20020253 Ver 1_Year 5 Monitoring Report_20090407

?Q 4- 2002 D 2?3
ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT
HOWELL WOODS
WETLAND RESTORATION
JOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
(EEP Project Number 183)
Monitoring Year 5 of 6 (2006)
Submitted to:
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
Raleigh, North Carolina
Prepared by/Monitoring Performer:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
2126 Rowland Pond Drive
Willow Spring, North Carolina 27592
Design Firm:
EcoScience Corporation
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 101
Raleigh, North Carolina 27592
Axiom Environmental. Inc.
February 2007
nntd
J,-fie..
L4 CF1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY/PROJECT ABSTRACT
The Howell Woods Wetland Restoration Site (Site) is located within the United States Geological Survey
(USGS) Hydrologic Unit 03020201 (North Carolina Division of Water Quality [NCDWQ] subbasin 03-
04-04) of the Neuse River Basin. The Site includes an approximately 140-acre tract, located
approximately 8.5 miles southeast of the Town of Smithfield in southern Johnston County (Figure 1).
The Site is contained within an approximately 2000-acre tract of land managed by Johnston County
Community College as part of the Howell Woods Environmental Learning Center.
The primary goals of the project included the following.
1. Enhance water quality functions in the Gar Gut Creek and Mill Creek watersheds.
2. Reestablish a functioning backwater slough system, which extends through developing
bottomland hardwood forests.
3. Provide educational opportunities to show the importance of wetlands for water quality.
4. Maximize the area returned to historic wetland function.
Five vegetation plots had been previously established by North Carolina State University. The plots are
10 meters square and are located randomly within the Site. These plots were surveyed in late June and
early July 2006 for the 2006 (year 5) monitoring season. Based on the number of stems counted, the
average plot density was measured at 1101 planted stems per acre, or 27 planted stems per plot for 2006
(year 5) monitoring, which is well-above the required 260 stems per acre for success. The dominant
species identified at the Site were elm species (Ulmus rubra and Ulmus americana) and green ash
(Fraxinus pennsylvanica). Four out of the five individual vegetation plots were well above the success
criteria with 1093 to 1700 planted stems per acre. Vegetation plot 1 was low with 162 planted stems per
acre present; however, natural recruits comprised an additional 148 stems for the plot (approximately
5992 stems per acre).
Vegetation problem areas include an area within the northwestern portion of the Site that had been burned
and partially bush hogged prior to year-5 (2006) monitoring. Burning resulted in some dieback; however,
the majority of the burned or cut stems are resprouting. This area is expected to recover as long as
burning and bush hogging activities are not resumed. In addition, vegetation on the outer rim of the
southeastern littoral shelf is sparse and survival of planted vegetation is poor, most likely resulting from
soil infertility due to the removal of nutrient rich surface soils during site construction.
No wetland problem areas have been identified during the year-5 (2006) monitoring year. Groundwater
hydrology within 12 inches of the soil surface is occurring for greater than 12.5 percent of the growing
season for year-5 (2006) at Gauges 1, 4-7, and 9-12 and greater than 5 percent of the growing season at
Gauges 2 and 8. Groundwater hydrology was within 12 inches of the soil surface for less than 5 percent
of the growing season for Gauge 3; however, this gauge is located on the margin of an upland area. In
addition, all groundwater gauges have a presence of hydrophytic wetland vegetation based on criteria set
forth in the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual.
In summary, the restoration site achieved success criteria for hydrology and vegetation in the Fifth
Monitoring Year (2006). In addition, based on available data the site achieved success criteria for
hydrology and vegetation over the entire 5-year monitoring period. However, the Site was not
constructed until mid-way through the first year growing season; therefore, the Site will be monitored for
a sixth growing season.
Howell Woods Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 6 (2006)
EEP Project Number 183 February 2007
Johnston County, North Carolina page i
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY/PROJECT ABSTRACT ................................................................................ i
1.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................... ..1
1.1 Location and Setting ................................................................................................................... ..1
1.2 Mitigation Structure and Objectives ............................................................................................ ..1
1.3 Project History and Background .................................................................................................. .. 6
1.4 Monitoring Plan View ................................................................................................................. .. 7
2.0 PROJECT CONDITION AND MONITORING RESULTS ............................................................ .. 8
2.1 Vegetation Assessment ............................................................................................................... .. 8
2. 1.1 Soil Data ................................................................................................................. .. 8
2.1.2 Vegetative Problem Areas ....................................................................................... .. 8
2.1.3 Stem Counts ............................................................................................................ 10
2.1.4 Vegetation Plot Photos ............................................................................................ 11
2.2 Wetland Assessment ................................................................................................................... 11
2.2.1 Wetland Problem Area Plan View ........................................................................... 13
2.2.2 Wetland Criteria Attainment ................................................................................... 13
3.0 FIVE-YEAR MONITORING ASSESSMENT ................................................................................ 14
4.0. REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................. 15
List of Figures
Figure 1. Site Location ..................................................................................................
Figure 2. DRAINMOD Revised Mitigation Unit Calculations ........................................
Figure 3. Monitoring Plans .......................................................................................
Figure 4. Vegetation Problem Areas .........................................................................
List of Tables
Table 1. Project Mitigation Structures and Objectives ...............................................
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History ........................................................
Table 3. Project Contact Table ..................................................................................
Table 4. Project Background Table ...........................................................................
Table 5. Preliminary Soil Data ..................................................................................
Table 6. Vegetation Problem Areas ...........................................................................
Table 7. Stem Counts for Planted Species Arranged by Plot ......................................
Table 8. Summary of Groundwater Gauge Results for Years 1 through 5 ..................
Table 9. Wetland Criteria Attainment .......................................................................
Appendices
APPENDIX A. VEGETATION PLOT PHOTOGRAPHS
APPENDIX B. GROUNDWATER GAUGE GRAPHS
APPENDIX C. GROUNDWATER GAUGE RAW DATA
APPENDIX D. CVS LEVELS 1 & 2 DATA FORMS
APPENDIX E. GAUGE VEGETATION LISTS
APPENDIX F. YEAR 1 (2002) GROUNDWATER GAUGE GRAPHS
APPENDIX G. YEAR 2 (2003) GROUNDWATER GAUGE DATA
APPENDIX H. YEAR 3 (2004) GROUNDWATER GAUGE GRAPHS
APPENDIX L YEAR 4 (2005) GROUNDWATER GAUGE GRAPHS
.............. 2
..............4
.............. 5
.............. 9
........................... 3
........................... 6
........................... 7
........................... 7
........................... 8
.........................10
.........................10
.........................12
.........................13
Howell Woods Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 6 (2006)
EEP Project Number 183 February 2007
Johnston County, North Carolina page ii
1.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND
1.1 Location and Setting
The Howell Woods Wetland Restoration Site (Site) is located within the United States Geological Survey
(USGS) Hydrologic Unit 03020201 (North Carolina Division of Water Quality [NCDWQ] subbasin 03-
04-04) of the Neuse River Basin. The Site includes an approximately 140-acre tract, located
approximately 8.5 miles southeast of the Town of Smithfield in southern Johnston County (Figure 1).
The Site is contained within an approximately 2000-acre tract of land managed by Johnston County
Community College as part of the Howell Woods Environmental Learning Center.
Directions to the Site:
From Highway 70 Business in Smithfield
? Travel south on Route 701 for approximately 15 miles
? Turn left/southeast on Devil's Racetrack Road for approximately 10 miles
? Turn left into the Howell Woods Environmental Learning Center
? See Jaime Sasser or Kinchon Taylor at the Center office for a gate key and directions into the Site
The Site is located in the Southeastern Plains Physiographic Province, within the Southeastern
Floodplains and Low Terraces ecoregion and is immediately east of the fall line of the Coastal Plain and
Piedmont regions of North Carolina.
The Site is situated within the Gar Gut watershed (slough-like tributary to the Neuse River) in the outer
perimeter of the Neuse River floodplain at the base of the escarpment between the Neuse River floodplain
and an elevated river terrace. Ponded depressions, swamps, and sloughs occur throughout the 3.5-mile
wide floodplain and are characterized by cypress-gum associations. Elevated, well-drained portions of
the floodplain support bottomland hardwood and mesic upland slope forests dominated by oaks and
ashes.
1.2 Mitigation Structure and Objectives
Prior to implementation of wetland restoration activities, the Site was characterized by agriculture, fallow
fields, and forest. Land use activities in the drainage area and adjacent tracts are limited due to frequent
flooding from the Neuse River and poorly drained soils. Onsite land use was characterized by farming
(agricultural row crops), hunting, and recreational activities associated with the Howell Woods
Environmental Learning Center.
The primary restoration feature at the Site included 5400 linear feet of a dredged and straightened canal
and associated ditch network system that drained the majority of the Site. The canal was dredged along
the toe of slope at the outer floodplain edge. This area historically supported a backwater slough, as
evidenced by relict channel reaches within forested sections of the Site situated adjacent to the excavated
canal.
Wetland/backwater slough restoration at the Site entailed 1) ditch cleaning prior to backfill, 2) impervious
ditch plug construction, 3) ditch/canal backfilling, 4) access road improvements, 5) littoral shelf creation,
and 6) pond outfall structural upgrades. In addition to hydrology alterations associated with ditch
backfilling, a primary component of the project entailed restoring surface water flows through the
abandoned backwater slough channel.
Howell Woods Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 6 (2006)
EEP Project Number 183 February 2007
Johnston County, North Carolina page I
V
:
DirectlOns to the Site
ti `? Y:q ?w From Highway 70 Business in Smithfield
Travel south on Route 701 for approximately 15 miles
?e Tom left/southeast on Devil's Racetrack Road
for approximately 10 miles
+? P mtae r Tom left into the Howell Woods Environmental
v ' m? a "yt_ Learning Center
;a ?s n ea _ See Jaime Sasser or Kinchon Taylor at the Center office
N ( y , _ for a gate key and directions into the Site
oo-
.a
G
a
a r 3
k. f
Q1 ?.
y _
' M1
? tt ?'.• tom; n-3 ? t.p 'tti Y
s
i +
APPROX.
vw , SITE
V i - LOCATION
1 - ! ? 1 era '._, ?
%
I
) / 2
S, y 1
i
t
.a ,
s -
0 1m l.
a m).
t.
1:158,400
Source 1977 North Carolina Atlas and Gazetteer, p.83.
2126 Rowland k.
SITE LOCATION own. by.
Willow Spring, NCn27592 HOWELL WOODS RESTORATION SITE Ckd by. WGL FIGURE
[phone] Project Number 183 WGL
[phone] fax Date
NOV 2006
' Year 5 (2006) Monitoring Report
Johnston County, North Carolina Project: mF-nnq
Based on an October 2001 Detailed Wetland Restoration Plan, the primary goals of the project included
1) maximizing the area returned to historic wetland function, 2) enhancing the water quality functions in
Gar Gut Creek and Mill Creek, and 3) reestablishing a functioning backwater slough system, which
extends through developing bottomland hardwood forests. Project structures and objectives are
summarized in Tables 1 and 2.
Table 1. Project Mitigation Structures and Objectives
Project Name/Number: Howell Woods (EEP Project Number 183)

