20200998 Ver 1_Draft Prospectus_20200715

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Draft Prospectus
Private Commercial Mitigation Bank for Stream and Wetland
Compensatory Mitigation Credits
Richmond County, North Carolina
Yadkin River Basin (CU 03040201)
April 2020
Prepared for:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
Prepared by:
4 WATER & LAND SOLUTIONS
10940 RAVEN RIDGE ROAD, SUITE 200, RALEIGH, NC 27614
(919) 614 - 5111 1 waterlandsolutions.com

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Table of Contents
1
Introduction..........................................................................................................................................5
1.1 Project Overview...........................................................................................................................5
1.2 Bank Site Location.........................................................................................................................5
1.3 Mitigation Goals and Objectives...................................................................................................5
1.4 Watershed Need and Technical Feasibility...................................................................................6
2
Qualifications........................................................................................................................................7
2.1 Bank Sponsor................................................................................................................................7
2.2 Bank Sponsor Qualifications.........................................................................................................7
2.2.1 Representative Mitigation Projects......................................................................................7
3
Bank Establishment and Operation....................................................................................................10
3.1 Site Ownership............................................................................................................................11
3.2 Proposed Service Area................................................................................................................11
4
Ecological Suitability of the Sites........................................................................................................11
4.1 Baseline Conditions — Fezzik Site................................................................................................11
4.1.1 Watershed Characterization...............................................................................................12
4.1.2 Physiography, Geology, and Soils.......................................................................................15
4.1.3 Existing Stream Conditions.................................................................................................15
4.1.4 Existing Reach Descriptions................................................................................................17
4.1.5 Existing Wetland Conditions...............................................................................................23
4.1.6 Potential Site Constraints....................................................................................................24
4.1.7 Mineral or Water Rights Assurance....................................................................................24
4.1.8 Hydrologic Trespass............................................................................................................
24
4.1.9 Invasive Species Vegetation................................................................................................25
4.1.10 Cultural Resources..............................................................................................................25
4.1.11 Threatened and Endangered Species.................................................................................25
4.1.12 Conditions Affecting Hydrology..........................................................................................25
4.1.13 Adjacent Land Use..............................................................................................................26
5
Mitigation Work Plan..........................................................................................................................26
5.1 Site Design Approach..................................................................................................................
26
5.1.1 Proposed Stream Conditions — Fezzik Site..........................................................................29
5.1.2 Proposed Riparian Buffer Conditions..................................................................................33
Page 2 4

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
5.1.3 Proposed Riparian Wetland Conditions..............................................................................34
5.1.4 Pollutant Load Reductions..................................................................................................35
5.2 Reference Ecosystems................................................................................................................
36
6 Credit Determination..........................................................................................................................36
6.1 Proposed Credit Types................................................................................................................36
7 Credit Release Schedule......................................................................................................................38
7.1 Credit Release Schedule..............................................................................................................38
7.2 Initial Allocation of Released Credits..........................................................................................38
7.3 Subsequent Credit Releases........................................................................................................39
7.4 Financial Assurances...................................................................................................................39
8 Long -Term Management....................................................................................................................39
8.1 Maintenance...............................................................................................................................39
8.2 Adaptive Management Plan.......................................................................................................40
9 Citations..............................................................................................................................................42
Tables
Table 1. Parcel Ownership Information.....................................................................................................11
Table 2. Reach Watershed Drainage & Jurisdictional Status — Fezzik Site.................................................17
Table 3. Existing Reach Description — Fezzik Site.......................................................................................18
Table 4. Total Pollutant Load and Reduction Estimate...............................................................................36
Table 5. Proposed Stream Mitigation Credits(SMCs).................................................................................37
Table 6. Proposed Wetland Mitigation Credits(WMCs).............................................................................37
Table 7. Credit Release Schedule................................................................................................................38
Table 8. Routine Maintenance Components..............................................................................................40
Water & Land Solutions Page 3

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Figures
Fezzik Site
Figure1................................................................................................................................. Project Location
Figure1a..............................................................................................................................Service Area Map
Figure2..................................................................................................................... USGS Topographic Map
Figure3.................................................................................................................................. NRCS Soils Map
Figure4......................................................................................................................................... LiDAR Map
Figure5.................................................................................................................................. Floodplain Map
Figure6a....................................................................................................................1955 Aerial Photograph
Figure6b...................................................................................................................1993 Aerial Photograph
Figure6c....................................................................................................................2008 Aerial Photograph
Figure6d...................................................................................................................2013 Aerial Photograph
Figure7......................................................................................................................... Existing Hydrography
Figure 8....................................................................................Channel Stability & Pre -Monitoring Features
Figure 9.....................................................................................................................Water Quality Stressors
Figure 10......................................................................................................... Proposed Mitigation Features
Appendices
Appendix ............................................................................................................... Existing Conditions Data
Part1........................................................................................................................................ Cross Sections
Part 2.................................................................................................................... NC WAM & NC SAM Forms
Part3....................................................................................................................................Preliminary Soils Report
Part4.................................................................................................................................... Groundwater Well Data
Part 5............................................................................................................NC DWQ Stream Identification Forms
Part6..............................................................................................................................................................Photolog
Appendix B.................................................................................................Adjacent Landowner Information
Appendix C.................................................................................................. Landowner Authorization Forms
Page 4 4

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
1 Introduction
1.1 Project Overview
Water & Land Solutions, LLC (WLS) is pleased to submit this draft prospectus for WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella
Mitigation Bank (bank). WLS proposes to develop this private commercial umbrella mitigation bank to
allow for the addition of future project sites located in the Yadkin River Basin, 8-digit Hydrologic Unit Code
(HUC) 03040201. The bank will initially include one project site named 'Fezzik Mitigation Project'. The
purpose of the bank is to provide stream and wetland mitigation credits to compensate for unavoidable
impacts to Waters of the U.S. authorized under section 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act, Section 10 of
the Rivers and Harbors Act, and all applicable state statutes.
This prospectus was prepared in accordance with C.F.R. §332.1-8 (2008), Compensatory Mitigation for
Losses of Aquatic Resources, and was based on current United States Army Corps of Engineers —
Wilmington District (USACE) Guidance, which is subject to the approval of the USACE District Engineer
(DE) in consultation with the NC Inter -Agency Review Team (IRT).
1.2 Bank Site Location
FP77/kl CitP
The Fezzik Mitigation Project Site (35°3'49.446"N, -79° 43'40.5876"W) is located in Richmond County,
North Carolina, approximately two miles west of the Town of Ellerbe (Figure 1). The site boundary is
within the 8-digit Hydrologic Unit (HU) 03040201, in the North Carolina Department of Environmental
Quality (NCDEQ) Sub -basin 03-07-16 (Warm Water Thermal Regime), all within the Yadkin River Basin. To
access the site from Raleigh, NC, follow US Interstate 1 South (US-1 S) towards Sanford for approximately
42 miles. Take a slight right onto US Interstate 15 South (US-15 S) and continue for approximately 17
miles. Turn right onto NC Highway 73 (NC-73) and continue approximately 7 miles and turn left onto NC
Highway 211 (NC-211). Continue on NC-211 for approximately 0.2 miles and turn right onto NC Highway
73 and continue approximately 10 miles. Merge onto NC Interstate 73 (1-73) toward Rockingham and
continue for approximately 5 miles and take exit 28 onto Millstone Road. Continue on Millstone Road
approximately 0.5 miles and arrive at the site entrance on the right.
1.3 Mitigation Goals and Objectives
The project mitigation goals and objectives will be based on the current resource condition and functional
capacity of the project watershed to improve and protect diverse aquatic resources comparable to stable
stream and wetland systems within the Upper Coastal Plain Physiographic Province. The project will meet
the general restoration goals and opportunities outlined in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin Restoration
Priority Plan (DMS, 2009). More specifically, watershed goals and management strategies will be met by:
• Promoting nutrient and sediment reduction in silvicultural areas by restoring and preserving
wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers,
• Improving flood attenuation and wetland hydrology by plugging ditches and increasing overbank
flows and a connection to the relic floodplain,
• Implementing water quality improvement features to reduce nonpoint source and pollutant
inputs.
Water & Land Solutions Page 5

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
To accomplish these goals, the following site -specific objectives will be measured to document overall
project success:
• Provide a floodplain connection to the incised Project stream reaches by lowering bank height
ratios (BHRs) to less than 1.2, thereby promoting more natural floodplain storage and overbank
flood flows,
• Improve bedform diversity by increasing scour pool to pool spacing and depth variability,
• Increase native species riparian buffer and wetland vegetation density/composition along
streambank and floodplain areas,
• Improve aquatic habitat and fish species diversity and migration through the addition of in -stream
cover and native woody debris,
• Site protection through a 95-acre conservation easement that will protect all streams, wetlands
and aquatic resources in perpetuity.
The preliminary site assessment suggests that the proposed mitigation activities will result in a higher
functioning aquatic ecosystem. The project goals and objectives address water quality stressors by
reducing nutrient and sediment inputs through stream restoration, riparian buffer restoration, and
riparian wetland restoration. Hydrologic functions will be improved by raising the local water table. The
biologic and habitat functions will be improved by extending wildlife corridors that connect with wooded
areas near the upstream extents of the project reaches.
Additionally, site protection through a 95-acre conservation easement in excess of 50 feet from the top
of banks, will protect all stream reaches and aquatic resources in perpetuity. These mitigation efforts will
provide a significant ecological benefit with minimal impacts and constraints during a recovery period that
would not otherwise occur through natural processes.
1.4 Watershed Need and Technical Feasibility
As a result of implementing this bank, WLS will restore, enhancement, and protect approximately 22,866
linear feet of stream and 9.62 acres of wetland to address components as defined in the RBRP (DIMS,
2009). In order to appropriately offset unavoidable impacts to Waters of the United States associated
with rapid growth and development, the proposed bank is critical to improving water quality and
protecting aquatic resource functions in this region.
The preliminary site assessments suggest that the proposed mitigation activities will result in a higher
functioning aquatic ecosystem. The project site goals and objectives will directly address water quality
stressors by reducing nutrient and sediment inputs through stream restoration, riparian buffer
restoration, riparian wetland restoration and implementing agricultural BMPs. Hydrologic functions will
be improved by raising the local water table. The biologic and habitat functions will be improved by
extending wildlife corridors with adjacent forested areas. Additionally, site protection through recorded
conservation easements will protect aquatic resource functions in perpetuity. These mitigation efforts
will provide numerous ecological benefits during a recovery period that would not otherwise occur
through natural processes.
Page 6 4

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
2 Qualifications
2.1 Bank Sponsor
WLS submits this prospectus on behalf of Water & Land Solutions, LLC (sponsor), who will serve as the
sponsor for the WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank. The contact information for the sponsor is
listed below:
Water & Land Solutions, LLC
c/o Adam V. McIntyre
7721 Six Forks Road
Raleigh, NC 27615
919-614-5111
[e-mail]
2.2 Bank Sponsor Qualifications
WLS is a mitigation provider that concentrates on the production and delivery of quality mitigation credits
and services to clients across multiple regions of the United States. WLS was founded with the purpose
of combining the key components of high quality and successful mitigation sites, including the technical
expertise for mitigation site development, the understanding of land management, and the expertise in
environmental economics and finance. Through its inception WLS has identified, targeted and employed
well -respected practitioners in the mitigation industry who have specifically focused their careers on all
of the unique aspects of successful mitigation project implementation.
Beyond our focus to improve ecological function of impaired systems, WLS has a specific mission to
positively impact people in our industry and the general public through education, partnerships, and
building meaningful relationships. In just over five years since establishment, WLS has grown to a staff of
fourteen people located in Raleigh, North Carolina with satellite offices in Weaverville, North Carolina,
Columbus, Ohio, and Crested Butte, Colorado. WLS staff have been recognized by industry colleagues as
leaders in the development, management, design, permitting, construction, and monitoring of successful
mitigation projects. Our projects and opportunities that we are currently pursuing include projects in
North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee.
2.2.1 Representative Mitigation Projects
WLS staff have extensive experience with stream, wetland, and riparian buffer restoration. Our
staff have been involved with the entire suite of services for hundreds of mitigation projects over
nearly two decades. This experience equates to the successful restoration of hundreds of
thousands of feet of stream and thousands of acres of wetlands. Several project examples are
highlighted below.
Water & Land Solutions Page 7

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Monteith Park Mitigation Site, Charlotte/Mecklenburg Stormwater Services, Huntersville, NC
Monteith Park before (left) and one year after restoration (right)
WLS completed what is considered to be one of the most unique watershed restoration projects in
the mitigation industry. The Monteith Park Mitigation Site (MPMS) is the only project to date in
North Carolina that utilized a watershed restoration approach to generate additional mitigation
credits at ratios beyond those typically awarded for stream and wetland restoration credits with
the intent on properly funding full restoration activities. The MPMS was identified as one of the
highest ranked stream restoration reaches in the McDowell Creek Watershed of Mecklenburg
County, NC. The project involved the restoration of 3,550 linear feet of stream, 1.0 acre of wetland
restoration, and the retrofit design and installation of five stormwater control devices (bioretention
basins) in an attempt to restore watershed hydrology to predevelopment conditions.
WLS staff identified the project in 2008 and have led project management duties on all aspects of
the project throughout its entirety. This complex mitigation project continues to be a highly
successful example of how ecosystem restoration, that involves technical, legal, financial, political,
and educational aspects, can be implemented in rapidly developing watersheds.
Page 8 4

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Edwards Mitigation Projects, Johnston County, NC
The Edwards Mitigation Projects (projects) are
three separate full -delivery mitigation projects
located adjacent to each other and are located
within the same watershed that are being
developed under full -delivery contracts with the
North Carolina Department of Environmental
Quality (NCDEQ) Division of Mitigation Services
(DIMS). These projects present a unique and
exciting opportunity for the restoration of an
entire subwatershed that has been highly
impacted from agricultural practices for over a
century.
The projects are 3 of 5 potential restoration projects being developed by WLS that will permanently
protect more than 21,000 linear feet of headwater stream system in consecutive and adjoining
watersheds. The projects will also permanently protect approximately 69 acres of riparian buffer corridor
and will provide permanent treatment of more than 1,100 acres of contiguous watershed acreage, all
within a watershed that is expected to see widespread land use conversion from agriculture to suburban
sprawl. The Sites have been negatively impacted by cattle grazing and row crop production since the
1950's. In addition, a portion of the streams have been impacted due to impoundments. Nearly all
vegetated buffers along the stream reaches have been removed for agricultural practices. Wetlands were
historically present throughout the riparian corridor, but have been significantly impacted due to cattle
trampling and channel incision (draining wetland areas). Most of the primary stream systems have been
channelized and incised (through headcut migration) leading to a significant loss of biologic function for
the entire watershed.
The comprehensive restoration of this subwatershed will provide significant habitat and water quality
improvements to the on -site wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers as well as the downstream
watershed. The anticipated watershed improvements include annual removal of approximately 790
tons/year of sediment, 6,700 pounds/year of nitrogen, and 1,200 pounds/year of phosphorus.
Hollowell Mitigation Project, Wayne County, NC
Water & Land Solutions (WLS) is developed a
private commercial mitigation bank as part of the
WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank located in
the Neuse River Basin, 8-digit Hydrologic Unit Code
03020201. This basin is located within the rapidly
growing Research Triangle region of North
Carolina. Portions of the Hollowell project are
designated as Conservation Areas under the
Wayne County Land Use Growth Strategies. This
designation is intended to focus conservation
activities towards resources that are limited or
irreplaceable. The bank project would further this
Water & Land Solutions Page 9

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
mission by protecting, in perpetuity, the ecological value of the Neuse River floodplain. In addition, the
bank site drains directly to the Neuse River, which is listed as 'Class C' and Nutrient Sensitive Waters per
the North Carolina Division of Water Resources. The Hollowell project will restore over 8,500 linear
feet of critical headwater streams. In addition this project will restore/enhance approximately 10 acres of
riparian wetlands. The restoration approach will address specific water quality goals by promoting
nutrient and sediment reduction in agricultural areas.
Scarborough Mitigation Project, Wayne County, NC
Water & Land Solutions (WLS) is developing
a private commercial mitigation bank as
part of the WLS Neuse 02 Umbrella
Mitigation Bank located in the Neuse River
Basin, 8-digit Hydrologic Unit Code
03020202. This sub -basin spans portions of
Johnston and Wayne Counties and includes
the towns of Goldsboro, Selma, Pine Level,
Mount Olive, Kinston, and Princeton. The
Scarborough project will restore over
10,000 linear feet of critical headwater
streams, restore approximately 120 acres
of riparian wetlands, and permanently
protect over 230 acres within the conservation easement. The site streams drain directly to the Neuse
River which is listed as 'Class C' and Nutrient Sensitive Waters, per the North Carolina Division of Water
Resources. Over 90 percent of the streambanks have inadequate riparian buffers and over 60
percent of the total stream length is actively subject to on -site water quality stressors resulting
from agricultural practices. Project restoration activities will reduce nutrient and sediment inputs from
surrounding agricultural areas. In addition, portions of the site are designated as Conservation Areas
under the Wayne County Land Use Growth Strategies. This designation is intended to focus conservation
activities to resources that are limited or irreplaceable. The SMP would further this mission by protecting,
in perpetuity, the ecological value of the Neuse River floodplain.
3 Bank Establishment and Operation
The Bank will be developed as a private commercial umbrella mitigation bank under an umbrella
mitigation banking instrument (UMBI) to allow for the addition of future mitigation project sites located
in the Yadkin River Basin, 8-digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03040201. The compensatory mitigation
credits developed under the UMBI will be available to public, private, and non-profit customers. The
proposed bank sites will include a combination of Stream Restoration, Enhancement, and Preservation
activities, as well as Riparian Wetland and Non -Riparian Wetland Restoration, Enhancement, and
Preservation activities, depending upon the need of the individual reach and/or wetland area, and the
Page 10 4

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
highest ecological lift possible. The proposed mitigation types, credit ratios, and performance monitoring
will follow current USACE guidance documents as approved by the USACE District Engineer (DE) and IRT.
3.1 Site Ownership
The Sponsor has obtained options to purchase conservation easement agreements for each of the
property parcels that comprise the site. The Sponsor will record conservation easements for the sites
upon IRT bank approval. WLS will provide Agent Authorization forms prior to any regulatory site visits.
The current property owners for the proposed site are listed in Table 1 below.
Fezzik
748800117359
All Cope LLC
Richmond
196.83
1380 126
748700487510,
73.07,
1692 5, 1473
Fezzik
Bells Creek LLC
Richmond
748700261904
162.76
108
Fezzik
748700199458
Jordan Two LLC
Richmond
173.11
158266
Fezzik
748700368983
Judy Thomas et al
Richmond
58.89
1275 297
Bertie S Gibson est c/o
Fezzik
748700258774
Richmond
5.87
656 638
Wendell Gibson
Fezzik
748700361085
Lee Howard Morgan
Richmond
6.25
1547 480
John F. & Betty M.
Fezzik
747700879310
Richmond
141.07
1612 535
Parsons
3.2 Proposed Service Area
The proposed Geographic Service Area (GSA) for the bank is illustrated in Figure 1a and will provide
compensatory mitigation credits for unavoidable, permitted impacts to Waters of the United States in the
Yadkin River Basin (8-Digit HUC 03040201). Use of approved mitigation credits from the bank to
compensate for impacts outside the GSA may be considered by USACE on a case -by -case basis. For
example, the Fezzik site is warm water stream site and will provide compensatory mitigation for warm
stream impacts. Future sites may be developed in the bank that provide both warm stream mitigation
credits as well as wetland mitigation credits.
4 Ecological Suitability of the Sites
4.1 Baseline Conditions — Fezzik Site
The Fezzik site is located in the NCDEQ (formerly NCDENR) Sub -basin 03-07-16, in the 8-digit Hydrologic
Unit (HU) 03040201 (Warm Water Thermal Regime), within the Yadkin River Basin. This sub -basin spans
entirely within Richmond County and includes the municipalities of Rockingham and Hamlet. The Fezzik
Site would further this mission by protecting, in perpetuity, the ecologically valuable watershed of the
Yadkin River.
Water & Land Solutions Page 11

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
4.1.1 Watershed Characterization
Predominant land uses in the watershed are agriculture and silviculture with a small percentage of low -
density residential use. Currently, the site catchment area has an impervious cover estimated to be less
than one percent, and the dominant land uses are row -crop agriculture and silviculture. Within the
watershed, there are over 100 miles of Water Supply Waters servicing the City of Rockingham. The project
will improve water quality by reducing nutrient and sediment inputs from the project area. The natural
flow regime will be improved and/or restored with riparian wetlands and floodplain areas by
implementing Priority Level I Restoration, where appropriate, to raise the existing streambed and
reconnect to the geomorphic floodplain. Aquatic and wildlife habitat functions will be improved and
protected with a permanent conservation easement in excess of SO feet wide along both sides of all
stream reaches. Additionally, water quality treatment features will be installed to remove direct nutrient
inputs and pollutant contamination from the project streams and wetlands. The site streams drain into
Bells Creek which drains into Hitchcock Creek which directly to the Yadkin River which is listed as a 'Class
C' nutrient sensitive water (C; NSW), according to the North Carolina Division of Water Resources
(NCDWR) (2017). As a result of implementing this project, WLS will be able to address components as
defined in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin Restoration Priority Plan (RBRP, 2009). The document describes
this basin as one with degraded water resources due to development pressures in urban and rural areas
and due to other land disturbing activities. In order to appropriately offset unavoidable impacts to Waters
of the United States associated with this growth and development, mitigation projects are essential to
improving water quality and protecting aquatic resource functions in this region.
Potential Functional Uplift and Ecological Benefits
The Fezzik site is located within all three of the DIMS modelled Targeted Resource Areas (TRA). The TRA's
include hydrology, habitat, and water quality aquatic functions. The potential functional uplift and
ecological benefits to impairments are summarized below as part of the overall project goals. Figure 9
illustrates the functional stressors within the project watershed boundary.
Benefits Related to Hydrology
Functional Stressors —All of the project reaches are within a Hydrology TRA, except the lower 1,400 feet
of Bells Creek, and UT3a. Functional stressors include peak flow alterations, artificial barriers, and
ditching/draining as described in the Project Reach Descriptions section. Some of the project reaches
have been ditched to promote rapid drainage from the adjacent agricultural fields and logging areas.
This disturbance has resulted in channel incision and a disconnection of the streams from their relic
floodplains. There is past downcutting associated with headcut migration and channelization. The
reaches that have been ditched/channelized also have spoil levees that are causing the reaches to be
entrenched. This historic channel manipulation has also drained historic wetland hydrology.
Page 12 4

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Functional Uplift Potential
• Floodplain Connectivity —A Priority Level I Restoration approach will reconnect incised
channels with their active and/or relic floodplains and improve stream and wetland hydrology to
areas that have been degraded and/or been historically manipulated.
• Surface Storage and Retention — Raising the bed elevation and reconnecting streams to their
active or relic floodplains will restore wetland hydrology and spread higher flow energies onto
the floodplain thereby increasing retention time, storage, and roughness. Wetland restoration
and incorporation of vernal pools, depressional areas, and other floodplain features will provide
additional retention, storage and habitat diversity and uplift.
• Groundwater Recharge and Hyporheic Exchange —The restored wetland hydrology and
microtopography will increase infiltration and improve overall hydrogeologic function. Benefits
will be achieved through increased groundwater infiltration, surface water interaction and
recharge rates.
• Proper Channel Form — Restoring an appropriate dimension, pattern, and profile will
efficiently transport and deposit sediment (point bars and floodplain sinks) relative to the
stream power and load that is supplied from banks and upland sources. Stream channels that
are appropriately sized to convey a smaller storm flow will improve channel stability by reducing
active bank erosion (lateral stability) and bed degradation (vertical stability; i.e. headcuts,
downcutting, incision).
• Sediment Transport — Boundary conditions, land use, climate, and geologic controls influence
stream channel formation, migration, and how sediment is transported through its watershed.
Appropriate transport capacity, flow competency and bed material size will ensure sediment is
more evenly distributed, such that excessive degradation and aggradation do not occur.
Adequately transporting or entraining fine-grain sediment will prevent embeddedness and
create interstitial habitat and in -stream cover within riffle areas.
Benefits Related to Habitat
Functional Stressors — All of the project reaches are within a Habitat TRA, except the lower 1,400 feet of
Bells Creek. Functional Stressors include limited bedform diversity.
Functional Uplift Potential
• Proper Channel Form — Restoring a natural bedform and appropriate channel geometry will
efficiently transport and deposit sediment (point bars and floodplain sinks) relative to the
stream power and load that is supplied from banks and uplands. Stream channels that are
appropriately sized to convey smaller storm flows will greatly improve channel stability by
reducing active bank erosion (lateral stability) and bed degradation (vertical stability; i.e.
headcuts, downcutting, incision).
• Terrestrial and Aquatic Habitat — Benefits will be achieved through the incorporation of
physical structures, removal of invasive species and re-establishing and enhancing native
vegetation to the riparian buffer areas. Benefits to aquatic organisms will be achieved through
the installation of appropriate in -stream structures using native rock material and woody debris.
Adequately transporting and depositing fine-grain sediment onto the floodplain will prevent
embeddedness and create interstitial habitat, organic food resources and in -stream cover. In -
stream habitat will be improved by creating deeper pools and areas of re -aeration. These lotic
Water & Land Solutions Page 13

