIUM

Sub-surface Storage and
Retention Condition MEDIUM
Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Particulate Change Condition MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NA
Soluble Change Condition MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Physical Change Condition MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Pollution Change Condition NA
Condition/Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NA
Habitat Physical Structure Condition LOW
Landscape Patch Structure Condition LOW
Vegetation Composition Condition LOW

Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Condition MEDIUM
Water Quality Condition MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Habitat Condition LOW

Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
USACE AID # NCDWR#
Project Name Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site Date of Evaluation 5/9/18
Applicant/Owner Name KCI Wetland Site Name WB, WF, WH
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization J. Sullivan / KCI
Level III Ecoregion Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body Meadow Creek
River Basin Cape Fear USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit 03030003
County Chatham NCDWR Region Raleigh
Yes No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees) 35.6860 / -79.4048
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in
recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub-surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic
tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc .)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear-cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? Yes No

Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
Anadromous fish
Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
Publicly owned property
N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
Designated NCNHP reference community
Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
Blackwater
Brownwater
Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) Lunar Wind Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? Yes No
Is the assessment area’s surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? Yes No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? Yes No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition – assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the
assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment
area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
A A Not severely altered
B B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire-plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compact ion, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2. Surface and Sub-Surface Storage Capacity and Duration – assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub-surface storage capacity and duration (Sub).
Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch ≤ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot
deep is expected to affect both surface and sub-surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
A A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
B B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
C C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change )
(examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3. Water Storage/Surface Relief – assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
3a. A A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
B B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
C C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
D D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot
4. Soil Texture/Structure – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature.
Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional
indicators.
4a. A Sandy soil
B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
B Soil ribbon ≥ 1 inch
4c. A No peat or muck presence
B A peat or muck presence
5. Discharge into Wetland – opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub-surface pollutants or discharges (Sub). Examples
of sub-surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank , underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
C C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area a nd
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6. Land Use – opportunity metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources draining
to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (5M),
and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M).
WS 5M 2M
A A A > 10% impervious surfaces
B B B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants
C C C ≥ 20% coverage of pasture
D D D ≥ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
E E E ≥ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
F F F ≥ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
G G G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent drainage and/or overbank flow from affecting the
assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer – assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
Yes No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the .water body. Make
buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbe d.)
A ≥ 50 feet
B From 30 to < 50 feet
C From 15 to < 30 feet
D From 5 to < 15 feet
E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
≤ 15-feet wide > 15-feet wide Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
Yes No
7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed?
Sheltered – adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
Exposed – adjacent open water with width ≥ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes and
Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp Forest
only)
Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (W T) and
the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
A A ≥ 100 feet
B B From 80 to < 100 feet
C C From 50 to < 80 feet
D D From 40 to < 50 feet
E E From 30 to < 40 feet
F F From 15 to < 30 feet
G G From 5 to < 15 feet
H H < 5 feet

9. Inundation Duration – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
A Evidence of short-duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
C Evidence of long-duration inundation or very long-duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable , see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear -cut, select “K” for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
A A A ≥ 500 acres
B B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D D From 25 to < 50 acres
E E E From 10 to < 25 acres
F F F From 5 to < 10 acres
G G G From 1 to < 5 acres
H H H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
I I I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
J J J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
K K K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness – wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
A Pocosin is the full extent (≥ 90%) of its natural landscape size.
B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas – landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contigu ous
naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility line
corridors the width of a four-lane road or wider, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300
feet wide.

Well Loosely
A A ≥ 500 acres
B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D From 10 to < 50 acres
E E < 10 acres
F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats

13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
Yes No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands .
14. Edge Effect – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificia l edges include
non-forested areas ≥ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors, and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directions? If the assessment area is c lear cut,
select option ”C.”
A 0
B 1 to 4
C 5 to 8
15. Vegetative Composition – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata compo sed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions , but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or clearing.
It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non-
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in at
least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non-tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics).
B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics).
17. Vegetative Structure – assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
Yes No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.