a a
0
a
o ? Revised y
Project R o Linear Linear
Segment or a. Footage or Footage or
Reach ID Acreage Acreage Comment
Areas Effectively Drained by Historic
Howell Woods R --- 24 acres 34 acres --- Ditch/Canal
Areas with Hydrology Effected by
Howell Woods E --- 74 acres 64 acres --- Ditches/Canal, but not Drained Below
Jurisdictional Threshold
Howell Woods C --- 4 acres 4 acres --- Littoral Shelf Excavation
Howell Woods R --- -- 5251 feet * Passive Backwater Slough Restoration
* No stationing along the reach, linear footage is based on down valley distance of the braided stream channel, as based on inter
agency guidance (USACE et. al. 2005)
**R = Restoration
E = Enhancement
C = Creation
At the time of project completion, stream restoration projects entailed traditional alterations to channel
dimension, pattern, and profile, as outlined in Applied River Morphology (Rosgen 1996). However,
recent guidance (USACE et al. 2005) for the restoration of backwater sloughs in low-slope settings (outer
Coastal Plain) indicates that stream restoration may be achieved through the reestablishment of braided
stream morphology through passive measures, including ditch filling and natural progression of the
stream through historic sloughs, braids, and channels. Under this scenario, stream restoration success
criteria may include the successful restoration of hydrology within areas previously drained by ditching or
other hydrology alterations. Using this guidance, approximately 5251 linear feet of backwater slough
stream channel has been restored within the Site (Figure 2).
Wetland restoration acreages and locations were determined in the October 2001 Detailed Wetland
Restoration Plan. Wetland restoration areas were defined as portions of the Site that were hydrologically
impacted (hydrology below 12 inches of the ground surface for most of the growing season) by drainage
ditch excavation. Wetland restoration areas were determined utilizing DRAINMOD computer
simulations to predict the effect Site drainage features had on the adjacent groundwater table. However,
the abandoned backwater slough channel, which served as an approximately 2 to 3 foot deep drainage
feature prior to restoration activities, was not included in the original DRAINMOD model simulations.
Utilizing drainage effect estimates from the October 2001 Detailed Wetland Restoration Plan, the
abandoned backwater slough channel drained an additional 10 acres of wetland at the Site prior to
restoration activities. These revised acreages are depicted on Figure 2 and are described in Table 1
(Project Mitigation Structures and Objectives).
Howell Woods Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 6 (2006)
EEP Project Number 183 February 2007
Johnston County, North Carolina page 3

o?
i .y
M4 ? 1
$$ m

a ?
O

N

J
I
z
Ch
o ! s
8
C 1
1 1
/ I
/ 1 ? LL
/ \ 2
1
r '' 7
1
f i cX
1 /
1 1
O,
1
1 /
1 flfl '
/
I ?
1 '
1 ,
I /
I ,
1
1 / P
„ /
1
I I
I 1
1 g 1
? t I
I 7 I
1 d 1
1
\ , ., 00
all
11
W W W
C
C
1.3 Project History and Background
In the spring of 1999, a preliminary feasibility study was conducted at the Site, which included the
following activities: 1) property boundary surveys, 2) aerial photography and topographic mapping, 3)
soil mapping, 4) hydraulic conductivity estimates, 5) groundwater and surface water elevation
monitoring, and 6) planting plan development. A feasibility report was prepared in April 1999 that
described the results of these studies and presented mitigation options for the Site.
A mitigation alternatives analysis was subsequently conducted in the spring of 2000. The alternatives
analysis outlined five mitigation options for the Site. These mitigation options included 1) no action, 2)
stream restoration on new location, 3) in-canal structures and ford construction, 4) in-canal structures and
road elevation, and 5) backwater slough/passive stream restoration.
In March 2000 approximately 19 acres of agricultural fields within the Site were revegetated with native,
wetland-adapted tree species. Approximately 9600 tree seedlings were purchased and planted on 10 foot
centers. Monitoring of planted species occurred in the fall of 2001.
In an effort to expand the Site boundaries, additional acreage was acquired by the North Carolina Wetland
Restoration Program and an expanded Compensatory Wetland Mitigation Design Plan was prepared for
the Site in October 2001. Upon completion of the detailed plan the project was bid on May 17, 2002.
Backwater Environmental, a subsidiary of Osborne Co. Inc., was awarded the construction contract and
work initiated on June 18, 2002. Earthwork associated with the project was completed within 4 weeks
and the Site was planted in the winter of 2002.
Completed project activities, reporting history, and completion dates are summarized in Table 2.
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Project Name/Number: Howell Woods (EEP Project Number 183)

