20190675 Ver 1_Final DRAFT MP_2020_20200923

ID#* 20190675 Version* 1
Select Reviewer:*
Erin Davis
Initial Review Completed Date 09/23/2020
Mitigation Project Submittal - 9/23/2020
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?* O Yes a No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
rJ Stream rJ Wetlands [Buffer ❑ Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:*
Lindsay Crocker
Project Information
..................................................................................................................................................................
ID#:* 20190675
Existing IDI
Project Type: F DMS r Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Swamp Grape
County: Robeson
Document Information
Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Version: * 1
Existing Version
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Plans
File Upload: Swamp Grape_100115_FDMP_2020.pdf 67.05MB
Rease upload only one PDF of the complete file that needs to be subrritted...
Signature
Print Name:* Lindsay Crocker
Signature:*

DRAFT MITIGATION PLAN
SWAMP GRAPE STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION SITE
Robeson County, North Carolina
DMS Project ID No. 100115
Full Delivery Contract No. 7869
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2019-01732
DWR Project No. 2019-0675
RFP No. 16-007705
Lumber River Basin
Cataloging Unit 03040204
Prepared for:
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699-1652
September 2020

Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes St. Suite 211
Raleigh, North Carolina
Ph: [phone]
Fx: [phone]
Response to DMS Comments
Swamp Grape Mitigation Site (DMS ID No. 100115)
Contract No. 0007869
Lumber River Basin 03040204, Robeson County
DMS Reviewers: Lindsay Crocker, Lin Xu, Melonie Allen, Joe Famularuo
Comments Received (Black Text) & Responses ( )
General
1. Suggest using decimal degrees throughout the report; this is what IRT and others use to navigate to the site.
• Review of the document indicates that decimal degrees were used on the Site location map, Table
4, directions to the site, NC WAM and SAM forms, and soil profiles.
Suggest removing text that defines industry standards, such as definition of Rosgen classification system; it
is not necessary and may lead to some confusion such as the statement that E type stream channels often
occur in narrower valleys as stated in section 4.1.1.2.
• Rosgen discussions of channel classification has been removed from Sections 4.1.1.2 and 4.1.2.2
Specific
3. Page 6, Valley confinement is indicated in Table 4 to be confined to moderately confined however the text
describes the site as having wide, flat alluvial valleys with 100' floodplains. Revise or explain
• Table 4 has been updated to read "Wide and flat alluvial valley".
4. Page 4, table 2: update Institution date to specific 4/18/2019
The institution date has been updated to 4/18/2019
5. Page 9, nutrient model: please include livestock type and number in the herd used to calculate nutrient and
fecal loading.
Total N and P have been calculated based on an area of pasture converted (5 acres) as stated in the
document. Fecal coliform values have been based on two goats, a small donkey, and a horse. Text
has been added to the document to clarify.
6. Page 10. 3.4 Project site Streams —Suggest mentioning re-establishing buffers and excluding livestock to this
paragraph since these two activities contribute greatly to water quality benefits of the project.
Text has been added to the paragraph to indicate the following "Site restoration activities including
re-establishing buffers, excluding livestock, and restoring stream channels will....."
7. Page 11 Table 7.0-Given the size, classification, and parameters presented in Table 7.0 and text that indicates
that comparison of small and large drainage area comparison will assist in site design parameters, please
briefly explain how the Jordan Creek reference reach was used to develop proposed design parameters.
• The comparison of various sized streams/watersheds is conductea using dimensionless ratios
(example Lp-p/Wbkf, Rc/Wbkf). These dimensionless ratios allow comparison of Site channels and
are presented in Table 131 (Appendix B). Table 7.0 does not ask for dimensionless ratios in the DMS
templates. However, Table 131 provides a significant amount of information concerning these ratios
and their subsequent design use. Text has been added to the Jordan Creek Reference Reach
narrative (Section 4.1.2.1, pg. 16) to include the following. "The comparison of a small and large
drainage area will assist in development of appropriate Site design parameters using dimensionless
ratios (see Table B-1(Appendix B) Morphological Stream Characteristics. Dimensionless ratios allow
for comparison of smaller and larger streams (see ratio variables presented in Table B-1)."
8. Page 12, 3.4.4 Valley Classification —There is a typo in the middle of the paragraph. Please change "slopwe"
to "slope."
• The typo has been fixed.
1101 Haynes St., Suite 211 • Raleigh, NC 27604 • www.restorationsystems.com • Ph 919.755.9490 • Fx 919.755.9492

9. On page 19 Table 12 — In the table, it listed UT1, UT3, and UT 6. However, there were only UT 1, UT 2, and
UT 3 in the project. Please make necessary changes.
• The table has been updated to include data for UT 1 upstream, UT 1 downstream, UT 2, and UT 3.
10. On page 20 Table 13 — In the table, it seems that both the Coastal Plain regional curve and the USGS regional
model underestimated the bank full discharge comparing to the field indicate for McRea Land Company
reference reach. However, the Coastal Plain regional curve over estimated while the USGS regional model
was close to the bank full discharge comparing to the field indicator for Jordan Creek reference reach. Please
explain which method was used to estimate the bank full discharge for the proposed condition.
• i exi nas peen added to clarify the aesign bankfull cross sectional area. The text now reads as follows.
"The designed onsite channel restoration area has been calculated using field indicators of bankfull
at the reference reaches (average value) and bankfull indicators identified at the Site. This analysis
indicates that design bankfull cross sectional area will equal 115 percent of the channel size indicated
by Coastal Plain regional curves."
11. On page 23 Table 16 — In the table, it stated one of project goals was "minimize downstream flooding to the
maximum extent possible". Please explain whether downstream flooding is an issue for the project
watershed since majority of watershed is under the forest land use.
Section 2 (Watershed Approach and Site Selection) outlines the Lumber River RBRP restoration goals
for the CU include "buffering waterways and implementation of stormwater and agricultural BMPs".
In addition, the upstream Site watershed is ditched dominated by agriculture fields that significantly
increase downstream flooding. The DMS comment is valid due to the existence of the pond dam
that historically would attenuate stormwater pulses. Yet the dam has been breached which during
the breach caused extensive downstream flooding and no longer functions to stop excessive
stormwater flows.
12. Page 24, Table 17. The biological conclusions shown on this table are ESA determinations. Rename this tab
'ESA determinations' or update the table with the biological conclusions listedon your table submitted to
USF&W.
i aole 17 has been renamed "Enaangered Species Hct ueierminations".
13. Page 26, Instream structures: Please clarify the intent to create perpendicular flow cells during bankfull
events; is this perpendicular to stream banks?
Vertical flow cells cause stream bank scour during turbulent flow. One purpose of in stream
structures (vanes and cross vanes) is to change the flow cells perpendicular to the stream bed and
banks which contribute to sediment transport and channel bar formation and maintenance.
14. Page 29, Table 18: UT 3 work proposed lists erase radius of curvatures along the channel. Please explain if
this will be replaced by more stable sinuosity as opposed to removing all sinuosity.
This was a typo. The text has been changed to read "ease" radius of curvatures.
15. Page 27, there is a piped channel crossing described here as inside the easement, but it is not shown on the
restoration plan. Explain what this paragraph is describing or update to explain that these are outside of the
easement.
Text has been added to the document to indicate the crossings will be located upstream, and outside
of the easement.
16. Page 27, Section 8.1.1. describes "not for credit" marsh treatment areas and indicates those are shown on
Figure 6A and 613, but they are not visible on those pages or plan sheets. Please check that this paragraph is
accurate to this project and shown on design.
The marsh treatment area discussion has been removed from the document. There are no marsh
treatment areas in this project.
17. Page 29, paragraph on wetland rehabilitation indicates that there are gauges installed in the rehabilitation
areas (Appendix A and Figure 4). Please indicate when those gauges were installed and provide that data if
Page 2 of 5

it is available. Also, please describe how hydrology will be improved in those areas to justify rehabilitation
instead of enhancement. For example, the restoration plan (Figure 6) indicates that those areas of
rehabilitation where UT2, UT3, and UT1 come together show that the channel depth will be decreased by
approximately 1 foot, which should be mentioned in the text for the hydrologic and vegetative functional
improvement.
• Text has been added to the document including the following statements.
- "These areas had preconstruction groundwater gauges installed in late May 2020."
- "Groundwater gauge data will be included in as -built and annual monitoring reports for
comparison to preconstruction gauge data."
• At this time groundwater gauge data has not been collected or processed for inclusion into the
detailed restoration plan.
18. The project credits table uses the terms, re-establishment, rehabilitation, and enhancement for wetlands.
Section 8.3 page 29 is not clear on the plan for these three mitigation types, the text indicates that wetland
restoration will occur through the creation of ephemeral pools and indicates that wetland rehabilitation will
result in extended hydroperiod; there is no description of how wetland enhancement is to occur. Please
update this section for more specificity and explanation.
This section has been updated to break out each of the wetland mitigation types. A paragraph for
wetland enhancement has been added to the document. Please note that ephemeral pools may be
a part of the wetland reestablishment strategy; however, the strategy also lists the following
activities. "Wetland reestablishment options will focus on the restoration of vegetative communities,
restoration of stream corridors and historic groundwater tables, as well as the reestablishment of
soil structure and microtopographic variations."
19. Page 32, Monitoring. It is likely that the IRT will require a flow gauge on UT2 because this is a pond removal
and based on field conversations/discussions. Suggest addition of flow gauge for this reach in this section.
UT 2 is characterized by a 263-acre drainage area and is considered a perennial stream. During the
multiple IRT walkthrough visits of the Site, the flow regime of this tributary was not questioned. We
will defer to IRT recommendations concerning monitoring of the flow regime; however, perennial
streams typically do not require flow monitoring gauges.
20. Page 33, Table 21. Monitoring Summary. Continuous State Recorders are required for any reaches where
Priority I restoration has occurred, the table lists number/extent in this column as NA and lists visual
evidence, photo documentation and or rain data below this; that will not meet the 2016 requirements. This
table also uses the term wetland restoration, please verify that this is intended to include both re-
establishment and rehabilitation. Please include the source of the growing season and note that if soil
temperature is used to validate a non- standard season; both temperature and bud burst /senescence will
be necessary to document beginning and end of the season.
Table 21, stream hydrology refers to flow gauges that monitor consecutive days of stream flow. As
all the channels are perennial, there are no continuous monitoring flow gauges proposed at the Site.
Bankfull event monitoring gauges (crest gauges) have been included in the Site and are included in
Table 21. We have three crest gauges proposed for the Site located on UT 1 upstream, UT1
Downstream, and UT 2.
• Text has been added for the wetland growing season to include the following. "*Soil temperature
will be monitored using a continuous recording soil probe located at the rain gauge. The growing
season will be initiated once bud burst has been documented on two or more species (excluding red
maple and sambucus) and suitable soil temperatures have been documented with the soil probe.
The earlies growing season initiation date will be March 1, assuming other growing season criteria
has been met."
21. Page 33-34, Table 21 indicates 13 groundwater gauges, but there are 15 gauges showing on the monitoring
plan map (Figure 15).
• The table has been updated to include 15 groundwater gauges.
Page 3 of 5

Construction Plan Sheets
1. Include a construction sequence sheet in the plan sheets.
A preliminary erosion control construction sequence in the plans (Sheet C8.05).
2. Ensure to label wetlands in the plan sheets as the approved JD.
• Wetland labels have been updated.
3. Show locations of proposed constructed riffles.
• As the Site is a sand bed stream, there are no constructed riffles proposed for the project. The Typical
detail for constructed riffles has been removed from the plan set.
4. Include a planting plan in the plan sheets.
• The planting plan has been added to the plan set.
5. Explain how ephemeral pools and marsh treatment areas will be constructed as they are not shown on the
plan sheets.
• There are no marsh treatment areas proposed at the Site; therefore, no detail has been included in
the plan set. Ephemeral pools are to be include as a field adjustment in areas of wetland that may
need additional hydrology, or in abandoned channel backfill areas. These areas are to be less than 1
foot in depth and are to be elliptical in shape. At this time, we have no areas of expected ephemeral
pools and do not have a detail for the depressions.
Digital Data
1. Provide the proposed monitoring features displayed in Fig. 10 (e.g. cross sections, veg plots, etc).
Monitoring equipment have been included in the digital submittal data.
2. The provided stream features for UT3 Reach 2 and UT2 Reach 2 do not connect to UT1 Reach 3. Please
provide continuous stream features that accurately represent the Mitigation Plan Footage reported in Table
1.
• The features have been added to the digital data submittal.
Appendices/Figures
1. Appendices/Figures: Add a figure that shows the RFE and the two reference stream sites in relation to this
project. This is especially important since the text of the Mitigation Plan relies heavily on the description and
analyses of these systems.
Figure 1A has been added to the document that shows the location of the Site and the adjacent
reference sites.
2. Appendix D. Update to insert the with Beecher signature or email on the PJD, mitigation plan may not be
approved without this document.
Mr. Gary Beecher from the USACE has provided us with emailed approval that is now included
but we have not received the tear sheet. We will update the document once we receive his
signature.
3. Appendix H, I, and J are missing. Update these for final draft submission.
• These appendices will be added for the final document.
4. Appendix K. — Add Tugwell and Haupt a -mails response to the final site visit minutes (11/7/2019 and
11/8/2019 e-mails).
• The requested emails have been added to the site visit minutes.
Page 4 of 5

Page 5 of 5

DRAFT MITIGATION PLAN
SWAMP GRAPE STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION SITE
Robeson County, North Carolina
DMS Project ID No. 100115
Full Delivery Contract No. 7869
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2019-01732
RFP No. 16-007705
DWR Project No. 2019-0675
Lumber River Basin
Cataloging Unit 03040204
Prepared for:
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699-1652
Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Contact: Raymond Holz
919-755-9490 (phone)
919-755-9492 (fax)
Prepared by:
And
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
September 2020
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
Contact: Grant Lewis
919-215-1693 (phone)
This mitigation plan has been written in conformance with the requirements of the following:
• Federal rule for compensatory mitigation project sites as described in the Federal Register Title
33 Navigation and Navigable Waters Volume 3 Chapter 2 Section § 332.8 paragraphs (c)(2)
through (c)(14).
• NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services In -Lieu Fee Instrument signed and dated July 28, 2010
These documents govern NCDMS operations and procedures for the delivery of compensatory mitigation
This document was assembled using the June 2017 DMS Stream and Wetland Mitigation Plan Template
and Guidance and the October 24, 2016 NC Interagency Review Team Wilmington District Stream and
Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 PROJECT INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................1
1.1
Directions to Site......................................................................................................................................1
1.2
USGS Hydrologic Unit Code and NCDWR River Basin Designation..........................................................1
1.3
Physiography and Land Use.....................................................................................................................1
1.4
Project Components and Structure..........................................................................................................2
2 WATERSHED APPROACH AND SITE SELECTION...........................................................................................7
3 BASELINE AND EXISTING CONDITIONS........................................................................................................8
3.1
Soils and Land Form.................................................................................................................................8
3.2
Sediment Model.......................................................................................................................................9
3.3
Nutrient Model.........................................................................................................................................9
3.4
Project Site Streams...............................................................................................................................10
3.4.1 Existing Conditions Survey.....................................................................................................10
3.4.2 Channel Classification and Morphology................................................................................12
3.4.3 Channel Evolution..................................................................................................................12
3.4.4 Valley Classification...............................................................................................................12
3.4.5 Discharge...............................................................................................................................12
3.5
Project Site Wetlands.............................................................................................................................12
3.5.1 Groundwater Model..............................................................................................................12
3.5.2 Hydrological Characterization...............................................................................................13
3.5.3 Soil Characterization..............................................................................................................13
4 REFERENCE STUDIES.................................................................................................................................14
4.1 Reference Streams.................................................................................................................................14
4.1.1 McCrea Land Company Reference Reach..............................................................................15
4.1.2 Jordan Creek Reference Reach..............................................................................................16
4,2 Reference Forest Ecosystem..................................................................................................................17
4.3 Freshwater Marsh..................................................................................................................................17
5 CHANNEL ASSESSMENTS...........................................................................................................................18
5.1 Channel Stability Assessment.................................................................................................................18
5.2 Bankfull Verification...............................................................................................................................19
6 FUNCTIONAL UPLIFT AND PROJECT GOALS/OBJECTIVES...........................................................................20
7 SITE DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION CONSTRAINTS................................................................................24
7.1 Threatened & Endangered Species........................................................................................................24
7.2 Cultural Resources.................................................................................................................................25
7.3 North Carolina Natural Heritage Elements............................................................................................25
7.4 FEMA......................................................................................................................................................26
7.5 Utilities...................................................................................................................................................26
7.6 Air Transport Facilities...........................................................................................................................26
8 DESIGN APPROACH AND MITIGATION WORK PLAN..................................................................................26
8.1 Stream Design........................................................................................................................................26
8.1.1 Stream Restoration................................................................................................................26
8.1.2 Stream Enhancement (Level 1)...............................................................................................27
8.1.3 Stream Enhancement (Level 11)..............................................................................................27
8.2 Individual Reach Discussions..................................................................................................................27
8.3 Wetland Enhancement, Reestablishment, and Rehabilitation
..............................................................29
8.4 Soil Restoration......................................................................................................................................30
8.5 Natural Plant Community Restoration...................................................................................................30
8.5.1 Planting Plan..........................................................................................................................30
8.5.2 Nuisance Species Management.............................................................................................32
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115)
Table of Contents page i
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site
Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina
September 2020

9 MONITORING AND SUCCESS CRITERIA......................................................................................................32
9.1 Success Criteria......................................................................................................................................35
9.2 Contingency............................................................................................................................................35
9.2.1 Stream Contingency..............................................................................................................35
9.2.2 Wetland Contingency............................................................................................................37
9.2.3 Vegetation Contingency........................................................................................................37
9.3 Compatibility with Project Goals............................................................................................................37
10 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN...............................................................................................................39
11 LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN............................................................................................................39
12 REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................................40
TABLES
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits....................................................................................................3
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History.............................................................................................................4
Table3. Project Contacts Table.....................................................................................................................................5
Table 4. Project Attribute Table.....................................................................................................................................5
Table 5. Web Soil Survey Soils Mapped within the Site................................................................................................8
Table 6. BEHI and NBS Modeling Summary...................................................................................................................9
Table 7. Essential Morphology Parameters.................................................................................................................11
Table 8. Results for Boussinesq Equation....................................................................................................................13
Table 9. Representative Soil Profile Descriptions........................................................................................................14
Table 10. Reference Forest Ecosystem........................................................................................................................17
Table 11. Freshwater Marsh Ecosystem......................................................................................................................18
Table 12. Stream Power (Q) and Shear Stress (i) Values............................................................................................19
Table 13. Reference Reach Bankfull Discharge Analysis..............................................................................................20
Table14. NC SAM Summary........................................................................................................................................21
Table15. NC WAM Summary......................................................................................................................................22
Table 16. Targeted Functions, Goals, Objectives, and Uplift Evaluation.....................................................................23
Table 17. Endangered Species Act Determinations.....................................................................................................24
Table 18. Individual Reach Descriptions and Functional Uplift...................................................................................28
Table19. Planting Plan................................................................................................................................................31
Table20. Monitoring Schedule....................................................................................................................................32
Table21. Monitoring Summary...................................................................................................................................33
Table22. Success Criteria............................................................................................................................................35
Table 23. Compatibility of Performance Criteria to Project Goals and Objectives......................................................38
APPENDICES
Appendix A. Figures
Figure 1. Site Location
Figure 1A. Reference Site Location
Figure 2. Hydrologic Unit Map
Figure 3. Topography and Drainage Area
Figure 4. Existing Conditions and Soils
Figure 5A. McRae Land Co. Reference Reach Dimension, Pattern, and Profile
Figure 513. Jordan Creek Reference Reach Dimension, Pattern, and Profile
Figure 6. Restoration Plan
Figures 6A-D. Mitigation Justification
Figure 7. Proposed Dimension, Pattern, and Profile
Figure 8. Typical Structure Details
Figure 9. Planting Plan
Figure 10. Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) Table of Contents page ii
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

APPENDICES CONTINUED
Appendix B. Existing Stream & Wetland Data
Table B1. Swamp Grape Morphological Stream Characteristics
Figure B1. Cross Section Locations
Existing Stream Cross-section Data
NC SAM Forms
NC WAM Forms
BEHI/NBS Data
Soil Boring Logs
Appendix C. Flood Frequency Analysis Data
Appendix D. Jurisdictional Determination Information
Appendix E. Categorical Exclusion Document
Appendix F. FEMA Coordination
Appendix G. Financial Assurance
Appendix H. Site Protection Instrument
Appendix I. Credit Release Schedule
AppendixJ. Maintenance Plan
Appendix K. IRT Post Visit Notes
Appendix L. Construction Plans
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) Table of Contents page iii
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

PROJECT INTRODUCTION
The Swamp Grape Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site (hereafter referred to as the "Site") encompasses
24.4 acres of a breached agriculture pond, disturbed forest, horse pasture, and row crops along unnamed
tributaries to Wilkinson Creek. The Site is located approximately 4 miles northwest of Rowland and 2.5
miles southwest of Alfordsville along the southwest edge of Robeson County near the North Carolina and
South Carolina border (Figures 1 and 2, Appendix A).
1.1 Directions to Site
Directions to the Site from Raleigh, North Carolina.
➢ Follow 1-40 for 29 miles,
➢ Take exit 328A to merge onto 1-95 South,
➢ After 79 miles, take exit 2 toward Rowland and turn right onto NC-130 West,
➢ After 2.5 miles, turn left onto Ashpole Church Road, then right onto Persimmon Road,
➢ After 2 miles, turn left onto Kitchen Street,
➢ The Site is on the right after approximately 0.5 mile and can be accessed from Rhein Drive.
o Site Latitude, Longitude
34.56399N,-79.34909W (WGS84)
1.2 USGS Hydrologic Unit Code and NCDWR River Basin Designation
The Site is located within Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) 03040204048010 (North Carolina Division of
Water Resources [NCDWR] subbasin number 03-07-55. The Site is not located in a Local Watershed Plan
(LWP), Regional Watershed Plan (RWP), or Targeted Resource Area (TRA) [Figures 1 and 2, Appendix A]).
Site hydrology drains to unnamed tributaries to Wilkinson Creek (Stream Index Number 14-34-11), which
has been assigned a Best Usage Classification of C, Sw (NCDWR 2013). Wilkinson Creek is not listed on the
NCDENR draft 2018 or final 2016 303(d) lists (NCDEQ 2018a, NCDEQ 2018b).
1.3 Physiography and Land Use
The Site is in the Atlantic Southern Loam Plains portion of the Southeastern Plains ecoregion of North
Carolina. Regional physiography is characterized by dissected, smooth and irregular plains; broad
interstream divides; Carolina bays; and mostly gentle side slopes dissected by many small, low to
moderate gradient sandy -bottomed streams (Griffith et al. 2002). Onsite elevations range from a high of
140 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) at the upper reaches to a low of approximately 115
feet NGVD at the Site outfall (USGS Rowland, North Carolina 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle) (Figure
3, Appendix A).
The Site provides water quality functions to watersheds ranging from approximately 0.41 square mile (263
acres) on UT2 to 1.53 square miles (977 acres) at the outfall (Figure 3, Appendix A). The watershed is
dominated by agricultural land, forest, and sparse residential development. Impervious surfaces account
for less than 2 percent of the upstream watershed land surface.
Land use at the Site is characterized by a breached agriculture ponds, row crops, livestock pasture, and
disturbed forest. The agriculture ponds were breached in August 2018 during hurricane Florence and were
in the process of being repaired for irrigation purposes when the site was identified for mitigation. Row
crops are currently soybeans, but other crops are rotated regularly. Livestock including horses, donkeys
and goats graze fields along the northern and eastern boundaries of the breached agriculture pond and
have unrestricted access to the streams.
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 1
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

1.4 Project Components and Structure
The Site encompasses 24.4 acres of drained pond, disturbed forest, and livestock pasture along unnamed
tributaries to Wilkinson Creek. In its current state, the Site includes 3941 linear feet of degraded stream
channel (based on the approved PJD), 15.9 acre of degraded wetland, 5.4 acres of drained, or otherwise
impacted hydric soil (Figure 4, Appendix A).
Proposed Site restoration activities include the construction of meandering, E/C-type stream channel
resulting in 2403 linear feet of stream restoration, 1494 linear feet of stream enhancement (Level 1), 235
linear feet of stream enhancement (Level 11), 5.32 acres of riparian wetland re-establishment, 2.73 acres
of riparian wetland rehabilitation , and 12.34 acre of riparian wetland enhancement (Table 1) (Figures 6
and 6A-6D, Appendix A).
Completed project activities, reporting history, completion dates, project contacts, and background
information are summarized in Tables 1-4.
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 2
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Swamp Grape Restoration Site
Project Segment
Existing
Footage/
Acreage
Mitigation
Plan Footage/
Acreage
Mitigation
Category
Restoration
Level
Mitigation
Ratio*
Mitigation
Credits
Comment
UT 1 Reach 1
278
297
Warm
El
2.000
148.500
UT 1 Reach 2
1063
1215
Warm
R
1.000
1215.000
UT 1 Reach 3
640
546
Warm
El
2.000
273.000
UT 1 Reach 4
250
235
Warm
Ell
3.000
78.333
UT 1 Reach 5
238
230
Warm
R
1.000
230.000
UT 1 Reach 6
170
165
Warm
El
2.000
82.500
UT 1 Reach 7
239
206
Warm
R
1.000
206.000
UT 1 Reach 8
88
87
Warm
El
2.000
43.500
UT 2 Reach 1
633
684
Warm
R
1.000
684.000
UT 2 Reach 2
193
266
Warm
El
2.000
133.000
UT 3 Reach 1
149
133
Warm
El
2.000
66.500
UT 3 Reach 2
NA
68
Warm
R
1.000
68.000
Wetland
Reestablish
__
5.322
NA
Reestablish
1.000
5.322
Wetland
Rehabilitation
2.730
2.730
NA
Rehabilitation
1.500
1.820
Wetland
Enhancement
12.336
12.336
NA
E
2.000
6.168
*Ratios for Stream Enhancement (Level I and 11) have been adjusted down to account for IRT concerns about existing function at the Site. Stream
Enhancement (Level 1) is proposed to be credited at a ratio of 2:1 and Stream Enhancement (Level 11) is proposed to be credited at a ratio of 3:1 to
account for existing stream function exhibited within the Site.
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 3
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

Table 1. Project Credits (continued)
Swamp Grape Restoration Site
Restoration Level
Stream
Riparian Wetland
Non -riparian
wetland
Coastal
Marsh
Warm
Cool
Cold
Riverine
Nonriverine
Restoration
2403.000
Re-establishment
-
5.322
Rehabilitation
--
1.820
--
Enhancement
--
6.168
--
Enhancement 1
747.000
--
Enhancement 11
78.333
--
Creation
--
Preservation
--
Totals
3228.333
--
13.310
--
--
--
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Swamp Grape Restoration Site
Activity or Deliverable
Data Collection
Complete
Completion
or Delivery
Technical Proposal
January 2019
January 2019
Institution Date
April 18, 2019
Mitigation Plan
August 2020
Construction Plans
August 2020
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 4
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Swamp Grape Restoration Site
Role
Firm
Restoration Systems
Full Delivery Provider,
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211
Planting Contractor,
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
General Contractor
Raymond Holz
919-755-9490
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Designer
Raleigh, NC 27603
Grant Lewis
919-215-1693
The John R. McAdams Company, Inc.
2905 Meridian Parkway
Engineer
Durham, NC 27713
Rebecca Stubbs
336-339-1648
k2 Design Group
5688 U.S. Hwy. 70 East
Surveyor
Goldsboro, NC 27534
John Rudolph (L-4194)
919-394-2547
Table 4. Project Attribute Table
Swamp Grape Restoration Site
Project Information
Project Name
Swamp Grape Restoration Site
Project County
Robeson County, North Carolina
Project Area (acres)
24.4
Project Coordinates (latitude & latitude)
34.5639,-79.3490
Planted Area (acres)
22.5
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province
Atlantic Southern Loam Plains
Project River Basin
Lumber
USGS HUC for Project (14-digit)
03040204048010
NCDWR Sub -basin for Project
03-07-55
Project Drainage Area (acres)
977.0
Percentage of Project Drainage Area that is
Impervious
<2%
CGIA Land Use Classification
Managed Herbaceous Cover & Hardwood Swamps
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 5
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

Table 4. Project Attribute Table (continued)
Swamp Grape Restoration Site
Reach Summary Information
Parameters
UT 1 Upstream
UT 1 Downstream
UT 2
UT 3
Length of reach (linear feet)
1293
1673
826
149
Valley Classification &
Wide and flat alluvial valley
Confinement
Drainage Area (acres)
192
977
263
392
NCDWR Stream ID Score
--
--
--
--
Perennial, Intermittent,
Perennial
Perennial
Perennial
Perennial
Ephemeral
NCDWR Water Quality
Classification
C, Sw
Existing Morphological
Description (Rosgen 1996)
F 5
Eg 5
Cg 5
Eg 5
Proposed Stream Classification
(Rosgen 1996)
Ce 5
Ce 5
Ce 5
Ce 5
Existing Evolutionary Stage
III/IV
V
V
III/IV
(Simon and Hupp 1986)
Underlying Mapped Soils
Bibb Soils
Drainage Class
Poorly drained
Hydric Soil Status
Hydric
Valley Slope
0.0062
0.0036
0.0042
0.0125
FEMA Classification
NA
Zone AE
NA
NA
Cypress -Gum Swamp (Brownwater Subtype) and Coastal Plain Small Stream
Native Vegetation Community
Swamp (Brownwater Subtype)
Watershed Land Use/Land
15% agriculture land, 84% disturbed swamp forest, <1% low density
Cover (Site)
residential/impervious surface
Watershed Land Use/Land
McRae - 40% agriculture, 35% forest, 5% low density residential/impervious
surface
Cover (McRae and Jordan Cr
Jordan Cr - 70% agriculture, 28% forest, 2% low density residential/impervious
Reference Channel)
surface
Percent Composition of Exotic
Invasive Vegetation
<5%
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 6
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

Table 4. Project Attribute Table (continued)
Swamp Grape Restoration Site
Wetland Summary Information
Parameters
Wetlands
Wetland acreage
5.32 acre drained/impacted & 15.07 acre degraded
Wetland Type
Riparian riverine
Mapped Soil Series
Bibb
Drainage Class
Poorly drained
Hydric Soil Status
Hydric
Source of Hydrology
Groundwater, stream overbank
Hydrologic Impairment
Impoundment, incised streams, compacted soils, livestock,
ditches
Native Vegetation Community
Cypress -Gum Swamp (Brownwater Subtype) and Coastal Plain
Small Stream Swamp (Brownwater Subtype)
% Composition of Exotic Invasive Vegetation
<5%
Restoration Method
Hydrologic, vegetative, livestock
Enhancement Method
Vegetative, livestock
Regulatory Considerations
Regulation
Applicable?
Resolved?
Supporting Documentation
Waters of the United States -Section 401
Yes
Yes
Section 401 Certification
Waters of the United States -Section 404
Yes
Yes
Section 404 Permit
Endangered Species Act
Yes
Yes
CE Document (App E)
Historic Preservation Act
Yes
Yes
CE Document (App E)
Coastal Zone Management Act
No
NA
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
Yes
Yes
DMS FEMA Checklist (App F)
Essential Fisheries Habitat
No
NA
2 WATERSHED APPROACH AND SITE SELECTION
Primary considerations for Site selection included the potential for improvement of water quality within
a region of North Carolina under livestock/agricultural pressure. More specifically, considerations
included: desired aquatic resource functions; hydrologic conditions; soil characteristics; aquatic habitat
diversity; habitat connectivity; compatibility with adjacent land uses; reasonably foreseeable effects the
mitigation project will have on ecologically important aquatic and terrestrial resources; and potential
development trends and land use changes.
Currently, the proposed Site is characterized as a drained pond surrounded by disturbed forest and
livestock pasture. A summary of existing Site characteristics in favor of proposed stream and wetland
activities include the following.
• Streams and wetlands are accessible to livestock
• Streams and wetlands subject to ditching/dredging and incision
• Streams and wetlands have been cleared of forest vegetation
• Streams and wetlands were impounded
• Site receives nonpoint source inputs including agricultural chemicals and livestock waste
• Wetland soils have been compacted by livestock and agricultural equipment
• Wetland hydrology has been removed by stream channel entrenchment
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 7
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

In addition to the opportunity for ecological improvements at the Site, the use of the particular mitigation
activities and methods proposed in the Design Approach & Mitigation Work Plan (Section 8.0) are
expected to produce naturalized stream and wetland resources that will be ecologically self-sustaining,
requiring minimal long-term management (Long-term Management Plan [Section 11.0]).
The Lumber River Basin Restoration Priorities 2008 (RBRP) report (NCEEP 2008) documents restoration
goals developed for the Lumber River Basin. The RBRP report documents restoration goals for the
03040204 catalog unit include buffering waterways and implementation of stormwater and agricultural
BMPs. Site specific mitigation goals and objectives have been developed through the use of North Carolina
Stream Assessment Method (NC SAM) and North Carolina Wetland Assessment Method (NC WAM) and
are discussed further in Section 6.0 (Functional Uplift and Project Goals/Objectives).
3 BASELINE AND EXISTING CONDITIONS
3.1 Soils and Land Form
Soils that occur within the Site, according to the Web Soil Survey (USDA 2020) are described in Table 5.
Table 5. Web Soil Survev Soils Manned within the Site
Map
Map Unit Name
Unit
(Classification)
Hydric Status
Description
Symbol
This series consists of well -drained soils found on
Aycock very fine
broad interstream divides and flats on marine
AyA
sandy loam
Non-hydric
terraces with 0-2 percent slopes. The parent material
(Typic Paleudults)
is loamy and silty marine deposits. Depth to the
water table is 48-72 inches. Depth to restrictive
features is more than 80 inches.
This series consists of poorly drained soils found on
Bibb soils
floodplains with 0-2 percent slopes. The parent
BB
(Typic
Hydric
material is sandy and loamy alluvium. Depth to the
Fluvaquents)
water table is 0-12 inches. Depth to restrictive
features is more than 80 inches.
This series consists of well -drained soils found on
Faceville fine sandy
ridges on marine terraces with 2-6 percent slopes.
FaB
loam
Non-hydric
The parent material is clayey marine deposit. Depth
(Typic Kandiudults)
to the water table and depth to the restrictive
features is more than 80 inches.
This series consists of well -drained soils found on
Wagram loamy
broad interstream divides and ridges on marine
WaB,
sand
Non hydric
terraces with 0-10 percent slopes. The parent
WaC
(Arenic
material is loamy marine deposits. Depth to the
Kandiudults)
water table is 60-80 inches. Depth to restrictive
features is more than 80 inches.
The Web Soil Survey (USDA 2020) indicates the Site is mapped as Bibb soils with Wagram soils on the Side
slopes. The Web Soil Survey mapping depicts the Site as impounded; however, the impoundment was
breached during past hurricanes. Floodplain portions of the Site were confirmed as Bibb soils with impacts
from sediment deposition in the pond and liquification/sloughing along side -slopes of the historic
impoundment. Seepage slopes encroach upon the Wagram soils which indicate that Bibb soils, or other
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 8
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

hydric unmapped soils extend up the valley walls. These soils have been present for some time, as
evidenced by drain tile extending up to agriculture fields.
Detailed soil profiles collected by a licensed soil scientist appear to confirm that Site soils are hydric in
nature and are characterized by F3 (depleted matrix) hydric soil indicators. The F3 indicator includes soils
with 60 percent or more chroma 2 or less within the upper 6 inches or starting within the upper 10 inches
of the soil profile.
3.2 Sediment Model
Sediment load modeling was performed using methodologies outlined in A Practical Method of
Computing Streambank Erosion Rate (Rosgen 2009) along with Estimating Sediment Loads using the Bank
Assessment of Non -point Sources Consequences of Sediment (Rosgen 2011). These models provide a
quantitative prediction of streambank erosions by calculating Bank Erosion Hazard Index (BEHI) and Near -
Bank Stress (NBS) along each Site reach. The resulting BEHI and NBS values are then compared to
streambank erodibility graphs prepared for North Carolina by the NC Stream Restoration Institute and NC
Sea Grant.
Streambank characteristics involve measurements of bank height, angles, materials, presence of layers,
rooting depth, rooting density, and percent of the bank protected by rocks, logs, roots, or vegetation. Site
reaches have been measured for each BEHI and NBS characteristic and predicted lateral erosion rate,
height, and length to calculate a cubic volume of sediment contributed by the reach each year. Data forms
for the analysis are available upon request and the data output is presented in Appendix B. Results of the
model are presented in Table 6.
Table 6. BEHI and NBS Modeling Summary
Stream Reach
Proposed Mitigation Treatment
Predicted Sediment
Contribution (tons/year)
UT 1
Restoration and Enhancement (Level I and 11)
241.0
UT 2
Restoration and Enhancement (Level I and 11)
2.0
UT 3
Restoration and Enhancement (Level I and 11)
1.1
Total Sediment Contribution
(tons/year)
244.0
Based on this analysis, mitigation of Site streams will reduce streambank erosion and subsequent
pollution of receiving waters.
3.3 Nutrient Model
Nutrient modeling was conducted using a method developed by North Carolina Division of Mitigation
Services (NCDMS) (NCDMS 2016) to determine nutrient and fecal coliform reductions from exclusion of
livestock from the buffer.
The equation for nutrient reduction for this model includes the following:
TN reduction (Ibs/yr) = 51.04 (Ibs/ac/yr) x Area (ac)
TP reduction (Ibs/yr) = 4.23 (Ibs/ac/yr) x Area (ac)
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 9
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

Where:
TN —total nitrogen;
TP —total phosphorus; and
Area —total area of restored riparian buffers inside of livestock exclusion fences.
Equations for fecal coliform reduction for this model include the following.
Fecal coliform reduction (col) = 2.2 x 1011 (col/AU/day) x AU x 0.085
Where:
Col - quantities of Fecal Coliform bacteria
AU - animal unit (1000 Ibs of livestock)
Results of the NCDMS analysis indicate approximately 5 acres of easement are grazed by livestock, which
contribute 255.2 Ibs/yr of nitrogen, 21.2 Ibs/yr of phosphorus, and 0.1 x 1011 col of fecal coliform/day that
will be reduced due to exclusion of livestock from the easement area. Fecal coliform values have been
based on two goats, a small donkey, and a horse.
3.4 Project Site Streams
Streams targeted for restoration include unnamed tributaries to Wilkinson Creek, which have been
cleared, impounded, dredged and straightened, trampled by livestock, eroded vertically and laterally, and
receive extensive sediment and nutrient inputs from agriculture activities. Approximately 38 percent of
the existing stream channel has been degraded contributing to sediment export from the Site resulting
from mechanical processes from ditching of streams, clearing of vegetation, and liquification from
impoundment. In addition, streamside wetlands have been cleared and drained by channel downcutting,
drain tile installation, and land uses. Current Site conditions have resulted in degraded water quality, a
loss of aquatic habitat, reduced nutrient and sediment retention, and unstable channel characteristics
(loss of horizontal flow vectors that maintain pools and an increase in erosive forces to channel bed and
banks). Site restoration activities including re-establishing buffers, excluding livestock, and restoring
stream channels will restore riffle -pool morphology, aid in energy dissipation, increase aquatic habitat,
stabilize channel banks, and greatly reduce sediment loss from channel banks.
3.4.1 Existing Conditions Survey
Site stream dimension, pattern, and profile were measured to characterize existing channel conditions.
Locations of existing stream reaches are depicted in Figure 4 (Appendix A). Stream geometry
measurements under existing conditions are summarized in Table 7 (Essential Morphology Parameters)
and presented in detail in Table B1 (Appendix B).
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 10
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

Table 7. Essential Morphology Parameters
Parameter
Existing
Reference
Proposed
UT 1
UT 2
UT3
Jordan Cr
a McRe
Land a
UT 1
UT 2
UT3
Valley Width (ft)
100-150
150
150
250
75
100-150
150
150
Contributing Drainage Area (sq. mi.)
1.53
0.41
0.61
16.9
0.20
1.53
0.41
0.61
Channel/Reach Classification
Eg5 - F5
Cg5
Eg5
E5
E5
Ce 5
Ce 5
Ce 5
Design Discharge Width (ft)
5.2-20.3
6.9-7.9
6.8-8.8
20.1-21.5
5.4-6.6
6.8-14.4
7.7-8.9
8.9-10.3
Design Discharge Depth (ft)
0.2-1.3
0.6-0.7
0.7-1.0
2.1-2.2
0.8
0.5-1.0
0.6
0.6-0.7
Design Discharge Area (ftz)
3.9-12.9
4.9
6.6
44.9
4.8
3.9-12.9
4.9
6.6
Design Discharge Velocity (ft/s)
0.9
0.9
0.9
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
Design Discharge (cfs)
3.5-12.1
4.5
6.1
44.3
4.3
3.5-12.1
4.5
6.1
Water Surface Slope
0.0028-
0.0061
0.0041
0.0077
0.0008
0.0077
0.0031-
0.0054
0.0035
0.0039
Sinuosity
1.01-1.3
1.02
1.17
1.60
1.13
1.15
1.15
1.15
Width/Depth Ratio
6.5-88
9.9-13.2
6.8-12.6
9.1-10.2
6.8-8.3
14.0
14.0
14.0
Bank Height Ratio
1.0-6.6
1.1-1.4
1.4-1.7
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Entrenchment Ratio
1.0-14.7
6.7-10.9
3.1-5.1
11.6-12.4
11.4-13.9
7.3-19.0
13-22.6
11.2-19.5
Substrate
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115)
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site
Robeson County, North Carolina
page 11
Restoration Systems, LLC
September 2020

3.4.2 Channel Classification and Morphology
Stream geometry and substrate data have been evaluated to classify existing stream conditions based on
a classification utilizing fluvial geomorphic principles (Rosgen 1996). Existing Site reaches are classified as
unstable F, Eg-, and Cg-type streams with variable sinuosity. Existing Site reaches are characterized by
sand substrate.
3.4.3 Channel Evolution
Site streams targeted for restoration have been cleared of forest vegetation, channelized, and impounded
resulting primarily in channels classified as channelized (Class III), degraded (Class IV), and aggraded and
widened (Class V) channels throughout the Site (Simon and Hupp 1986).
3.4.4 Valley Classification
Site Streams are characterized by moderately sized, second order, wide and flat alluvial valley with
approximately 100-foot floodplain valley width. Valley slopes are typical for the Coastal Plain region and
range from 0.0036 to 0.0062. UT 3 has a short valley that is characterized by a slope of 0.0125; however,
this is artificially elevated by a combination of short reach, an offsite dam, and sediment deposits on the
breached pond margins. Valley slopes in UT 3 should not hinder proposed water surface slopes, which are
expected to be 0.0039 upon completion of the project.
3.4.5 Discharge
This hydrophysiographic region is characterized by moderate rainfall with precipitation averaging
approximately 45.6 inches per year (USDA 1987). Drainage basin sizes range from 0.41-square mile on
UT2, and 1.53 square miles at the Site outfall.
The Site's discharge is dominated by a combination of upstream basin catchment, groundwater flow, and
precipitation. Based on indicators of bankfull at reference reaches and on -Site, the designed channel will
equal the channel size indicated by Coastal Plain regional curves (Sweet et al. 2003); this is discussed in
Section 5.2 (Bankfull Verification). Based on bankfull studies, the bankfull discharge ranges from 4.5-12.1
cubic feet per second for UT2 and the Site outfall, respectively.
3.5 Project Site Wetlands
Jurisdictional wetlands/hydric soils within the Site were delineated in the field following guidelines
set forth in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual and subsequent regional supplements
and located using GPS technology with reported submeter accuracy (Environmental Laboratory
1987). Ajurisdictional wetland delineation was completed and verbally approved by United States
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) representative Gary Beecher during a field meeting on June 9,
2020. At this time Mr. Beecher has not given us the tear sheet, but has provided email
approval of the delineation, included with the PJD in Appendix D, and the package will be
updated upon receipt from the USACE. Existing jurisdictional wetlands are depicted in light blue
cross hatch and drained hydric soils are depicted in yellow on Figure 4 (Appendix A).
3.5.1 Groundwater Model
For this study, the Boussinesq equation was utilized to predict groundwater impacts associated with
stream incision within the middle reaches of UT 1 (Reach 3) and the lower reaches of UT 2 and 3. These
reaches are currently incised to a depth of 2.0 to 2.8 feet based on measured cross sectional
data. Proposed channel depths are expected to be approximately 0.7 to 1.2 feet.
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 12
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

The Boussinesq equation was applied to Site streams to predict the linear distance of groundwater
drawdown that exceeds 1 foot for 12-percent of the growing season. The percentage of the growing
season (12 percent) was selected based upon guidance from the Wilmington District Stream and Wetland
Compensatory Mitigation Update (IRT 2016).
Results from the Boussinesq equation predicted lateral effects; results of the Boussinesq equation are
summarized in Table 8.
Table 8. Results for Boussinesa Eauation
Depth to
Soil
Ditch Depth
Aquaclude
Ksat (cm/hr)
Growing
Drainable
Ditch Impact
(ft)
Season (hrs)
Porosity (cm)
(ft)
(cm)
1
152
5.08
533
0.0433
3
2
152
5.08
533
0.0433
78
Bibb
3
152
5.08
533
0.0433
104
4
152
5.08
533
0.0433
118
5
152
5.08
533
0.0433
120
To verify the Bousinesq equation results, groundwater gauges were nested at distances of 10, 20, and 45
feet from the incised channels. These gauges will record groundwater depth for approximately 1 year
prior to construction activities. Depth to water table was noted in each gauge boring hole and additional
mapping within the reach was conducted to ascertain model accuracy. Field review and boring data
indicates the model slightly overpredicts drainage effects, with a 2-foot channel draining approximately
50 feet in the farthest extent. Mapping of the drainage effect was updated and is depicted in Figure 6
(Appendix A).
3.5.2 Hydrological Characterization
Construction activities are expected to reestablish approximately 5.32 acre of drained/impacted riparian
hydric soils, rehabilitate 2.73 acres of riparian wetlands, and enhance 12.34 acre of cleared riparian
wetlands. Areas of the Site targeted for riparian wetlands will receive hydrological inputs from periodic
overbank flooding of restored tributaries, groundwater migration into wetlands, upland/stormwater
runoff, and, to a lesser extent, direct precipitation. Hydrological impairment in drained soils has resulted
from lateral draw -down of the water table adjacent to existing, incised stream channels, ditches, and/or
drain tile installation. Other areas of hydric soil impairment result from overburden from dam, road, or
pond construction.
3.5.3 Soil Characterization
Detailed soil mapping conducted by a North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist (NCLSS) in late 2019 and early
2020 indicate that the Site is currently underlain by hydric soils of the Bibb series (Figure 4, Appendix A).
Soils have been disturbed by impoundment, livestock grazing, vegetation clearing, and conversion to
pastureland. Soils in the historic impoundment are characterized by sedimentation associated with valley
wall liquification and sloughing, as well as from improper sediment transport capacity. Dense herbaceous
vegetation is colonizing the historic pond bed and trapping the sediment on the floodplain.
Areas upstream of the historic pond bed have been drained by ditching, drain tile installation, and channel
incision. A portion of these soils have been effectively drained; however, seeps and springs (as well as
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 13
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

collapsed drain tile) pockmark the area and are expected to have hydrology enhanced by proposed
activities.
Hydric soils within the historic pond bed are experiencing a drainage effect along the newly formed flow
path following the breach of the dam. These hydric soils have also been partially buried in some areas as
the result of sediment, mostly coarse sand, dropping out as the stream entered the former pond. This is
particularly evident along the margins and upper extents of the former pond where streams entered the
former pond. The soils in the historic pond are mapped as the Bibb series; however extended inundation
has caused a build-up of organic material resulting in a mineral subsoil with a mucky modifier. Likewise
the surface horizon in some areas is sand rather than the normally associated sandy loam due to the lack
of sediment transport and aggradation from the adjacent stream channel.
Onsite hydric soils are grey to gley in color and are predominantly associated with the F3-Depleted Matrix
hydric soil field indicator. Eight detailed soil profiles conducted by a NCLSS are as follows; the location of
these profiles are representatives of soils throughout the project (Figure 4 Appendix A).
Table 9. Representative Soil Profile Descriptions
Location
Mitigation
Depth (inches)
Color Texture
Approach
0-3
10 YR 3/2 Sandy Loam
10 YR 4/2
Soil Profile GA-01 from
PJD package (area
Rehabilitation
3-8
10 YR 3/2 mottles Clay loam
upstream of historic
10 YR 4/6 mottles
pond)
10 YR 4/1
10 YR 4/6 mottles Clay
Soil Profile T (Partially
0 - 12
10 YR 7/1 Sand
buried hydric soil
within historic pond
Rehabilitation
10 YR 2/1
bed and subject to
12 — 20+
10 YR 4/6 mottles Mucky sandy loam
drainage effect)
N 4/ mottles
Soil Profile J (Partially
0-6
10 YR 7/1 Sand
buried hydric soil
Enhancement
10 YR 2/1
within historic and
p
6 —15+
10 YR 4/6 mottles Mucky sandy loam
bed)
N 4/ mottles
4 REFERENCE STUDIES
4.1 Reference Streams
Distinct bankfull indicators were present within the reference stream channels. In addition, dimension,
pattern, and profile variables have not been altered or degraded, allowing for assistance with the
proposed restoration reaches (Figure 5A-B, Appendix A).
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 14
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