17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non-marsh wetlands.
A ≥ 25% coverage of vegetation
B < 25% coverage of vegetation

17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non-marsh wetlands. Consider
structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA WT
A A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
B B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
C C Canopy sparse or absent

A A Dense mid-story/sapling layer
B B Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
C C Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent

A A Dense shrub layer
B B Moderate density shrub layer
C C Shrub layer sparse or absent

A A Dense herb layer
B B Moderate density herb layer
C C Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
B Not A
19. Diameter Class Distribution – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man-placed natural debris.
A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
B Not A
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion – wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non-Tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. P atterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
A B C D

22. Hydrologic Connectivity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion,
man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes

Canopy Mid-Story Shrub Herb
NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0

Wetland Site Name WB, WF, WH Date of Assessment 5/9/18
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization J. Sullivan / KCI

Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO

Sub-function Rating Summary
Function Sub-function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition LOW

Sub-surface Storage and
Retention Condition MEDIUM
Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Particulate Change Condition LOW
Condition/Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NA
Soluble Change Condition MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Physical Change Condition LOW
Condition/Opportunity LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Pollution Change Condition NA
Condition/Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NA
Habitat Physical Structure Condition LOW
Landscape Patch Structure Condition LOW
Vegetation Composition Condition MEDIUM

Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Condition LOW
Water Quality Condition LOW
Condition/Opportunity LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Habitat Condition LOW

Overall Wetland Rating LOW

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
USACE AID # NCDWR#
Project Name Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site Date of Evaluation 5/9/18
Applicant/Owner Name KCI Wetland Site Name WC, WD, WG
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization J. Sullivan / KCI
Level III Ecoregion Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body Meadow Creek
River Basin Cape Fear USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit 03030003
County Chatham NCDWR Region Raleigh
Yes No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees) 35.6820 / -79.4042
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in
recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub-surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic
tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc .)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear-cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? Yes No

Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
Anadromous fish
Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
Publicly owned property
N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
Designated NCNHP reference community
Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
Blackwater
Brownwater
Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) Lunar Wind Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? Yes No
Is the assessment area’s surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? Yes No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? Yes No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition – assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the
assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment
area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
A A Not severely altered
B B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire-plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compact ion, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2. Surface and Sub-Surface Storage Capacity and Duration – assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub-surface storage capacity and duration (Sub).
Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch ≤ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot
deep is expected to affect both surface and sub-surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
A A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
B B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
C C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change )
(examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3. Water Storage/Surface Relief – assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
3a. A A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
B B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
C C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
D D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot
4. Soil Texture/Structure – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature.
Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional
indicators.
4a. A Sandy soil
B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
B Soil ribbon ≥ 1 inch
4c. A No peat or muck presence
B A peat or muck presence
5. Discharge into Wetland – opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub-surface pollutants or discharges (Sub). Examples
of sub-surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank , underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
C C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area a nd
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6. Land Use – opportunity metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources draining
to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (5M),
and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M).
WS 5M 2M
A A A > 10% impervious surfaces
B B B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants
C C C ≥ 20% coverage of pasture
D D D ≥ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
E E E ≥ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
F F F ≥ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
G G G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent drainage and/or overbank flow from affecting the
assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer – assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
Yes No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the .water body. Make
buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbe d.)
A ≥ 50 feet
B From 30 to < 50 feet
C From 15 to < 30 feet
D From 5 to < 15 feet
E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
≤ 15-feet wide > 15-feet wide Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
Yes No
7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed?
Sheltered – adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
Exposed – adjacent open water with width ≥ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes and
Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp Forest
only)
Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (W T) and
the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
A A ≥ 100 feet
B B From 80 to < 100 feet
C C From 50 to < 80 feet
D D From 40 to < 50 feet
E E From 30 to < 40 feet
F F From 15 to < 30 feet
G G From 5 to < 15 feet
H H < 5 feet

9. Inundation Duration – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
A Evidence of short-duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
C Evidence of long-duration inundation or very long-duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable , see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear -cut, select “K” for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
A A A ≥ 500 acres
B B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D D From 25 to < 50 acres
E E E From 10 to < 25 acres
F F F From 5 to < 10 acres
G G G From 1 to < 5 acres
H H H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
I I I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
J J J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
K K K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness – wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
A Pocosin is the full extent (≥ 90%) of its natural landscape size.
B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas – landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contigu ous
naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility line
corridors the width of a four-lane road or wider, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300
feet wide.