Activity or Report
Scheduled
Completion Data
Collection
Completion Actual
Completion
or Deliver
Initial Feasibility Report --- --- Apr 1999
Mitigation Alternatives Analysis Spring 2000 --- Spring 2000
Initial Site Planting (approximately 19 acres) Mar 2000 --- Mar 2000
Year 1 Monitoring (2001) Fall 2002 --- Nov 2002
Additional Property Acquisition
Compensatory Wetland Mitigation Design Plan Oct 2001 --- Oct 2001
Site Implementation (Wetland/Backwater Slough) Fall 2002 --- Jul 2002
Site Planting (approximately 12 acres) Dec 2002 --- Dec 2002
Year 2 Monitoring (2003) Dec 2003 --- Dec 2003
Year 3 Monitoring (2004) Dec 2004 --- Dec 2004
Year 4 Monitoring (2005) Dec 2005 --- Dec 2005
Year 5 Monitoring (2006) Dec 2006 Oct 2006 Nov 2006
Contact information regarding project designer, construction, planting contractor, and monitoring
personnel are summarized in Table 3 and relevant project background information is summarized in Table
4.
Howell Woods Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 6 (2006)
EEP Project Number 183 February 2007
Johnston County, North Carolina page 6
Table 3. Project Contact Table
Project Name/Number: Howell Woods EEP Project Number 183
Designer EcoScience Corporation
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 101
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Jerry McCrain [phone]
Construction Contractor Backwater Environmental
PO Box 1654
Pittsboro, North Carolina 27312
Wes Newell [phone]
Planting Contractor Carolina Silvics
908 Indian Trail Road
Edenton, North Carolina 27932
Dwight McKinney
Monitoring Performers Axiom Environmental, Inc.
2126 Rowland Pond Dr.
Willow S rin , NC 27592
Monitoring Point of Contact Grant Lewis 919-215-1693
Table 4. Project Background Table
Project Name/Number: Howell Woods EEP Project Number 183
Project County Johnston County, North Carolina
Drainage Area Primary Neuse River - 1870 square miles
Secondary Gar Gut - 9.8 square miles
Drainage impervious cover estimate (%) < 5
Stream Order second
Ph sio ra hic Region Coastal Plain
Ecoregion Southeastern Floodplains and Low Terraces
Rosgen Classification of As-built D-t e
Cowardin Classification PFO1
Dominant Soil Types Altavista, State, Wehadkee, and Chastain
Reference Site ID Onsite
USGS HUC for Project and Reference Project and Reference - 03020201
NCDWQ Subbasin for Project and Reference Project and Reference - 03-04-04
Any portion of any project segment 303d listed? No (Stream Index #27-52-7)
Any portion of any project segment upstream of a 303d
listed segment? Yes, reach of the Neuse River in Subbasin 03-04-05 -
Stream Index # 27-(56b)
Reasons for 303d listing or stressor Mercury Level in Fish
F/5-of project easement fenced 0
1.4 Monitoring Plan View
Monitoring activities for the Site, including relevant structures and utilities, project features, specific
project structures, and monitoring features are detailed in Figure 3.
Howell Woods Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 6 (2006)
EEP Project Number 183 February 2007
Johnston County, North Carolina page 7
Site features have been monitored through the use of continuous recording groundwater gauges,
permanently monumented vegetation plots, an onsite rain gauge, and photographic documentation. The
Site contains 14 groundwater gauges including two reference gauges and 12 mitigation area gauges.
Several gauges malfunctioned over the past few years and were replaced. The current groundwater
monitoring scheme is depicted in Figure 3. Gauge manufacturer and types include Remote Data Systems
(RDS) WL 40, RDS Ecotone, and Infinities.
There are five vegetation plots on the Site that have been permanently monumented with five-foot metal
fence posts, driven into each of the four corners of the plot, with PVC pipe attached for ease in plot
location identification.
2.0 PROJECT CONDITION AND MONITORING RESULTS
2.1 Vegetation Assessment
In the fall of 2001, vegetation monitoring plots were randomly established within the Site. Each sample
plot was composed of two-300-foot transects extending from a central point, usually a groundwater
monitoring gauge. The Site was monitored for the as-built and the 2002 (year 1) growing season utilizing
this methodology with vegetation success achieved.
During the 2003 (year 2) monitoring period, North Carolina State University implemented a revised
vegetation monitoring procedure based on the Draft Vegetation Monitoring Plan for NCWRP Riparian
Buffer and Wetland Restoration Projects document (undated). Five-10 meter by 10 meter plots were
established and permanently marked with pipe. The location of each vegetation monitoring plot is
depicted on Figure 3.
2.1.1 Soil Data
General soil conditions found onsite, including level of erosion and percentage of organic matter, are
summarized in Table 5.
Table 5. Preliminary Soil Data
Project Name/Number: Howell Woods (EEP Project Number 183)
Series Max Depth
inches % Clay on
Surface K T OM %
Altavista +60 10 - 20 0.24 5 0.5 - 3
State +60 5 - 15 0.28 5 <2
Wehadkee +60 5 - 20 0.24 5 2-5
Chastain +72 27 - 50 0.28 5 1 -6
Agricultural activities and excavation associated with Site implementation resulted in the exposure of
subsurface soil horizons; therefore, a reduction in percent clay and organic matter in the soil surface
layers occurred. In addition, erosion factors are calculated based on the percentage of silt, sand, and
organic matter and are likely to have been affected by Site development and implementation as well.
Values of erosion factors K and T have likely been elevated above the amount published in the Johnston
County Soil Survey (USDA 1994).
2.1.2 Vegetative Problem Areas
Vegetation problem areas within the Site are depicted on Figure 4 and are outlined in Table 6. An area
within the northwestern portion of the Site had been burned and partially bush hogged prior to year 5
Howell Woods Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 6 (2006)
EEP Project Number 183 February 2007
Johnston County, North Carolina page 8

Own. by. FIGURE
Axiom Environmental, Inc VEGETATION PROBLEM AREAS cLF
2126 Rowland Pond Drive
Willow spring, NC 27592 HOWELL WOODS RESTORATION SITE Date, A
[phone] Project Number 183 Nov 2006 4
[phone] fax
Year 5 (2006) Monitoring Report P,olect. Axiom E,wonmmntal Inc. Johnston County, North Carolina 06-002.02
(2006) monitoring. Burning resulted in some dieback; however, the majority of the burned or cut stems
are resprouting. This area is expected to recover as long as burning and bush hogging activities are
ceased. In addition, vegetation on the outer rim of the southeastern littoral shelf is sparse and survival of
planted vegetation is poor, most likely resulting from soil infertility due to the removal of nutrient rich
surface soils during site construction.
Table 6. Vegetation Problem Areas
Project Name/Number: Howell Woods EEP Project Number 183
Feature/Issue Location Probable Cause Photo
Weak vigor Northwestern Problem Area Photo 1
Burning and partial bush hogging
Portion of Site (Appendix A)
Poor vegetation development Removal of top soil/soil nutrients Problem Area Photos
Littoral Shelves
during construction 2-3 (Appendix A)
The Site is characterized by planted seedlings exhibiting various degrees of vigor. Overall, vigor was
noted as good, although a few seedlings appeared to be lacking vigor as the result of burning and bush
hogging activities. Most seedlings within Plot 1 were natural recruits, and many seedlings within Plot 2
exhibited weak vigor due to the burning and bush hogging.
2.1.3 Stem Counts
Five vegetation plots had been previously established by North Carolina State University as depicted in
Figure 3. The plots are 10 meters square and are located randomly within the Site. These plots were
surveyed in late June and early July 2006 for the 2006 (year 5) monitoring season; results are included in
Table 7. No reference area was studied; therefore no comparisons could be made to reference conditions.
Table 7. Stem Counts for Planted Species Arranged by Plot
Project Name/Number: Howell Woods (EEP Project Number 183)
Year 5 (2006) Individual Plot Data
0.0247 acre each) Year 2
(2003) Year 3
(2004) Year 4
(2005) Year 5
(2006) %
Species 1 2 3 4 5 Totals Totals Totals Totals Survival
Ce halanthus occidentalis 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0
Crataegus s. 0 3 0 5 0 * 0 0 8
Dios ros vir iniana 0 1 0 1 0 * 0 0 2
Fraxinus penns lvanica 0 14 0 5 0 22 21 28 19 86
Ilex deciduas 0 0 0 1 0 * 0 0 1
Platanus occidentalis 1 0 0 2 2 4 3 3 5 125
Populus hetero h lla 0 1 0 0 0 * 0 0 1
uercus l rata 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 --
Quercus ni ra 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0
uercus pagoda 1 0 1 0 0 4 5 4 2 50
Quercus phellos 1 5 2 0 0 7 7 6 8 114
uercus s. 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 --
Taxodium distichum 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 2 200
Ulmus americana 0 0 0 0 1 * 0 0 1
Ulmus rubra 1 0 2 1 0 * 0 0 4
U1mussp. 0 1 36 16 27 * 185 130 80
Total Stems Per Plot 4 27 42 32 31 45* 223 173 136
Stems Per Acre 162 1093 1700 1296 1255 364 1806 1401 1101
- Historical project documents necessary to provide this data were unavailable at the time of this report submission. 1 0N.
t
Howell Woods Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 6 (2006) ??-'.).
EEP Project Number 183 February 2007. 0
Johnston County, North Carolina page 10
Due to the revised monitoring protocol during the second year of vegetation surveys, no comparisons of
as-built or 2002 (year 1) can be made to the subsequent monitoring years. Therefore, planted species
have been based upon previous annual monitoring reports and percent survival is based on a comparison
of 2003 (year 2) totals where possible. The phased planting schedule made it difficult to determine
planted trees from naturally recruited trees; therefore, the number of "planted" species was based on the
experience and judgment of the monitoring team, and counts for planted species may be influenced by
naturally recruited stems. During preparation of the 2006 (year 5) monitoring report, no as-built
mitigation plan or data for 2002 (year 1) totals were available and therefore, are not included in the table.
Based on the number of stems counted, the average plot density monitored at this Site is greater than 260
stems per acre and is considered successful. The average plot density has been measured at 1101 stems
per acre, or 27 stems per plot for 2006 (year 5) monitoring. The dominant species identified at the Site
were elm species (Ulmus rubra and Ulmus americana) and green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica). Four out
of the five individual vegetation plots were well above the success criteria with 1093 to 1700 planted
stems per acre. Vegetation plot 1 was low with 162 planted stems per acre; however, natural recruits
including various elms, sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciua), red maple (Acer rubrum), hawthorne
(Crataegus sp.), cherrybark oak (Quercus pagoda), and loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) comprised an
additional 148 stems for the plot (approximately 5992 stems per acre).
Several new species were recorded this year: 1) hawthorn (Crataegus sp.), 2) persimmon (Diospyros
virginiana), 3) possumhaw (Ilex decidua), 4) swamp cottonwood (Populus heterophylla), and 5) overcup
oak (Quercus lyrata). This is likely due to an earlier sampling time and subsequent lower densities of
vigorous herbs and vines.
Shrub diversity is not particularly high within plots; however, various species would be expected to
colonize the Site over time. Species documented within the shrub layer include possumhaw (Ilex
decidua), hawthorn (Crataegus sp.), and crimson-eyed rosemallow (Hibiscus moscheutos). Other plant
species found on the Site can be found in Appendix E in the gauge vegetation lists.
2.1.4 Vegetation Plot Photos
Photographs were taken at all permanent photo points and are included in Appendix A. The photographs
show that vegetation is generally growing well and consists of a good combination of woody and
herbaceous species.
2.2 Wetland Assessment
Fourteen groundwater monitoring gauges have been maintained and monitored throughout the year-5
(2006) growing season. Twelve are located within the restoration areas and two are located within the
reference wetlands immediately northwest of the Site. The groundwater gauges record daily readings of
groundwater depth. Daily rainfall data recorded from a rain gauge maintained and monitored on the Site
was used for seasonal comparison; however, the gauge malfunctioned and rain data after August 14, 2006
could not be recovered. Graphs of groundwater hydrology and precipitation are included in Appendix B.
Success criteria for wetland hydrology require that the area be inundated or saturated within 12 inches of
the ground surface for a consecutive period of 12.5 percent of the growing season. The growing season in
Johnston County begins March 21 and ends November 4 (229 days). Areas inundated less than 5 percent
of the growing season (11 days) are classified as nonwetlands. Areas inundated between 5 percent and
12.5 percent of the growing season can be classified as wetlands depending upon factors such as the
presence of hydrophytic vegetation and hydric soils. In order to attain hydrologic success, saturation
within 12 inches of the ground surface is required for at least 11 consecutive days (5 percent of the
growing season) or 29 consecutive days (12.5 percent of the growing season).
Howell Woods Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 6 (2006)
EEP Project Number 183 February 2007
Johnston County, North Carolina page 11
Table 8. Summary of Groundwater Gauge Results for Years 1 through 5
Project Name/Number: Howell Woods (EEP Project Number 183)
Success Criteria Achieved/Max Consecutive Days During Growing
a
°-