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
systems can provide sources of organic matter that ultimately improve the biodiversity of
downstream river systems.
• Landscape Connectivity— Benefits to landscape connectivity will be achieved by restoring a
healthy stream corridor, promoting aquatic and terrestrial species migration and protecting
their shared resources in perpetuity.
Benefits Related to Water Quality
Functional Stressors — All of the project reaches are within a Water Quality TRA (water quality model bin
1). Functional stressors to most project reaches include non-functioning buffer/non-functioning wetland
vegetation, sediment, and nutrients.
Functional Uplift Potential
• Nutrient Reduction/Native Buffer Vegetation — Currently, excess nutrients and pollutants
such as nitrogen and phosphorus from onsite silvicultural and upstream agricultural practices
are entering many of the project reaches without adequate native riparian buffers
(fragmentation). High -functioning riparian and non -riparian buffer vegetation will be established
or enhanced and permanently protected to remove direct pollutant sources and filter runoff
prior to entering the project reaches.
• Sediment Reduction — Appropriate transport capacity, flow competency and bed material size
will ensure sediment is more evenly distributed, such that excessive degradation and
aggradation do not occur. Adequately transporting or entraining fine-grain sediment will
prevent embeddedness. Benefit will be achieved through stabilization of eroding banks; planting
vegetated buffers; and dissipating excess flow energy and shear stress with increased overbank
flows during storm events.
• DO, NO3-, DOC Concentration — Benefits will be achieved through the restoration of more
natural stream bedforms, including riffle and pool sequences, which will increase dissolved
oxygen (DO) concentrations. In addition, as planted riparian buffers mature, increased shade
and wider vegetation density/structure will reduce water temperatures and groundwater
nitrates (NO3-) as well as increase dissolved organic carbon (DOC) (King et al, 2016).
• Bioengineering Treatments — Bioengineering practices such as live staking, brush layering, and
vegetated soil lifts will provide lateral bank stability, rapid tree growth and bank shading to
reduce water temperatures, bank erosion and increase dissolved oxygen levels.
• Water Quality Improvement Features — Water quality improvement features will be
implemented to provide various levels of pollutant removal. When implemented collectively
along with stream, riparian buffer, and wetland restoration, these features can be effective at
reducing nutrients and pollutants, particularly sediment loadings, and therefore provide
additional ecological uplift to a project. The features that are best suited for use at this project
site include small basins to treat agricultural runoff. The constructed features will be in the form
of small "maintenance -free" treatment basins that will capture and treat runoff from the
surrounding areas before it reaches the restored riparian buffer corridor or stream channel.
These features will improve water quality by increasing infiltration and groundwater recharge,
providing diffuse flow energies, and allowing nutrient uptake within the extended buffer area.
Page 14 4

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
4.1.2 Physiography, Geology, and Soils
The project site is located in the western edge of the Upper Coastal Plain Physiographic Province within
the Southeastern Plains Sand Hills Level III/IV Ecoregion ('64c'). This Ecoregion is characterized as rolling
to hilly with a dissected drainage network. Undisturbed valleys in this region are composed primarily of
marine sands and clays, capped in places with Tertiary sands, deposited over the crystalline and
metamorphic rocks of the Piedmont. The underlying geology across the project site is located in the
Carolina Slate Belt and classified as a Metamudstone and Meta-Argillite ('CZmd') formed during the Late
Proterozoic -Cambrian period. The Tillery formation consists primarily of thin to thick bedded
metaconglomerates and metavolcanic rock interbedded with metasandstone (The North Carolina
Geological Survey, 1985). This rock was observed as substrate throughout many of the project reaches.
As shown on the NRCS Soils Map (Figure 3), existing soils around the project reaches are mostly within
the mapping unit 'ChA' (Chewacla). The 'ChA' loam soil series has inclusions of hydric soils as evidenced
by its taxonomic subgroup (Fluvaquentic Dystrudepts) and described as frequently flooded, somewhat
poorly drained, (0 to 2 percent slopes) and present along floodplains (NRCS, 1999). It is anticipated that
as a direct result of implementing Priority Level I stream restoration, ditch plugging and removing spoil
piles/berms along the channels, the natural wetland hydrology will be restored and allow the wetlands to
regain their natural/historic functions.
On -site hydric soil investigations of the project areas proposed for wetland restoration were conducted
on October 15th, 2019 by a licensed soil scientist (LSS), George Lankford, LSS, with George K. Lankford,
LLC (See Appendices for soil boring information and hydric soils mapping). The findings were based on
hand -turned auger borings and indicate the presence of hydric soils along the Bells Creek floodplain. The
hydric soils status is based upon the "Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States" (USDA, NRCS,
2016, Version 8.1). The presence of hydric soil indicators and hydric inclusions within 12 inches of the soil
surface was verified and hydric soil boundaries were identified in areas shown on Figure 7.
Mr. Lankford noted that areas of existing hydric soils have been manipulated by a combination of past
and current agricultural and silvicultural practices (ditching/dredging, surface modifications, and timber
bedding). As such, combining the proposed activities and modifications presents a favorable opportunity
for meeting riparian wetland restoration criteria and functional uplift potential. It is anticipated that as a
direct result of implementing Priority Level I stream restoration, limited overburden soil removal
(bedding/furrows), ditch plugging, surface roughening, lost wetland hydrology will be restored and allow
the wetlands to regain their natural/historic functions and jurisdictional status. The area proposed for
wetland restoration (re-establishment) are labeled on Figure 10.
4.1.3 Existing Stream Conditions
WLS conducted field investigations from August through October 2019 to evaluate and document the
existing conditions for each of the project stream reaches and wetland areas. Subsequent field
investigations included evaluating channel conditions, riparian buffer vegetation assessment,
photographic documentation, cross-section surveys, NC SAM/NC WAM, and hydric soils investigations.
The results of the cross-section surveys and the visual field evaluations were used to conduct geomorphic
stream classification and assess channel stability for each of the project stream reaches. The results of the
existing condition assessments are summarized in the table below.
Water & Land Solutions Page 15

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Many of the project reaches have been impacted from historic and current land use practices, including
agriculture and silviculture. Figure 9, Functional Stressors, shows recent aerial photography with current
functional stressors. Historic agricultural and more recent timber practices, including ditch/channel
maintenance and spoil piles have severely impacted the streambanks along some of the project reaches.
Areas of invasive species vegetation including clusters of Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense) were
observed within some wooded areas along the project reaches. The past land use disturbances, minimal
impervious cover and current silvicultural practices present an ideal opportunity for water quality and
ecosystem improvements through the implementation of this project.
The streams at the project site were broken down into 12 reaches (BC-R1, BC-R2, UT1, UT2-R1, UT2-R2,
UT2-R3, UT2a, UT2b-R1, UT2b-R2, UT2c, UT3, and UT3a) totaling approximately 23,066 linear feet of
existing streams. Project reaches were differentiated based on drainage area breaks at confluences,
changes in existing conditions, restoration approaches, and/or changes in intermittent/perennial stream
status. The presence of historic valleys for each of the project stream reaches can clearly be seen from
LiDAR imagery (Figure 4, LiDAR Map), and are obvious through field observation. The evaluations of
intermittent/perennial stream status were made in October 2019 during abnormally dry conditions ('DO'
— Abnormally Dry). These evaluations were based on NCDWR's Methodology for Identification of
Intermittent and Perennial Streams and Their Origins, (NCDWR, 2010) stream assessment protocols. Table
3 in the executive summary and Table 4 present the results of the field evaluations along with the
unverified jurisdictional status and current NC Stream Assessment Method (NC SAM, 2015) functional
rating of each project reach. Copies of the supporting field assessment forms are available in Appendix A.
Table 2 provides reach designations, approximate drainage area, stream status based on field analysis and
NCDWR stream classification form score.
Page 16 4

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Table 2. Reach Watershed Drainage & Jurisdictional Status — Fezzik Site
1,369
2.14
Perennial
38
3,929
6.14
Perennial
--
96
0.15
Intermittent
25
787
1.23
Perennial/Intermittent
34.5
973
1.52
Perennial
--
1,062
1.66
Perennial
--
52
0.08
Intermittent
25
64
0.10
Intermittent
29
109
0.17
Perennial/Intermittent
--
38
0.06
Intermittent
22.5
371
0.58
Perennial
34
31
0.05
Intermittent
30
While some of the drainage areas of the tributaries are small, the NCDWQ stream scores are all above 19.
Discussions with the landowners regarding flow histories of the streams, as well as our extensive
experience with restoration projects in the Upper Coastal Plain, lead WLS to conclude which of the project
stream reaches are suited to the proposed restoration enhancement and/or preservation practices. Table
3 characterizes the streams based on stream length, general description and Rosgen stream classification.
4.1.4 Existing Reach Descriptions
Visual inspections of the channel substrate materials were conducted for each of the project reaches. The
reaches were observed to be predominantly coarse gravel/small cobble material in many locations. Due
to past downcutting associated with headcut migration and channelization, grade control along the
project reaches appears to be provided by coarse bed material and culvert crossings.
Water & Land Solutions Page 17

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Table 3. Existing Reach Description - Fezzik Site
4,946
2.1, 1.6
8.5, 8.0
1.0, 1.2
B4c
High
3,293
2.0
8.3
1.3
F4
Low
740
2.3
7.2
1.5
Incised E4b
Medium
3018
2.3
6.2
1.2
Incised E4
Medium
1,500
2.0
5.8
1.4
Incised E4
Low
612
1.8
12.4
1.4
G4
Low
680
1.4
6.1
1.7
G4
Low
1,054
1.7
9.7
1.2
B4
High
614
1.2
3.6
2.5
G4
Low
262
1.5
3.8
2.4
G4/B4
Low
4,287
2.2, 1.6
8.5, 5.1
2.0, 2.1
Incised E4/G4c
Low
850
1.8
7.5
1.7
G4
Low
Currently, the project areas consist of mostly managed pine timber that have been in continuous
production for decades. A further review of topographic maps, field investigation of on -site features,
similar stream and wetland conditions (both reference and restored), and LiDAR survey data provides
clear evidence that the existing channel patterns appear to be indicative of valley signatures, valley slopes,
and catchments that likely supported a natural stream and wetland system.
Historically, many of the project stream and wetlands areas have been extensively ditched to promote
rapid drainage from the adjacent agricultural fields and logging areas. This disturbance has resulted in
channel incision and a disconnection of the streams from their relic floodplains. Portions of the project
riparian buffers have been cleared or have a successional riparian buffer. As a result of these significant
modifications to the stream valleys (i.e. ditching/manipulation) and on -going timber practices, it is difficult
to discern the historic channels in some locations. However, the LiDAR signatures clearly illustrate natural
valley morphology and crenulations that would likely support a riparian system.
Page 18 4

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Bells Creek: Bells Creek (BC-R1) originates west
of 1-74 and flows southeast onto the project area
until the culvert crossing at Millstone
Road/Church Street. The valley slope is
approximately 0.9 percent, the sinuosity is 1.16,
and the drainage area is 1,369 acres. Because the
stream system within the project area has not
been historically manipulated, natural bedform
features are present and the channel is mostly
stable throughout most of its length. The
riparian buffer along BC -RI consists of mixed
pine/hardwood, with some successional woody
vegetation, as the property was recently
timbered. Based on the stable channel
conditions and minimal historic anthropogenic
disturbances, BC-R1 was classified along its
length as a 'B4c' stream type.
Looking downstream along BC -RI showing stable
channel conditions and streamside vegetation.
BC-R2 continues from the Millstone Road culvert crossing to the confluence with UT3 near Haywood
Parker Road. The reach has been channelized along the lower portion and the sinuosity is very low
(k=1.04). The dimension of BC-R2 currently is a trapezoidal channel with a top width of approximately
30.0 feet and a depth of approximately 4.1 feet. The typical BHR range was measured to be 1.3 to 1.5.
Based on field observations and LiDAR imagery, the channel appears to have been historically ditched in
an attempt to drain surface hydrology for agricultural/timber use. The channel is entrenched due to spoil
levees along the top of bank and active bank erosion was observed along the reach. The historic channel
manipulation and straightening has drained historic wetland hydrology.
The riparian buffer along BC-R2 consists of mixed
pine/hardwood, with some successional woody
vegetation, as the property was recently
timbered. Based on the existing channel
conditions and historic anthropogenic
disturbances, including channelization and
straightening, the reach was classified as an 'F4'
stream type.
y�
Fy �'
Looking downstream along BC-R2 at straightened
channel conditions.
Water & Land Solutions Page 19

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
UT1: UT1 is a headwater tributary to upper Bells
Creek (BC-R1) that has been historically
channelized along much of its length. The valley
slope is approximately 2.1 percent and the
drainage area is approximately 96 acres. The
channel begins upstream of a culvert crossing at
1-74 and flows towards BC-R1 where spoil levees
are evident along both top of banks. Because the
system has been channelized, the sinuosity is very
low (k=1.05). Although moderately incised, the
channel bed appears mostly stable and the typical
Bank Height Ratio (BHR) measured to be 1.5.
The riparian buffer along the entire length of UT1
consists of mostly woody vegetation. Based on
the existing channel conditions and historic
anthropogenic disturbances, including
channelization and straightening, UT1 is classified
as an incised 'E4b' stream type.
Looking at right bank along UT1 showing
berm/spoil area along the top of bank.
UT2-R1: Similar to BC-R1, UT2-R1 originates immediately west of 1-74 and flows east onto the project
area until its confluence with UT2b-R2. UT2-R1 has been historically manipulated along some of its length,
however it appears to be relatively stable and located within the natural valley/low point along most of
its length. The valley slope is approximately 1.1 percent and the drainage area is 787 acres. A majority of
the drainage area is in mixed forest, low density residential and active timber management.
Mature woody vegetation was observed along most of this reach. Because the system has been
manipulated, the sinuosity is moderate (k=1.14). The average channel width is approximately 12.0 feet, a
depth of approximately 3.7 feet, and the typical BHR was measured to be 1.2. The riparian buffer along
UT2-R1 consists of mixed pine/hardwood, with some successional woody vegetation, as the property was
recently timbered. Based on the mostly stable channel conditions and minimal anthropogenic
disturbances, the reach was classified as an incised 'E4' stream type.
Page 20 4

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
UT2-R2: UT2-R2 continues from its confluence with
UT2b-R2 for approximately 1,500 feet. The reach is
slightly incised along much of its length although
maintain vertical stability and natural bed features.
The typical BHR for the reach was measured to be
1.4. The valley slope is approximately 0.6 percent and
the drainage area is 973 acres. It appears the channel
has been historically manipulated and the sinuosity is
low (k=1.08). The riparian buffer along the entire
length is mostly wooded. Based on the existing
conditions and coarse gravel/small cobble bed
materials, UT2-R2 is classified as an incised 'E4'
stream type.
Looking downstream at coarse bed material and
slightly incised channel conditions along UT2-R2.
UT2-R3: UT2-R3 continues to flow from UT2-R2 to the confluence with BC-R2. UT2-R3 has a stream length
of approximately 612 feet, valley slope of 0.4 percent, and drainage area of 1,062 acres. The lower section
of UT2 connects an extensive drainage network that appears to have been manipulated and deepened to
accommodate rapid drainage and on -going timber operations. Localized bank erosion was observed in
the lower portion of the reach, however based on the incised conditions and lack of adequate bedform
diversity and pool -to -pool spacing, UT2-R3 was classified as a 'G4' stream type.
UT2a: UT2a originates nearthe western property line
and flows southeast for approximately 680 feet
towards UT2-R1. The valley slope is approximately 2.8
percent and the drainage area is 52 acres. UT2a
appears to be severely incised, with some bank
erosion present and a BHR of 1.7. A majority of stream
length appears to have been manipulated and the
riparian buffer is less than 50 feet wide throughout its
entire length. Based on the existing conditions, UT2a
is classified as a 'G4' stream type.
Looking downstream at incised channel conditions
along UT2a.
UT2b-R1: UT2b-R1 begins below a pond dam and flows east for approximately 1,054 feet before its
confluence with UT2b-R2 and UT2c. The valley slope is approximately 3.1 percent and the drainage area
is 64 acres. Although the surrounding area has been recently timbered, according to the landowner and
after reviewing aerial imagery, the stream in this area has not been disturbed and is located in its natural
Water & Land Solutions Page 21

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
valley. A severe headcut was observed in the lower portion of the reach, but a majority of the upper reach
exhibits stable conditions. The riparian buffers widths are less than 50 feet in width along the entire reach
length. Based on the step -pool morphology and cobble substrate, UT2b-R1 is classified as a 'B4' stream
type.
Looking upstream at incised channel conditions
along UT2b-R2.
Looking downstream at incised channel
conditions along UT2c.
UT2b-R2: UT2b-R2 continues below an active
headcut near UT2c and flows northeast for
approximately 614 feet towards UT2-R2. The
valley slope is approximately 1.9 percent and
the drainage area is 109 acres. UT2b-R2 appears
to be severely incised, with some bank erosion
present and a BHR of 2.5. A majority of stream
length appears to have been disconnected from
its geomorphic floodplain and the riparian
buffer is approximately 50 feet wide throughout
its entire length. Based on the existing
conditions, UT2b-R2 is classified as a 'G4' stream
type.
UT2c: UT2c originates as a headwater tributary
and flows north for approximately 262 feet
towards UT2b-R2. The valley slope is
approximately 2.3 percent and the drainage
area is 38 acres. UT2c appears to be severely
incised, with some bank erosion present and a
BHR of 2.4. Similar to UT2b-R1, the surrounding
area has been recently timbered. According to
the landowner and after reviewing aerial
imagery, the stream in this area has not been
recently disturbed and located in its natural
valley. A severe headcut was observed in the
upper portion of the reach, but a majority of the
upper tributary is stable. The riparian buffers
widths are less than 50 feet in width along the
entire left top of bank. Based on the coarse
gravel substrate, UT2c is classified as a 'G4/ B4c'
stream type.
Page 22 4

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
UT3: UT3 originates within a timber management
area and flows northeast for approximately 4,287
feet towards lower BC-R2. The valley slope is
approximately 1.6 percent and the drainage area is
371 acres. It appears most of the reach has been
historically manipulated and the sinuosity is low
(k=1.04). The typical BHR for the reach was
measured to be 1.6 in the upper reach and 2.5 in the
lower reach below the existing access road. UT3
appears to be moderately incised and vertically
contained (ER=1.9), with minimal active bank
erosion present along the reach. Based on the
coarse gravel/cobble substrate, UT3 is classified as a
'G4/B4c' stream type.
Looking downstream along UT3 at incised
channel conditions.
Based on field observations and LiDAR imagery, the lower portion appears to have been historically
ditched in an attempt to drain surface hydrology for agricultural/timber use. The channel is entrenched
due to spoil levees along the top of bank and active bank erosion was observed along the reach. The
historic channel manipulation and straightening has drained historic wetland hydrology. The riparian
buffer along UT3 consists of mixed pine/hardwood, with some successional woody vegetation, as the
property was recently timbered.
UT3a: UT3a is a small headwater tributary that flows southeast for approximately 850 feet towards upper
UT3. The valley slope is approximately 1.8 percent and the drainage area is approximately 31 acres. UT3a
appears to be moderately incised and entrenched throughout most of its length. The riparian buffer along
UT3a consists of mixed pine/hardwood, with some successional woody vegetation, as the property was
recently timbered. Based on the existing conditions, UT3a is classified as an incised 'G4' stream type.
4.1.5 Existing Wetland Conditions
Degraded and/or drained riparian wetlands were found within the project boundary. These areas contain
hydric soils indicators and total approximately 9.62 acres (See Figure 7), and conditions are favorable for
restoring wetland hydrology and re-establishment of jurisdictional status. The predominant wetland
vegetation communities are impacted by current silviculture practices and historic agricultural land use.
Existing conditions in these areas are favorable for restoring these areas. The predominant wetland
vegetation communities are either disturbed, absent or not considered reference quality. It is expected
that as a direct result of implementing Priority Level I stream restoration and other hydrology
modifications in these areas, degraded wetland functions will be restored. A natural overbank flooding
regime will be restored throughout the area by restoring the appropriate bankfull channel geometry and
stream pattern, and by raising the stream bed elevation to reconnect the channel to its historic floodplain.
In addition, plugging toe ditches and removing spoil piles and fill material will also serve to raise the
seasonal water table. The overall restoration approach will improve the hyporheic zone interaction and
both biological and chemical processes associated with aquatic functions of the stream and wetlands.
These activities, including minimal grading of microtopography, ditch plugging and spoil pile removal, will
provide significant functional uplift along the riparian corridor. Whenever possible, any existing
jurisdictional wetland areas will be avoided by keeping proposed restoration and construction activities
Water & Land Solutions Page 23

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
away from the wetland boundaries. In some areas, disturbance of the existing wetlands may be
unavoidable to restore a stable and fully functioning wetland and riparian system.
On -site investigations of the soils
within the project area were
conducted on October 151h, 2019
by licensed soil scientist (LSS),
George Lankford, LSS, with George
K. Lankford, LLC (See Hydric Soils
Investigation in the Appendices).
The findings were based on hand -
turned auger borings and indicate
the presence of hydric soils along
the floodplains of many of the
project reaches. The hydric soils
status is based upon the "Field
Indicators of Hydric Soils in the
United States" (USDA, NRCS, 2016,
Version 8.1).
LiDAR graphic showing existing drainage ditches along Bells
The presence of hydric soil Creek (BC-R2) floodplain and hydric soils area (W01).
indicators and hydric inclusions
within 12 inches of the soil surface was verified and a hydric soil boundary was identified as containing
potential jurisdictional hydrology. Mr. Lankford noted that areas of existing hydric soils have been
manipulated by a combination of drainage alterations, agricultural use, and timber bedding.
Groundwater wells with HOBO data loggers were installed on December 3rd, 2019 to record groundwater
levels throughout the hydric soil areas and wetlands. The number and location of wells can be seen on
Figure 8. Graphs of the collected data, rainfall data, and growing season is available in Appendix A. The
growing season totals 232 days, beginning March 23rd and ending November 10th.
4.1.6 Potential Site Constraints
There are no existing easements on the site. Any easement breaks will permanently exclude the existing
easement corridors from the conservation easement boundary.
4.1.7 Mineral or Water Rights Assurance
There are no known mineral or surface water rights issues within or adjacent to the site properties.
4.1.8 Hydrologic Trespass
As shown on Figure 5, the lower portion of project reaches BC-R2 and UT3 are located within a FEMA
regulated floodplain (Zone AE, Panel 7486). While it is not anticipated that there will be issues associated
with FEMA permitting or documentation, WLS will coordinate with the local floodplain administrator as
needed and prepare the required documentation to obtain approval for any FEMA regulated impacts. In
addition, the project will be designed so that any increase in flooding will be contained within the project
boundary and will not impact adjacent landowners, therefore hydrologic trespass will not be a concern.
Page 24 4

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
4.1.9 Invasive Species Vegetation
There are currently no substantial communities of invasive plant species within the proposed project
boundaries. Some small, immature Chinese Privet (Ligustrum sinense) and Multiflora rose (Rosa
multiflora) plants were observed on the periphery of the project area and existing riparian buffer areas.
These areas will be monitored by WLS, and any invasive plants found within the project boundary will be
treated to prevent expansion and establishment of a substantial invasive community. This will allow for
a healthy, native riparian and upland plant community to dominate the area and help prevent future
establishment of invasive species vegetation.
4.1.10 Cultural Resources
The project is not anticipated to have any adverse impacts on cultural or historic resources. There are no
sites currently listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) within the project area. The nearest
sites are located in the Ellerbe Commercial District (HPO Site ID: RH0457) which are approximately 1.9
miles from the project site. On -site investigations and discussions with the landowners have not disclosed
any potential resources or occurrences of this type on the property. If the project is awarded, WLS will
coordinate with the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (NCSHPO) to ensure that there will
be no cultural or historical resource impacts as a result of restoration activities. Based on a review using
Google Earth, the nearest airport to the project site is the Richmond County Airport, which is located
approximately 11.5 miles south of the site. Camp Mackall Auxiliary Airfield (US Army) is located
approximately 12 miles to the east. The proposed Fezzik project will not affect operations at either of
these airport facilities.
4.1.11 Threatened and Endangered Species
Based on a review of the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) database and IPaC, there are currently four
federally -listed endangered species known to occur in Richmond County: red -cockaded woodpecker
(Picoides borealis), Michaux's sumac (Rhus michauxii), rough -leaved loosestrife (Lysimachia
asperulaefolia), and Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii). There are no threatened species
listed for Richmond County. Project implementation is not anticipated to have a negative impact on these
species. WLS will coordinate with the appropriate agencies should a determination be required for
permitting.
4.1.12 Conditions Affecting Hydrology
Road culvert crossings are located just outside of the project area upstream of UT1 and BC-R1, as well as
one just downstream of the confluence of UT3 and BC-R2 at Haywood Parker Road. Within the project
area there are two road culvert crossings. One, is located where BC-R1 and BC-R2 converge at Millstone
Road and the second culvert is located midway down UT3. The easement is proposed to be broken in 5
places due to road crossings and to allow landowner access to the property. Two easement breaks will be
located on BC-R1, one on UT2-R1, one on UT3 and one at Millstone Road. The culvert sizes and locations
may remain, and therefore, design elevations and culvert sizes may be modified to tie into this vertical
control point. There are several ditches throughout the Site. These ditches were historically used to drain
wetlands and create arable land for timberland. These ditches will be plugged during restoration activities
to prevent them from negatively affecting hydrology on the completed project.
Water & Land Solutions Page 25