Well Loosely
A A ≥ 500 acres
B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D From 10 to < 50 acres
E E < 10 acres
F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats

13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
Yes No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands .
14. Edge Effect – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificia l edges include
non-forested areas ≥ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors, and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directions? If the assessment area is c lear cut,
select option ”C.”
A 0
B 1 to 4
C 5 to 8
15. Vegetative Composition – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata compo sed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions , but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or clearing.
It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non-
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in at
least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non-tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics).
B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics).
17. Vegetative Structure – assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
Yes No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.

17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non-marsh wetlands.
A ≥ 25% coverage of vegetation
B < 25% coverage of vegetation

17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non-marsh wetlands. Consider
structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA WT
A A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
B B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
C C Canopy sparse or absent

A A Dense mid-story/sapling layer
B B Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
C C Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent

A A Dense shrub layer
B B Moderate density shrub layer
C C Shrub layer sparse or absent

A A Dense herb layer
B B Moderate density herb layer
C C Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
B Not A
19. Diameter Class Distribution – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man-placed natural debris.
A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
B Not A
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion – wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non-Tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. P atterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
A B C D

22. Hydrologic Connectivity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion,
man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes

Canopy Mid-Story Shrub Herb
NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0

Wetland Site Name WC, WD, WG Date of Assessment 5/9/18
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization J. Sullivan / KCI

Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO

Sub-function Rating Summary
Function Sub-function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition LOW

Sub-surface Storage and
Retention Condition MEDIUM
Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Particulate Change Condition LOW
Condition/Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NA
Soluble Change Condition MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Physical Change Condition MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Pollution Change Condition NA
Condition/Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NA
Habitat Physical Structure Condition LOW
Landscape Patch Structure Condition LOW
Vegetation Composition Condition MEDIUM

Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Condition LOW
Water Quality Condition MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Habitat Condition LOW

Overall Wetland Rating LOW

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059

12.7 Approved Jurisdictional Determination 

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059

Page 1 of 2
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW-2018-01983 County: Chatham County U.S.G.S. Quad: Siler City
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Property Owner/Applicant: KCI Technologies, Inc.
Joe Sullivan
Address: 4505 Falls of Neuse Rd Suite 400
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
Telephone Number: 919-278-2533
Size (acres) 18 (approximately)Nearest Town Siler City
Nearest Waterway Meadow Creek River Basin Cape Fear
USGS HUC 03030003 Coordinates Latitude: 35.680758
Longitude: -79.402617
Location description: The site is located at 865 Carter Brooks Road, approximately 2000 feet east of the Carter
Brooks Road, Jack Elkins Road intersection, near Siler City, Chatham County, North Carolina. The Site is identified as
the Hipbone Creek Restoration Site (See map attached to PJD form).
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
X There are waters, including wetlands, on the above described project area, that may be subject to Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The
waters, including wetlands, have been delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently
accurate and reliable. Therefore this preliminary jurisdiction determination may be used in the permit evaluation process,
including determining compensatory mitigation. For purposes of computation of impacts, compensatory mitigation
requirements, and other resource protection measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat all
waters and wetlands that would be affected in any way by the permitted activity on the site as if they are jurisdictional
waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program
Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331). However, you may request an approved JD, which is an
appealable action, by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
There are wetlands on the above described property, that may be subject to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). However, since the
waters, including wetlands, have not been properly delineated, this preliminary jurisdiction determination may not be
used in the permit evaluation process. Without a verified wetland delineation, this preliminary determination is merely an
effective presumption of CWA/RHA jurisdiction over all of the waters, including wetlands, at the project area, which is
not sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable permit decision. We recommend that you have the
waters of the U.S. on your property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a
timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by the Corps.
B. Approved Determination
There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described property subject to the permit requirements of
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC
§ 1344). Unless there is a change in law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period
not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
There are waters of the U.S., including wetlands, on the above described project area subject to the permit requirements
of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
We recommend you have the waters of the U.S. on your property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to
accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that
can be verified by the Corps.
SAW-2018-01983
The waters of the U.S., including wetlands, on your project area have been delineated and the delineation has been
verified by the Corps. We strongly suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be
reviewed and verified by the Corps. Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to
CWA jurisdiction on your property which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be
relied upon for a period not to exceed five years.
The waters of the U.S., including wetlands, have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat
signed by the Corps Regulatory Official identified below on ______________. Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act
(CAMA). You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City, NC, at [phone] to
determine their requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US, including wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit
may constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material,
construction or placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the
Army permit may constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). If
you have any questions regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Andrew Williams at
[phone] or [e-mail].
C. Basis For Determination:N/A. An Approved JD has not been completed.
D. Remarks: None
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps’ Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the
particular site identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation
provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation
in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources
Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information for Approved Jurisdiction Determinations (as indicated in Section B. above)
If you object to this determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
Enclosed you will find a Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and Request for Appeal (RFA) form. If you request
to appeal this determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Jason Steele, Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 10M15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
SAW-2018-01983
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for
appeal under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP.
Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by: Not Applicable.
It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this
correspondence.
Corps Regulatory Official: ______________________________________________________
Date: November 16, 2018
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete our Customer Satisfaction Survey, located online at
http://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm_apex/f?p=136:4:0.
Copy Furnished (via emai):
Stephanie Goss
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Water Resources Water Quality Regional Operations Section
1628 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1628
Todd Tugwell
Regulatory Project Manager
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 106
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587