'

S
ri
l

Season (Percentage)
ry e
a
o Number Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
U It
x A (2002)^ (2003)- (2004)** (2005) (2006)
1 RDSA S2C9894 Yes/ No Data No Data No Data es/
>
2% 34 days
%)

2
RDSB
B6522D1 Yes/
No Data
No Data Malfunctioned Yes/
>12.5% *** 25 days (11.0

3
RDSC
B6B6E09 No/ No Data No Data Malfunctioned No/
<5% *** 8 days 3.9
4 INF6 A279A59 Malfunctioned No Data No Data No Data es
76 days (33.2%
Malfunctioned Yes/
5 INF5 A28984F No Data No Data No Data
/<5% 229 days (100 %)

6
RDSD
B6B4FB9 Malfunctioned
No Data
No Data Malfunctioned Yes/

1<5 ***
33 days (14.4
INF1/ Yes/ Yes/73 days Yes/ Yes/

JG6 EBD85C9
0
5-12.5/0
o
(31.9/0)
No Data
36 days (15.7

168 days (73.4 %)
°
/o)
8 INF2 A3C095A Malfunctioned Malfunctioned No Data No Data Yes/
19 days 8.3

N
/ Malfunctioned/
9 RDSE B652374 o No Data No Data 4 days (1.7 %) Yes/
<5/° 29 days (12.7 %)
***
10 IN174 A286A2D Malfunctioned Yes/54 days
No Data
No Data Yes/
1<5% 23.6% 68 days 29.7
11 INF3 AB36608 Malfunctioned Yes/54 days
No Data
No Data Yes/
1<5%
(23.6%) °
32 days (14.0 /o)

N
/ Malfunctioned/
12 RDSF B652408 o No Data No Data 4 days (1.7 %) Yes/
<5 /o 52 days (22.7 %)
***
Refl REF1 N386A9171 Yes/ Yes/70 days
No Data
No Data Yes/
>12.5% (30.6%) 34 days (14.8 %)
:R:ef2 REF2 N3B6AA64 Yes/
Yes/ Yes/74 days
s/74 days
No Data
No Data Yes/

A r, > ( 72 days (31.4 %)
. aag.,o 1114 iuuCuvucu iv, u,c iuaJumy Or me growing season. bite construction did not occur until mid-growing season;
therefore, gauges will be monitored for a sixth growing season.
* - Data for most of the end of the growing season was unavailable.
** - Graph is included in the year 3 (2004) report for one of the Infinities gauges; however, it does not indicate which one.
*** - Gauges malfunctioned for the first several months of the growing season.

Howell Woods Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 6 (2006)
EEP Project Number 183 February 2007
Johnston County, North Carolina page 12
Groundwater gauge graphs or data for years 1 (2002) through year 4 (2005) are included in Appendices F
through I, respectively. Table 8 summarizes success criteria achievement for groundwater gauges over
the 5-year monitoring period.
Groundwater hydrology within 12 inches of the soil surface occurred for greater than 12.5 percent of the
growing season for the year-5 (2006) growing season at Gauges 1, 4-7, and 9-12 and greater than 5
percent of the growing season at Gauges 2 and 8. Groundwater hydrology was within 12 inches of the
soil surface for less than 5 percent of the growing season for Gauge 3; however, this gauge is located on
the margin of an upland area as depicted on Figure 2 of this document and within the Detailed Restoration
Plan. In addition, all groundwater gauges had a presence of hydrophytic wetland vegetation based on
criteria set forth in the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Vegetation lists for each gauge
can be found in Appendix E.
2.2.1 Wetland Problem Area Plan View
No wetland problem areas have been identified during the year-5 (2006) monitoring year. As depicted in
Appendix B, all gauges are currently functioning and recorded groundwater hydrology within 12 inches
of the ground surface for greater than 5 percent of the growing season with a presence of hydrophytic
vegetation except for Gauge 3, which is located along an upland margin as depicted on Figure 2 and in the
Detailed Restoration Plan.
2.2.2 Wetland Criteria Attainment
All monitored gauges within restoration areas met success criteria of inundation/saturation within 12
inches of the surface for at least 5 percent of the growing season with a presence of hydrophytic
vegetation except for Gauge 3, which is located along an upland margin (Table 9). Hydrographs
containing precipitation data and raw data for each gauge can be found in Appendices B and C,
respectively. Photographs and CVS Levels 1 & 2 Data Forms for vegetation plots can be found in
Appendices A and D, respectively.
Table 9. Wetland Criteria Attainment
Project Name/Number: Howell Woods (EEP Project Number 183)