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
4.1.13 Adjacent Land Use
Site -adjacent land use is primarily silviculture. None of these land uses will have negative impacts on the
operation of the site.
5 Mitigation Work Plan
5.1 Site Design Approach
The project will involve the combination of restoration, enhancement and preservation of 12 reaches (BC-
R1, BC-R2, UT1, UT2-R1, UT2-R2, UT2-R3, UT2a, UT2b-R1, UT2b-R2, UT2c, UT3, and UT3a) totaling
approximately 23,066 linear feet of existing streams and 9.62 acres of riparian wetlands (Figure 10,
Proposed Mitigation Features). This comprehensive approach utilizes a suite of stream mitigation
practices, from Priority Level I Restoration to Preservation, and appropriately addresses all of the
intermittent and perennial stream reaches at the project site along with restoring degraded riparian
wetlands and limiting the number of stream crossings.
Many of the project stream reaches are unstable or degraded, with documented active lateral migration
and associated localized channel widening and downcutting. Many of the project riparian buffers have
been partially cleared or disturbed. Currently, the project reaches act as excess sources of sediment and
nutrients to the project watershed, as well as the receiving waters. The proposed project will provide
adequate floodplain access to all stream reaches. For any project reach along which Priority Level II
Restoration must be utilized, the following elements will be incorporated into the proposed design and
construction:
• Floodplain bench excavation grading will extend a minimum of 1.5 bankfull widths beyond the
stream belt width such that meandering floodplains are not created.
• All proposed floodplains will be constructed such that they are over -excavated to accommodate
replacement of topsoil.
• Design and construction oversight measures will ensure the proper harvesting, segregating,
stockpiling, storage, handling, overall management and replacement of A and B soil horizon
materials onto the excavated floodplain and native substrate in the riffle areas.
• Constructed return slopes between the outer edge of the excavated floodplain and the terrace
will be a minimum of 5:1 or flatter.
WLS will assess watershed information including: drainage areas, historic and current land uses and
development trends, geologic setting and landscape controls, soil types, and terrestrial plant
communities. WLS will compare the results of the existing conditions analyses along with reference data
from previous project implementation to determine the degrees of impairment and functional losses as
they relate to physical and biological processes, as well as aquatic resources. To develop an appropriate
design approach for the project reaches, the restoration potential must be determined to maximize the
highest functional uplift based on the hydrology, hydraulics, geomorphology, physiochemical, and
biological hierarchy (Harman, 2012). The design will utilize hybrid stream restoration approaches
Page 26 4

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
(Skidmore, 2001) that have been successfully implemented on similar past projects. This includes using
process based analytical tools when appropriate, as well as Rosgen's methodology (NRCS NEH, 2007),
under which dimensionless ratios from reference reach data (analog) and past project experience
(empirical) are analyzed to develop design criteria.
The proposed project will provide increased floodplain access throughout the project area for all reaches
and will be monitored to demonstrate successful floodplain function. The stream channel design will
include analysis of the hydrology, hydraulics, shear stress, sediment transport, and bankfull channel
dimensions. WLS will consider three methods (field indicators if present, published regional curve
information, and hydraulic modeling) for estimating a bankfull discharge. The hydrology and hydraulics
analysis will evaluate a range of lower flow discharges and flood frequency curves to help determine an
appropriate design discharge. The design discharge will be used to select an appropriate channel
geometry and help monitor long-term project performance.
The wetland re-establishment approach is supported by on -site soils investigations, surface flow
observations, topography, and historical observations by landowners. A large contiguous hydric soil
polygon is mapped along the riparian corridors of the proposed lower stream reaches. The combination
of Priority I restoration, plugging toe ditches, and minor grading of spoil and fill will restore the hydrologic
conditions that formed the in -situ hydric soils.
Design Criteria Selections
Since the project has the potential to appropriately address active streambank erosion along the project
reaches, future supply of fine sediment from on -site streambank erosion is expected to be reduced.
However, a more detailed sediment transport analysis will be conducted to quantify sediment that is being
supplied, and if it will be transported adequately, thus preventing excessive aggradation.
During the formal design process, WLS will assess the hydraulic design forces to ensure that the channel
bed will not aggrade nor degrade. Bed degradation (incision) can occur without an adequate sediment
supply if the design channel has excessive shear stress or stream power. Consequently, constructed riffles
will be incorporated into the proposed design with adequate substrate and/or wood materials that will
be immobile during storm events, since the sediment supply not likely be sufficient to rebuild riffles
naturally. The constructed riffles will also increase dissolved oxygen content, provide aquatic habitat and
assurance that the restored channel will not degrade over time.
Final selection of design criteria will be based on a combination of approaches, including review of
reference data, flow regime equations and on -site flow duration, evaluation of monitoring results from
successful past projects, and best professional judgment. Evaluating data from reference reach surveys
and monitoring results from numerous Coastal Plain and Piedmont stream and wetland projects in this
transitional area provide pertinent background information to determine the appropriate restoration
potential and design parameters given the existing conditions, current functions and site constraints. The
design parameters for the stream reaches will also consider current USACE Coastal Plain Stream Guidance
and mitigation credit compensation methods.
The conceptual restoration design activities and structural elements are justified for the following
reasons:
Water & Land Solutions Page 27

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
• Site streams have been degraded or otherwise manipulated during the conversion of the
surrounding area for agricultural use. Re-establishing stable stream conditions and adding in -
stream structures will restore floodplain connectivity, and improve bedform diversity as well as
wetland hydrology;
• A majority of the site streams are moderately to severely incised and/or oversized (BHRs greater
than 1.5) and do not have access to their geomorphic floodplain, which is exacerbated by adjacent
ditches, levees and access roads;
• Past agricultural and silvicultural activities have resulted in the loss of natural wetland hydrology
and native woody vegetation;
• Enhancement measures or preservation alone would not achieve the highest possible level of
restoration or functional lift for the degraded stream and wetland system.
Sediment Transport Considerations
Sediment transport calculations and stream power analyses will be performed for both the existing
degraded channels and the proposed design channels. WLS will assess the stream's transport competency
and capacity to quantify the stream's ability to move its sediment load. This assessment will help
determine if additional sediment transport calculations or models will be necessary. However, it is still
critically important to perform watershed reconnaissance and estimate how much sediment is being
supplied to the project reaches by determining load rates from both within the channel (bed/banks) and
upland sources.
WLS will perform quantitative channel assessments that includes collecting sediment samples and
predicting streambank erosion rates and comparing model results using the BANCS Method (BEHI/NBS)
and/or BSTEM to evaluate bed and bank material characteristics and estimate sediment yields. The bed
material will be sieved and a grain size distribution developed. The results of the substrate analyses will
be used to classify the streams, and complete critical shear stress calculations required for designing
slopes/depths and predicting channel stability. Other observation methods, such as dendro-geomorphic
studies (bank root mass), bank pins/profiles, cross-section surveys, and time -series aerial photography
may also be used as a comparative analysis.
Additionally, WLS will calculate stream power and compare the results to stable reference data for sand
bed streams and published values to reduce uncertainties. If the results fall outside common stable ranges
for similar stream types and slopes, multiple design iterations and methods, such as the Copeland Stability
Curve, HEC-RAS-SAM modeling program, will be run to confirm that sediment loads can be transported
adequately through the system without containing excess energy in the channel and verify that the design
will not excessively aggrade or degrade.
Stream and Floodplain Improvement Features
In -stream structures are utilized for grade control, streambank protection, and improving bedform
diversity and habitat. All in -stream structures will be constructed from materials naturally found at the
project site such as hardwood trees, trunks/logs, brush/branches, gravel and cobble stone materials. To
ensure sustainability of those structures, WLS will use methods of structure design and construction that
have proven successful on numerous past projects in the same region. WLS will also incorporate
bioengineering practices, when appropriate, that use biodegradable materials and fabrics, uncompacted
Page 28 4

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
soils, live plant cuttings, and native vegetation to stabilize streambanks. Bioengineering treatments will
provide initial bank stability that allows for the quick establishment of deep-rooted vegetation along the
eroding streambanks. Once established, these live, dormant plant cuttings will provide long-term stability
to the treated areas.
WLS has field verified that the project site has adequate, viable construction access, staging, and stockpile
areas. Note that physical constraints or barriers, such as stream crossings, account for less than two
percent of the proposed total project footage within the conservation easement area. These same existing
site access points and crossings will be used for future access after the completion of construction. Where
practicable, impacts to existing native riparian buffer vegetation and existing wetlands will be minimized.
The use of native species riparian buffer transplants will be maximized as well. Any potential impacts to
existing wetland areas will be avoided during construction, with only temporary, minimal impacts
expected and when necessary for maximized permanent stream, wetland, and riparian buffer functional
uplift.
5.1.1 Proposed Stream Conditions — Fezzik Site
UT1: Due to the past manipulation and degraded condition of project reach UT1, a Priority Level 1/11
Restoration approach is proposed to restore natural stream functions and improve water quality. A
majority of this reach does not have access to a bankfull bench, and portions of the channel have been
historically manipulated to accommodate timber production. Given the smaller drainage area, valley
confinement and steeper slopes, this reach will be restored as Rosgen '134c' stream type using appropriate
step -pool morphology with limited meander geometry. Within portions of the deeper channel segments,
a shallow Priority Level 11 Restoration approach is proposed to create bankfull benches. If necessary, a
portion of UT1 will be constructed partially offline within the abandoned floodplain area before
reconnecting with the BC-R1 channel alignment further downstream.
Riparian buffers in excess of 50 feet will be supplementally planted along the entire length. Any mature
trees or significant native vegetation will be protected and incorporated into the design. Bioengineering
techniques, such as geolifts, toe wood, and live stakes, will also be used to protect streambanks and
promote woody vegetation growth. These proposed restoration activities will provide bedform diversity
and maximize functional uplift. Any exotic species vegetation will be removed and native riparian species
vegetation will be planted in the resulting disturbed areas.
UT2-R3: UT2-R3 is currently incised due to past manipulation and channelization. Therefore, a Priority
Level I Restoration approach is proposed to improve stream functions and wetland hydrology in areas
with hydric soils. The reach will be restored as a Rosgen'C4/B4c' stream type using appropriate riffle -pool
morphology with conservative meander geometry. Work along this reach will involve filling in the lateral
ditches, raising the bed elevation, and reconnecting the existing stream with its relic floodplain. Portions
of the new channel will be constructed offline before reconnecting with the proposed BC-R2 channel
alignment further downstream. The proposed design width -to -depth ratio will be comparable to stable
streams in this geologic setting. It is expected that channel widths will narrow slightly, over time, due to
vegetation growth along the streambanks. In -stream structures, including rock riffles, log weirs and log
vanes will be used to dissipate flow energy, protect streambanks, and eliminate potential for future
incision. Restored streambanks will be graded to stable side slopes and the historic floodplain will be
Water & Land Solutions Page 29

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
reconnected to further promote stability and hydrological function across the stream and wetland
complex.
UT2a: UT2a currently exhibits incised conditions due to past manipulation and downcutting. A Priority
Level 1/11 Restoration approach is proposed to improve stream functions. The reach will be restored as a
Rosgen '134' stream type using appropriate step -pool morphology with conservative meander geometry.
Work along this reach will involve raising the bed elevation and reconnecting the existing stream with its
geomorphic floodplain. In -stream structures, including rock riffles, log weirs and log and rock step -pools
will be used to dissipate flow energy, protect streambanks, and eliminate potential for future incision.
Restored streambanks will be graded to stable side slopes to further promote channel stability. Riparian
buffers of at least 50 feet wide will be planted within the conservation easement. These proposed
restoration activities will provide the maximum possible functional uplift.
UT2b-R2: The restoration of UT2b-R2 will begin at an active headcut along UT2b-R1. Due to the incised
conditions, a Priority Level 1/11 Restoration approach is proposed to restore floodplain functions and
improve water quality. Given the wider valley width and flatter slopes, the reach will be restored as a
Rosgen 'C4' stream type using appropriate riffle -pool morphology with conservative meander geometry.
A new channel will be constructed within the abandoned floodprone areas by raising the profile and
reconnecting the UT2b-R2 channel alignment further downstream.
The design width/depth ratio for the new channel will be similar to stable streams in this geologic setting.
It is expected that over time, channel widths will narrow slightly over time due to fine sediment deposition
and vegetation growth along the streambanks. In -stream structures, such as rock riffles, log weirs, and log
and rock step pools will be used to control grade in the steeper sections, as well as dissipate flow energy,
protect streambanks, and eliminate potential for future incision. Restored streambanks will be graded to
stable side slopes and the floodplain will be reconnected to further promote stability and hydrological
function. Riparian buffers of at least 50 feet wide will be planted within the conservation easement. These
proposed restoration activities will provide the maximum possible functional uplift.
UT2c: The restoration of UT2c will begin at an active headcut and tie into UT2b-R2. Due to the incised
conditions, a Priority Level 1/II Restoration approach is proposed to restore floodplain functions and
improve water quality. Given the narrow valley width and steeper slopes, the reach will be restored as a
Rosgen '134' stream type using appropriate step -pool morphology with limited meander geometry. The
design width/depth ratio for the restored channel will be similar to stable streams in this geologic setting.
It is expected that over time, channel widths will narrow slightly over time due to fine sediment deposition
and vegetation growth along the streambanks. In -stream structures, such as rock riffles, log weirs, and log
and rock step pools will be used to control grade in the steeper sections, as well as dissipate flow energy,
protect streambanks, and eliminate potential for future incision. Restored streambanks will be graded to
stable side slopes and the floodplain will be reconnected to further promote stability and hydrological
function. Riparian buffers of at least 50 feet wide will be planted along the left top of within the
conservation easement. These proposed restoration activities will provide the maximum possible
functional uplift.
UT3: UT3 begins as a headwater tributary and then flows to its confluence with BC-R2 near the bottom
of the project boundary. UT3 is channelized and straightened in some sections, but generally flows
Page 30 4

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
through the low point of the valley. The upper half of UT3 is steeper and more confined. Along this section
of UT3, work will involve a combination of Priority Level I and II Restoration by excavating a floodplain
bench before raising the bed elevation and reconnecting the stream with its geomorphic floodplain, which
will promote more frequent over bank flooding. A stable stream system will be achieved by constructing
a single -thread meandering channel across the geomorphic floodplain, increasing the width/depth ratio,
and raising the bed elevation. Proposed grading activities in the lower reach will restore historic flow
patterns and adjacent wetland hydrology by filling ditches and removing berms along the existing
channels. The reach will be restored as a Rosgen 'B4c/C4' stream type using appropriate step -pool and
riffle -pool morphology with a conservative meander planform geometry that accommodates the valley
slope and width.
This approach will allow restoration of a stable channel form with appropriate bedform diversity, as well
as improved biological functions through increased aquatic and terrestrial habitats. In -stream structures
will be incorporated to control grade, dissipate flow energies, protect streambanks, and eliminate the
potential for channel incision. Proposed in -stream structures will include rock riffles for grade control and
habitat, rootwads, brush toe, and cover logs, and log weirs for encouraging step -pool formation, energy
dissipation, bank stability, and bedform diversity and to provide natural scour features and improved
aquatic habitat. It is expected that over time, these areas will stabilize as native vegetation becomes
established along the streambanks. This approach will also improve the hydrological function and
hyporheic zone interaction between the stream channel and riparian wetlands.
An existing culverted stream crossing will remain, if necessary, at the same location towards the middle
of reach UT3. At the stream crossing, the existing channel will be filled to an elevation sufficient to connect
the channel to its historic floodplain using native rock material and suitable fill material from
overburden/borrow areas. Riparian buffers in excess of 50 feet will be restored along the entire length of
the reach. Any mature trees or significant native vegetation will be protected and incorporated into the
design. Bioengineering techniques, such as geolifts, toe wood, and live stakes, will also be used to protect
streambanks and promote woody vegetation growth along the streambanks. These proposed restoration
activities will provide the maximum possible functional uplift. Any exotic species vegetation, primarily
Chinese privet, will be removed in this area and native riparian species vegetation will be planted in the
resulting disturbed areas.
UT3a: UT3a currently exhibits incised conditions due to past manipulation and downcutting. A Priority
Level 1/11 Restoration approach is proposed to improve base flow conditions and stream functions. The
reach will be restored as a Rosgen '134c' stream type using appropriate step -pool morphology with
conservative meander geometry. Work along this reach will involve raising the bed elevation and
reconnecting the existing stream with its geomorphic floodplain. In -stream structures, including rock
riffles, log weirs and log and rock step -pools will be used to dissipate flow energy, protect streambanks,
and eliminate potential for future incision. Restored streambanks will be graded to stable side slopes to
further promote channel stability. Riparian buffers of at least 50 feet wide will be planted within the
conservation easement. These proposed restoration activities will provide the maximum possible
functional uplift.
BC-R2: The Bells Creek mainstem tributary (BC-R2) begins at the Millstone Road/Church Street culvert
crossing above the confluence with UT2. The reach is moderately incised with BHRs ranging from 1.3 to
1.6. Based on preliminary site investigations, historic aerials and LiDAR imagery, the channel appears to
Water & Land Solutions Page 31

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
have been manipulated and straightened in many locations. Work along this reach will involve a Priority
Level I Restoration by raising the bed elevation and reconnecting the existing stream with its relic
floodplain. The lower section of BC-R2 will transition into a Priority Level II restoration to create a
floodplain bench and tie into the existing culvert elevation near the bottom of the project boundary at
Haywood Parker Road. This approach will promote more frequent over bank flooding in areas with hydric
soils, thereby creating favorable conditions for wetland restoration (re-establishment). The existing
channel has a stable bed with coarse gravel/cobble substrate in many locations, however it exhibits lateral
instability and overwidening, as evidenced by active bank erosion and irregular sediment deposits
observed as mid -channel and side bar formations. This systemic degradation is causing fine bank
sediments to enter the stream and will likely continue, if restoration is not implemented, since the existing
channel has many vertical banks that are devoid of deep rooting vegetation, as a result from active
straightening and deepening and removing riparian buffer vegetation for timber production.
This reach will be restored as Rosgen 'C4' stream type using appropriate riffle -pool morphology with a
conservative meander planform geometry that accommodates the flatter valley slope and widths. This
approach will allow restoration of a stable channel form with appropriate bedform diversity, as well as
improved ecological function through increased aquatic and terrestrial habitats. It is anticipated that the
design width/depth ratio for the channel will be similar to stable streams in this geologic setting. In -stream
structures will be incorporated to control grade, dissipate flow energies, protect streambanks, and
eliminate the potential for future channel incision. In -stream structures will likely include rock riffles for
grade control and aquatic habitat and log j-hook vanes, and log and rock weirs for encouraging pool
formation, bank stability, and bedform diversity. In addition to in -stream channel features, shallow vernal
pools will be created in the floodplain to provide habitat diversity, nutrient cycling, and improved storage
and attenuation of overland flows.
UT2-R2: UT2-R2 begins at the confluence with UT2b-R2 and UT2-R1. UT2-R2 appears to have been
historically manipulated, but generally flows through the low point of the valley. An Enhancement Level I
approach is proposed along this reach to address localized bank erosion and lateral instability.
Construction activities will consist of regrading the streambanks back to the existing stable dimension,
removing spoil piles/berms, installing erosion control matting, and supplemental riparian buffer planting
and live stakes. This approach will provide appropriate bedform diversity, as well as improved biological
functions through increased aquatic and terrestrial habitats. In -stream structures will be incorporated to
dissipate flow energies and protect streambanks. Proposed in -stream structures will include constructed
rock riffles for grade control and habitat, brush toe, and cover logs, and log weirs for encouraging step -
pool formation, energy dissipation, bank stability, and bedform diversity and to provide natural scour
features and improved aquatic habitat. Riparian buffers in excess of 50 feet will be planted and protected
along the entire length of the reach. Any mature trees or significant native species vegetation will be
protected and incorporated into the design. Any exotic species vegetation, primarily Chinese privet, will
be removed and native riparian species vegetation will be planted in the resulting disturbed areas.
UT2-R1: Work along project reach UT2-R1 will involve Enhancement Level II practices to improve the
current channel condition and bedform diversity. The existing channel is currently oversized, straightened
and lacks natural bedform diversity. However, the channel bed is mostly stable with limited bank erosion.
Consequently, WLS proposes to stabilize any eroding banks, install limited in -stream structures to increase
aquatic habitat, supplemental planting the riparian buffer widths to more than 50 feet, and permanently
Page 32 4

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
protect the riparian area with a conservation easement. Any mature trees or significant native vegetation
will be protected and incorporated into the design. Where necessary, bioengineering techniques, such as
live stakes and geolifts, will also be used to protect streambanks and promote native woody vegetation
growth along the streambanks. Any exotic species vegetation will be removed in these areas and native
riparian species vegetation will be planted in any disturbed areas.
BC1-R1 and UT2b-R1: Preservation is proposed along these reaches since the existing stream systems
are mostly stable with a mature riparian buffer due to minimal historic impacts. An existing headcut will
be stabilized along UT2b-R2 near the confluence with UT2c and all areas will be protected in perpetuity
through a conservation easement. Any exotic species vegetation will be removed in these areas and
riparian buffers in excess of 50 feet will be supplementally planted and permanently protected along the
entire reach length. This approach will extend the wildlife corridor throughout a majority of the riparian
corridors, while providing a natural hydrologic connection and critical habitat linkage within the
catchment area.
Water Quality Improvement Features: WLS plans to include water quality improvement features as
part of a comprehensive watershed restoration approach. When implemented collectively along with
stream, riparian buffer, and riparian wetland restoration, these water quality improvement features can
be effective at reducing pollutants, particularly nutrient and sediment loadings, and therefore provide
additional ecological uplift to a project.
The proposed water quality improvement features will include small impoundments or basins to treat
agricultural, timber cutting and/or animal production wastewater runoff before reaching the restored
riparian buffer corridor. These features will increase infiltration and groundwater recharge, diffuse flow
energies, and allow nutrient uptake within the extended buffer area. The features will be excavated along
the project reaches at non -jurisdictional or depressional areas where ephemeral drainages intersect with
the proposed restored stream corridor. This strategy will allow these features to function properly with
minimal risk and without any long-term maintenance requirements. A stable outlet channel will be
constructed to deliver runoff to the receiving restored project stream reach. Currently one water quality
treatment feature is show on the conceptual plan at the origin of UT2a to attenuate and treat
concentrated flow from US 200 and Millstone Road. Following topographic survey additional
opportunities to implement water quality features will be identified.
5.1.2 Proposed Riparian Buffer Conditions
Riparian buffers will be restored, enhanced and protected along all project reaches and wetland areas.
The proposed plant selection for buffer areas will include appropriate native species vegetation described
by Schafale (2012) and will adhere to the tolerances cited in WRP Technical Note VN-RS-4.1(USACE, 1997).
The proposed Piedmont alluvial forest natural vegetation community will include species based on an
appropriate reference community. A variety of species will be planted to ensure an appropriate, diverse
plant community as shown in the table below.
Moderately -tolerant vegetation species can survive on soils that are saturated or flooded for several
months during the growing season. Flood -tolerant vegetation species can survive on soils that are
saturated or flooded for long, indefinite periods during the growing season (USACE, 1997). Vegetation
species planted along the streambanks, floodplain, wetland areas, and transitional upland areas will
Water & Land Solutions Page 33

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
include a mixture of native species plants appropriate for the Sand Hills ecoregion, with the selection also
based on expected wetness conditions.
WLS utilizes a successful planting strategy that includes early successional, as well as climax species. The
vegetation selections will be mixed throughout the project planting areas so that the early successional
species will adapt to climax species as they mature over time. The understory and shrub layer species are
all considered to be climax species in the buffer community. WLS recognizes that buffer conditions at
mature reference sites are not reflected at planted or successional buffer sites until the woody species
begin to establish and compete with herbaceous vegetation. To account for this, a buffer planting strategy
that includes a combination of overstory and understory species, planted at a density of 680 stems per
acre, is typically utilized.
WLS will also consider the revegetation and supplemental planting of larger and older planting stock to
modify species density and type. This consideration will be utilized particularly to increase the rate of
buffer establishment and buffer species variety, as well as to decrease the planting/application costs.
Examples include selective supplemental planting of older mast producing species as potted stock in later
years for increased survivability. This technique can be effective as it avoids sun scald common with bare
root planting at initial revegetation. During the project implementation, invasive species exotic vegetation
will be treated and mechanically removed during construction activities to control its presence and reduce
its spread within the conservation easement areas. These efforts will aid in the establishment of native
riparian vegetation species within the restored riparian buffer areas.
During the project implementation, invasive species and exotic vegetation will be treated both to control
its presence and reduce its spread within the conservation easement areas. These efforts will aid in the
establishment of native riparian vegetation species within the restored riparian buffer areas.
5.1.3 Proposed Riparian Wetland Conditions
As described previously, areas of significantly degraded riparian wetlands were observed along portions
of the floodplain areas. Based on Mr. Lankford's findings, conditions are favorable for re-establishing areas
of degraded riparian wetlands and maximizing functional uplift potential. It is anticipated that as a direct
result of implementing Priority Level I stream restoration, restoring historic flow patterns, limited
overburden soil removal and surface roughening, and revegetation, lost wetland hydrology will be
restored and allow the wetlands to regain their natural/historic functions. The area proposed for wetland
re-establishment is labeled on Figures 10. WLS and Mr. Lankford concluded these areas will likely
experience seasonal wetness for prolonged periods and conditions are favorable to support appropriate
wetland hydrology. WLS, based on the 2016 NCIRT guidance, proposes the suggested wetland saturation
range and hydroperiod for the Chewacla and Wehadkee soil series is 10-12%.
Riparian wetland re-establishment will involve improving current hydrologic conditions within the valley
bottom of BC-R2. A natural overbank flooding regime will be restored throughout the area by restoring
the appropriate bankfull channel geometry and by raising the stream bed elevation to reconnect the
channel to its historic floodplain. It is anticipated that as a direct result of implementing Priority Level I
stream restoration and other hydrologic modifications, historic wetlands will regain their lost functions.
The hydric soils areas have been extensively modified and degraded to the extent they are no longer
jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. and wetland re-establishment is proposed at a 1:1 credit ratio.
Page 34 4