Digitally signed by WILLIAMS.ANDREW.E.1244561655
DN: c=US, o=U.S. Government, ou=DoD, ou=PKI,
ou=USA, cn=WILLIAMS.ANDREW.E.1244561655
Date: 2018.11.16 08:54:51 -05'00'
SAW-2018-01983
NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: Joe Sullivan KCI Technologies Inc File Number: SAW-2018-01983 Date: November 16,
2018
Attached is: See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) A
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) B
PERMIT DENIAL C
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E
SECTION I -The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision.
Additional information may be found at http://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/RegulatoryProgramandPermits.aspx or
Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
x ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature
on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the
permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
x OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that the
permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district engineer. Your
objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right to appeal
the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a) modify the
permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify the permit
having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections, the district engineer
will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
x ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature
on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the
permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
x APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you
may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form
and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of
this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative
Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form
must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or
provide new information.
x ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the date of
this notice means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
x APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative
Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by
the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
SAW-2018-01983
E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps
regarding the preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved
JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new
information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD.
SECTION II - REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your
objections to an initial proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to
this form to clarify where your reasons or objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps
memorandum for the record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the
review officer has determined is needed to clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps
may add new information or analyses to the record. However, you may provide additional information to clarify
the location of information that is already in the administrative record.
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the
appeal process you may contact:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division,
Attn: Andrew Williams
3331 Heritiage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
also contact:
Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
CESAD-PDO
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day
notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations.
________________________________________
Signature of appellant or agent.
Date: Telephone number:
For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:
Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Jason Steele,
Administrative Appeal Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]
Appendix 2 - PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A.REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD:
B.NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD:
C.DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
D.PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: County/parish/borough: City:
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format):
Lat.:Long.:
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody:
E.REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s):
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA WHICH ³MAY BE´SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Site
number
Latitude
(decimal
degrees)
Longitude
(decimal
degrees)
Estimated amount
of aquatic resource
in review area
(acreage and linear
feet, if applicable)
Type of aquatic
resource (i.e., wetland
vs. non-wetland
waters)
Geographic authority
to which the aquatic
resource “may be”
subject (i.e., Section
404 or Section 10/404)
Joseph Sullivan, 4505 Falls of Neuse Rd; Suite 400, Raleigh, NC 27609
NC Chatham Siler City
35.6804 -79.4018
Meadow Creek
/PWFNCFS