4.1.1 McCrea Land Company Reference Reach
4.1.1.1 Watershed Characterization
The McCrea Land Company Reference Site is located in western Robeson County within the same
physiographic province and similar landscape position as the Site. The reference reach is approximately 5
miles north of the Site in a topographic crenulation flowing to a significantly larger stream (Heel Creek).
Alterations, development, and impervious surfaces within the watershed are minimal.
4.1.1.2 Channel Classification
Stream geometry and substrate data have been evaluated to classify the reference reach based on a
classification utilizing fluvial geomorphic principles (Rosgen 1996a). This classification stratifies streams
into comparable groups based on pattern, dimension, profile, and substrate characteristics. The reference
reach is characterized as an E-type, moderately sinuous (1.13) channel with a sand -dominated substrate.
Reference reaches that are characterized by E-type channels typically have a dense herbaceous
understory that resists erosive forces associated with deep, sinuous channels.
4.1.1.3 Discharge
The reference stream has an approximately 0.20-square mile watershed and a bankfull discharge of 4.3
cubic feet per second based on bankfull indicators.
4.1.1.4 Channel Morphology
Stream cross -sections and profiles were measured along the reference stream (Figure 5A, Appendix A).
The stream reach is transporting its sediment supply while maintaining stable dimension, pattern, and
profile. Stream geometry measurements for the reference stream are summarized in the Morphological
Stream Characteristics Table (Table 131).
Dimension: Data collected at the reference reach indicates a bankfull cross -sectional area of 4.8 square
feet, a bankfull width of 6.0 feet, a bankfull depth of 0.8 feet, and a width -to -depth ratio of 7.5. Regional
curves predict that the stream should exhibit a bankfull cross -sectional area of approximately 2.8 square
feet for the approximate 0.20-square mile watershed (Sweet and Geratz 2003), above the 4.8-square feet
displayed by channel bankfull indicators identified in the field. For a more detailed discussion on bankfull
verification see Section 3.5 (Bankfull Verification).
The reference reach exhibits a bank -height ratio averaging 1.0. In addition, the width of the floodprone
area is approximately 75 feet giving the channel an entrenchment ratio of 11.4 to 13.9, typical of a stable
E-type channel.
Pattern: In -field measurements of the reference reach have yielded an average sinuosity of 1.13 (thalweg
distance/straight-line distance). Other channel pattern attributes include an average pool -to -pool spacing
ratio (Lp_p/Wbkf) of 3.5, a meander wavelength ratio (L,n/Wbkf) of 5.9, and a radius of curvature ratio
(Rc/Wbkf) of 1.1. These variables were measured within a stable, forested reach, which did not exhibit any
indications of pattern instability such as shoot cutoffs, abandoned channels, or oxbows.
Profile: Based on elevational profile surveys, the reference reach is characterized by a valley slope of
0.0087 (rise/run). Ratios of the reference reach riffle, run, pool, and glide slopes to average water surface
slope are 0.30, 0.78, 0.30, and 0.03, respectively.
Substrate: The channel is characterized by a channel substrate dominated by sand -sized particles.
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 15
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

4.1.2 Jordan Creek Reference Reach
4.1.2.1 Watershed Characterization
Jordan Creek is located approximately 17 miles north of the Site, in Central Scotland County. This
reference reach is located in the same physiographic province and landscape setting. However, the
channel is significantly larger than Site tributaries. The comparison of a small and large drainage area will
assist in development of appropriate Site design parameters using dimensionless ratios (see Table B-1
(Appendix B) Morphological Stream Characteristics. Dimensionless ratios allow for comparison of smaller
and larger streams (see ratio variables presented in Table B-1).
4.1.2.2 Channel Classification
The reference reach is characterized as an E-type, high sinuosity (1.60) channel with a sand -dominated
substrate.
4.1.2.3 Discharge
The reference stream has an approximately 16.9-square mile watershed and a bankfull discharge of 44.3
cubic feet per second based on bankfull indicators.
4.1.2.4 Channel Morphology
Stream cross -sections and profiles were measured along the reference stream (Figure 513, Appendix A).
The stream reach is transporting its sediment supply while maintaining stable dimension, pattern, and
profile. Stream geometry measurements for the reference stream are summarized in the Morphological
Stream Characteristics Table (Table B1, Appendix B).
Dimension: Data collected at the reference reach indicates a bankfull cross -sectional area of 44.9 square
feet, a bankfull width of 20.8 feet, a bankfull depth of 2.2 feet, and a width -to -depth ratio of 9.7. Regional
curves predict that the stream should exhibit a bankfull cross -sectional area of approximately 76.4 square
feet for the approximate 16.9-square mile watershed (Sweet and Geratz 2003), below the 44.9-square
feet displayed by channel bankfull indicators identified in the field. Low bankfull cross sectional area may
result from high bedload and low slope conditions for the Site; however, these conditions appear to be in
equilibrium as the channel width -to -depth ratio is typical for the area. For a more detailed discussion on
bankfull verification see Section 3.5 (Bankfull Verification).
The reference reach exhibits a bank -height ratio of 1.0, which is representative of a stable E-type channel.
In addition, the width of the floodprone area is approximately 250 feet giving the channel an
entrenchment ratio of 11.6-12.4, typical of a stable E-type channel.
Pattern: In -field measurements of the reference reach have yielded an average sinuosity of 1.60 (thalweg
distance/straight-line distance). Other channel pattern attributes include an average pool -to -pool spacing
ratio (Lp_p/Wbkf) of 4.3, a meander wavelength ratio (L,n/Wbkf) of 5.5, and a radius of curvature ratio
(Rc/Wbkf) of 1.3. These variables were measured within a stable, forested reach, which did not exhibit any
indications of pattern instability such as shoot cutoffs, abandoned channels, or oxbows.
Profile: Based on elevational profile surveys, the reference reach is characterized by a valley slope of
0.0013 (rise/run). Ratios of the reference reach riffle, run, pool, and glide slopes to average water surface
slope are 1.1, 0.8, 3.5, and 0, respectively.
Substrate: The channel is characterized by a channel substrate dominated by sand -sized particles.
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 16
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

4.2 Reference Forest Ecosystem
A Reference Forest Ecosystem (RFE) is a forested area on which to model restoration efforts at the Site in
relation to soils and vegetation. RFEs should be ecologically stable climax communities and should be a
representative model of the Site as it likely existed prior to human disturbances. Data describing plant
community composition and structure should be collected at the RFEs and subsequently applied as
reference data in an attempt to emulate a natural climax community.
The RFEs for this project are located on the two reference reaches and the downstream floodplain of
Wilkinson Creek. The RFEs support plant community and landform characteristics that restoration efforts
will attempt to emulate. Tree and shrub species identified within the reference forest and outlined in
Table 10 will be used, in addition to other relevant species in appropriate Schafale and Weakley (1990)
community descriptions.
i ame iv. rcererence rorest tcosystem
Cypress -Gum Swamp Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp
(Brownwater Subtvoe) (Brownwater Subtvoe)
Nyssa aquatica
Taxodium distichum
Nyssa biflora
Nyssa aquatica
Taxodium distichum
Quercus michauxii
Salix nigra
Quercus shumardii
Populus herophylla
Quercus pagoda
Carya aquatica
Quercus laurifolia
Fraxinus caroliniana
Quercus nigra
Celtus laevigata
Platanus ocidentalis
Betula nigra
Salix nigra
Nyssa biflora
Liriodendron tulipifera
The cypress -gum swamp (brownwater subtype) vegetative community is proposed for the downstream
areas adjoining the larger floodplain of Wilkinson Creek. These are the lowest and wettest portion of the
floodplain. This vegetative community is slow to recover from disturbance and due to inundation and poor
nutrients is typically characterized by slow growth of tree species.
This community grades upstream to the Coastal Plain small stream swamp vegetative community, but the
boundary is indistinct and arbitrary. The Site should be classified as a blackwater subtype; however,
sediment washing from upstream agriculture operations makes the system function more typical of a
brownwater subtype community. Significant overlap in these two communities should not pose a problem
as species in both communities may be planted in the overlap.
4.3 Freshwater Marsh
Some portions of the Site are expected to be dominated by an open, herbaceous vegetative community
characteristic of a Coastal Plain semipermanent impoundment as described in Schafale and Weakley
(1990). Overbank flooding appears to occur and may result in extended periods of open water and
emergent vegetation. Species listed in Table 11 below will be included in permanent seeding mix for
stabilization.
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 17
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

Table 11. Freshwater Marsh Ecosystem
Freshwater Marsh — Coastal Plain Semi -permanent Impoundment
Poygonum spp.
Limnobium spongia
Peltandra virginica
Nymphoides spp.
Nymphaea odorata
Potamogeton spp.
Nuphar lutea
Utricularia spp.
Ceratophyllum spp.
Pontederia cordata
Myriophyllum spp.
Sagittaria spp.
Lemna spp.
Cephalanthus occidentalis
Egeria densa
Rosa palustris
Elodea spp.
Decodon verticillantus
5 CHANNEL ASSESSMENTS
5.1 Channel Stability Assessment
Channel degradation or aggradation occurs when hydraulic forces exceed or do not approach the resisting
forces in the channel. The amount of degradation or aggradation is a function of relative magnitude of
these forces over time. The interaction of flow within the boundary of open channels is only imperfectly
understood. Adequate analytical expressions describing this interaction have yet to be developed for
conditions in natural channels. Thus, means of characterizing these processes rely heavily upon empirical
formulas.
Traditional approaches for characterizing stability can be placed in one of two categories: 1) maximum
permissible velocity and 2) tractive force, or stream power and shear stress. The former is advantageous
in that velocity can be measured directly. Shear stress and stream power cannot be measured directly and
must be computed from various flow parameters. However, stream power and shear stress are generally
better measures of fluid force on the channel boundary than velocity.
Stream power and shear stress were estimated for 1) existing dredged and straightened reaches, 2) the
reference reaches, and 3) proposed Site conditions. Important input values and output results (including
stream power, shear stress, and per unit shear power and shear stress) are presented in Table 10. Average
stream velocity and bankfull discharge values were calculated for the existing Site stream reaches, the
reference reach, and proposed conditions.
In order to maintain sediment transport functions of a stable stream system, the proposed channel should
exhibit stream power and shear stress values so the channel is neither aggrading nor degrading. Results
of the analysis indicate the proposed channel reaches are expected to maintain stream power as a
function of width values of approximately 0.12-0.17 and shear stress values of approximately 0.11-0.16
(Table 12).
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 18
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

Table 12. Stream Power (92) and Shear Stress (,r) Values
Bankfull
Discharge
g
3
(ft /s)
Water
surface
Slope
(ft/ft)
Total
Stream
PowerW
U
Hydraulic
Radius
Shear
Stress
(�)
Velocity
(v)
ti v
Cmax
Existing Conditions
UT 1- Upstream
3.5
0.0061
1.33
0.10
4.12
1.57
0.06
0.10
2.35
UT 1- Downstream
12.1
0.0028
2.11
0.17
1.55
0.27
0.54
0.15
0.41
UT 2
4.5
0.0041
1.15
0.15
0.86
0.22
0.60
0.13
0.33
UT 3
6.1
0.0077
2.93
0.38
0.85
0.41
0.74
0.31
0.62
Reference Conditions
McRae Land Co.
14.3
10.0077
12.07
10.34
10.63
10.30
10.90
10.27
0.46
Jordan Cr
144.3
10.0008
12.21
10.11
11.78
10.09
10.99
10.09
0.13
Proposed Conditions
UT 1- Upstream
3.5
0.0054
1.18
0.16
0.46
0.16
0.90
0.14
0.23
UT 1- Downstream
12.1
0.0031
2.34
0.17
0.84
0.16
0.94
0.15
0.24
UT 3
4.5
0.0035
0.98
0.12
0.52
0.11
0.92
0.10
0.17
UT 3
6.1
0.0039
1.48
0.15
0.60
0.15
0.92
0.13
0.22
McRae Land Company reference reach values for stream power and shear stress are higher due to steeper
valley and water surface slopes resulting in higher stream power and shear stress values. Jordan Creek
reference reach values for stream power and shear stress are slightly lower due to flatter valley and water
surface slopes resulting in slightly lower stream power and shear stress values.
Existing, Site streams are characterized by a wide range of water surface slopes and varying degrees of
degradation. In general, stream power values of existing streams are elevated compared to proposed
values. Shear stress values of existing streams are significantly elevated as compared to proposed and
reference reach values. Proposed stream power and shear stress values appear adequate to mobilize and
transport sediment through the Site, without aggradation or erosion on proposed stream banks.
5.2 Bankfull Verification
Discharge estimates for the Site utilize an assumed definition of "bankfull" and the return interval
associated with that bankfull discharge. For this study, the bankfull channel is defined as the channel
dimensions designed to support the "channel forming" or "dominant" discharge (Gordon et al. 1992).
Current research also estimates a bankfull discharge would be expected to occur approximately every 0.1
to 0.3 years (Geratz et al. 2003). This is much shorter than previous state and nationwide estimates in
other ecoregions of approximately every 1.3 to 1.5 years (Rosgen 1996, Leopold 1994). The shortened
recurrence interval may be attributed to precipitation inputs onto wide, nearly level land with a large
surface storage capacity, an elevated water table, and slow flushing rates (Geratz et al. 2003)
Based on available Coastal Plain regional curves, the predicted bankfull discharge for the McRae Land
Company and Jordan Creek Reference Reaches is 2.5 and 75.4 cubic feet per second (cfs) for the reference
reaches (Sweet and Geratz 2003).
Field indicators of bankfull, primarily topographic breaks identified on the banks, and riffle cross -sections
were utilized to obtain an average bankfull cross -sectional area for the reference reaches. The Coastal
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 19
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

Plain regional curves were then utilized to plot the watershed area and discharge for the reference reach
cross -sectional area. Field indicators of bankfull approximate an average discharge of 4.3 and 44.3 cfs,
respectively for the for the McRae Land Company and Jordan Creek Reference Reaches, which is 59 and
170 percent of that predicted by the regional curves.
The USGS regional regression equation for the Coastal Plain region indicates that bankfull discharge at a
0.1-0.3 year return interval averages approximately 2-5 and 40-90 cfs, respectively (USGS 2006); similar
to that predicted by bankfull indicators.
Based on the above analysis of methods to determine bankfull discharge, proposed conditions at the Site
will be based on reference reaches. Indicators of bankfull were used at the reference reaches to compare
the bankfull cross -sectional area to that predicted by the curves. The designed onsite channel restoration
area has been calculated using field indicators of bankfull at the reference reaches (average value) and
bankfull indicators identified at the Site. This analysis indicates that design bankfull cross sectional area
will equal 115 percent of the channel size indicated by Coastal Plain regional curves. Table 13 summarizes
all methods analyzed for estimating bankfull discharge.
Table 13. Reference Reach Bankfull Discharge Analysis
Method
Watershed Area
Return Interval
Discharge
(square miles)
(years)
(cfs)
McRea Land Company Reference Reach
Coastal Plain Regional Curves
(Sweet and Geratz 2003)
0.2
0.1 0.3
2.5
Coastal Plain Regional Regression Model
(USGS 2004)
0.2
0.1 0.3
2-5
Field Indicators of Bankfull (Coastal Plain
Regional Curves, Sweet and Geratz 2003)
0.2
0.1 0.3
4.3
Jordan Creek Reference Reach
Coastal Plain Regional Curves
(Sweet and Geratz 2003)
16.9
0.1 0.3
75.4
Coastal Plain Regional Regression Model
(USGS 2004)
16.9
0.1-0.3
40-90
Field Indicators of Bankfull (Coastal Plain
Regional Curves, Sweet and Geratz 2003)
16.9
0.1-0.3
44.3
6 FUNCTIONAL UPLIFT AND PROJECT GOALS/OBJECTIVES
Project goals are based on the Lumbar River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) report (NCEEP 2008) and
on -site data collection of channel morphology and function observed during field investigations. The Site
is located within Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) 03040204048010 (Figure 2, Appendix A). The RBRP
report documents restoration goals for the 03040204 cataloging unit include buffering waterways and
implementation of stormwater and agricultural BMPs.
Site specific mitigation goals and objectives have been developed through the use of North Carolina
Stream Assessment Method (NC SAM) and North Carolina Wetland Assessment Method (NC WAM)
analyses of existing and reference stream systems at the Site (NC SFAT 2015 and NC WFAT 2010). These
methodologies rate functional metrics for streams and wetlands as high, medium, or low based on field
data collected on forms and transferred into a rating calculator. Using Boolean logic, the rating calculator
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 20
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

assigns a high, medium, or low value for each metric and overall function. Site functional assessment data
forms are available upon request and model output is included in Appendix B.
Tables 14 through 16 summarize NC SAM and NC WAM metrics targeted for functional uplift and the
corresponding mitigation activities proposed to provide functional uplift. Metrics targeted to meet the
Site's goals and objectives are depicted in bold.
Table 14. INC SAM Summary
NC SAM Function Class Rating
Summary
SAM 1
UT 1(Downstream)
SAM 2
UT 1 (Upstream)
SAM 3
UT 3
SAM 4
UT 2
(1) HYDROLOGY
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
(4) Floodplain Access
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
(4) Microtopography
LOW
LOW
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(1) WATER QUALITY
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Stream -side Area Vegetation
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
YES
YES
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
(1) HABITAT
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
(3) In -Stream Habitat
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
(3) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
OVERALL 1111111NU
LOW
LOW I
LOW
LOW
Based on NC SAM output, all three primary stream functional metrics (Hydrology, Water Quality, and
Habitat), as well as 20 sub -metrics are under -performing as exhibited by a LOW metric rating (see Figure
4, Appendix A for NC SAM data reaches). LOW performing metrics are to be targeted for functional uplift
through mitigation activities, goals and objectives, as well as, monitoring and success criteria.
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115)
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site
Robeson County, North Carolina
page 21
Restoration Systems, LLC
September 2020

Table 15. NC WAM Summary
NC WAM Sub -function Rating Summary
WAM 1
WAM 2
Wetland Type
Bottomland Hardwood
Forest
Bottomland Hardwood
Forest
(1) HYDROLOGY
LOW
LOW
(2) Surface Storage & Retention
LOW
LOW
(2) Sub -surface Storage and Retention
LOW
LOW
(1) WATER QUALITY
LOW
MEDIUM
(2) Pathogen change
LOW
LOW
(2) Particulate Change
LOW
MEDIUM
(2) Soluble change
LOW
MEDIUM
(2) Physical Change
LOW
MEDIUM
(1) HABITAT
LOW
LOW
(2) Physical Structure
LOW
LOW
(2) Landscape Patch Structure
LOW
MEDIUM
(2) Vegetative Composition
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
OVERALL
LOW
LOW
NC WAM forms were filled out at two locations in the Site: one upstream of the historic pond bed and
one in the pond bed. Typically, NC WAM forms are not filled out in wetland restoration areas. However,
the primary functional uplift to wetlands will occur in these areas. Therefore, NC WAM forms were filled
out using best professional judgement concerning several sub -functions.
Table 16 outlines stream and wetland functions targeted for functional uplift, goals that are tied to the
specific functions, and objectives to be completed to achieve the proposed goals.
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 22
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

Table 16. Targeted Functions, Goals, Objectives, and Uplift Evaluation
DMS Functional Uplift Evaluations
Targeted Functions
Goals
Objectives
Identified Functional Stressor (Uplift Potential)
(1) HYDROLOGY
(2) Flood Flow
• Construct new channel at historic floodplain elevation to restore overbank
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
flows and restore jurisdictional wetlands
(4) Floodplain Access
• Minimize downstream flooding to the maximum extent
possible.
0 Plant woody riparian buffer
• Remove livestock
• Peak Flows (restore overbank flooding, surface water and
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
• Remove a ditch/drain tile network that contributes surface waters directly
subsurface water storage, increase frictional resistance to
(4) Microtopography
to the channel
• Protect riparian buffers with a perpetual conservation easement
floodwaters)
• Artificial Barriers (Removing 2 breached dams and a perched
Wetland Surface Storage and Retention
Wetland Sub -surface Storage and Retention
culvert)
• Ditching/Draining (Removing a ditch/drain tile network from the
(3) Stream Stability
• Construct channels with dimension, and longitudinal
• Increase stream stability within the Site so that channels
are neither aggrading nor degrading.
proper pattern, profile
• Remove livestock from the Site
0 Construct stable channels that do not contribute sediment to downstream
floodplain and restoring ditched stream channels)
Channel
(4) Chl Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
receiving waters.
• Plant woody riparian buffer
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(1) WATER QUALITY
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
• Remove direct nutrient and pollutant inputs from the
• Remove livestock and reduce agricultural land/inputs
• Plant woody riparian buffer
• Restore/enhance jurisdictional wetlands adjacent to Site streams
• Non-functioning Riparian Buffer/Wetland Vegetation (restoring
or enhancing —22.5 acres of riparian buffer)
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Indicators of Stressors
Site and reduce contributions to downstream waters.
' Remove a ditch/drain tile network that contributes surface waters directly
. Nutrients (removing 255.2 Ibs N and 21.2 Ibs P per year)
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
to the channel
• Restore overbank flooding by constructing channels at historic floodplain
• Fecal Coliform (removing 0.1x1011 colonies of fecal coliform)
Wetland Pathogen Change
Wetland Particulate Change
elevation.
Wetland Soluble Change
Wetland Physical Change
(1) HABITAT
(2) In -stream Habitat
• Construct stable channels with woody debris available as instream habitat
• Plant woody riparian buffer to provide organic matter and shade
• Construct new channel at historic floodplain elevation to restore overbank
flows
• Habitat Fragmentation (Replacement of a perched culvert)
0 Limited Bedform Diversity (restoring regular, sustained
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In -Stream Habitat
(2) Stream -side Habitat
• Improve instream and stream -side habitat.
• Protect riparian buffers with a perpetual conservation easement
sequence of riffles and pools that do not fill with sediment)
(3) Stream -side Habitat
• Restore/enhance jurisdictional wetlands adjacent to Site streams
• Stabilize stream banks
. Absence of Large Wood Debris (restoring wood debris on
g y ( g y
channel banks or in bed)
(3) Thermoregulation
• Install in -stream structures
Wetland Physical Structure
Wetland Landscape Patch Structure
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 23
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

7 SITE DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION CONSTRAINTS
The presence of conditions or characteristics that have the potential to hinder restoration activities on
the Site was evaluated. The evaluation focused primarily on the presence of hazardous materials, utilities
and restrictive easements, rare/threatened/endangered species or critical habitats, and the potential for
hydrologic trespass. Existing information regarding Site constraints was acquired and reviewed. In
addition, any Site conditions that have the potential to restrict the restoration design and implementation
were documented during the field investigation.
No known Site constraints, that may hinder proposed mitigation activities, were identified during field
surveys. Potential constraints reviewed include the following.
7.1 Threatened & Endangered Species
Four federally protected species is listed as occurring in Robeson County as of February 21, 2020 (USFWS
2018); the following table summarizes potential habitat and a preliminary biological conclusion.
Table 17. Endangered Species Act Determinations
Potential
Biological
Species
Habitat
Habitat
Conclusion
at Site
American alligator
(Alligator
The alligator is found rivers, streams, canals, lakes, swamps, and
Not likely
mississippiensis)
coastal marshes. Adult animals are highly tolerant of salt water,
to
Threatened due to
but the young are apparently more sensitive, with salinities greater
Yes
adversely
Similarity of
than 5 parts per thousand considered harmful.
affect
Appearance
The red -cockaded woodpecker (RCW) typically occupies open,
Red -cockaded
mature stands of southern pines, particularly longleaf pine (Pinus
woodpecker
paiustris), for foraging and nesting/roosting habitat. The RCW
(Picoides borealis)
excavates cavities for nesting and roosting in living pine trees, aged
No
No effect
Endangered
60 years or older, which are contiguous with pine stands at least
30 years of age to provide foraging habitat. The foraging range of
the RCW is normally no more than 0.5 miles.
Bald eagle
Bald eagles typically nest in tall, living trees in a conspicuous
No eagle
(Haliaeetus
location near open water. Eagles forage over large bodies of water
Yes
act permit
leucocephalus)
and utilize adjacent trees for perching.
required
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 24
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

Table 18. Endangered Species Act Determinations
(Continued)
Wood storks typically construct their nests in medium to tall trees
that occur in stands located either in swamps or on islands
surrounded by relatively broad expanses of open water. In many
areas, bald cypress and red mangrove trees are preferred. During
Wood stork
the nonbreeding season or while foraging, wood storks occur in a
Not likely
(Mycteria
wide variety of wetland habitats, including freshwater marshes
to
americana)
and stock ponds, shallow, seasonally flooded roadside or
Yes
adversely
Threatened
agricultural ditches, narrow tidal creeks or shallow tidal pools,
affect
managed impoundments, and depressions in cypress heads and
swamp sloughs. Because of their specialized feeding behavior, the
most attractive feeding areas are swamp or marsh depressions
where fish become concentrated during dry periods.
Grows in sandy or rocky, open, upland woods on acidic or
circumneutral, well -drained sands or sandy loam soils with low
cation exchange capacities. The species is also found on sandy or
submesic loamy swales and depressions in the fall line Sandhills
region as well as in openings along the rim of Carolina bays;
maintained railroad, roadside, power line, and utility rights -of way;
Not likely
Michaux's sumac
areas where forest canopies have been opened up by blowdowns
(Rhus michauxii)
and/or storm damage; small wildlife food plots; abandoned
Yes
to
Endangered
building sites; under sparse to moderately dense pine or
adversely
affect
pine/hardwood canopies; and in and along edges of other
artificially maintained clearings undergoing natural succession. In
the central Piedmont, it occurs on clayey soils derived from mafic
rocks. The plant is shade intolerant and, therefore, grows best
where disturbance (e.g., mowing, clearing, grazing, periodic fire)
maintains its open habitat.
7.2 Cultural Resources
The term "cultural resources" refers to prehistoric or historic archaeological sites, structures, or artifact
deposits over 50 years old. "Significant" cultural resources are those that are eligible or potentially eligible
for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. Evaluations of site significance are made with
reference to the eligibility criteria of the National Register (36 CFR 60) and in consultation with the North
Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO).
Field visits were conducted at the Site in December 2018 and December 2019 to ascertain the presence
of structures or other features that may be eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places.
No structures were identified within proposed easement boundaries; however, coordination with SHPO
will occur prior to construction activities to determine if any significant cultural resources are present.
7.3 North Carolina Natural Heritage Elements
A query of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database indicates there are no records
for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, or conservation/managed areas within
the proposed project boundary. Within a one -mile radius of the project boundary NCNHP lists two state
listed species (significantly rare) including the coppery emerald (Somatochlora georgiana) and the
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 25
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

phantom darter (Triacanthagyna trifida). No natural areas or managed areas are documented within a
one -mile radius of the Site (Appendix C).
7.4 FEMA
Inspection of the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map 3710828800J, Panel 8288, effective January 19, 2005,
indicates that downstream of the dam at the Site outfall the floodplain of Wilkinson Creek is mapped as
AE floodplain. As the dam historically may have inhibited floodwaters (and therefore the AE floodplain)
from extending upstream into the Site, the current breach in the dam may result in the Zone AE floodplain
extending into the Site. The Site is not mapped by FEMA as AE floodplain. Correspondence with the local
floodplain administrator Dixon Ivey (attached in Appendix F) indicates that no action will be required by
FEMA for the project. An EEP floodplain requirement checklist is also include in the Appendix F.
7.5 Utilities
A powerline located parallel to the upper reaches of UT 1 is expected to be moved outside of the proposed
conservation easement. This utility is not expected to hinder mitigation activities. No other utilities are
located within the proposed conservation easement.
7.6 Air Transport Facilities
No air transport facility is located within 5 miles of the Site.
8 DESIGN APPROACH AND MITIGATION WORK PLAN
8.1 Stream Design
Onsite streams targeted for restoration have endured significant disturbance from land use activities such
as impoundment, land clearing, livestock grazing, straightening and rerouting of channels, ditching within
the floodplain, and other anthropogenic maintenance. Site streams will be restored to emulate historic
conditions at the Site utilizing parameters from nearby, relatively undisturbed reference streams (see
Section 4.1 Reference Streams).
Primary activities designed to restore Site streams include 1) stream restoration, 2) stream enhancement
(Level 1), 3) stream enhancement (Level 11), 4) wetland reestablishment, 5) wetland rehabilitation, 6)
wetland enhancement, and 7) vegetation planting (Figures 6A-6D, Appendix A).
8.1.1 Stream Restoration
Stream restoration efforts are designed to restore a stable stream that approximates hydrodynamics,
stream geometry, and local microtopography relative to reference conditions. Restoration at the Site will
be a combination of Priority I and II restoration. Bankfull elevations will be raised to meet the adjacent
valley floodplain elevation as soon a tie in elevations may be achieved.
Stream restoration is expected to entail 1) channel excavation, 2) channel stabilization, 3) channel
diversion, and 4) channel backfill.
In -stream Structures
In -stream structures will be used for grade control, habitat, and to elevate local water surface profiles in
the channel, flattening the water energy slope or gradient and directing stream energy into the center of
the channel and away from banks. The structures will consist of log cross -vanes or log j-hook vanes;
however, at the discretion of the Engineer, rock cross -vanes or rock j-hook vanes may be substituted if
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 26
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

dictated by field conditions. In addition, the structures will be placed in relatively straight reaches to
provide secondary (perpendicular) flow cells during bankfull events.
Piped Channel Crossing
Landowner constraints will necessitate the installation of two piped channel crossings upstream, and
outside of the easement boundary, to allow access to portions of the property isolated by stream
restoration activities Figure 5 (Appendix A). The crossings have been blown out during flooding/dam
breach or are currently perched and serve as a barrier to wildlife crossing. The crossings will be
constructed with suitable sized pipes to allow for stormwater flows, with adjacent floodplain pipes to
allow for overflow discharge onto the floodplain. Materials will include hydraulically stable rip -rap or
suitable rock. The crossings will be large enough to handle anticipated vehicular traffic. Approach grades
to the crossings will be at an approximate 10:1 slope and constructed of hard, scour -resistant crushed
rock or other permeable material, which is free of fines.
8.1.2 Stream Enhancement (Level 1)
Stream enhancement (level 1) will entail restoration of stream dimension, installation habitat and grade
control structures, easement markers, and planting riparian buffers with native forest vegetation to
facilitate stream recovery and prevent further degradation of the stream.
8.1.3 Stream Enhancement (Level 11)
Stream enhancement (level 11) will entail installation of easement markers and planting riparian buffers
with native forest vegetation to facilitate stream recovery and prevent further degradation of the stream.
8.2 Individual Reach Discussions
Mitigation strategies proposed for each reach are presented in Table 18.
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 27
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

Table 19. Individual Reach Descriptions and Functional Uplift
Individual
Mitigation Activities
Functional Uplift Provided for
Reach
Identified Stressors
• Install a piped channel crossing at the upper
conservation easement boundary to fix the channel
elevation and eliminate perched hydrologic step that
• Non-functioning riparian
may hinder wildlife passage.
buffer/wetland vegetation
• Tie into upstream property boundary and begin to
• Nutrients
elevate the stream bed with grade control/habitat
structures and contour the channel banks to the
• Fecal Coliform
UT 1
appropriate dimension.
• Peak Flows
Upstream
• Increase sinuosity within the historic channel/new
• Artificial Barriers
valley.
• Ditching/Draining
• Elevate the channel to hydrate adjacent wetlands.
• Habitat Fragmentation
• Backfill ditches and drain tiles in the adjacent floodplain.
' Limited Bedform Diversity
• Remove livestock from the property.
• Absence of Large Woody
• Plant a vegetative buffer within the entire floodplain.
Debris
• Tie into downstream reaches of UT 1 using a series of
step-down habitat structures.
• Tie into the upper reaches of UT 1 and use a series of
Non-functioning riparian
stream restoration, enhancement (Level I and 11)
buffer/wetland vegetation
techniques to develop a channel with the proper
• Nutrients
dimension, pattern, and profile.
UT-1
• Remove the remnants of the breached dam.
• Peak Flows
Downstream
• Tie the channel to the downstream property line at the
• Artificial Barriers
appropriate location and slope.
• Habitat Fragmentation
• Remove the dam and sediment plume downstream from
• Limited Bedform Diversity
the dam to restore wetlands in these areas.
• Absence of Large Woody
• Plant a vegetative buffer within the entire floodplain.
Debris
• Tie into the upstream property boundary stream
elevation.
• Remove unconsolidated sediments in the upstream
pond and stabilize with suitable material.
• Non-functioning riparian
• Excavate the design channel to the proper dimension,
buffer/wetland vegetation
pattern and profile through the reach.
• Nutrients
• Remove the road crossing/dam from the floodplain.
• Artificial Barriers
UT-2
• Restore the stream channel downstream of the
• Peak Flows
impoundment that is currently characterized as a
braided stream channel through a sediment wedge.
• Limited Bedform Diversity
• Remove the gazebo/dock from the banks of the historic
• Absence of Large Woody
pond bed.
Debris
• Tie into UT 1 across and inner bend at the appropriate
elevation.
• Plant a vegetative buffer within the entire floodplain.
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 28
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

Table 18. Individual Reach Descriptions and Functional Uplltt (Continued)
• Tie into the upstream property boundary stream
elevation.
• Non-functioning riparian
• Contour the channel to the appropriate dimension
buffer/wetland vegetation
through the reach using Enhancement (Level 1)
UT-3
techniques.
• Nutrients
• Ease radius of curvatures along the channel.
• Limited Bedform Diversity
• Tie the lower reaches of the channel into UT 1 across an
. Absence of Large Woody
inner bend.
Debris
• Plant a vegetative buffer within the entire floodplain.
8.3 Wetland Enhancement, Reestablishment, and Rehabilitation
Alternatives for wetland enhancement, reestablishment/rehabilitation are designed to restore a fully
functioning wetland system, which will provide surface water storage, nutrient cycling, removal of
imported elements and compounds, and will create a variety and abundance of wildlife habitat.
Wetland Enhancement
Wetland enhancement includes areas of existing wetlands (based on the approved PJD) that have been
cleared of forest vegetation, have been impounded, or are pasture for livestock grazing. These areas will
be planted with native forest vegetation and will have livestock removed/fenced from the area. Planting
and livestock removal will enhance 12.331 acres of existing wetland within the Site boundaries.
Wetland Reestablishment
Portions of the Site underlain by hydric soils have been impacted by stream dredging, drain tile
installation, vegetative clearing, agriculture grazing, and other land disturbances associated with land use
management. Wetland reestablishment options will focus on the restoration of vegetative communities,
restoration of stream corridors and historic groundwater tables, as well as the reestablishment of soil
structure and microtopographic variations. In addition, the construction of (or provisions for) surface
water storage depressions (ephemeral pools) will also add an important component to groundwater
restoration activities. These activities will result in the reestablishment of approximately 5.32 acres of
jurisdictional riparian riverine wetlands.
Wetland Rehabilitation
Wetland Rehabilitation will occur in areas of the Site that are currently jurisdictional; however, are
currently being affected by groundwater drawdown from ditches, drain tiles, and channel incision. These
areas had preconstruction groundwater gauges installed in late May 2020. The location of groundwater
gauges are depicted on Figure 4 (Appendix A). Wetland rehabilitation areas should show and
improvement in hydrology including increased hydroperiod of the gauge during normal climactic
conditions and/or increased stream connectivity from stream overbank flooding. A series of nested
groundwater gauges have been installed in the pond bed (Figure 6C, Appendix A). These gauges have
been installed at a distance of 10, 20, and 45 feet from the stream top of bank. Nested gauges are installed
to show a groundwater drawdown from incised streams in the pond bed. Wetland rehabilitation activities
will result in approximately 2.73 acres of improved jurisdiction riparian wetlands. Groundwater gauge
data will be included in as -built and annual monitoring reports for comparison to preconstruction gauge
data.
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 29
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

8.4 Soil Restoration
Soil grading will occur during stream restoration activities. Topsoil will be stockpiled during construction
activities and will be spread on the soil surface once critical subgrade has been established. The replaced
topsoil will serve as a viable growing medium for community restoration to provide nutrients and aid in
the survival of planted species.
8.5 Natural Plant Community Restoration
Restoration of floodplain forest and stream -side habitat allows for development and expansion of
characteristic species across the landscape. Ecotonal changes between community types contribute to
diversity and provide secondary benefits, such as enhanced feeding and nesting opportunities for
mammals, birds, amphibians, and other wildlife. Reference Forest Ecosystem (RFE) data, onsite
observations, and community descriptions from Classification of the Natural Communities of North
Carolina (Schafale and Weakley 1990) were used to develop the primary plant community associations
that will be promoted during community restoration activities.
8.5.1 Planting Plan
Stream -side trees and shrubs include species with high value for sediment stabilization, rapid growth rate,
and the ability to withstand hydraulic forces associated with bankfull flow and overbank flood events.
Stream -side trees and shrubs will be planted within 15 feet of the channel top of bank throughout the
meander belt -width. Shrub elements will be planted along the reconstructed stream banks, concentrated
along outer bends. Cypress -Gum Swamp (Brownwater Subtype) is the target community for the lowest
portions of the Site with Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp (Brownwater Subtype) targeted for portions
of the Site adjacent. Significant overlap in species for each planting community allows for a broad fringe
between the ecological zones.
Table 19 depicts the total number of stems and species distribution within each vegetation association
(Figure 9, Appendix A). Planting will be performed between December 1 and March 15 to allow plants to
stabilize during the dormant period and set root during the spring season.
Due to floodplain soils being of the Bibb series, scattered openings dominated by herbs and shrubs are
likely to develop overtime. These areas are each expected to be less than an acre in size and encompass
less than 20% of the Site. The general location of the herbaceous dominated wetlands are depicted on
Figure 9 (Appendix A). As the wetland matures, poorly drained soils will make conditions favorable species
like those described in a Coastal Plain Semipermanent Impoundment to thrive.
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 30
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

Table 20. Planting Plan
Vegetation Association
Cypress Gum Swamp*
Coastal Plain Small Stream
Stream-side
Assemblage**
TOTALSwamp*
Area (acres)
2.3
17.4
2.8
22.5
Species
# planted*
% of total
# planted*
% of total
# planted**
% of total
# planted
Swamp black gum (Nyssa biflora)
391
25
2366
20
190
10
2948
Bald cypress (Taxodium distichum)
391
25
2366
20
190
10
2948
Tupelo gum (Nyssa aquatica)
391
25
391
Pond cypress (Taxodium ascendens)
391
25
--
391
Water oak (Quercus nigra)
1775
15
190
10
1965
Willow oak (Quercus phellos)
1775
15
190
10
1965
Schumard oak (Quercus schumardii)
1183
10
190
10
1374
American elm (Ulmus americana)
1183
10
190
10
1374
Shagbark hickory (Carya ovata)
1183
10
190
10
1374
Black willow (Salix nigra)
190
10
190
Tag alder (Alnus serrulata)
190
10
190
Buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis)
190
10
190
TOTAL
1564
100
11832
100
1904
100
15,300
* Planted at a density of 680 stems/acre.
** Planted at a density of 2720 stems/acre.
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115)
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site
Robeson County, North Carolina
page 31
Restoration Systems, LLC
September 2020

8.5.2 Nuisance Species Management
Invasive plant species will be observed and controlled mechanically and/or chemically, as part of this
project. No other nuisance species controls are proposed at this time. Inspections for beaver and other
potential nuisance species will occur throughout the course of the monitoring period. Appropriate actions
may be taken to ameliorate any negative impacts regarding vegetation development and/or water
management on an as -needed basis. The presences of nuisance species will be monitored over the course
of the monitoring period. Appropriate actions will be taken to ameliorate any negative impacts regarding
vegetation development and/or water management on an as -needed basis.
9 MONITORING AND SUCCESS CRITERIA
Monitoring will be conducted by Axiom Environmental, Inc based on the schedule in Table 20. A summary
of monitoring is outlined in Table 21(Figure 10, Appendix A). Annual monitoring reports will be submitted
to the NCDMS by Restoration Systems no later than December 31 of each monitoring year data is
collected.
Table 21. Monitoring Schedule
Resource
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Streams
Wetlands
Vegetation
Visual Assessment
Report Submittal
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 32
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

Table 22. Monitoring Summary
Stream Parameters
Parameter
Method
Schedule/Frequency
Number/Extent
Data Collected/Reported
Stream Profile
Full longitudinal survey
As -built (unless otherwise
All restored stream
Graphic and tabular data.
required)
channels
Stream Dimension
Cross -sections
Years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7
Total of 16 cross -sections on
Graphic and tabular data.
restored channels
Areas of concern will be
All restored stream
depicted on a plan view figure
Visual Assessments
Yearly
channels
with a written assessment and
Channel Stability
photograph of the area included
in the report.
Only if instability is
Additional Cross -sections
Yearly
documented during
Graphic and tabular data.
monitoring
Stream Hydrology
NA
NA
NA
NA
Continuous monitoring surface
Continuous recording
Surface water data for each
water gauges and/or trail
NA
through monitoring period
monitoring period
camera
Bankfull Events
Continuous through
2 surface water gauges on
Visual evidence, photo
Visual/Physical Evidence
documentation, and/or rain
monitoring period
UT 1 and UT 2
data.
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 33
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

Table 21. Monitoring Summary (Continued)
Wetland Parameters
Parameter
Method
Schedule/Frequency
Number/Extent
Data Collected/Reported
As -built, Years 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6,
Soil temperature* at the
and 7 throughout the year
15 gauges spread
beginning of each monitoring
Wetland Restoration
Groundwater gauges
with the growing season
throughout restored
period to verify the start of the
defined as March 1-October
wetlands
growing season, groundwater
22
and rain data for each
monitoring period
Vegetation Parameters
Parameter
Method
Schedule/Frequency
Number/Extent
Data Collected/Reported
Permanent vegetation plots
0.0247 acre (100 square meters)
As -built, Years 1, 2, 3, 5, and
23 plots spread across the
Species, height, planted vs.
in size; CVS-EEP Protocol for
7
Site
volunteer, stems/acre
Vegetation establishment
Recording Vegetation, Version
and vigor
4.2 (Lee et al. 2008)
Annual random vegetation
As -built Years 1 2 3 5 and
As needed to determine
plots, 0.0247 acre (100 square
vegetation density in a
Species and height
meters) in size
7
questionable area
*Soil temperature will be monitored using a continuous recording soil probe located at the rain gauge. The growing season will be initiated once
bud burst has been documented on two or more species (excluding red maple and sambucus) and suitable soil temperatures have been
documented with the soil probe. The earlies growing season initiation date will be March 1, assuming other growing season criteria has been met.
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 34
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

9.1 Success Criteria
Monitoring and success criteria for stream restoration should relate to project goals and objectives
identified from on -site NC SAM and NC WAM data collection. From a mitigation perspective, several of
the goals and objectives are assumed to be functionally elevated by restoration activities without direct
measurement. Other goals and objectives will be considered successful upon achieving success criteria.
The following summarizes Site success criteria.
Table 23. Success Criteria
Streams
• All streams must maintain an Ordinary High -Water Mark (OHWM), per RGL 05-05.
• Bank height ratio (BHR) cannot exceed 1.2 at any measured cross-section.
• BHR at any measure riffle cross-section should not change by more than 10% from baseline condition during
any given monitoring period.
• The stream project shall remain stable and all other performance standards shall be met through four
separate bankfull events, occurring in separate years, during the monitoring years 1-7.
Wetland Hydrology
• Saturation or inundation within the upper 12 inches of the soil surface for, at a minimum, 12 percent of the
growing season, during average climatic conditions.
Vegetation
• Within planted portions of the site, a minimum of 320 stems per acre must be present at year 3; a minimum
of 260 stems per acre must be present at year 5; and a minimum of 210 stems per acre must be present at
year 7.
• Trees must average 7 feet in height at year 5, and 10 feet in height at year 7 in each plot.
• Planted and volunteer stems are counted, provided they are included in the approved planting list for the
site; natural recruits not on the planting list may be considered by the IRT on a case -by -case basis.
9.2 Contingency
In the event that stream success criteria are not fulfilled, a mechanism for contingency will be
implemented.
9.2.1 Stream Contingency
Stream contingency may include, but may not be limited to 1) structure repair and/or installation; 2) repair
of dimension, pattern, and/or profile variables; and 3) bank stabilization. The method of contingency is
expected to be dependent upon stream variables that are not in compliance with success criteria. Primary
concerns, which mayjeopardize stream success, include 1) structure failure, 2) headcut migration through
the Site, and/or 3) bank erosion.
Structure Failure
In the event that structures are compromised the affected structure will be repaired, maintained, or
replaced. Once the structure is repaired or replaced, it must function to stabilize adjacent stream banks
and/or maintain grade control within the channel. Structures which remain intact, but exhibit flow
around, beneath, or through the header/footer will be repaired by excavating a trench on the upstream
side of the structure and reinstalling filter fabric in front of the pilings. Structures which have been
compromised, resulting in shifting or collapse of a header/footer, will be removed and replaced with a
structure suitable for Site flows.
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 35
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