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Additionally, the overall restoration approach will improve the hyporheic zone interaction and both
biological and chemical processes associated with aquatic functions of the stream. These activities,
including minimal grading and blending of microtopography, will provide significant functional uplift
across the project area. Where possible, any existing wetland areas will be avoided by keeping proposed
restoration and construction activities away from the wetland boundaries.
In some areas, disturbance of the existing wetlands may be unavoidable to restore a stable and fully
functioning wetland and riparian system. Restoration of a stable stream system requires that the new
channel be restored to the lowest part of the valley, which may result in a temporary disturbance of an
existing wetland through the area. However, restoration of the stream channel will also restore and
enhance areas of adjacent wetlands through higher water table conditions (elevated stream profile) and
a more frequent over -bank flooding regime. All areas within the conservation easement will be planted
with native tree species and protected in perpetuity against timbering and agricultural conversion,
including existing and restored wetland areas.
Four groundwater monitoring gauges were installed in the wetland area to document the range of typical
conditions. The early data is presented in the appendix A. Generally, the gauge installed in an existing
wetland are (Gauge 1) is consistently within 12 inches of the ground surface elevation. The remaining
gauges exhibited shortened wetland hydroperiods due to soil conditions and artificial drainage
manipulation. Further monitoring and analysis will be conducted through the mitigation plan phase.
5.1.4 Pollutant Load Reductions
WLS utilized the Spreadsheet Tool for Estimating Pollutant Loads (STEPL v4.4, 2018) to help quantify how
the project may reduce pollutant loads into the Bells Creek Watershed. The STEPL model was developed
for the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA, Tetra Tech, 2015) and was used to
estimate sediment and nutrient load reductions from the implementation of stream
restoration/stabilization and installing agricultural BMPs, such as vegetated filter strips and wetland
detention. Model inputs include land use information, Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE)/runoff
curve numbers, eroded streambank length, streambank height, lateral recession rates, soil type/weight,
and BMP type/efficiency applicable to the agricultural piedmont area. The summary of total annual
pollutant loadings and removal estimates are shown in Table 4.
Water & Land Solutions Page 35

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Table 4. Total Pollutant Load and Reduction Estimate
W1 (BC-R1,
144.4,
67.6,
BC-R2, UT1) 9,276 13,565.1 3,129.0 666.8
1 1% 46.9, 1.5%
10.1%
W2 (UT2-R1,
UT2-R2, UT2-
R3, UT2a,
8,206 3,159.9 771.3 300.6
162.8,
60.7, 7.9%
107.5,
UT2b-R1,
5.2%
35.8%
UT2b-R2, UT2c
W(
4.9,
UT3a)3 5,584 852.5 247.3 94.8
9/ 02.8, 1.1%
5.2%
Note 1: Soil Texture Class is predominantly sandy loam.
Note 2: Average Bank heights in scour areas ranged 1.1 to 3.4 feet.
Note 3: Lateral Recession Rates (ft/yr) ranged from slight category (0.01 to 0.05) to moderate (0.06 to
0.20)
Note 4: BMPs input used for streambank stabilization, streambank protection and 100 ft buffers.
5.2 Reference Ecosystems
Reference ecosystems will be identified and surveyed that represent similar conditions to the restored
stream and wetland system. Stream channel geometry, morphologic relationships, and wetland
hydrology/saturation will be based on published regional curve relationships, reference reach
information, process and empirical data from successful past projects.
6 Credit Determination
6.1 Proposed Credit Types
Expected credit types are Stream Mitigation Credits (SMCs) and Wetland Mitigation Credits (WMCs).
SMCs (Warm Thermal Regime) will be generated through Stream Restoration, Enhancement, and
Preservation activities (Table 5). Riparian, riverine wetlands mitigation credits will be generated through
Restoration (Re-establishment)(Table 6).
Page 36 4

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Table 5. Proposed Stream Mitigation Credits (SMCs)
Stream Preservation
4,945
10:1
495
Warm
Stream Restoration (PI)
3,438
1:1
3,438
Warm
Stream Restoration (PI/II)
793
1:1
793
Warm
Stream Enhancement II
3,020
4:1
755
Warm
Stream Enhancement I
1,599
3:1
533
Warm
Stream Restoration (PI)
598
1:1
598
Warm
Stream Restoration (PI)
668
1:1
668
Warm
Stream Preservation
1,204
10:1
120
Warm
Stream Restoration (PI)
730
1:1
730
Warm
Stream Restoration (PI)
337
1:1
337
Warm
Stream Restoration (PI/II)
4,736
1:1
4,736
Warm
Stream Restoration (PI)
798
1:1
798
Warm
Note 1: No mitigation credits are proposed outside the conservation easement boundaries.
Note 2: Existing and proposed stream lengths were estimated from GIS/GPS data and will be modified after
developing a survey basemap and formal mitigation work plans have been approved by IRT.
Riparian Wetland Re-establishment 9.62 1:1 9.62 Riparian/Riverine
Note 1: No mitigation credits are proposed outside the conservation easement boundaries.
Note 2: Existing and proposed wetland areas were estimated from GIS/GPS data and a preliminary LSS hydric soils
investigation. The actual areas will be modified after developing a survey basemap and formal mitigation plans have
been approved by IRT.
All the project stream reaches proposed for mitigation credits are perennial or intermittent streams as
determined using North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) Stream Identification Forms. While
some of the drainage areas of the headwater tributaries are small, the NCDWQ stream scores were all
above 19 and observed during abnormally dry conditions ('DO' Drought Classification). Discussions with
the landowners regarding flow histories of the streams, as well as our direct experience with nearby
restoration projects and performance monitoring, including successful DMS full -delivery projects,
support this conclusion.
Water & Land Solutions Page 37

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
7 Credit Release Schedule
7.1 Credit Release Schedule
All credit releases, except the initial release, will be based on the total number of mitigation credits
generated as reported in the approved final mitigation plan and verified by the as -built survey. The initial
credit release will be based on the proposed restoration lengths (SMCs) and acreages (WMCs) as approved
in the final mitigation plan. The credit ledger will be managed by WLS and approved by the USACE District
Engineer (DE) and IRT. The estimated credits will be released following current USACE guidance, as shown
in Table 7.
Table 7. Credit Release Schedule
Site Establishment (as defined above)
Completion of all initial physical and
biological improvements made pursuant to
the Mitigation Plan
Year 1 Monitoring Report demonstrates that
channels are stable and interim performance
standards have been met
Year 2 Monitoring Report demonstrates that
channels are stable and interim performance
standards have been met
Year 3 Monitoring Report demonstrates that
channels are stable and interim performance
standards have been met
Year 4 Monitoring Report demonstrates that
channels are stable and interim performance
standards have been met
Year 5 Monitoring Report demonstrates that
channels are stable and interim performance
standards have been met
Year 6 Monitoring Report demonstrates that
channels are stable and interim performance
standards have been met
Year 7 Monitoring Report demonstrates that
channels are stable and interim performance
standards have been met
15%
15%
15%
15%
15%
30%
15%
30%
10%
40%
10%
40%
10%
50%
10%
50%
10%
60%
15%
65%
5%
65% (75%)
5%
70%
10%
75% (85%)
15%
85%
5%
80% (90%)
5%
90%
90%
10%
10%
100%
(100%)
7.2 Initial Allocation of Released Credits
The standard credit release schedule generated through stream and wetland mitigation projects will
occur upon establishment of the bank site(s), and upon initial satisfactory completion of the following
activities:
Page 38 4

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
1) Execution and Approval of the UMBI by the Sponsor and the IRT.
2) Approval of the Final Mitigation Plan.
3) Confirmation the mitigation bank site has been secured.
4) Delivery of the financial assurances as described in the Mitigation Plan.
S) Recordation of the long-term protection mechanism and title opinion acceptable to the USACE.
6) Issuance of the 404 permit verification for construction of the site, if required.
For mitigation bank sites that include preservation -only credits, 100% of the preservation credits will be
released with the completion of the six criteria stated above.
7.3 Subsequent Credit Releases
All subsequent credit releases must be approved by the DE, in consultation with the IRT, once
performance standards have been met or exceeded. For mitigation bank site(s), implementation of the
approved Mitigation Plan must be initiated no later than the first full growing season after the date of the
first credit transaction (credit sale). For streams, a reserve of 10% of the site(s) total stream credits will
be released after four (4) bankfull events have occurred, in separate years, provided the channel is stable
and all other performance standards are met. In the event that less than four bankfull events occur during
the monitoring period, release of these reserve credits is at the discretion of the IRT. For headwater
streams (zero order), channel formation and continuous surface water flow within the valley must be
documented to occur every year for at least 30 consecutive days during the prescribed monitoring period.
For wetlands, the site(s) must meet or exceed the percent saturatio n/hydrope riod thresholds for common
wetland soil series in North Carolina.
7.4 Financial Assurances
The bank sponsor will provide financial assurances in the form of a casualty insurance policy. The
insurance policy will be submitted for review and approval by the USACE and Office of General Counsel
(OGC) prior to completion of the final UMBI. Upon establishment, the USACE will hold the original policy
document to ensure bank compliance and successful project site completion.
8 Long -Term Management
8.1 Maintenance
The bank sites will be protected in perpetuity by a recorded conservation easement. The conservation
easement will allow for annual site inspections during the post -construction monitoring period. These
site inspections may identify components and features that require routine maintenance. The site will be
monitored on a regular basis and a physical inspection will take place at least once a year throughout the
post -construction monitoring period until performance standards are met. Routine post -construction
maintenance may include the following components as described in Table 8.
Water & Land Solutions Page 39

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Table S. Routine Maintenance Components
Stream
Routine channel maintenance and repair activities may include modifying in -stream
structures to prevent piping, securing loose coir matting, and supplemental
installations of live stakes and other target vegetation along the project reaches.
Areas of concentrated stormwater and floodplain flows that intercept the channel
may also require maintenance to prevent bank failures and head -cutting until
vegetation becomes established.
Wetland
Routine wetland maintenance and repair activities may include securing of loose
erosion control matting and supplemental plantings of target vegetation within the
wetland. Areas of concentrated stormwater and floodplain flows that intercept the
wetland may also require maintenance to prevent excess scour.
Vegetation
Vegetation will be maintained to ensure the health and vigor of the targeted plant
community. Routine vegetation maintenance and repair activities may include
supplemental planting, pruning, and fertilizing. Exotic invasive plant species will
controlled by mechanical and/or chemical methods. Any invasive plant species
control requiring herbicide application will be performed in accordance with NC
Department of Agriculture (NCDA) rules and regulations.
Site Boundary
Site boundaries will be demarcated in the field to ensure clear distinction between
the mitigation site and adjacent properties. Boundaries may be identified by fence,
marker, bollard, post, or other means as allowed by site conditions and/or
conservation easement. Boundary markers disturbed, damaged, or destroyed will be
repaired and/or replaced on an as needed basis.
Stream Crossing
The stream crossing(s) within the site may be maintained only as allowed by the
recorded Conservation Easement, deed restrictions, rights of way, or corridor
agreements.
Beaver Management
Routine maintenance and repair activities caused by beaver activity may include
supplemental planting, pruning, and dewatering/dam removal. Beaver management
will be implemented using accepted trapping and removal methods only within the
recorded Conservation Easement.
Upon final IRT approval and project closeout, the site(s) will be transferred to a long-term land steward.
The responsible party for long-term management has not yet been chosen, but will be approved by the
DE and IRT prior to the bank establishment. The long-term management and land steward shall be
responsible for periodic/routine inspection of the site(s) to ensure that the conservation easement and/or
the deed restrictions are being upheld. Any endowment funds for the conservation easement and deed
restrictions shall be negotiated prior to site transfer to the responsible party. The management activities
will be conducted in accordance with the terms and conditions of the approved UMBI as agreed to by
WLS, USACE, and the IRT.
8.2 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 approved mitigation plan, the sponsor shall notify the USACE
and coordinate with IRT members to develop a remedial action plan. The sponsor will also coordinate with
the USACE to obtain authorization and approval to conduct the remedial action. The remedial action plan
should describe the source or reason for the failure, a concise description of the corrective measures that
Page 40 4

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
are proposed, and a time frame for the implementation of the corrective measures. Additional
monitoring, as prescribed by IRT guidance, may also be required to satisfy the performance standards.
Water & Land Solutions Page 41

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
9 Citations
Harman, W., R. Starr, M. Carter, K. Tweedy, M. Clemmons, K. Suggs, C. Miller. 2012. A function based
framework for developing stream assessments, restoration goals, performance standards and
standard operating procedures. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wetlands,
Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, D.C.
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, 2017. "Water Supply Watershed Interactive
Map." Accessed via: https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/energy-mineral-land-resources/water-
supply-watershed-protection-program
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS), 2009. "Lower Yadkin Pee -Dee River Basin
Restoration Priorities (RBRP) 2009."
North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR), 2010. "Methodology for Identification of
Intermittent and Perennial Streams and Their Origins", v 4.11.
NC Stream Functional Assessment Team, 2015. "NC Stream Assessment Method (NC SAM) User Manual".
Version 2.1, August 2015.
NC Wetland Functional Assessment Team, 2010. "NC Wetland Assessment Method (NC WAM) User
Manual". Version 4.1, October 2010.
Rosgen, D.L. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology Books, Pagosa Springs, CO.
Rosgen, D.L. 1997. A Geomorphological Approach to Restoration of Incised Rivers.
Schafale, M.P. 2012. Guide to the Natural Communities of North Carolina, Fourth Approximation. North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, NCDENR, Raleigh, NC.
Skidmore, P. 2001. A Categorization of Approaches to Natural Channel Design.
The North Carolina Geological Survey, 1985. "Geologic Map of North Carolina"
Tweedy, K. 2008. A Methodology for Predicting Channel Form in Coastal Plain Headwater Systems.
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil
Survey Division. 1999. Soil Survey, Richmond County, NC.
United States Department of Agricultrue (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2007.
Stream Restoration Design National Engineering Handbook (NEH).
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil
Survey Division 2016. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, v. 8.1.
United States Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Threatened and Endangered
Species in North Carolina (County Listing). Richmond County. 2018.
United States Army Corps of Engineers. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
Technical Report Y-87-1. Environmental Laboratory. US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment
Station. Vicksburg, MS.
Page 42 4

WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
United States Army Corps of Engineers. 1997. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Research Program. Technical
Note VN-RS-4.1. Environmental Laboratory. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station.
Vicksburg, MS.
United States Army Corps of Engineers. 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines, April 2003, U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers. Wilmington District.
United States Army Corps of Engineers. 2016. Notification of Issuance of Guidance for Compensatory
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Conducted for Wilmington District, October 2016, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers. Wilmington District.
United States Army Corps of Engineers. 2009. Compensatory Mitigation for Losses of Aquatic Resources;
Final Rule dated April 10, 2009 of the Federal Register Vol. 73, No. 70.
Water & Land Solutions Page 43

Legend
Project Location 0 Richmond County
Q Proposed Conservation Easement NC Counties
Existing Stream 0 HUC-12
Q 14-Digit Hydrologic Unit
® TLWs
HUC-8 (Yadkin 201)
0 50 100
o Miles
Project is located in HUC-8: 03040201
TLW HUC: 03040201010010
Montgomery
� f
)Moore Cc
Anson County �rJ Richmo County i{
Scotland County
l�
0 5 10
Miles,
Legend
TRAs
P Water Quality
o Water Quality and Habitat
o Water Quality, Habitat, and Hydrology
DES
3S
-
y
N
J
0 0.25 0.5 Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS7Intermap, INCREMENT P, NR
Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (HongjKong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailar
Mlles NGCC, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community
FIGURE
WATER & LAND TI Fezzik Project Location
SOLUTIONS Mitigation Project
NAD 1983 2011 State Plane
North Carolina FIPS 3200 FT US

Legend
C Fezzik Mitigation Project
WBDHU8
Lower Pee Dee: 03040201
rlonroe a e -�
E 01+
U
d'C-kJ ng ha
r771
1 ,
tSourr+ C arglnia
' \ Hartsville
1
'� �___` DarlinQtcn
Pines
I_
Pori Br
�'''t M1Afitar
l Ra eerva
I
` Raeford
m
r� 1
r
f
f F 121,
r� �ted
taurinburq
Lum Le«
P—br
�3Br]SCE 1
Be rn ett wil le
1
38
11
y
iElar °�
h
3d v c
c�
301 ti Mullins
. IA
-� 11
-0at3 �
wt' r
szt l
i 15� 1
Y3:
51' 0
x1 �
•! 1
r aka City �Jr
0 5 10 20
Miles r,a,
FIGURE
WATER & LA N Dr" Fezzik Service Area
SOLUTIONS
Mitigation Project Map
NAD 1983 2011 State Plane la
North Carolina FIPS 3200 FT US
m
r� 1
r
f
f F 121,
r� �ted
taurinburq
Lum Le«
P—br
�3Br]SCE 1
Be rn ett wil le
1
38
11
y
iElar °�
h
3d v c
c�
301 ti Mullins
. IA
-� 11
-0at3 �
wt' r
szt l
i 15� 1
Y3:
51' 0
x1 �
•! 1
r aka City �Jr
0 5 10 20
Miles r,a,
FIGURE
WATER & LA N Dr" Fezzik Service Area
SOLUTIONS
Mitigation Project Map
NAD 1983 2011 State Plane la
North Carolina FIPS 3200 FT US

Total Watershed Area: 4,300 acres
Impervious Cover: 3.6% ;
Dominant Land Use: Agriculture (6.21 % pasture/crops)
Forest (52.81% deciduous/evergreen/mixed) Timber (11.79%)
-dY.
�• r I
ti UT1
r u.
UT2-R1 UT2a
--- - =fir.' UT2b-R2
Y
r� UT2b-R1
BC-R1
Legend
--- Proposed Conservation Easement
r BC-R1: 1,369 AC
BC-R2: 3,929 AC
UT2-R3: 1,062 AC
UT2a: 52 AC
UT2c: 38 AC
UT2b-R2: 109 AC
UT3: 371 AC
a
Nr UT2c
UT3 _
0 750 1,500 3,000 Feet", ' ( LIT. a = i Troy Quadrangle
North Carolina - Richmond Co.
C.op_yr,•ig:hY ©.20�13Nat'onal Geog'raghic Society�i�eubed
FIGURE
WATER & LAN DM Fezzik USGS Topographic SOLUTIONS Mitigation Project Map 2
NAD 1983 2011 State Plane
North Carolina FIPS 3200 FT US

C
UxC2
a.
QWATER &LAND'"
SOLUTIONS
0
UxB2
Fezzik
Mitigation Project
Legend
Conservation Easement
Existing Stream
Soils -Web Soil Survey
-AcB: Ailey loamy sand, 0-8%
slopes
12 -AcC: Ailey loamy sand, 8-15%
slopes
-BcB: Badin channery silt loam,
2-8% slopes
CaC: Candor & Wakulla, 8-15%
ChA slopes
ChA: Chewacla loam, 0-2%
slopes, frequently flooded
CrB: Creedmoor fine sandy
UxC2 - loam, 2-8% slopes, moderatly
eroded
BCB UXB2 JmA: Johnston mucky loam,
frequently flooded
MbB2:Mayodan sandy clay
- loam, 2-8% slopes, moderately
Wc6 MbC2 eroded
MbC2: Mayodan sandy clay
ChA loam, 8-15% slopes, moderately
CaC eroded
- PoA:Pelion loamy sand, 0-2%
ACB slopes
-PoB: Pelion loamy sand, 2-8%
slopes
UxB2:Georg evil le -Bad in
- complex, 2-8% slopes,
CrB moderately eroded
MbC2 UxC2: Georgeville-Badin
complex, 8-15% slopes,
moderately eroded
W: water
-WcB: Wakulla and Candor soils,
0-8% slopes
FIGURE
NRCS Soils
Map 3
NAD 1983 2011 State Plane

Legend -�
Conservation Easement
.L'
WATER & LA N D*M
SOLUTIONS
Fezzik
Mitigation Project
4
w
r�
Source: Historicalaerials.com
Geograp�hics, C ES/Airbus D=, DA, G ,
1955 FIGURE
Aerial Photograph
Map 6a
NAD 1983 2011 State Plane

Legend
I� Conservation Easement
44
i
i ! -I A►. e.
a
A
&
Ek\
o soo soo 1,200 Feet
—J Source:
Google Earth
Source: Esri, D'igiUadGdobe�sGeoE e, EarthstarGeographies, C E'/Airbus DS, W
DA, USG'-,
AeroGRID,
IGN, and the GF- User Community
WATER & LAN U-
1993
FIGURE
Fezzik
Aerial Photograph
SOLUTIONS
Mitigation Project
Map
6 b
NAD 1983 2011 State Plane
North Carolina FIPS 3200 FT US

Legend Z�
F--1 Conservation Easement r
T
r
r
c
t
;hG
Ave, Ir
46
� 0 300 600 1,200 Feet
ou w Esri, Digiw
AeroGRID, IGN, ar
WATER & LA N U- Fezzik
SOLUTIONS Mitigation Project
�.W, 1
0111111�a I
Source: Google Earth
Geographies, C E /Airbus D� , U� DA, USG ,
OF f
2013 FIGURE
Aerial Photograph
Map 6d
NAD 1983 2011 State Plane
lorth Carolina FIPS 3200 FT US

Appendix A- Existing Conditions Data
WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Prospectus

Fezzik Mitigation Project

106
105
104 .00
CO 103
_N
LJJ 102
101
100
xS1
o Ground Points • Bankfull Indicators • Water Surface
Points
Wbkf = 16.3 Dbkf = 1.87 Abkf = 30.6
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Horizontal Distance (ft)

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name:
Bells Creek
Reach Name:
UT2
Cross Section Name:
xSl
Survey Date:
10/14/2019
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 100 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 10 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
4.77
105.23
LP
4
4.88
105.12
6
4.83
105.17
LB
8
5.91
104.09
9.3
7.32
102.68
9.8
8
102
LEw
11
8.21
101.79
12
8.32
101.68
Tw
13
8.22
101.78
BEDROCK
14
8.06
101.94
BEDROCK
15
8.22
101.78
BEDROCK
16
8.06
101.94
REw
17
7.35
102.65
18.2
6.53
103.47
18.9
4.96
105.04
BKF
21
4.85
105.15
25
5.04
104.96
27
5.5
104.5
RP
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
108.4
108.4
108.4
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
105.04
105.04
105.04
Floodprone width (ft)
27
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
16.34
6.93
13.83
Entrenchment Ratio
1.65
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
1.87
2.2
1.63
Maximum Depth (ft)
3.36
3.36
3.26
width/Depth Ratio
8.74
3.14
8.48
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
30.62
15.28
15.35
wetted Perimeter (ft)
19.71
11.4
14.78
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
1.55
1.34
1.04
Begin BKF Station
6.24
6.24
13.17
End BKF Station
27
13.17
27
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
Shear Stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

106
105
104 .00
CO 103
_N
LJJ 102
101
100
XS2
o Ground Points • Bankfull Indicators • Water Surface
Points
Wbkf = 4.41 Dbkf = .72 Abkf = 3.18
0 5 10 15 20 25
Horizontal Distance (ft)

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name:
Bells Creek
Reach Name:
UT2A
Cross Section Name:
XS2
Survey Date:
10/14/2019
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 100 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 10 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
4.97
105.03
LP
2.4
4.95
105.05
4
5.58
104.42
5
6.14
103.86
7.3
7.02
102.98
LB
8.1
7.76
102.24
BKF
8.3
8.25
101.75
9.1
8.52
101.48
LEw
9.8
8.7
101.3
10.5
8.77
101.23
Tw
11
8.75
101.25
11.5
8.67
101.33
REw
12
8.04
101.96
12.5
7.8
102.2
13
6.31
103.69
RB
14
5.78
104.22
16
5.72
104.28
17
5.62
104.38
19
5.33
104.67
21
5.17
104.83
RP
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
103.25
103.25
103.25
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
102.24
102.24
102.24
Floodprone width (ft)
6.26
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
4.41
2.02
2.39
Entrenchment Ratio
1.42
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.72
0.72
0.72
Maximum Depth (ft)
1.01
0.97
1.01
width/Depth Ratio
6.13
2.81
3.32
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
3.18
1.45
1.73
wetted Perimeter (ft)
5.21
3.39
3.76
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.61
0.43
0.46
Begin BKF Station
8.1
8.1
10.12
End BKF Station
12.51
10.12
12.51
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0

shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

10
O
CO 10
_N
W
ME
10
XS3
o Ground Points • Bankfull Indicators
Wbkf = 17.3
• Water Surface
Points
Dbkf = 3.09 Abkf = 53.5
0 10 20 30 40
Horizontal Distance (ft)