Gauge ID Hydrology
Threshold
Met? Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Criteria Met?
Site
Mean
Vegetation
Plot ID Vegetation
Survival
Threshold
Met?
Site
Mean
1 Yes Yes 1 Yes
2 Yes Yes 2 Yes
3 No Yes 3 Yes 100%
4 Yes Yes 4 Yes
5 Yes Yes 5 Yes
6 Yes Yes 92%
7 Yes Yes
8 Yes Yes
9 Yes Yes
10 Yes Yes
11 Yes Yes
12 Yes Yes
Howell Woods Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 6 (2006)
EEP Project Number 183 February 2007
Johnston County, North Carolina page 13
3.0 FIVE-YEAR MONITORING ASSESSMENT
In summary, the restoration site achieved success criteria for vegetation and hydrology for all restoration
area groundwater gauges with the exception of a gauge (Gauge 3) located along an upland margin in the
Fifth Monitoring Year (2006).
Results from vegetation surveys exceeded success criteria with 346, 1806, 1401, and 1101 planted stems
per acre present in years 2 through 5, respectively with an increase in species diversity over the 5-year
monitoring period. No data was available for year 1 monitoring.
Vegetative problem areas within the Site include a burned and partially bush hogged area that is expected
to recover, and an area of poor vegetation development along the outer rim of one of the littoral shelves.
Groundwater hydrology within 12 inches of the soil surface occurred for greater than 12.5 percent of the
growing season for the year-5 (2006) growing season at Gauges 1, 4-7, and 9-12 and greater than 5
percent of the growing season at Gauges 2 and 8. Groundwater hydrology was within 12 inches of the
soil surface for less than 5 percent of the growing season for Gauge 3; however, this gauge is located on
the margin of an upland area as depicted on Figure 2 of this document and within the Detailed Restoration
Plan. Vegetation documented in the vicinity of each of the twelve restoration area groundwater gauges
was considered hydrophytic wetland vegetation. In addition, wetland criteria set forth in the Corps of
Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual were met with the presence of the three criteria, 1) hydric soils,
2) hydrophytic vegetation, and 3) wetland hydrology at Gauges 1-2 and 4-12.
In summary, the restoration site achieved success criteria for hydrology and vegetation in the Fifth
Monitoring Year (2006). Based on available data, the site achieved success criteria for hydrology and
vegetation over the entire 5-year monitoring period. However, the Site was not constructed until mid-way
through the first year growing season; therefore, the Site will be monitored for a sixth growing season.
Howell Woods Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 6 (2006)
EEP Project Number 183 February 2007
Johnston County, North Carolina page 14
4.0. REFERENCES
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report
Y-87-1. United States Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP). Undated. Draft Internal Guidance for
Vegetation Monitoring Plans for NCWRP Riparian Buffer and Wetland Restoration Projects.
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, North Carolina.
Rosgen, D. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology (Publisher). Pagosa
Springs, Colorado.
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources. 2005. Information Regarding Stream Restoration
in the Outer Coastal Plain of North Carolina. Available:
http://h2o.enr. state.nc.us/ncwettands/documents/CoastalPlainSTreamMitigationFinalDraftPolicyNov28. doc
[October 30, 20061.
United States. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1994. Soil Survey of Johnston County,
North Carolina. United States Department of Agriculture.
Howell Woods Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 6 (2006)
EEP Project Number 183 February 2007
Johnston County, North Carolina page 15
Appendix A
(Click here)
APPENDIX A
VEGETATION PHOTOGRAPHS
Howell Woods Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 6 (2006)
EEP Project Number 183 February 2007
Johnston County, North Carolina Appendix A
Appendix A
Vegetation Plot Photographs
Howell Woods Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 6 (2006)
EEP Project Number 183 February 2007
Johnston County, North Carolina Appendix A
Appendix A
Howell Woods
EEP Project Number 183
Johnston County, North Carolina
Vegetation Problem Area Photographs
Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 6 (2006)
February 2007
Appendix A
Appendix B
(Click here)
APPENDIX B
GROUNDWATER GAUGE GRAPHS
Howell Woods Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 6 (2006)
EEP Project Number 183 February 2007
Johnston County, North Carolina Appendix B
(sagaui) uogelldlaaad
c
0
?n
un
c
0
as
E a
> a
a c
z w
c?
ca
d ?
a? °o
N
L
cv
CD
}
..,. ?. ?. _. _ ?. . - go-AO N-170
90-100-LZ
90-100-6 L
90-100-L L
90-100-£0
gp-daS-SZ
gp-daS-L L
90-daS-60
gp-deS- LO
90-6ny-bZ
90-6nd-9 L
gp-6ny-90
90-Inf-L£
90-Inf -£Z
90-In f -9 L
90-Inf -L0
90-unr-6Z,
gp-unr-LZ o
w 90-unf-£L
gp-unf-90
.. gp-AeW-9Z
gp-AeW-OZ
c o 90-AeW-Z L
N
U} M A
0 gp-AeVI-b0
us
c gp-adV-9Z
3 gp-jdV-9 L
o
t7 90-ad`d-0 L
N y. N
c ° 90-jdV-ZO
cs ?
va gp-JeW-SZ
- - - - - - r 90-JeW-LL
90-aeW-60
gp-aeW-LO
90-ga=j-LZ
90-ga=I-£ L
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lo LO LO Sri Sri LO LO LO Sri LO
It co N r N M
g0ul) IaAa-i Ja1CJ
(soyoul) uolae;ldioaJd
In u? Un
N N .- ?- O O
N
?o
?o
? N
V LO
L
}
c
0
ar
0
m L
E*
0
0 c
z uJ
c
0
c?
us
c
0
0
va
90-^oN-£
90-1a0-9Z
90-100-8 L
90-100-0 L
90-100-Z
90-deS-VZ
go-des-9L
90-deS-9
90-6nd-L£
90-6n`d-£Z
90-6ny-9 L
90-6ny-8
90-Inf-L£
90-Inf -£Z
90-Inf -9 L
90-Inf-L
90-unr-6Z a;
R
90-unr-LZ o
90-unf-£L
90-unr-9
90-Ae"-8Z
90-Ae W-OZ
90-Aewz L
90-Aen-t,
90-JdV-9Z
90-Jdy-8 L
90-ady-0 L
90-Jdy-Z
90-aen-SZ
90-JeW-L L
90-aeW-6
90-aen- L
90-gaj-LZ
90-ga:?-£ L
o O O o O O O o o O O O O
r r r r r i i
m
m
D
d ?
N
ca
L
}
(saypul) uoi;e;IdlaaJd
I
N N
Lq
O O
0
90-100-92
a?
90-100-L L
rn '"
90-100-6
. o
90-100- L
0
E 90-daS-£Z
0 90-daS-9 L
z ui
90-daS-L
g0-6ny-0£
90-6ny-ZZ
90-6ny-tq
90-6ny-g
90-Inf-6Z
90-Inf-6Z
g0-Inf-£ L
y 90-Inf-9
9 90-unr-LZ
,- 90-unr-6L
90-unf-Z L
i.
A
90-unr-t,
N N
90-AeW-LZ
90-AeW-6 L
N T • ronwm+•
90-AeW-L L
90-AeW-£
a) go-jdV-SZ
U) N
M T
a?a 90-jdy-L L
0 90-ady-6
.- ca 90-ady-L
cv
u 90-aeW-tlZ
m
90-aeW-6
90-aeW-L
mmw_ 90-gaj-LZ
90-ga_I-£ L
O w (O It N O N (O w O N It O O O N? O O O NIt O w
r- N N N (V N (M (h M C7 M
j^irr?l.{d}S.?9b j'>r^a3.? teD?d:'d6+'a
(S040ul) uo?lelldlaaad
LO U?
N N r c- O O
?a
D
? N
ca
a?
}
0 90-100-OE
?n
90-100-EZ
rn
90-100-9 L
' 90-100-6
90-100-Z
E - 90-deS-gZ
CD 0
>
0 c - gp-daS-8L
z w N gp-deS-LL
gp-daS-t,
gp-6nd-8Z
90-6ny-LZ
90-6ny-tq
90-6nV-L
90-Inf -L£
90-Inf -tZ
A 90-Inf-L L
90-Inf-O L
90-Inf -£
gp-unf-9Z a
90-unr-6L
gp-unf-Z L
„ 90-unr-g
90-AeW-6Z
90-AeW-ZZ
? gp-?(eW-5 L
gp-AeW-g
U) 90-AeW- L
90-jdy-tZ
0 b T
90-jdV-LL
C7 gp-JdV-0 L
_ a gp-ady-E
u ?
M
vs 90-aeW-LZ
r.... _ ._. gp-JeW-OZ
90-JeW-E L
90-aeW-g
90-gad-LZ
90-gad-OZ
90-gad-EL
t0 ,t N O Co co -4- N O N O 0p O N O O O
r r .- r i i i i r r r r r N
(S Llaul) IOAa gal
(say0ui) uollelldlaaad
N N
C
a
?a
a
u?
0 0
c
?r 3
L O
(1
>
Q G
w
m
LO
co
a? o
N
L
c?
d
c
a
cn
m
a?
v?
c
0
L
ra ,..
O
U ?
U)
90-100-0£
90-100-£Z
90-100-9 L
90-100-6
90-130-Z
90-daS-SZ
90-daS-9 L
90-daS-LL
90-deS-t,
90-6n`d-8Z
90-6nV-LZ
90-6ny-b L
90-6nV-L
90-Inf-L£
90-Inf -1'Z
90-Inf -L 6
90-I n f -0 L
90-I n f -£
90-unf-9Z ca
O
90-u n f-6 L
90-u n f-Z L
90-u n r-g
90-AeW-6Z
90-AeW-ZZ
90-AeW-9 L
90-AeW-9
90-AeW- L
90-add-bZ
90-jdd-L L
90-jd`d-0 L
90-ady-£
90-JeW-LZ
90-JeW-OZ
90-aeW-£ L
90-aeW-9
90-g9J-LZ
90-gaj-OZ
90-gaj-£ L
O co CO It N O N (? 00 0 N V
(sayoui) uoi#e;idioaad
LQ LO U?
N N .- ?- O O
R
R
O
co --
m ?
N
R
LO
L
R
d
}
r_
0
a?
ua
C
0
0
v t
n
,.:.. 900Z/ L £/O L
900Z/ L Z/0 L
900Z/ L L/0 L
900Z/ L/0 L
900Z/ L Z/6
# ? " 900Z/L L/6
° 900Z/ L/6
9002/ZZ/8
9002/Z L/8
900Z/Z/8
9002/£Z/L
900Z/£ L/L
9002/£/L
or ::
M 9002/£Z/9 G
p 900Z/£ L/9
900Z/£/9
900Z/17Z/9
t , 900ML/9
r..? 9002/b/S
9002/bZ/b
9002/V L/v
E 9002/tl/t,
9002/5Z/£
900Z/9 L/£
9002/5/£
9002/£Z/Z
9002/£ L/Z
o CO "t N O N CO o0 O N CO 00 O N N O 00 O N CO 0p O
? 1 N N N N N CM C'7 M C? CM IT
(s t4OUI) wan °1 JOJe
(segoul) uolle;IdloaJd
Lq Ll? Lq
N N O O
a
s
A
C
t?
R
? N
V u7
L
N
-C
U