Headcut Migration Through the Site
In the event that a headcut occurs within the Site (identified visually or through measurements [i.e. bank -
height ratios exceeding 1.4]), provisions for impeding headcut migration and repairing damage caused by
the headcut will be implemented. Headcut migration may be impeded through the installation of in -
stream grade control structures (rip -rap sill and/or log cross -vane weir) and/or restoring stream geometry
variables until channel stability is achieved. Channel repairs to stream geometry may include channel
backfill with coarse material and stabilizing the material with erosion control matting, vegetative
transplants, and/or willow stakes.
Ronk Frnsinn
In the event that severe bank erosion occurs within the Site, resulting in incision, lateral instability, and/or
elevated width -to -depth ratios locally or systemically, contingency measures to reduce bank erosion and
width -to -depth ratio will be implemented. Bank erosion contingency measures may include the
installation of log -vane weirs and/or other bank stabilization measures. If the resultant bank erosion
induces shoot cutoffs or channel abandonment, a channel may be excavated to reduce shear stress to
stable values.
Beaver and other Invasive Species
Indications of beaver establishment will be monitored throughout the 7-year monitoring period. If beaver
are identified in the Site, the location of the dam will be depicted on CCPV mapping and the beaver will
be trapped during the following fall/winter. Once beaver have been trapped, the dam will be removed.
Removal of the dam is expected to occur by hand to minimized disturbance to the adjacent mitigation
areas.
When invasive species controls are required by the IRT, species such as multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora),
Russian olive (Eleagnus angustifolium), Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), and tree of heaven (Ailanthus
altissima) will be treated by cutting and directly treating the stump with Garlon 4A (or other similar
materials) to minimize re -sprouting. Appropriate actions to ameliorate any negative impacts regarding
vegetation development and/or water management will occur on an as -needed basis. Additional
monitoring, or other contingency measures will be determined by consultation with the IRT.
Road/Culvert Maintenance
Observation of road crossings/culverts will occur during regular monitoring visits conducted at the Site.
Culverts will be monitored primarily for blockage; however, if erosion is occurring it will also be noted.
Roadbeds, culverts, and crossings will be monitored for the seven-year monitoring period to ensure that
no additional sediment deposition is occurring within the Site. Once the seven-year monitoring period
has expired, maintenance of the crossing will be the responsibility of the landowner.
Development/Logging
Topographic re-entrants discharging into the conservation easement typically are directed into marsh
treatment areas that treat the initial stormwater pulse to capture sediment and nutrients from adjacent
runoff. These areas will naturalize over time into small wetland depressions. If the property adjacent to
the Site is developed or logged such that excessive sediment enters the Site, the marsh treatment area
may be re -excavated to capture additional drainage effluent. Maintenance of the marsh treatment area
is not expected to occur over an extended period of time; however, short term maintenance may occur
until stabilization of the adjacent landscape features occurs.
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 36
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

9.2.2 Wetland Contingency
Hydrological contingency will require consultation with hydrologists and regulatory agencies if wetland
hydrology enhancement is not achieved. Floodplain surface modifications, including construction of
ephemeral pools, represent a likely mechanism to increase the floodplain area in support of jurisdictional
wetlands. Recommendations for contingency to establish wetland hydrology will be implemented and
monitored until Hydrology Success Criteria are achieved.
9.2.3 Vegetation Contingency
If vegetation success criteria are not achieved, supplemental planting may be performed with tree species
approved by regulatory agencies. Supplemental planting will be performed as needed until achievement
of vegetation success criteria.
9.3 Compatibility with Project Goals
Table 23 outlines the compatibility of Site performance criteria described above to Site goals and
objectives that will be utilized to evaluate if Site goals and objectives are achieved.
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 37
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

Table 24. Compatibility of Performance Criteria to Project Goals and Objectives
Goals
Objectives
Success Criteria
(1) HYDROLOGY
• Attenuate flood flow across
•
Construct new channel at historic floodplain elevation to restore overbank
•
BHR not to exceed 1.2
the Site.
flows and restore jurisdictional wetlands
•
Document four overbank events in
• Minimize downstream
.
Plant woody riparian buffer
separate monitoring years
flooding to the maximum
•
Remove livestock
•
Livestock excluded from the easement
extent possible.
.
Remove a ditch/drain tile network that contributes surface waters directly to
•
Attain Wetland Hydrology Success Criteria
• Connect streams to
the channel
•
Attain Vegetation Success Criteria
functioning wetland
•
Protect riparian buffers with a perpetual conservation easement
•
Conservation Easement recorded
systems.
•
Cross-section measurements indicate a
stable channel with appropriate substrate
•
Construct channels with proper pattern, dimension, and longitudinal profile
• Increase stream stability
•
Visual documentation of stable channels
within the Site so that
•
Remove livestock from the Site
and structures
channels are neither
.
Construct stable channels that do not contribute sediment to downstream
•
BHR not to exceed 1.2
aggrading nor degrading.
receiving waters.
•
o
< 10/ change in BHR in any given year
•
plant woody riparian buffer
•
Livestock excluded from the easement
•
Attain Vegetation Success Criteria
(1) WATER QUALITY
•
Remove livestock and reduce agricultural land/inputs
• Remove direct nutrient and
•
Plant woody riparian buffer
pollutant inputs from the
•
Restore/enhance jurisdictional wetlands adjacent to Site streams
•
Livestock excluded from the easement
Site and reduce
•
Remove a ditch/drain tile network that contributes surface waters directly to
•
Attain Wetland Hydrology Success Criteria
contributions to
the channel
•
Attain Vegetation Success Criteria
downstream waters.
•
Restore overbank flooding by constructing channels at historic floodplain
elevation.
(1) HABITAT
•
Construct stable channels with woody debris available as instream habitat
•
Plant woody riparian buffer to provide organic matter and shade
•
Cross-section measurement indicate a
stable channel with appropriate substrate
•
Construct new channel at historic floodplain elevation to restore overbank
• Improve instream and
flows
•
Visual documentation of stable channels
and in -stream structures.
stream -side habitat.
•
Protect riparian buffers with a perpetual conservation easement
.
Attain Wetland Hydrology Success Criteria
•
Restore/enhance jurisdictional wetlands adjacent to Site streams
•
Stabilize stream banks
•
Attain Vegetation Success Criteria
•
Conservation Easement recorded
•
Install in -stream structures
Mitigation Plan (Project No. xxx) page 38
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

10 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN
In the event the mitigation Site or a specific component of the mitigation Site fails to achieve the necessary
performance standards as specified in the mitigation plan, the sponsor shall notify the members of the
IRT and work with the IRT to develop contingency plans and remedial actions.
11 LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT PLAN
The Site will be transferred to the NCDEQ Stewardship Program. This party shall serve as conservation
easement holder and long-term steward for the property and will conduct periodic inspection of the Site
to ensure that restrictions required in the conservation easement are upheld. Funding will be supplied by
the responsible party on a yearly basis until such time an endowment is established. The NCDEQ
Stewardship Program is developing an endowment system within the non -reverting, interest -bearing
Conservation Lands Conservation Fund Account. The use of funds from the Endowment Account will be
governed by North Carolina General Statute GS 113A-232(d)(3). Interest gained by the endowment fund
may be used for the purpose of stewardship, monitoring, stewardship administration, and land
transaction costs, if applicable.
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 39
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

12 REFERENCES
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-
87-1. United States Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Gordon, N.D., T.A. McMahon, and B.L. Finlayson. 1992. Stream Hydrology: an Introduction for Ecologists.
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. West Sussex, England.
Griffith, G.E., J.M. Omernik, J.A. Comstock, M.P. Schafale, W.H. McNab, D.R. Lenat, T.F. MacPherson, J.B.
Glover, and V.B. Shelbourne. 2002. Ecoregions of North Carolina and South Carolina. U.S.
Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia.
Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation. Version 4.2. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
Ecosystem Enhancement Program. Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ). 2018a. Final 2016 Category 5
Assessments-303(d) List (online). Available:
https://fi les. nc.gov/ncdeq/Water% 20Qua I ity/Planning/TM DL/303d/2016/2016_NC_Category_5
_303d_list.pdf (February 4, 2019).
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ). 2018b. Draft 2018 North Carolina 303(d)
List (online). Available:
https://fi les. nc.gov/ncdeq/Water% 20Quality/Planning/TM DL/303d/2018/2018-DRAFT-NC-303-
d--ListwCover.pdf (February 4, 2019).
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS). 2016. Quantifying Benefits to Water Quality
from Livestock Exclusion and Riparian Buffer Establishment for Stream Restoration. June 15,
2016. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2013. River Basin Classification Schedule: Lumber
(online). Available:
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water/20Quality/Planning/CSU/Surface/2OWater/River/2OBasin/
20Water% 2OQua l ity%20CIassifications % 20as% 20of%2ODec% 209 % 202013/Lu m ber_Hydro_orde
r.pdf (December 18, 2019).
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP 2008). Lumber River Basin Restoration
Priorities 2008 (online). Available:
https:Hfiles.nc.gov/ncdeq/Mitigation/20Services/Watershed_Planning/Lumber_River_Basin/Lu
mber_RBRP_2008_FINAL.pdf. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, Raleigh (December 18, 2018).
North Carolina Stream Functional Assessment Team. (NC SFAT 2015). N.C. Stream Assessment Method
(NC SAM) User Manual. Version 2.1.
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 40
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

North Carolina Wetland Functional Assessment Team. (NC WFAT 2010). N.C. Wetland Assessment
Method (NC WAM) User Manual. Version 4.1.
Rosgen, D. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology (Publisher). Pagosa Springs, Colorado
Rosgen, D. 2009. A Practical Method of Computing Streambank Erosion Rate (online). Available:
http://www.u-s-c.org/htmI/documents/Erosionrates.pdf.
Rosgen, D. 2011. Estimating Sediment Loads using the Bank Assessment of Non -point source
Consequences of Sediment (BANCS). Watershed Assessment of River Stability and Sediment
Supply (WARSSS). Hagerstown, Maryland.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina:
Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and
Recreation, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. Raleigh,
North Carolina.
Schafale, M.P. 2012. Guide to the Natural Communities of North Carolina: Fourth Approximation. North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program, North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources. Raleigh, North Carolina.
Simon A, Hupp CR. 1986. Geomorphic and Vegetative Recovery Processes Along Modified Tennessee
Streams: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Disturbed Fluvial Systems. Forest Hydrology and
Watershed Management. IAHS-AISH Publ.167.
Sweet, W.V. and J.W. Geratz. 2003. Bankfull Hydraulic Geometry Relationships and Recurrence Intervals
for North Carolina's Coastal Plain. J. of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA)
39(4):861-871.
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2010. Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of
Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual, Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2020. Web Soil Survey (online). Available:
https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm [February 10, 2020]. United States
Department of Agriculture.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1987. Soil Survey of Robeson County, North Carolina.
Soil Conservation Service.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2018. Endangered Species, Threatened Species, Federal
Species of Concern, and Candidate Species, Robeson County, North Carolina (online). Available:
https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/alamance.html [February 21, 2020].
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 41
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

United States Geological Survey (USGS). 2006. Estimating the Magnitude and Frequency of Floods in
Rural Basins of North Carolina — Recompiled. USGS Water -Resources Investigations Report 01-
4207. Raleigh, North Carolina.
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) page 42
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

APPENDIX A - FIGURES
Figure 1. Site Location
Figure 1A. Reference Site Location
Figure 2. Hydrologic Unit Map
Figure 3. Topography and Drainage Area
Figure 4. Existing Conditions and Soils
Figure 5A. McRae Land Company Reference Reach Dimension, Pattern, and Profile
Figure 513. Jordan Creek Reference Reach Dimension, Pattern, and Profile
Figure 6. Proposed Conditions
Figures 6A-D. Mitigation Justification
Figure 7. Proposed Dimension, Pattern, and Profile
Figure 8. Typical Structure Details
Figure 9. Planting Plan
Figure 10. Monitoring Plan
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) Appendices
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

rF L �ft •
* N
k
M • f -
%4-
so
� # � Ikzlcm I:nvk9ranar4ail, Inc.
� Prepared for:
Y -
C" rg t:E Na i I-'gra'hi
1 ' � �__-
-�� ��- Project:
VV
�_ �
SWAMP GRAPE
MITIGATION SITE
Fib + -do- i Robeson County, NC
41
err -r arm rA Title:
130 — J16- cat
'A
SITE
- - LOCATION
501 I! „# _
jw
Drawn by:
cK
49
' \ - . Date:
a 5x� �� !
APR 2020
Legend
o� ,� _
S `. i s
.--Rowland - ' 0 oSwamp Grape Easement
Scale:
T >� S5 - _ � # - NCDOT Roads 1:15,000
Project No.:
20-003
0 40 USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map (Rowland, NC Quad)
AD -
Directions to the Site from Raleigh: FIGURE
t - Head East on 1-40 for 29 miles
Y - ilk- Take exit 328A to merge onto 1-95 South
- After 79 miles, take exit 2 toward Rowland and turn right onto NC-130 W
- After 2.5 miles, turn left onto Ashpole Church Road, then right onto Persimmon Road
- After 2 miles, turn left onto Kitchen Street
k x -
- The Site is located on the right after 0.5 miles and can be accessed from Rhein Drive.
Copyright:©-2013 Na tio al Geographic - Site Latitude, Longitude 34.5639,-79.3490 (WGS84)
` bhui Fk k _ Society, i-cub d
- ,- d

�ti". a�a sci
o
Laurel Hill
Jordan Creek �a
Reference Site a`
Lauri nburg
Gitson
91
�` l9
P \ Q}
McColl \
i"
Pea Badge Rd \ i
Tahirn \ �
McRae Land Co
+� \ Reference Site
Legend \ ma
OSwamp Grape Site
Reference Site
- Atlantic Southern Loam Plains EcoRegion /
Geologic Unit Boundary
Countylines f
Clio
Carolina Cn�/ °` \
7N
0 1.25 2.5 5 ,' 7.5 10
Miles
7
's.
Ma
a
o`
Wilkinson Cr
Reference Site
Swamp Grape Site
n
0
Map
Unit
Geologic Zone
Kb
Black Creek Formation
Km
Middendorf Formation
N
Red Springs
f v�f
Axic- Enwon-enivi, Inc.
Prepared for:
Project:
SWAMP GRAPE
MITIGATION SITE
Robeson County, NC
i Title:
Pembroke
REFERENCE
SITE
LOCATIONS
4
Drawn by:
WG L
Date:
SEPT 2020
Scale:
1:120,000
Project No.:
20-003
FIGURE
- Raynham 1 A
Wc
McDonald
6

N I =gram
1#Duarr�in J..
ham
` .
401
yy'
� --- CCow
da�rJy
r-
177 7#
# x
t1 74
Farrah
a
Laurel Bill'
4'e l
III
4
r
f
Ll bile➢
* ,
1
�
4015
•y VilSrlace
�
'S'
�
a
Arw
;..
Beattie
'
3gtIIOt�
1
H T
-
US
�,.•
�
Bennett�irill
1
"
—
A
T 5B
s
812
.�
Legend
Swamp Grape Easement
'}
USGS Hydrologic Unit 03040204
14 Digit Hydrologic Unit Boundaries
•.,�
•.
�
Targeted Local Watersheds
--4
J
0 2.5 5 10
15
+ I
Ab
Miles
t
Fudurn Emnmomwnl . Inc.
Prepared for:
r}
RESTORATION
r
r
4
1 t Project:
{
20
.B hill
SwIn s SWAMP GRAPE
` MITIGATION SITE
y Robeson County, NC
7: f' Title:
� I
HYDROLOGIC
= UNIT MAP
711 Poke
:z
Location of Swamp Grape Mitigation ! 1
Site within USGS Hydrologic Unit r urE
and Targeted Local Watershed
03040204048010
ao ,
do
+ % #1
l
s
w a ilr�tane+
Orri
Copyri2:(l 2018
Drawn by:
KRJ
Date:
APR 2020
Scale:
1:260,000
Project No.:
20-003
FIGURE
2

50
25
a
0 50
100 150
Reference Pattern
Lp-p = 21 (11 - 39) ft
pattern Legend
Lm = 35 (23 - 44) ft
Tap of Bank
Wbelt = 14 (12 - 17) ft
- Thalweg
Rc = 7 (5 - 13) ft
Lp-p/Wbkf = 3.5 (1.8 - 6.5)
Cross Section
Lm/Wbkf = 5.9 (3.9 - 7.4)
Wbelt/Wbkf = 2.3 (2.0 - 2.8)
RcNVbkf = 1.1 (0.8 - 2A )
SIN = 1.13
.11
too
S9
100
99
99 K
27 c
�Crea Land Company Reference Reach
IT
.,s
1
W
Abkf = 7.0 ft
Wbkf = 7.1 ft 100
Amax = 1.6 ft
0
one Hrea Crass Section 2 - Riffle
Abkf = 5A ft
Dave =0.8ft
Wbkf =6.6ft
inkfL II Dmax = 1.0 ft
Bank Height = 1.0 ft
Bank Height Ratio = 1.0
W/D = 8.0
FPA=75
ENT = 11 A
Stream Type = E
5 10 15 20 25
0 5 to- 15 20
Cross Section 3 - Pool
Abkf = 6.5 ft
Wbkf = 8.5 ft
Dmax = 1.3 ft
Cross Section 4 - Riffle
Abkf = 4.2 ft
Dave = 0,8 ft
Wbkf = 5A ft
Dmax = 1.1 ft
Bank Height = 1.1 ft
Bank Height Ratio = 1.0
WfD = 7.0
FPA = 75
ENT = 13.8
IStream Type = E
z=_-
Profile (Reference Reach)
Save = 0.0077 rise/run
Svalley = 0.0087 rise/run
Sriffle = 0.0026 (0 - 0.0712) rise/run
Spool = 0.0020 (0 - 0.0057) rise/run
Srun = 0.0060 (0 - 0.1700) rise/run
Sglide = 0.0002 (0 - 0.0075) rise/run
Water Surface
Channel Bed
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
NOTES/REVISIONS
i
Project:
Swamp Grape
Mitigation Site
Robeson County
North Carolina
Title:
McRae Land Company
Reference Reach
Dimension, Pattern,
and Profile
scale: NA FIGURE NO.
Date: 5 A
Feb 2020
Project No.:
20-003

150
100
50
0 1 1 1 1 1 1
0 100
Reference Pattern
Lp-p = 89 (49 - 152) ft
Lm = 115 (63 - 166) ft
Wbelt = 99 (75 - 134) ft
Rc=26 (13-53)ft
Lp-p/Wbkf = 4.3 (2A - 7.3)
Lm/Wbkf = 5.5 (3.0 - 8.0)
Wbelt/Wbkf = 4.5 (3.6 - 5A)
RdWbkf = 1.3 (0.6 - 2.6)
SIN = 1.60
*a
'aa
98
97
s�
100
99
99
98
98
S7
S7
95
95
95
95
94
Cros 3 Sec ion 2
)n 4
SOction
200
Pattern Legend
Top of Bank
- - Thalweg
Cross Section
•.a 2a 30 as 5a as
Jordan Creek Reference Reach
-�1
33
aik.'uii
1
97
3
96
85
0 400 2a 30 4a F, as 7a
101
100
JUU111,
ss an
98
97
95
0 10 20 30 40 50
Cross section 1 - Riffle
Abkf = 44.6 ft
. fi err■■■■■►�������rr:wanu���������■■■■■■■■■■r■■■■■
■E.■■■■■■■■■Ll■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■��■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
a `aa 2a0 300 40a =_•aa r1m 7M SIM 10
Profile (Reference Reach
Cross Section 2 - Ponl
Abkf = 52.5 ft
Wbkf = 24.4 ft
Dmax = 3.6 ft
Cross section 3 - Riffle
Abkf = 45.1 ft
Dave = 2.1 ft
Wbkf = 21.5 ft
Dmax = 2.7 ft
Bank Height = 2.7 ft
Bank Height Ratio = 1.0
W/❑ = 10.3
FPA = 250
ENT = 11.6
Stream Type = E
Cross Section 4 - Pool
Abkf = 68.4 ft
Wbkf = 19.6 ft
Dmax = 6.0 ft
Save = 0.0008 rise/run
Svalley = 0.0013 rise/run
Sriffle = 0.0008 (0.0003 - 0.0018) riselrun
Spool = 0.0006 (0 - 0.0014) rise/run
Srun = 0.0026 (0 - 0.0038) rise/run
Sglide = 0.0000 (0 - 0.0001) rise/run
Water Surface
Channel Bed
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
NOTES/REVISIONS
Project:
Swamp Grape
Mitigation Site
Robeson County
North Carolina
Title:
Jordan Creek
Reference Reach
Dimension, Pattern,
and Profile
Scale: NA FIGURE NO.
Date: 5 B
Feb 2020
Project No.:
20-003

UT 1 (Reach 8) = 87 ft
Enhancement (Level 1)
Mitigation Activities
Channel will excavated at the existing floodplain grade
Install habitat strucures to stabilize the channel,
add woody debris to the channel, and create habitat.
Plant with native forest vegetation.
n\\/ UT 1 (Reach 6) = 165 ft
l ] \l l Enhancement (Level l)
Mitigation Activities
C� Channel will be contoured to the appropriate dimension and
stabilized where necessary.
Plant with native forest vegetation.
UT 1 (Reach 7) = 206 ft
Restoration
Mitigation Activities
\
Channel will excavated at the existing floodplain grade
reducing channel depth by over one foot.
Restore channel pattern features (Rc, Lp-p, Lm) that are
filled by dam construction.
Remnants of the failed dam will be removed.
Plant with native forest vegetation.
UT 1 (Reach 5) = 230 ft
Restoration
Mitigation Activities
Channel will excavated at the existing floodplain grade
with the appropriate pattern features (Rc, Lp-p, Lm).
Channel will be moved away from unstable valley wall.
Plant with native forest vegetation.
Stabilization
1 (Reach 4) = 235 ft En
Enhancement (Level II)
Mitigation Activities )
- Channel will be contoured to the appropriate dimension and
stabilized where necessary.
Plant with native forest vegetation. \ 1
UT 2 (Reach 2) = 266 ft
Enhancement (Level 1)
Mitigation Activities
Excavate channel at proper dimension, reducing channel depth from 1.9 ft to 0.8 ft.
Adjust channel pattern from Lp-p of 8-35 ft to 24-49 ft and Rc from 4-8 ft to 18-20 ft.
The channel into UT 1 across an inner bend.
Plant with native vegetation
UT 2 (Reach 1) = 684 ft /
Restoration /
Mitigation Activities
Pond will be excavated to remove unconsolidated sediments.
Pond will be backfilled with stable soil material.
Channel will excavated within the stabilized pond bed.
Remove remnants of the road crossing/dam.
Remove dock and gazebo.
Tie to the downstream floodplain with step-down habitat strucures.
Plant with native forest vegetation.
LEGEND
Easement Boundary = -24.4 ac
Major Topography Line
Minor Topography Line
Stream Restoration = 2403 ft
Stream Enhancement (Level 1) = 1494 ft
Stream Enhancement (Level 11) = 235 ft
Wetland Reestablishment = 5.322 ac
Wetland Rehabilitation = 2.730 ac
Wetland Enhancement = 12.336 ac
0"
Piped Crossing
Ditch Backfill
— —
Drain Tile Removal
Log Cross Vane
Log Vane
UT 1 (Reach 1) = 297 ft
Enhancement (Level 1)
Mitigation Activities
Piped channel crossing installed in upper reach.
Channel will be backfilled approximately 5.5 ft.
Channel width will be decreased from 30.1 ft to 7.4 ft.
Ditches will be backfilled and drain tile removed.
Livestock removal from area.
Plant with native forest vegetation in pasture areas.
0
UT 3 (Reach 2) = 68 ft
Restoration
Mitigation Activities
Channel will excavated to tie UT 3 with UT 1 across and inner bend. \
Plant with native forest vegetation.
A 9. �.
UT 3 (Reach 1) = 133 ft
Enhancement (Level 1)
Mitigation Activities
Tie to upstream channel elevation at the property line.
Contour the channel to the appropriate dimension and reduce
channel depth from 2.1 ft to 0.9 ft.
Ease radius of curvature from 8-14 ft to 19-28 ft.
Install habitat strucures to stabilize the channel,
add woody debris to the channel, and create habitat.
Plant with native forest vegetation.
UT 1 (Reach 3) = 546 ft _
Enhancement (Level 1)
Mitigation Activities
Channel will excavated at the existing floodplain grade.
Reduce channel depth from 2.1 ft to 1.2 ft.
Adjust channel pattern and reduce Lp-p and Rc.
Habitat strucures will be installed to stabilize the channel,
add woody debris to the channel, and create habitat.
Plant with native forest vegetation.
UT 1 (Reach 2) = 1215 ft
Restoration
Mitigation Activities
Channel will excavated at the existing floodplain grade.
In middle reaches, some floodplain excavation will be necessary
to tie into elevations of the historic pond bed.
Floodplain fill in the pond bed will be required to raise the floodplai
to the historic elevation prior to settling and liquifaction.
Step-down habitat strucures will be installed to tie the upper UT 1
Reach 2 floodplain to the lower reaches.
Ditches will be backfilled and drain tile removed.
Livestock removal from area.
Plant with native forest vegetation in pasture areas.
W1n
Powerline moved outside
of conservation easement
boundaries.
0 200 400
SCALE IN FEET
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
NOTES/REVISIONS
Project:
Swamp Grape
Mitigation Site
Robeson County
North Carolina
Title:
RESTORATION
PLAN
Scale: FIGURE NO.
AS SHOWN
Date: /�
Mar 2020 /v
Project No.:
20-003

F'S.,
0
UT 1 (Raarh 1) = 298 ft
Enhancement (Level 1)
Mitigation Activities
- Piped channel crossing installed in upper reach.
- Channel will be backfilled approximately 5.5 ft.
- Channel width will be decreased from 30.1 ft to 7. 1 ft.
- Ditches will be backfilled and drain tile removed.
- Livestock removal from area.
- Plant with native forest vegetation in pasture areas -
UT 1 Reach 1
Measurement
Existing
Proposed
- Channel Width
30.1 ft
7.4 ft
- Low Bank Height
5.95 ft
0.7 ft
- Sinuosity
1.01
1.13
- Radius of Curvature
NA
14 - 22
LEGEND
Easement Boundary = --24.4 ac
Major Topography Line
Minor Topography Line
Stream Restoration = 2403 ft
Stream Enhancement (Level 1) = 1494 ft
Stream Enhancement (Level 11) = 235 ft
I Piped Crossing
Ditch Backfill
Drain Tile Removal
N
0
J
UT 1 (Raarh 2) = 1215 ft
Restoration
Mitigation Activities
Channel will excavated at the existing floodplain grade
In middle reaches, some floodplain excavation will be necessary
to tie into elevations of the historic pond bed.
Floodplain fill in the pond bed will be required to raise the floodplain
to the historic elevation prior to settling and liquifaction.
Step-down habitat strucures will be installed to tie the upper UT 1
Reach 2 floodplain to the lower reaches.
' Ditches will be backfilled and drain tile removed.
/ Livestock removal from area.
Plant with native forest vegetation.
UT 1 Reach 2
Measurement
Existing
Proposed
Channel Width
15.9 ft
7.4 ft
Low Bank Height
3.3 ft
0.7 ft
Sinuosity
1.01
1.16
Radius of Curvature
NA
14 - 18
0
0 50 100
SCALE IN FEET
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
NOTES/REVISIONS
Project:
Swamp Grape
Mitigation Site
Robeson County
North Carolina
Title:
MITIGATION
JUSTIFICATION
Scale:
AS SHOWN
FIGURE NO.
A A
(�=
Date:
Mar 2020
Project No.:
20-003

UT 2 Reach 1
Measurement
Existing
Proposed
Channel Width
163 ft - Braided
8.3 ft
Sinuosity
1 1.02
1.2
Radius of Curvature
I NA
18 - 20
■
a
UT 2 (Reach 1) = 684 ft
Restoration
Mitigation Activities
- Pond will be excavated to remove unconsolidated sediments.
- Pond will be backfilled with stable soil material.
- Channel will excavated within the stabilized pond bed.
- Remove remnants of the road crossing/dam.
- Remove dock and gazebo.
- Tie to the downstream floodplain with step-down habitat strucures.
- Plant with native forest veaetation.
LEGEND
Easement Boundary = --24.4 ac
Major Topography Line
Minor Topography Line
Stream Restoration = 2403 ft
Stream Enhancement (Level 1) = 1494 ft
Stream Enhancement (Level II) = 235 ft
Piped Crossing
Ditch Backfill
Drain Tile Removal
0
HT 1 (Raarh 2) = 1215 ft
Restoration
Mitigation Activities
- Channel will excavated at the existing floodplain grade.
- In middle reaches, some floodplain excavation will be necessary
to tie into elevations of the historic pond bed.
- Floodplain fill in the pond bed will be required to raise the floodplain
to the historic elevation prior to settling and liquifaction.
- Step-down habitat strucures will be installed to tie the upper UT 1
Reach 2 floodplain to the lower reaches.
- Ditches will be backfilled and drain tile removed.
- Livestock removal from area.
- Plant with native forest vegetation.
UT 1 Reach 2
Measurement
Existing
Proposed
- Channel Width
15.9 ft
7.4 ft
- Low Bank Height
3.3 ft
0.7 ft
- Sinuosity
1.01
1.16
- Radius of Curvature
NA
14 - 18
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
NOTES/REVISIONS
Project:
Swamp Grape
Mitigation Site
Robeson County
North Carolina
Title:
� MITIGATION
JUSTIFICATION
U
0 50 100
SCALE IN FEET
Scale: FIGURE NO.
AS SHOWN
Date: 6 B
Mar 2020
Project No.:
20-003

LEGEND
Easement Boundary = -24.4 ac
Major Topography Line
Minor Topography Line
Stream Restoration = 2403 ft
Stream Enhancement (Level 1) = 1494 ft
Stream Enhancement (Level 11) = 235 ft
Piped Crossing
Ditch Backfill
Drain Tile Removal
NESTED GAUGE LEGEND
Wetland Rehabilitation Area
• Nested Groundwater Gauge
Note: Zone of ditch influce is depicted on Figure 6C
for nested gauge area only.
Zone of ditch drainage influence from
existing, incised stream channels within the middle
reaches of UT 2 and 3. These reaches are currently
incised to a depth of 2.0 to 2.8 feet based on measured
cross sectional data. Proposed channel depths are
expected to be 0.7 to 1.2 feet. Results of the equation
are discussed in Section 3.5.1 of the Detailed Restoration
Plan, and summarized in Table 8.
IIT 1 (RParh 4) = 235 ft
Enhancement (Level 11)
Mitigation Activities
Channel will be contoured to the appropriate dimension and
stabilized where necessary.
Plant with native forest vegetation.
UT 1 Reach 4
Measurement
Existing
Proposed
Channel Width
16.1 ft
13.4 ft
Low Bank Height
2.1 ft
1.2 ft
* �F=rjo. Nested groundwater gauges
in zone of influence from incised
stream channels. Gauges are
nested at 10, 20, and 45 feet from
/ existing channel top of bank.
UT 2 Reach 2
Measurement
Existing
Proposed
Channel Width
7.5 ft
8.3 ft
Low Bank Height
1.9 ft
0.8 ft
Pool -to -Pool Spacing
8 - 35 ft
24 - 49 ft
- Radius of Curvature
4.0 - 7.5 ft
18 - 20 ft
\
F�4 C�c.1C�
IIT 2 (RParh ) = 2RR ft
Enhancement (Level 1)
Mitigation Activities
- Excavate channel at proper dimension, reducing channel depth from 1.9 ft to 0.8 ft.
- Adjust channel pattern from Lp-p of 8-35 ft to 24-49 ft and Rc from 4-8 ft to 18-20 ft.
- The channel into UT 1 across an inner bend.
- Plant with native vegetation.
J�
[IT R (RParh 2) = RR ft
Restoration
Mitigation Activities
- Channel will excavated to tie UT 3 with UT 1 across and inner bend.
- Plant with native forest vegetation.
UT 3 Reach 1 and Reach 2
Measurement
Existing
Proposed
- Channel Width
7.8 ft
9.6 ft
- Low Bank Height
2.1 ft
0.9 ft
- Radius of Curvature
7.8 - 13.9 ft
19 - 28 ft
IIT A (RParh 1) = 131 ft
Enhancement (Level 1)
Mitigation Activities
- Tie to upstream channel elevation at the property line.
- Contour the channel to the appropriate dimension and reduce
channel depth from 2.1 ft to 0.9 ft.
Ease radius of curvature from 8-14 ft to 19-28 ft.
- Install habitat structures to stabilize the channel,
add woody debris to the channel, and create habitat.
Plant with native forest vegetation.
a
I�(RPar_h R) = 54R ft
Enhancement (Level 1)
Mitigation Activities
- Channel will excavated at the existing floodplain grade.
- Reduce channel depth from 2.1 ft to 1.2 ft.
- Adjust channel pattern and reduce Lp-p and Rc.
- Habitat structures will be installed to stabilize the channel,
add woody debris to the channel, and create habitat.
- Plant with native forest vegetation.
UT 1 Reach 3
Measurement
Existing
Proposed
Channel Width
8.8 ft
13.4 ft
Low Bank Height
2.1 ft
1.2 ft
Pool -to -Pool Spacing
20 - 55 ft
37 - 54 ft
Radius of Curvature
7.5 - 23.4 ft
14 - 24 ft
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
NOTES/REVISIONS
Project:
Swamp Grape
Mitigation Site
Robeson County
North Carolina
Title:
i
MITIGATION
JUSTIFICATION
0 50 100
SCALE IN FEET
Scale:
FIGURE NO.
AS SHOWN
^
Date:
Mar 2020
V=
C
Project No.:
20-003

UT 1 (Raarh R = R7 ft O
Enhancement (Level I)
Mitigation Activities
- Channel will excavated at the existing floodplain grade.
- Install habitat strucures to stabilize the channel,
add woody debris to the channel, and create habitat.
Plant with native forest vegetation.
L--�
UT 1 ( ach 7) = 2QA ft
Restoration
Mitigation Activities
Channel will excavated at the existing floodplain grade
reducing channel depth by over one foot.
Restore channel pattern features (Rc, Lp-p, Lm) that are
filled by dam construction.
Remnants of the failed dam will be removed.
Plant with native forest vegetation.
UT 1 Reach 8
Measurement
Existing
Proposed
-Channel Width
26.6
13.4 ft
- Low Bank Height
1.7 ft
1.2 ft
UT 1 Reach 7
Measurement
Existing
Proposed
Channel Width
15.4 ft
13.4 ft
Low Bank Height
2.2 ft
1.2 ft
94
UT 1 (Reach 5) = 23n ft
Restoration
Mitigation Activities
- Channel will excavated at the existing floodplain grade
with the appropriate pattern features (Rc, Lp-p, Lm).
- Channel will be moved away from unstable valley wall.
- Plant with native forest vegetation.
UT 1 Reach 5
Measurement
Existing
Proposed
Channel Width
12.2 ft
13.4 ft
Low Bank Height
2.2 ft
1.2 ft
Sinuosity
1.14
1.21
Pool -to -Pool Spacing
23 - 38 ft
48 - 73 ft
Radius of Curvature
9.7 - 12.5 ft
24 - 40 ft
LEGEND
Easement Boundary = —24.4 ac
Major Topography Line
Minor Topography Line
Stream Restoration = 2403 ft
Stream Enhancement (Level 1) = 1494 ft
Stream Enhancement (Level 11) = 235 ft
Piped Crossing
Ditch Backfill
Drain Tile Removal
0
UT 1(Reach d)= 235 ft
Enhancement (Level 11)
Mitigation Activities
Channel will be contoured to the appropriate dimension and
stabilized where necessary.
Plant with native forest vegetation.
UT 1 Reach 4
Measurement
Existing
Proposed
- Channel Width
16.1 ft
13.4 ft
- Low Bank Height
2.1 ft
1.2 ft
UT 1 (Reach = IAS ft
Enhancement (Level 1)
Mitigation Activities
Channel will be contoured to the appropriate dimension and
stabilized where necessary.
Plant with native forest vegetation.
UT 1 Reach 6
Measurement
Existing
Proposed
Channel Width
11.3 ft
13.4 ft
Low Bank Height
2.2 ft
1.2 ft
Pool -to -Pool Spacing
24 - 58 ft
55 - 73 ft
Radius of Curvature
13.6 - 18.6 ft
24 - 40 ft
s
��
0 50 100
SCALE IN FEET
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
NOTES/REVISIONS
Project:
Swamp Grape
Mitigation Site
Robeson County
North Carolina
Title:
MITIGATION
JUSTIFICATION
Scale: FIGURE NO.
AS SHOWN
Date: 6 D
Mar 2020
Project No.:
20-003

POOL
_WATER SURFACE - -
MMATiM
rF j-
-
I
BOTTOM OF
CHANNEL J
POOL-TO•POOL SPACING [fl.]
{VARIES -SEE NOTE 1 )
TYPICAL CHANNEL PROFILE
NOTES:
1, POOL -TO -POOL SPACING IS MEASURED FROM
CENTER OF POOL BEND TO CENTER OF POOL BEND.
POOLLENGTH
TYPICAL CHANNEL PLAN VIEW
CHANNEL PLAN VIEW NOTES:
1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL LAYOUT THE CHANNEL ALIGNMENT BY LOCATING
THE RADII AND SCRIBING THE CENTER LINE FOR EACH POOL BEND. THE
CONNECTING TANGENT SECTIONS SHALL COMPLETE THE LAYOUT OF THE CHANNEL.
2. FIELD ADJUSTMENTS OF THE ALIGNMENT MAY BE REQUIRED TO SAVE TREES
OR AVOID OBSTACLES. THE STAKE -OUT SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE CONSTRUCTION
MANAGER BEFORE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CHANNEL.
15' MIN. w hkf
VALLEY
SIDE SLOPE LIVE WILLOW
STAKES
COI R FIBE R
EROSION PROPOSED
3 CONTROL MATTING FLOODPLAIN
21 o
6ANK SLOPE
w
W bol
TYPICAL RIFFLE CROSS-SECTION
PROPOS
FLOODP
MAX, 11 SLOPE
TYPICAL POOL CROSS-SECTION
CHANNEL CONSTRUCTION NOTES:
1. MATERIAL EXCAVATED FROM CHANNEL AND FLOODPLAIN SHALL BE
USED TO BACKFILL EXISTING CHANNEL,
2. BANK PROTECTION SHALL CONSIST OF NATURAL COIR FIBER MATTING.
LIVE WILLOW
STAKES
3POSED
)ODPLAIN
CROSS-SECTION DIMENSIONS
REACH
Wbkf ft.
Wbot ft.
Driff ft.
Dthal ft.
D ool ft.
Wool ft.
Wthal ft.
UT 1 Upstream of UT 2
7A
4.6
0.6
0.1
0.9
8.9
3.5
UT 1 Downstream of UT 2
13.4
8.6
1.1
0.1
1.6
16.1
6.5
UT 2
8.3
5.1
0.7
0.1
1.0
9.9
3.9
UT 3
9.6
6.0
0.8
0.1
1.2
11.5
j 4.3
Axiom Environmental. Inc.
I NOTES/REVISIONS I
Project:
Swamp Grape
Mitigation Site
Robeson County
North Carolina
Title:
PROPOSED DIMENSION,
PATTERN, AND PROFILE
Scale:
FIGURE NO.
NA
Date,
Mar 2020
Project No-,
20-003

X57 STONE AND
CLASS'A' RIP RAPT
NATIVE CHANNEL -
MATERIAL
LOG CROSS VANE
SCALE'NTS
FILTER FABRIC
.--. LOG SILL
:ILTER FABRIC
HEADER LOG
NOTES:
1. HEADER AND FOOTER LOGS SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 18`
DIAMETER AND SHALL BE A HARDWOOD SPECIES.
(FOOTER LOG MAY BE SUBSTITUTED WITH PINE)
2. A DOUBLE FOOTER LOG MAY BE REQUIRED IN SAND BED
STREAMS,
3. ALL STONES ARE TO BE STRUCTURE STONES,
4. FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE PLACED ON THE UPSTREAM SIDE
OF THE STRUCTURE TO PREVENT WASHOUT OF SEDIMENT
THROUGH LOG GAPS, FILTER FABRIC SHALL EXTEND
FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE FOOTER TO THE FINISHED GRADE
ELEVATION AND SHALL BE PLACED THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE
STRUCTURE.
S. PERPENDICULAR ROOTWAO LOGS ARE REQUIRED IF THE LOG
VANE ARM DOES NOT HAVE A ROOTBALL TO TIE INTO THE BANK.
HEADER LOG
7• fL� A COiR LOG TOP OF BANK
CLASS'A' RIP PAP FLOW (BANKFULL)
NATIVE CHANNEL
MATERIAL
EXITING 7tlP OF BANK 957 STONE 1 NATIVE 1 SCOUR
EXISTING CHANNEL MATERIAL \ OL
GROUND HEADER LOG IBANKFULL) GROUND
COIR LOG ]]] STREAMBED
BACKFILLED AND AND
PAC TS❑ POOL FILTER ELEVATION
WITH p57 STONE RND 7 C][q FABRIC
CLANNE RIP RAP 1 NATIVE '�'�i FOOTER LOG
CHANNEL MATERIAL 92F
STREAMSN FILTER FABRIC SECTION A -A
ELEVATION FOOTER LOG
SECTION B-B
REACH
ARM LENGTH (FT,)
CHANNEL OEPTH (FT-)
UT 1 Upstream of UT 2
a
0-".9
UT 1 Downstream of UT 2
14
1.2 - 1-6
UT2and 3
9
0.7-1.1
NOTE:
HEADER AND FOOTER STONES ARE LARGE, ANGULAR BOULDERS
MEASURING A MINIMUM OF 24" ALONG THE SHORTEST DIMENSION,
CHANNEL
BANK __'-
0
4b
CHANNEL
BANK
FILTER
EXIST,
CHANNEL
HEADER
STONE
ELEVATION A -A
� HEADEft STONE - -I
HEADER STONE
� 0.5'
5'
�� FOOTER STONE � CHANNEL
— f1CDTw l
yrM
A �ti
NEEDEDRICK FILL
PLAN VIEW WHERE
TYPICAL CROSS -VANE
\\ CHANNEL
\ BANK
I\
\ i •A
\ l
CHANNEL
BANK i I
I I
LARGE ' t
STONE r ►
r
1 / //111 ►
SCOUR I / // 1 A ►
HOLE _mmm1 I 11 1 I 1 ► ►
I �
I/ I I I ►
r ii ,'� ,I ►► ►
1 rr /// � ►1 ►
l � / t► Ir
1
Fooief Log
I
I
I
I
I
NOTE:
FILTER FABRIC TOED IN AND DRAPED PLAN VIEW
ON UPSTREAM SIDE OF LOG VANE —
PRIOR TO BACKFILL, SCALE: N.T-S-
LARGE
TOP OF BANK
CROSS-SECTION A -A
SCALE' N-T.S.
-OG VANE
FILTER
FABRIC
LARGE
STONE
TOP OF BANK
FOOTER BANKFULL_ — — — — — —— _ _ _ J
STORE
r �
BOTTOM OF CHANNEL
l � �
BACK FILL • _
TO GRADE I r IEADER LOG FOO[ef LflA
FLOW FILTER
— - - — - FABRIC
EXIST.
t GROUND NOTE:
FILTER FABRIC TOED IN AND DRAPED
PROFILE B-B ON UPSTREAM SIDE OF LOG VANE
— SCALE: N.T.S. PRIOR TO SACKFILL-
FILTER FABRIC
TYPICAL LOG VANE
OF
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Project:
Swamp Grape
Mitigation Site
Robeson County
North Carolina
Title:
TYPICAL
STRUCTURE
DETAILS
FIGURE NO.
NO SCALE
Date:
Mar 2020
Project No-: 8
20-003

e
r. 3 i.. !?. • '� .,ice• Y
Ve gelation Asix is lion
fyyes y Gum S vamp*
C.*Ha tal Plain S mall
stream Swanr
Streann_yide
Assemblage—
TOTAL
Area (acres)
2.3
17.4
2.8
22-5
Species
# planted*
% ortotal
# planted'
°/a of total
# planted""
% of total
# planted
Swamp black gum (Nyssa bifloru1
391
-.
20
190
10
2948
Bald cypress (Taxodizrm disfichrrm)
391
25
' :r,..
20
I` ei
.11
2948
Tupelo gum rNyssaagsralica)
391
25
391
Pond cypress (Taxodiumascendens}
391
25
391
Water oak (Quercus nigra ]
1775
15
190
10
1965
Willow oak (Qkercus pheflos }
1775
1 �
190
10
1965
Schutrerd oak (Quercus schiimardn }
1 183
10
190
10
1374 u;
American elm ([llmsrs anzericana }
1 183
10
190
10
1374
Shagbark hickory (Caryaovafa)
1183
10
190
Ifl
1374
Black willow (Salix nigra)
190
Ifl
190
Tag alder (Alnms seir dafa)
190
Ifl
190
Buttonbush (Cephalanrhus occidenfalis }
190
Ifl
190
TOTAL 1564 100 11H31 100 1904 100 15300
Planted at a dertsily of 680 stems/acre.
'i Planted w :i timAy of 2720 sIciii= ; ov. `
INN
LEGEND
Easement Boundary = -24.4 ac
Streamside Assemblage
r Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp
.--mo Cypress Gum Swamp
I
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
NOTES/REVISIONS
Project:
Swamp Grape
Mitigation Site
Robeson County
North Carolina
Title:
PLANTING
PLAN
Scale.-
AS SHOWN FIGURE NO.
�
Date,
D 200 400 Mar 202O9
Project No-,
SCALE IN FEET 20-003

J
4PA
1—I i l
LEGEND
Easement Boundary = —24.4 ac
Stream Restoration = 2403 ft
Stream Enhancement { Level 1] = 1495 ft
Stream Enhancement ( Level 11) = 235 ft
Wetland Reestablishment = 5.322 ac
Wetland Rehabilitation = 2.730 ac
Wetland Enhancement = 12,331 ac
Permanent Monumented Cross Section
.
Vegetation Plot
Groundwater Gauge
/
Crest Gauge
Q
Rain Gauge/Soil Temperature Probe
$ tRESTORATION
NOTES/REVISIONS
..`
i
N, Project:
Swamp Grape
Mitigation Site
r
Robeson County
North Carolina
Title:
MONITORING
PLAN
Scale.-
FIGURE NO.
AS SHOWN
1
0
Date,
Mar 2020
Project No-,
20-003

Appendix B - Existing Stream & Wetland Data
Table B1. Swamp Grape Morphological Stream Characteristics
Existing Stream Cross-section Data
NC SAM Forms
NC WAM Forms
BEHI/NBS Data
Soil Boring Logs
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) Appendices
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