8JMNJOHUPO
%JTUSJDU
4"8
)JQ
#POF

$SFFL
3FTUPSBUJPO
4JUF
9 /PWFNCFS



9 0DUPCFS



1) The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in
the review area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option
to request and obtain an approved JD (AJD) for that review area based on an
informed decision after having discussed the various types of JDs and their
characteristics and circumstances when they may be appropriate.
2) In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a
Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring “pre-
construction notification” (PCN), or requests verification for a non-reporting NWP or
other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an AJD for the
activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit applicant has
elected to seek a permit authorization based on a PJD, which does not make an
official determination of jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the
option to request an AJD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit
authorization, and that basing a permit authorization on an AJD could possibly result
in less compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) the
applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting the terms
and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4) the applicant can
accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply with all the termsand
conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has
determined to be necessary; (5) undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject
permit authorization without requesting an AJD constitutes the applicant’s acceptance
of the use of the PJD; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered
individual permit)or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps permit
authorization based on a PJD constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the
review area affected in any way by that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and
waives any challenge to such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance
or enforcement action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7)
whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD or a PJD, the JD will be processed
as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered individual permit (and all terms
and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be administratively
appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it
becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether geographic
jurisdiction exists over aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an official
delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, the Corps will
provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable. This PJD finds
that there “may be” waters of the U.S. and/or that there “may be”navigable waters of
the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the review
area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following
information:
SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources
below where indicated for all checked items:
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map: ________________BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB.
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale: _______BBBBBBBBBBBB.
Data sheets prepared by the Corps:________BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB.
Corps navigable waters’ study: ____________BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB.
U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas: ________BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB.
USGS NHD data.
USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: _________BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB.
Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: __________BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB.
National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: ________BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB.
State/local wetland inventory map(s): ____________BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB.
FEMA/FIRM maps: ________________BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB.
100-year Floodplain Elevation is: ____BBBBBBBBBBBB.(National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: Aerial (Name & Date): ______BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB.
or Other (Name & Date): ______BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB.
Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:__________BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB.
Other information (please specify): ______________BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB.
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily
been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional
determinations.
Signature and date of Signature and date of
Regulatory staff member person requesting PJD
completing PJD (REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)
1
1 Districts may establish timeframes for requestor to return signed PJD forms. If the requestor does not respond
within the established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is
necessary prior to finalizing an action.
Vicinity Map
Siler City 1:24K
2017 Statewide Aerial Photographs
Joseph Sullivan Digitally signed by Joseph Sullivan
DN: cn=Joseph Sullivan, o=KCI, ou,
email=[e-mail], c=US
Date: 2018.10.31 09:44:37 -04'00'

%FMJOFBUJPO
.BQ
9
9
9 /$%82

4USFBN
*EFOUJGJDBUJPO
'PSNT

9 64"$&

0DUPCFS

TJUF
WJTJU

Digitally signed by
WILLIAMS.ANDREW.E.1244561655
DN: c=US, o=U.S. Government, ou=DoD,
ou=PKI, ou=USA,
cn=WILLIAMS.ANDREW.E.1244561655
Date: 2018.11.16 08:34:39 -05'00'
WA
WB
WC
WD
WE
WE
T3
T3
T1
T1
T1
T2
T1-1
T3-1
WF
WG
WH
NC Center for Geographic Information & Anaylsis
Source: NC OneMap
Orthoimagery, 2017.±
Project Easement
Wetland Waters
Non-Wetland Waters
Ephemeral Flow
Intermittent Flow
0 300150
Feet
FIGURE 3. POTENTIAL WOTUS MAP
HIP BONE CREEK RESTORATION SITE
CHATHAM COUNTY, NC

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059

12.8 Approved FHWA Categorical Exclusion Form 

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059

Categorical Exclusion Form for Division of
Mitigation Services Projects
Version 1.4
Note: Only Appendix A.should to be submitted (along with any supporting documentation) as the
environmental document.
t,oun Name: Chatham County, NC
DIMS Number: 100059
Project ---Sponsor: KCI Technologies, Inc.
;1L AOaress: 4ou5 taus Oi Neuse
1 E-mail: [e-mail]
anager. I Jeff Schaffer
Reviewed By:
V/, 0 L"?0
Date
Conditional Approved By -
Date
❑ Check this box if there are outstanding issues
Final Approval By:
Date
For Division Administrator
FHWA
6
For Division Administrator
FHWA
Version 1.4, 8/18/05