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: Bells Creek
Reach Name: BC-R2
Cross Section Name: xS3
Survey Date: 10/22/2019
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 0 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 0 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
4.12
105.88
LP
2
4
106
4
4.55
105.45
5
4.18
105.82
7
4.74
105.26
8.3
4.9
105.1
LB
9.1
5.77
104.23
BKF
9.8
7.42
102.58
11.3
9.35
100.65
LEW
13
9.52
100.48
14
9.59
100.41
TW
16
9.41
100.59
18
9.37
100.63
20
9.4
100.6
22
9.33
100.67
23.7
9.15
100.85
REW
24.3
8.19
101.81
26
5.9
104.1
RB
28
5.23
104.77
30
5.24
104.76
32
5.52
104.48
34
5.24
104.76
35
5.05
104.95
RP
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
108.05
108.05
108.05
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
104.23
104.23
104.23
Floodprone width (ft)
35
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
17.29
8.64
8.65
Entrenchment Ratio
2.02
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
3.09
3.27
2.91
Maximum Depth (ft)
3.82
3.82
3.63
width/Depth Ratio
5.6
2.64
2.97
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
53.47
28.28
25.19
wetted Perimeter (ft)
21.06
14.3
13.97
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
2.54
1.98
1.8
Begin BKF Station
9.1
9.1
17.74
End BKF Station
26.39
17.74
26.39
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve

Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
Shear Stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

106
105
104 .00
CO 103
_N
LJJ 102
101
100
XS4
o Ground Points • Bankfull Indicators
Wbkf = 31.1
• Water Surface
Points
Dbkf = 1.97 Abkf = 61.4
0 10 20 30 40
Horizontal Distance (ft)

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name:
Bells Creek
Reach Name:
BC-R3
Cross Section Name:
XS4
Survey Date:
10/14/2019
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 100 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 10 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
5.89
104.11
LP
3
5.86
104.14
RP
6
5.53
104.47
FP
9
5.19
104.81
12
5
105
BKF
13
7.58
102.42
GRAVEL LAYER
14
7.91
102.09
14.5
9.01
100.99
LEw
15
9.07
100.93
17
9.08
100.92
19
9.11
100.89
Tw
21
9.13
100.87
23
9.04
100.96
25
8.88
101.12
REw
26
7.23
102.77
27
5.92
104.08
RB
30
5.42
104.58
BTM BERM
32.5
4.49
105.51
TOP BERM
36
4.71
105.29
39
4.82
105.18
RP
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
109.13
109.13
109.13
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
105
105
105
Floodprone width (ft)
39
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
31.13
15.47
15.66
Entrenchment Ratio
1.25
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
1.97
1.02
2.91
Maximum Depth (ft)
4.13
4.07
4.13
width/Depth Ratio
15.8
15.17
5.38
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
61.41
15.77
45.63
wetted Perimeter (ft)
36.3
23.01
21.43
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
1.69
0.69
2.13
Begin BKF Station
0
0
15.47
End BKF Station
31.13
15.47
31.13
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0

shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

106
105
104
O
103
_N
LJJ 102
101
100
XS5
Ground Points o Bankfull Indicators • Water Surface
Points
0 10 20 30 40
Horizontal Distance (ft)

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: Bells Creek
Reach Name: UT2 DS
Cross Section Name: XS5
Survey Date: 10/14/2019
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 100 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 10 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
6.38
103.62
LP
7
6.21
103.79
13
5.19
104.81
LB
14
5.69
104.31
16
6.53
103.47
16.3
8.95
101.05
LEw
18.7
9.24
100.76
Tw
21
9.18
100.82
23
8.84
101.16
REw
26
5.65
104.35
27.7
4.85
105.15
RB
33.6
4.66
105.34
RP
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
106.84
106.84
106.84
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
103.8
103.8
103.8
Floodprone width (ft)
33.6
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
17.33
20.26
5.22
Entrenchment Ratio
1.94
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
1.39
1.07
2.13
Maximum Depth (ft)
3.04
3.04
3
width/Depth Ratio
12.47
18.99
2.45
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
24.03
12.92
11.11
wetted Perimeter (ft)
20.9
17.51
9.39
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
1.15
0.74
1.18
Begin BKF Station
0
0
20.26
End BKF Station
25.48
20.26
25.48
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
Shear Stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

105
100
95
.e
XS6
o Ground Points • Bankfull Indicators
Wbkf = 11.2
• Water Surface
Points
Dbkf = 1.31 Abkf = 14.7
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Horizontal Distance (ft)

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name:
Bells Creek
Reach Name:
UT3
Cross Section Name:
XS6
Survey Date:
10/14/2019
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 100 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 10 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
6.72
103.28
LP
4
6.92
103.08
8
6.49
103.51
12
6.26
103.74
18
5.85
104.15
22
5.53
104.47
25
5.1
104.9
27
5.32
104.68
28.7
5.95
104.05
LB
29
7.78
102.22
30.9
8.95
101.05
BKF
32
9.55
100.45
34.4
9.79
100.21
POINT BAR
35.8
10.81
99.19
LEw
38.7
11.09
98.91
Tw
40.3
10.86
99.14
REw
42.3
8.72
101.28
43.3
6.82
103.18
RB
50
7.02
102.98
56
5.59
104.41
RP
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
103.19
103.19
103.19
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
101.05
101.05
101.05
Floodprone width (ft)
25.26
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
11.19
6.63
4.56
Entrenchment Ratio
2.26
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
1.31
1.1
1.62
Maximum Depth (ft)
2.14
2.03
2.14
width/Depth Ratio
8.54
6.01
2.81
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
14.69
7.31
7.38
wetted Perimeter (ft)
12.54
9.16
7.43
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
1.17
0.8
0.99
Begin BKF Station
30.9
30.9
37.53
End BKF Station
42.09
37.53
42.09
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0

105
100 .00
C6
_N
LLJ 95
.e
XS7
o Ground Points • Bankfull Indicators • Water Surface
Points
Wbkf = 4.82 Dbkf = 1.41 Abkf = 6.79
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Horizontal Distance (ft)

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name:
Bells Creek
Reach Name:
UT2C
Cross Section Name:
XS7
Survey Date:
10/14/2019
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 100 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 10 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
5.21
104.79
LP
4
5.5
104.5
9
5.36
104.64
11
5.71
104.29
LB
13.1
9.04
100.96
13.6
9.95
100.05
LEw
15
10.2
99.8
16.6
10.23
99.77
Tw
17.2
10
100
REw
17.58
8.5
101.5
BKF
17.8
7.67
102.33
18.3
6.84
103.16
20.8
5.63
104.37
22
5.37
104.63
25
5.15
104.85
27
5.05
104.95
RP
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
103.23
103.23
103.23
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
101.5
101.5
101.5
Floodprone width (ft)
6.78
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
4.82
2.41
2.41
Entrenchment Ratio
1.41
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
1.41
1.28
1.54
Maximum Depth (ft)
1.73
1.7
1.73
width/Depth Ratio
3.42
1.88
1.56
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
6.79
3.08
3.71
wetted Perimeter (ft)
6.89
4.97
5.32
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.99
0.62
0.7
Begin BKF Station
12.76
12.76
15.17
End BKF Station
17.58
15.17
17.58
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
Shear Stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

106
105
104 .00
CO 103
_N
LJJ 102
101
100
o Ground Points • Bankfull Indicators • Water Surface
Points
Wbkf = 4.25 Dbkf = 1.14 Abkf = 4.86
0 10 20 30 40
Horizontal Distance (ft)

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name:
Bells Creek
Reach Name:
UT2C
Cross Section Name:
XS8
Survey Date:
10/14/2019
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 100 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 10 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
5.26
104.74
LP
6
4.8
105.2
11
5.42
104.58
13.7
6.54
103.46
LB
14
8.88
101.12
14.5
9.58
100.42
LEw
16.4
9.71
100.29
17.5
9.79
100.21
Tw
18
9.67
100.33
REw
18.19
8.45
101.55
BKF
18.5
5.93
104.07
RB
25
5.16
104.84
34.7
4.71
105.29
RP
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
102.89
102.89
102.89
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
101.55
101.55
101.55
Floodprone width (ft)
4.58
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
4.25
2.13
2.12
Entrenchment Ratio
1.08
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
1.14
1.06
1.23
Maximum Depth (ft)
1.34
1.24
1.34
width/Depth Ratio
3.73
2
1.72
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
4.86
2.26
2.6
wetted Perimeter (ft)
6.05
4.1
4.42
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.8
0.55
0.59
Begin BKF Station
13.94
13.94
16.07
End BKF Station
18.19
16.07
18.19
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
Shear Stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

106
105
104 .00
CO 103
_N
LJJ 102
101
100
XS9
o Ground Points • Bankfull Indicators
Wbkf = 4.17
• Water Surface
Points
Dbkf = 1.09 Abkf = 4.52
0 10 20 30 40
Horizontal Distance (ft)

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name:
Bells Creek
Reach Name:
UT2D
Cross Section Name:
XS9
Survey Date:
10/14/2019
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 100 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 10 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
4.8
105.2
LP
8
4.8
105.2
17
5.2
104.8
LB
19
7.4
102.6
19.7
9.5
100.5
20.5
9.6
100.4
Tw
21.8
8.85
101.15
23.3
7.8
102.2
BKF
25
4.94
105.06
RB
34.8
4.46
105.54
RP
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
104
104
104
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
102.2
102.2
102.2
Floodprone width (ft)
6.64
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
4.17
2.09
2.08
Entrenchment Ratio
1.59
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
1.09
1.45
0.72
Maximum Depth (ft)
1.8
1.8
1.38
width/Depth Ratio
3.83
1.44
2.89
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
4.52
3.03
1.49
wetted Perimeter (ft)
5.93
4.81
3.89
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.76
0.63
0.38
Begin BKF Station
19.13
19.13
21.22
End BKF Station
23.3
21.22
23.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
Shear Stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

105
100
95
.e
xS1 0
o Ground Points • Bankfull Indicators
Wbkf = 7. 6
• Water Surface
Points
Dbkf = 1.48 Abkf = 11.3
0 10 20 30 40
Horizontal Distance (ft)

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name:
Bells Creek
Reach Name:
UT3
Cross Section Name:
XS10
Survey Date:
10/14/2019
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 100 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 10 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
5.64
104.36
LP
4
5.35
104.65
8
5.53
104.47
10.6
5.74
104.26
LB
11.9
7.21
102.79
15
9.07
100.93
16.9
9.73
100.27
17.5
10.3
99.7
LEw
18.7
10.55
99.45
20
10.59
99.41
Tw
21.3
10.32
99.68
REw
21.5
8.41
101.59
BKF
23.2
6.18
103.82
RB
26
5.86
104.14
33
6
104
RP
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
103.77
103.77
103.77
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
101.59
101.59
101.59
Floodprone width (ft)
12.13
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
7.6
3.79
3.81
Entrenchment Ratio
1.6
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
1.48
0.94
2.02
Maximum Depth (ft)
2.18
1.93
2.18
width/Depth Ratio
5.14
4.02
1.89
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
11.28
3.57
7.71
wetted Perimeter (ft)
9.9
6.25
7.51
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
1.14
0.57
1.03
Begin BKF Station
13.9
13.9
17.69
End BKF Station
21.5
17.69
21.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
Shear Stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

1'
106
O
CO 104
_N
W
i[IN
100
xS1 1
o Ground Points • Bankfull Indicators • Water Surface
Points
Wbkf = 17 Dbkf = 2 Abkf = 34
0 10 20 30 40
Horizontal Distance (ft)

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River
Name:
Bells Creek
Reach
Name:
BC-R1
Cross
Section Name:
XSll
Survey
Date:
10/14/2019
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 100 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 10 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
3.95
106.05
LP
7
4.5
105.5
10
5.6
104.4
LB
11
7
103
LEW
14
7.1
102.9
18
7.25
102.75
TW
22
6.85
103.15
REW
23
5.3
104.7
24
4.5
105.5
BKF
35
3.8
106.2
RP
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
108.21
108.21
108.21
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
105.48
105.48
105.48
Floodprone width (ft)
35
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
16.92
8.45
8.48
Entrenchment Ratio
2.07
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
1.99
1.76
2.21
Maximum Depth (ft)
2.73
2.64
2.73
width/Depth Ratio
8.5
4.8
3.84
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
33.64
14.87
18.76
wetted Perimeter (ft)
18.98
12
12.25
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
1.77
1.24
1.53
Begin BKF Station
7.05
7.05
15.5
End BKF Station
23.98
15.5
23.98
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
Shear Stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

1'
106
O
CO 104
_N
W
i[IN
100
XS12
o Ground Points • Bankfull Indicators
Wbkf = 7.07
• Water Surface
Points
Dbkf = .98 Abkf = 6.96
0 5 10 15 20
Horizontal Distance (ft)

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name:
Bells Creek
Reach Name:
UT1
Cross Section Name:
XS12
Survey Date:
10/14/2019
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 100 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 10 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
3.7
106.3
LP
2
4.46
105.54
4.2
5.24
104.76
LB
5.3
6.04
103.96
BKF
6.2
7
103
LEw
7.7
7.13
102.87
9.3
7.43
102.57
Tw
10.2
7.35
102.65
REw
10.7
7.03
102.97
12
6.72
103.28
12.7
5.45
104.55
RB
14
5.07
104.93
19
4.65
105.35
RP
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
105.35
105.35
105.35
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
103.96
103.96
103.96
Floodprone width (ft)
16.46
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
7.07
3.54
3.53
Entrenchment Ratio
2.33
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.98
0.94
1.03
Maximum Depth (ft)
1.39
1.3
1.39
width/Depth Ratio
7.21
3.76
3.43
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
6.96
3.33
3.62
wetted Perimeter (ft)
8.06
5.29
5.38
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.86
0.63
0.67
Begin BKF Station
5.3
5.3
8.84
End BKF Station
12.37
8.84
12.37
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
Shear Stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
Accompanies user rvianuai version om
USACE AID #
NCDWR#
Project Name
Fezzik
Date of Evaluation
10/28/2019
Applicant/Owner Name
Wetland Site Name
HS-W1
Wetland Type
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Level III Ecoregion
Southeastern Plains
Nearest Named Water Body
Bells Creek
River Basin
Yadkin-PeeDee
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
03040201
County
Richmond
NCDWR Region
Raleigh
❑ Yes ® No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees)
35.061021,-79.721298
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 HOW, 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
Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the
assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment
area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
❑A ❑A Not severely altered
®B ®B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub).
Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot
deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
❑A ❑A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ❑B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
®C ®C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change)
(examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
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 and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6. Land Use - opportunity metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources draining
to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (5M),
and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M).
WS 5M 2M
❑A ❑A ❑A > 10% impervious surfaces
❑B ❑B ❑B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants
❑C ❑C ❑C >- 20% coverage of pasture
❑D ❑D ❑D >- 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
❑E ❑E ❑E >- 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
®F ®F ®F >- 20% coverage of clear-cut land
❑G ❑G ❑G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent drainage and/or overbank flow from affecting the
assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer- assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the .water body. Make
buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
®A >- 50 feet
❑B From 30 to < 50 feet
❑C From 15 to < 30 feet
❑D From 5 to < 15 feet
❑E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
❑<- 15-feet wide ®> 15-feet wide ❑ Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
®Yes ❑No
7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed?
®Sheltered - adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
❑Exposed - adjacent open water with width >_ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area - wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes and
Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp Forest
only)
Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and
the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
®A ®A >_ 100 feet
❑B ❑B From 80 to < 100 feet
❑C ❑C From 50 to < 80 feet
❑D ❑D From 40 to < 50 feet
❑E ❑E From 30 to < 40 feet
❑F ❑F From 15 to < 30 feet
❑G ❑G From 5 to < 15 feet
❑H ❑H < 5 feet

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

17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
❑A >_ 25% coverage of vegetation
❑B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider
structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA WT
o ❑A ❑A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
®B ®B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U ❑C ❑C Canopy sparse or absent
>,
o ❑A
❑A
Dense mid-story/sapling layer
❑B
❑B
Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
®C
®C
Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
❑A
❑A
Dense shrub layer
1E ®B
®B
Moderate density shrub layer
U) ❑C
❑C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
.0 ®A
®A
Dense herb layer
_ ❑B
❑B
Moderate density herb layer
❑C
❑C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
®B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
❑C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
❑A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion — wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
❑A ®B ❑C ❑D
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion,
man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
❑A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
®B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes
Wetland has been severly altered for timber management. Multiple ditches in the wetland.

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name HS-W1 Date of Assessment
10/28/2019
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest Assessor Name/Organization
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
YES
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
HIGH
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
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
Veqetation Composition
Condition
LOW
Function Ratina Summa
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
Accompanies user rvianuai version om
USACE AID #
NCDWR#
Project Name
Fezzik
Date of Evaluation
10/28/2019
Applicant/Owner Name
Wetland Site Name
HS-W2
Wetland Type
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Level III Ecoregion
Southeastern Plains
Nearest Named Water Body
Bells Creek
River Basin
Yadkin-PeeDee
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
03040201
County
Richmond
NCDWR Region
Raleigh
❑ Yes ® No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees)
35.059282,-79.719929
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 HOW, 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
Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the
assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment
area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
❑A ❑A Not severely altered
®B ®B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub).
Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot
deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
❑A ❑A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ❑B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
®C ®C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change)
(examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
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 and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6. Land Use - opportunity metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources draining
to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (5M),
and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M).
WS 5M 2M
❑A ❑A ❑A > 10% impervious surfaces
❑B ❑B ❑B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants
❑C ❑C ❑C >- 20% coverage of pasture
❑D ❑D ❑D >- 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
❑E ❑E ❑E >- 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
®F ®F ®F >- 20% coverage of clear-cut land
❑G ❑G ❑G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent drainage and/or overbank flow from affecting the
assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer- assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the .water body. Make
buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
®A >- 50 feet
❑B From 30 to < 50 feet
❑C From 15 to < 30 feet
❑D From 5 to < 15 feet
❑E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
❑<- 15-feet wide ®> 15-feet wide ❑ Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
®Yes ❑No
7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed?
®Sheltered - adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
❑Exposed - adjacent open water with width >_ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area - wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes and
Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp Forest
only)
Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and
the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
®A ®A >_ 100 feet
❑B ❑B From 80 to < 100 feet
❑C ❑C From 50 to < 80 feet
❑D ❑D From 40 to < 50 feet
❑E ❑E From 30 to < 40 feet
❑F ❑F From 15 to < 30 feet
❑G ❑G From 5 to < 15 feet
❑H ❑H < 5 feet

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

17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
❑A >_ 25% coverage of vegetation
❑B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider
structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA WT
o ❑A ❑A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
®B ®B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U ❑C ❑C Canopy sparse or absent
>,
o ❑A
❑A
Dense mid-story/sapling layer
❑B
❑B
Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
®C
®C
Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
❑A
❑A
Dense shrub layer
1E ®B
®B
Moderate density shrub layer
U) ❑C
❑C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
.0 ®A
®A
Dense herb layer
_ ❑B
❑B
Moderate density herb layer
❑C
❑C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
®B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
❑C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
❑A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion — wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
❑A ®B ❑C ❑D
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion,
man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
❑A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
®B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes
Wetland has been severly altered for timber management. Multiple ditches in the wetland.

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name HS-W2 Date of Assessment
10/28/2019
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest Assessor Name/Organization
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
YES
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
HIGH
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
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
Veqetation Composition
Condition
LOW
Function Ratina Summa
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM

ies user manuai version c. i
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User
Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if any 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): Fezzik - BC preservation 2. Date of evaluation: 10/9/19
3. Applicant/owner name: WLS 4. Assessor name/organization: CSC
5. County: Richmond 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Yadkin 201 on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Bells Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.066552,-79.722567
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): BC preservation 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 800
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 3 r Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 13 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? [,Yes F, No
14. Feature type: F, Perennial flow r, Intermittent flow [,Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: [,Mountains (M) [,Piedmont (P) [,Inner Coastal Plain (1) ;Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic
valley shape (skip for F,a [gib
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip [,Size 1 (< 0.1 mi`) [,Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi`) Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi`) [, Size 4 (? 5 mi)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? FYes [-,No If Yes, check all that appy to the assessment area.
r Section 10 water r Classified Trout Waters r Water Supply Watershed ( [-,I [;II Fill [;IV [-,V)
r Essential Fish Habitat r Primary Nursery Area r High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
r Publicly owned property r NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect [- Nutrient Sensitive Waters
F Anadromous fish F 303(d) List r CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
r Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
r 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 adversely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates).
�B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
B Not 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
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 the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
r F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
r G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
r H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
r I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
[r J Little to ho stressors
Recent Weather -watershed metric
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.
(i 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-C No drought conditions
9 Large or Dangerous Stream - assessment reach metric
Yes f: 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)
F A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses a E r F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) p co r G Submerged aquatic vegetation
r B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o .2:, r H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation �c L o r I Sand bottom
r C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) L m r J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
F D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots 02 r K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
F E Little or no habitat
"***`****"'----**************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
Bedform and Substrate - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11 a. Yes F, No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedfc rm evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
f B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
F- C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffles 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.)
11 d. [,Yes [,No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12. Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. (-Yes F, 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. F, 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.
F r Adult frogs
r r Aquatic reptiles
r r Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
r r Beetles (including water pennies)
r r Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
r r Asian clam (Corbicula )
r r Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
F r Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
r r Dipterans (true flies)
r 7 Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
F F Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
r i- Midges/mosquito larvae
r I- Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
r i- Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula )
r r Other fish
r r Salamanders/tadpoles
r r Snails
r r Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
r- i- Tipulid larvae

r r 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 include: 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 E; 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.
P A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
r B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
r C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
r D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
F E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F_ F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors -assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
r A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
r B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
r C Urban stream (>> 24 % impervious surface for watershed)
r D Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
r E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
fy 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 E ;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: r
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB
RB
LB RB LB RB
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
c+�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 - First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
to assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
A A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
B B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
C C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity- assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. Yes [+;No Was a 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 r-, C 67 to < 79 MID 79 to < 230 n E >- 230

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Fezzik - BC preservation Date of Evaluation
Stream Category Oa3 Assessor Name/Organization
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Function Class Rating Summary
10/9/19
CSC
NO
NO
NO
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology HIGH
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Flood Flow HIGH
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation HIGH
(4) Floodplain Access HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer HIGH
(4) Microtopography LOW
(3) Stream Stability HIGH
(4) Channel Stability HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport NA
(4) Stream Geomorphology HIGH
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality HIGH
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance OMITTED
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow HIGH
(3) Substrate HIGH
(3) Stream Stability HIGH
(3) In -stream Habitat LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat NA
Overall HIGH

ies user manuai version c.i
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User
Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if any 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): Fezzik - BC 2. Date of evaluation: 10/8/19
3. Applicant/owner name: WLS 4. Assessor name/organization: CSC
5. County: Richmond 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Yadkin 201 on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Bells Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.057800,-79.19706
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): BC 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 1200
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 4 r Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 17 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? [,Yes F, No
14. Feature type: F, Perennial flow r, Intermittent flow [,Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: [,Mountains (M) [,Piedmont (P) [,Inner Coastal Plain (1) ;Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic
valley shape (skip for F,a [gib
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip [,Size 1 (< 0.1 mi`) [,Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi`) Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi`) E+; Size 4 (? 5 mi)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? FYes [-,No If Yes, check all that appy to the assessment area.
r Section 10 water r Classified Trout Waters r Water Supply Watershed ( [-,I [;II Fill [;IV [-,V)
r Essential Fish Habitat r Primary Nursery Area r High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
r Publicly owned property r NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect r Nutrient Sensitive Waters
F Anadromous fish F 303(d) List r CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
r Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
r 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 adversely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates).
�B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
B Not 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
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.
r A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
r B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)

F_ C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
[r D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
r E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
r F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
r G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
F H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
r I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
r J Little to ho stressors
Recent Weather -watershed metric
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.
(i 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-C No drought conditions
9 Large or Dangerous Stream - assessment reach metric
Yes f: 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)
F A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses a E F_F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) p co r G Submerged aquatic vegetation
r B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o .2:, r H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation �c L o r I Sand bottom
r C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) L m r J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
R D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots 02 r K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
r E Little or no habitat
"***`****"'----**************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
Bedform and Substrate - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11 a. Yes F, No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedfc rm evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
f B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
F- C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffles 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.)
11 d. [,Yes [,No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12. Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. (-Yes F, 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. F, 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.
F r Adult frogs
r r Aquatic reptiles
r r Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
r r Beetles (including water pennies)
r r Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
r r Asian clam (Corbicula )
r r Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
F r Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
r r Dipterans (true flies)
r 7 Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
F F Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
r i- Midges/mosquito larvae
r I- Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
r i- Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula )
r r Other fish
r r Salamanders/tadpoles
r r Snails
r r Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
r- i- Tipulid larvae

r r 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 include: 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 E; 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.
P A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
r B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
r C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
r D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
F E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F_ 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)
f— B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
r C Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
r D Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
r E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
r 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: r
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB
RB
LB RB LB RB
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
c+�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 - First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
to assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
A A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
B B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
C C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity- assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. Yes [+;No Was a 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 r-, C 67 to < 79 MID 79 to < 230 n E >- 230