Table 131. Swamp Grape Site Morphological Stream Characteristics
REFERENCE - JORDAN
REFERENCE-MCREA
Variables
CREEK
LAND COMPANY
Stream Type
E 5
E 5
Drainage Area (mil)
16.90
0.20
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
44.3
4.3
Dimension Variables
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (Abkf)
44.9
4.8
Existing Cross -Sectional Area (Aapn;xg)
44.9
4.2-5.4
Bankfull Width (Nb )
Mean:
20.8
Mean:
6.0
Range:
20.1 -21.5
Range:
5.4-6.6
Bankfull Mean Depth (Dbkf)
Mean:
2.2
Mean:
0.8
Range:
2.1 -2.2
Range:
0.8-0.8
Bankfull Maximum Depth (D_x)
Mean:
2.8
Mean:
1.1
Range:
2.7 - 2.9
Range:
1.0-1.1
Pool Width (W
Mean:
22.0
Mean:
7.8
Pool)
Range:
19.6 - 24.4
Range:
7.1-8.5
Maximum Pool Depth (Dp,,,)
Mean:
4.8
Mean:
1.5
Range:
3.6 - 6.0
Range:
1.3-1.6
Mean:
250
Mean:
75.0
Width of Floodprone Area (Wfpa)
Range:
Range:
Dimension Ratios
Entrenchment Ratio (NroafWb )
Mean:
12.0
Mean:
12.6
Range:
11.6 - 12.4
Range:
11.4-13.9
Width / Depth Ratio (Wbkf/Dbkf)
Mean:
9.7
Mean:
7.5
Range:
9.1 - 10.2
Range:
6.8-8.3
Max. Dbkf / Dbkf Ratio
Mean:
1.3
Mean:
1.3
Range:
Range:
1.3-1.4
Low Bank Height / Max. Dbkf Ratio
Mean:
1.0
Mean:
1.0
Range:
Range:
Maximum Pool Depth / Bankfull
Mean:
2.2
Mean:
1.8
Mean Depth (Dp,,,/Dbkf)
Range:
1.7 - 2.8
Range:
1.6-2.0
Pool Width / Bankfull
Mean:
1.1
Mean:
1.3
Width (WplllfWbkf)
Range:
0.9 - 1.2
Range:
1.2-1.4
Pool Area / Bankfull
Mean:
1.3
Mean:
1.4
Cross Sectional Area
Range:
1.2 - 1.5
Range:
1.4-1.5
REFERENCE - JORDAN
REFERENCE- MCREA
Variables
CREEK
LAND COMPANY
Pattern
Variables
Pool to Pool Spacing (LP_p)
Med:
89.1
Med:
21.1
Range:
49-152
Range:
10.6-38.9
Meander Length (Lm)
Med:
114.5
Med:
35.4
Range:
63-166
Range:
23.3-44.4
Belt Width (Wbe10
Med:
99.0
Med:
13.7
Range:
75-134
Range:
11.7-16.6
Radius of Curvature (Rj
Med:
26.4
Med:
6.5
Range:
13-53
Range:
4.5-12.7
Sinuosity (Sin)
1
1.60
1
1.13
Pattern Ratios
Pool to Pool Spacing/
Med:
4.3
Med:
3.5
Bankfull Width (LP_PNVbkf)
Range:
2.4-7.3
Range:
1.8-6.5
Meander Length/
Med:
5.5
Med:
5.9
Bankfull Width (LmfWbkf)
Range:
3.0-8.0
Range:
3.9-7.4
Meander Width Ratio
Med:
4.5
Med:
2.3
(WbeicfWbkf)
Range:
3.6 - 5.4
Range:
2.0-2.8
Radius of Curvature/
Med:
1.3
Med:
1.1
Bankfull Width (RCNVbkf)
Range:
0.6 - 2.6
Range:
0.8-2.1
Profile Variables
Average Water Surface Slope (Sage)
0.0008
0.0077
Valley Slope (S,11,)
0.0013
0.0087
Riffle Slope (Sr;ffiJ
Mean:
0.0008
Mean:
0.0026
Range:
0.0003 - 0.0018
Range:
0-0.0712
Pool Slope (Spool)
Mean:
0.0006
Mean:
0.0020
Range:
0 - 0.0014
Range:
0-0.0057
Run Slope (Sr,,)
Mean:
0.0026
Mean:
0.006
Range:
0-0.0038
Range:
0-0.1700
Glide Slope (Sgi;de)
Mean:
0.0000
Mean:
0.0002
Range:
0 - 0.0001
Range:
0-0.0075
Profile Ratios
Riffle Slope/ Water Surface
Mean:
1.1
Mean:
0.30
Slope (SPffia/S-)
Range:
0.4 - 2.3
Range:
0-9.28
Pool SlopefWater Surface
Mean:
0.8
Mean:
0.30
Slope (Spool/Sage)
Range:
0 - 1.8
Range:
0-0.74
Run SlopefWater Surface
Mean:
3.50
Mean:
0.78
Slope (Sr,,/Save)
Range:
0 - 5.1
Range:
0-22.15
Glide SlopefWater Surface
Mean:
0.00
Mean:
0.03
Slope (Sg;;ba/Saxa)
Range:
0 - 0.2
Range:
0-0.97
Existing (UT 1 upstream)
Proposed (UT 1 upstream)
Existing (UT 1 downstream)
Proposed (UT 1 downstream)
F5
Ce5
Eg5
Ce5
0.30
0.30
1.53
1.53
3.5
3.5
12.1
12.1
Dimension Variables
3.9
3.9
12.9
12.9
8.5-56.8
3.9
14.2-30.5
12.9
Mean: 13.2
Mean:
7.4
Mean:
12.2
Mean:
13.4
Range: 5.2 to 17.6
Range:
6.8
to
7.9
Range:
10.2
to
20.3
Range:
12.4
to
14.4
Mean: 0.3
Mean:
0.5
Mean:
1.1
Mean:
1.0
Range: 0.2 to 0.8
Range:
0.5
to
0.6
Range:
0.6
to
1.3
Range:
0.9
to
1.0
Mean: 0.7
Mean:
0.7
Mean:
1.8
Mean:
1.2
Range: 0.4 to 1.5
Range:
0.6
to
0.9
Range:
1.1
to
2.4
Range:
1.2
to
1.6
Mean:
8.9
Mean:
14.6
Mean:
16.1
No distinct repetitive pattern of
Range:
7.4
to
11.8
Range:
12.9
to
15.4
Range:
13.4
to
21.5
riffles and pools due to
Mean:
0.9
Mean:
2.1
Mean:
1.6
staightening activities
Range:
0.8
to
1.1
Range:
1.9
to
2.4
Range:
1.4
to
1.9
Mean: 20
Mean:
100
Mean:
150
Mean:
150
Range: 8 to 50
Range:
50
to
150
Range:
50
to
150
Range:
100
to
200
Dimension Ratios
Mean: 1.5
Mean:
13.5
Mean:
12.3
Mean:
11.2
Range: 1.0 to 9.3
Range:
7.3
to
19.0
Range:
2.8
to
14.7
Range:
8.0
to
13.9
Mean: 44.0
Mean:
14.0
Mean:
11.1
Mean:
14.0
Range: 6.5 to 88.0
Range:
12.0
to
16.0
Range:
7.8
to
33.8
Range:
12.0
to
16.0
Mean: 2.1
Mean:
1.3
Mean:
1.6
Mean:
1.3
Range: 1.3 to 3.0
Range:
1.2
to
1.5
Range:
1.4
to
2.3
Range:
1.2
to
1.5
Mean: 2.8
Mean:
1.0
Mean:
1.3
Mean:
1.0
Range: 1.5 to 6.6
Range:
1.0
to
1.3
Range:
1.0
to
1.8
Range:
1.0
to
1.3
Mean:
1.7
Mean:
1.9
Mean:
1.7
Range:
1.5
to
2.0
Range:
1.7
to
2.2
Range:
1.5
to
2.0
No distinct repetitive pattern of
Mean:
1.2
Mean:
1.2
Mean:
1.2
riffles and pools due to
staightening activities
Range:
1.0
to
1.6
Range:
1.1
to
1.3
Range:
1.0
to
1.6
Mean:
1.3
Mean:
1.2
Mean:
1.3
Range:
1.1
to
1.5
Range:
1.2
to
1.2
Range:
1.1
to
1.5
Existing (UT 1 upstream)
Proposed (UT 1 upstream)
Existing (UT 1 downstream)
Proposed (UT 1 downstream)
Pattern Variables
Med:
29.6
Mean:
28.1
Med:
53.8
Range:
22.2
to 44.3
Range:
9.5
to
64.0
Range:
40.3
to 80.6
No distinct repetitive pattern of
riffles and pools due to
Med:
Range:
36.9
44.3
to 59.1
Mean:
Range:
45.5
56.3
to
89.2
Med:
Range:
67.2
80.6
to 107.5
Med:
22.2
Mean:
34.9
Med:
40.3
staightening activities
Range:
14.8
to 29.6
Range:
21.5
to
62.0
Range:
26.9
to 53.8
Med:
22.2
Mean:
19.6
Med:
40.A67.2
Range:
14.8
to 36.9
Range:
6.2
to
125.7
Range:
26.9
to
1.01
1.15
1
1.30
1
1.15
Pattern Ratios
Med:
4.0
Mean:
2.3
Med:
4.0
Range:
3.0 to
6.0
Range:
0.8 to
5.2
Range:
3.0 to 6.0
Med:
6.0
Mean:
4.6
Med:
6.0
No distinct repetitive pattern of
Range:
5.0 to
8.0
Range:
3.7 to
7.3
Range:
5.0 to 8.0
riffles and pools due to
Med:
3.0
Mean:
2.9
Med:
3.0
staightening activities
Range:
2.0 to
4.0
Range:
1.8 to
5.1
Range:
2.0 to 4.0
Med:
3.0
Mean:
1.6
Med:
3.0
Range:
2.0 to
5.0
Range:
0.5 to
10.3
Range:
2.0 to 5.0
Profile Variables
0.0061
0.0054
0.0028
0.0031
0.0062
0.0062
0.0036
0.0036
Mean:
0.0086
Mean:
0.0050
Range:
0.0065
to 0.0097
Range:
0.0038
to 0.0056
Mean:
0.0005
Mean:
0.0003
No distinct repetitive pattern of
Range:
0.0000
to 0.0038
Range:
0.0000
to 0.0022
riffles and pools due to channel
incision
Not Measured
Mean: 0.0032
Mean:
0.0019
Range:
0.0000
to 0.0065
Range:
0.0000
to 0.0038
Mean:
0.0006
Mean:
0.0003
Range:
0.0000
to 0.0043
Range:
0.0000
to 0.0025
Profile Ratios
Mean: 1.60
Mean: 1.60
Range: 1.2 to 1.8
Range: 1.2 to 1.8
Mean: 0.10
Mean: 0.10
No distinct repetitive pattern of
Range: 0.0 to 0.7
Range: 0.0 to 0.7
riffles and pools due to channel
Not Measured
Mean: 0.60
Mean: 0.60
incision
Range: 0.0 to 1.2
Range: 0.0 to 1.2
Mean: 0.11
Mean: 0.11
Range: 0.0 to 0.8
1
Range: 0.0 to 0.8

Table 131 continuted. Swamp Grape Site Morphological Stream Characteristics
REFERENCE - JORDAN
REFERENCE- MCREA LAND
Variables
CREEK
COMPANY
Stream Type
E 5
E 5
Drainage Area (mil)
16.90
0.20
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
44.3
4.3
Dimension Variables
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (Abkf)
44.9
4.8
Existing Cross -Sectional Area (Aapn;xg)
44.9
4.2-5.4
Bankfull Width (Nb )
Mean:
20.8
Mean:
6.0
Range:
20.1 - 21.5
Range:
5.4-6.6
Bankfull Mean Depth (Dbkf)
Mean:
2.2
Mean:
0.8
Range:
2.1 -2.2
Range:
0.8-0.8
Bankfull Maximum Depth (D_x)
Mean:
2.8
Mean:
1.1
Range:
2.7 - 2.9
Range:
1.0-1.1
Pool Width (W
Mean:
22.0
Mean:
7.8
Pool)
Range:
19.6 - 24.4
Range:
7.1-8.5
Maximum Pool Depth (Dp,,,)
Mean:
4.8
Mean:
1.5
Range:
3.6 - 6.0
Range:
1.3-1.6
Mean:
250
Mean:
75.0
Width of Floodprone Area (Wfpa)
Range:
Range:
Dimension Ratios
Entrenchment Ratio (NroafWb )
Mean:
12.0
Mean:
12.6
Range:
11.6 - 12.4
Range:
11.4-13.9
Width / Depth Ratio (Wbkf/Dbkf)
Mean:
9.7
Mean:
7.5
Range:
9.1 - 10.2
Range:
6.8-8.3
Max. Dbkf / Dbkf Ratio
Mean:
1.3
Mean:
1.3
Range:
Range:
1.3-1.4
Low Bank Height / Max. Dbkf Ratio
Mean:
1.0
Mean:
1.0
Range:
Range:
Maximum Pool Depth / Bankfull
Mean:
2.2
Mean:
1.8
Mean Depth (Dp,,,/Dbkf)
Range:
1.7 - 2.8
Range:
1.6-2.0
Pool Width / Bankfull
Mean:
1.1
Mean:
1.3
Width (WplllfWbkf)
Range:
0.9 - 1.2
Range:
1.2-1.4
Pool Area / Bankfull
Mean:
1.3
Mean:
1.4
Cross Sectional Area
Range:
1.2 - 1.5
Range:
1.4-1.5
REFERENCE - JORDAN
REFERENCE- MCREA LAND
Variables
CREEK
COMPANY
Pattern
Variables
Pool to Pool Spacing (Lp_p)
Med: 89.1
Med: 21.1
Range: 49-152
Range: 10.6-38.9
Meander Length (Lm)
Med: 114.5
Med: 35.4
Range: 63-166
Range: 23.3-44.4
Belt Width (Wbeit)
Med: 99.0
Med: 13.7
Range: 75-134
Range: 11.7-16.6
Radius of Curvature (Rj
Med: 26.4
Med: 6.5
Range: 13-53
Range: 4.5-12.7
Sinuosity (Sin)
1 1.60
1 1.13
Pattern Ratios
Pool to Pool Spacing/
Med:
4.3
Med:
3.5
Bankfull Width (LP_PNVbkf)
Range:
2.4 - 7.3
Range:
1.8-6.5
Meander Length/
Med:
5.5
Med:
5.9
Bankfull Width (LmfWbkf)
Range:
3.0-8.0
Range:
3.9-7.4
Meander Width Ratio
Med:
4.5
Med:
2.3
(WbeicfWbkf)
Range:
3.6 - 5.4
Range:
2.0-2.8
Radius of Curvature/
Med:
1.3
Med:
1.1
Bankfull Width (RCNVbkf)
Range:
0.6 - 2.6
Range:
0.8-2.1
Profile Variables
Average Water Surface Slope (Sage)
0.0008
0.0077
Valley Slope (S,11a,)
0.0013
0.0087
Riffle Slope (Sr;ffiJ
Mean:
0.0008
Mean:
0.0026
Range:
0.0003 - 0.0018
Range:
0-0.0712
Pool Slope (Spool)
Mean:
0.0006
Mean:
0.0020
Range:
0 - 0.0014
Range:
0-0.0057
Run Slope (S-)
Mean:
0.0026
Mean:
0.006
Range:
0 - 0.0038
Range:
0-0.1700
Glide Slope (Sgi;de)
Mean:
0.0000
Mean:
0.0002
Range:
0 - 0.0001
Range:
0-0.0075
Profile Ratios
Riffle Slope/ Water Surface
Mean:
1.1
Mean:
0.30
Slope (SPffia/S-)
Range:
0.4 - 2.3
Range:
0-9.28
Pool SlopefWater Surface
Mean:
0.8
Mean:
0.30
Slope (Spool/Sage)
Range:
0 - 1.8
Range:
0-0.74
Run SlopefWater Surface
Mean:
3.50
Mean:
0.78
Slope (S­ /Save)
Range:
0 - 5.1
Range:
0-22.15
Glide SlopefWater Surface
Mean:
0.00
Mean:
0.03
Slope (Sg;;ba/Saxa)
Range:
0 - 0.2
Range:
0-0.97
Existing (UT 2)
Proposed (UT 2)
Existing (UT 3)
Proposed (UT 3)
Cg 5
Ce 5
Eg 5
Ce 5
0.41
0.41
0.61
0.61
4.5
4.5
6.1
6.1
Dimension Variables
4.9
4.9
6.6
6.6
4.9 - 10.1
4.9
6.6 - 10.1
6.6
Mean:
Range:
6.9
7.5
to
7.9
Mean:
Range:
7.7
8.3
to
8.9
Mean:
Range:
6.8
7.8
to
8.8
Mean:
Range:
8.9
9.6
to
10.3
Mean:
Range:
0.6
0.6
to
0.7
Mean:
Range:
0.6
0.6
to
0.6
Mean:
Range:
0.7
0.9
to
1.0
Mean:
Range:
0.6
0.7
to
0.7
Mean:
Range:
1.2
1.4
to
1.7
Mean:
Range:
0.7
0.8
to
1.0
Mean:
Range:
1.2
1.3
to
1.4
Mean:
Range:
0.8
0.9
to
1.1
Mean:
Range:
6.0
9.0
to
12.0
Mean:
Range:
8.3
9.9
to
13.3
Mean:
Range:
7.6
7.6
to
7.6
Mean:
Range:
9.6
11.5
to
15.4
Mean:
Range:
1.8
2.0
to
2.2
Mean:
Range:
0.9
1.0
to
1.2
Mean:
Range:
1.6
1.6
to
1.6
Mean:
Range:
1.0
1.2
to
1.4
Mean:
Range:
50
75
to
75
Mean:
Range:
100
150
to
200
Mean:
Range:
27.0
31
to
35
Mean:
Range:
100
150
to
200
Dimension Ratios
Mean:
Range:
6.7
9.5
to
10.9
Mean:
Range:
13.0
18.1
to
22.6
Mean:
Range:
3.1
4.1
to
5.1
Mean:
Range:
11.2
15.6
to
19.5
Mean:
Range:
9.9
12.5
to
13.2
Mean:
Range:
12.0
14.0
to
16.0
Mean:
Range:
6.8
9.7
to
12.6
Mean:
Range:
12.0
14.0
to
16.0
Mean:
Range:
2.0
2.3
to
2.4
Mean:
Range:
1.2
1.3
to
1.5
Mean:
Range:
1.4
1.6
to
1.7
Mean:
Range:
1.2
1.3
to
1.5
Mean:
Range:
1.1
1.3
to
1.4
Mean:
Range:
1.0
1.0
to
1.3
Mean:
Range:
1.4
1.6
to
1.8
Mean:
Range:
1.0
1.0
to
1.3
Mean:
Range:
3.0
3.3
to
3.7
Mean:
Range:
1.5
1.7
to
2.0
Mean:
Range:
1.9
1.9
to
1.9
Mean:
Range:
1.5
1.7
to
2.0
Mean:
Range:
0.8
1.2
to
1.6
Mean:
Range:
1.0
1.2
to
1.6
Mean:
Range:
1.0
1.0
to
1.0
Mean:
Range:
1.0
1.2
to
1.6
Mean:
Range:
1.3
1.3
to
1.3
Mean:
Range:
1.1
1.3
to
1.5
Mean:
Range:
1.3
1.3
to
1.3
Mean:
Range:
1.1
1.3
to
1.5
Existing (UT 2)
Proposed (UT 2)
Existing (UT 3)
Proposed (UT 3)
Pattern Variables
No distinct repetitive pattern of
riffles and pools
Med:
Range:
24.8
33.1
to 49.7
Mean:
Range:
11.3
25.1
to 34.6
Med:
Range:
28.8
38.4
to 57.7
Med: 49.7
Range: 41.4 to 66.3
Mean: 42.2
Range: 28.9 to 56.0
Med:
Range: 48.1
57.7
to 76.9
Med: 24.8
Range: 16.6 to 33.1
Mean: 23.7
Range: 23.2 to 24.7
Med:
Range: 19.2
28.8
to 38.4
Med: 24.8
Range: 16.6 to 41.4
Mean: 12.4
Range: 7.8 to 34.6
Med:
Range: 19.2
28.8
to 48.1
1.02
1
1.20
1
1.17
1.15
Pattern Ratios
Med:
4.0
Mean:
3.2
Med:
4.0
Range:
3.0 to
6.0
Range:
1.4 to
4.4
Range:
3.0 to 6.0
Med:
6.0
Mean:
5.4
Med:
6.0
No distinct repetitive pattern of
Range:
5.0 to
8.0
Range:
3.7 to
7.2
Range:
5.0 to 8.0
riffles and pools
Med:
3.0
Mean:
3.0
Med:
3.0
Range:
2.0 to
4.0
Range:
3.0 to
3.2
Range:
2.0 to 4.0
Med:
3.0
Mean:
1.6
Med:
3.0
Range:
2.0 to
5.0
Range:
1.0 to
4.4
Range:
2.0 to 5.0
Profile Variables
0.0041
0.0035
0.0077
0.0039
0.0042
0.0042
0.0125
0.0125
Mean:
0.0056
Mean:
0.0062
Range:
0.0042
to 0.0063
Range:
0.0047
to 0.0070
Mean:
0.0004
Mean:
0.0004
No distinct repetitive pattern of
riffles and pools
Range:
0.0000
to 0.0025
Not Measured
Range:
0.0000
to 0.0027
Mean: 0.0021
Mean: 0.0023
Range:
0.0000
to 0.0042
Range:
0.0000
to 0.0047
Mean:
0.0004
Mean:
0.0004
Range:
0.0000
to 0.0028
Range:
0.0000
to 0.0031
Profile Ratios
Mean: 1.60
Mean: 1.60
Range: 1.2 to 1.8
Range: 1.2 to 1.8
Mean: 0.10
Mean: 0.10
No distinct repetitive pattern of
riffles and pools
Range: 0.0 to 0.7
Not Measured
Range: 0.0 to 0.7
Mean: 0.60
Mean: 0.60
Range: 0.0 to 1.2
Range: 0.0 to 1.2
Mean: 0.11
Mean: 0.11
Range: 0.0 to 0.8
1
Range: 0.0 to 0.8

i
a
XS 2
XS 4
X55_
XS 9
XS 10
XS 11
XS 12
Z XS 1
XS 3
UT2-XS1-`�
UT2-XS2
UT2-XS3' II�/
UT2-XS4
UT2-XS5
XS 6
�XS7
XS s
l
ic
�Jc
UT3-XS3
UT3 -XS 2
_UT3-XS 1
XS 13 XS 14
XS 15
- XS 16
XS 17
XS 18
XS 19
XS 20
�l1 �XS21
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
NOTES/REVISIONS
Project:
Swamp Grape
Mitigation Site
Robeson County
North Carolina
Title:
1
Cross Section
I Locations
scale. FIGURE NO.
1 As Shown
91P Al"k
� [ date:
D 201 411 Mar 2020
[ . Project No-: B1
SCALE IN FEET 20-003

Swamp Grape (UT 1 Downstream -XS 1) Pool ---
25 30
height of instrument (ft):FUMM omit I distance I FS FS I Ft
notes ot. (ft) (ft) I elevation I I bankfull top of
dimensions
16.0
15.4
x-section area
1.0
16.1
d mean
width
wet P
2.1
d max
1.0
h d radi
2.1
bank ht
hydraulics
0.00 shear stress Ibs/ft s
0.00 shear velocity (ft/sec)
8-B threshold qrain size mm
Swamp Grape (UT 1 Downstream - XS 2) Riffle ---
Riffle
height of instrument (ft) NUMM
omit distance FS FS FS
notes ot. (ft) (ft) I elevation bankfull top of bank
20 25
„n„
dimensions
12.9
10.2
x-section area
1.3
11.2
d mean
width
wet P
1.9
d max
1.2
h d radi
2.1
bank ht
8.0
w/d ratio
150.0
W flood prone area
14.8
ent ratio
hydraulics
0.0
velocity ft/sec
0.0
discharge rate, Q cfs
0.00
shear stress Ibs/ft s
0.00
shear velocity (ft/sec)
0.000
unit stream power Ibs/ft/sec
0.00
Froude number
0.0
friction factor uW
"
threshold rain size mm
check from channel material
0
measured D84 mm
0.0
relative rou hness 1 0.0 1 fric. factor
0.000
1 Mannin 's n from channel material

notes
Swamp Grape (UT 1 Downstream - XS 3) Riffle ---
MEMO I
Swamp Grape (UT 1 Downstream - XS 3)
description:
Swamp Grape (UT 1 Downstream - XS 3)
.-.. . ...u-. 200.00
25 30
elevation
I bankfull top of bank (ft) I slope (%) I "n"
118.5443
118.5761
. .
117,57 118.4
118.0267
117.0443
dimensions
12.9
12.4
1.4
2.2
150.0
x-section area
1 1.0
13.0
1.0
11.8
12.1
d mean
116.1764
116.3138
width
wet P
116.2543
d max
h d radi
116.8191
bank ht
w/d ratio
118.3958
W flood prone area
ent ratio
118.1967
hydraulics
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.00
0.0
"
velocity ft/sec
discharge rate, Q cfs
shear stress Ibs/ft s
shear velocity (ft/sec)
unit stream power Ibs/ft/sec
Froude number
friction factor uW
threshold qrain size mm
check from
channel material
0
0.0
measured D84 mm
relative roughness 0.0 fric. factor
0.000 1 Manning's n from channel material
Swamp Grape (UT 1 Downstream - XS 4) Pool ---
119.5
119
118.5
118
> 117.5
w 117
116.5
116
0 5 10 Width frA River Left to 4t (ft) 25
section: ■.
Pool
description: ■.
height of instrument (ft): ....
omit I distance I FS FS FS
notes pt. (ft) (ft) elevation bankfull Itoo of bank
30 35
dimensions
16.0
15.4
x-section area
1.0
17.4
d mean
width
wet P
2.0
d max
0.9
h d radi
2.0
bank ht
hydraulics
0.00 shear stress Ibs/ft s
0.00 shear velocity (ft/sec)
B-B threshold grain size mm

122
121
120
119
'w
u 118
117
116
0 5
section:
Riffle
description:
heiaht of instrument (ft)
notes
Swamp Grape (UT 1 Downstream - XS 5) Riffle ---
10 15 20 25
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
elevation
118.3446
118.8217
bankfull top of bank I (ft) slope (%) I "n"
118.72 118.82
118.674
118.4769
dimensions
12.9
12.2
2.4
2.5
150.0
x-section area
1.1
13.5
1.0
11.5
12.3
d mean
117.8317
117.6666
width
wet P
116.3398
d max
h d radi
116.6356
bank ht
w/d ratio
117.4507
W flood rove area
ent ratio
118.0095
hydraulics
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.00
0.0
"
velocity ft/sec
118.5116
118.7189
118.9392
discharge rate, Q cfs
shear stress Ibs/ft s
shear velocity (ft/sec)
unit stream power Ibs/ft/sec
Froude number
friction factor uW
threshold qrain size mm
check from
channel material
0
0.0
measured D84 mm
relative rouahness 1 0.0 fric. factor
0.000 1 Manning's n from channel material
Swamp Grape (UT 1 Downstream - XS 6) Pool ---
120
119.5
119
c 118.5
118
w 117.5
117
116.5
116
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
section. Downstream
Pool
description: ■.
height of instrument (ft):
notes
omit
pt.
distance
(ft)
F
FS
(ft)
elevation
FS FS
bankfull top of bank
channel
slope (% )
119.0314
118.9812
118.62 118.98
0
118.9494
0
118.6499
dimensions
16.0
13.8
2.2
2.6
x-section area 1.2
width 15.2
d max 1.1
bank ht 4-1-8
re 9-B
d mean
118.4591
0
118.2037
wet P
0
116.9432
h d radi
0116.9322
0
116.3919
0
116.4025
0
117.101
hydraulics
0.00
0.00
B-B
0
118.1019
0
118.2743
118.7473
shear stress Ibs/ft s
119.3625
shear velocity (ft/sec)
119.2621
threshold qrain size mm

121
120.5
120
119.5
119
A 118.5
w 118
117.5
117
116.5
Swamp Grape (UT 1 Downstream - XS 7) Riffle ---
10 15 20 25
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
section: Downstream
Riffle
description: ■.
height of instrument (ft): r r r r
omit distance FS FS FS W fpa channel Mannir
notes pt. (ft) (ft) elevation bankfull top of bank (ft) slope (%) "n"
dimensions
12.9
11.9
1.8
2.3
150.0
x-section area
1.1
12.9
1.0
11.1
12.6
d mean
width
wet P
d max
h d radi
bank ht
w/d ratio
W flood prone area
ent ratio
hydraulics
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.00
0.0
"
velocity fUsec
discharge rate, Q cfs
shear stress Ibs/ft s
shear velocity fUsec
unit stream power Ibs/ft/sec
Froude number
friction factor uW
threshold qrain size mm
check from channel material
0
0.0
0.000
measured D84 mm
relative rou hness 1 0.0
fric. factor
1 Mannin 's n from channel material

120.5
120
119.5
119
> 118.5
w 118
117.5
117
0
notes
Swamp Grape (UT 1 Downstream - XS 8) Riffle ---
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
of instrument (ft):FLOM
,ce I FS FS I Ft
1 (ft) I elevation bankfull top of
„n„
dimensions
12.9
20.3
x-section area
0.6
20.8
1 d mean
width
wet P
1.4
d max
0.6
h d radi
1.7
bank ht
32.0
w/d ratio
75.0
W flood prone area
3.7
ent ratio
hydraulics
0.0
velocity ft/sec
0.0
discharge rate, Q cfs
0.00
shear stress Ibs/ft s
0.00
shear velocity (ft/sec)
0.000
unit stream power Ibs/ft/sec
0.00
Froude number
0.0
friction factor uW
"
threshold rain size mm
check from channel material
0
measured D84 mm
0.0
relative rou hness 1 0.0 fric. factor
0.000
1 Mannin 's n from channel material
120.5
120
119.5
c 119
118.5
w 118
17.5
117
116.5
Swamp Grape (UT 1 Downstream - XS 9) Pool ---
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
Pool
height of instrument (ft):
notes
omit distance
pt. (ft)
FS
(ft)
'
elevation
119.8835
119.692
119.3148
FS FS
bankfull top of bank
channel
slope (% )
�• �•
119.28 119.69
0
118.4303
dimensions
16.0
12.9
2.4
2.8
x-section area 1.2
width 14.3
d max 1.1
bank ht 40-4
reli B-B
d mean
117.8113
0 • •
0
0
• • •
117.5574
116.9049
118.1893
wet P
h d radi
0
119.3064
0
119.7396
0
119.7449
JL_8-B
hydraulics
0.00
0.00
0
0
shear stress Ibs/ft s
shear velocity (ft/sec)
threshold rain size mm

122
121.5
121
120.5
120
A 119.5
w 119
118.5
118
117.5
Swamp Grape (UT 1 Downstream - XS 10) Riffle ---
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
Riffle
height of instrument (ft):
�
notes
omit
pt.
distance
I (ft)
FS
(ft)
elevation
FS FS W fpa channel Manning's
bankfull top of bank (ft) slope (%) "n"
120.1199
120.3188
119.835 120.32
0
Wr
120.0001
0
119.3055
dimensions
12.9
11.6
1.8
2.3
150.0
x-section area
1.1
12.3
1.0
10.5
12.9
d mean
119.0249
0
118.3706
width
wet P
0
118.0666
d max
h d radi
0
118.1654
bank ht
w/d ratio
0
118.7195
W flood prone area
ent ratio
0
119.2732
hydraulics
0
119.7511
0
120.3074
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.00
0.0
8-B
velocity ft/sec
0
120.6649
discharge rate, Q cfs
120.4453
shear stress Ibs/ft s
120.4655
shear velocity (ft/sec)
unit stream power Ibs/ft/sec
Froude number
friction factor uW
threshold qrain size mm
check from channel material
0
0.0
easured D84 mm
ative rou hness 0.0 fric. factor0.000
�re
annin 's n from channel material
121
120.5
120
119.5
u 119
118.5
118
notes
0
Swamp Grape (UT 1 Downstream - XS 11) Riffle ---
5 10 Ath from Riverl%ft to Right (f )5 30 35 40
section: Downstream
Riffle
description: ■.
of instrument (ft):
Ice FS FS FS W fpa channel Manning's
1 (ft) elevation bankfull It000fbank (ft) slope (%) "n"
dimensions
12.9
17.8
x-section area
0.7
18.7
d mean
width
wet P
1.1
d max
0.7
h d radi
2.0
bank ht
24.7
w/d ratio
50.0
W flood rone area
2.8
ent ratio
hydraulics
0.0
velocity (ft/sec)
0.0
discharge rate, Q cfs
0.00
shear stress Ibs/ft s
0.00
shear velocity (ft/sec)
0.000
unit stream power Ibs/ft/sec
0.00
Froude number
0.0
friction factor uW
"
threshold qrain size mm
check from channel material
0
measured D84 mm
0.0
relative rou hness 0.0 fric. factor
0.000
Mannin 's n from channel material

121.5
121
120.5
120
> 119.5
w 119
118.5
118
of instrument
Pool
Swamp Grape (UT 1 Downstream - XS 12) Pool ---
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
notes I ot. I (f) I (f) I elevation I I bankfull

Swamp Grape (UT 1 Upstream - XS 13) Riffle ---
122
121.5
121
c 120.5
120
119.5
w 119
118.5
118
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
of instrument
notes
elevation I I bankfull I top of
„n„
dimensions
3.9
5.9
1.5
2.2
25.0
x-section area
0.7
7.1
0.5
8.9
4.2
d mean
width
wet P
d max
h d radi
bank ht
w/d ratio
W flood prone area
ent ratio
hydraulics
0.0
velocity ft/sec
0.0
discharge rate, Q cfs
0.00
shear stress Ibs/ft s
0.00
shear velocity (ft/sec)
0.000
unit stream power Ibs/ft/sec
0.00
Froude number
0.0
friction factor uW
"
threshold qrain size mm
check from channel material
0
measured D84 mm
0.0
relative rou hness 1 0.0 fric. factor
0.000
1 Mannin 's n from channel material
121.5
121
120.5
120
u 119.5
119
118.5
Swamp Grape (UT 1 Upstream - XS 14) Pool ---
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
Pool
height of instrument (ft) NUMM
omit distance FS FS FS
notes ot. (ft) (ft) I elevation bankfull It000fbank
dimensions
5.1
x-section area
0.9
d mean
5.8
width
6.7
wet P
1.2
d max
0.8
h d radi
2.0
bank ht
6,6
re B B
hydraulics
0.00
shear stress Ibs/ft s
0.00
shear velocity (ft/sec)
8-B
threshold qrain size mm

of instrument
notes
Riffle
elevation
bankfull top of bank (ft) slope (%) I "n"
121.2742
120.972
119.84 120.8
120.9743
120.7977
dimensions
3.9
5.2
1.0
2.0
8.0
x-section area
0.8
6.1
0.6
6.9
1.5
d mean
119.9648
119.0804
width
wet P
118.9799
d max
h d radi
118.8043
bank ht
w/d ratio
118.9808
W flood prone area
ant ratio
119.5873
hydraulics
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.00
0.0
8-B
MMMM-
velocity (ft/sec)
120.9538
121.2829_
discharge rate, Q cfs
shear stress Ibs/ft s
shear velocity (ft/sec)
unit stream power Ibs/ft/sec
Froude number
friction factor uW
threshold grain size mm
check from
channel material
0
0.0
measured D84 mm
relative roughness 0.0 fric. factor
0.000 1 Manning's n from channel material
Swamp Grape (UT 1 Upstream - XS 16) Riffle ---
122.5
122
121.5
121
> 120.5
w 120
119.5
119
0 5 10 Width from River'Left to Right (ft) 20 25 30
INNIENTA
description:height of instrument (ft):omit
notes
pt.
distance
(ft)
FSFS
(ft)
t
FS
bankfull top of bank
W fpa channel Manning's
(ft) slope (%) "n"
120.69 121.74
dimensions
3.9
5.4
1.3
2.4
50.0
x-section area
1 0.7
6.5
0.6
7.5
9.3
Idmean
121.0368
120.7402
width
wet P
120.7934
d max
h d radi
�ent
120.6846
bank ht
w/d ratio
120.7116
W flood prone area
ratio
119.3581
hydraulics
119.655
120.033
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.00
0.0
B-B
velocity ft/sec
120.4932
discharge rate, Q cfs
120.8704
shear stress Ibs/ft s
121.1693
shear velocity (ft/sec)
121.5481
unit stream power Ibs/ft/sec
121.7374
Froude number
friction factor uW
threshold qrain size mm
check from channel material
0
0.0
0.000
measured D84 mm
Li
relative rou hness 1 0.0 fric. factor
1 Mannin 's n from channel material

122.5
122
121.5
121
'120.5
120
119.5
0
notes
Swamp Grape (UT 1 Upstream - XS 17) Riffle ---
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
Riffle
of instrument (ft) Paux
nce IFS FS F
(ft) elevation bankfull top of
„n„
dimensions
3.9
11.6
x-section area
0.3
11.7
1 d mean
width
wet P
0.7
d max
0.3
h d radi
2.2
bank ht
34.5
w/d ratio
18.0
W flood prone area
1.6
ent ratio
hydraulics
0.0 velocity ft/sec
0.0
discharge rate, Q cfs
0.00
shear stress Ibs/ft s
0.00
shear velocity (ft/sec)
0.000
unit stream power Ibs/ft/sec
0.00
Froude number
0.0
friction factor uW
"
threshold rain size mm
check from channel material
0
measured D84 mm
0.0
relative rou hness 1 0.0 fric. factor
0.000
1 Mannin 's n from channel material
123.5
123
122.5
122
'121.5
121
120.5
Swamp Grape (UT 1 Upstream - XS 18) Riffle ---
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
description:
height of instrument (ft).
Riffle
notes
omit
pt.
distance
(ft)
FS
(ft)
elevation
FS FS
bankfull top of bank
W fpa channel Manning's
(ft) slope ( % ) "n"
0
0
r •
•AMMS&AP
r
122.116
122.2699
122.098
122.0568
121.125 122.1
3 .
dimensions
3.9
17.6
0.4
1.4
18.0
x-section area
0.2
17.7
0.2
79.1
1.0
d mean
120.9237
0
120.9495
width
wet P
0
120.963
d max
h d radi
0
120.881
bank ht
w/d ratio
0
120.7489
W flood prone area
ent ratio
0
120.9751
hydraulics
0
122.1097
0
122.3378
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.00
0.0
B-B
velocity (ft/sec)
0
122.9126
discharge rate, Q cfs
shear stress Ibs/ft s
shear velocity (ft/sec)
unit stream power Ibs/ft/sec
Froude number
friction factor uW
threshold rain size mm
check from channel material
0
0.0
0.000
measured D84 mm
relative rou hness 1 0.0 fric. factor
1 Mannin 's n from channel material

Swamp Grape (UT 1 Upstream - XS 19) Riffle ---
I
1
1 1 1 1 1
M. Swamp Grape (UT 1 Upstream - XS 19)
Swamp Grape (UT 1 Upstream - XS 19)
height of instrument (ft): 200.00
dimensions
3.9
15.9
0.6
2.0
22.0
x-section area
0.2
16.0
0.2
64.5
1.4
d mean
width
wet P
d max
h d radi
bank ht
w/d ratio
W flood prone area
ent ratio
hydraulics
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.00
0.0
8-B
velocity fUsec
discharge rate, Q cfs
shear stress Ibs/ft s
shear velocity fUsec
unit stream power Ibs/ft/sec
Froude number
friction factor uW
threshold grain size mm
check from channel material
0
0.0
0.000
measured D84 mm
relative rou hness 1 0.0
fric. factor
1 Mannin 's n from channel material

123.5
123
122.5
122
w 121.5
121
120.5
0
notes
Swamp Grape (UT 1 Upstream - XS 20 Riffle ---
10 20 30 40
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
of instrument (ft) PEOW
,ce I FS FS Ft
1 (ft) elevation bankfull top of
50 60
„n„
dimensions
3.9
16.6
x-section area
0.2
16.7
1 d mean
width
wet P
0.6
d max
0.2
h d radi
1.5
bank ht
70.7
w/d ratio
30.0
W flood prone area
1.8
ent ratio
hydraulics
0.0
velocity ft/sec
0.0
discharge rate, Q cfs
0.00
shear stress Ibs/ft s
0.00
shear velocity (ft/sec)
0.000
unit stream power Ibs/ft/sec
0.00
Froude number
0.0
friction factor uW
"
threshold rain size mm
check from channel material
0
measured D84 mm
0.0
relative rou hness 1 0.0 fric. factor
0.000
1 Mannin 's n from channel material
201
200
199
198
197
w 196
195
194
Swamp Grape (UT 1 Upstream - XS 21) Riffle ---
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
Riffle
height of instrument (ft):
notes
pt.
it distance
(ft)
FS
(ft)
elevation
FS FS
bankfull top of bank
W fpa channel Manning's
(ft) slope (%) "n"
199.65
199.46
L 195.575 198.4
0
199.12
0
198.4
dimensions
3.9
14.8
0.5
3.3
16.0
x-section area
0.3
15.1
0.3
56.1
1.1
d mean
197.1
0
195.91
width
wet P
0
195.37
d max
bank ht
h d radi
0
195.35
w/d ratio
0
195.34
W flood prone area
ent ratio
0
195.16
hydraulics
0
195.09
0
196.3
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.00
0.0
8-B
velocity (ft/sec)
0
196.82
discharge rate, Q cfs
197.71
shear stress Ibs/ft s
198.5
shear velocity (ft/sec)
200.5
unit stream power Ibs/ft/sec
Froude number
friction factor uW
threshold rain size mm
check from channel material
0
0.0
0.000
measured D84 mm
relative rou hness 1 0.0 fric. factor
1 Mannin 's n from channel material

Swamp Grape (UT 2 - XS 1) Pool ---
!i!i
r
i
7
• r r
height of instrument (ft):FUMM omit I distance I FS FS I R
notes ot. (ft) (ft) I elevation I I bankfull top of
20 25
Swamp Grape (UT 2 - XS 2) Riffle ---
Riffle
height of instrument (ft): MM
omit distance FS FS FS
notes ot. (ft) (ft) I elevation bankfull top of bank
20 25
„n„
dimensions
4.9
7.5
x-section area
0.6
8.2
d mean
width
wet P
1.4
d max
0.6
h d radi
1.9
bank ht
11.6
w/d ratio
50.0
W flood prone area
6.6
ent ratio
hydraulics
0.0
velocity (ft/sec)
0.0
discharge rate, Q cfs
0.00
shear stress Ibs/ft s
0.00
shear velocity (ft/sec)
0.000
unit stream power Ibs/ft/sec
0.00
Froude number
0.0
friction factor uW
8-B
threshold rain size mm
check from channel material
0
measured D84 mm
0.0
relative rou hness 1 0.0 fric. factor
0.000
1 Mannin 's n from channel material

of instrument
notes
Swamp Grape (UT 2 - XS 3) Riffle ---
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
Swamp Grape (UT 2 - XS 3)
elevation
bankfull top of bank I (ft) slope (%) I "n"
121.1323
120.9577
120.22 120.44
120.7546
120.1705
dimensions
4.9
6.9
1.7
1.9
75.0
x-section area
0.7
8.4
0.6
9.8
10.8
d mean
119.9475
118.5389
width
wet P
118.7407
d max
h d radi
119.5163
bank ht
w/d ratio
119.6457
W flood prone area
ent ratio
120.1431
hydraulics
120.3141
120.5513
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.00
0.0
"
velocity (ft/sec)
120.9089
discharge rate, Q cfs
shear stress Ibs/ft s
shear velocity (ft/sec)
unit stream power Ibs/ft/sec
Froude number
friction factor uW
threshold qrain size mm
check from
channel material
0
0.0
measured D84 mm
relative roughness1 0.0 fric. factor
0.000 1 Manning's n from channel material
Swamp Grape (UT 2 - XS 4) Pool ---
121.5
121
120.5
120
u 119.5
119
118.5
0 5 10 Width from River'Left to Right (ft) 20 25 30
section.
Pool
description:
height of instrument (ft):
notes
omit
pt.
distance
(ft)
FS
(ft)
elevation
FS FS
bankfull top of bank
channel
slope (% )
0
121.1151
121.1101
120.64 120.96
0
120.9637
120.5599
dimensions
6.4
12.0
1.8
2.2
x-section area 1 0.5
width 12.9
d max 0.5
bank ht 22.2
re 8-B
Id mean
120.5231
120.3123
wet P
120.0658
h d radi
119.873
118.8045
119.5582
120.0822
hydraulics
0.00
0.00
B-B
120.3395
120.6432
120.9297
shear stress Ibs/ft s
121.1537
shear velocity (ft/sec)
threshold qrain size mm

Swamp Grape (UT 2 - XS 5) Riffle ---
122.5
122
121.5
121
> 120.5
w 120
119.5
119
0 5 10 15 20 25
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
section:
Riffle
description:
height of instrument (ft):
omit distance FS FS FS W fpa channel Manning's
notes pt. (ft) (ft) elevation bankfull top of bank (ft) slope (%) "n"
dimensions
4.9
7.9
1.2
1.5
75.0
x-section area
0.6
8.5
0.6
12.8
9.5
d mean
width
wet P
d max
h d radi
bank ht
w/d ratio
W flood prone area
ent ratio
hydraulics
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.00
0.0
"
velocity fUsec
discharge rate, Q cfs
shear stress Ibs/ft s
shear velocity fUsec
unit stream power Ibs/ft/sec
Froude number
friction factor uW
threshold qrain size mm
check from channel material
0
0.0
0.000
measured D84 mm
relative rou hness 1 0.0
fric. factor
1 Mannin 's n from channel material

Swamp Grape (UT 3 - XS 1) Riffle ---
@Ei
J !Ei
r
• r r Er
height of instrument (ft): UM
omit distance FS FS FS W fpa channel Mannil
notes ot. (ft) (ft) elevation bankfull top of bank (ft) slope (%) ..n..
I
dimensions
6.6
6.8
1.4
2.0
35.0
x-section area
1.0
7.6
0.9
7.0
5.2
d mean
width
wet P
d max
h d radi
bank ht
w/d ratio
W flood prone area
ent ratio
hydraulics
0.0
velocity fUsec
0.0
discharge rate, Q cfs
0.00
shear stress Ibs/ft s
0.00
shear velocity fUsec
0.000
unit stream power Ibs/ft/sec
0.00
Froude number
0.0
friction factor uW
IL-±L-Uhreshold
grain size mm
check from channel material
0
measured D84 mm
0.0
relative rou hness 1 0.0 fric. factor
0.000
1 Mannin 's n from channel material
122
121.5
121
120.5
u 120
119.5
119
0 5
notes
of instrument
Swamp Grape (UT 3 - XS 2) Pool ---
0
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
Swamp Grape (UT 3 - XS 2)
Swamp Grape (UT 3 - XS 2) _
200.00
mmm�m M
dimensions
8.6
7.6
x-section area
1.1
8.9
d mean
width
wet P
1.6
d max
1.0
h d radi
1.7
bank ht
hydraulics
0.00 shear stress Ibs/ft s
0.00 shear velocity fUsec
8-B threshold grain size mm

Swamp Grape (UT 3 - XS 3) Riffle ---
ii
�r
i r
Swamp Grape (UT 3 - XS 3)
Swamp Grape (UT 3 - XS 3)
height of instrument (ft): 200.00
dimensions
6.6
8.8
1.2
2.1
27.0
x-section area
0.7
9.7
0.7
11.7
3.1
d mean
width
wet P
d max
h d radi
bank ht
w/d ratio
W flood prone area
ent ratio
hydraulics
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.00
0.0
"
SOME-
velocity fUsec
discharge rate, Q cfs
shear stress Ibs/ft s
shear velocity fUsec
unit stream power Ibs/ft/sec
Froude number
friction factor uW
threshold qrain size mm
check from channel material
0
0.0
0.000
measured D84 mm
relative rou hness 1 0.0
fric. factor
1 Mannin 's n from channel material

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
user rvianuai version d.,i
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Swamp Grape 2. Date of evaluation: 1/2/19
3. Applicant/owner name: Restoration Systems 4. Assessor name/organization: AXE/WGL
5. County: Robeson 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: Lumber 04 on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Wilkinson Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 34.56490,-79.350402
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
SAM 1 (UT 1
9. Site number (show on attached map): Downstream) 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 1000
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 1 to 1.5 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 12 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ®No
14. Feature type: ®Perennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ❑ Piedmont (P) ® Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ®A ❑B
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 mil) ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mil) ®Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mil) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑l ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ®Yes ❑No
1. Channel Water- assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
®A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
❑B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not A
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
❑A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
®B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
®C > 25% of channel unstable

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

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

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

Draft NIC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Swamp Grape Date of Assessment 1/2/19
Stream Category la3 Assessor Name/Organization AXE/WGL
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
MEDIUM
(4) Floodplain Access
HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
LOW
(4) Microtopography
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
LOW
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
(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
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
MEDIUM
(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
NA
Overall
LOW

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
user rvianuai version d.,i
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Swamp Grape 2. Date of evaluation: 2/21/2020
3. Applicant/owner name: Restoration Systems 4. Assessor name/organization: AXE/WGL
5. County: Robeson 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: Lumber 04 on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Wilkinson Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 34.561806,-79.347243
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
SAM 2 (UT 1
9. Site number (show on attached map): Upstream) 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 500
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 4 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 25 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ®No
14. Feature type: ®Perennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ❑ Piedmont (P) ® Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ®A ❑B
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 mil) ®Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mil) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mil) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑l ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ®Yes ❑No
1. Channel Water— assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction — assessment reach metric
®A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
❑B Not
3. Feature Pattern — assessment reach metric
®A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
❑B Not A
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile — assessment reach metric
®A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
❑B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability — assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
®C > 25% of channel unstable

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

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

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

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Swamp Grape Date of Assessment 2/21/2020
Stream Category la2 Assessor Name/Organization AXE/WGL
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
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
MEDIUM
(4) Microtopography
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
LOW
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
(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
MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall
LOW

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
user rvianuai version d.,i
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Swamp Grape 2. Date of evaluation: 2/21/2020
3. Applicant/owner name: Restoration Systems 4. Assessor name/organization: AXE/WGL
5. County: Robeson 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: Lumber 04 on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Wilkinson Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 34.564065,-79.349276
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): SAM 3 (UT 3) 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 200
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 3 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 7 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ®No
14. Feature type: ®Perennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ❑ Piedmont (P) ® Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ®A El
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 mil) ®Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mil) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mil) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑l ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ®Yes ❑No
1. Channel Water— assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction — assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not A
3. Feature Pattern — assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile — assessment reach metric
®A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
❑B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability — assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
®C > 25% of channel unstable

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

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

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

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Swamp Grape Date of Assessment 2/21/2020
Stream Category la2 Assessor Name/Organization AXE/WGL
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
MEDIUM
(4) Floodplain Access
MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
LOW
(4) Microtopography
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
LOW
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
(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
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
MEDIUM
(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
NA
Overall
LOW

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
user rvianuai version d.,i
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Swamp Grape 2. Date of evaluation: 2/21/2020
3. Applicant/owner name: Restoration Systems 4. Assessor name/organization: AXE/WGL
5. County: Robeson 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: Lumber 04 on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Wilkinson Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 34.564348,-79.349068
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): SAM 4 (UT 2) 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 200
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 3 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 6 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ®No
14. Feature type: ®Perennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ❑ Piedmont (P) ® Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ®A El
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 mil) ®Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mil) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mil) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑l ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ®Yes ❑No
1. Channel Water— assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction — assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not A
3. Feature Pattern — assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile — assessment reach metric
®A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
❑B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability — assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
®C > 25% of channel unstable

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

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

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

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Swamp Grape Date of Assessment 2/21/2020
Stream Category la2 Assessor Name/Organization AXE/WGL
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
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
LOW
(4) Microtopography
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
LOW
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
(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
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
MEDIUM
(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
NA
Overall
LOW

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
Accompanies user Manual Version b.0
USACE AID #
NCDWR#
Project Name
Swamp Grape
Date of Evaluation
4/10/2020
Applicant/Owner Name
Restoration Systems
Wetland Site Name
WAM 1
Wetland Type
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Keith/Axiom
Level III Ecoregion
Southeastern Plains
Nearest Named Water Body
Wilkinson Creek
River Basin
Lumber
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
03040204
County
Robeson
NCDWR Region
Fayetteville
F— Yes M No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees)
34.56172.-79.34701
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in
recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic
tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ® Yes ❑ No
Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑ Anadromous fish
® Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
❑ NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
❑ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
❑ Publicly owned property
❑ N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
❑ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
❑ Designated NCNHP reference community
❑ Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
® Blackwater
❑ Brownwater
❑ Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ❑ Lunar ❑ Wind ❑ Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? ❑ Yes ® No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? ❑ Yes ® No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition —assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the
assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment
area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
®A ❑A Not severely altered
❑B ®B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub).
Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot
deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
❑A ❑A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ❑B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
®C ®C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change)
(examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
Water Storage/Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
3a. ❑A ❑A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
❑B ❑B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
❑C ❑C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®D ®D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. ❑A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
❑B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
®C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

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

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

17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
®A >_ 25% coverage of vegetation
❑B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider
structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
TAA WT
o ❑A ❑A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
m ❑B ❑B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
cU ®C ®C Canopy sparse or absent
T
o ❑A
❑A
Dense mid-story/sapling layer
❑B
❑B
Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
®C
®C
Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
- ❑A
❑A
Dense shrub layer
Moderate density layer
.�! ❑B
❑B
shrub
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 A
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
❑B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
®C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
❑A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
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
Assesment area is in cow pasture adjacent to incised stream. Stream incision has removed the majority of hydrology from the wetland. Livestock
activity has caused excessive soil compaction throughout assessment area.