Version 1.4, 8/18/05 1
Part 2: All Projects
Regulation/Question Response
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)
1. Is the project located in a CAMA county? Yes
No
2. Does the project involve ground-disturbing activities within a CAMA Area of
Environmental Concern (AEC)?
Yes
No
N/A
3. Has a CAMA permit been secured? Yes
No
N/A
4. Has NCDCM agreed that the project is consistent with the NC Coastal Management
Program?
Yes
No
N/A
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA)
1. Is this a “full-delivery” project? Yes
No
2. Has the zoning/land use of the subject property and adjacent properties ever been
designated as commercial or industrial?
Yes
No
N/A
3. As a result of a limited Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential
hazardous waste sites within or adjacent to the project area?
Yes
No
N/A
4. As a result of a Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous
waste sites within or adjacent to the project area?
Yes
No
N/A
5. As a result of a Phase II Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous
waste sites within the project area?
Yes
No
N/A
6. Is there an approved hazardous mitigation plan? Yes
No
N/A
National Historic Preservation Act (Section 106)
1. Are there properties listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of
Historic Places in the project area?
Yes
No
2. Does the project affect such properties and does the SHPO/THPO concur? Yes
No
N/A
3. If the effects are adverse, have they been resolved? Yes
No
N/A
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act (Uniform Act)
1. Is this a “full-delivery” project? Yes
No
2. Does the project require the acquisition of real estate? Yes
No
N/A
3. Was the property acquisition completed prior to the intent to use federal funds? Yes
No
N/A
4. Has the owner of the property been informed:
* prior to making an offer that the agency does not have condemnation authority; and
* what the fair market value is believed to be?
Yes
No
N/A
Version 1.4, 8/18/05 2

Part 3: Ground-Disturbing Activities

Regulation/Question Response
American Indian Religious Freedom Act (AIRFA)
1. Is the project located in a county claimed as “territory” by the Eastern Band of
Cherokee Indians?
Yes
No
2. Is the site of religious importance to American Indians? Yes
No
N/A
3. Is the project listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of Historic
Places?
Yes
No
N/A
4. Have the effects of the project on this site been considered? Yes
No
N/A
Antiquities Act (AA)
1. Is the project located on Federal lands? Yes
No
2. Will there be loss or destruction of historic or prehistoric ruins, monuments or objects
of antiquity?
Yes
No
N/A
3. Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required? Yes
No
N/A
4. Has a permit been obtained? Yes
No
N/A
Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA)
1. Is the project located on federal or Indian lands (reservation)? Yes
No
2. Will there be a loss or destruction of archaeological resources? Yes
No
N/A
3. Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required? Yes
No
N/A
4. Has a permit been obtained? Yes
No
N/A
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
1. Are federal Threatened and Endangered species and/or Designated Critical Habitat
listed for the county?
Yes
No
2. Is Designated Critical Habitat or suitable habitat present for listed species? Yes
No
N/A
3. Are T&E species present or is the project being conducted in Designated Critical
Habitat?
Yes
No
N/A
4. Is the project “likely to adversely affect” the specie and/or “likely to adversely modify”
Designated Critical Habitat?
Yes
No
N/A
5. Does the USFWS/NOAA-Fisheries concur in the effects determination?
(By virtue of no-response)
Yes
No
N/A
6. Has the USFWS/NOAA-Fisheries rendered a “jeopardy” determination? Yes
No
N/A
Version 1.4, 8/18/05 3
Executive Order 13007 (Indian Sacred Sites)
1. Is the project located on Federal lands that are within a county claimed as “territory”
by the EBCI?
Yes
No
2. Has the EBCI indicated that Indian sacred sites may be impacted by the proposed
project?
Yes
No
N/A
3. Have accommodations been made for access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred
sites?
Yes
No
N/A
Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA)
1. Will real estate be acquired? Yes
No
2. Has NRCS determined that the project contains prime, unique, statewide or local
important farmland?
Yes
No
N/A
3. Has the completed Form AD-1006 been submitted to NRCS? Yes
No
N/A
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA)
1. Will the project impound, divert, channel deepen, or otherwise control/modify any
water body?
Yes
No
2. Have the USFWS and the NCWRC been consulted? Yes
No
N/A
Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (Section 6(f))
1. Will the project require the conversion of such property to a use other than public,
outdoor recreation?
Yes
No
2. Has the NPS approved of the conversion? Yes
No
N/A
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Essential Fish Habitat)
1. Is the project located in an estuarine system? Yes
No
2. Is suitable habitat present for EFH-protected species?