900Z-noN-t
90OZ-1a0-LZ
90OZ-100-6 L
900Z-1a0-L L
90OZ-100-£
900Z-deS-SZ
900Z-daS-L L
900Z-daS-6
9002-daS-L
900Z-6ny-bZ
900Z-6nV-9 L
900Z-6ny-9
900Z-Inf -6£
900Z-Inf -£Z
900Z-Inf -9L
900Z-Inf-L
900Z-unf-6Z
900Z-unf -LZ
900Z-un r-£ L
900Z-un r-9
9002-AeN-8Z
900Z-AeN-OZ
900Z-AeN-Z L
9002-AeN-b
9002-Jdd-9Z
900Z-Jdd-9 L
900Z-Jd`d-0 L
900Z-JdV-ZO
900Z-JeN-SZ
900Z-JeN-L L
900Z-1eN-60
900Z-JeN- W
900Z-gaj-LZ
900Z-ga:j-£L
N
N
O 00 CO ? N O N ? CO 00 O N ? CO 00 O
(sayoul) uollej!dloaJd
U? LO
?r
ar
0
z
m
r•+
c?
o to
mo
O)o
? N
u7
L
lV lV v v
0 .:........,.. ._..._...,.?. ,,.?. ?... ,. ? 90-100-0£
un
90-100-EZ
.
u)
90-100-9 L
90-100-6
° 90-100-Z
.?. gp-daS-9Z
0
gp-daS-9 L
gp-daS-?6
90-daS-t,
gp-6ny-gZ
90-6nd-6Z
90-6nV-t, L
y 90-6ny-L
90-Inf -6E
90-Inf-,VZ
PMM
9
90-Inf-L 6
90-Inf -06
90-Inf-E
d
y gp-un(? l-9Z e
9 gp-unf-66
gp-unr-Z6
gp-un(-g
?..-,:. gp-Aen-6Z
90-Aen-ZZ
N •
A •
c 90-Aen-9 L
0 a
90-ten-g
cn ?? 90-Aen- 6
..,. ...... 90-Jdd--VZ
0 90-JdV-L
'sue
c? 90-Jdy-06
.c 90-Jdy-E
u
` 90-Jen-LZ
- ._.., - - ....-. --- 90-Jen-OZ
gp-Jen-E L
90-Jen-9
90-gaj-LZ
90-gaj-OZ
90-qaj-E L
OofO?NCDc' C 000CNN%%4 N?000ON V 000004
? ' ' ?--•--•--NNNNNMMMMM??
(saLloui) uoilelldloaad
L
CN N .- r O O
D
? N
LO
L
d
}
0 90-100-6 £
z?
us 90-100-6 Z
? T
c 9 90-100-
90-100-6
=M > 4
gp-daS-6Z
o c
z w ,.
gp-daS-LL
? N mwa
? ? m• -...?r.,? wwd .? gp-deS-?
90-End-ZZ
90-6nd-Z 6
.mss:
90-6ny-Z
90-In r-£Z
90-I n f -£ 6
IN-, 90-Inf-£
N
90-unf-£Z o
_.. ,_ 90-unf -£6
90-unr-£
r gp-AeW-bZ
c gp-AeW-b l
o
w
gp-AeW-t
CO
gp-add-tZ
C
a ?
gp-add-b 6
?- t9
04
y0e 90-add-},
1? N II
g U} ? ° 90-aeW-SZ
.w... ?....L.
90-aeW-9 L
90-a e ws
rc
90-gaj-£Z
4
I
90-4aj-£ L
O m CD -t N O N T Co w O N It CD O O N O M O N"t (o w
N N N N N M M M M M
(saypui) ual}e}idl3aad
N N O O
r
ca
? cc
?o
Io
,ca Ln
v L
ca
d
90-^aN-9
90-100-0£
90-100-£Z
90-100-9 L
90-100-6
90-100-Z
90-das-SZ
90-des-8 L
90-des-LL
90-das-t,
90-6ny-8Z
90-End-LZ
90-6nV-bL
90-6ny-L
90-Inf -6£
90-Inr-t7z
90-Inf-L L
90-Inf -0 L
90-Inf -£
N
90-unr-gZ O
90-unf-6L
90-unf-ZL
90-unr-g
90-AeW-6Z
90-AeW-ZZ
90-AeW-9 L
90-Aen-8
90-Aen- L
90-adV-VZ
90-ady-L L
90-ady-0 L
90-adV-£
90-aeW-LZ
90-JeW-OZ
90-JeW-£ L
90-Jen-9
90-gad-LZ
90-gad-OZ
90-qad-£ L
N O v N O N I T C9 O N v CD w O N [t (D w O N V O m O
•1 - - r- - N N (V N N M cM (M (M M IY
c?
? to
?o
?o
04
c? LO
L.
M
d
}
(sagoul) uollelldioaad
LO
N N ? r
O O
....... e - ?. _.._ - _. gp-noN-9
°, 90-100-62
e.
90-100-ZZ
90-100-9 6
0 90-100-9
0 90-100- 6
E 4-
c gp-daS-bZ
w o
> ".
0 90-daS-L 6
90-daS-O 6
N xw+xxamm^'^ .
A w.
xsow ?..?x., 90-dag-£
90-6ny-LZ
90-6ny-OZ
90-6ny-£ 6
..w 90-6ny-g
90-Inf-O£
90-Inf -£Z
N 90-Inf -96
90-Inf -6
a 90-Inf -Z
A 90-un?-SZ o
90-unf-86
gp-unf-66
90-unr-t,
90-AeW-8Z
90-AeN-6Z
O M 90-?eW-?6
90-AeN-L
gp-jdV-0£
„m
90-jdy-£Z
r 0 90-jdy-96
cv 90-jdV-6
0
M A 90-ady-Z
rig 90-aeW-9Z
90-JeW-6 6
90-aeW-Z 6
90-JeW-9
90-gaj-9Z
90-qa_A-OZ
90-gaj-£ 6
O 00 cD d N O N d CO W O N (O w O N It (0 w O N It (O
r e- .- I N N N (V N M (M M M
(segoul) uo13ej!dl0aad
LO U?
N N O O
?a
w
?u
N
?o
?o
ca LO
L
R
d
- -- 90-noN-t,
m
90-100-61
90-300- L L
o 90-300-£
as
90-daS-9Z
4) 0
'o gp-daS-L L
w
90-daS-6
90-daS-?
90-6nV-t Z
90-6ny-9 L
gp-6ny-8
90-Inf -6£
<11 90-Inf -£Z
90-Inf -S6
90-Inf-L
gp-unr-6Z
.. gp-unf-6Z
90-unf-£ ?
Y
90-u n r-g
gp-AeW-8Z
s gp-AeW-OZ
b 90-AeW-Z 6
u?
90-JdV-9Z
90-Jdd-8
L
a
.- t9 90-Jdy-0 L
N w
o 90-jdy-Z
b N
Ar
E (n -4 m gp-JeW-SZ
90-JeW-6
90-JeW- 6
90-ga:j-6Z
I T I 7? 90-qaj-£ L
LO O LO O 0 O 0 O to O 0 OUl) O m O LO O LO O
(0 (0 0 LO ? ? M M N N - ? ? .- N N M
(sagoul) uoilelldioaJd
N N .- O O
r ?
c? ^
0
0
c LO
d
L L
c?
L 0
c9
,
> 0
zs -?. m
0 c
z w
N
0
{? M m
9
rn
c
0
r- c7
cv ,?
C 0 i
MA
90-100-0£
90-100-£Z
90-100-9 L
90-100-6
90-100-2
90-daS-9Z
90-daS-8 L
90-daS- ?
90-daS-t,
90-6nd-8Z
90-find- 6Z
90-6ny-{, L
90-6nV-L
90-Inf-6£
9O-Inf-tiZ
90-Inf -L 6
90-Inf -06
90-Inf -£
d
9O-unf-9Z e
9O-unr-66
9O-unf-Z6
90-unr-g
90-AeIN-6Z
90-Ae W-ZZ
90-Aen-9 L
90-Aen-8
90-Ae"- 6
90-Jdy-bZ
90-Jdy-L 6
90-Jdd-O L
90-Jdy-£
90-JeW-LZ
90-JeW-OZ
90-Jen-£ L
90-JeW-g
90-gaj-LZ
90-qa:I-OZ
90-gazl-£ b
le o LO O 0 O le o 4 O U') O U') O U) O
N N ' - N N M M I I L9
(SULIOUO Iah ° J<a. ,
(S043ul) uoi}e}ldl3e3d
U? U? U?
N N ?- O O
c
cs
v?
crs
?r
?. 0
-a 0
0 °
o c
iu
N ?
rn ?
?O
C7 tO
0
0
v
C m
LO
L L
m ?
cl: }
900Z-AON-90
- - - - - - --- .._.... ...._.. 9002-100-0£
N 900Z-100-£Z
9 900Z-100-9 L
900Z-}00-60
900Z-}oO-ZO
900Z-deS-9Z
9002-daS-9 L
900Z-deS- L L
9002-daS-b0
9002-6nV-SZ
900Z-5nV-6Z
9002-5ny-t6
900Z-bnV-LO
900Z-Inr-6£
900Z-Inr-bZ
900Z-Inf -L 6
900Z-Inf-06
9002-Inf -£0
9 900Z-unr-gZ o
9002-unr-66
900Z-unf-Z6
9002-unf -50
900Z-AeW-6Z
9002-AeW-ZZ
900Z-AeW-9 L
ro 900Z-AeW-SO
9002-AeW- 60
9002-JdV-.VZ
N
0 9002-Jdy-L 6
900Z04
-JdV-0 6
U 0
9002-Jd`d-£0
us I ? 9002-aeW-LZ
L 900Z-JeW-OZ
900Z-JeW-£ L
900Z-JeW-90
9002-gaj-LZ
9002/OZ/Z
9002/£ 6/Z
OM N N LO O In O LO O LO O Lo O LO
7 N N M M
e call lOAO J }e
Appendix C
(Click here)
APPENDIX E
GAUGE VEGETATION LISTS
Howell Woods Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 6 (2006)
EEP Project Number 183 February 2007
Johnston County, North Carolina Appendix E
REFERENCE GAUGE 1
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Quercus lyrata Canopy OBL
2. Nyssa bii fora Canopy OBL
3. Ulmus americana Canopy FACW
4. Acer rubrum Canopy FAC
5. Liquidambar sytraciflua Sapling FAC+
6. Ilex decidua Shrub FACW-
7. Commelina virginica Herb FACW
g. Carex spp. Herb FAC to OBL
9. Leersia lenticularis Herb OBL
10. Boehmeria cylindrica Herb FACW+
11. Saururus cernuus Herb OBL
Percent of Dominant Species tha t are OBL, FACW, or FAC
(except FAC-). Include spec ies noted (*) as showing
morphological adaptations to wetlands = 100%
REFERENCE GAUGE 2
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
I. Quercus lyrata Canopy OBL
2. Quercus phellos Canopy FACW-
3. Acer rubrum Canopy FAC
4. Liquidambar sytraciua Canopy FAC+
5. Carpinus caroliniana Sapling FAC
6. Ulmus rubra Sapling FAC
7. Ilex decidua Shrub FACW-
g, Crataegus sp. Shrub FAC to OBL
9. Carex spp. Herb FACW+
10. Fraxinus pennsylvanica Herb FACW
11. Commelina virginica Herb FACW
12 Saururus cernuus Herb OBL
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC
(except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing
morphological adaptations to wetlands = 100%
Appendix F
(Click here)
APPENDIX F
YEAR 1 (2002) GROUNDWATER GAUGE GRAPHS
Howell Woods Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 6 (2006)
EEP Project Number 183 February 2007
Johnston County, North Carolina Appendix F
o. o
I .
;2