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name WAM 1
Date of Assessment
4/10/2020
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Keith/Axiom
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
YES
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -surface Storage and
Retention
Condition
LOW
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NO
Soluble Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Veaetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Ratina Summa
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
LOW
Water Quality
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
Accompanies user Manual Version b.0
USACE AID #
NCDWR#
Project Name
Swamp Grape
Date of Evaluation
4/10/2020
Applicant/Owner Name
Restoration Systems
Wetland Site Name
WAM 2 (Old Pond)
Wetland Type
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Keith/Axiom
Level III Ecoregion
Southeastern Plains
Nearest Named Water Body
Wilkinson Creek
River Basin
Lumber
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
03040204
County
Robeson
NCDWR Region
Fayetteville
F— Yes M No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees)
34.56311.-79.34826
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in
recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic
tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ❑ Yes ® No
Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑ Anadromous fish
® Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
❑ NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
❑ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
❑ Publicly owned property
❑ N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
❑ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
❑ Designated NCNHP reference community
❑ Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
® Blackwater
❑ Brownwater
❑ Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ❑ Lunar ❑ Wind ❑ Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? ❑ Yes ® No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? ® Yes ❑ No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition —assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the
assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment
area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
®A ®A Not severely altered
❑B ❑B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub).
Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot
deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ❑B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
❑C ❑C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change)
(examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
Water Storage/Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
3a. ❑A ❑A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
❑B ❑B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
❑C ®C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®D ❑D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. ❑A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
❑B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
®C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

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

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

17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
❑A >_ 25% coverage of vegetation
❑B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider
structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
TAA WT
o ❑A ❑A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
m ❑B ❑B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
cU ®C ®C Canopy sparse or absent
T
o ❑A
❑A
Dense mid-story/sapling layer
❑B
❑B
Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
®C
®C
Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
- ❑A
❑A
Dense shrub layer
Moderate density layer
.�! ®B
®B
shrub
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 A
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
❑B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
®C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
❑A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
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
Assesment area in old pond bed and bound by agriculture fields and pasturland.

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name WAM 2 (Old Pond) Date of Assessment 4/10/2020
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest Assessor Name/Organization Keith/Axiom
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) YES
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO
Sub -function Ratina Summa
Function
Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -surface Storage and
Retention
Condition
LOW
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
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
MEDIUM
Veaetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Ratina Summa
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
LOW
Water Quality
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

Site
Swamp Grape Site
Stream
UT 1 Right Bank
Bank Length
2913
Observers
WGL
Date
18-May-20
Station
Bank
BEHI
NBS
Erosion Rate
Length
Bank Height
Erosion
1
177
right
Low
Low
0
177
2
0.0
2
451
right
Mod
Low
0.02
274
2
11.0
3
468
right
High
High
0.11
17
2
3.7
4
566
right
Mod
Low
0.02
98
2
3.9
5
584
right
High
High
0.11
18
2
4.0
6
620
right
Mod
Low
0.02
36
2.5
1.8
7
637
right
High
High
0.11
17
2.5
4.7
8
661
right
Mod
Low
0.02
24
2.5
1.2
9
689
right
High
Extreme
0.13
28
2.5
9.1
10
787
right
Mod
Low
0.02
98
2.5
4.9
11
819
right
High
High
0.11
32
2.5
8.8
12
1000
right
Mod
Low
0.02
181
2.5
9.1
13
1032
right
High
High
0.11
32
2.5
8.8
14
1184
right
Mod
Low
0.02
152
3
9.1
15
1215
right
High
Extreme
0.13
31
3
12.1
16
1327
right
Mod
Low
0.02
112
2.5
5.6
17
1347
right
High
High
0.11
20
2.5
5.5
18
1377
right
Mod
Low
0.02
30
2.5
1.5
19
1393
right
High
High
0.11
16
2
3.5
20
1489
right
Mod
Low
0.02
96
2
3.8
21
1506
right
High
High
0.11
17
2
3.7
22
1606
right
Mod
Low
0.02
100
2
4.0
23
2192
right
Low
Low
0
586
2
0.0
24
2913
right
V High
Extreme
1.5
721
4
4326.0
Sum erosion sub -totals for each BEHI/NBS
Total Erosion (ft3/yr)
4445.8
Divide total erosion (ft3) by 27
Total Erosion (yd/yr)
164.7
Multiply Total erosion (yard3) by 1.3
Total Erosion (tons/yr)
214.1
Erosion per unit length
Total Erosion (Tons/yr/ft)
0.073

Site
Swamp Grape Site
Stream
UT 1 Left Bank
Bank Length
2935
Observers
WGL
Date
18-May-20
Station
Bank
BEHI
NBS
Erosion Rate
Length
Bank Height
Erosion
1
349
left
Low
Low
0
349
2
0.0
2
384
left
High
High
0.11
35
2
7.7
3
473
left
Mod
Low
0.02
89
2
3.6
4
490
left
High
High
0.11
17
2
3.7
5
600
left
Mod
Low
0.02
110
2
4.4
6
630
left
High
High
0.11
30
2
6.6
7
689
left
Mod
Low
0.02
59
2
2.4
8
711
left
High
High
0.11
22
2
4.8
9
979
left
Mod
Low
0.02
268
2
10.7
10
1014
left
High
High
0.11
35
2.5
9.6
11
1065
left
Mod
Low
0.02
51
2.5
2.6
12
1108
left
High
High
0.11
43
2.5
11.8
13
1142
left
Mod
Low
0.02
34
2.5
1.7
14
1178
left
High
Extreme
0.13
36
2.5
11.7
15
1298
left
Mod
Low
0.02
120
2.5
6.0
16
1326
left
High
High
0.11
28
2
6.2
17
1372
left
Mod
Low
0.02
46
2
1.8
18
1389
left
High
High
0.11
17
2
3.7
19
1525
left
Mod
Mod
0.05
136
2
13.6
20
1557
left
High
High
0.11
32
2
7.0
21
1660
left
Mod
Low
0.02
103
2
4.1
22
2210
left
Low
Low
0
550
2
0.0
23
2935
left
V High
Extreme
0.15
725
4
435.0
24
Sum erosion sub -totals for each BEHI/NBS
Total Erosion (ft3/yr)
558.8
Divide total erosion (ft3) by 27
Total Erosion (yd/yr)
20.7
Multiply Total erosion (yard3) by 1.3
Total Erosion (tons/yr)
26.9
Erosion per unit length
Total Erosion (Tons/yr/ft)
0.009

Site
Swamp Grape Site
Stream
UT 2
Bank Length
1774
Observers
WGL
Date
18-May-20
Station
Bank
BEHI
NBS
Erosion Rate
Length
Bank Height
Erosion
1
24
right
Mod
Low
0.02
24
2.5
1.2
2
42
right
High
High
0.11
18
2.5
5.0
3
151
right
Mod
Low
0.02
109
2.5
5.5
4
179
right
High
High
0.11
28
2.5
7.7
5
257
right
Mod
Low
0.02
78
2
3.1
6
892
right
Low
Low
0
635
1.5
0.0
7
8
92
Left
Mod
Low
0.02
92
2.5
4.6
9
102
Left
High
High
0.11
10
2.5
2.8
10
136
Left
Mod
Low
0.02
34
2.5
1.7
11
154
Left
High
High
0.11
18
2.5
5.0
12
258
Left
Mod
Low
0.02
104
2
4.2
13
882
Left
Low
Low
0
624
1.5
0.0
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Sum erosion sub -totals for each BEHI/NBS
Total Erosion (ft3/yr)
40.6
Divide total erosion (ft3) by 27
Total Erosion (yd/yr)
1.5
Multiply Total erosion (yard3) by 1.3
Total Erosion (tons/yr)
2.0
Erosion per unit length
Total Erosion (Tons/yr/ft)
0.001

Site
Swamp Grape Site
Stream
UT 3
Bank Length
295
Observers
WGL
Date
18-May-20
Station
Bank
BEHI
NBS
Erosion Rate
Length
Bank Height
Erosion
1
78
right
Mod
Low
0.02
78
2
3.1
2
97
right
High
High
0.11
19
2
4.2
3
145
right
Mod
Low
0.02
48
2
1.9
4
5
6
7
8
18
Left
Mod
Low
0.02
18
2
0.7
9
37
Left
High
High
0.11
19
2
4.2
10
81
Left
Mod
Low
0.02
44
2
1.8
11
103
Left
High
High
0.11
22
2
4.8
12
150
Left
Mod
Low
0.02
47
2
1.9
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Sum erosion sub -totals for each BEHI/NBS
Total Erosion (ft3/yr)
22.6
Divide total erosion (ft3) by 27
Total Erosion (yd/yr)
0.8
Multiply Total erosion (yard3) by 1.3
Total Erosion (tons/yr)
1.1
Erosion per unit length
Total Erosion (Tons/yr/ft)
0.004

BEHIMBS Summary
Stream Reach
Erosion Rate
(tons/year)
UT 1 right bank
214.1
UT 1 left bank
26.9
UT 2
2.0
UT 3
1.1
Total
244.0

AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
SOIL BORING LOG
Date: 5/10/2020
Project/Site: Swamp Grape
County, State: Robeson County, NC
Sampling Point/
Coordinates: Soil Profile A (34.564094,-79.349134)
Investigator: W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series: Bibb
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Notes: Location is shown on
Figure 4.
Depth (inches)
Matrix
Mottling
Texture
Color
%
Color
%
Type
Location
0-4
10 YR 7/1
90
10 YR 5/8
5
C
PL
Sand
10 YR 5/1
5
C
M
4-7
10 YR 4/2
95
10 YR 3/6
5
C
PL
Silty Clay
12-26
10 YR 4/1
95
10 YR 5/1
5
D
M
Fine Sandy Clay
26+
10 YR 6/1
97
10 YR 4/6
3
C
M
Sand
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. Locaction: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis

AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
SOIL BORING LOG
Date: 5/10/2020
Project/Site: Swamp Grape
County, State: Robeson County, NC
Sampling Point/
Coordinates: Soil Profile B (34.56437,-79.349416)
Investigator: W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series: Bibb
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Notes: Location is shown on
Figure 4.
Depth (inches)
Matrix
Mottling
Texture
Color
%
Color
%
Type
Location
0-3
10 YR 7/1
95
10 YR 6/8
5
C
P
Sand
3-18
10 YR 5/1
95
10 YR 3/6
5
C
P
sandy loam
18+
10 YR 7/1
97
10 YR 5/6
3
C
M
sand
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. Locaction: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis

AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
SOIL BORING LOG
Date: 5/10/2020
Project/Site: Swamp Grape
County, State: Robeson County, NC
Sampling Point/
Coordinates: Soil Profile C (34.562827,-79.347331)
Investigator: W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series: Bibb
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Notes: Location is shown on
Figure 4.
Depth (inches)
Matrix
Mottling
Texture
Color
%
Color
%
Type
Location
0-6
10 YR 4/2
99
10 YR 4/4
1
C
P
Sandy loam
6-8
10 YR 4/2
95
10 YR 3/1
3
C
M
sandy loam
10 YR 5/4
2
C
M
8-14
10 YR 4/1
40
10 YR 5/1
10
C
M
clay loam
10 YR 6/1
40
10 YR 5/6
10
C
M
14+
10 YR 4/1
85
10 YR 3/2
15
C
M
sand
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. Locaction: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis

AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
SOIL BORING LOG
Date: 5/10/2020
Project/Site: Swamp Grape
County, State: Robeson County, NC
Sampling Point/
Coordinates: Soil Profile D (34.562558,-79.346803)
Investigator: W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series: Bibb
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Notes: Location is shown on
Figure 4.
Depth (inches)
Matrix
Mottling
Texture
Color
%
Color
%
Type
Location
0-4
10 YR 3/2
95
10 YR 5/1
3
D
M
loamy sand
10 YR 4/4
2
C
P
4-8
10 YR 3/1
100
loamy sand
8-12
10 YR 6/2
80
10 YR 4/1
20
C
M
sand
12-20
10 YR 6/2
100
sand
20+
10 YR 7/1
100
sand
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. Locaction: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis

AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
SOIL BORING LOG
Date: 5/10/2020
Project/Site: Swamp Grape
County, State: Robeson County, NC
Sampling Point/
Coordinates: Soil Profile E (34.562126,-79.346997)
Investigator: W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series: Bibb
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Notes: Location is shown on
Figure 4.
Depth (inches)
Matrix
Mottling
Texture
Color
%
Color
%
Type
Location
0-4
10 YR 3/2
99
10 YR 3/3
1
C
P
sandy loam
4-7
10 YR 3/2
95
10 YR 7/1
5
D
M
loamy sand
7-13
10 YR 5/1
70
10 YR 6/1
30
D
M
loamy sand
13-18
10 YR 6/1
95
10 YR 5/1
5
C
M
sand
18+
10 YR 7/1
100
sand
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. Locaction: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis

AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
SOIL BORING LOG
Date: 5/10/2020
Project/Site: Swamp Grape
County, State: Robeson County, NC
Sampling Point/
Coordinates: Soil Profile F (34.561372,-79.346721)
Investigator: W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series: Bibb
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Notes: Location is shown on
Figure 4.
Depth (inches)
Matrix
Mottling
Texture
Color
%
Color
%
Type
Location
0-1
10 YR 3/2
97
10 YR 3/4
3
C
P
sandy loam
1-9
10 YR 5/2
90
10 YR 6/1
5
sand
10 YR 5/1
4
D
M
10 YR 5/6
1
C
M
9-18
10 YR 5/1
70
10 YR 5/6
30
C
M
sand
18+
Gley 5/1
90
10 YR 5/2
10
D
M
sand
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. Locaction: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis

AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
SOIL BORING LOG
Date: 5/10/2020
Project/Site: Swamp Grape
County, State: Robeson County, NC
Sampling Point/
Coordinates: Soil Profile G (34.561135,-79.346555)
Investigator: W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series: Bibb
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Notes: Location is shown on
Figure 4.
Depth (inches)
Matrix
Mottling
Texture
Color
%
Color
%
Type
Location
0-3
10 YR 3/1
97
10 YR 4/4
3
C
P
sandy loam
3-9
10 YR 3/1
95
10 YR 6/1
3
D
P
loamy sand
10 YR 4/4
2
C
P
9-24
10 YR 6/2
70
10 YR 5/2
29
C
M
sand
10 YR 5/3
1
24+
10 YR 7/1
97
10 YR 5/6
3
C
M
sandy clay
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. Locaction: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis

AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
SOIL BORING LOG
Date: 5/10/2020
Project/Site: Swamp Grape
County, State: Robeson County, NC
Sampling Point/
Coordinates: Soil Profile H (34.560936,-79.346756)
Investigator: W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series: Bibb
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Notes: Location is shown on
Figure 4.
Depth (inches)
Matrix
Mottling
Texture
Color
%
Color
%
Type
Location
0-8
10 YR 5/1
95
10 YR 4/4
5
C
P
sandy loam
8-16
10 YR 4/1
90
10 YR 6/1
8
D
M
loamy sand
10 YR 3/4
2
C
P
16+
10 YR 7/1
97
10 YR 5/1
2
C
M
sand
10 YR 6/4
1
C
M
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. Locaction: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis

Appendix C - Flood Frequency Analysis Data
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) Appendices
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

Reference Reaches
Flood Frequency Analaysis-Regional Regression Equation (USGS 2004)
McRae Land Reference Reach
Return
Interval
(years)
Discharge
(cfs)
0.1
2
0.3
5
2
21.9
5
46.4
10
69.9
25
108
50
145
100
188
200
240
500
325
Note: Bold values are interpolated.
Jordan Creek Reference Reach
Return
Interval
(years)
Discharge
(cfs)
0.1
40
0.3
90
2
434
5
777
10
1070
25
1500
50
1890
100
2320
200
2810
500
3550
350
Olaf
250
U
v 200
tin
L
s 150
U
N
0 100
50
0
4000
3500
3000
2500
v
2000
1500
LA
1000
500
0
McRae Land Company Reference Reach
0 100 200 300 400 500
Return interval (years)
Jordan Creek Reference Reach
0 100 200 300 400 500
Return interval (years)

Appendix D - Jurisdictional Determination Info
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) Appendices
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

From: Ray Holz
To: John Hambv
Subject: Fwd: 2019-00904: Swamp Grape PJD
Date: Friday, September 18, 2020 1:30:43 PM
Attachments: 404 and WOUS delineation Mao.odf
Raymond H.
Restoration Systems
From Cell: [phone]
From: Beecher, Gary H CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, September 18, 2020 1:15:34 PM
To: Grant Lewis <[e-mail]>
Cc: Ray Holz <rholz@restoration systems.com>
Subject: RE: 2019-00904: Swamp Grape PJD
Mr. Grant,
On June 9, 2020 I met you and your assistant onsite to verify the 404 wetland line and to identify
additional Waters of the U.S. on the Swamp Grape Mitigation project in Robeson County, NC.
USACE Project ID:
SAW-2019-00904
I concur with the delineation for the project site. I will get the requested PJD out to you and the
applicant sometime next week.
Thanks for your patience,
Respectfully,
Gary
-----Original Message -----
From: Grant Lewis <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, September 18, 2020 12:46 PM
To: Beecher, Gary H CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Cc: Raymond Holz ([e-mail]) <[e-mail]>
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] FW: 2019-00904: Swamp Grape PJD
Hello Gary;
I tried to call your phone number at the USACE office and it indicated you are tele-working and the
best way to reach you is by email. I am trying to get an email indicating the approval of the Swamp
Grape PJD we reviewed on June 19th. Although I will need a tear sheet eventually, I mainly need a
quick email from you indicating you approved the delineation. I am ready to submit the detailed
plan and it is being held up because I don't have written confirmation from you. Can you please
send an email, or tear sheet with your approval?
Thank you

Grant
Grant Lewis
Senior Project Manager
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
[e-mail]
[phone] (cell)
-----Original Message -----
From: Grant Lewis
Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2020 12:19 PM
To: 'Beecher, Gary H CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)' <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: 2019-00904: Swamp Grape PJD
Hey Gary;
I am sorry to pester you. I really only need an email indicating you agreed with the delineation as
we saw it in the field. If you have a tear sheet, that would be great. However, at this time even an
email from you would suffice for my detailed plan submittal.
Thanks
Grant
Grant
Grant Lewis
Senior Project Manager
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
[e-mail]
[phone] (cell)
-----Original Message -----
From: Grant Lewis
Sent: Friday, September 11, 2020 10:01 AM
To: Beecher, Gary H CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]. mil>
Subject: FW: 2019-00904: Swamp Grape PJD
Hey Gary;
I am submitting the Detailed Restoration Plan for the Swamp Grape Site we revied on June 9th. I
was wondering if you could respond with an email that indicates you agreed with the delineation
and/or send a tear sheet. I need these for submittal of my document.
Thanks and have a good weekend.

Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
ACTION ID #: SAW- Begin Date (Date Received):
Prepare file folder ❑ Assign Action ID Number in ORM ❑
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: Swamp Grape Mitgation Site
2. Work Type: OPrivate ❑ Institutional ❑Government ❑ Commercial
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form B3d and 133e]:
The Swamp Grape Mitigation Site is approximately—24.3 acres in size. The project is intended to restore/enhance/preserve
approximately---3941 linear feet of stream and — 15.891 acres of wetlands.
4. Property Owner / Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A4]: Bodenhamer, Louie Arthur, Wife /Bodenhamer Louie
5. Agent / Consultant [PNC Form A5 — or ORM Consultant ID Number]:
Raymond Holz (Restoration Systems, LLC) / Grant Lewis (Axiom Environmental, Inc)
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form 135b]: NA
7. Project Location— Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form B l b] :
The Site is located off Kitchen Street near Rowland, NC. (34.56391N, 79.34901"
8. Project Location— Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form Bla]: 829936273300, 829955333900
9. Project Location — County [PCN Form A2b]: Robeson County
10. Project Location —Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: Rowland, NC
11. Proj ect Information — Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form 132a] : Wi I ki n so n C ree k
12. Watershed / 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form B2c]: 03040204
Authorization: Section 10 ❑ Section 404 0
Regulatory Action Type:
Standard Permit
Nationwide Permit #
Regional General Permit #
►� Jurisdictional Determination Request
Section 10 and 404 ❑
❑ Pre -Application Request
❑ Unauthorized Activity
Compliance
No Permit Required
Revised 20150602

jurisdictional Determination Request
US Army Corps
of Engineers
Wllmtngtorr Dhstrid
This form is intended for use by anyone requesting a jurisdictional determination (JD) from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Wilmington District (Corps). Please include all supporting
information, as described within each category. with your request. You may submit your request
via mail, electronic mail. or facsimile. Requests should be sent to the appropriate project
manager of the county in which the property is located. A current list of project managers by
assigned counties can be found on-line at:
http://www.saw.usace.armv.iiii[/Missions/Re ulatoaPerinitPro€rain/Contact/CountvLocator.aspx..
by calling 910-251-4633, or by contacting any of the field offices listed below. once your
request is received you will be contacted by a Corps project manager.
ASHEVILLE & CHARLOTTE REGULATORY
FIELD OFFICES
US Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
General Number: [phone]
Fax ]Number: ( 828 ) 281-8120
RALEIGHREGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Armv Corps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest. North Caro lina27587
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
INSTRUCTIONS:
WASH INGTON REGULATORY F1ELDOFFICE
US Army Carps of Engineers
2407 West Fifth Street
Washington. North Carolina 27889
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
WILMINGTON REGULATORY FIELDOF'F7CE
US Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
General Number: 910-251-4G33
Fax Number: [phone]
All requesters must complete Parts A, B, C, D, E, F and G.
NOTE To CONSULTANTS AND AGENCIES: If you are requesting a JD on behalf of a
paying client or your agency, please note the specific submittal requirements in Part H.
]VOTE ON PART ❑ — PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION: Please be aware that
all .I❑ requests must include the current property owner authorization for the Corps to
proceed with the determination, which may include inspection of the property when
necessary. This form must be signed by the current property owner(s) or the owner(s)
authorized agent to be considered a complete request.
NOTE ON PART D - NCDOT REQUESTS: Property owner authorization/notification for
JD requests associated with North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
projects will be conducted according to the current NCDOTIUSACE protocols.
NOTE TO USDA PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS: A Corps approved or preliminary JD
may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of
1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in
USDA programs, you should also request a certified wetland determination from the local
office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service. prior to starting work.
Version: M y 2017 Page I

Jurisdictional Determination Request
A. PARCEL INFORMATION
Street Address: 6547 Kitchen Street
City, State:
Rowland, NC
County: Robeson
Parcel Index Number(s) (PIN): 829936273300, 829955333900
13. REQUESTOR INFORMATION
Name: Grant Lewis - Axiom Environmental, Inc
Mailing Address: 218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603
Telephone Number: [phone]
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
Select one:
I am the can ent property owner.
❑ 1 am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultant[
Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
Other, please explain.
C. PROPERTV OWNER INFORMATION '-
Name: Restoration Systems, LLC
Mailing Address: 1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Telephone Number: 919-334-9122
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
' Must provide completed Agent Authorization Form/Letter.
' Documentation of ownership also needs to be provided with request (copy of Deed, County GI5'ParcellTax Record).
Vrrsism: May 21117 Page 2

Jurisdictional Determination Request
D. PROPERTY ACCESS CERTIFICATION;-`
By signing below, I authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Carps of
Engineers (Corps) to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on -
site investigations, if necessary, and issuing a jurisdictional determination pursuant to Section
404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. i, the
undersigned, am either a duly authorized owner of record of the property identified herein. or
acting as the duly authorized agent of the owner of record of the property.
W. Grant Lewis
Print blame
Capacity: ❑ Owner ❑1 Authorized Agents
4/23/2020
Data l P gitally el9ned l+y W �raul l rw r
W. G ra n t L e w i s PM �h=W. Gram Levers. aA%lom Envlrvn,i.1,- .Ine„
oy, emaN�lewiyFalJomen>tironmentalo+g, rrus
Pate-2RZR.IH.23 Rd-79:[!7 �'DR'
Signature
E. REASON FOR JD REQUEST: (Check as many as applicable)
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all aquatic resources.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all jurisdictional aquatic resources under Corps authority.
QI intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps, and the JD would be used to avoid and minimize
impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources and as an initial step in a future permitting
�oceSs.
I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps, this request is accompanied by my permit application
and the JD is to be used in the permitting process.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities in a navigable water of the
LU.S_ which is included on the district Section 10 list and/or is subject to the ebb and flow of
the tide.
A Corps JD is required in order obtain my local/state authorization.
I intend to contest jurisdiction over a particular aquatic resource and request the Corps
confirm that jurisdiction does/does not exist over the aquatic resource on the parcel.
0 I believe that the site may be comprised entirely of dry land.
Other:
For NC DOT requests following the current NCDOT/USACE protocols, skip to Part E.
If there are multiple parcels owned by ditt'erent parties, please provide the following for cacti additional parcel on a
continuation sheet.
s Must provide agent authorization form/letter signed by owner(s},
Version: May 2017 Page 3

Jurisdictional Determination Request
F. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD) TYPE (Select One)
❑f i am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminary JD for the property identified herein.
A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) provides an indication that there may
be "waters of the United States„ or ``navigable waters of the United States"ion a property.
PJDs are sufficient as the basis for permit decisions. For the purposes of permitting, all
waters and wetlands on the property will be treated as if they are jurisdictional "waters of
the United States". PJDs cannot be appealed (33 C.F.R. 331.2]; however, a PJD is
"preliminary" in the sense that an approved JD can be requested at any time. PJDs do
not expire.
❑ I am requesting that the Corps provide an approved JD for the property identified herein.
An Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) is a determination that
jurisdictional "waters of the United States" or "navigable waters of the United
States" are either present or absent on a site. An approved JD identifies the limits of
waters on a site detennined to be jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act and/or
Rivers and Harbors Act. Approved .1Ds are sufficient as the basis for permit
decisions. AJDs are appealable (33 C.F.R. 331.2), The results of the AJD will be
posted on the Corps website. A landowner, permit applicant, or other "affected
party" (33 C.F.R. 331.2) who receives an AJD may rely upon the AJD for five years
(subject to certain limited exceptions explained in Regulatory Guidance Letter 05-
02).
❑ I am unclear as to which JD I would like to request and require additional information
to inform my decision.
G. ALL REQUESTS
Map of Property or Project Area. This Map must clearly depict the boundaries of the
review area.
Size of Property or Review Area —24.3 acres.
❑ The property boundary (or review area boundary) is clearly physically marked on the site_
Vcrsism: May '_d117 Page 4

jurisdictional Determination Request
H. REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS
V
Project Coordinates (Decimal Degrees): Latitude:
34.5639
Longitude:-79.3490
❑f A legible delineation snap depicting the aquatic resources and the property/review area.
Delineation maps must be no Iarger than 1 Ix17 and should contain the following: (Corps
signature of submitted survey plats will occur after the submitted delineation map has been
reviewed and approved).'
■ North Arrow
■ Graphical Scale
■ Boundary of Review Area
■ Date
■ Location of data points for each Wetland Determination Data Form or tributary
assessment reach.
For Annroved Jurisdictional Determinations:
■ Jurisdictional wetland features should be labeled as Wetland Waters of the US, 404
wetlands, etc. Please include the acreage of these features.
■ Jurisdictional non -wetland features (i.e. tidal/navigable waters, tributaries,
impoundments) should be labeled as Non -Wetland Waters of the US, stream, tributary.
open water, relatively permanent water, pond. etc. Please include the acreage or linear
length of each of these features as appropriate.
■ IsoIated waters, waters that Iack a significant nexus to navigable waters, or lion -
jurisdictional upland features should be identified as Non -Jurisdictional. Please
include a justification in the label regarding why the feature is non jurisdictional (i.e.
"Isolated", "No Significant Nexus". or "Upland Feature"). Please include the acreage
or linear length of these features as appropriate.
or Preliminary Jurisdictional Determinations:
■ Wetland and non -wetland features should not be identified as Jurisdictional. 404.
Waters of the United States, or anything that implies jurisdiction. These features can be
identified as Potential Waters of the United States. Potential Non -wetland Waters of
the United States, wetland, stream, open water, etc. Please include the acreage and
linear length of these features as appropriate.
7 Completed Wetland Determination Data Forms for appropriate region
(at least one wetland and one upland form needs to be completed for each wetland type)
Please refer to the guidance document titled "Survey Standards for.lurisdictionaI Determinations" to ensure that the
supplied map meets the necessary mapping standards. http://wwAv.saw.usace.army.miI/Mission_ s/Regulatotw-.Permit-
Pro,—nramJurisdictionl
vmr ion: May 2017 Page 5

jurisdictional Determination Request
Completed appropriate Jurisdictional Determination form
• PJDs, please complete a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form'and include the
Aquatic Resource Table
• AJDs, please complete an Approved Jurisdictional Determination Forms
❑ Vicinity Map
0 Aerial Photograph
USGS Topographic Map
Soil Survey Map
Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map. Proposed Site
Plan, previous delineation maps. LIDAR maps, FEMA tloodplain snaps)
Landscape Photos (iftal:en)
❑7 NCSAM and/or NCWAM Assessment Forms and Rating Sheets
NC Division of Water Resources Stream Identification Forms
Other Assessment Forms
7 www.saw.tcsaee.armytrnil/Portals/59/does/regulatory/reedocs,iJDIRGL 08-43_App A Prelim JD Form tillable.pdf
9 Please see http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory-Permit-Program/Jurisdiction,
Principal Purpose: The information that you provide will be used in evaluating your request to determine
whether there are any aquatic resources within the project area subject to federal jurisdiction u nd e r t h e regu latory
authorities referenced above.
Routine Uses: This information may be shared witli the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local
government agencies, and the public, and may be made available as part of a public notice as required by federal
law. Your name and property location where federal j uri sd iction is to bedeterntined will be included in the
approved jurisdictional determination (AJD), which will be made available to the public on the District's website
and on the Headquarters USAGE website.
Disclasure: Submission of requested information is voluntary; however, if information is not provided, the
request for an AJD cannot he evaluated nor can an AJ❑ be isstied.
Version; May 2017 Page 6

OATTACH M ENT
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL
DETERMINATION (JD):
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PRELIMINARY JD:
Grant Lewis- Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Ave
Raleigh, NC 27603
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Swamp Grape Mitigation Site.
(USE THE ATTACHED TABLE TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE WATERBODIES
AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: North Carolina County/parish/borough: Robeson County City: Rowland
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format):
Lat 34.56390N, Long. 79.3490°W
Name of nearest waterbody: Wilkinson Creek
Identify (estimate) amount of waters in the review area:
Non -wetland waters: 3941 linear feet: 3-12 width (ft)
Cowardin Class: R3UB1/2
Stream Flow: Perennial
Wetlands: 15.891 acres
Cowardin Class: PEM/PSS/PFO
Surface waters: N/A
Name of any water bodies on the site that have been identified as Section 10
waters:
Tidal: 0
Non -Tidal: 0
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT
APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
❑ Field Determination. Date(s):
1

1. The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional waters of the
United States on the subject site, and the permit applicant or other affected party
who requested this preliminary JD is hereby advised of his or her option to
request and obtain an approved jurisdictional determination (JD) for that site.
Nevertheless, the permit applicant or other person who requested this
preliminary JD has declined to exercise the option to obtain an approved JD in
this instance and at this time.
2. In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or
a Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring
"pre -construction notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non -reporting
NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an
approved JD for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware of the
following: (1) the permit applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization
based on a preliminary JD, which does not make an official determination of
jurisdictional waters; (2) that the applicant has the option to request an approved
JD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and
that basing a permit authorization on an approved JD could possibly result in less
compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) that
the applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting
the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4)
that the applicant can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply
with all the terms and conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation
requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5) that undertaking
any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without requesting
an approved JD constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the
preliminary JD, but that either form of JD will be processed as soon as is
practicable; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered
individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps
permit authorization based on a preliminary JD constitutes agreement that all
wetlands and other water bodies on the site affected in any way by that activity
are jurisdictional waters of the United States, and precludes any challenge to
such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement
action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether
the applicant elects to use either an approved JD or a preliminary JD, that JD
will be processed as soon as is practicable. Further, an approved JD, a proffered
individual permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual
permit denial can be administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331,
and that in any administrative appeal, jurisdictional issues can be raised (see 33
C.F.R. 331.5(a)(2)). If, during that administrative appeal, it becomes necessary
to make an official determination whether CWA jurisdiction exists over a site, or
to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional waters on the site, the Corps will
provide an approved JD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable.
This preliminary JD finds that there "maybe" waters of the United States on the
subject project site, and identifies all aquatic features on the site that could be
affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:
2

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for preliminary JD (check all that apply
- checked items should be included in case file and, where checked and
requested, appropriately reference sources below):
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the
applicant/consultant:
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the
applicant/consultant.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Rowland, NC
(1997) 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
Web Soil Survey (online at http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov), and Soil
Survey of Robeson County (2018)
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum
of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date): NC OneMap 2017 Orthoimagery.
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination (s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Other information (please specify):
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not
necessarily been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for
later jurisdictional determinations.
Signature and date of
Regulatory Project Manager
(REQUIRED)
Signature and date of
person requesting preliminary JD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)

Estimated amount
of aquatic
Class of
Cowardin
resource in review
aquatic
Site number
Latitude
Longitude
Class
area
resource
2966 feet length
non -section 10
1. UT-1
34.560778
-79.346953
R3UB 1/2
4-12 feet avg width
— non -wetland
826 feet length
non -section 10
2. UT-2
34.562403
-79.349674
R3UB 1/2
4-6 feet avg width
— non -wetland
149 feet length
non -section 10
3. UT-3
34.564474
-79.348954
R3UB 1/2
4-6 feet avg width
— non -wetland
non -section 10
4. Wetland GA
34.561526
-79.346808
PEM
0.356 acre
wetland
non -section 10
5. Wetland GB
34.561183
-79.346589
PEM
0.031 acre
wetland
6. Wetland GC
34.561082
-79.346829
PEM /PSS
0.018 acre
non -section 10
wetland
non -section 10
7. Wetland GD
34.560864
-79.346655
PEM
0.130 acre
wetland
non -section 10
8. Wetland GG
34.561957
-79.34684
PSS
0.087 acre
wetland
non -section 10
9. Wetland GH
34.562561
-79.346963
PEM
0.757 acre
wetland
non -section 10
10. Wetland GL
34.564463
-79.349952
PEM/PFO
14.512 acre
wetland

�' ■ ` \• !•
- ■ IV
Axiorn Enwonmenla+: IBC,
ti Y L '0 �r
r Prepared for:
RESTORATION
'�' ■
1 4 r ••
• _ .,r# Project:
41
CD
y SWAMP GRAPE
"'�" L Z— ��; ,� MITIGATION SITE
u
{� �'_ _ ♦ z , Robeson County, NC
Awd
��? y r + f ■ �t��a ` Title:
.130
4b� � *- .tom � �f• � � � O } ,
SITE
I 501 - .ram LOCATION
_ - f� ■ %-
' ". '.,yQ r- -:; - f • ,.� �„ � a �~a ,`nor
��- ��• ._ �'� _ `nd. �Q — �R =s c� �� .� Drawn by:
KRJ
�r r r V S1
� f�•�� r �'"��Q� ` �— � � Date:
- :'� t _•r APR 2019
+ Legend
r Rowland E? $ oSwampGrapeEasement=24.3ac Scale:
�V r
NCDOT Roads 1:20,000
Project No.:
Ab-
USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map (Rowland, NC Quad)
Directions to the Site from Raleigh: FIGURE
.� _� - Head Easton 1-40 for 29 miles
- _ • I - "' - Take exit 328A to merge onto 1-95 South
-�. 't ` r -- o - After 79 miles, take exit 2 toward Rowland and turn right onto NC-130 W
- After 2.5 miles, turn left onto Ash ole Church Road, then ri ht onto Persimmon Road
- After 2 miles, turn left onto Kitchen Street
`�'� - The Site is located on the right after 0.5 miles and can be accessed from Rhein Drive.
,•ig.t�©20131 ationaTGeo. aphic _ F Site Latitude, Longitude 34.5639,-79.3490 (WGS84)
-��. IilaeR■d*^ o`�tet , irculied ���n � . -
a ,1. d

FaB
VnR
well.. IRa
I�0 -C Axiom Enwonmenla+: Inc,
40 We fa B + Prepared for:
V — 4 •
� _ ' j'�+I. a �3 A
T�I&
• 8 JT r urn
MaA
RESTORATION
•
--ram �J� . ti rw JT Project:
WaB
NSA AyA
Ey Na
BB xA SWAMP GRAPE
/SO WaC ' : Tr MITIGATION SITE
• FdA
Tr AyA �
FaB 1_ k', ti Robeson Count NC
j Wa NUB rx NaA ` . y'
.. Exr4
� s _ Fa,4 � �r Title:
AyA
• N°A Tr PROJECT
• " Tr AyA A ExA AAA MAPPING
�
�
a� w f si-.
a
Notes:
EyA a r AyA Background Imagery Source:
r 1'p 1. Rowland, NC (1997) 7.5-minute
I Tr !( topographic quadrangle provided
2. Soil Geological Survey of Robeson County
Fa B Ex(1978), sheets 44 and 51, provided
.3 B 6 - + h yA by the Natural Resource
' i7 I"5 Conservation Service (NRCS).
AyA Tr
Na Drawn by: AEK
l �-_ , • _m�'_'a / AyA - Tr +' Date: JAN 2020
11.9
' x Ay E AyA ExA Scale: 1:3200
■ �4'� Project No.: 18-002.10
10
J$ w
'sv nTr FIGURE
■ U Legend ExA 4 AyA iC
Swamp Grape Mitigation Site * `., Tr
k AvA 2
0
d' .
. ¢.0• 0 750 1, 500 3,000 Tr {
Feet
rAy Tr w.