Yes
No
N/A
3. Is sufficient design information available to make a determination of the effect of the
project on EFH?
Yes
No
N/A
4. Will the project adversely affect EFH? Yes
No
N/A
5. Has consultation with NOAA-Fisheries occurred? Yes
No
N/A
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)
1. Does the USFWS have any recommendations with the project relative to the MBTA? Yes
No
2. Have the USFWS recommendations been incorporated? Yes
No
N/A
Wilderness Act
1. Is the project in a Wilderness area? Yes
No
2. Has a special use permit and/or easement been obtained from the maintaining
federal agency?
Yes
No
N/A

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059

12.9 Agency Correspondence 

Mitigation Plan             Hip Bone Creek Restoration Site 
December 6, 2019                     DMS Project Number 100059

Date: June 26, 2018 Attendees: Kim Browning, ACOE Jeff Schaffer, NC DMS Mac Haupt, NC DWR Periann Russell, NC DMS Todd Bowers, US EPA Tim Morris, KCI Charlie Morgan, KCI Steve Stokes, KCI Adam Spiller, KCI From: Tim Morris, Project Manager KCI Associates of North Carolina, P.A. Subject: Hipbone Creek Restoration Site Post Contract IRT Site Review Meeting Cape Fear 03 Chatham County, North Carolina Contract No. #7528 DMS Project #100059 An IRT field review was conducted for the above referenced project on June 26, 2018 starting at 9:00 am. Weather was overcast with periods of steady rain. Approximately 0.10” of rainfall had fallen earlier in the morning. Rainfall for the year was approximately 4.74” below normal and 2.93” below normal for the month of June (Source U.S. Climate Data). Tributary 1 was primarily dry. Other tributaries were flowing at the time of the meeting, although isolated sections of T3 appeared to be dry. The comments follow the order of the site walk. There was overall agreement on the proposed levels of intervention and the proposed credit strategy unless specified below.
T1 to T2
- Flow monitoring (pressure transducers, photo/video documentation) should be used on T1 to ensure adequate hydrology in the system to support the stream call.
- IRT Requested that KCI check with landowner to see if he had a maintenance plan for the trees on the pond dam.
- IRT was concerned with the lack of a dedicated emergency spillway for the pond up-gradient of T1.
- KCI indicated that the easement would not include the pond dam or spillway and livestock were excluded from all ponds upgradient of the proposed easement areas.

- Cattle had access through the fence to the wetland enhancement portions along T1. The degree of cattle access and impact prompted the IRT (DWR) to inform KCI that stream credit (Enhancement 2) may be warranted for this section of stream within the wetland to the point where cattle impacts were obvious.
- Since the restoration section of T-1 would be Priority 1, the IRT cautioned KCI that bringing the channel up could result in hydrology loss for all or a portion of the reach.
T2 to T1
- The IRT felt that the upper reach of T2 above the confluence of T1 could become more wetland-like if an adequate channel was not designed into the plan. Although this channel will be small in cross section, it should be created to allow the documentation of flow in this reach. Credit losses may be realized in this reach if vegetation takes over.
T1 from T2 to T3

- Flow in the channel increased through this reach.
- Plugging of existing ditches in the wetland rehabilitation and wetland reestablishment areas and the filling of T1 to create a Priority 1 channel was thought to be appropriate justification for the proposed crediting for the wetland area north of T1 just above T3.

T1 from T3 to end of T1

- No specific comments were raised. KCI showed the IRT the small section of Enhancement 2 stream where the profile of the stream and the pattern did not justify Restoration in this section. Some minor profile work may still take place here but on a smaller scale.
- The wetland area north of the Enhancement 2 section was examined as well, including the two small drainage features that would be plugged to rehabilitate the existing wetlands and re-establish the drained wetlands. No specific comments were generated.
T3
- The IRT indicated that the Enhancement 2 portion of T3 may be eligible for Enhancement 1 credit (1.5:1 Ratio) since the cattle impacts are so significant that a channel would have to be graded through that area. Similar to T2, the IRT indicated that the strong wetland component through this area could take over the channel and potentially cause a credit loss. Flow monitoring would be important in this reach as well as the creation of an appropriately sized channel to maintain channel continuity.
- The IRT indicated that the upper portion of T3 where no credit was proposed for stream but wetland enhancement was proposed for the wetland elements was not as impacted by cattle as other sections of the project and the justification (invasive species control, fencing, selective planting, hydrology augmentation in areas of small headcuts) for the enhancement would need to be well documented in the Mitigation Plan. Meeting was adjourned at approximately 11:15am. If there are questions or concerns regarding the content in these minutes please call (919-278-2511) or email me [e-mail].