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Fezzik - BC
Stream Category Oa4
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Function Class Rating Summary
Date of Evaluation 10/8/19
Assessor Name/Organization
CSC
NO
NO
NO
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology LOW
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Flood Flow LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW
(4) Floodplain Access LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer MEDIUM
(4) Microtopography MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(4) Channel Stability LOW
(4) Sediment Transport NA
(4) Stream Geomorphology MEDIUM
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance OMITTED
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat LOW
(3) Baseflow HIGH
(3) Substrate NA
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat NA
Overall LOW

ies user manuai version c.i
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User
Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if any 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): Fezzik - UT1 2. Date of evaluation: 10/9/19
3. Applicant/owner name: WLS 4. Assessor name/organization: KO, CSC
5. County: Richmond 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Yadkin-PeeDee on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Bells Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.071759,-79.730716
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): UT1 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 1500
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 2.5 r Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 8 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? [,Yes [•,' No
14. Feature type: [;Perennial flow F, Intermittent flow [,Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: [,Mountains (M) [,Piedmont (P) [,Inner Coastal Plain (1) ,Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic
valley shape (skip for a [,b
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip [,Size 1 (< 0.1 mi`) [,Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi`) Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi`) [; Size 4 (? 5 mi)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? FYes [, No If Yes, check all that appy to the assessment area.
r Section 10 water r Classified Trout Waters r Water Supply Watershed ( [,I [;II Fill [,IV [,V)
r Essential Fish Habitat r Primary Nursery Area r High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
r Publicly owned property i- NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect r Nutrient Sensitive Waters
F Anadromous fish F 303(d) List r CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
r Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
r 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 adversely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates).
�B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
�'A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
K,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
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.
r A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
r B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)

F_ C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
[- D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
F E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
F F Livestoak with access to stream or intertidal zone
r G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
r H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
F, I Other: Sedimentation/erosion (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
r J Little to ho stressors
Recent Weather -watershed metric
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
C- B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
C` 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 7 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)
r A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses a E r F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) p co r G Submerged aquatic vegetation
r B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o c r H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation �c L o r I Sand bottom
f C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) L m r J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
F7 D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots 02 r K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
r E Little or no habitat
*********.....****************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate -assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11a. C' Yes F, No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
(✓ A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
r B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
r C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffles 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.)
11 d. [,Yes [-,No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12. Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. C` Yes F, 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. F, No Water [,Other:
12b. (- Yes f , 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.
F_ r Adult frogs
r r Aquatic reptiles
F r Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
F_ r Beetles (including water pennies)
r- r- Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
F r Asian clam (Corbicula )
F_ r Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
r- r Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
F_ F_ Dipterans (true flies)
r_ 7 Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
F_ F Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
F i- Midges/mosquito larvae
F I- Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
r F- Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula )
F r Other fish
F r Salamanders/tadpoles
r f- Snails
r I- Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
F_ I- Tipulid larvae

r r 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 include: 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 E; 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.
F A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
r B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
r C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
F D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
P, E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F_ F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors -assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
r A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
r B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
r C Urban stream (>> 24 % impervious surface for watershed)
r D Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
r E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
F 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 E ; 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: r
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB
RB
LB RB LB RB
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
c+�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 - First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
to assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
A A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
B B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
C C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity - assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. [;Yes [ ;No Was a 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 r-, C 67 to < 79 MID 79 to < 230 n E >- 230

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Fezzik - UT1
Stream Category Oa3
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Function Class Rating Summary
Date of Evaluation 10/9/19
Assessor Name/Organization KO, CSC
NO
NO
NO
Intermittent
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow MEDIUM
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation MEDIUM
(4) Floodplain Access MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer HIGH
(4) Microtopography LOW
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM
(4) Channel Stability LOW
(4) Sediment Transport NA
(4) Stream Geomorphology HIGH
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality LOW
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM
(2)Indicators of Stressors YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance OMITTED
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat MEDIUM
(2) In -stream Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow MEDIUM
(3) Substrate HIGH
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat MEDIUM
(2) Stream -side Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Stream -side Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat NA
Overall MEDIUM

ies user manuai version c.i
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User
Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if any 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): Fezzik - UT2a 2. Date of evaluation: 10/8/19
3. Applicant/owner name: WLS 4. Assessor name/organization: CSC
5. County: Richmond 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Yadkin-PeeDee on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Bells Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.065203,-79.729762
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): UT2a 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 2000
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 4.3 r Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 6 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? [,Yes F, No
14. Feature type: [,Perennial flow F; Intermittent flow [-,Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: [,Mountains (M) [,Piedmont (P) [,Inner Coastal Plain (1) ;Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic
valley shape (skip for F,a [gib
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip [,Size 1 (< 0.1 mi`) [,Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi`) Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi`) [, Size 4 (? 5 mi)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? FYes [-,No If Yes, check all that appy to the assessment area.
r Section 10 water r Classified Trout Waters r Water Supply Watershed ( [-,I [;II Fill [;IV [-,V)
r Essential Fish Habitat r Primary Nursery Area r High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
r Publicly owned property r NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect r Nutrient Sensitive Waters
F Anadromous fish F 303(d) List r CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
r Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
r 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 adversely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates).
�B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
B Not 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
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.
r A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
r B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)

F_ C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
F D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
r E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
r F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
r G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
F H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
(✓ I Other: timber (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
F J Little to ho stressors
Recent Weather -watershed metric
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-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)
101b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
r A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses a E F_F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) p co r G Submerged aquatic vegetation
r B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o .2:, r H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation �c L o r I Sand bottom
j' C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) L m r J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
r D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots 02 r K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
[✓ E Little or no habitat
******.*****`**'****************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************
Bedform and Substrate - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11 a. . Yes (-,No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedfc rm evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
f B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
F- C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffles 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.)
11 d. [,Yes [,No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12. Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. (-Yes F, 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. F, 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.
F r Adult frogs
r r Aquatic reptiles
r r Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
r r Beetles (including water pennies)
r r Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
r r Asian clam (Corbicula )
r r Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
F r Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
r r Dipterans (true flies)
r 7 Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
F F Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
r i- Midges/mosquito larvae
r I- Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
r i- Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula )
r r Other fish
r r Salamanders/tadpoles
r r Snails
r r Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
r- i- Tipulid larvae

r r 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 include: 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 E; 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.
P A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
r B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
r C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
r D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
F E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F_ 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)
f— B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
r C Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
r D Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
r E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
r 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: r
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB
RB
LB RB LB RB
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
c �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 - First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
to assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
A A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
B B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
C [+'�C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity - assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. [,Yes F,No Was a conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. F,No Water [Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
[,A <46 [,B 46to<67 [,C 67to<79 MD 79to<230 nE >- 230

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Fezzik - UT2a
Stream Category Oa3
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Function Class Rating Summary
Date of Evaluation 10/8/19
Assessor Name/Organization
CSC
NO
NO
NO
Intermittent
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology LOW
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW
(4) Floodplain Access MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer LOW
(4) Microtopography LOW
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(4) Channel Stability LOW
(4) Sediment Transport NA
(4) Stream Geomorphology LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality LOW
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration LOW
(3) Thermoregulation LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance OMITTED
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat LOW
(3) Baseflow MEDIUM
(3) Substrate HIGH
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat LOW
(3) Stream -side Habitat LOW
(3) Thermoregulation LOW
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat NA
Overall LOW

ies user manuai version c.i
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User
Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if any 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): Fezzik - UT2b-R1 2. Date of evaluation: 10/9/19
3. Applicant/owner name: WLS 4. Assessor name/organization: CSC
5. County: Richmond 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Yadkin-PeeDee on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Bells Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.063103,-79.729224
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): UT2b-R2 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 700
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 4 r Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 5 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? [,Yes F, No
14. Feature type: [, Perennial flow F;Intermittent flow [-,Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: [,Mountains (M) [,Piedmont (P) [,Inner Coastal Plain (1) ;Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic
valley shape (skip for F,a b
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip [,Size 1 (< 0.1 mi`) [,Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi`) Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi`) [ -, Size 4 (? 5 mi)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? FYes [-,No If Yes, check all that appy to the assessment area.
r Section 10 water r Classified Trout Waters r Water Supply Watershed ( [-,I [;II Fill [;IV [-,V)
r Essential Fish Habitat r Primary Nursery Area r High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
r Publicly owned property r NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect r Nutrient Sensitive Waters
F Anadromous fish r 303(d) List r CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
r Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
r 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 adversely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates).
�B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
B Not 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
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.
F_ A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
r B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)

F_ C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
F D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
1771 E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
r F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
r G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
F H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
r I Other: timber (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
F J Little to ho stressors
Recent Weather -watershed metric
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.
(i 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-C No drought conditions
9 Large or Dangerous Stream - assessment reach metric
Yes f: 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)
F A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses a E F_F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) p co r G Submerged aquatic vegetation
r B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o .2:, r H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation �c L o r I Sand bottom
r C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) L m r J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
R D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots 02 r K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
r E Little or no habitat
"***`****"'"*`************* -* REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS *"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"---
11. Bedform and Substrate -assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11 a. . Yes (-,No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedfc rm evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
f B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
F- C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffles 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
E; (; 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.)
11 d. [,Yes [,No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12. Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. (-Yes F, 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. F, 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.
F r Adult frogs
r r Aquatic reptiles
r r Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
r r Beetles (including water pennies)
r r Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
r r Asian clam (Corbicula )
r r Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
F r Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
r r Dipterans (true flies)
r 7 Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
F F Megaloptera (alderfly, fishily, dobsonfly larvae)
r i- Midges/mosquito larvae
r I- Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
r F- Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula )
r r Other fish
r r Salamanders/tadpoles
r r Snails
r f Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
r- I- Tipulid larvae

r r 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 include: 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 r-,A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water>-- 6 inches deep
B E; B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
F,C F, 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.
r A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
r B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
r C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
r D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
F E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors - assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
F A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
r B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
r C Urban stream (>> 24 % impervious surface for watershed)
r D Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
r E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
fy 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 < 1 00-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: r
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB
RB
LB RB LB RB
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 - First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
to assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
A A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
B B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
C C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity- assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. Yes [+;No Was a 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 r-, C 67 to < 79 [ -A D 79 to < 230 n E >- 230

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Fezzik - UT2b-R1
Stream Category Oa3
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Function Class Rating Summary
Date of Evaluation 10/9/19
Assessor Name/Organization CSC
NO
NO
NO
Intermittent
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology HIGH
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow HIGH
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation HIGH
(4) Floodplain Access HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer HIGH
(4) Microtopography LOW
(3) Stream Stability HIGH
(4) Channel Stability HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport NA
(4) Stream Geomorphology HIGH
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality HIGH
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance OMITTED
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow MEDIUM
(3) Substrate HIGH
(3) Stream Stability HIGH
(3) In -stream Habitat LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat NA
Overall HIGH

ies user manual version c.i
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User
Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if any 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): Fezzik - UT2b-R2 2. Date of evaluation: 10/9/19
3. Applicant/owner name: WLS 4. Assessor name/organization: CSC
5. County: Richmond 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Yadkin-PeeDee on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Bells Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.063103,-79.729224
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): UT2b 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 500
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 4 r Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 5 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? [,Yes F, No
14. Feature type: [, Perennial flow F;Intermittent flow [-,Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: [,Mountains (M) [,Piedmont (P) [,Inner Coastal Plain (1) ;Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic
valley shape (skip for F,a b
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip [,Size 1 (< 0.1 mi`) [,Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi`) Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi`) [ -, Size 4 (? 5 mi)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? FYes [-,No If Yes, check all that appy to the assessment area.
r Section 10 water r Classified Trout Waters r Water Supply Watershed ( [-,I [;II Fill [;IV [-,V)
r Essential Fish Habitat r Primary Nursery Area r High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
r Publicly owned property r NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect r Nutrient Sensitive Waters
F Anadromous fish r 303(d) List r CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
r Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
r 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 adversely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates).
�B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
B Not 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
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.
F_ A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
r B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)

F_ C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
F D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
1771 E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
r F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
r G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
F H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
r I Other: timber (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
F J Little to ho stressors
Recent Weather -watershed metric
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.
(i 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-C No drought conditions
9 Large or Dangerous Stream - assessment reach metric
Yes f: 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)
F A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses a E F_F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) p co r G Submerged aquatic vegetation
r B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o .2:, r H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation �c L o r I Sand bottom
r C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) L m r J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
R D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots 02 r K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
r E Little or no habitat
"***`****"'"*`************* -* REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS *"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"*"---
11. Bedform and Substrate -assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11 a. . Yes (-,No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedfc rm evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
f B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
F- C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffles 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
E; (; 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.)
11 d. [,Yes [,No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12. Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. (-Yes F, 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. F, 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.
F r Adult frogs
r r Aquatic reptiles
r r Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
r r Beetles (including water pennies)
r r Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
r r Asian clam (Corbicula )
r r Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
F r Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
r r Dipterans (true flies)
r 7 Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
F F Megaloptera (alderfly, fishily, dobsonfly larvae)
r i- Midges/mosquito larvae
r I- Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
r F- Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula )
r r Other fish
r r Salamanders/tadpoles
r r Snails
r f Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
r- I- Tipulid larvae

r r 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 include: 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 r-,A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water>-- 6 inches deep
B E; B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
F,C F, 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.
r A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
r B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
r C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
r D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
F E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors - assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
F A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
r B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
r C Urban stream (>> 24 % impervious surface for watershed)
r D Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
r E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
fy 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 < 1 00-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: r
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB
RB
LB RB LB RB
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 - First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
to assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
A A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
B B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
C C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity- assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. Yes [+;No Was a 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 r-, C 67 to < 79 [ -A D 79 to < 230 n E >- 230

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Fezzik - UT2b-R2
Stream Category Oa3
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Function Class Rating Summary
Date of Evaluation
Assessor Name/Organization
10/9/19
CSC
NO
NO
NO
Intermittent
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology LOW
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW
(4) Floodplain Access LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer HIGH
(4) Microtopography LOW
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(4) Channel Stability LOW
(4) Sediment Transport NA
(4) Stream Geomorphology MEDIUM
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance OMITTED
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat LOW
(3) Baseflow MEDIUM
(3) Substrate HIGH
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat NA
Overall LOW

ies user manuai version c.i
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User
Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if any 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): Fezzik - UT2c lower 2. Date of evaluation: 10/9/19
3. Applicant/owner name: WE 4. Assessor name/organization: CSC
5. County: Richmond 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Yadkin-PeeDee on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Bells Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.062533,-79.729332
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): UT2c lower 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 300
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 5 r Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 7 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? [,Yes F, No
14. Feature type: [;Perennial flow F; Intermittent flow [,Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: [,Mountains (M) [,Piedmont (P) [,Inner Coastal Plain (1) ;Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic
valley shape (skip for -a [gib
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ` ,Size 1 (< 0.1 mi`) [,Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi`) Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi`) [, Size 4 (? 5 mi)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? FYes [-,No If Yes, check all that appy to the assessment area.
r Section 10 water r Classified Trout Waters r Water Supply Watershed ( [-,I [;II Fill [;IV [-,V)
r Essential Fish Habitat r Primary Nursery Area r High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
r Publicly owned property r NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect r Nutrient Sensitive Waters
F Anadromous fish F 303(d) List r CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
r Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
r 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 adversely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates).
�B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
B Not 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
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.
r A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
r B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)

F_ C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
F D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
1771 E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
r F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
r G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
F H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
r I Other: timber (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
F J Little to ho stressors
Recent Weather -watershed metric
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-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)
101b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
r A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses a E F_F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) p co r G Submerged aquatic vegetation
r B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o .2:, r H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation �c L o r I Sand bottom
j' C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) L m r J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
r D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots 02 r K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
[✓ E Little or no habitat
******.*****`**'****************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************
Bedform and Substrate - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11 a. . Yes (-,No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedfc rm evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
f B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
F- C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffles 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.)
11 d. [,Yes [,No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12. Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. (-Yes F, 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. F, 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.
F r Adult frogs
r r Aquatic reptiles
r r Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
r r Beetles (including water pennies)
r r Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
r r Asian clam (Corbicula )
r r Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
F r Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
r r Dipterans (true flies)
r 7 Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
F F Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
r i- Midges/mosquito larvae
r I- Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
r i- Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula )
r r Other fish
r r Salamanders/tadpoles
r r Snails
r r Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
r- i- Tipulid larvae

I— r 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 include: 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?
IN 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.
r A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
r B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
r C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
r D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
f E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F., F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
F_ A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
r B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
r C Urban stream (>> 24 % impervious surface for watershed)
r D Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
r E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
177 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: 7
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB
RB
LB RB LB RB
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 - First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
to assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
A A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
B B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
C C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity - assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. [,Yes [+;No Was a 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 46to<67 [,C 67to<79 MD 79to<230 nE >- 230

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Fezzik - UT2c lower
Stream Category Oa3
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Function Class Rating Summary
Date of Evaluation 10/9/19
Assessor Name/Organization
CSC
NO
NO
NO
Intermittent
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology LOW
(2) Baseflow LOW
(2) Flood Flow LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW
(4) Floodplain Access LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer MEDIUM
(4) Microtopography LOW
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(4) Channel Stability LOW
(4) Sediment Transport NA
(4) Stream Geomorphology MEDIUM
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality LOW
(2) Baseflow LOW
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration LOW
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance OMITTED
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat LOW
(3) Baseflow LOW
(3) Substrate HIGH
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat NA
Overall LOW

ies user manual version c.i
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User
Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if any 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): Fezzik - UT2-R1 2. Date of evaluation: 10/8/19
3. Applicant/owner name: WLS 4. Assessor name/organization: CSC
5. County: Richmond 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Yadkin-PeeDee on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Bells Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.063826,-79.728535
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): UT2-R1 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 2500
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 3.5 r Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 10.5 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? [,Yes F, No
14. Feature type: F;Perennial flow [, Intermittent flow [-,Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: [,Mountains (M) [,Piedmont (P) [,Inner Coastal Plain (1) ;Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic
valley shape (skip for F,a b
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip [,Size 1 (< 0.1 mi`) [,Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi`) Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi`) [ -, Size 4 (? 5 mi)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? FYes [-,No If Yes, check all that appy to the assessment area.
r Section 10 water r Classified Trout Waters r Water Supply Watershed ( [-,I [;II Fill [;IV [-,V)
r Essential Fish Habitat r Primary Nursery Area r High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
r Publicly owned property r NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect r Nutrient Sensitive Waters
F Anadromous fish r 303(d) List r CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
r Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
r 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 adversely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates).
�B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
B Not 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
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.
F_ A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
r B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)

F_ C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
F D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
r E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
r F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
r G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
F H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
r I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
f- J Little to ho stressors
Recent Weather -watershed metric
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.
(i 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-C No drought conditions
9 Large or Dangerous Stream - assessment reach metric
Yes f: 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)
r A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses a E r F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) p co r G Submerged aquatic vegetation
r B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o .2:, r H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation �c L o r I Sand bottom
r C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) L m r J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
R D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots 02 r K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
r E Little or no habitat
... *----'*'*' ---REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS********************
11. Bedform and Substrate - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11 a. C Yes F, No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
iib. Bedformevaluated. Check the appropriatebox(es).
r1_ A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
F_ B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
F- C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffles 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.)
11 d. [,Yes [,No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12. Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. (-Yes F, 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. F, 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.
F r Adult frogs
r r Aquatic reptiles
r r Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
r r Beetles (including water pennies)
r r Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
r r Asian clam (Corbicula )
r r Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
F r Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
r r Dipterans (true flies)
r 7 Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
F F Megaloptera (alderfly, fishily, dobsonfly larvae)
r i- Midges/mosquito larvae
r I- Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
r F- Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula )
r r Other fish
r r Salamanders/tadpoles
r r Snails
r r Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
r- I- Tipulid larvae

r r 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 include: 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 E; 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.
177 A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
r B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
r C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
r D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
F E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors - assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
F A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
r B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
r C Urban stream (>> 24 % impervious surface for watershed)
r D Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
r E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
fy 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: r
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB
RB
LB RB LB RB
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 - First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
to assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
A A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
B B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
C C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity - assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ,Yes [+;No Was a 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 r-, C 67 to < 79 [ -A D 79 to < 230 n E >- 230

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Fezzik - UT2-R1
Stream Category Oa3
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Function Class Rating Summary
Date of Evaluation
Assessor Name/Organization
10/8/19
CSC
NO
NO
NO
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow MEDIUM
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation MEDIUM
(4) Floodplain Access MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer MEDIUM
(4) Microtopography LOW
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM
(4) Channel Stability MEDIUM
(4) Sediment Transport NA
(4) Stream Geomorphology MEDIUM
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality HIGH
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM
(2)Indicators of Stressors NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance OMITTED
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat MEDIUM
(2) In -stream Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow MEDIUM
(3) Substrate HIGH
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM
(3) In -stream Habitat LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Stream -side Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat NA
Overall MEDIUM

ies user manuai version c.i
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User
Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if any 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): Fezzik - UT2-R2 and UT2-R3 2. Date of evaluation: 10/9/19
3. Applicant/owner name: WLS 4. Assessor name/organization: CSC
5. County: Richmond 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Yadkin-PeeDee on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Bells Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.058682,-79.720182
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): UT2-R2 and UT2-R3 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 2400
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 4 r Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 12 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? [,Yes F, No
14. Feature type: [, Perennial flow F;Intermittent flow [-,Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: [,Mountains (M) [,Piedmont (P) [,Inner Coastal Plain (1) ;Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic
valley shape (skip for F,a b
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip [,Size 1 (< 0.1 mi`) [,Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi`) Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi`) E+; Size 4 (? 5 mi)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? FYes [-,No If Yes, check all that appy to the assessment area.
r Section 10 water r Classified Trout Waters r Water Supply Watershed ( [-,I [;II Fill [;IV [-,V)
r Essential Fish Habitat r Primary Nursery Area r High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
r Publicly owned property r NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect r Nutrient Sensitive Waters
F Anadromous fish r 303(d) List r CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
r Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
r 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 adversely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates).
�B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
B Not 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
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.
F_ A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
r B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)

F_ C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
F D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
1771 E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
r F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
r G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
F H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
r I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
f- J Little to ho stressors
Recent Weather -watershed metric
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.
(i 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-C No drought conditions
9 Large or Dangerous Stream - assessment reach metric
Yes f: 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)
r A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses a E r F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) p co r G Submerged aquatic vegetation
r B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o .2:, r H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation �c L o r I Sand bottom
r C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) L m r J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
R D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots 02 r K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
r E Little or no habitat
... *----'*'*' ---REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS********************
11. Bedform and Substrate - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11 a. C Yes (-,No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
r1_ A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
F_ B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
F- C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffles 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
E; (; 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.)
11 d. [,Yes [,No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12. Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. (-Yes F, 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. F, 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.
F r Adult frogs
r r Aquatic reptiles
r r Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
r r Beetles (including water pennies)
r r Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
r r Asian clam (Corbicula )
r r Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
F r Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
r r Dipterans (true flies)
r 7 Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
F F Megaloptera (alderfly, fishily, dobsonfly larvae)
r i- Midges/mosquito larvae
r I- Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
r F- Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula )
r r Other fish
r r Salamanders/tadpoles
r r Snails
r r Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
r- I- Tipulid larvae

r r 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 include: 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 E; 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.
177 A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
r B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
r C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
r D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
F E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors - assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
F A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
r B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
r C Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
r D Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
r E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
r 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 E ; 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: r
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB
RB
LB RB LB RB
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 - First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
to assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
A A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
B B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
C C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity- assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. Yes [+;No Was a 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 r-, C 67 to < 79 [ -A D 79 to < 230 n E >- 230

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Fezzik - UT2-R2 and UT2-R3
Stream Category Oa4
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Function Class Rating Summary
Date of Evaluation 10/9/19
Assessor Name/Organization
CSC
NO
NO
NO
Intermittent
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology LOW
(2) Baseflow LOW
(2) Flood Flow LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW
(4) Floodplain Access LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer MEDIUM
(4) Microtopography MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(4) Channel Stability LOW
(4) Sediment Transport NA
(4) Stream Geomorphology LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow LOW
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance OMITTED
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat LOW
(3) Baseflow LOW
(3) Substrate NA
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat NA
Overall LOW

ies user manuai version c.i
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User
Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if any 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): Fezzik - UT3 lower 2. Date of evaluation: 10/9/19
3. Applicant/owner name: WLS 4. Assessor name/organization: CSC
5. County: Richmond 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Yadkin-PeeDee on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Bells Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.057750,-79.720527
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): UT3 lower 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 1500
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 4.9 r Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 15 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? [,Yes F, No
14. Feature type: F, Perennial flow r, Intermittent flow [,Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: [,Mountains (M) [,Piedmont (P) [,Inner Coastal Plain (1) ;Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic
valley shape (skip for F,a [gib
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip [,Size 1 (< 0.1 mi`) [,Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi`) Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi`) E+; Size 4 (? 5 mi)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? FYes [-,No If Yes, check all that appy to the assessment area.
r Section 10 water r Classified Trout Waters r Water Supply Watershed ( [-,I [;II Fill [;IV [-,V)
r Essential Fish Habitat r Primary Nursery Area r High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
r Publicly owned property r NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect r Nutrient Sensitive Waters
F Anadromous fish F 303(d) List r CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
r Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
r 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 adversely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates).
�B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
B Not 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
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.
r A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
r B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)