Legend
LSwamp Grape Easement = 24.3 ac
Potential Non -Wetland Waters (perennial) — 3941 feet
'y Potential Wetland Waters — 15.891 acre
NC SAM Form Location
USACE Form Location
NC WAM Form Location
o Wetland GPS Point
2-foot Lidar Contours
4-foot Lidar Contours
0 250 500
N
Axic- Env"ri-erniaj. Inc,
Prepared for:
Project:
SWAMP GRAPE
MITIGATION SITE
Robeson County, NC
Title:
Potential
Waters of the U.S.
Wetland GH
0.757 acre
Notes:
Background Imagery Source:
2017 aerial photography
provided by the NC One Map
ti - •- _ -
r==
program (online, provided by
Wetland GG
the NC Geographic Information
0.087 acre
Coordination Council).
Wetland GA
. �
oo ■
0.356 acre
J kA
O
ork Wetland GB
Drawn by: AEK
- -= o 0.031 acre
-o 0
8
Wetland GC
Date: APR 2020
Scale: 1:2600
Project No.: 20-003
FIGURE
3
0.018 acre
`
1,000 Wetland GD
Feet 0.130 acre

e7'A 1 WET`
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: O UJ OA1 G if. A City/County: _4 d b-f 6 0 01 Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: A_ Sampling Point., Lt a
Investigator(s): A Y 1044 ,fit I!i I'fs/1 ir. t, 't : Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hdisbpe, terrace, etc.): FJ--d4love7 Local relief (ooncave, convex, none): FA9 �- Sb pe (yy): 2 i
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): Let: 2 Long: Datum: 061 5 G
Soil Map Unit Name: `.A ` _ NWI classification: _ _
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site I for thi time of r? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation :/ - Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances' present? Yes No
Are Vegetation . Sod or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Sod Present? Yes No within a Wetland?
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators minimum of one is r
uired•
check all that apply
❑ Surface Water (Al)
Aquatic Fauna (613)
High Water Table (A2)
H
Mart Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
Saturation (A3)
❑
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Water Marks (61)
❑
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
❑ Sediment Deposits (132)
❑
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑_ Drift Deposits (83)
❑
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (64)
❑
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑
Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
Yes �. No
Surface Soil Cracks (BB)
❑_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
0 Drainage Patterns (B10)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
0 Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X_ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No '< Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes_Y No Depth (inches): b Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
(includes ca..Pla•\ frim,e
-bescribe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
{�f h/f �0/'1"Cirl/ y / /CA .,f AitlAq-e d b y
or t1 d 4 P-0 1,01 ivle . P.,7 e.. :6 Y'A � t/f #' 4,it l/I 9 vG 4 01L
il6G d� ri M A / 11 4 / h4Co a H D� � O r )�/ `ta�f 'f t� ��q,f �P�! �! !►rflE...
ci re J`C-h y mat. led.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region -Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size:1S r ) %.Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
2. �rt
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
1W 4-
Sampling Point:
f
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
Z"
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
_ (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Z-
Species Across All Strata:
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
t d�
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A/B)
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 = ,
FACU species
x 4 = _ .-
UPC species
x 5 = -
Column Totals:
(A) _ (B)
= Total Cover
F% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: `5
)
1. ".. c
2. S•ewr 60 4- tJ 5 Cam- \.sv
_ L
3. 'if N,xr-:-A
till ir�C
4. Can(
5.
6.
7.
B.
9.
10.
11.
12.
- = Total Cover
50% of total cover:
`160 20% of total cover: J (0_
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
3,3' 1
)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover.
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below)
Prevalence Index = B/A=
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
oetinitions of Four
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb -Ali herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine -All woody vines greater then 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes _Y_ No
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region -Version 2.0
US Army Corps of Engineers

SOIL
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirr
Depth
inches
Matrix
Color mast
Redox Features
% Color (moist) % Tvoe
loc-
v 3
�o�lR-a �-1
u
73- 4
6002_
nYR_ V
i,"/a41
C
N1
Sampling Point: (� - a- 4 w-,-A
Texture Remarks
'Type: C=Concentration, D=De letion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric
❑
Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs,
Histoscl (Al) ❑
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
unless othervdse noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Solle:
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O) Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside 11I 150A,B)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3) Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
H5
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
Redox Dark Surface (F6) (MLRA 153B)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7) ❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
Redox Depressions (F8) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
Marl (F10) (LRR U) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Depleted Ochric (F71) (MLRA 151)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Coast Prairie Redox (All 6) (MLRA 150A)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U) wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151) unless disturbed or problematic.
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Lj
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (If observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region —Version 2.0

6,A 1 up
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Wti r; Ca r a fie:_ CityJCouMy: a b! 5 . ✓) Sampling Date: �1' O 20
ApplicanVOwner: P-� e s it 1w i p'7 ' *'A g, 4VA*A State: Ale— Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Air r` o wl A4 ✓1 ✓,00 OU ►f 44 1 Section, Township, Range: _
Landform (hhlsk)pe, terrace, etc.): F-1 o 1:;IIC /A i+ ✓1 Local relief (concave, convex, none): t- Slope (%): 2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): L R Let: 3 Y. 54, ! 7,7 Long: — 5l r Datum: GtI-7 5 ,6i1
Soil Map Unit Name: a �b _ NWI classification:
Are climatic J hydro Ic conditions on the site typical for is time of year? Yes V No (If no, explain In Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil , or Hydrology for
disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances' present? Yes y No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (if needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ^% No within a Wetland? Yes No
Weiland Hydrology Present? Yes No /'
Remarks:
At e a is tot o�- Ae $4W, dl l•odrta"
11A"4 $<J 4 Vv, rtrrrf , A►rtpi 't' set �"e� i(,�e �`� / fY�
a it* 1. 64 f: e
HYDROLOGY
vVenand Hydrology Indicators:
Prima::y Indicators iminimum of one is reoulred,
check all that 81L�1-1_
❑�Surface Water (At)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
11
u High Water Table (A2)
Mad Deposits (815) (LRR U)
Ej Saturation (A3)
❑
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Q Water Marks (61)
IzOxidized
Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
❑
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Drift Deposits (83)
❑
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑_ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑_ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑
Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery
(B7)
0 Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
Feld Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No ✓ Depth (inches): _
�
Water Table Present? Yes
No th (inches):
I I Surface Soil Cracks (156)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88)
0 Drainage Patters (810)
Moss Trim Lines (1316)
❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T. U)
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):. Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
r..,,.i„aee —;11— #A ... %
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge,
Remarks:
photos, previous inspections), if available:
vrcw'A� 1A
A* '-mil,iCA. Nib k,c.mtzsLa, y
Gal a.ir ,e tr,V„ O� corr
4A�A s dW1
<
lv� VY�
Tlip- 1
MM
No t/
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Guff Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
64•.�..J..4n 1"IM�
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
%gWr Species? Status
r
= Total Cancer
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
SaplincVShrub Stratum (Plat size: ) -
1. __- -
2. -
3. _
4. -
5. -
6. -
7. -
8
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: -
Sampling Point:
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
3 (B)
DC7 (AAB)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species _
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 = .
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = BJA =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydro) v must
1. 1.0
2. Aa
3. l.'rr eAr,A f g0Sf coos>r
4. E,. rit► ;1 ;:rDfrte�M1
� r
R r �
7.
t %J_
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
',r �
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
FAL
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
r
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
y'?
Sapling/Shrub -Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
8• Herb -AII herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
g, of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 it tall.
10. Woody vine -All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
11. height.
12.
S = Total Cover 01
- -
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: }
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Remarks: (if observed, list
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region -Version 2.0

SOIL
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to
Sampling Pant: CO A I u P
or conarm ine aosence oT Inalcators.)
Depth
finches)
Matrix
_ Color {mast)
Redox Features
% Color (mast) % Twe
Loc"
Flux q ,
LID /o Y2
S,
10
AA
4'IR Wz
2 0
—4L
f
S" Ifle
Nt
C
Texture
S �--
S-
SG t.-
Remarks
'Type:
C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Sall Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs,
Histosol (Al) ❑
Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3) ❑
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
unless othervrlse noted.)
Polyvalue Below Surface (SS) (LRR S, T, U)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Solle:
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A, B)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Organic Bodies (AB) (LRR P, T, U)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Muck Presence (AB) (LRR U)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
(MLRA 153B)
❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
Marl (F10) (LRR U)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S7) (LRR O, S)
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Sandy Redox (S5) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Stripped Matrix (S6) Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
trictive Layer (If observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes —Z Na
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region —Version 2.0

G" -041 up
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM —Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: 5�'r^? City/County: 'ti k�b 5007 Sampling Date: `(4 0 2A
Applicant/Owner: R 1 !N'l i State: 15-- Sampling Point:"
Investigator(s): lY ar %c?'�% 9/1 i/1 ✓0,1 tffe.116a Z Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc,): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Flot Slope (%): 2—
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): L, Let: 3 �1, SG7, 3 Long:.— -. C� 2 Datum: IAI & S ay
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: _
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for thistime of year? Yes
Are Vegetation ✓ . Soil , or Hydrology ✓ significantly disturbed?
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic?
No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes /o
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS— Attach site mshowing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
a
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
e e
tj i/)Gi t Sfren.M, Aeeo� i
�o [ 1"vG.5 I,:. cto( ir` , ill
HYDROLOGY
Indicators:
❑ Surface Water 01)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Saturation (A3)
Q Water Marks (B1)
HSediment Deposits (132)
Drift Deposits (83)
❑_ Algal Mat or Q-w§i (B4)
❑_ Iron Deposits (85)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Q' HJater-Stained Leaves (B9)
SecongaWrgfictltbrs (mirifturn of two reguiLqM
heck all that apply _ _
Surface Soil Cracks (86)
Aquatic Fauna (813)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88)
Marl Depo { 9) (LRR U)
0 Drainage Patterns (B10)
Oydrdg'�n Sulfide Odor (C1)
Q Moss Trim Lines (B18)
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
Q Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (CS)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
JZGeomorphic Position (D2)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ FAC-Neutral Test (135)
Q Sphagnum moss (138) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): _
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
AbsWe- Uominant Inc2cator
% CoverL Species? I Status
= Total Cover
50%oftaai over: 20% of total cover:
SaplinalShrub Stratum (Pict size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7. _
8. - -
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Sampling Point: C L" I
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
too
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A!B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species _ x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 = _
Column Totals: (A)
(B)
Prevalence Index = EYA=
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_.pominance Test is >50°%
_ 3 -Prevalence Index is 53.0'
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3. ELked-7-1 S -
4. rJ i n`. T-1-1 . Y-1 i
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
_
3.
4.
Y
5.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: _
r r� be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4 Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb -All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine -AII woody vines greater than 3.28 it in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks: (if observed, list morphological adaptations below).
J
US Anny Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region -Version 2.0

w
SOIL
Sampling Point: & H44—w
needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.)
Depth Matrix
(inches) Color (moist)
%
Redox,Feltures
ColorMoist) % Type'
104
2-0
!1'�
x-lef3
C
&�
i iJ ' 7 Jfe
7-:1
.
�$ r ICE Y'R--10b
°�
r,aY -L.
u
r"
luyk r1 � `0 C' _�&—
Texture Remarks
Ld
t �
z
'T C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. ZLocation: PL=Pore Linino, M=Matrix.
Hydric
Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs,
unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Solis:
Histosd (Al) '
❑
Pdyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑
Thin Dark Surface (89) (LRR S, T, U) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
0
Black Histic (A3)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fi) (LRR O) Reduced Vertic (1`18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3) Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
Organic Bodies (AS) (LRR P, T, U)
Redox Dark Surface (F6) (MLRA 15313)
cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7) ❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
H5
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
Redox Depressions (F8) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
Marl (F10) (LRR U) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U) wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
D
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151) unless disturbed or problematic.
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Reduced Vertic (F78) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Sandy Redox (S5) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Stripped Matrix (S6) Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
Dark Surface (87) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present? Yes —zNo
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region —Version 2.0

Cv 1t oq _ W rT
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: 'S Co#W "a City/County: Koloc504 Sampling pate: _ ►O
Applicant/Owner. _ �06 [of,;,, , e>,! r 5 5 S State: _ V 6 Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): A x��DM & fi✓,V• 7Mg- A 4s I Section, Township, Range:.
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): ;:�' I agd PL a Z'. Local relief (ooncave, convex, none): Slope (%): 2 7
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): L {� Lat: 3 ` • S *J 3 Long: — y 41 . �y zz Datum: &S 81
Soil Map Unit Name: D i le b _ NWI classification:
Are climatic I hydrologic nditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation P' . Soil _or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes r No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers In Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transacts, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Sog Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks: �
mt
HYDROLOGY
Welland Hydrology Indicatom:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that a;)i
L�JI Surtace Water (Al)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (1313)
1�1 High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
❑ Marl Deposits (815) (LRR U)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Water Marks (B1)
aOxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
SSediment Deposits (62)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Drift Deposits (83)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Ej Algal Mat or Crust (134)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
0 Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Ej Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
0 Water -Stained Leaves (89)
Field Observations: �(
Surface Water Present? Yes No V Depth (inches):
,41�e '4.I' . , l
� 1 "
Surface Soil Cracks (SO)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
0 Drainage Pattems (1310)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (135)
0 Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Water Table Present? Yes 1—k — No Depth (inches): ! ,b
Saturation Present? Yes 0'C- No Depth (inches): _ 16 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes r� No
(includes capillary fringe]
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well. aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status
1...-
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
�,y = Total Cover
50% of total,adver: 20% of total cover:
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
2.
3.
4.
5.
7.
8.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Her Stratum (Plot size:
)
��-
i. W1tC,
2.. ; , *
3.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: t
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
)
_
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations
Sampling Point: -
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A!B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A=
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb -All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region -Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: ^
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.)
Depth
(inches)
Matrix
Color moist
S?
Redox Features
% Color m 'st Type
JA,_
_
Loc-
15- LO
i ram- c ,
^
9&\ I 011A G
�p t
101L ` ,
t� IV 6= _� _�
�t►'�
-0—
M
Texture Remarks
[DY1h-1-►
'Type: C=Concentration, D=De letion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 21-ocation: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric
Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs,
unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Solls3:
Histosoi (All) ❑
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
Histic Epipedon (A2) D
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Q
Black Histic (A3) u
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O) Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
BHydrogen
Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3) Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
Organic Bodies (AS) (LRR P, T, U)
Redox Dark Surface (F6) (MLRA 153B)
❑
cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Red Parent Material (TF2)
e5
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
Redox Depressions (F8) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF72)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
Mari (F10) (LRR U) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Depleted Ochric (Fi 1) (MLRA 151)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T) 31ndicators ofhydrophytic vegetation and
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U) wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S7) (LRR O, S)
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151) unless disturbed or problematic.
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Sandy Redox (S5) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Stripped Matrix (S6) Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A,153C, 153D)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (It observe
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0

4pL 23 W0 -"
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Ir ` ' � r- P1g6 _ City/County: P01"S40+ l Sampling Date; )161Zt3
Applicant/Owner. Rc S t neon t,'a .? 4 !? _ _ State: 41GSampling Point: t---►.�-c l"
Investigator(s): ,4 X s6rYq PA a® 44),f ': Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floe I� . l Local relief (concave, convex, none): �F%a'L' Slope (96): Z �a
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): L,OR Let: Gj . �� i 463 Long: _7k 340 2 _ Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: _ 13i44 NWI classification:
Are Wimatic 1 hydrolog conditions On the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ✓ , Soii or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances' present? Yes ✓ No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (if needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Sol Present? Yes � No 4 within a Wetland? Yes ✓ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
A rcal is ai
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of t"
Prima Indicators [minimum of one is reouire
Surface Water (A1)
_ High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (61)
8Sediment Deposits (152)
Drift Deposits (83)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (64)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
C3 Water -Stained Leaves (139)
Field Observations:
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Marl Deposits (1315) (LRR U)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Oxidized Rhizospheres along living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (CO
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Lj Surface Soil Cracks (136)
❑_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
0 Drainage Patterns (B10)
Moss Trim Lines (BIB)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (132)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (135)
0 Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T. U)
Surface Water Present? Yes No Y' Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): _ _ Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe]
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections).if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Streturn (Plot size: ) �I % Gover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7 e
8.
= Total Cover
Sampling PointLkAot-
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant 11
Species Across All Strata: f (B)
Percent of Dominant Species /�r1`'
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: T (AB)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 = .
FACW species x 2 =
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
FAC species x 3 =
Sa lin rub Stratum (Plat size:
)
FACU species x 4 =
1
UPL species x 5 =
2
Column Totals: (A) (B)
3.
4.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
5• -
-
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
6•
- -
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
7.
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
8• —
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
= Total Cover
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
1. , r. r.r,u
wJ
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
2. C�fe�. '_
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3. v S 5 :
—
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
4. -"94Pc
VJ
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
5. �6rPOK<'1�51.�-ry �.�hFFai�.h., ram+
�✓ GJ
height.
6•
SaplinglShrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
7
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
8•
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
g.
of size, and woody plants less then 3.28 ft tall.
10.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
11.
height.
12.
U D = Total Cover
50% of total cover:
20°A of total cover:
Woody Dine Stratum (Plot size:
)
2.
3.
4.
5
Hydrophytic
= Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover.
Present? Yes No
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below)
US Army Corps of Engineers
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region -Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Poincj r
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(iinche�s)) �, Color (mast) % Color mast % Twe Loc
ch
Texture Remarks
'Type: C=Concentration, D=De letion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric
Sall Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs,
unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Solls :
Histosol (Al)
❑
Payvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Q
Black Histic (A3)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O) Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3) Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
Redox Dark Surface (F6) (MLRA 153B)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7) ❑ Red Parent Material (TF2)
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
Redox Depressions (178) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
Marl (F10) (LRR U) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U) wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) (LRR O, S)
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151) unless disturbed or problematic.
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Sandy Redox (S5) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Stripped Matrix (36) Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A,153C, 153D)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (If observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
w,n Cb "
�h� A� 4
Hydric Soil Present? Yes Jffb.,,— No
Ste- P S'�-t"
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0
k'

LaL 23 4P
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: ` V-) A ✓A CRY/County:.
Applicant/Owner. r {� XG+. a ►7 �1 �' t -' 5 _
Investigator(s): Ac'S , !qw oYl 6A. S a ~ S Section, Township, Range:
4 vN Sampling Date:
State: A16— Sampling Point:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): , 51-jCt, Local relief (concave, convex, none): WC _.r slope N: —Lz-
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): Let: 3 `; . 3G y 463 Long: -P -79.3 52 Datum: 62 5 y
Soil Map Unit Name: G C c I/! //,-- NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes •—,-,"No (If no, explain In Remarks.)
Are Vegetation �/ , Soil . or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No
Are Vegetation Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes
Hydric Sod Present? Yes
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
No Is the Samplac
No within a Wetlai
No
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is reouired:
check all that apply)
Uftfle Soil Cracks (B8)
tfsparsely
❑�--II Surface Water (At)
L-1 High Water Table
H
Aquatic Fauna (613) l
Mart Deposits U)
Vegetated Concave Surface (88)
0 Drainage Patterns
(A2)
❑_ Saturation (A3)
❑
(1315) (LRR
Hydrogen Sulfide Odo::
(810)
❑ Moss Trim Lures (61a)
Water Marks (B1)
❑
Oxidized Rr ::s; ieres along Living Roots (C3)
0 Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
❑
Pr -,series of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (83)
❑
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
❑
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Geomorphic Position (132)
❑ Iron Deposits (65,
❑
Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
U Inundation. Visible on Aerial Imagery
(B7)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
0 Water=Stained Leaves (B9)
0 Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No )5_ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes No---
_ includes ca illaryf�n e1
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge,
monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.. _
Absolute "'Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
® -%'hover Species? Status
1
1
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
--Total Cover
50% of total cover:
?A96 of total cover:
Saplina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
2. iN"U- 0 tr,; ,:,- M 11
3. VM"C %A- 6A JCVF t„1
4. "i,�A7t' C c ,'fir C i iC t' =j'�..-
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
92- =Total Cover
50% of total cover: Ir! 20% of total cover: `�'� j_
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
101*1 fW* C
2.
3.
4.
5.
Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: Z
Remarks: (If observed, list morph
Sampling Point: v
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (AB)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals: _
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub -Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less then 3.28 it tall.
Woody vine -All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
4
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region -Version 2.0

SOIL
Description: (Describe to the
Depth Matrix
(inches) Color moist
J '$Ions l I"b
8-� . S ? ►icy
Sampling Point: 6-1— —
Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.)
Redox Features
Color (moist) % Twe Loc- Texture Remarks
i.Dvtfi^i I,r
16 tl
ape: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced
Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric
Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs,
unless othervAse noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Solle:
❑
Histosd (Al)
❑
Pdyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
❑
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Q
Black Histic (A3)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O) Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Piedmont Floodplain Sails (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3) ❑ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
❑
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
Redox Dark Surface (F6) (MLRA 153B)
❑
H
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Depleted Dark Surface (177) Red Parent Material (TF2)
❑
Muck Presence (AB) (LRR U)
Redox Depressions (F8) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
Mari (F10) (LRR U) Q Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T) 9lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Coast Prairie Redox (All6) (MLRA 150A)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U) wetland hydrology must be present,
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
1
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151) unless disturbed or problematic.
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Stripped Matrix (86)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 1530)
_I Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region —Version 2.0

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
Accompanies user Manual version b.0
USACE AID #
NCDWR#
Project Name
Swamp Grape
Date of Evaluation
4/10/2020
Applicant/Owner Name
Restoration Systems
Wetland Site Name
WAM 1
Wetland Type
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Keith/Axiom
Level III Ecoregion
Southeastern Plains
Nearest Named Water Body
Wilkinson Creek
River Basin
Lumber
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
03040204
County
Robeson
NCDWR Region
Fayetteville
F— Yes M No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Lonaitude (deci-dearees)
34.56172.-79.34701
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in
recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic
tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ® Yes ❑ No
Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑ Anadromous fish
® Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
❑ NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
❑ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
❑ Publicly owned property
❑ N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
❑ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
❑ Designated NCNHP reference community
❑ Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
® Blackwater
❑ Brownwater
❑ Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ❑ Lunar ❑ Wind ❑ Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? ❑ Yes ® No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? ❑ Yes ® No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition —assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the
assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment
area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
®A ❑A Not severely altered
❑B ®B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub).
Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot
deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
❑A ❑A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ❑B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
®C ®C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change)
(examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
Water Storage/Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
3a. ❑A ❑A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
❑B ❑B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
❑C ❑C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®D ®D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. ❑A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
❑B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
®C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture/Structure — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature.
Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional
indicators.
4a. ❑A Sandy soil
®B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
❑C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
❑D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
❑E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. ❑A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
®B Soil ribbon >_ 1 inch
4c. ®A No peat or muck presence
❑B A peat or muck presence
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)
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
m ❑B ❑B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
CU ®C ®C Canopy sparse or absent
❑A
❑A
Dense mid-story/sapling layer
❑B
❑B
Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
®C
®C
Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
❑A
❑A
Dense shrub layer
Moderate density layer
1E ❑B
❑B
shrub
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 Overbankflow 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
Assesment area is in cow pasture adjacent to incised stream. Stream incision has removed the majority of hydrology from the wetland. Livestock
activity has caused excessive soil compaction throughout assessment area.

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name WAM 1 Date of Assessment 4/10/2020
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest Assessor Name/Organization Keith/Axiom
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) YES
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 Ratina Summa
Function
Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -surface Storage and
Retention
Condition
LOW
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Soluble Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Veaetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Ratina Summa
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
LOW
Water Quality
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
Accompanies user Manual version b.0
USACE AID #
NCDWR#
Project Name
Swamp Grape
Date of Evaluation
4/10/2020
Applicant/Owner Name
Restoration Systems
Wetland Site Name
WAM 2 (Old Pond)
Wetland Type
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Keith/Axiom
Level III Ecoregion
Southeastern Plains
Nearest Named Water Body
Wilkinson Creek
River Basin
Lumber
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
03040204
County
Robeson
NCDWR Region
Fayetteville
F— Yes M No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Lonaitude (deci-dearees)
34.56311.-79.34826
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in
recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic
tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ❑ Yes ® No
Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑ Anadromous fish
® Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
❑ NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
❑ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
❑ Publicly owned property
❑ N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
❑ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
❑ Designated NCNHP reference community
❑ Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
® Blackwater
❑ Brownwater
❑ Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ❑ Lunar ❑ Wind ❑ Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? ❑ Yes ® No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? ® Yes ❑ No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition —assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the
assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment
area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
®A ®A Not severely altered
❑B ❑B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub).
Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot
deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ❑B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
❑C ❑C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change)
(examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
Water Storage/Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
3a. ❑A ❑A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
❑B ❑B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
❑C ®C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®D ❑D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. ❑A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
❑B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
®C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture/Structure — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature.
Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional
indicators.
4a. ❑A Sandy soil
®B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
❑C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
❑D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
❑E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. ❑A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
®B Soil ribbon >_ 1 inch
4c. ®A No peat or muck presence
❑B A peat or muck presence
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)
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
m ❑B ❑B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
CU ®C ®C Canopy sparse or absent
❑A
❑A
Dense mid-story/sapling layer
❑B
❑B
Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
®C
®C
Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
❑A
❑A
Dense shrub layer
Moderate density layer
1E ®B
®B
shrub
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 Overbankflow 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
Assesment area in old pond bed and bound by agriculture fields and pasturland.

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name WAM 2 (Old Pond) Date of Assessment 4/10/2020
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest Assessor Name/Organization Keith/Axiom
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) YES
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO
Sub -function Ratina Summa
Function
Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -surface Storage and
Retention
Condition
LOW
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
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
MEDIUM
Veaetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Ratina Summa
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
LOW
Water Quality
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
Accompanies user ivianuai version c.,i
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Swamp Grape
3. Applicant/owner name: Restoration Systems
5. County: Robeson
7. River basin: Lumber 04
2. Date of evaluation: 1/2/19
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach)
Assessor name/organization: AXE/WGL
Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Wilkinson Creek
34.56490.-79.350402
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
SAM 1 (UT 1
9. Site number (show on attached map): Downstream) 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 1000
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 1 to 1.5 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 12 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ®No
14. Feature type: ®Perennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ❑ Piedmont (P) ® Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ®A\ J ❑B
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mil) ®Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mil) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑l ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ®Yes ❑No
1. Channel Water — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction — assessment reach metric
®A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
❑B Not
3. Feature Pattern — assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile — assessment reach metric
❑A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
®B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability — assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
®C > 25% of channel unstable

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

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

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

Draft INC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Swamp Grape Date of Assessment 1/2/19
Stream Category la3 Assessor Name/Organization AXE/WGL
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
MEDIUM
(4) Floodplain Access
HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
LOW
(4) Microtopography
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
LOW
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
(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
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
MEDIUM
(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
NA
Overall
LOW

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
Accompanies user ivianuai version c.,i
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Swamp Grape
3. Applicant/owner name: Restoration Systems
5. County: Robeson
7. River basin: Lumber 04
2. Date of evaluation: 2/21/2020
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach)
Assessor name/organization: AXE/WGL
Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Wilkinson Creek
34.561806,-79.347243
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
SAM 2 (UT 1
9. Site number (show on attached map): Upstream) 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 500
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 4 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 25 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ®No
14. Feature type: ®Perennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ❑ Piedmont (P) ® Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ®A\ J ❑B
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) ®Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mil) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mil) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑l ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ®Yes ❑No
1. Channel Water — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction — assessment reach metric
®A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
❑B Not
3. Feature Pattern — assessment reach metric
®A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
❑B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile — assessment reach metric
®A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
❑B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability — assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
®C > 25% of channel unstable

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

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

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

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Swamp Grape Date of Assessment 2/21/2020
Stream Category la2 Assessor Name/Organization AXE/WGL
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
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
MEDIUM
(4) Microtopography
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
LOW
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
(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
MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall
LOW

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
Accompanies user ivianuai version c.,i
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Swamp Grape
3. Applicant/owner name: Restoration Systems
5. County: Robeson
7. River basin: Lumber 04
2. Date of evaluation: 2/21/2020
Assessor name/organization:
Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad:
AXE/WGL
Wilkinson Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 34.564065,-79.349276
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): SAM 3 (UT 3) 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 200
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 3 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 7 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ®No
14. Feature type: ®Perennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ❑ Piedmont (P) ® Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic NAB J El
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) ®Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mil) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mil) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑l ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ®Yes ❑No
1. Channel Water — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction — assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not
3. Feature Pattern — assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile — assessment reach metric
®A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
❑B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability — assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
®C > 25% of channel unstable

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

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

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

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Swamp Grape Date of Assessment 2/21/2020
Stream Category la2 Assessor Name/Organization AXE/WGL
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
MEDIUM
(4) Floodplain Access
MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
LOW
(4) Microtopography
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
LOW
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
(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
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
MEDIUM
(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
NA
Overall
LOW

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
Accompanies user ivianuai version c.,i
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Swamp Grape
3. Applicant/owner name: Restoration Systems
5. County: Robeson
7. River basin: Lumber 04
2. Date of evaluation: 2/21/2020
Assessor name/organization:
Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad:
AXE/WGL
Wilkinson Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 34.564348,-79.349068
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): SAM 4 (UT 2) 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 200
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 3 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 6 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ®No
14. Feature type: ®Perennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ❑ Piedmont (P) ® Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic NAB J El
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) ®Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mil) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mil) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑l ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ®Yes ❑No
1. Channel Water — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction — assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not
3. Feature Pattern — assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile — assessment reach metric
®A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
❑B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability — assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
®C > 25% of channel unstable

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

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

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

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Swamp Grape Date of Assessment 2/21/2020
Stream Category la2 Assessor Name/Organization AXE/WGL
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
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
LOW
(4) Microtopography
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
LOW
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
(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
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
MEDIUM
(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
NA
Overall
LOW

HG�as_Type - Units
UT-1
NORTH CAROLINA
R3UB
RIVERINE
Area
2966 ACRE
RPW
34.56077800-79.34695300
UT-2
NORTH CAROLINA
R3UB
RIVERINE
Area
826 ACRE
RPW
34.56240300-79.34967400
UT-3
NORTH CAROLINA
R3UB
RIVERINE
Area
149 ACRE
RPW
34.56447400-79.34895400
Wetland GA
NORTH CAROLINA
PEM
RIVERINE
Linear
0.356 FOOT
DELINEATE
34.56152600-79.34680800
Wetland GB
NORTH CAROLINA
PEM
RIVERINE
Linear
0.031 FOOT
DELINEATE
34.56118300-79.34658900
Wetland GC
NORTH CAROLINA
PEM /PSS
RIVERINE
Linear
0.018 FOOT
DELINEATE
34.56108200-79.34682900
Wetland GD
NORTH CAROLINA
PEM
RIVERINE
Linear
0.13 FOOT
DELINEATE
34.56086400-79.34665500
Wetland GG
NORTH CAROLINA
PSS
RIVERINE
Linear
0.087 FOOT
DELINEATE
34.56195700-79.34684000
Wetland GH
NORTH CAROLINA
PEM
RIVERINE
Linear
0.757 FOOT
DELINEATE
34.56256100-79.34696300
Wetland GL
NORTH CAROLINA
PEM/PFO
RIVERINE
Linear
14.512 FOOT
DELINEATE
34.56446300-79.34995200

Appendix E - Categorical Exclusion Document
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) Appendices
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

■ ■■■ Roy Cooper. Governor
00 0 NC DEPARTMENT OF Susi Hamilton, Secretary
■■L■■ NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
IN won Walter Clark, Director, Land and Water Stewardship
NCNHDE-7765
December 17. 2018
Phillip Perkinson
Axiom Environmental Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27612
RE. Bodenhammer; 18-002
Dear Phillip Perkinson:
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide
information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
Based on the project area mapped with your request, a query of the NCNHP database, indicates
that there are no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, and/or
conservation/managed areas within the proposed project boundary. Please note that although there
may be no documentation of natural heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not
imply or confirm their absence, the area may not have been surveyed. The results of this query
should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists. In the event that rare
species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may update our
records.
The attached `Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that
have been documented within a one -mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these
records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area
if suitable habitat exists. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one -mile
radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report.
If a Federally -listed species is found within the project area or is indicated within a one -mile radius of
the project area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for
guidance. Contact information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is found here:
https://www.fws.gov/offices/Directory/ListOffices.cfm?statecode=37.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria
for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published
without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information
source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission.
The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a
Dedicated Nature Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Clean Water Management Trust Fund
easement, or Federally -listed species are documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance,
please contact Rodney A. Butler at rodnev.butlerWncdcr.aov or 919-707-8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOVRCES
121 W. JONES STREET. RALEIGH. NC 27603 • 16S1 MAIL SERVICE CENTER, RALEIGH. NC 27699
& OFC g19.707.9120 • FAX [phone]

Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Bodenhammer
Project No. 18-002
December 17, 2018
NCNHDE-7765
Element Occurrences Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Taxonomic
EO ID Scientific Name Common Name
Element
Group
Observation
Occurrence
Date dJM
Rank
Dragonfly or
33769 Somatochlora Coppery Emerald
2004-Pre
H?
Damselfly
georgiana
Dragonfly or
33789 Triacanthagyna trifida Phantom Darner
2004-Pre
H?
Damselfly
No Natural Areas are Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
No Managed Areas are Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Accuracy
Federal State
Status Status
M i
5-Very
--- Significantly
Low
Rare
5-Very
--- Significantly
Low
Rare
Global State
Rank Rank
M
G3G4 S2?
G5 S1?
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at httr)s://ncnhde.natureserve.org/content/helr). Data query generated on December 17, 2018; source: NCNHP, Q4 Oct 2018.
Please resubmit your information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 2 of 3

NCNHDE-7765: Bodenhammer
der. ..
` O
saL 9rh
r`
ti � c9
N
Y
W+E
December 17, 2018
Project Boundary
Buffered Project Boundary
2
•)�i�j
� SY h
r
5a R
1:24,322
0 0.2 0.4 0.8 mi
0 0.325 0.65 1.3 km
Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS,
FAO, NIPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NIL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan,
MsETI, Esri China (Hong Kong), isstopo, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and
the GIS User Community
Page 3 of 3

Swamp Grape Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site
Robeson County, North
Carolina DMS Project No. 100115
Categorical Exclusion/ERTR
} 4 W
it �H , �•.�.
is
Prepared for:
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
Janurary 2020

Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
NC DMS Contract # 7869 RFP # 16-007705 IMS/Project # 100115
TASK 1 b.) Categorical Exclusion Summary:
Part 1: General Project Information
(Attached) Part 2: All Projects
Regulation/Questions
Coastal Zone Management Act
Not applicable — project is not located within a CAMA county.
CERCLA
No Issue within project boundaries — please see the attached Executive Summary from a Limited
Phase 1 Site Assessment performed by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. on June 10th, 2019.
National Historic Preservation Act (Section 106
No Issue— please see attached letter from Ramona M. Bartos- State of the Historic Preservation
Office dated May 31st, 2019
Uniform Act
Please see the attached letter, sent to the landowner on June 7th, 2019.
Part 3: Ground -Disturbing Activates Regulation/Questions
American Indian Religious Freedom Act (AIRFA)
Not applicable — project is not located in a county claimed as "territory" by the Eastern Band of
Cherokee Indians.
Antiquities Act (AA)
Not applicable — project is not located on Federal land.
Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA)
Not applicable — project is not located on federal or Indian lands.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
There are five known federally protected species occurring in Robeson County, NC
and our summary is that the project may affect, but is not likely to adversly affect any
protected species. An updated biological conclusion letter was sent to USFWS Raleigh
Field Office on February 5th, 2020 and they agreed with our findings documented via
email exchange. The NCWRC also determind that it is unlikely that stream and wetland
mitigation will adversely affect any federal or state -listed species. Their recommendations
will be followed during the contructions of the site.

Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
NC DMS Contract # 7869 RFP # 16-007705 IMS/Project # 100115
Executive Order 13007 (Indian Sacred Sites)
Not applicable — project is not located in a county claimed as "territory" by the Eastern Band of
Cherokee Indians.
Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA)
Please find the attached Form AD-1006 and letter from Milton Cortes of the NRCS dated May 30th, 2019.
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA)
Please find the attached letter tothe USFWS. A biological survey indicated the project is to have "No
affect or is unlikely to adversly affect any federally -listed endangered or threatened species."
Land & Water Conservation Fund Act (Section 6(f))
Not applicable
Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and management Act (Essential Fish Habit
Not applicable — project is not located within an estuarine system
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)
USFWS has no recommendation with the project relative to the MBTA
Wilderness Act
Not applicable —the project is not located within a Wilderness area.

Appendix A
Categorical Exclusion Form for Division of Mitigation Services Projects
Version 2
Note: Only Appendix A should to be submitted (along with any supporting documentation) as the environmental
document.
Part
1: General Project Information
Project Name:
Swamp Grape Mitigation Site
County Name:
Robeson Count
DMS Number:
#100115
Project Sponsor:
Restoration Systems, LLC
Project Contact Name:
JD Hamby
Project Contact Address:
1101 Haynes St. Ste. 211 Raleigh, NC 27604
Project Contact E-mail:
[e-mail]
DMS Project Mana er:
Lindsay Crocker [e-mail]
Project Description
The Site is proposed to include 3,701 feet of combined restored and enhanced stream channel along with 10.1 acres of reestablished and
enhanced riparian wetlands. Site alterations include
the cessation irrigation source for row crop production, removal of the earthen dam,
restoration of wetlands, and planting native, woody
vegetation within the entire 21.5 acre Site easement. Mitigation outlined in this report will
result in net gains in hydrology, water quality, and
habitat functions, and are designed to provide 3,061 Stream Mitigation Units and 10.0 Non -
riparian Wetland Mitigation Units.
For Official Use Only
Reviewed By:
2/21 /2020
Date
DMS Project Manager
Conditional Approved By:
Date
For Division Administrator
FHWA
❑ Check this box if there are outstanding issues
Final Approval By:
Z-2/ —20
7�entii� Gf%
Date
For Division Administrator
FHWA

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

3: Ground -Disturbing Activities
Regulation/QuestionPart
..
American Indian Religious Freedom Act AIRFA
1. Is the project located in a county claimed as "territory" by the Eastern Band of
❑ Yes
Cherokee Indians?
E� No
2. Is the site of religious importance to American Indians?
❑ Yes
0 No
U N/A
3. Is the project listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of Historic
❑ Yes
Places?
❑ No
L_J N/A
4. Have the effects of the project on this site been considered?
❑ Yes
❑ No
U N/A
Antiquities Act AA
1. Is the project located on Federal lands?
❑ Yes
U No
2. Will there be loss or destruction of historic or prehistoric ruins, monuments or objects
❑ Yes
of antiquity?
o
N/A
3. Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required?
❑
Yes
0
N/A
4. Has a permit been obtained?
❑ Yes
VNIA
Archaeological Resources Protection Act ARPA
1. Is the project located on federal or Indian lands (reservation)?
❑ es
o
2. Will there be a loss or destruction of archaeological resources?
❑ Yes
E]ONo
N/A
3. Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required?
❑
Yes
F�Ao
N/A
4. Has a permit been obtained?
❑ Yes
❑ No
D N/A
Endangered Species Act ESA
1. Are federal Threatened and Endangered species and/or Designated Critical Habitat
❑i Yes
listed for the county?
❑ No
2. Is Designated Critical Habitat or suitable habitat present for listed species?
V Yes
❑ No
❑ N/A
3. Are T&E species present or is the project being conducted in Designated Critical
❑ Yes
Habitat?
U No
❑ N/A
4. Is the project "likely to adversely affect" the specie and/or "likely to adversely modify"
❑ Yes
Designated Critical Habitat?
❑ No
U N/A
5. Does the USFWS/NOAA-Fisheries concur in the effects determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
� � N/A
6. Has the USFWS/NOAA-Fisheries rendered a "jeopardy" determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
j N/A

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

o�
+- N
1 j Axiom EnrKanmenial. Inc,
L/ Ago r
Prepared for:
( 4 - h•Qo •
RESTORATION
-w oad
• �'-f �4 ; !� Project:
A- -4110- — _� ■
SWAMP GRAPE
« MITIGATION SITE
+ r • ti
i
Robeson County, NC
, / Title:
�•.L SITE
501 -a-
- LOCATION
It re
r ; • a$=� �� d 'sr, Drawn by:
1 ■ nn
C _ �, • — � «g KRJ
l a
Date:
{' r APR 2019
_ � �._ w — � • Legend
Rowland'" �s
r — Q Scale:
Swamp Grape Easement = 25.2 aca 1:20,000
• iiiJJJ
f _ ■ NCDOT Roads
{ !kC Project No.:
USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map (Rowland, NC Quad) 18-002.10
� - I ■ ■
1
Directions to the Site from Raleigh: FIGURE
Head East on I-40 for 29 miles
Take exit 328A to merge onto 1-95 South
After 79 miles, take exit 2 toward Rowland and turn right onto NC-130 W
f r a `� After 2 5 miles turn left onto Ash ole Church Road then ri ht onto Persimmon Road 01
After 2 miles, turn left onto Kitchen Street
hag,, r� - The Site is located on the right after 0.5 miles and can be accessed from Rhein Drive.
�( ' - �`'C�o;, giht-,© 013 National Ge5 rap�htic —� 1 Site Latitude, Longitude 34.5639,-79.3490 (WGS84)
cubed
]] d

N In gram
Mountain
c�g
lfGl
k.
l
Farlan �
ga,ks creek
t , rwallaoe
52
Cheraw ('
`r 79
T
- McColl
J 1 �
Bea 38 r Wallace rad.m
1 4�e
BEnnr8tt5Yllfe V J
.' 158 ■ , f
83
f 9 Clio
Legend
x r
�tr
k
= Swamp Grape Easement = 25.2 ac
r USGS Hydrologic Unit 03040204 \.Mindem
14 Digit Hydrologic Unit Boundaries
Targeted Local Watersheds
� � 9 Litde•Rocl
v�
0 2.5 5 10 15 � *
Miles r.
Axiom EnrKanmenia,. Inc,
AWFOom
Prepared for:
Project:
,
20
cash
aint SWAMP GRAPE
G MITIGATION SITE
y
Robeson County, NC
TM
— - 72 1
r
1
e.
HYDROLOGIC
UNIT MAP
711 ;�
Pembroke
301,
11
Y
Drawn by:
Location of Swamp Grape Mitigation
e2 �L
rton
KRJ
Site within USGS Hydrologic Unit
UMBE
Date:
and Targeted Local Watershed
APR 2019
03040204048010
�
Scale:
V
r 301
r
1:260,000
_
Project No.:
-i
w 41
R , land
•
18-002.10
*
�l
i
FIGURE
9 Fairmont
2
JHamcr 130
P ill
Q:l
Orrwn �
130
904 Copyrig,t:(c) 2018 Ga,-mir

WaCom
99
98
98
97
NCSAM Form #1 ,``r'� 97
Score: Low � J
96
FaB kl XS-1
::
Legend
Swamp Grape Easement = 25.2 ac
Streams = 3817 ft
Existing Ditches
® Existing Impacted Hydric Soils = 5.0 ac
® Hydric Soil with Overburden = 1.0 sc
Existing Wetland = 14.1 ac
Cross Sections
NCSAM Form Location
Soil Profile
Existing Foot Path
Soil Boundary
2-foot Lidar Contours
0 300 600
Feet
Soil Map Unit
Soil Series
AyA
Aycock very fine sandy loam
BB
Bibb sods
FaB
Faceville fine sandy loam
WaB, WaC
Wagram loamy sand
WaB
Cross Section 1
s
N
Ax om ErLvtmrwwnia]. Pnc,
Prepared for:
•
DA = 1.53 sq mi
_ Abkf=12.9 sq ft
Aexisting = 17.9 sq ft
Wbkf - 13.9 ft
Dbkf=0.9ft
Dmax = 1.6 ft
Wbkf/Dbkf = 15.0
FPA = 150 ft
ENT = 10.8
LBH = 1.9 ft
BHR = 1.19
C-type
io is zo zs Project:
SWAMP GRAPE
MITIGATION SITE
Robeson County, NC
Title:
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
AND SOILS
Ffl
,ate G� �� . �� �■� Drawn by:
KRJ
Date:
APR 2019
Scale:
1:3200
�..■ ' Project No.:
��- 18-002.10
FIGURE
Y
FaB AyA'

June 7th, 2019
Mr. Bodenhamer
6547 Kitchen St. Road
Rowland, NC
28383
Dear Mr. Bodenhamer,
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that Restoration Systems, LLC, in
offering to purchase your property in Robeson County, North Carolina, does not have
the power to acquire it by eminent domain. Also, Restoration Systems' offer to
purchase your property is based on what we believe to be its fair market.
If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 919-334-9122
Sincerely,
?�1
JD Hamby
Project Manager

Ep1T OF Ty�2m
a.
0
9
�gaCti 3, t$A
United States Department of the Interior
Project Name
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
P.O. Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Date: 2/5/2020
Self -Certification Letter
Swamp Grape
Dear Applicant:
U.S.
F 8t, d W ILD AFT.
31iNV lCl3
Thank you for using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) Raleigh Ecological
Services online project review process. By printing this letter in conjunction with your
project review package, you are certifying that you have completed the online project
review process for the project named above in accordance with all instructions
provided, using the best available information to reach your conclusions. This letter,
and the enclosed project review package, completes the review of your project in
accordance with the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544, 87 Stat.
884), as amended (ESA), and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C.
668-668c, 54 Stat. 250), as amended (Eagle Act). This letter also provides
information for your project review under the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (P.L. 91-190, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347, 83 Stat. 852), as amended. A copy of this
letter and the project review package must be submitted to this office for this
certification to be valid. This letter and the project review package will be maintained
in our records.
The species conclusions table in the enclosed project review package summarizes
your ESA and Eagle Act conclusions. Based on your analysis, mark all the
determinations that apply:
"no effect" determinations for proposed/listed species and/or ❑
proposed/designated critical habitat; and/or
0 "may affect, not likely to adversely affect" determinations for proposed/listed
species and/or proposed/designated critical habitat; and/or
"may affect, likely to adversely affect" determination for the Northern long-
eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) and relying on the findings of the January 5,
2016, Programmatic Biological Opinion for the Final 4(d) Rule on the
Northern long-eared bat;
0 "no Eagle Act permit required" determinations for eagles.

Applicant Page 2
We certify that use of the online project review process in strict accordance with the
instructions provided as documented in the enclosed project review package results in
reaching the appropriate determinations. Therefore, we concur with the "no effect" or
"not likely to adversely affect" determinations for proposed and listed species and
proposed and designated critical habitat; the "may affect" determination for Northern
long-eared bat; and/or the "no Eagle Act permit required" determinations for eagles.
Additional coordination with this office is not needed. Candidate species are not
legally protected pursuant to the ESA. However, the Service encourages consideration
of these species by avoiding adverse impacts to them. Please contact this office for
additional coordination if your project action area contains candidate species.
Should project plans change or if additional information on the distribution of
proposed or listed species, proposed or designated critical habitat, or bald eagles
becomes available, this determination may be reconsidered. This certification letter is
valid for 1 year. Information about the online project review process including
instructions, species information, and other information regarding project reviews
within North Carolina is available at our website http://www.fws.gov/raleigh/Pp.html.
If you have any questions, you can write to us at [e-mail] or please contact
Leigh Mann of this office at 919-856-4520, ext. 10.
Sincerely,
/s/Pete Benjamin
Pete Benjamin
Field Supervisor
Raleigh Ecological Services
Enclosures - project review package

Project Name: Swamp Grape #100115
Date: 6/5/2019
ESA Section 7/Eagle Act
Species Name
Conclusion
Determination
Notes/Documentation
Red -cockaded woodpecker
(Picoides borealis)
No suitable habitat
No effect
See notes below*
Endangered
Wood stork (Mycteria
Suitable habitat present,
Not likely to adversely affect
americana) Threatened
species not present
See notes below**
Michaux's sumac
(Rhus michauxii)
Suitable habitat present,
Not likely to adversely affect
See notes below ***
Endangered
species not present
Bald Eagle
(Haliaeetus
Unlikely to disturb bald
No Eagle Act permit required
No nest within action area
leucocephalus)
eagles
American Alligator
(Alligator
Suitable habitat present,
Not likely to adversely affect
A qualified biologist conducted
mississippiensis)
species not present
surveys and indicated absence.
This [document] provides a summary of the results of an Axiom Environmental, Inc. (Axiom) federally protected species survey at the Swamp
Grape Mitigation Site. The approximately 20.5-acre site is located east of N.C. Highway 501 in Robeson County, NC.
*Red -cockaded Woodpecker
Habitat for red -cockaded woodpecker typically occupies open, mature stands of southern pines,
particularly longleaf pine, for foraging and nesting/roosting habitat. The red -cockaded woodpecker
excavates cavities for nesting and roosting in living pine trees, aged 60 years or older, and which are
contiguous with pine stands at least 30 years of age to provide foraging
habitat. The site supports scattered pines greater than 30 years old and a few pines greater than 60
years old. These pines are located sparsely among a primarily hardwood forest, resulting in unsuitable
nesting and foraging habitat for red -cockaded woodpeckers. In addition, an investigation of these pines
on May 21, 2019, found no evidence of red -cockaded woodpecker nesting/roosting. A review of NCNHP
records dated May 24, 2019 indicates no occurrences of this species within 1.0 mile of the site.
**%A1nnr4 ctnrk
Wood stork is primarily associated with freshwater and estuarine habitats that are used for nesting,
roosting, and foraging. Wood storks do not breed in North Carolina, however, a few disperse to
southeastern North Carolina following the breeding season. Because of their specialized feeding
behavior, wood storks forage most effectively in shallow -water areas with highly concentrated prey.
Ideal foraging conditions are characterized by water that is relatively calm, open, and having water
depths between 5 and 15 inches. The western side of site supports a small open water area with
wetlands occurring throughout the entire site. This is considered suitable habitat. An investigation of
the site was conducted by Axiom biologists on May 21, 2019 and found no evidence of wood stork
foraging or roosting. As of May 24, 2019, the NCNHP has no record of this species within 1.0 mile of the
site.
***Michaux's Sumac
Habitat for Michaux's sumac consists of rocky, open, upland woods on acidic or circumneutral, well -
drained sands or sandy loam soils, particularly where disturbance (such as mowing, grazing, clearing, or
periodic fire) maintains an open habitat. Suitable habitat for Michaux's sumac occurs within open
areas of the site, residential yards, and the edge of agricultural fields and the remnant pond.
Systematic surveys performed within areas of suitable habitat were performed by Axiom biologists on
May 21, 2019, and identified no individuals. As of May 24, 2019, the NCNHP has no record of this
species within 1.0 mile of the site.

ex
hSai k 4YYFJiYJft
United States Department of the Interior AWMWT
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
In Reply Refer To: February 05, 2020
Consultation Code: 04EN2000-2019-SLI-0818
Event Code: 04EN2000-2020-E-01352
Project Name: Swamp Grape
Subject: Updated list of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed
project location, and/or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The species list generated pursuant to the information you provided identifies threatened,
endangered, proposed and candidate species, as well as proposed and final designated critical
habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and/or may be affected by
your proposed project. The species list fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of
species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to
contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to
federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical
habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the
Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be
completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be
completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and
implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested
through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.
Section 7 of the Act requires that all federal agencies (or their designated non-federal
representative), in consultation with the Service, insure that any action federally authorized,
funded, or carried out by such agencies is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any
federally -listed endangered or threatened species. A biological assessment or evaluation may be
prepared to fulfill that requirement and in determining whether additional consultation with the
Service is necessary. In addition to the federally -protected species list, information on the
species' life histories and habitats and information on completing a biological assessment or

02/05/2020 Event Code: 04EN2000-2020-E-01352
evaluation and can be found on our web page at http://www.fws.gov/raleigh. Please check the
web site often for updated information or changes
If your project contains suitable habitat for any of the federally -listed species known to be
present within the county where your project occurs, the proposed action has the potential to
adversely affect those species. As such, we recommend that surveys be conducted to determine
the species' presence or absence within the project area. The use of North Carolina Natural
Heritage program data should not be substituted for actual field surveys.
If you determine that the proposed action may affect (i.e., likely to adversely affect or not likely
to adversely affect) a federally -protected species, you should notify this office with your
determination, the results of your surveys, survey methodologies, and an analysis of the effects
of the action on listed species, including consideration of direct, indirect, and cumulative effects,
before conducting any activities that might affect the species. If you determine that the proposed
action will have no effect (i.e., no beneficial or adverse, direct or indirect effect) on federally
listed species, then you are not required to contact our office for concurrence (unless an
Environmental Impact Statement is prepared). However, you should maintain a complete record
of the assessment, including steps leading to your determination of effect, the qualified personnel
conducting the assessment, habitat conditions, site photographs, and any other related articles.
Please be aware that bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668 et seq.), and projects affecting these species may require
development of an eagle conservation plan (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/
eagle_guidance.html). Additionally, wind energy projects should follow the wind energy
guidelines (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/) for minimizing impacts to migratory birds and
bats.
Guidance for minimizing impacts to migratory birds for projects including communications
towers (e.g., cellular, digital television, radio, and emergency broadcast) can be found at: http://
www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdlssues/Hazards/towers/towers.htm; http://
www.towerkill.com; and http://www.fws.gov/migratory birds/CurrentBirdlssues/Hazards/towers/
comtow.html.
Not all Threatened and Endangered Species that occur in North Carolina are subject to section 7
consultation with the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service. Atlantic and shortnose sturgeon, sea
turtles,when in the water, and certain marine mammals are under purview of the National Marine
Fisheries Service. If your project occurs in marine, estuarine, or coastal river systems you should
also contact the National Marine Fisheries Service, http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages
Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project
planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number in
the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project
that you submit to our office. If you have any questions or comments, please contact John Ellis
of this office at [e-mail].