o
j Z
q lagwanoN - uoseag ?iu!MOJ?;o p
0
f

LL.
Q

0
? •?
I cn

N e
M I
?,

cu
r' l
?
-

W
N
T T
? _
_

w .2 =3
t -0

2-27

/?

.?J

O d c
O
' 0 0 --"--' - --I---- 7 75
-
W

n
W

0 ?

6l pdy - o I

eas 6ulnnd10 ;o %9'Z L
Q
Q
y_ - - - -
mo -
- -
?
%
L !!
d - nn
eas
;o
9
LZ 4oPJeW seas 6w ojo;o Wets
I
N
I ?
I c
(a

Lo
N O O u7 O 0 (D N a0 'I- 0 co N OD q-
N r ?- O O I' (M Cl) N N N r r 0 op N (D c) 'T co N (D
r r N N N M ('7 O
tr
(ui) llejuie?l (ui) y ldaa
aaleMp unoao

r I U

t o
Z

q jagwanoN - uoseas ? uimaJ Jo pug

.
N
I
a

C4. IM
CY)
Z
7E N

G" cu _ I 3

? t

_ t
_?

o ?
.

,? •- ........... .

6l I.ady.. .

gas Buim¢io to %5'Zl
ff
Q

ZF= - - -
-l vjwv - u
eas'Buim?J-o lo X
5 a
C 0
• 2 40pie1N - seas Bui ao;o vets
I co
?
N
t LL
t

O
N O u7 O O O O0Nco? O(pNOD?O?OON(?O ? CoNtDO
N r r p Cj d MMNNN?-e- r r.-?NNNMt?s{
r r r r r r r
° (ul) IleIulea (ui) 4ldaa
jolempunoaE)
• '. . I.",
N

N LO
N M
. LL
co
CY)
Z

. 0 , W
O
1

4
3
p

I U

r
>
0
z
b JOQWGAON - uoS S 16u!mo,O )o Pu3
O
CL
U
cm
a

N r? 1
CO _T
.
U -0

LS.2
y L 1
C O

• 1 r
I ?

6L I!jdy- uo
eaS 6u!m¢,c) %S ZL
Il CL
Q
- - - l Iu y - uo eaS u!m
- -
?J
lZ yaPIEW - seaS 6u! aE) ; e3S
I
N
LL
I
m
c

V7 O V7 O u? O Oco NGo q.O0 (V co v
p M M N N N r'
? 0''op CNcoO?ooNfo
(V N CV C7 M O
p
N N r ,
(u!) Ileluweb (ul) 4 09C)
Jejemp unao
a

• V
4)

I
?
0 a
Z

q JagwanoN uoseag u!Ma?;o pu3
i
N I a

N r
I o

?
W a,
I
Q
T). oo
c1r)
z N
Z.

I w

YI
/?
? ?I 45
.a N w
0 CD C
m
O
o 0-
C

47P
e
p
I C? o

_• 6l I!Jdy - uo eag 6u!m?
jE) ;o "o5'Z t A
- II
- -
• -
- -t 1id --u o eag TuiM6o;00-%9
_ LZ yopJBIN - seag 6ui aV;o eels
I m
N
U-

V7
N 0 w C'4
O O O O ?1 O?DNO0? Osl CON(DOtwN m O
N v MMNC*gC14 ' ??NNNMM 4
(u!) llejuie?j (u!) 4jdaa
Ja;empunaE)

I O
Z

y jagWOAON - uoseaS I6uinaaE) ;o pu3
I v
O
N I a
o I )

N o)

Q
M
M I m

z 75
.
M

p O
0 (D

_.