F_ C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
F D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
1771 E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
r F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
r G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
F H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
r I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
r J Little to ho stressors
Recent Weather -watershed metric
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-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)
101b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
r A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses a E F_F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) p co r G Submerged aquatic vegetation
r B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o .2:, r H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation �c L o r I Sand bottom
j' C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) L m r J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
r D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots 02 r K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
[✓ E Little or no habitat
****"""**""*`**'****************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
Bedform and Substrate - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11 a. Yes F, No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedfc rm evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
f B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
F- C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffles 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.)
11 d. [,Yes [,No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12. Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. (-Yes F, 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. F, 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.
F r Adult frogs
r r Aquatic reptiles
r r Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
r r Beetles (including water pennies)
r r Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
r r Asian clam (Corbicula )
r r Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
F r Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
r r Dipterans (true flies)
r 7 Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
F F Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
r i- Midges/mosquito larvae
r I- Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
r i- Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula )
r r Other fish
r r Salamanders/tadpoles
r r Snails
r r Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
r- i- Tipulid larvae

r r 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 include: 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 E; 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.
P A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
r B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
r C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
r D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
F E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F_ 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)
f— B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
r C Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
r D Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
r E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
r 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 E ;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: r
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB
RB
LB RB LB RB
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
c+�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 - First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
to assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
A A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
B B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
C [+'�C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity - assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. [,Yes F,No Was a conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. F,No Water [Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
[,A <46 [,B 46to<67 [,C 67to<79 MD 79to<230 nE >- 230

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Fezzik - UT3 lower
Stream Category Oa4
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Function Class Rating Summary
Date of Evaluation 10/9/19
Assessor Name/Organization
CSC
NO
NO
NO
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology LOW
(2) Baseflow LOW
(2) Flood Flow LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW
(4) Floodplain Access LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer HIGH
(4) Microtopography HIGH
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(4) Channel Stability LOW
(4) Sediment Transport NA
(4) Stream Geomorphology LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow LOW
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance OMITTED
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat LOW
(3) Baseflow LOW
(3) Substrate NA
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat NA
Overall LOW

ies user manual version z.i
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User
Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if any 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): Fezzik - UT3a 2. Date of evaluation: 10/9/19
3. Applicant/owner name: WLS 4. Assessor name/organization: CSC
5. County: Richmond 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Yadkin-PeeDee on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Bells Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.056032,-79.726375
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): UT3a 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 500
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 2.5 r Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 7 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? [,Yes F, No
14. Feature type: F;Perennial flow [, Intermittent flow [-,Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: [,Mountains (M) [,Piedmont (P) [,Inner Coastal Plain (1) ;Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic
valley shape (skip for F,a b
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip F Size 1 (< 0.1 mi`) [,Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi`) Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi`) [ -, Size 4 (? 5 mi)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? FYes [-,No If Yes, check all that appy to the assessment area.
r Section 10 water r Classified Trout Waters r Water Supply Watershed ( [-,I [;II Fill [;IV [-,V)
r Essential Fish Habitat r Primary Nursery Area r High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
r Publicly owned property r NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect r Nutrient Sensitive Waters
F Anadromous fish r 303(d) List r CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
r Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
r 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 adversely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates).
�B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
B Not 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
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.
F_ A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
r B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)

F_ C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
F D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
1771 E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
r F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
r G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
F H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
r I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
f- J Little to ho stressors
8. Recent Weather -watershed metric
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-C No drought conditions
9 Large or Dangerous Stream - assessment reach metric
Yes f: 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)
101b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
r A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses a E r F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) p co r G Submerged aquatic vegetation
r B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o .2:, r H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation �c L o r I Sand bottom
F C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) L E r J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
r D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots V r K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
F E Little or no habitat
***... *... *....'*'*' ...REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11 a. C Yes F, No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
r1_ A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
F_ B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
F- C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffles 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.)
11 d. [,Yes [,No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12. Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. (-Yes F, 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. F, 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.
F r Adult frogs
r r Aquatic reptiles
r r Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
r r Beetles (including water pennies)
r r Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
r r Asian clam (Corbicula )
r r Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
F r Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
r r Dipterans (true flies)
r 7 Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
F F Megaloptera (alderfly, fishily, dobsonfly larvae)
r i- Midges/mosquito larvae
r I- Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
r i- Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula )
r r Other fish
r r Salamanders/tadpoles
r r Snails
r f Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
r- I- Tipulid larvae

r r 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 include: 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 E; 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.
177 A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
r B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
r C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
r D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
F E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors - assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
F A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
r B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
r C Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
r D Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
r E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
r 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 E ;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: r
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB
RB
LB RB LB RB
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 - First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
to assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
A A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
B B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
C [+'�C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity - assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ,Yes F,No Was a conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. F, No Water Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
[ , A <46 �' B 46 to < 67 r-, C 67 to < 79 [ -A D 79 to < 230 n E >- 230

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Fezzik - UT3a
Stream Category Oat
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Function Class Rating Summary
Date of Evaluation
Assessor Name/Organization
10/9/19
CSC
NO
NO
NO
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology LOW
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW
(4) Floodplain Access LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer HIGH
(4) Microtopography HIGH
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(4) Channel Stability LOW
(4) Sediment Transport NA
(4) Stream Geomorphology LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance OMITTED
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat LOW
(3) Baseflow MEDIUM
(3) Substrate HIGH
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat NA
Overall LOW

GEORGE K LANKFORD, LLC Shady Grove Road
Pittsboro, NC 27312
919-602-0127 [e-mail]
Fezzik Site -Preliminary Hydric Soil Evaluation
Provide for:
Mr. Daniel Ingram
Water & Land Solutions
7721 Six Forks Rd., Suite 130
Raleigh, NC 27615
Re: Preliminary Hydric Soil Evaluation
Fezzik Mitigation Site
Richmond County NC
A preliminary hydric soil evaluation was completed on October 15, 2019 for the Fezzik Mitigation site.
The site is located in Richmond County approximately 8 miles north of Rockingham, NC and northwest
of Haywood -Parker Road (SR 1441). The area to be evaluated is approximately 40 acres on the floodplain
of Bells Creek and the lower reaches of its tributaries.
This report presents a preliminary evaluation of the subject property based upon a limited field evaluation
for the purpose of confirming the presence and approximate extent of hydric soil, and assessing the site's
suitability for wetland mitigation consisting of restoration/enhancement/rehabilitation of wetlands across
the site. This evaluation is not a soil delineation and all boundaries shown are estimated and approximate.
The observations and opinions stated in this report reflect conditions apparent on the subject property at
the time of the site evaluation. My findings, opinions, conclusions, and recommendations are based on the
site conditions with locations and boundaries of the property as evident in the field.
Project Information and Background
The purpose of the project was to determine the existence of hydric soils suitable for re-establishment or
rehabilitation of wetlands by utilizing existing hydrology and implementing practical drainage
modifications. The soil evaluation focused upon floodplains, adjacent back water landscapes, and other
areas having higher potential for containing hydric soil.
This project site is within the central Southern Piedmont physiographic region on the floodplain of Bells
Creek and its adjacent tributaries. The area has broad gentle ridges and mostly gentle side slopes with
steeper slopes dissected by drainages. Geology of the project and a large portion of the contributing
watershed is mostly within the Carolina Slate Belt where the formation consists of Metamudstone and
meta-argillite. The lower portion of the project appears to fall within a small window of Triassiac Basin.
The upper reaches of Bells Creek originate within Coastal Plain geology of the Pinehurst and Middendorf
Formations. Bells Creek is a higher order stream that flows southward from the site.
The project landscape is the nearly level to concave floodplain along Bells Creek. Within the project,
Bells Creek and a small third order stream enters a relatively wide floodplain from the north. Land use is
currently managed for timber.
NRCS Soil Mapping
The NRCS mapping units are areas of soil having similarly defined soil properties and physical
characteristics with similar management criteria base upon these properties. Map units across a site are
useful for general planning, but cover larger scales and which typically include smaller areas of dissimilar
soils not discernable without a detailed site evaluation. Properties of the map units provide the
Page 1 of 9 November, 2019

GEORGE K LANKFORD, LLC Shady Grove Road
Pittsboro, NC 27312
919-602-0127 [e-mail]
Fezzik Site -Preliminary Hydric Soil Evaluation
background for interpreting the range of soil properties that may be encountered at the site. General
characteristics of these mapping units are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1. NRCS Hydric Soil Map Units at the Fezzik Site -
Taxonomic
Drainage
Hydric
Landscape setting (down
Series
Class
Class
(Hydric Rating)
across
Chewacla loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded (ChA) (Consociation)
Prime farmland if drained and either protected from flooding or not frequently flooded during the growing season
Parent material - alluvium
Depth to water table — Chewacla 6 to 24 inches
Flooding — frequent Pondin - none
Chewacla (80%)
Fluvaquentic
somewhat
No
linear -linear
D strude is
poorly
(B/D)
Toccoa (15%)
Typic
well
No
linear -linear
(frequently flooded
Udi uvents
B
Wehadkee (5%)
Fluvaquentic
poorly
Yes
onded
Endoa ue is
(B/D)linear-linear
Creedmoor fine sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes (CrB) (Consociation)
Prime farmland
Parent material - residuum weathered from shale and siltstone and/or mudstone and/or sandstone
Depth to water table —18 to 242 inches
Flooding — none Pondin - none
Creedmoor (90%)
Aquic
Ha ludults
moderately
well
No
C/D
convex -convex
Mayodan (8%)
HaTypic ludults
well
Bo
convex -convex
Ailey loamy sand, 0 to 8 percent slopes (AcB) (Consociation)
Farmland of statewide importance
Parent material - sandy and loamy marine deposits
Depth to water table —more than 80 inches
Flooding — none Pondin - none
o
Ailey (85 /o)
Fluvaquentic
somewhat
No
convex -convex
D strude is
poorlyB
Bibb (8%)
Typic
poorly
Yes
concave -linear
Fluva uents
A/D
Johnston (7%)
Fluvaquentic
very poorly
Yes
concave -linear
Endoa ue is
B/D
Georgeville-Badin complex, 2 to 8 percent slopes, moderately eroded (UxB2) (Complex)
Farmland of statewide importance
Parent material - sandy and loamy marine deposits
Depth to water table —more than 80 inches
Flooding — none Pondin - none
Georgeville (70%)
Typic
Kanha ludults
well
No
B
convex -convex
Badin (15%)
well
co
concave -linear
HaTypic ludults
Source-NRCS Web Soil Survey (2019 10 22)
The NRCS soil survey indicates one soil map unit within the floodplain and three map units along the
adjacent toe slope just above the floodplain and on the higher slopes of the watershed. The Chewacla
(ChA) soils are mapped on the floodplain and formed in alluvium derived from the contributing uplands.
Page 2 of 9 November, 2019

GEORGE K LANKFORD, LLC Shady Grove Road
Pittsboro, NC 27312
919-602-0127 [e-mail]
Fezzik Site -Preliminary Hydric Soil Evaluation
The Chewacla soil is subject to frequent flooding and may contain areas of poorly drained hydric
inclusions subject to ponding. To the east on a gentle side slope the Ailey (AcB) map unit has a sandy
surface underlain by sandy clay loam. This unit has inclusions of poorly and very poorly drained hydric
soils. To the west and north are well drained Creedmoor (CrB) and Georgeville-Badin complex (UxB2)
map units. These soils typically have fine sand or silty surface underlain by silty and clayey soils and are
commonly shallow to bedrock. This eroded Georgeville-Badin complex may have contributed
significantly to current deposition and character of soils found within the floodplain.
The poorly or very poorly drained hydric inclusions have a water table normally within 12 inches of the
soil surface. These inclusions occur on nearly level to concave landforms that occasionally to frequently
flood and have slow to very slow runoff. They are rated as hydric by the NRCS.
The NRCS mapping units are useful for planning and indicate the types and ranges of soils characteristics
that may be found within a landscape. Map units often correlate closely with soils at a location, but have
limitation because a sites soils represent the natural conditions where multiple gradients are influenced by
geology, hydrology, slope, and past land management practices. An actual site evaluation is necessary to
determine soil characteristics specific to this site.
Methodology
A series of 41 soil borings were evaluated across the project area to evaluate the soils and verify the
presence of hydric soil. Utilizing hydric soil indicators, areas of hydric soil and an approximate extent are
estimated (Figure 2). This work provides representative profiles and describes general soil characteristics
and details of site -specific conditions observed that may affect wetland restoration. These boring
observations do not contain adequate detail to classify these soils to a series.
Current site hydrology was evaluated based upon observations of a water table (or its absence), soil
characteristics, natural and constructed drainage features, and other visible indications as apparent at the
time of the evaluation. Soil features and hydric soil indicators were evaluated and described using
morphologic characteristics and criteria based on "Field Indicators ofHydric Soils in the United States"
(USDA, NRCS, 2018, Version 8.2). The indicators used are valid for the Eastern Mountains and
Piedmont Region (V2.0), Land Resource Region (LLR) P and Major Land Resource Region 136
(Southern Piedmont)
Soil boring locations were approximately located using the Terrain Navigator Pro smart phone application
by Trimble. Soil boundaries shown on figures are approximated using boring and field point locations
combined with aerial photography and professional experience. Ditches are determined from the site visit
and supplemented by aerial photography. The classification of a feature as a stream or ditch was not
officially determined for this report and may actually differ from this discussion.
Results and Discussion
Site Conditions
The project area evaluated consists of the floodplain where Bells Creek and an unnamed tributary enter
this relatively wide, nearly level floodplain. The floodplain is located between gentle to moderately
sloping uplands. Topography consists of a nearly level to slightly concave floodplain along Bells Creek
and the unnamed tributary. Bells Creek flows down the east side of this floodplain and the tributary flow
along the west slope. The floodplain is approximately 2,000 feet down the valley with a width ranging
from 200 to more than 400 feet. Currently the land use is forestry with old bedding rows visible in many
places. Areas that appear to be crowned are also visible along the west side of the valley. Old fencing was
Page 3 of 9 November, 2019

GEORGE K LANKFORD, LLC Shady Grove Road
Pittsboro, NC 27312
919-602-0127 [e-mail]
Fezzik Site -Preliminary Hydric Soil Evaluation
found to support historic aerials indicating the use as row crop and pasture prior to the current land use.
The central portion of the floodplain appears to be at a slightly lower elevation.
Given the large watershed, Bells Creek would be expected to regularly flood with limited evidence of past
events was observed. Indications of past flooding may have been obscured due to the moderate drought
conditions. Bells Creek is relatively straight and may have been moved to the eastern edge of the
floodplain. The unnamed tributary located along the west side has been dredged and has a distinct spoil
berm along its left bank. This tributary is significantly oversized, resulting in a loss of overbank flooding
on a regular basis. Where the two streams enter at the upper end of this floodplain, shallow ditches are
present to collect and direct surface water to the tributary. A system of wide swales also direct surface
waters down the valley where they drain into ditches and enter the tributary or Bells Creek near Haywood
Parker Road.
The floodplain is in planted pines with native vegetation regenerating throughout. The wider swales have
vegetation characteristic of wetlands, including black willow (Salix nigra), tag alder (Alnus serrulate), red
maple (Acer rubrum), and various herbaceous species. Between the swales, loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) is
dominate. The wetter species may be remnant from when the floodplain was much wetter, with current
management and conditions allowing the more rapid regeneration of species that out compete pines in
these marginal areas.
Soils
Soils were found to have a loamy or silty texture throughout with mottling usually beginning within the
upper 10 inches of the surface. Surface horizons are brown to dark brown and have distinct to prominent
mottles within the upper 10 inches. The subsoils are a depleted brown to pinkish gray, also with distinct
to prominent mottles of strong brown to light brown and occasionally dark reddish -brown mottles. The
colors become a more depleted with depth and mottles increase with depth. Representative soil profiles
are shown in Table 2 below.
Hydric soils within the floodplain occur mostly in a large, contiguous unit consistently displaying hydric
indicators (Figure 2). The largest unit (HS 1) is along the unnamed tributary and is drained by swales and
ditches with a berm along this channel limit current hydrology. Adjacent to HS 1 and along Bells Creek
are soils exhibiting marginal hydric indicators (HS 2). Soils in this unit have features that appear historic
hydric features. Soils in this unit are typically are too bright to meet the technical standard for the F3
indicator, but contain similar mottles present that indicate a seasonal high water table was present at one
time. Two small hydric soil areas make up the third map unit and occur along the slope west of Bells
Creek. Soils in this unit appear to have jurisdictional hydrology. No ditches or significant drainage
modifications were observed and hydrology is likely groundwater discharge or seepage with upland
runoff.
In most of the floodplain at around 10 inches a brittle horizon is present. This brittle layer is likely a
fragipan that is restrictive to vertical infiltration, perching a water table that promotes retention and
ponding, especially within depressional areas. A longer period of saturation would allow for the saturation
to penetrate to the subsoil layers. The observed drainage modifications remove surface water and limits
the length of saturation and ponding.
At the lower end of the project, head cutting in ditches was observed. Some of these headcuts seem to
break through this brittle horizon and appear to be actively undermining this fragipan. This type of
erosion was observed to be limited. Textures having fine sand and silt need stabilization to limit erosional
losses. Although textures are mostly loamy, erosion may be a concern in disturbed soils. Currently, the
woody vegetation present provides adequate soil stabilization, but observations suggests a trend of these
Page 4 of 9 November, 2019

GEORGE K LANKFORD, LLC Shady Grove Road
Pittsboro, NC 27312
919-602-0127 [e-mail]
Fezzik Site -Preliminary Hydric Soil Evaluation
headcuts progressing. Because of the sylvicultural uses, future timber harvesting may destabilize the
current conditions and accelerate soil loss and erosion. Due to the width and relatively level topography
of the floodplain, erosion potential can be managed effectively.
Table 2. Representative Soil Profiles at the Fezzik Site
Depth
Color
Mottle Percentage
Texture **
Notes
Matrix
Mottle
(inches)
(Location*)
SB 14
Hydric Indicators WT not observed'
October 14, 2019
173-De leted Matrix
0-2
7.5 YR 4/3
SiL
2-8
7.5 YR 4/3
7.5 YR 5/8
10% PL
SiL
8-32
7.5 YR 5/2
7.5 YR 4/6
5% (PL)
SL
black concretions have sharp
7.5 YR 2.5/1
2% PL
boundaries and may be relict
SB 21
Hydric Indicators WT not observed'
Octoberl4, 2019
F3-De leted Matrix - relict
0-2
7.5 YR 3/4
L
2-7
7.5 YR 4/4
L
7-15
7.5 YR 5/3
7.5 YR 5/6
7% (PL)
SL
weakly indurate fragipan and
5 YR 4/6
2% PLpartially
restrictive
15-20
7.5 YR 5/2
7.5 YR 5/8
10% PL
SL
Hydric Indicators WT not observed'
SB 28
173-Depleted Matrix
October 15, 2019
F 19- Piedmont Flood lain Soils
0-3
7.5 YR 4/4
SL
3-7
7.5 YR 5/2
7.5 YR 4/6
10% PL
SL
7-26
7.5 YR 6/2
7.5 YR 5/8
20% (PL)
SL
Weakly indurate fragipan and
partially restrictive
Hydric Indicators WT not observed'
SB 38
173-Depleted Matrix
October 15, 2019
178- Redox Depressions
F 19- Piedmont Flood lain Soils
0-2
7.5 YR 4/2
L
2-13
7.5 YR 5/2
7.5 YR 5/8
20% (PL)
SCL
rounded gravel —10%
7.5 YR 4/2
5 % PL
13-20
7.5 YR 6/1
7.5 YR 5/8
20% PL
SCL
rounded gravel —10%
WT = observed apparent water table
*PL =pore lining, M = matrix
**Texture (follows USDA textural classification)
S = sand, L = loam, Si = silt, C = clay
f = fine, c = coarse (textural modifiers for sand)
' The evaluation was performed during a moderate drought condition.
Hydric Soil Indicators
The soil evaluation confirmed the presence of hydric soil indicators within 12 inches of the soil surface.
These hydric soils have low chroma soils containing distinct or prominent mottles of redox concentrations
within the upper 10 inches. This pattern meets the F3-Depleted Matrix indicator. Where redox
Page 5 of 9 November, 2019

GEORGE K LANKFORD, LLC Shady Grove Road
Pittsboro, NC 27312
919-602-0127 [e-mail]
Fezzik Site -Preliminary Hydric Soil Evaluation
concentrations exceed 5 percent and occur within a depressional landscape, the F8-Redox Depressions
indicator is met. Additionally, a few areas were found to contain more than 20 percent distinct or
prominent redox concentrations within the upper 10 inches, thus meeting the criteria for the F19-
Piedmont Flood Plain Soils. The F19 indicator is still a test indicator in this MLRA. The loss of flooding
be changing hydric indicators through the loss of these characteristics.
Interpretation of Soil Indicators
The interpretation of hydric indicators at this site is difficult because of the late season and moderate
drought conditions present at the time of the site visit. Determining the effectiveness of site drainage
features and drainage modifications also presents challenges due to these drier soil conditions.
The marginal soils occur within a landscape similar to the areas of hydric soil identified. These adjacent
soils currently exhibit slightly higher chromas with relict concentrations from historically wetter
conditions. At this site, the historically wet soils developed gray, depleted color and the characteristic
mottles along pores and root channels. These gray soils may have been "stained" when flooding events
provide a source of iron minerals that would oxidize under the current, better drained state. This staining
occurs because drainage modifications limit or remove hydrology necessary for producing the conditions
and processes required to prevent this oxidation pattern. As these minerals re -oxidize throughout the
profile, more color or higher chromas follow. Under the better drained condition, oxidation may occur
more evenly throughout the soil instead of primarily along pore linings that typically produce the pattern
of mottles. This change can result in an apparent loss of one or more critical indicators. The total area of
hydric soil may extend beyond the area sketched in the field due to the existence of the relict pattern
present in HS 2. Additional evaluation of these soils is needed to properly identify the potential of this
area.
The hydric indicators and relict features observed suggest the Fezzik site had a range of hydroperiods tied
to local groundwater and surface elevations. The wettest soil occurred in areas with lower elevation and
the longest saturation periods. Prior to these modifications, some depressions in the floodplain may have
been saturated for weeks to months during the growing season.
Current Hydrologic Alterations
Historically, primary hydrology was overbank events from Bells Creek and the unnamed tributary. This
would have been supplemented with upland runoff, groundwater discharge, and small areas of seepage
along the toe of slope. Bells Creek is moderately incised and the tributary is deeply incised from past
dredging. The tributary also has a berm to the floodplain that also limits flooding. Both channels appear
straightened and possibly relocated to opposite sides of the floodplain. The crowing extends the length of
the floodplain with wide swales between. The swales and ditches intercept flows and drain surface water
more rapidly. Shallow bedding rows are visible. Currently, these modifications direct flows down the
valley toward Haywood -Parker Road at the confluence of Bells Creek and the unnamed tributary.
Depressional floodplain features are currently absent and limit potential ponding. Along the backwater
areas and toe slopes there does not appear to be large areas of wet seeps. Smaller seasonal seepage areas
would be obscured due to the late summer evaluation and dry conditions.
The water table was not observed during this initial site visit in late October, but vegetation indicates the
swales may still retain limited wetland hydrology. Based on the landscape and observed soil
characteristics, these areas would have historically ranged from semipermanently flooded to saturated.
The drainage modifications appear to be at effective at removal of surface water and has resulted in
significantly lowering of the local groundwater elevation.
Page 6 of 9 November, 2019

GEORGE K LANKFORD, LLC Shady Grove Road
Pittsboro, NC 27312
919-602-0127 [e-mail]
Fezzik Site -Preliminary Hydric Soil Evaluation
Recommendations
This site has potential for providing significant Wetland Re-establishment by restoring a natural capture
and storage of flooding events from these two streams. Hydrologic restoration would most likely consist
of restoring a more natural floodplain landscape and re-establishing the stream beds at higher elevations
that more readily access the floodplain. Restoration of the floodplain will require plugging and filling of
the ditches and filling swaths of the swales that are currently providing rapid surface drainage. The
removal, either in part or wholly, of the crowns and berms will allow surface water to flow across the
floodplain. This will eliminate the existing direct flow paths down the valley length and provide
opportunities to create natural depressions to pond surface water.
Restoration of the unnamed tributary will also raise the groundwater and allow floodwater to access the
floodplain provide surface water to the restored floodplain landscape. Restoration of Bells Creek will
raise ground water and provide opportunities for significant flooding of the floodplain. The restoration of
a normal conditions across the floodplain and raising of stream beds will allow the functional uplift of
floodplain soil by allowing significant storage natural to this landform.
Due to an existing fragipan like horizon, ripping at this site is not recommended. Where present, this
restrictive horizon can help extend surface ponding and saturation. The existing wetland areas may be
reconnected to the larger floodplain by this restoration project. No drainage modifications were readily
observed and no work in these areas is suggested beyond establishing an appropriate vegetative
community.
Based on the NRCS soil mapping units potential occurring at this site, success criteria may be expected to
range from 9 to 12 percent, although the ponding in depressional areas may reach 16 percent. Because the
hydrology of this site relies on flooding and surface storage, there may be frequent short-term local
saturation events throughout the growing season. In wetter years, some areas may meet the success
criteria more than once in a given year.
Conclusions
The site consists of a relatively wide, contiguous floodplain between Bells Creek and an unnamed
tributary. Current land use is forestry with multiple drainage modifications observed. Three soil units of
were observed. The most extensive soil unit consists of soils meeting the F3-Depleted Matrix hydric
indicator. Adjacent to this map unit in the same landscape, soils appear to have features that marginally
hydric and generally are too bright to meet the technical standard for the F3 indicator. These soils may
have been historically hydric and are transitioning due to better drained conditions. The two small soil
areas comprise the third unit. These areas appear to have appropriate hydrology and are jurisdictional
wetlands.
The soils observed appear to match hydric inclusions described within the NRCS map units. Soils were
found to have a loamy or silty texture throughout with redoximorphic mottling usually beginning within
the upper 10 inches of the surface. These soils indicate historic saturation with wetland hydrology.
Around 10 inches a brittle horizon is present across much of the floodplain. This brittle layer is likely a
fragipan that is restrictive to vertical infiltration, perching a water table that promotes ponding, especially
within depressional areas. A water table was not observed, but vegetation indicates the swales may still
retain limited wetland hydrology. The interpretation of hydric indicators at this site is difficult because of
the late season and moderate drought conditions present at the time of the site visit. Determining the
effectiveness of site drainage features and drainage modifications also presents challenges due to these
drier conditions.
Page 7 of 9 November, 2019