02/05/2020 Event Code: 04EN2000-2020-E-01352
Attachment(s):
• Official Species List

02/05/2020 Event Code: 04EN2000-2020-E-01352
Official Species List
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
[phone]

02/05/2020 Event Code: 04EN2000-2020-E-01352
Project Summary
Consultation Code: 04EN2000-2019-SLI-0818
Event Code: 04EN2000-2020-E-01352
Project Name: Swamp Grape
Project Type: STREAM / WATERBODY / CANALS / LEVEES / DIKES
Project Description: This proposal describes the Swamp Grape Stream & Wetland Mitigation
Site (Site) and is designed specifically to assist in fulfilling North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR)
Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS) mitigation goals. The Site is
located within 14-digit Cataloging Unit and Targeted Local Watershed
03040204048010, approximately 4 miles northwest of Rowland and 2.5
miles southwest of Alfordsville along the southwest edge of Robeson
County near the North Carolina and South Carolina border. The Site is not
located within a Regional or Local Watershed Planning area. The Site is
situated along warm water, unnamed tributaries to Wilkinson Creek.
Project Location:
Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:
www.google.com/maps/place/34.5634127240389N79.34829046493127W
Counties: Robeson, NC

02/05/2020 Event Code: 04EN2000-2020-E-01352 3
Endangered Species Act Species
There is a total of 4 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheriesi, as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
Birds
NAME
Red -cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7614
Wood Stork Mycteria americana
Population: AL, FL, GA, MS, NC, SC
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8477
Reptiles
NAME
American Alligator Alligator mississippiensis
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/776
STATUS
Endangered
Threatened
STATUS
Similarity of
Appearance
(Threatened)

02/05/2020 Event Code: 04EN2000-2020-E-01352 4
Flowering Plants
NAME STATUS
Michaux's Sumac Rhus michauxii Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecl2/sl2ecies/5217
Critical habitats
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S
JURISDICTION.

a ■■N Roy Cooper. Governor
00 i NC DEPARTMENT OF Susi Hamilton, Secretary
notan NATUPAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
E sow Walter Clark, Director, Land and Water Stewardship
NCNHDE-9071
May 24, 2019
Allison Keith
Axiom Environmental
218 Snow Ave
Raleigh, NC 27603
RE. Swamp Grape, 18-002.10
Dear Allison Keith:
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide
information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
Based on the project area mapped with your request, a query of the NCNHP database indicates that
there are no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, and/or
conservation/managed areas within the proposed project boundary. Please note that although there
may be no documentation of natural heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not
imply or confirm their absence, the area may not have been surveyed. The results of this query
should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists. In the event that rare
species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may update our
records.
The attached `Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that
have been documented within a one -mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these
records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area
if suitable habitat exists. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one -mile
radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report.
If a Federally -listed species is found within the project area or is indicated within a one -mile radius of
the project area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for
guidance. Contact information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is found here:
https://www.fws.gov/offices/Directory/ListOffices.cfm?statecode=37.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria
for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published
without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information
source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission.
The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a
Dedicated Nature Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Clean Water Management Trust Fund
easement, or Federally -listed species are documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance,
please contact Rodney A. Butler at rodnev.butlerWncdcr.aov or 919-707-8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
1:1 W. JONES STREET, PALE01_ P<_ 27603 - 16S1 MAIL SERVICE CENTER. RALEiGH. NC 276"
OFC !J19 707.9120 • FAX [phone]

Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Swamp Grape
Project No. 18-002.10
May 24, 2019
NCNHDE-9071
Element Occurrences Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Taxonomic
EO ID Scientific Name Common Name
Element
Group
Observation
Occurrence
Date dJM
Rank
Dragonfly or
33769 Somatochlora Coppery Emerald
2004-Pre
H?
Damselfly
georgiana
Dragonfly or
33789 Triacanthagyna trifida Phantom Darner
2004-Pre
H?
Damselfly
No Natural Areas are Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
No Managed Areas are Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Accuracy
Federal State
Status Status
M i
5-Very
--- Significantly
Low
Rare
5-Very
--- Significantly
Low
Rare
Global State
Rank Rank
M
G3G4 S2?
G5 S1?
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at httr)s://ncnhde.natureserve.org/content/helr). Data query generated on May 24, 2019; source: NCNHP, Q2 Apr 2019.
Please resubmit your information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 2 of 3

May 24, 2019
❑ Project Boundary
❑ Buffered Project Boundary
NCNHDE-9071: Swamp Grape
1:23,483
0 0.2 OA 0.8 mi
0 0.3 0.6 1.2 km
Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin. Inlam p, in ement P Corp., GEWO, USGS,
FAO, Np$, NRCAN, Geogasa. IG N, ICadaster NL, OFCF— a Survey, Esri .Japan.
METI_ Esri China (Hwg Kong), (Q) apen5l"Uap ppnytYtprg, and the GIS
User Co Uniry
Page 3 of 3

From: Mann. Leigh on behalf of Raleigh. FW4
To: John Hambv
Subject: Swamp Grape
Date: Monday, February 10, 2020 2:21:13 PM
Mr. Hamby,
The biologist reviewed your packet submitted for this project and agreed with your findings.
You can use the self certification letter for you records for this project. If you have any
questions please feel free to contact us.
Respectfully,
Leigh Mann
Office Automation
USFWS Raleigh ES FO
551-F Pylon Drive
Raleigh, NC 27606
Office: 1-919-856-4520 ext. 10
Fax: [phone]
leigh mannPfws.gov
NOTE: This email correspondence and any attachments to and from this sender is subject to the Freedom
of Information Act (FOIA) and may be disclosed to third parties.

April 261", 2019
Gabriela Garrison
Eastern Piedmont Coordinator
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Sandhills Dept, P.O. Box 149
Hoffman, NC 28347
Re: Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Project, Robeson County, NC
Dear Ms. Garrison:
The purpose of this letter is to request concurrence from the North Carolina Wildlife Recourse Commission
concerning a stream and wetland restoration project located in Robeson County for the N.C. Division of
Mitigation Services. The project will restore stream channels and riparian wetlands in a drained lake bed and
forested areas. Please review and comment on any possible issues that might emerge with respect to the
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act from the potential stream restoration project. Attached is a USGS base
map with the projects 21.5 acre footprint identified. The Site is located approximately 4 miles northwest of
Rowland and 2.5 miles southwest of Alfordsville along the southwest edge of Robeson County near the North
Carolina and South Carolina border. Site land use consists of a breached agriculture pond, disturbed forest,
horse pasture, and row crops. The pond was breached in August 2018 during hurricane Florence. All Site
hydrology drains to warm water, unnamed tributaries to Wilkinson Creek.
The Site is located in the Atlantic Southern Loam Plains portion of the Southeastern Plains ecoregion of North
Carolina. Regional physiography is characterized by dissected, smooth and irregular plains; broad
interstream divides; Carolina bays; and mostly gentle side slopes dissected by many small, low to moderate
gradient sandy -bottomed streams (Griffith et al. 2002). Onsite elevations range from a high of 140 feet
National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) at the upper reaches to a low of approximately 115 feet NGVD at
the Site outfall (USGS Rowland, North Carolina 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle)
The Site is proposed to include 3,701 feet of combined restored and enhanced stream channel along with
10.1 acres of reestablished and enhanced riparian wetlands. Site alterations include the cessation irrigation
source for row crop production, removal of the earthen dam, restoration of wetlands, and planting native,
woody vegetation within the entire 21.5 acre Site easement. Mitigation outlined in this report will result in
net gains in hydrology, water quality, and habitat functions, and are designed to provide 3,061 Stream
Mitigation Units and 10.0 Non -riparian Wetland Mitigation Units.
We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact the below
referenced Project Manager with any questions that you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance
associated with this project. If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will assume you have no
comments on the project. Your valuable time and cooperation are much appreciated.

Yours truly,
Restoration Systems, LLC
JD Hamby
Project Manager
[e-mail]
919-755-9490
Attachments: Location and USGS Map

John Hamby
From:
Garrison, Gabriela <[e-mail]>
Sent:
Wednesday, May 22, 2019 2:09 PM
To:
John Hamby
Subject:
RE: [External] Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Project
Hi JD,
I apologize for the delay
in response. We have no objection to this project.
Thank you!
Gabriela
Gabriela Garrison
Eastern Piedmont Habitat Conservation Coordinator
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Sandhills Depot, P.O. Box 149
Hoffman, NC 28347
Office and Cell: 910-409-7350
[e-mail]
www.ncwildlife.org
a In n f-1
From: John Hamby <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, April 26, 2019 10:41 AM
To: Garrison, Gabriela <[e-mail]>
Subject: [External] Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Project
External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
report.spamreport.spam@ncgov
Good Afternoon Gabriela,
The purpose of this email is to request concurrence from the North Carolina Wildlife Recourse Commission concerning a
stream restoration project located in Robeson County for the N.C. Division of Mitigation Services. Attached you will find
a letter outlining a few of the details of the project. The project will restore streams and riparian wetlands in existing
pasturelands and forested areas. Please review and comment on any possible issues that might emerge with respect to
the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act from the potential stream restoration project. If we do not receive a response
within 30 days, we will assume your department has no comment.
Thank you for your time,
JD
John "ID" Hamby I Project Manager
1101 Haynes St. Suite 211 11101 Haynes St. Suite 211 1 Raleigh, NC 27604NC 27604
tel:[phone] I cell:919.801.4754 1 fax:[phone]
email: ihambyPrestorationsystems.com

April 241h, 2019
Renee Gledhill -Earley,
Environmental Review Coordinator
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office
109 East Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27699-4617
Sent electronically to Environmental. [e-mail]
Re: Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Project, Robeson County, NC
Dear Renee,
The purpose of this letter is to request written concurrence from the State Historic Preservation Office
(SHPO) for the Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Project in Robeson County, a Full -Delivery
project for the N.C. Davison of Mitigation Services. Please review and comment on any possible issues that
might emerge with respect to SHPO from a potential stream restoration project depicted on the attached
mapping.
Project Name: Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Project
Project Location: Site Latitude, Longitude 34.335125,-79.205717 (WGS84)
Project Contact: JD Hamby, Restoration Systems LLC, 1101 Haynes St. Suite 211,
Raleigh, NC 27604
Project Description: The project has been identified for the purpose of providing in -kind mitigation for
unavoidable stream channel and wetland impacts. Permits from the NC DWR and USACE will be obtained to
restore waters of the US. Soil and erosion control permits will also be obtained. The project encompasses
—20 acres of drain hydric soils, formerly used as an irrigation. Several thousand feet of stream and several
acres of wetlands will be restored.
The term "cultural resources" refers to prehistoric or historic archaeological sites, structures, or artifact
deposits over 50 years old. "Significant" cultural resources are those that are eligible or potentially
eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. Evaluations of site significance are made
with reference to the eligibility criteria of the National Register (36 CFR 60) and in consultation with the
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO).
Field visits were conducted in Spring 2019 to conduct evaluations for presence of structures or features
that may be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. No structures were identified within the
Site boundaries that may be eligible for the National Register. In addition to field reviews for historically
relevant structures, a records search was conducted at the SHPO office to determine if documented

occurrences of historic structures or artifacts occur within, or adjacent to the Site. The SHPO records
identify no features within the Site boundaries and no features within a one mile radius of the Site.
Typical SHPO coordination will occur prior to construction activities to determine if any significant
cultural resources are present; however, no constraints are expected at this time. We thank you in
advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact me with any questions
that you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance associated with this project.
Yours truly,
RESTORATION SYSTEMS, LLC
JD Hamby
Project Manager
[e-mail]
919-755-9490
Attachments — USGS Map, Existing Conditions

btu. STATE,,
North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper
Secretary Susi H. Hamilton
May 31, 2019
JD Hamby
Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211
Raleigh, NC 27604
Re: Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation, Robeson County, ER 19-1524
Dear Mr. Hanby:
Thank you for your letter of April 24, 2019, concerning the above project.
Office of Archives and History
Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected by
the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579 or
environmental.review&ncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above
referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
(�� wt�
tf'Ramona
Bartos, Deputy
State Historic Preservation Officer
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599

April 2511, 2019
Milton Cortes
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service 4407
Bland Road
Suite 117
Raleigh, NC 27609
Re: Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site, Robeson County, NC
Restoration Systems, LLC (RS), of Raleigh, NC has been awarded a contract by DMS to provide Stream
and Wetland Mitigation Units at the Brahma Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site in Alamance County, North
Carolina.
One of the earliest tasks to be performed by IRS is completion of an environmental screening and
preparation/submittal of a Categorical Exclusion (CE) document. This document is specifically required by the
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to ensure compliance with various federal environmental laws and
regulations. DMS must demonstrate that its projects comply with federal mandates as a precondition to FHWA
reimbursement of compensatory mitigation costs borne by the North Carolina Department of Transportation to
offset its projects' unavoidable impacts to streams and wetlands.
In order for the project to proceed, IRS is obligated to coordinate with the NRCS to complete Form AD-1006 in
compliance with the Farmland Protection Policy Act on behalf of the FHWA. The purpose of this letter isto request
your assistance in completion of the Form.
Project Location & Description
The Site is located approximately 4 miles northwest of Rowland and 2.5 miles southwest of Alfordsville along
the southwest edge of Robeson County near the North Carolina and South Carolina border. Site land use
consists of a breached agriculture pond, disturbed forest, horse pasture, and row crops. The pond was
breached in August 2018 during hurricane Florence. All Site hydrology drains to warm water, unnamed
tributaries to Wilkinson Creek.
The Site is located in the Atlantic Southern Loam Plains portion of the Southeastern Plains ecoregion of
North Carolina. Regional physiography is characterized by dissected, smooth and irregular plains; broad
interstream divides; Carolina bays; and mostly gentle side slopes dissected by many small, low to moderate
gradient sandy -bottomed streams (Griffith et al. 2002). Onsite elevations range from a high of 140 feet
National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) at the upper reaches to a low of approximately 115 feet NGVD at
the Site outfall (USGS Rowland, North Carolina 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle)
Restoration Means & Methods
Stream restoration efforts are designed to restore a stable stream that approximates hydrodynamics, stream
geometry, and local microtopography relative to reference conditions. Restoration at the Site will entail 1)
notching the dam to dewater sediments; 2) removal of the dam to the elevation of the adjacent floodplain; 3)
excavating sediment that is unsuitable for channel bank construction; 4) backfilling areas of sediment removed
with soil suitable for channel construction (if necessary); 5) excavation of the design channel, 6) stabilization of

the channel with coir matting, seed, and mulch; and 7) installation of structures.
The dam was breached in the summer of 2018 during hurricane Florence; however, landowners are
reconstructing the dam for irrigation purposes. Therefore, the dam will be notched and the pond bed will be
seeded with temporary grasses to stabilize sediments remaining in the pond. Care will be taken during notching
of the dam to drain the maximum amount of water, thereby allowing sediments to dewater.
Once the pond has dewatered and sediments have stabilized, the dam will be removed with finished grades
matching elevations of the valley and floodplain above and below the dam location. Material removed from the
dam, if suitable, may be used as channel backfill for reaches of stream to be abandoned during Priority I stream
restoration efforts. If additional backfill remains, the material will be stockpiled outside of the easement, or
spread evenly across the adjacent property and seeded for stabilization. Erosion control measures, such as silt
fence, seeding, and mulching will be implemented on all stockpiled or spread soil materials.
A determination on sediment quantity and quality within the abandoned pond will be made concerning the
ability to work within, or to stabilize the sediment for stream construction. If sediment is deemed unsuitable for
channel construction, the sediment will be removed from the vicinity of the design channel and spread along the
outer margins of the pond. Subsequently, suitable soil material will be placed in the location of the design
channel such that design channel banks will be stabilized without liquefaction. The removal of unsuitable
material, installation of suitable material, and excavation of the design channel may occur simultaneously to
reduce impacts of machinery on the pond bed.
Excavation of the design channel will occur in the pond bed similar to other reaches of restored stream, with
stabilization using approved erosion control materials and techniques.
Bare -root seedlings will be planted at a density of approximately 680 stems per acre on 8-foot centers. Plantingwill be
performed between November 15 and March 15 to allow plants to stabilize during the dormant periodandset root
during the spring season. Potential species planted within the Site may include the following.
Should you have any questions or if any additional information is needed to complete the form, please feel
freeto contact me at the office 919.334.9111. If we do not hear from you within 45 days, we will assume you
have no comments on the project. Your valuable time and cooperation are much appreciated.
Yours truly,
RESTORATION SYSTEMS, LLC
�l
JD Hamby
Project Manager
[e-mail]
919-334-9111
Attachments- Location and Condition Maps
AD-1006 Form

John Hamby
From: Cortes, Milton - NRCS, Raleigh, NC <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2019 5:02 PM
To: John Hamby
Subject: RE: Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
Attachments: AD1006_Swamp Grape Easement.pdf
Importance: High
John
Please find attached the Farmland Conversion Impact Rating for the Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland
Mitigation Site.
If we can be of further assistance please let us know.
Best Regards;
Milton Cortes
State Soil Scientist
USDA NRCS
4407 Bland Rd., Suite 117
Raleigh, NC 27609
Desk: 919-873-2171
From: John Hamby <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2019 5:25 PM
To: Cortes, Milton - NRCS, Raleigh, NC <[e-mail]>
Subject: Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
Good Afternoon Milton,
Attached I hope you will find all the necessary documents for our farmland impact evaluation attached above.
If you have any questions, feel free to call or email me.
Best Regards,
JD
John "ID" Hamby I Project Manager
1101 Haynes St. Suite 211 1 Raleigh, NC 27604
tel:[phone] I cell:919.801.4754 1 fax:[phone]
email: [e-mail]

U.S. Department of Agriculture
FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING
PART I (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Date Of Land Evaluation Request 4/25/19
Name Of Project Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
Federal Agency Involved Federal Highway Administration
Proposed Land Use Stream and Wetland Restoration
County And State Robeson County, INC
PART II (To be completed by NRCS) Date Request Received By NRCS
Does the site contain prime, unique, statewide or local important farmland? Yes No Acres Irrigated Average Farm Size
(If no, the FPPA does not apply -- do not complete additional parts of this form). V ❑ none 282 acres
Major Crop(s)
CORN
Farmable Land In Govt. Jurisdiction
Acres: 493,220 % 81
Amount Of Farmland As Defined in FPPA
Acres: 469,352 % 77
Name Of Land Evaluation System Used
Robeson Co. NC LESA
Name Of Local Site Assessment System
N/A
Date Land Evaluation Returned By NRCS
May 30, 2019 By eMail
PART III (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Alternative Site Rating
Site A
Site B
Site C
Site D
A. Total Acres To Be Converted Directly
0.5
B. Total Acres To Be Converted Indirectly
21.0
C. Total Acres In Site
21.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
PART IV (To be completed by NRCS) Land Evaluation Information
A. Total Acres Prime And Unique Farmland
0.8
B. Total Acres Statewide And Local Important Farmland
4.6
C. Percentage Of Farmland In County Or Local Govt. Unit To Be Converted
0.0
D. Percentage Of Farmland In Govt. Jurisdiction With Same Or Higher Relative Value
81.2
PART V (To be completed by NRCS) Land Evaluation Criterion
Relative Value Of Farmland To Be Converted (Scale of 0 to 100 Points)
15
0
0
0
PART VI (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Site Assessment Criteria (These criteria are explained in 7 CFR 658.5(b)
Maximum
Points
1. Area In Nonurban Use
15
15
2. Perimeter In Nonurban Use
10
10
3. Percent Of Site Being Farmed
20
5
4. Protection Provided By State And Local Government
20
0
5. Distance From Urban Builtup Area
15
14
6. Distance To Urban Support Services
15
10
7. Size Of Present Farm Unit Compared To Average
10
6
8. Creation Of Nonfarmable Farmland
10
0
9. Availability Of Farm Support Services
5
4
10. On -Farm Investments
20
15
11. Effects Of Conversion On Farm Support Services
10
0
12. Compatibility With Existing Agricultural Use
10
1
TOTAL SITE ASSESSMENT POINTS
160
80
0
0
0
PART VI (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Relative Value Of Farmland (From Part V)
100
15
0
0
0
Total Site Assessment (From Part VI above or a local
site assessment)
160
80
0
0
0
TOTAL POINTS (Total of above 2lines)
260
95
0
0
0
Site Selected:
Date Of Selection
Was A Local Site Assessment Used?
Yes ❑ No ❑
Reason For Selection:
(See Instructions on reverse side) Form AD-1006 (10-83)
This form was electronically produced by National Production Services Staff

Swamp Grape
6392 Kitchen St Road
Rowland, NC 28383
Inquiry Number: 5677241.2s
June 07, 2019
6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor
Shelton, CT 06484
(rEDR . Toll Free: 800.352.0050
www.edrnet.com
FORM -NULL -PVC

TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
PAGE
Executive Summary-------------------------------------------------------
ES1
Overview Map
2
Detail Map
3
Map Findings Summary----------------------------------------------------
4
Map Findings
8
Orphan Summary---------------------------------------------------------
9
Government Records Searched/Data Currency Tracking
GRA
GEOCHECK ADDENDUM
Physical Setting Source Addendum------------------------------------------
A-1
Physical Setting Source Summary
A-2
Physical Setting Source Map
A-7
Physical Setting Source Map Findings----------------------------------------
A-8
Physical Setting Source Records Searched------------------------------------.
PSGR-1
Thank you for your business.
Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050
with any questions or comments.
Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data
Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from
other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL
DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION,
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE,
ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL,
CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY
LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings,
environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor
should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any
property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice.
Copyright 2019 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole
or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.
EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other
trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners.
TC5677241.2s Page 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A search of available environmental records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR).
The report was designed to assist parties seeking to meet the search requirements of EPA's Standards
and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312), the ASTM Standard Practice for
Environmental Site Assessments (E 1527-13), the ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site
Assessments for Forestland or Rural Property (E 2247-16), the ASTM Standard Practice for Limited
Environmental Due Diligence: Transaction Screen Process (E 1528-14) or custom requirements developed
for the evaluation of environmental risk associated with a parcel of real estate.
TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION
ADDRESS
6392 KITCHEN ST ROAD
ROWLAND, NC 28383
COORDINATES
Latitude (North):
Longitude (West):
Universal Tranverse Mercator
UTM X (Meters):
UTM Y (Meters):
Elevation:
34.5639000 - 34' 33' 50.04"
79.3490000 - 79' 20' 56.40"
Zone 17
651462.4
3825725.0
122 ft. above sea level
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH TARGET PROPERTY
Target Property: TP
Source: U.S. Geological Survey
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY IN THIS REPORT
Portions of Photo from: 20140517, 20150601
Source: USDA
TC5677241.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

F- MAPPED SITES SUMMARY
Target Property Address:
6392 KITCHEN ST ROAD
ROWLAND, NC 28383
Click on Map ID to see full detail.
MAP
ID SITE NAME ADDRESS
NO MAPPED SITES FOUND
DATABASE ACRONYMS
RELATIVE DIST (ft. & mi.)
ELEVATION DIRECTION
5677241.2s Page 2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TARGET PROPERTY SEARCH RESULTS
The target property was not listed in any of the databases searched by EDR.
SURROUNDING SITES: SEARCH RESULTS
Surrounding sites were not identified.
Unmappable (orphan) sites are not considered in the foregoing analysis.
TC5677241.2s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3

Q)

OVERVIEW MAP - 5677241.2S
Target Property
—
Sites at elevations higher than
or equal to the target property
♦
Sites at elevations lower than
the target property
A
Manufactured Gas Plants
National Priority List Sites
Dept. Defense Sites
0 1/4 1/2 1 Mlles
Indian Reservations BIA Hazardous Substance
County Boundary Disposal Sites
ioo-year flood zone
5oo-year flood zone
■ National Wetland Inventory
State Wetlands
This report includes Interactive Map Layers to
display and/or hide map information. The
legend includes only those icons for the
default map view.
SITE NAME: Swamp Grape
CLIENT: Restoration Systems, LLC
ADDRESS: 6392 IGtchen St Road
CONTACT: JD Hamby
Rowland INC 28383
INQUIRY #: 5677241.2s
LAT/LONG: 34.5639 / 79.349
DATE: June 07, 2019 10:01 pm
Copyright �o 2019 EDR, Inc. (,) 2015 TonnTom Rai. 2015.

DETAIL MAP - 5677241.2S
Target Property
Sites at elevations higher than
or equal to the target property
♦
Sites at elevations lower than
the target property
A
Manufactured Gas Plants
t
Sensitive Receptors
National Priority List Sites
Dept. Defense Sites
0 1 /16 1 /9 1 /4 Mlles
Indian Reservations BIA Hazardous Substance
ioo-year flood zone Disposal Sites
5oo-year flood zone
National Wetland Inventory
State Wetlands
This report includes Interactive Map Layers to
display and/or hide map information. The
legend includes only those icons for the
default map view.
SITE NAME: Swamp Grape
CLIENT: Restoration Systems, LLC
ADDRESS: 6392 IGtchen St Road
CONTACT: JD Hamby
Rowland INC 28383
INQUIRY #: 5677241.2s
LAT/LONG: 34.5639 / 79.349
DATE: June 07, 2019 10:02 pm
Copyright �o 2019 EDR, Inc. (,) 2015 TonnTom Rai. 2015.

Appendix F - FEMA Coordination
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) Appendices
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

From:
dixon.ivevClco.robeson.nc.us-
To:
Grant Lewis
Subject:
RE: Swamp Grape Stream Restoration Site FEMA floodplain checklist
Date:
Tuesday, May 26, 2020 2:01:42 PM
Good afternoon Mr. Lewis. I apologize for not marking the correct action
required. Per our conversation pertaining to the dam removal at Wilkins
Creek, no action will be required.
-----Original Message -----
From: Grant Lewis <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 8:48 AM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: RE: Swamp Grape Stream Restoration Site FEMA floodplain checklist
Hello Dixon;
I have been trying to reach you for the past couple weeks to discuss the
FEMA floodplain checklist you signed and returned to my attention. I would
like to discuss your recommendations for the project. On the floodplain
checklist you were supposed to check if we needed to do a CLOMR/LOMR, No
Rise, or No Action. I am happy to update the form if we can discuss the
project, or you may reseed the form with an updated signature block.
Whatever is easier for you.
Please give me a call at 919-215-1693 to determine the best way forward with
the project and EEP checklist.
Thank you for your time.
Grant
Grant Lewis
Senior Project Manager
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
[e-mail]
[phone] (cell)
-----Original Message -----
From: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2020 10:18 AM
To: Grant Lewis <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Swamp Grape Stream Restoration Site FEMA floodplain checklist
-----Original Message -----
From: Grant Lewis <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2020 8:22 AM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: Crocker, Lindsay <[e-mail]>; Dow, Jeremiah J
<[e-mail]>; John Hamby <[e-mail]>

Subject: Swamp Grape Stream Restoration Site FEMA floodplain checklist
Hello Dixon;
I am working on a stream restoration project in Robeson County for the NC
Department of Environmental Quality. Part of my due diligence is compiling
the attached EEP Floodplain Requirements Checklist and submitting it to the
Local Floodplain Administrator for review.
Please review and sign the last page of the checklist and submit to my
attention. I appreciate your time in this matter and look forward to
working with you on this project.
Thank you.
Grant Lewis
Grant Lewis
Senior Project Manager
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
[e-mail] <mailt07glewis(g)axiomenvironmental.org>
[phone] (cell)
<file:///S:/Business/Administrative/logo s/Axiom. jpg>

Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue, Raleigh, North Carolina 27603 919-215-1693
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
April 30, 2020
Dixon Ivey
Robeson County Director Planning & Inspections
415 Country Club Rd
Lumberton, NC 28360
Re: Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland mitigation project
Robeson County
FEMA Floodplain Requirements Checklist
Dear Mr. Ivey:
20-003
The purpose of this letter is to request concurrence from the Robeson County concerning a stream
and wetland restoration site located in Robeson County. The Site encompasses approximately 26.7
acres of breached agriculture pond, disturbed forest, horse pasture, and row crops along unnamed
tributaries to Wilkinson Creek. Proposed activities at the Site include the restoration of perennial
and stream channels, enhancement of perennial stream channel, and restoration/enhancement of
riparian wetlands.
Stream reaches are depicted on the attached figures and lengths/priority are as follows:
Reach
Length
Priority
UT 1
2966
Restoration and Enhancement Level I and II
UT 2
826
Restoration and Enhancement Level I
UT 3
149
Restoration and Enhancement Level I
FEMA mapping was reviewed to determine if the project is located in a FEMA study area (DFIRM
panel number 8288). Based on existing floodplain mapping, the lower reaches of the Site below the
breached dam are in Special Flood Hazard Area. Flood elevations in the Special Flood Hazard Area
are likely to be controlled by the discharge of Wilkinson Creek and are not expected to be altered by
proj ect activities; however, we request guidance from your organization as to how to mover forward
with the project.

We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact the
below referenced NC DMS Project Manager with any questions that you may have concerning the
extent of site disturbance associated with this project.
Yours truly,
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL
IV Aa4j ��'
W. Grant Lewis
Senior Project Manager
Attachments
Figure 1 Site Location
Figure 2 Hydrologic Unit Map
Figure 3 Topography and Drainage Area
Figure 4 Existing Conditions
Figure 5 Proposed Conditions
EEP Floodplain Requirements Checklist
Cc JD Hamby
Lindsay Crocker
Jeremiah Dow

r�.
f
_
�� �� � � •� J / Ji Aram Environmenial, mc.
A J �O Prepared for:
T �
lj �
� � oav � F ir7Ti.7■i115i7■■�■1
Copyrigh :1 1 N i I r phi — _ Q- • ,�
Society, i-� b d • Project:
t� r GtdJ
- r t, ya r _ SWAMP GRAPE
lei
MITIGATION SITE
+ f y Robeson County, NC
• F
I ,� � - _ �t +� , • • Title:
130
SITE
LOCATION
501
�* I ' � I }`•.' �� •V �l r Ask ' -� '� +d � 3 x � ■ ,`�ee
Z -b"
` -4b-�
Drawn by:
KRJ
Date:
1 - DEC 2018
Legend
Row and
Swam Grape Scale:
p GE267
p 1:20,000
V NCDOT Roads
Project No.:
18-002.10
USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map (Rowland, NC Quad)
-h �} Directions to the Site from Raleigh: FIGURE
Head East on 1-40 for 29 miles
Take exit 328A to merge onto 1-95 South
�� ` !' o After 79 miles, take exit 2 toward Rowland and turn right onto NC-130 W
After 2.5 miles, turn left onto Ashpole Church Road, then right onto Persimmon Road
After 2 miles, turn left onto Kitchen Street
The Site is located on the right after 0.5 miles and can be accessed from Rhein Drive.
60"p right©"2013 N'atio.nal G�ee0graphic Site Latitude, Longitude 34.5639,-79.3490 (WGS84)
iet�, i rcub'ed r \'q l
r,{ O - _ d

N In gram
Mountain
L
c
I'D
■
74
ockingham -
rks
/10L
Farlan
on
f
Ch erav ht un i a Pa I
Lynch Sc
Field Wallace
Cheraw
79
S
Laurel Hill
-J mccol 11
H ill
rylark*fo Or-, J
H e Aunt
Ar Bennettsvil 15
83
38 k"
Legend
Swamp Grape Easement = 26.7 ac
USGS Hydrologic Unit 03040204
14 Digit Hydrologic Unit Boundaries
Targeted Local watersheds
0 2.5 5 10 15
I Miles ZVI
Axiom Erivifonimnlal, Iric.
Prepared for:
airktoon-
L urn lber Bridge ii
INFA Mi"
Project:
h SW 391
springs
SWAMP GRAPE
Saint
MITIGATION SITE
AL
Robeson County, NC
Title:
HYDROLOGIC
UNIT MAP
Drawn by:
.(Location of Swamp Grape Mitigation
22
KRJ
Site within USGS Hydrologic Unit
urnbmt
Date:
and Targeted Local Watershed
DEC 2018
03040204048010
Scale:
1:260,000
301
i 41
Project No.:
18-002.10
k,
-4�
FIGURE
Fiinn"
P
11
A Ornarn
Iz
I
copyright:©el

UT 1 ( Reach 8) = 87 ft
Enhancement ( Level 0
Mitigation Activities
Channel will excavated at the existing floodplain grade
Install habitat strucures to stabilize the channel,
add woody debris to the channel, and create habital.
Plan[ Win native forest vegetation.
UT 1 ( Reach 7) = 206 ft
Restoration
Mitigation Activities
Channel will excavated at the existing floodplain grade
reducing channel depth by over one foot -
Restore channel pattern features ( Rc, Lp-p, Lm) that are
filled by dam construction.
Remnants of the failed dam will be removed.
Plant with native forest vegetation -
UT 1 ( Reach 5) = 230 ft
Restoration
Mitigation Activities
Channel will excavated a[ the existing floodplain grade Soil Stabilization
with the appropriate pattern features ( Rc, Lip-p, Lm)
Channel will be moved away from unstable valley waft,
Plant with native forest vegetation.
LEGEND
UT 1 ( Reach 4) = 235 ft
Enhancement ( Level 11)
Mitigation Activities
Channel will be contoured to the appropriate dimension and
stabilized where necessary.
Plant with native forest vegetation.
UT 2 ( Reach 2) = 266 ft
Enhancement ( Level 0
Mitigation Activities
Excavate channel at proper dimension, reducing channel depth from 1-9 ft to 0.8 ft.
Adjust channel pattern from Lp-p of 8.35 ft to 24.49 ft and Rc from 4.8 ft to 18.20 ft.
The channel into UT 1 across an inner bend.
Plant with native vegetation
UT 2 ( Reach 1) = 684 ft
Restoration
Mitigation Activities
Pond will be excavated to remove unconsolidated sediments.
Pond will be backfilled with stable soil material.
Channel will excavated within the stabilized pond bed.
Remove remnants of the road crossing/dam.
Remove dock and gazebo -
Tie to the downstream flood plain with step-down habitat strucures.
Plant with native forest vegetation.
Easement Boundary = -24.4 ac
Major Topography Line
Minor Topography Line
Stream Restoration = 2403 ft
Stream Enhancement ( Level 1) = 1495 ft
Stream Enhancement ( Level 10 = 235 ft
Wetland Reestablishment = 5.322 ac
Wetland Rehabilitation = 1-379 ac
Wetland Enhancement = 13.689 ac
Piped Crossing
Ditch Backfill
- —
Drain Tile Removal
<
Log Cross Vane
I-%
Log Vane
UT 1 � Reach 6) = 165 ft
Enhancement ( Level g
Mitigation Activities
Channel will be contoured to the appropriate dimension and
stabilized where necessary.
Pian[ with native forest vegetation.
UT 1 ( Reach 1) = 298 ft
Enhancement ( Level 0
Mitigation Activities
Piped channel crossing installed in upper reach.
Channel will be backfilled approximately 5.5 ft.
Channel width will be decreased from 30-1 ft to 7-4 ft-
❑itches will be backfilled and drain tile removed.
Livestock removal from area.
- Plant with native forest vegetation in pasture areas.
1,
W,:t
s s,
a
UT 3 'Reach 2) = 68 ft
Restoration
Mitigation Activities
Channel will excavated to tie UT 3 with UT 1 across and inner bend.
Plant with native forest vegetation.
UT 3 ( Reach 1) = 133 ft
Enhancement ( Level 9
Mitigation Activities
Tie to upstream channel elevation at the property line.
Contour the channel to the appropriate dimension and reduce
channel depth from 2.1 ft to 0.9 ft.
Ease radius of curvature from 8-14 ft to 19.28 fL
Install habitat strucures to stabilize the channel.
add woody debris to the channel, and create habitat.
Plant with native forest vegetation.
UT 1 [ Reach 3) = 546 ft
Enhancement ( Level p
Mitigation Activities
Channel will excavated at the existing floodplain grade -
Reduce channel depth from 2A ft to 1.2 ft.
Adjust channel pattern and reduce Lp-p and Rc.
Habitat strucures will be installed to stabilize the channel.
add woody debris to the channel, and create habitat -
Plant with native forest vegetation.
UT 1 ( Reach 2) = 1215 ft
Restoration
Mitigation Activities
-Channel will excavated at the existing floodplain grade.
In middle reaches, some floodplain excavation will be necessary
to tie into elevations of the historic pond bed.
F000dplain fill in the pond bed will be required to raise the flood pla
to the historic elevation prior to settling and liquifaction.
Step-down habitat strucures will be installed to tie the upper UT 1
Reach 2 floodplain to the lower reaches.
Ditches will be backfilled and drain the removed.
Livestock removal from area -
Plant with native forest vegetation in pasture areas.
Powerline moved outside
of conservation easement
boundaries.
D 200 400
SCALE IN FEET
Axiom Environmental. Inc.
NOTES/REVISIONS
Project:
Swamp Grape
Mitigation Site
Robeson County
North Carolina
Title:
RESTORATION
PLAN
Scale.-
FIGURE NO.
AS SHOWN
Date,
Mar 2020
5
Project No-,
20-003

'I+--
r
pia a meet
PROGRAM
EEP Floodplain Requirements Checklist
This form was developed by the National Flood Insurance program, NC Floodplain
Mapping program and Ecosystem Enhancement Program to be filled for all EEP projects.
The form is intended to summarize the floodplain requirements during the design phase of
the projects. The form should be submitted to the Local Floodplain Administrator with
three copies submitted to NFIP (attn. State NFIP Engineer), NC Floodplain Mapping Unit
(attn. State NFIP Coordinator) and NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program.
Project Location
Name of project:
Swamp Grape Site
Name if stream or feature:
UTs to Wilkinson Creek
County:
Robeson
Name of river basin:
Lumber
Is project urban or rural?
Rural
Name of Jurisdictional
municipality/county:
Lumberton/Robeson
DFIRM panel number for
entire site:
8288
Consultant name:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
Phone number:
919-215-1693
Address:
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603
FEMA Floodplain_Checklist.docx Page 1 of 3

Design Information
Provide a general description of project (one paragraph). Include project limits on a
reference orthophotograph at a scale of 1" = 500". (See Attached)
Summarize stream reaches or wetland areas according to their restoration priority.
(See Attached)
F,xamnle
Reach
Length
Priority
Example: Reach A
1000
One Restoration
Example: Reach B
2000
Three (Enhancement)
Floodplain Information
Is project located in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA)?
r' Yes r No The lower reaches
If project is located in a SFHA, check how it was determined:
r Redelineation
I— Detailed Study
r- Limited Detail Study
i— Approxnnate Study
IWO Don't know
List flood zone designation:
Check if applies:
r AE Zone
G Floodway
r Non Encroachment
r None
I— A Zone
r Local Setbacks Required
r No Local Setbacks Required
If local setbacks are reauired. list how manv feet:
Does proposed channel boundary encroach outside floodway/non-
encroachment/setbacks?
(' Yes r+ No
FEMA Floodplain_Cheeklist.doex Page 2 of 3

Land Acquisition (Check)
I— State owned (fee sftTle)
r Conservation easment (Design Bid Build)
r Conservation Easement (Full Delivery Project)
Note: if the project property is state-owned, then all requirements should be addressed
to the Department of Administration, State Construction Office (attn: Herbert Neily,
919 807-4101)
Is community/county participating in the NFIP program?
1. Yes r No
Note: if community is not participating, then all requirements should be addressed to
NFIP attn: State NFIP Engineer, 919 715-8000
Name of Local Floodplain Administrator: Dixon Ivey
Phone Number: 910-272-6522
Floodplain Requirements
This section to be filled by designer/applicant following verification with the LFPA
f No Action
FE1017"W1,
17- Letter of Map Revision
r Conditional Letter of Map Revision
r Other Requirements
List other requirements:
Comments:
Name:
W. Grant Lewis
Signature:
9)
Title:
President
Date:
30 20 zo
FEMA Floodplain_Checklist.docx Page 3 of 3

Appendix G - Financial Assurances
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) Appendices
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

Per the NC DMS RFP #: 16-007571, Restoration Systems will provide financial assurance in one of the
following forms:
1) Performance Bonding — The Offeror must provide security in the form of acceptable
performance bonds as described in the following paragraph to guarantee delivery of the
maximum number of originally contracted Mitigation Units. The performance bonds must be
obtained from a company licensed in North Carolina as shown in the Federal Treasury Listing of
Approved Sureties (Circular 570). The maximum allowable amount provided by a surety may
not exceed the "underwriting limitation" for the surety as identified in the Federal Treasury
Listing. Although this RFP is a request for mitigation and not construction, the performance
bonds shall follow the prescribed wording provided in N.C.G.S. § 44A-33. The Offeror must
provide two performance bonds. The first bond must be for 100% of the total value of the
contract and must be in effect and submitted with the Task 3 deliverable (see Section 8. SCOPE
OF WORK —Task 3) before NC DMS will authorize payment for that deliverable. The bond must
remain in effect until the Offeror has received written notification from the NC DMS that the
requirements of Task 6 (submittal of baseline monitoring report) have been met. After the
successful completion of Task 6, the bond can be retired and a second bond must be substituted
for the first. The second bond must be for 40% of the value of the contract, which covers the
monitoring period. The Monitoring Phase Performance Bond can be reduced yearly concurrent
with the payment schedule once the yearly deliverable is approved by NC DMS and credits are
released by the IRT.
2) Letters of Credit- LOCs must be drawn from a reputable Bank identified by the FDIC as "Well
Capitalized" or "Adequately Capitalized" and follow the submittal timing, contract amounts and
schedules for reduction as those described above for the performance bonds. Evergreen or
irrevocable Letters of Credit shall be required to provide a 120 day notice of cancellation,
termination or non -renewal.
3) Casualty Insurance on underlying performance of Credits or Units of Restoration — Must follow
the same submittal timing, contract amounts and reduction schedules as those described above
in performance bonds. The insurance must contain the following information.
a) The "NC DENR" must be named as the "Regulatory Body'. NC DENR
shall have the sole right to place a claim against the policy. NC DENR
shall have the sole right and obligation as the responsible "regulatory
body' to approve any claim settlement.
b) Initial insurance must be for a 10 year period.
The process of evaluating these options is underway. Once obtained, IRS will provide digital and hard
copies of the assurance of distribution to IRT members.
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) Appendices
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

Appendix H - Site Protection Instrument
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) Appendices
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT
AND RIGHT OF ACCESS PROVIDED
PURSUANT TO
FULL DELIVERY
MITIGATION CONTRACT
COUNTY
SPO File Number:
DMS Project Number:
Prepared by: Office of the Attorney General
Property Control Section
Return to: NC Department of Administration
State Property Office
1321 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1321
THIS DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF ACCESS, made
this day of , 20, by Landowner name goes here
, ("Grantor"), whose mailing address is Landowner address goes here , to the State of
North Carolina, ("Grantee"), whose mailing address is State of North Carolina, Department of
Administration, State Property Office, 1321 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1321. The
designations of Grantor and Grantee as used herein shall include said parties, their heirs,
successors, and assigns, and shall include singular, plural, masculine, feminine, or neuter as
required by context.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-214.8 et seq., the State
of North Carolina has established the Division of Mitigation Services (formerly known as the
Ecosystem Enhancement Program and Wetlands Restoration Program) within the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources for the purposes of acquiring, maintaining, restoring,
enhancing, creating and preserving wetland and riparian resources that contribute to the
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 1 of 11

protection and improvement of water quality, flood prevention, fisheries, aquatic habitat, wildlife
habitat, and recreational opportunities; and
WHEREAS, this Conservation Easement from Grantor to Grantee has been negotiated,
arranged and provided for as a condition of a full delivery contract between ( insert name and
address of full delivery contract provider ) and the North Carolina Department of Environmental
Quality, to provide stream, wetland and/or buffer mitigation pursuant to the North Carolina
Department of Environmental Quality Purchase and Services Contract Number
WHEREAS, The State of North Carolina is qualified to be the Grantee of a Conservation
Easement pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 121-35; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the United
States Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District entered into a Memorandum of
Understanding, (MOU) duly executed by all parties on November 4, 1998. This MOU
recognized that the Wetlands Restoration Program was to provide effective compensatory
mitigation for authorized impacts to wetlands, streams and other aquatic resources by restoring,
enhancing and preserving the wetland and riparian areas of the State; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the North Carolina
Department of Transportation and the United States Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington
District entered into a Memorandum of Agreement, (MOA) duly executed by all parties in
Greensboro, NC on July 22, 2003, which recognizes that the Division of Mitigation Services
(formerly Ecosystem Enhancement Program) is to provide for compensatory mitigation by
effective protection of the land, water and natural resources of the State by restoring, enhancing
and preserving ecosystem functions; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, the North Carolina Division of
Water Quality, the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management, and the National Marine
Fisheries Service entered into an agreement to continue the In -Lieu Fee operations of the North
Carolina Department of Natural Resources' Division of Mitigation Services (formerly Ecosystem
Enhancement Program) with an effective date of 28 July, 2010, which supersedes and replaces
the previously effective MOA and MOU referenced above; and
WHEREAS, the acceptance of this instrument for and on behalf of the State of North
Carolina was granted to the Department of Administration by resolution as approved by the
Governor and Council of State adopted at a meeting held in the City of Raleigh, North Carolina,
on the 8th day of February 2000; and
WHEREAS, the Division of Mitigation Services in the Department of Environmental
Quality, which has been delegated the authority authorized by the Governor and Council of State
to the Department of Administration, has approved acceptance of this instrument; and
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 2of11