64 ludy uo
eaS 6wm¢jE);o
II Q
Q

- - - -4 lu y -- uo eaS
i?

_ lZ y3pjey4 - sea w aZ);o ve;S
I
?
I
U
ns
?I
N
?
I e
I
I C

oOR (Dsf NOOR (D stNO
N ? ? T- V- O O O O O O(DNOO?OONODctOIooNwC) zr ONOO
M M N N N ' N N (V M CM q
(ui) IlejulLN (u!) Ujdaa
Jalempuno E)
eo ,

o
Z

' Ir jagwanoN - uoseaS ?uimaO;o Pu3
I O
N
O ? c
o cn
o
N N _
I ?(D
CL
,
-CO I a)
V? LL! rr vi
. T I ?
L Q
,
O
N
?. ?
C
2,Q? I 0 -
V a °° ` .w+
I
O
j
L c O

?
W
3 i
a ? ?
.. .................
6 t INdy - uo ...... ....
...
COS 6uim 10%9'
l
Z M

Q
IuTV -- uo eaS bo%5
?J
• -' tZ 4oP1eW - Se 6uiwU Jo IJeIS
I
v

a ?
tL
a? I
c
c?

N O V7 O tp O O (Q N co 'T O tO N oo 'T
N r O O V c)NN04 s- O sT co N 0 O V oo N tC 0
rrNNC II?I?i?
(0 Ilejuieb (u!) 4 3daa
jajemp unaE)

z

. q JagUJanoN - u as ?wMOj j;o pu3
I o

o I o
N
LO
to co
I
=
Q

J
'

M -

N 1 -
---
0

z 0 2:1

t5 -8 )
:3 :3
-C

?
LO
I ^
o
L)

3 ? I
O = I •-
. .. ud. uo
614. b- ? o o
ea 6wM d
S IEJ3 Zl Q
- - - -L iu y -- uo eas YU71M iJ; 5
• _ lZ yopjeyy seas 6ui wE);o eis
I
LL

u7
N O 1A O U1 O O(DNOD?tO(DNODV
N r ?- O O 'T cMMNNN?-? OITODN(OO V OD
'NCVC N(D
M O
(u!) Ilejuie?j (u!) yl dea
Jalemp unojo

!11
N 00 .?`--
C)

co
ce)
Z ,.
y
O ?

O ?
S ?

Lq a Lc? O to a OtfSNa0?7 OCfltV[C1Q O tj coNCQOQ 000V tDO
N N r- r C,j O ?' M t7 CV C`V N r- r ? ?- ?-- CV N N M t+7 ci'
(ul) IlejuleH (ui) y;daci
J@IempunojE)
0

Q
N qlT
cr)
00
N
tf?
Q
o(l)
0
O

U.) O U? O Uf O O (D N CO'T O (D N to rr o f oD N (D O V co c-4 too
{V {V ?- r O O NF M CO N N N t- r- t r- r- N N N I? M
(U!) Ifepeb (ui) gldap
ja}empunoig
r-
0

- • I a

c 0
Z

,
q jagwanoN - uoseas uiMaJ to pu3

1
I 0
.N I ? .

O N
N N
a
Q
LU -- _.?

?/ J
c
u
c 75
N 'C
CT co

? I
O
...........
..
.
...................
....... . a
..
.
. 61 OV - Uo e 6 • J9 to %9'Z l Q
9- .
ulM
o _
LIP V u t
%
- lZ 4oPJew 6ui wg to liels
I

I
c
ca

U? O U) O U) O O co N Co at O to N co v O oo N w O O N (O O
N N M N N N •- •- r N N N M I? V
(ul) Ile3ulea (ul) 41da0
aa}empunoaE)

.o
z

v JagwanoN - uoseaS 16uinnaE);o pu3
5
N I a

I
U) Q a
W
N
M
w c
o'
U yap
0 4)
o

?
tv p

O I C

x
6t Judy- uo
eaS Guinn j /°S'Zl CL
Q

lZ yopJen SeaS 6u! o to eels
a?
LL
c

u7 O U? O tl)
p
r O O CO N 00 V O CO N 00 't O 00 N O O"T 00 N (O O
p V mm N N N - r- ' N NNC?C?
r
N N
(ul) Ile}uiel (u!) 4jda(i
aalempunojE)

N
oN Q
M
?. 00
co
,,ww U)
Y/ Q
O
O0
3
I
w?
W Q
O

Z

e q JagwanoN - uoseas kulmOJO 19 pu3
? I
O
p
v v
C
p '
0
I
? .
? a

a
i

i
Q

N
C
v'
27

2-
Nay
I ?
o
o C
I
I ?
I
.. ......... ........
6l ludy- uo ............I.
eas 6uiAIJE) I 'Z t CL
Q

-L lu -- ua eas v-vm %S
lZ 40PjeW seag 6ui aE) jo lie)
I m
I
LL
C

tC) O u7 O O O OtflNCC)?OCONG??
N N ?- O C v m m N N C4 O ?OONCOO;• co Nt0
r-?NNCV MC'M 0
?
(U!) ue;uieb (w) y ;daa
Ja;emp unoaE)
A
N
OO CD
No
NU
?W
?U)
y W
13-
o a,
o?
- cn
as o
0
e
O N O O 0CD NOD V OICDNOD V O?ODN?0O ?ODN0O
N N ? O O VM(1) NNNr- r ' ?r-NNNMC??
(u!) Ileluie8 (u!) 4ldea
Jalempunoig
0

p
Z
° q jagwano - u !MOJ60;o pu3
s
0
N a
Q )

N O
U) CO

S
LL N ao c

O _
(` o ? I c
G

?
O L
.... ... .. .. .. .. Ijd...... ..
6l I. \I' - uo ...
Be$ 6ulIAA 1 )0 %S'Z L
Q
e
--- - - -t limey u0 a 10 %S
•
lZ 40piew -
seas ?010 ue)s L
N
LL

. c
co

u7
N O u7 O O OO?N00vOMNW V O'q•TNM 0 -T WN w0
N r r O O MMNNNrr ??NNNMM?
(u!) Ile}ulea (u!) 43d9(3
ialempunaE)
Appendix G
(Click here)
APPENDIX G
YEAR 3 (2004) GROUNDWATER GAUGE DATA
Howell Woods Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 5 (2006)
EEP Project Number 183 February 2007
Johnston County, North Carolina Appendix G

Irt
r

.C Qa

H

Appendix H
(Click here)
APPENDIX H
YEAR 4 (2005) GROUNDWATER GAUGE GRAPH
Howell Woods Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 5 of 5 (2006)
EEP Project Number 183 February 2007
Johnston County, North Carolina Appendix H
Lc)
O
U
N

uoseas 6ulmoiB pus U-)
O

0
z
LO
O
a
m
CO
m
m
rn
c
?
C fN
N
t0 N E O
C 00

N 76
:3
t0
C °?
r N
CL CA
d V
C O
O O
?
O
? -
H CD c
L 3
O
ax
3
N
co
O
- O
M Q
uoseas 6ulmOJ6lie}s
LO
O
.n
a?
LL
LO
O
c
O LO O LO O) Lo N N M M d0 LO co
i i
(ui) IGA81 JOIBM
uoseas 6ulmOJ6 pug
� 4
g �
N
d �
uoseas 6ulmOJ6 liels
LL
c O N O
(ui) 4}dap

LO
0

uoseas 6ulmoi6 pua
Ln
0
>
0
z
LO
0

07
N
O
= u7 75 )
? O
N
d
Z ? N

o _
3 LO
o
H E
=

d m
m
a ?
UD
0

uoseas 6ulmOJ6lie}s

m
LL
LO
0
c
O LO N N C) LO 0 LO -cu)
i i i ; i
(ui) y;dap
LO
4

uoseas 6uimoj6 pue

CO)
Q
O ?
M N

L
4

uoseas 6UIMOJ6 lie;s

ti
LO
4

(ui) 44dep
LO

uoseas 6ulmok pue o

d 4

•o
N

b

B 3 LO
?
N
GI
E
7
2
Q
uoseas 6uimoi6 }gels

m
u_
LO
4

O O

i p
U7 N N

i i ? i

o c

U-)
(ui) 4;dap
LO
0

uoseas 6uimoa6 pue LO
C
z
0

LO
4
= o
?
•o
N
0 N O
N R

0 Q
?- 3
c _
E
L
+?+
co
T

uoseas bulmok lie}s

P
LL
LO
0

L?
LO L
? (V
LO
M c
c?
(ui) y4dop