GEORGE K LANKFORD, LLC Shady Grove Road
Pittsboro, NC 27312
919-602-0127 [e-mail]
Fezzik Site -Preliminary Hydric Soil Evaluation
Historically, hydrology was primary overbank events from Bells Creek and the unnamed tributary. Both
channels appear straightened and relocated to opposite sides of the floodplain. In addition to stream
channelization, modifications include, multiple ditches, long drainage swales, potential crowning, and low
bedding rows. The swales and ditches intercept flows and drain surface water more rapidly. The crowning
extends the length of the floodplain with wide swales between. Depressional floodplain features are
currently limited and the potential for ponding is low.
Table 3. Summary of Site Characteristics — Fezzik Site
Site characteristics present suitable for wetland restoration:
• Large contiguous area within the lower reaches of Bells Creek are suitable for Wetland Re-
establishment.
• Landscape is a suitable location within depressional areas of floodplain.
• Hydrology is absent across at least the majority of this site due to the incision of Bells Creek,
dredging of an unnamed tributary, strategically located ditches, and crowing/bedding for
forestry operations.
• Historic hydrology appears to have been frequent flooding from the two streams with extended
floodplain storage due to the nearly level floodplain landscape.
• Hydrology is currently limited due to drainage modifications that rapidly remove surface
water, limit ponding, and reduce flooding from the streams.
• Restoration and raising of the current bed elevations for Bells Creek and the unnamed tributary
will establish the natural reconnection to the floodplain, increasing the frequency and duration
of flooding.
• Drainage from ditches and drainage swales can easily be targeted to enhance hydrology.
• Drainage modifications appear straightforward by plugging/filling shallow ditches, disrupting
the drainage patterns created by the swales and crowning, and reintroducing natural shallow
depressional features.
• Low depressional areas already contain a seed bank and source for appropriate wetland plants.
• Multiple hydric soils indicators were observed.
• Restored habitat will provide a large, functional, interconnected stream and wetland system
along Bells Creek.
Limitations at this site are mostly minor.
• The natural hydrology appears to primarily be from frequent flooding.
• Interpretation of existing hydrology and marginal hydric soils was difficult due to dry
(moderate drought) conditions.
• There is a possibility the linear drainage features may be jurisdictional wetlands that would be
treated as Wetland Rehabilitation.
• Concerns about earthwork needed to raise Bells Creek to restore hydrology.
• All areas of hydric soil are subject to change upon full delineation.
• Site evaluation was limited.
The current hydroperiod is limited due to the drainage modifications lowering of groundwater elevation
and limiting ponding across the floodplain. Hydrologic restoration would most likely consist of restoring
a more natural floodplain landscape and re-establishing the stream beds at higher elevations that readily
access the floodplain. Within the floodplain, plugging and filling of the ditches and filling swaths of the
swales will eliminate the rapid surface drainage. The removal, either in part or wholly, of the crowns and
Page 8 of 9 November, 2019

GEORGE K LANKFORD, LLC Shady Grove Road
Pittsboro, NC 27312
919-602-0127 [e-mail]
Fezzik Site -Preliminary Hydric Soil Evaluation
berms will allow surface water to flow across the floodplain while creating an opportunity for natural
depressions to pond surface water. Due to the existing fragipan like horizon, ripping at this site is not
recommended. These modifications will increase of the frequency and duration of these flooding events
and restore the natural hydroperiods and greatly increase the function of this stream and wetland system.
Based on observation of the landscape and the potential source for hydrology, this site can provide
successful Wetland Re-establishment.
This project provides an opportunity to provide significant re-establishment of aquatic resources. In
addition, site is part of a large existing riparian community. Potential functional benefits to re-establishing
wetlands at this site include the physical attributes of flood storage and retention, re-establishment of
appropriate community structure, and the establishment of potential high -quality aquatic habitat. This
project is expected to provide enhancement of hydro-geochemical process includes pollutant
sequestration and degradation, nutrient capture and transformations, and sediment trapping. The
establishment of a suitable community structure will provide a wide range of habitat and micro habitats.
In general, this appears to be a site with appropriate conditions for wetland re-establishment (Table 3).
The topographic setting, soils, and previous drainage modification are appropriate for a successful
hydrologic restoration at the Fezzik site. Filling of ditches and destruction of crowns and swales along
with surface roughening will produce soil microhabitat as part of a functional wetland. Restoration of
these wetlands will re-establish the natural function to degraded and lost aquatic resources by providing a
stable and unique wetland habitat. Additional detailed site information will be required to verify the full
extent of suitable soils and describe existing conditions prior to restoration.
This report describes the results of this soil evaluation. Any subsequent transfer of the report by the user
shall be made by transferring the complete report, including figures, maps, appendices, all attachments
and disclaimers
Sincerely,
George Lankford
Soil Scientist, LSS #1223
Attachments
SOUL sct�
Soil Scientist Seal
Page 9 of 9 November, 2019

Soo hem Pines
IVLaurinburg
Bennettwik Lurn��
■
k 0
91
10 v rllr � �-C-
Declination
N
1 41,
'RnA13
Legend
2) GN 0.73' E
IVIN 8.43' W
Project Area (Parcel)
'J
. L -nbfde
Map Name: MILLSTONE
LAKE
Scale: 1 inch =
2,000 ft.
SCALE 1:24000
Figure 1. USGS Vicinity Map
Fezzick Mitigation Site
0 1000
--A
2000 3000 4000
I
Richmond County, NC
Feet
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Miles

I.
stone Roa�g
ol
:-iE,;

�•.� _ '�� s� r 'P � w
? � ` 4041
y- ,�.�
F! T 1 - � • AI F I�
f_
a + ■
1. 40 le4v r
0
i
♦A
r IF
4w IN
_4 l
r 4t5
IVfF lie JP
rA
17
IL
•. fir' - HS-w2
40
04
t*� r�i
r At
1C AA
Ile
IL
FV
+ •� �A lot &� r , JPrt .r . ' ' - �a-fir •og ■ , ; a ��]
��' �� ��•+ jam•' 'P1*'f i i
Op 1P
••
\ _ F �� - la natinn I i ' Prl fnenRtraetKAAn ,
LEGEND
Proposed Easement
Stream
Drainage Feature
Hydric Soil
Hydric Soil -Marginal
Wetland
Scale: 1 inch = 150 ft.
Horizontal Datum: WGS84
Figure 3A. Project Aerial - Hydric Soils Areas
Fezzik Mitigation Site
SCALE 1:1800
" 0 100 200
Feet
E
0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05
s Miles

s � Ik',� i• � I
� r •
r
. w
16,
't t `yam .. �F . , f
r� I a
�I - r r �•
Ot
w
.. 4 ' +
HS-1
41P r
AF
I& A � +
- irY +
f ■ n i r
SOIL SC
s IL
.T-
LEGEND
Proposed Easement
Stream
Drainage Feature
Hydric Soil
Hydric Soil -Marginal
Wetland
Soil Boirng Point
Profile Point
a� 3
1 J
(ED
Iw
�►� s � F' � � , . Ace `'' .J ' -- `ii*' ,
t Ir 1�
WA
Offo 7
& Flo
4 do
7
r
Scale: 1 inch = 150 ft.
Horizontal Datum: WGS84
Figure 3B. Project Aerial - Hydric Soils Boring Points
Fezzik Mitigation Site
N
E
s
SCALE 1:1800
0 100 200
Feet
0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05
Miles

Rainfall Data collected from CRONOS station NRCK-Rockingham located in Dobbins Heights, NC
Fezzik Groundwater Well !
.M111111111111 Daily Rainfall —Groundwater Depth Ground Level — -12" Below Surface
10
5
u
N -S
L
U
C
L
Q -10
d
n
-25
-30
5
4.5
4
35
N
LL
3 U
C
C
15
1
0.5
-35
0
0
m
m
m
vi
a
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
0
0
0
O
0
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
=
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
vy
[V
M
N
N
N
M
M
M
rfl
a
Fezzik Groundwater Well 2
Daily Rainfall —Groundwater Depth Ground Level --12" Below Surface
6
5
-10
T
U -15
C
L
a -26
m
n
-25
Ld
v
0
� -36
0
l7
35
-40
-45
m s
m
s
m
0 O
N N
O
N
0
N
0 O
N N
0 0
N N
.-1
O 0
N N
rtl O
N
0
N
r•
ti
0
N
C
ti
O
0
N
e-I
ti
O O
N N
n �'
O
N
e-1
O
N
f�
O O
N N
V
O O
N N
CD N
0 O 0 a 0 0
O O O O O O
M M m m
5
4.5
4
33
m
3 L
2.5 6
c
2 y.
.iE
❑
1.5
1
03
0
O
O

Fezzik Groundwater Well 3
Daily Rainfall —Groundwater Depth • Ground Level — 12" Below Surface
5
5
4-5
4
-5
L
3.5
u
-10
N
L
n
3 u
❑ -15
2.5 w
m
3
�
2 a
-20
'm
0
-25
1
-30
V
6.s
-35
I
A
4
m m
r-0
m
m
m
0 0
N N
0
N
0
N
0
N
0
N
0
N
0
N
0 0
N N
0
N
0
N
0
N
0
N
0
N
r-1
O O
N
N
rl N
ei
ri
O
N
N
rl
rl
O
N
N
ei
'-I
O
N
N
rl
O O
N N
ri
�-1
O
=
ri
O
=
ri
O
N
N
O
=
N
O
=
N
O
N
N
O O
N N
M
In
O
N
m
O
N
M
O
=
M
O
N
V
O
N
V
Fezzik Groundwater Well 4
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIDailyRainfall —Groundwater Depth Ground Level 12" Below Surface
5
2.5
D
2
5
N
61
L
C -10
Q�j
m
—
o
-20
C_
16
ru
3
z
a -
—
v
-25
0
0
-30
0.5
-35
-40
ILL
0
0
mm
e-4
0
e-4
0
cmn
c
m
1-4
O
N
0
NNNN
O
0
0
0
NN
0
c
N
O
m
0
N
O
NNN
0
O
0
N
0
N1-1
0
N
N
N
N
N
N
F
N
7
N
-1
N
W
N
N
-I-1
N
0_0
N
_rl
N
1-
N
O
N
r,
N
7
N
r_-I
N
M1
N
N
ri
71
N
N
N
ri
e-1
N
rn
e-1
ri
N
M
V
r-1
N
rl
N
eel
N
rl
N
'-I
r-�
ri
r-1
N
N
ry
m
m
M
M
v

NC DWQ Stream Identification Farm Version 4.11 UC u S ( r« if
Date: Q
Project/Site: Yd(uly Zo
Latitude:
Evaluator: CSC
County: T( i ym' ►l
Longitude:
Total Points: r-y
Stream Determination (clr le -a
Other
Stream is at least intermittent S
if a 19 or arBnnial if t 30'
Ephemeral Intermittent erennia
e.g. Quad Name:
r} t-
A. Geomorphology Subtotal =
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
,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
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
(V
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
arauciai dncnes are no[ raied; see discussions in manuai
B. Hydrology Subtotal =
12. Presence of Baseflow r h f
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
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 plies
0
0.5
1
1.
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes 3T
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)
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
Other0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

Urr!
NC DWO Stream Identification Fnrm Veminn 4.11
Date: I (�-�
t
Project/Site: �a J JU (1 -7 01
Latitude:
Evaluator: „(�
County: T, LI 1' Wh
Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream is at least Intermittent lttent
Stream DateUWQMMQ circle one)
Other
ifx 19 or perennial if x 0'
if3
Ephemeral Intermitter Perennial
I e.g, Quad Name:
s
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = i
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
,a, Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
!$ -
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ri le- ool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
1
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
(1
2
3
B. Headcuts
0
1
/.
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
anmciai aitcnes are not rates: see aiscussions in manual
B- HvdmInav fSuhtntal = 1
12. Presence of Baseflow ty:
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
U
10.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No =
Yes = 3
C. Bioloav (Subtotal = 1 l
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0 1
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:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
ul-2
Date: r dAJ f
Projectlsite: �!<10f1 ZG
Latitude:
Evaluator: C [
County: �l'dj t,ry
Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent 3 tJ y
Stream Determination [circle one
Ephemeral Intermitte erennia
Other
e.g. Quad Name:
if a 19 or erennial if a 30• t1 '
-f r
A. Geomorphology ( Subtotal =
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
18' Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
W
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
rile- ool sequence
0
1
2
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
tfes =
artificial ditches are not rated; see di s uIns in manualB. Hvdroloov !Subtotal = T
12. Presence of Baseflowt
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0)
1
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
i
1.5
16.Organic debris lines or plies
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
o =
Yes = 3
C. Bioloov (Subtotal = \A 1 y
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
CO)1
2
3
22. Fish
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
115
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL =1.5
Other =
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods.
See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch: �(Qtt�cm;; Wl

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 k G la"'e'
Date: 0 W1 I
ProjectlSite' Y,fAV't ZGl
Latitude:
Evaluator: CZ
County: 91Itt rr-c"Jt
Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream is at leastintermlttent Z Q !
Stream De na circle one)
Ephemere� IntermltFnt Perennial
Other
e g Quad Name:
if t 19 or perennial if a 30' 1 7 fI
rel
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 'r ) f
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1' Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
7 3
2 Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3. In -channel structure- ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
02
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Activelrelict floodplain
0
1
2
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
15
10 Natural valley
0
0.5
1
15
11 Second or greater order channel
No = 0
es = 3
anmciaL oiicnes are not raiea see discussions in manuai
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = — �0}
12. Presence of Baseflow , '
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14_ Leaf litter
1.5)
1
05
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
ITO
0.5
1
1.5
16 Organic debris lines or piles
05
1
1 5
LIT Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Biology Subtotal
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
LV
2
1
0
19_ Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish
05
1
15
23 Crayfish
05
1
15
24 Amphibians
05
1
15
25 Algae
0
05
1
15
26 Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0 75. OBL = 1
Other 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods See p 35 of manual
Notes
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 VLTZ - q
Date:
ProjectlSite: NK4 Zvi
Latitude:
Evaluator:
County: i^
Longitude:
Total Points: n�
Stream bete {circle one)
Other
Stream is at least intermittent �(
ff t i 9 or perennial if z 3t}'
Ephemeral Intermitter Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology Subtotal -I.-, �
Absent
Weak
Mo to
Strong
10, Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
A.
L 2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool. step -pool,
ri le- ool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
i
2
3
5. Activelrellct fioodplain
0
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
1
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
2
8. Headcuts
V
1
2
L3J
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
" artificial ditches are not rated; see disqussions 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.
1
1.5
16.Organic debris lines or piles
10
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
es = 3
C. Biology Subtotal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FA
= 0.75; OBL = 1.5
Other =
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 LkTZb
Date:
Project/slte: I G l u n ZIP,
Latitude:
Evaluator:
County: �i I Mrd
Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream Dete inaua circle one)
Other
Stream is at least intermittent rYu +�
Ephemeral I termittent erenniai
e.g. Quad Name:
If a 19 orperennial if 2 30'
A. Geomorphology Subtotal =
Absent
Weak
Moderate
SjMng
1'-Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
r3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1,5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 01
Yes = 3
arunciat ditches are not rated; see a ussions in manuai �J
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = )
12. Presence of Baseflow
V
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0 0.5
1
1.5
16.Organic debris lines or piles
0.5
1 1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
13),
2
1 0
19. Rooted upland plants In streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0.5
1
1 1.5
24. Amphibians
6
1
1 1.5 '
25, Algae
0)
�T_. 9
1
1.5
26. Welland 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:

NC DWO Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Me
Date: 1 6 / i ' 9
Project/Site: Y�� !i Zt
Latitude:
Evaluator: Cs�
County:
Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
Stream Determination.( ircle one)
Ephemeral1lntermitten erennial
Other
e g Quad Name:
if 2 19 or cerenniat if a 30" v
`
l "'1
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 1 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Stpkng
18 Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3 )
2 Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3_ In -channel structure: ex riffle -pool, step -pool,
rioDle-pool sequence
0
1
�,
/
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
( 2J
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2)
3
6 Depositional bars or benches
1
1
2
3
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
d'j
8 Headcuts
0
1
2)
3
9 Grade control
0
05
1
7
10 Natural valley
0
05
1
1_
11 Second or greater order channel
o = 0
Yes = 3
01 UM1141 ullu Mb 01U IIYI ICICu, SCC ulbwbblul lb 11111 Pal lull
B. Hvdrologv (Subtotal = n . S )
12. Presence of Baseflow awl
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria '
1
3
14 Leaf litter
1.5
1
0
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
05
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
05
1
1 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
(No
=
Yes = 3
G. Ulologv (Subtotal = 1._7 )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19 Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
1
0
20 Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22 Fish
05
1
15
23. Crayfish
05
1
15
24 Amphibians
Qj
05
1
1.5
25 Algae
0.5
1
15
26 Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75 OBL = 15 Other =
0
•perennial streams may also be identified using other methods See p 35 of manual
�1
Notes:
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 161101
Project/Site: fat in Zol
Latitude:
Evaluator: L
County: V i CA A
Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream Determination (cir a-am)j
Other
Stream is at least intermittent 3(f
if z 19 or perennial if z 30' !!
Ephemeral Intermitten Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = X, 5 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Str ng
1" 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.
ri le- ool sequence
0
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
0
1
2
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
05
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
05
1
1,
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
((es = 3
dlll"Udl UILUMS are nUi RAe4; see ul Ussiuns In manual
B. Hvdrologv (Subtotal = 1 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
(.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
05
1
1_5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
05
i
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes =�J
C. Biology (Subtotal = U ) ra
18_ Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22 Fish
05
1
15
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
is
24. Amphibians
0.5
1
15
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other(=
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods See p. 35 of manual,
Notes:
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 V _[� r7
Date: 0f [ M l 1
Project/Site: Y4,tbp 26-1
Latitude:
Evaluator: _044
County: (�� mu„�(
longitude:
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
Stream Data ad
Other
if a 19 or perennial if a 30'
Ephemera ntermittent Peran
pry Quad Name:
on
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 11. )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
18 Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool.
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
5. Activelrelict floodplain
0
1
0
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0Mo
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
2
3
8 Headcuts
0
2
3
9 Grade control
0
0.5
1
10. Natural valley
0
05
47
1 5
11. Second or greater order channel
Yes = 3
"artificial ditches are not rated, see �d,, i,scu�ssio in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = _- ,�) "t
12 Presence of Baseflow
0
1
Cp
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
2
3
14 Leaf litter
1 5
CV
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
1
15
16. Organic debris lines or piles
1
1 05
1
15
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = ) X p
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20, Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21 Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish
0.5
1
15
23 Crayfish
0
1
1.5
24 Amphibians
0
1
15
25. Algae
0.5
1
15
26. Wetland plants in strearnbed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods See p 35 of manual
Notes:
Sketch / o (k - (% �rMl� ar? l i-k ;1
S � �
�0 P

,S J4,
R d-
t , a _ , •`
y ,
a
BC-R2 north of UT2

i,
s •'sk '"rid=
_-. �`-��t,���f'n"•�_ ;.
BC-R2 north of UT2
i .ems+ Y °• M�c � y�
BC-R2 north of UT2
eel
•. �•
> i v
BC-R2 north of UT2
. Q
BC-R2 north of UT2

� ./. ✓
�y
�,.r;Vl.r-.,,.v
,�.. ,,�
riu< � , .��,
�„
. �1�,.�
"fk�'

r f
w
44
UT3, XS6 downstream (10/09/2019)
Mmmr
wf
UT2b-R2, XS7 downstream
UT3, XS6 upstream (10/09/2019)
44V
k.
1 P«
UT2b-R2, XS7 upstream

t
10.09 2019
UT2b-R1, XS8 downstream
019
ti f
u
lip 'i` . r]M• �.� • , > ^, � ���a. - - `S -
UT2c, XS9 downstream
I
UT2b-R1, XS8 upstream
m_: q ` IV
i
r
UT2c, XS9 upstream

c
k _
J
Ya f { A t
o; ^1
OIL
i4
UT3, XS10 downstream
y � a
04
BC-R1, XS11 downstream
UT3, XS10 upstream
TV
ti
AT , O
im
BC-R1, XS11 upstream

Appendix B- Adjacent Landowner
Information
WLS Yadkin 201 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Prospectus

Appendix B- Adjacent Landowner Information
Table 1. Fezzik- Adjacent Landowner Information
Fire Tower Life, LLC
360 Fire Tower Road, Ellerbe,
748800132241
NC 28338
Thomas E. White
116 Duncan Road, Ellerbe, NC
748800129512
28338
Brent S. and Jessica M. Conner
2017 Pinedale Road,
748800225599
Rockingham, NC 28379
Rodney Lynn and Linda S. McCaskill
P.O. Box 467, Ellerbe, NC
748800612118
28338
Lewis Allen Culler et al. Kimberly L. Culler
P.O. Box 213, Welcome, NC
748800407437
27374
Benjamin S. Parsons
792 Haywood Parker Road,
748700595524
Ellerbe, NC 28338
Benjamin S. and Kelli Parsons
792 Haywood Parker Road,
748700594313
Ellerbe, NC 28338
Thomas M. Mcinnis
P.O. Box 1267, Rockingham,
748700684950
NC 28379
Bells Creek LLC
P.O. Box 618, Ellerbe, NC
748700674809,
748700661780
Jason Nathaniel and Christi Mabe
129 BB Covington Road,
748700457764
Ellerbe, NC 28338
Richard L. and Jennifer Holloway
17124 Holloway Lane,
748700356887,
Rockville, VA 23146
748700356623,
748700350038,
748700256155
Howell G. and Annie Darnell
125 Gibson Nursery Road,
748700040540
Ellerbe, NC 28338
Herman Roger Hall
P.O. Box 204, Ellerbe, NC
747700952527
28338
Willie Mack and Evelyn Williams
1419 18th Street SE,
747700861121
Washington DC, 20020
John F. and Betty M. Parsons
P.O. Box 618, Ellerbe, NC
747700871586,
28338
747700968715
Jordan One LLC
P.O. Box 98, Mount Gilead,
747700895569
NC 27306
Regina H. Uribe
200 Melvabrook Drive,
747800910208
Clinton, NC 28328
Ellerbe Lions Club C/O Ed Vuncannon
P.O. Box 56, Ellerbe, NC
747800707839
28338
City of Ellerbe
N/A
747800606786

Barbara L. Hill
307 Millstone Road, Ellerbe,
747800714751
NC 28338
Hilda G. and John T. Talbert
347 Wiregrass Road,
747800612686
Rockingham, NC 28379
William F. and Faye Jordan
P.O. Box 641, Ellerbe, NC
747800721674
28338
Glenn and Kay M. Mabe
574 Gilchrist Road, Carthage,
747800723268
NC 28327
Lowell T. and Danny L. Hill
118 Arville Road,
747800833544
Rockingham, NC 28379
Eddie Mabe
110 Josie Creek Drive,
747800728289
Piedmont, SC 29673
Jennifer Denane Maske
216 Firetower Road, Ellerbe,
747800822403
NC 28338
Darrell Ross and Jennifer Maske
216 Firetower Road, Ellerbe,
747800823595
NC 28338
William Frederick Jordan
P.O. Box 641, Ellerbe, NC
747800838090
28338
Jewell H. Weatherly
285 Fire Tower Road, Ellerbe,
747800937150
NC 28338
Kenneth Lee
302 Firetower Road, Ellerbe,
748800023918
NC 28338
Richard B. and Helen Lee
310 Firetower Road, Ellerbe,
748800034075
NC 28338
Note: Listed in the table above are all the names and mailing addresses for all the land-
owners adjacent to the Fezzik Mitigation Site.
Table 2. Fezzik- Project Landowner Information
Fezzik
748800117359
All Cope LLC
Richmond
196.83
1380 126
748700487510,
73.07,
1692 5, 1473
Fezzik
Bells Creek LLC
Richmond
748700261904
162.76
108
Fezzik
748700199458
Jordan Two LLC
Richmond
173.11
158266
Fezzik
748700368983
Judy Thomas et al
Richmond
58.89
1275 297
Bertie S Gibson est c/o
Fezzik
748700258774
Richmond
5.87
656 638
Wendell Gibson
Fezzik
748700361085
Lee Howard Morgan
Richmond
6.25
1547 480
John F. & Betty M.
Fezzik
747700879310
Richmond
141.07
1612 535
Parsons