WHEREAS, Grantor owns in fee simple certain real property situated, lying, and being
in Township, County, North Carolina (the "Property"), and being
more particularly described as that certain parcel of land containing approximately
acres and being conveyed to the Grantor by deed as recorded in Deed Book at Page
of the County Registry, North Carolina; and
WHEREAS, Grantor is willing to grant a Conservation Easement and Right of Access
over the herein described areas of the Property, thereby restricting and limiting the use of the
areas of the Property subject to the Conservation Easement to the terms and conditions and
purposes hereinafter set forth, and Grantee is willing to accept said Easement and Access Rights.
The Conservation Easement shall be for the protection and benefit of the waters of if known
insert name of stream, branch, river or waterway here.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, terms, conditions, and
restrictions hereinafter set forth, Grantor unconditionally and irrevocably hereby grants and
conveys unto Grantee, its successors and assigns, forever and in perpetuity, a Conservation
Easement along with a general Right of Access.
The Conservation Easement Area consists of the following:
Tracts Number containing a total of acres as shown on the plats
of survey entitled "Final Plat, Conservation Easement for North Carolina Division of Mitigation
Services, Project Name: , SPO File No. , EEP Site No. ,
Property of ," dated , 20 by name of surveyor,
PLS Number and recorded in the County, North Carolina Register
of Deeds at Plat Book Pages
See attached "Exhibit A", Legal Description of area of the Property hereinafter referred to as the
"Conservation Easement Area"
The purposes of this Conservation Easement are to maintain, restore, enhance, construct,
create and preserve wetland and/or riparian resources in the Conservation Easement Area that
contribute to the protection and improvement of water quality, flood prevention, fisheries,
aquatic habitat, wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunities; to maintain permanently the
Conservation Easement Area in its natural condition, consistent with these purposes; and to
prevent any use of the Easement Area that will significantly impair or interfere with these
purposes. To achieve these purposes, the following conditions and restrictions are set forth:
L DURATION OF EASEMENT
Pursuant to law, including the above referenced statutes, this Conservation Easement and
Right of Access shall be perpetual and it shall run with, and be a continuing restriction upon the
use of, the Property, and it shall be enforceable by the Grantee against the Grantor and against
Grantor's heirs, successors and assigns, personal representatives, agents, lessees, and licensees.
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 3 of 11

II. GRANTOR RESERVED USES AND RESTRICTED ACTIVITIES
The Conservation Easement Area shall be restricted from any development or usage that
would impair or interfere with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Unless expressly
reserved as a compatible use herein, any activity in, or use of, the Conservation Easement Area
by the Grantor is prohibited as inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation Easement.
Any rights not expressly reserved hereunder by the Grantor have been acquired by the Grantee.
Any rights not expressly reserved hereunder by the Grantor, including the rights to all mitigation
credits, including, but not limited to, stream, wetland, and riparian buffer mitigation units,
derived from each site within the area of the Conservation Easement, are conveyed to and belong
to the Grantee. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the following specific uses are
prohibited, restricted, or reserved as indicated:
A. Recreational Uses. Grantor expressly reserves the right to undeveloped recreational
uses, including hiking, bird watching, hunting and fishing, and access to the Conservation
Easement Area for the purposes thereof.
B. Motorized Vehicle Use. Motorized vehicle use in the Conservation Easement Area is
prohibited except within a Crossing Area(s) or Road or Trail as shown on the recorded survey
plat.
C. Educational Uses. The Grantor reserves the right to engage in and permit others to
engage in educational uses in the Conservation Easement Area not inconsistent with this
Conservation Easement, and the right of access to the Conservation Easement Area for such
purposes including organized educational activities such as site visits and observations.
Educational uses of the property shall not alter vegetation, hydrology or topography of the site.
D. Damage to Vegetation. Except within Crossing Area(s) as shown on the recorded
survey plat and as related to the removal of non-native plants, diseased or damaged trees, or
vegetation that destabilizes or renders unsafe the Conservation Easement Area to persons or
natural habitat, all cutting, removal, mowing, harming, or destruction of any trees and vegetation
in the Conservation Easement Area is prohibited.
E. Industrial, Residential and Commercial Uses. All industrial, residential and
commercial uses are prohibited in the Conservation Easement Area.
F. Agricultural Use. All agricultural uses are prohibited within the Conservation Easement
Area including any use for cropland, waste lagoons, or pastureland.
G. New Construction. There shall be no building, facility, mobile home, antenna, utility
pole, tower, or other structure constructed or placed in the Conservation Easement Area.
H. Roads and Trails. There shall be no construction or maintenance of new roads, trails,
walkways, or paving in the Conservation Easement.
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 4of11

All existing roads, trails and crossings within the Conservation Easement Area shall be shown on
the recorded survey plat.
I. Signs. No signs shall be permitted in the Conservation Easement Area except
interpretive signs describing restoration activities and the conservation values of the
Conservation Easement Area, signs identifying the owner of the Property and the holder of the
Conservation Easement, signs giving directions, or signs prescribing rules and regulations for the
use of the Conservation Easement Area.
J. Dumping or Storing. Dumping or storage of soil, trash, ashes, garbage, waste,
abandoned vehicles, appliances, machinery, or any other material in the Conservation Easement
Area is prohibited.
K. Grading, Mineral Use, Excavation, Dredging. There shall be no grading, filling,
excavation, dredging, mining, drilling, hydraulic fracturing; removal of topsoil, sand, gravel,
rock, peat, minerals, or other materials.
L. Water Quality and Drainage Patterns. There shall be no diking, draining, dredging,
channeling, filling, leveling, pumping, impounding or diverting, causing, allowing or permitting
the diversion of surface or underground water in the Conservation Easement Area. No altering
or tampering with water control structures or devices, or disruption or alteration of the restored,
enhanced, or created drainage patterns is allowed. All removal of wetlands, polluting or
discharging into waters, springs, seeps, or wetlands, or use of pesticide or biocides in the
Conservation Easement Area is prohibited. In the event of an emergency interruption or
shortage of all other water sources, water from within the Conservation Easement Area may
temporarily be withdrawn for good cause shown as needed for the survival of livestock on the
Property.
M. Subdivision and Conveyance. Grantor voluntarily agrees that no further subdivision,
partitioning, or dividing of the Conservation Easement Area portion of the Property owned by the
Grantor in fee simple ("fee") that is subject to this Conservation Easement is allowed. Any future
transfer of the Property shall be subject to this Conservation Easement and Right of Access and to the
Grantee's right of unlimited and repeated ingress and egress over and across the Property to the
Conservation Easement Area for the purposes set forth herein.
N. Development Rights. All development rights are permanently removed from the
Conservation Easement Area and are non-transferrable.
O. Disturbance of Natural Features. Any change, disturbance, alteration or impairment of
the natural features of the Conservation Easement Area or any intentional introduction of non-
native plants, trees and/or animal species by Grantor is prohibited.
The Grantor may request permission to vary from the above restrictions for good cause
shown, provided that any such request is not inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation
Easement, and the Grantor obtains advance written approval from the Division of Mitigation
Services, 1652 Mail Services Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652.
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 5 of 11

III. GRANTEE RESERVED USES
A. Right of Access, Construction, and Inspection. The Grantee, its employees and agents,
successors and assigns, receive a perpetual Right of Access to the Conservation Easement Area
over the Property at reasonable times to undertake any activities on the property to restore,
construct, manage, maintain, enhance, protect, and monitor the stream, wetland and any other
riparian resources in the Conservation Easement Area, in accordance with restoration activities
or a long-term management plan. Unless otherwise specifically set forth in this Conservation
Easement, the rights granted herein do not include or establish for the public any access rights.
B. Restoration Activities. These activities include planting of trees, shrubs and herbaceous
vegetation, installation of monitoring wells, utilization of heavy equipment to grade, fill, and
prepare the soil, modification of the hydrology of the site, and installation of natural and
manmade materials as needed to direct in -stream, above ground, and subterraneous water flow.
C. Signs. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors or assigns, shall be permitted
to place signs and witness posts on the Property to include any or all of the following: describe
the project, prohibited activities within the Conservation Easement, or identify the project
boundaries and the holder of the Conservation Easement.
D. Fences. Conservation Easements are purchased to protect the investments by the State
(Grantee) in natural resources. Livestock within conservations easements damages the
investment and can result in reductions in natural resource value and mitigation credits which
would cause financial harm to the State. Therefore, Landowners (Grantor) with livestock are
required to restrict livestock access to the Conservation Easement area. Repeated failure to do so
may result in the State (Grantee) repairing or installing livestock exclusion devices (fences)
within the conservation area for the purpose of restricting livestock access. In such cases, the
landowner (Grantor) must provide access to the State (Grantee) to make repairs.
E. Crossing Area(s). The Grantee is not responsible for maintenance of crossing area(s),
however, the Grantee, its employees and agents, successors or assigns, reserve the right to repair
crossing area(s), at its sole discretion and to recover the cost of such repairs from the Grantor if
such repairs are needed as a result of activities of the Grantor, his successors or assigns.
IV. ENFORCEMENT AND REMEDIES
A. Enforcement. To accomplish the purposes of this Conservation Easement, Grantee is
allowed to prevent any activity within the Conservation Easement Area that is inconsistent with
the purposes of this Conservation Easement and to require the restoration of such areas or
features in the Conservation Easement Area that may have been damaged by such unauthorized
activity or use. Upon any breach of the terms of this Conservation Easement by Grantor, the
Grantee shall, except as provided below, notify the Grantor in writing of such breach and the
Grantor shall have ninety (90) days after receipt of such notice to correct the damage caused by
such breach. If the breach and damage remains uncured after ninety (90) days, the Grantee may
enforce this Conservation Easement by bringing appropriate legal proceedings including an
action to recover damages, as well as injunctive and other relief. The Grantee shall also have the
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 6 of 11

power and authority, consistent with its statutory authority: (a) to prevent any impairment of the
Conservation Easement Area by acts which may be unlawful or in violation of this Conservation
Easement; (b) to otherwise preserve or protect its interest in the Property; or (c) to seek damages
from any appropriate person or entity. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Grantee reserves the
immediate right, without notice, to obtain a temporary restraining order, injunctive or other
appropriate relief, if the breach is or would irreversibly or otherwise materially impair the
benefits to be derived from this Conservation Easement, and the Grantor and Grantee
acknowledge that the damage would be irreparable and remedies at law inadequate. The rights
and remedies of the Grantee provided hereunder shall be in addition to, and not in lieu of, all
other rights and remedies available to Grantee in connection with this Conservation Easement.
B. Inspection. The Grantee, its employees and agents, successors and assigns, have the
right, with reasonable notice, to enter the Conservation Easement Area over the Property at
reasonable times for the purpose of inspection to determine whether the Grantor is complying
with the terms, conditions and restrictions of this Conservation Easement.
C. Acts Beyond Grantor's Control. Nothing contained in this Conservation Easement
shall be construed to entitle Grantee to bring any action against Grantor for any injury or change
in the Conservation Easement Area caused by third parties, resulting from causes beyond the
Grantor's control, including, without limitation, fire, flood, storm, and earth movement, or from
any prudent action taken in good faith by the Grantor under emergency conditions to prevent,
abate, or mitigate significant injury to life or damage to the Property resulting from such causes.
D. Costs of Enforcement. Beyond regular and typical monitoring expenses, any costs
incurred by Grantee in enforcing the terms of this Conservation Easement against Grantor,
including, without limitation, any costs of restoration necessitated by Grantor's acts or omissions
in violation of the terms of this Conservation Easement, shall be borne by Grantor.
E. No Waiver. Enforcement of this Easement shall be at the discretion of the Grantee and
any forbearance, delay or omission by Grantee to exercise its rights hereunder in the event of any
breach of any term set forth herein shall not be construed to be a waiver by Grantee.
V. MISCELLANEOUS
A. This instrument sets forth the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the
Conservation Easement and supersedes all prior discussions, negotiations, understandings or
agreements relating to the Conservation Easement. If any provision is found to be invalid, the
remainder of the provisions of the Conservation Easement, and the application of such provision
to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is found to be invalid, shall not be
affected thereby.
B. Grantor is responsible for any real estate taxes, assessments, fees, or charges levied upon
the Property. Grantee shall not be responsible for any costs or liability of any kind related to the
ownership, operation, insurance, upkeep, or maintenance of the Property, except as expressly
provided herein. Upkeep of any constructed bridges, fences, or other amenities on the Property
are the sole responsibility of the Grantor. Nothing herein shall relieve the Grantor of the
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 7of11

obligation to comply with federal, state or local laws, regulations and permits that may apply to
the exercise of the Reserved Rights.
C. Any notices shall be sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested to the
parties at their addresses shown herein or to other addresses as either party establishes in writing
upon notification to the other.
D. Grantor shall notify Grantee in writing of the name and address and any party to whom
the Property or any part thereof is to be transferred at or prior to the time said transfer is made.
Grantor further agrees that any subsequent lease, deed, or other legal instrument by which any
interest in the Property is conveyed is subject to the Conservation Easement herein created.
E. The Grantor and Grantee agree that the terms of this Conservation Easement shall survive
any merger of the fee and easement interests in the Property or any portion thereof.
F. This Conservation Easement and Right of Access may be amended, but only in writing
signed by all parties hereto, or their successors or assigns, if such amendment does not affect the
qualification of this Conservation Easement or the status of the Grantee under any applicable
laws, and is consistent with the purposes of the Conservation Easement. The owner of the
Property shall notify the State Property Office and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in writing
sixty (60) days prior to the initiation of any transfer of all or any part of the Property or of any
request to void or modify this Conservation Easement. Such notifications and modification
requests shall be addressed to:
Division of Mitigation Services Program Manager
NC State Property Office
1321 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1321
and
General Counsel
US Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403
G. The parties recognize and agree that the benefits of this Conservation Easement are in
gross and assignable provided, however, that the Grantee hereby covenants and agrees, that in
the event it transfers or assigns this Conservation Easement, the organization receiving the
interest will be a qualified holder under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 121-34 et seq. and § 170(h) of the
Internal Revenue Code, and the Grantee further covenants and agrees that the terms of the
transfer or assignment will be such that the transferee or assignee will be required to continue in
perpetuity the conservation purposes described in this document.
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 8of11

VI. QUIET ENJOYMENT
Grantor reserves all remaining rights accruing from ownership of the Property, including
the right to engage in or permit or invite others to engage in only those uses of the Conservation
Easement Area that are expressly reserved herein, not prohibited or restricted herein, and are not
inconsistent with the purposes of this Conservation Easement. Without limiting the generality of
the foregoing, the Grantor expressly reserves to the Grantor, and the Grantor's invitees and
licensees, the right of access to the Conservation Easement Area, and the right of quiet
enjoyment of the Conservation Easement Area,
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said rights and easements perpetually unto the State of
North Carolina for the aforesaid purposes,
AND Grantor covenants that Grantor is seized of said premises in fee and has the right to
convey the permanent Conservation Easement herein granted; that the same is free from
encumbrances and that Grantor will warrant and defend title to the same against the claims of all
persons whomsoever.
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 9of11

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal, the day
and year first above written.
(SEAL)
NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF
I, , a Notary Public in and for the County and State
aforesaid, do hereby certify that , Grantor, personally appeared
before me this day and acknowledged the execution of the foregoing instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and Notary Seal this the
day of , 20.
Notary Public
My commission expires:
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 10 of 11

Exhibit A
[INSERT LEGAL DESCRIPTION]
NCDMS Full Delivery Conservation Easement Template adopted 5 May 2017
Page 11 of 11

Appendix I - Credit Release Schedule
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) Appendices
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

The schedules below list the updated credit release schedules for stream and wetland mitigation projects
developed by bank and ILF sites in North Carolina:
Credit Release Schedule and Milestones for Wetlands
Credit
Banks
ILF/NCDMS
Release
Release Activity
Interim
Total
Interim
Total
Milestone
Release
Released
Release
Released
Site Establishment (includes all required criteria
1
15%
15%
0%
0%
stated above)
Completion of all initial physical and biological
2
improvements made pursuant to the Mitigation
15%
30%
30%
30%
Plan
Year 1 monitoring report demonstrates that
3
10%
40%
10%
40%
interim performance standards have been met
Year 2 monitoring report demonstrates that
4
°
10 /°
°
50 /°
°
10 /°
°
50/°
interim performance standards have been met
Year 3 monitoring report demonstrates that
5
15%
65%
15%
65%
interim performance standards have been met
Year 4 monitoring report demonstrates that
6
interim performance standards have been met
5%
70%
5%
70%
Year 5 monitoring report demonstrates that
7
°
15 /°
°
85 /°
°
15 /°
°
85/°
interim performance standards have been met
Year 6 monitoring report demonstrates that
8
°
5 /°
°
90 /°
°
5 /°
°
90/°
interim performance standards have been met
Year 7 monitoring report demonstrates that
9
10%
100%
10%
100%
performance standards have been met
*Please note that vegetation plot data may not be required with monitoring reports submitted during
these monitoring years unless otherwise required by the Mitigation Plan or directed by the NCIRT.
30

Credit Release Schedule and Milestones for Streams
Credit
Banks
ILF/NCDMS
Release
Release Activity
Interim
Total
Interim
Total
Milestone
Release
Released
Release
Released
Site Establishment (includes all required criteria
1
15%
15%
0%
0%
stated above)
Completion of all initial physical and biological
2
improvements made pursuant to the Mitigation
15%
30%
30%
30%
Plan
Year 1 monitoring report demonstrates that
3
channels are stable and interim performance
10%
40%
10%
40%
standards have been met
Year 2 monitoring report demonstrates that
4
channels are stable and interim performance
10%
50%
10%
50%
standards have been met
Year 3 monitoring report demonstrates that
5
channels are stable and interim performance
10%
60%
10%
60%
standards have been met
Year 4 monitoring report demonstrates that
6`
channels are stable and interim performance
5%
5%
(75%--)
(75%-)
standards have been met
Year 5 monitoring report demonstrates that
7
channels are stable and interim performance
10%
10%
(85%--)
(85%--)
standards have been met
Year 6 monitoring report demonstrates that
8'
channels are stable and interim performance
5%
o
.)
5%
o
(90%
(90%-)
standards have been met
Year 7 monitoring report demonstrates that
9
channels are stable, performance standards
10%
--)
10%
--)
(100%
(100%
have been met
*Please note that vegetation data may not be required with monitoring reports submitted during these monitoring
years unless otherwise required by the Mitigation Plan or directed by the NORT.
**10% reserve of credits to be held back until the bankfull event performance standard has been met.
31

Appendix J - Maintenance Plan
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) Appendices
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

Maintenance Plan
The Site shall be monitored on a regular basis and a physical inspection of the site shall be conducted a
minimum of once per year throughout the post -construction monitoring period until performance
standards are met. These site inspections may identify site components and features that require routine
maintenance. Routine maintenance should be expected most often in the first two years following site
construction and may include the following:
Component/Feature
Maintenance through project close-out
Routine channel maintenance and repair activities may include securing of loose
coir matting and supplemental installations of live stakes and other target
Stream
vegetation along the channel. Areas where stormwater and floodplain flows
intercept the channel may also require maintenance to prevent bank failures and
head -cutting.
Vegetation shall be maintained to ensure the health and vigor of the targeted
plant community. Routine vegetation maintenance and repair activities may
include supplemental planting, pruning, mulching, and fertilizing. Exotic invasive
Vegetation
plant species shall be controlled by mechanical and/or chemical methods. Any
vegetation control requiring herbicide application will be performed in
accordance with NC Department of Agriculture (NCDA) rules and regulations.
Beaver and associated dams are to be removed as they colonize and until the
Beaver
project is closed.
Site boundaries shall be identified in the field to ensure clear distinction between
the mitigation site and adjacent properties. Boundaries may be identified by
Site Boundary
fence, marker, bollard, post, tree- blazing, 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.
Road crossings above the site may be maintained only as allowed by
Road Crossing
Conservation Easement or existing easement, deed restrictions, rights of way,
or corridor agreements.
Routine maintenance and repair activities may include removal of debris and
Drop Structure
supplemental installation of live stakes and other target vegetation along the
channel. Undermining of the structure may require repair or replacement.

Appendix K - IRT Site Visit Notes
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) Appendices
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

From: Tuawell, Todd J CIV USARMY CESAW (US)
To: Crocker, Lindsay; Davis. Erin B; Haupt, Mac
Cc: Wilson. Travis W.; Baumgartner, Tim; Raymond Holz(rholz(alrestoration systems. com); Grant Lewis; Alex
Baldwin; Browning, Kimberly D CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)
Subject: RE: Swamp Grape Post -Post -Contract notes for review #100115
Date: Thursday, November 7, 2019 12:34:36 PM
Lindsay,
I have looked at the comments. One thing I just wanted to note is that I don't believe the majority of the wetland
within the old pond bed will be rehabilitation, and the minutes seem oriented toward demonstrating that these areas
will be rehabilitation. There may be some areas where sufficient uplift can be justified, but overall I think the
functions within the pond bed are already present, so planting may be the major source of uplift (meaning
enhancement). Also, the last bullet about removal of the infrastructure, including pipe and dock, would not really be
justification for significant uplift.
Todd
-----Original Message -----
From: Crocker, Lindsay[mailto:LindsU.CrockerUacdenr.govI
Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2019 2:44 PM
To: Tugwell, Todd J CIV USARMY CESAW (US)<[e-mail]>; Davis, Erin B
<erin.davis&cdenr.gov>; Haupt, Mac <mac.haupt(0ncdenr.gov>
Cc: Wilson, Travis W.<travis.wilson&cwildlife.org>; Baumgartner, Tim <[e-mail]>;
Raymond Holz ([e-mail])<rholz(a�restorationsystems.com>; Grant Lewis
(glewis(oaxiomenvironmental.org) <glewis(oaxiomenvironmental.org>; Alex Baldwin
<abaldwin(a�)restorationsystems.com>; Browning, Kimberly D CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)
<Kimberly .D.Browning(ousace. army.mil>
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Swamp Grape Post -Post -Contract notes for review #100115
IRT Members,
Please review the attached notes from the 10/29/2019 site visit that will serve as a basis for developing the
Mitigation Plan with your approval. Let us know if you have any additional comments for consideration.
Thank you all for your patience in working through this project with us,
Lindsay
Lindsay Crocker
Project Manager
NC DEQ Division of Mitigation Services
217 West Jones St., Raleigh, NC 27603
Office 919.707.8944

Cell 919.594.3910
[e-mail]<mailto:lindsay.crockerLg2ncdenr. og_v>
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be
disclosed to third parties unless the content is exempt by statute or other regulation.

From: Haupt, Mac
To: Crocker. Lindsay; Tuawell. Todd J CIV USARMY CESAW (US); Davis. Erin B
Cc: Wilson. Travis W.; Baumaartner. Tim; Raymond Holz(rholz(abrestoration systems. com); Grant Lewis; Alex
Baldwin; Kim Browning
Subject: RE: Swamp Grape Post -Post -Contract notes for review #100115
Date: Friday, November 8, 2019 9:47:55 AM
Lindsay,
I believe most of the wetlands on stream right of upper UT1 now shown as re-establishment will
likely be rehabilitation at best. As you said, this will be dependent upon the PJD. Also, I agree with
Todd that the wetlands in the pond bottom are mostly enhancement.
Also, as Erin suggested at the end of the site visit it would be preferable to extend the wetlands to
the wood -line upstream of UT2. This would rely on the landowner willing to move the crossing they
wanted in this area.
Thanks,
Mac
From: Crocker, Lindsay
Sent: Wednesday, November 6, 2019 2:44 PM
To: Tugwell, Todd J CIV USARMY CESAW (US)<[e-mail]>; Davis, Erin B
<[e-mail]>; Haupt, Mac <[e-mail]>
Cc: Wilson, Travis W. <[e-mail]>; Baumgartner, Tim
<[e-mail]>; Raymond Holz ([e-mail])
<[e-mail]>; Grant Lewis ([e-mail])
<[e-mail]>; Alex Baldwin <[e-mail]>; Kim
Browning <[e-mail]>
Subject: Swamp Grape Post -Post -Contract notes for review #100115
IRT Members,
Please review the attached notes from the 10/29/2019 site visit that will serve as a basis for
developing the Mitigation Plan with your approval. Let us know if you have any additional
comments for consideration.
Thank you all for your patience in working through this project with us,
Lindsay
Lindsay Crocker
Project Manager
NC DEC. Division of Mitigation Services
217 West Jones St., Raleigh, NC 27603
Office 919.707.8944
Cell 919.594.3910

Iindsay. crocker( ncdenr.goov
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be
disclosed to third parties unless the content is exempt by statute or other regulation.

Swamp Grape Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site
IRT Site Visit: 10-29-2019
NC DMS Contract # 7869 RFP # 16-007705
Supplementary Site Visit Notes
TO: NC DMS
FROM: Restoration Systems
DATE: November 6, 2019
RE: Swamp Grape Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site Visit, October 29t", 2019
On May 30t", 2019, Restoration Systems (RS) held a post -contract site visit for the Swamp Grape Mitigation
Site (Site) with the North Carolina Inter -agency Review Team (IRT). A significant portion of the Site
encompasses a breached agricultural pond. Failure of the pond's earthen impoundment occurred during
Hurricane Florence in September of 2018. RS and its consultant Axiom Environmental (Axiom) assessed
the Site leading up to the May visit as if the breached impoundment was restorable, and the agricultural
pond could be re-established.
Though evaluated for compensatory mitigation, IRT members raised concerns regarding the permitting of
the pond in 1999. Todd Tugwell of the U.S. Army Corps (Corps) relayed the IRT's concerns to the local
Corps representative, Mickey Sugg, who conducted an internal review of the property. Mr. Sugg
determined the Corps did not permit the construction but concluded the Corps would take no action
against the landowner given the property's current condition. Moreover, if the landowner wanted to
reconstruct the earthen impoundment, a Section 404 Permit would be required for the entire footprint
of the pond. With clarity regarding the historical permitting, RS re-evaluated the Site based on its current
condition. RS presented on preliminary findings during the September 2019 state-wide IRT meeting, and
IRT members requested a second site visit, which occurred on October 29t", 2019. The following notes are
a summary of the October site visit.
Attendees:
USACE:
- Todd Tugwell
NC DWR:
- Mac Haupt
- Erin Davis
Axiom Environmental:
- Grant Lewis
NC DMS:
- Lindsay Crocker
- Jeff Schaffer
- Jeremiah Dow
- Tim Baumgartner
Restoration Systems:
- JD Hamby
- Alex Baldwin
- Raymond Holz
Site Visit Notes:
- Under RFP 16-007705, DMS awarded RS' Option 2, consisting of 3,061 SMUs and 10 RWMUs
within a 20.5-acre easement. Under the revised evaluation, the easement size increased to 25.25
acres. The revised acreage is within the total amount Proposed under Option 1 of RS technical
proposal, which proposed a 26.7-acre easement. The expanded footprint is aimed at generating
sufficient wetland mitigation credit to satisfy contract thresholds with DMS.
- DMS noted that due to the nature of impacts, 75% of the contracted wetland credit must be
derived from "R" credit type (Re-establishment, Rehabilitation, or Creation).
Page 1 of 4

Stream Notes:
- UT-1:
- UT-2:
- UT-3:
Swamp Grape Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site
IRT Site Visit: 10-29-2019
NC DMS Contract # 7869 RFP # 16-007705
The condition of the upper reach calls for more design and channel work than currently
proposed. An E1 approach or even R would be more favorable than E2.
The slope of the banks should be shallower, and the channel brought up to at least the
elevation of the culvert.
Todd wants to see the justification of the channel design at the lower end of the reach
just above the confluence, with defined success criteria in the mitigation plan (this goes
for all E1/E2 reaches).
The channel banks will be rebuilt following the low point in the valley.
Mac does not want to see parallel channels unless the topography would justify it.
IRT agreed that removing the dam at the property line would benefit the reach.
- Main Channel (below the confluence of tribs 1, 2, & 3)
Todd and Mac had concerns as to the level of work to be done, and whether thatjustified
E1 at a ratio of 1.5:1.
E2 at a ratio of 2.5:1 might be more appropriate in some areas.
The mitigation plan will match the proposed design to the needs of the stream rather
than the needs of the crediting.
Lots of trees, wood, cross -veins, etc. will be added in this reach to improve habitat.
The entire dam will be removed to achieve floodplain access. The clay will be used
throughout the site for ditch plugs, and for stream structures.
Justification will be needed as to the design below the dam. It was agreed below the dam
is within the broader floodplain of Wilkinson Creek, which may drive the appropriate
approach within this area. An ordinary high-water mark and channel exist currently.
Wetland Notes:
- The wetland mitigation potential and crediting strategy were discussed at length. Several areas
shown as enhancement may fall under the definition of Rehabilitation if functional improvements
are justified, but at a lower ratio (2:1). These should be explored in the Mitigation Plan as
applicable.
- Erin encouraged us to include removing deep areas of legacy sediment within pond bed and
downstream of breached dam for wetland Creation at a 3:1 ratio, especially in areas where non-
hydric sandy sediments have deposited in order to promote tree growth.
- Prior to the start of 2020 growing season it was agreed that wells should be placed in existing
wetland pockets proposed for Rehabilitation to determine a baseline condition.
Page 2 of 4

Swamp Grape Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site
IRT Site Visit: 10-29-2019
NC DMS Contract # 7869 RFP # 16-007705
Mac voiced concern about the source of hydrology in the drained hydric soils above the furthest
upstream ditch along UT-1.
A majority of the drained area along UT-1 was highly manipulated soils with hydrological inputs
from springs at the top of the slope directed into the existing ditch network.
- It was agreed that the mitigation plan should include verbiage about "Marsh like areas" that will
likely develop in the wetter areas throughout the site. The mitigation plan will include success
criteria for these areas based on the percentage of the wetland area; a threshold percentage will
be determined for these areas not to exceed.
Erin indicated that management of monoculture of Juncus could be tied to rehabilitation credit
success.
- Todd stated that sandy sediment removal could only provide Re-establishment credit if Johnston
or Bibb soils could be documented below, but overall he discouraged seeking Rehabilitation credit
in those areas but would consider creation at a 3:1 ratio.
- Re-establishment of wetlands in the dam footprint at a 1:1 ratio would need to be justified
- Removal of the dock, irrigation pipe, and other remnant infrastructure should be incorporated
areas as part of the project's wetland approach.
Proposed Swamp Grape Credit Ratios & Notes
Stream Ratios
Reach
Ratio
Notes
Based on IRT feedback, RS will provide as much functional uplift as is
E2 @ /
possible with the goal of raising the channel and re-establishing the
UT-1 (Upper Reach)*
.5: 1
E1 @ 1.5:
1
stream to his historic floodplain as quickly as possible. This reach will
begin as an E2 and transition to an E1 into a full new channel design
restoration reach below.
UT-1 (Middle Reach)
R @ 1:1
Stream restoration with a new channel design through the ditched
portion of UT-1 (Figure 1—Appendix B)
UT-1 (Lower Reach)
E1 @ 1.5:1
Stream Pattern and dimension restoration, restore habitat, the design
will be mindful of confluence location of UT-1, 2, & 3.
UT-2 (Upper Reach)
R @ 1:1
Stream restoration through impounded water, removal of the failed
crossing.
UT-2 (Lower Reach)
E1 @ 1.5:1
Stream Pattern and dimension restoration, restore habitat, the design
will be mindful of confluence location of UT-1, 2, & 3.
UT-3
R @ 1:1
Stream restoration to confluence of UT-1 & 2 (Figure 2 - Appendix B)
Main Channel (Upper
The overall functional uplift approach to the Main Channel will be a
Reach)**
E1 @ 1.5:1
mix of E1 and E2 determined by what is appropriate according to
existing stream conditions. During detailed planning there will be
Main Channel (Lower
E2 @ 2.5:1
small sections of E1 mapped in the Lower Reach, and small sections of
Reach)**
E2 mapped in the Upper Reach.
Page 3 of 4

Swamp Grape Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site
IRT Site Visit: 10-29-2019
NC DMS Contract # 7869 RFP # 16-007705
Wetland Ratios
Area
Ratio
Notes
Restoration of wetland hydrology by filling of
Re-establishment (along UT-1, UT-2, and
1
existing ditches and removal of fill sediment < 12-
underneath the dam footprint)
'1
inches in depth, and restoration of hydrophytic
vegetation
Restoration of hydrophytic vegetation and
Rehabilitation (in pockets along UT-1
enhancement of wetland hydrology through filling
determined by PJD)
1.5:1
of ditches and reconnecting the stream to the
floodplain. High functional improvement
Restoration of hydrophytic vegetation, including
treatment of Juncus effuses monoculture and
Rehabilitation and/or Enhancement
enhancement of wetland hydrology by reconnecting
(through the middle of the site in the old
2:1
the stream to the floodplain, installation of in -
pond bed)
stream structures, development of marsh and
shallow water habitat, and improved hyporheic
zone. Lower functional improvement.
Creation (in pockets in areas of sandy
Removal of legacy fill sediment that is >12-inches in
sediment determined by the PJD)
3:1
depth in order to restore wetland hydrology and
promote restoration of hydrophytic vegetation
Preservation (below the existing dam)*
N/A
Not applicable to RS' DMS Contract
Attachments;
A.) Correspondence with Mickey Sugg — US Army Corps
B.) October 2019 Pattern and Dimension Analysis
C.) Revised Mitigation Treatment Figure
Page 4 of 4

Swamp Grape Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site
IRT Site Visit: 10-29-2019
NC DMS Contract # 7869 RFP # 16-007705
Attachment;
A.) Correspondence with Mickey Sugg — US Army Corps

Ray Holz
From: Tugwell, Todd J CIV USARMY CESAW (US) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2019 10:12 AM
To: Crocker, Lindsay
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Louie Bodenhamer Property- Swamp Grape
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an
attachment to report. spa [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Lindsay, give me a call. I heard back from Mickey and had a chance to speak with Ray, but wanted to pass on the info to
you as well.
Todd - 919-949-9005
-----Original Message -----
From: Crocker, Lindsay [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2019 7:38 AM
To: Tugwell, Todd J CIV USARMY CESAW (US) <[e-mail]>
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [External] RE: Louie Bodenhamer Property- Swamp Grape
Thanks Todd.
Get Outlook for Android <Blockedhttps://aka.ms/ghei36>
From: Tugwell, Todd J CIV USARMY CESAW (US) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2019 7:24:51 AM
To: Mickey Sugg; Crocker, Lindsay; Kim Browning
Subject: [External] RE: Louie Bodenhamer Property- Swamp Grape
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an
attachment to report. spa [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Thanks Mickey. I'll reach out to the provider today.
Todd
-----Original Message -----
From: Sugg, Mickey T CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)
Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2019 4:43 PM
To: Tugwell, Todd J CIV USARMY CESAW (US) <[e-mail]>; Crocker, Lindsay
< Lindsay. [e-mail]>; Browning, Kimberly D CIV USARMY CESAW (US)
<[e-mail]>
Subject: Louie Bodenhamer Property- Swamp Grape
Good afternoon,
I spoke with Mr. Louie Bodenhamer today concerning his breached pond. Based on aerials and absence of any record of
Corps dealings on the property, I informed him that authorization from our office would be required to replace/repair
the breach and re -impound the site. In regards to the existing berm and pre -Florence work in the stream & wetlands, it
is outside our 5-year statute of limitation for unauthorized work so no enforcement action will be taken for that past

work. Informing me that there was an old breached berm (impounded in the 30s), he confirmed that the pond was
reconstructed —2000 at the advice of Robeson County Ag. Dept (think he may be referring to NRCS) when he purchased
the property.
With this said, we will likely send the Bodenhamer's a letter restating our permit requirements. Not sure what that does
to the mitigation proposal, but I'll leave that up to the IRT.
If you have any questions, call me. I'm out tomorrow & all next week.
-m ickey
Mickey Sugg, Chief
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403
[phone] (direct line)
[phone] (fax)
"The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at:
"Blockedhttp://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm_apex/f?p=136:4:0 "

Swamp Grape Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site
IRT Site Visit: 10-29-2019
NC DMS Contract # 7869 RFP # 16-007705
Attachment;
B.) October 2019 Pattern and Dimension Analysis

Table 1. Swamp Grape Morphological Stream Characteristics
Lumber 03040204
Variables
REFERENCE - UT TO
"REFERENCE - MILL
"REFERENCE - UT TO
"REFERENCE - UT TO HOG
ANGOLA CREEK
CREEK
WILD CAT
SWAMP
Stream Type
E 6
E 5
E 5
E 5
Drainage Area (miz)
2.09
1.92
0.44
0.08
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
11.5
19.8
7.8
1.6
Dimension Variables
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (Abkf)
12.2
21.0
8.5
1.8
Mean:
12.3
Mean:
11.3
Mean:
8.2
Mean:
3.8
Bankfull Width (Wbkf)
Range:
8.8 - 13.6
Range:
Range:
Range:
Mean:
1.3
Mean:
1.9
Mean:
1.0
Mean:
0.5
Bankfull Mean Depth (Dbkf)
Range:
1.0 - 1.4
Range:
Range:
Range:
Mean:
1.9
Mean:
2.6
Mean:
1.6
Mean:
0.7
Bankfull Maximum Depth (DmaX)
Range:
1.8 - 2.1
Range:
Range:
Range:
Mean:
11.2
Mean:
11.9
Mean:
8.8
Mean:
3.8
Pool Width (WPooi)
Range:
8.7 - 11.5
Range:
Range:
Range:
Mean:
2.9
Mean:
3.1
Mean:
1.8
Mean:
1.1
Maximum Pool Depth (DPooi)
Range:
2.8 - 3.0
Range:
Range:
Range:
Mean:
300.0
Mean:
300
Mean:
130.0
Mean:
100.0
Width of Floodprone Area (Wfpa)
Range:
300 - 300
Range:
Range:
Range:
Dimension Ratios
Mean:
24.4
Mean:
26.5
Mean:
15.9
Mean:
26.6
Entrenchment Ratio (WfpaANbkf)
Range:
22.1 - 34.1
Range:
Range:
Range:
Mean:
9.7
Mean:
6.1
Mean:
8.0
Mean:
7.9
Width / Depth Ratio (Wbkf/Dbkf)
Range:
6.8 - 12.3
Range:
Range:
Range:
Mean:
1.5
Mean:
1.4
Mean:
1.5
Mean:
1.4
Max. Dbkf / Dbkf Ratio
Range:
1.4-1.9
Range:
Range:
Range:
Mean:
1.0
Mean:
1.0
Mean:
1.0
Mean:
1.0
Low Bank Height / Max. Dbkf Ratio
Range:
1.0 - 1.0
Range:
Range:
Range:
Maximum Pool Depth / Bankfull
Mean:
2.2
Mean:
1.7
Mean:
1.7
Mean:
2.2
Mean Depth (Dpooi/Dbkf)
Range:
2.2-2.3
Range:
Range:
Range:
Pool Width / Bankfull
Mean:
0.9
Mean:
1.0
Mean:
1.1
Mean:
1.0
Width (Wpoo1/Wbkf)
Range:
0.7-0.9
Range:
Range:
Range:
Pool Area / Bankfull
Mean:
1.9
Mean:
Mean:
Mean:
Cross Sectional Area
Range:
1.4-2.0
Range:
Range:
Range:
Existing UT 1 Upstream
PROPOSED UT 1 Upstream
Existing UT 3
PROPOSED UT 3
F 5
E/C 5
Eg 5
E/C 5
0.30
0.30
0.73
0.73
3.3
3.3
6.4
6.4
Dimension Variables
Dimension Variables
3.6
3.6
6.9
6.9
Mean: 15.0
Mean:
7.1
Mean:
7.6
Mean:
9.8
Range: 14.6 to 17.6
Range:
6.6
to
7.6
Range:
6.9
to
8.3
Range:
9.1
to
10.5
Mean: 0.3
Mean:
0.5
Mean:
0.8
Mean:
0.7
Range: 0.3 to 0.3
Range:
0.5
to
0.5
Range:
0.7
to
0.8
Range:
0.7
to
0.8
Mean: 0.6
Mean:
0.7
Mean:
1.5
Mean:
1.0
Range: 0.6 to 0.6
Range:
0.6
to
0.9
Range:
1.5
to
1.5
Range:
0.8
to
1.2
Mean:
7.8
Mean:
6.4
Mean:
10.8
No distinct repetitive pattern of
Range:
7.1
to
9.9
Range:
6.3
to
6.5
Range:
9.8
to
13.8
riffles and pools due to
Mean:
1.0
Mean:
1.8
Mean:
1.3
staightening activities
Range:
0.7
to
1.1
ange:
1.7
to
1.8
Range:
0.9
to
1.5
Mean: 19.3
Mean:
70
ean:
FRan
150.0
Mean:
70
Range: 16.5 to 25.5
Range:
50.0
to
100.0
ge:
150.0
to
150.0
Range:
50.0
to
100.0
Dimension Ratios
Dimension Ratios
Mean: 1.3
Mean:
9.9
Mean:
19.9
Mean:
7.1
Range: 1.1 to 1.4
Range:
7.0
to
14.1
Range:
18.1
to
21.7
Range:
5.1
to
10.2
Mean: 50.0
Mean:
14.0
Mean:
10.2
Mean:
14.0
Range: 48.7 to 58.7
Range:
12.0
to
16.0
Range:
8.6
to
11.9
Range:
12.0
to
16.0
Mean: 2.0
Mean:
1.4
Mean:
2.0
Mean:
1.4
Range: 2.0 to 2.0
Range:
1.2
to
1.7
Range:
1.9
to
2.1
Range:
1.2
to
1.7
Mean: 3.3
Mean:
1.0
Mean:
1.3
Mean:
1.0
Range: 1.5 to 5.5
Range:
1.0
to
1.2
Range:
1.2
to
1.3
Range:
1.0
to
1.2
Mean:
1.9
Mean:
2.3
Mean:
1.9
Range:
1.3
to
2.2
Range:
2.3
to
2.4
Range:
1.3
to
2.2
No distinct repetitive pattern of
Mean:
1.1
Mean:
0.8
Mean:
1.1
riffles and pools due to
staightening activities
Range:
1.0
to
1.4
Range:
0.8
to
0.8
Range:
1.0
to
1.4
Mean:
1.6
Mean:
1.0
Mean:
1.6
Range:
1.3
to
1.9
Range:
1.0
to
1.0
Range:
1.3
to
1.9

Table 1 continued. Swamp Grape Morphological Stream Characteristics
Lumber 03040204
Variables
REFERENCE - UT TO
"REFERENCE - MILL
"REFERENCE - UT TO
"REFERENCE - UT TO HOG
ANGOLA CREEK
CREEK
WILD CAT
SWAMP
Pattern Variables
Med:
64.6
Med:
36.2
Med:
15.3
Med:
16.0
Pool to Pool Spacing (LP_P)
Range:
34.5 - 137.1
Range:
11.4 - 61.0
Range:
14.0 - 16.6
Range:
9.0-23.0
Med:
132.2
Med:
55.2
Med:
25.8
Med:
41.0
Meander Length (Lm)
Range:
71.9 - 191.4
Range:
37.7 - 72.6
Range:
22.5 - 29.0
Range:
12.0-70.0
Med:
48.2
Med:
21.1
Med:
16.6
Med:
10.8
Belt Width (Wbeit)
Range:
26.6 - 76.6
Range:
15.1 - 27.0
Range:
13.8 - 19.4
Range:
5.6-16.0
Med:
22.9
Med:
19.8
Med:
13.1
Med:
25.0
Radius of Curvature (R j
Range:
6.6 - 44.8
Range:
9.7 - 29.8
Range:
10.9 - 15.3
Range:
4.4-45.6
Sinuosity (Sin)
1.17
1
1.18
1.15
1.24
Pattern Ratios
Pool to Pool Spacing/
Med:
5.3
Med:
3.2
Med:
1.9
Med:
4.2
Bankfull Width (LP_P/Wbkf)
Range:
2.8 - 11.1
Range:
1.0 - 5.4
Range:
1.7 - 2.0
Range:
2.4-6.1
Meander Length/
Med:
10.7
Med:
4.9
Med:
3.1
Med:
10.9
Bankfull Width (Lm/Wbkf)
Range:
5.8 - 15.6
Range:
3.3 - 6.4
Range:
2.7 - 3.5
Range:
3.2-18.6
Meander Width Ratio
Med:
3.9
Med:
1.9
Med:
2.0
Med:
2.8
(Wbelt/Wbkf)
Range:
2.2 - 6.2
Range:
1.3 - 2.4
Range:
1.7 - 2.4
Range:
1.5-4.2
Radius of Curvature/
Med:
1.9
Med:
1.8
Med:
1.6
Med:
6.6
Bankfull Width (RcMlbkf)
Range:
0.5 - 3.6
Range:
0.9 - 2.6
Range:
1.3 -1.9
Range:
1.2-12.1
* References were measured for Brown Marsh Swamp (NCDMS Contract No. 16-D06038) that was successfully closed out in 2012.
Existing UT 1 Upstream
PROPOSED UT 1 Upstream
Existing UT 3
PROPOSED UT 3
Pattern
Variables
Pattern
Variables
Med:
28.4
Med:
38.6
Med:
39.3
Range:
21.3
to
56.8
Range:
25.2
to
46.7
Range:
29.5
to
78.6
Med:
60.3
Med:
70.5
Med:
83.5
No distinct repetitive pattern of
riffles and pools due to
Range:
42.6
to
99.4
Range:
59.0
to
77.7
Range:
59.0
to
137.E
Med:
21.3
Med:
29.2
Med:
29.5
staightening activities
Range:
10.6
to
35.5
Range:
29.0
to
29.3
Range:
14.7
to
49.1
Med:
21.3
Med:
12.1
Med:
29.5
Range:
14.2
to
71.0
Range:
7.8
to
16.5
Range:
1
19.7
to
98.3
1.00
1.17
1.14
1.09
Pattern Ratios
Pattern Ratios
Med:
4.0
Med:
5.1
Med:
4.0
Range:
3.0
to
8.0
Range:
3.3
to
6.1
Range:
3.0
to
8.0
Med:
8.5
Med:
9.3
Med:
8.5
No distinct repetitive pattern of
riffles and pools due to
staightening activities
Range:
6.0
to
14.0
Range:
7.8
to
10.2
Range:
6.0
to
14.0
Med: 3.0
Med: 3.8
Med: 3.0
Range:
1.5
to
5.0
Range:
3.8
to
3.9
Range:
1.5
to
5.0
Med:
3.0
Med:
1.6
Med:
3.0
Range:
2.0
to
10.0
Range:
1.0
to
2.2
Range:
2.0
to
10.0

■ . S ',I .■ y= Rj� _ �� r� ` :1ya� +4 _ Channely is
7 •- ! !! 1
Existing Channel
Sinuosity 1.09
Sinuosity 1.14
y� Width
Radius 20 to 30 ft
X Is
\ '� • '" -' e
DA=0.52sq mi
Abkf=5.4sq 3fft r '; - *�!• y
Dbkf-0-'14 f
Dmax=1-5ft _ _.
WbkflDbkf=12.5 .7 _ �t •;=
FPA=150ft _
Bdr - 18.2
LEH = 1.8 fl Y� -
ew =1-2 -
?0
DA-0.52sgmi
Abkf=5.4sgft
Wbkf=6.3 ft
Dbkf=0.9ft
Drnam=1.7ft s, -
LBH=2-6ft I -
BFR =1.53
1s la
t
10O.0 Cross Section 4 - Riffle
99.5
FPA
99.0 DA=0.52sgmi
98.5
Abkf=5.4sgft
Abkf Wbkf=6.9 ft
98 D Mkf = 0-8 ft
A= 0.52sq mi Omax=1,5 ft
,bkf=5.4 agft 97 S WbkflDbkf=8.8
Wbkf = 6.5 ft FPA =150 ft
Dbkf = 0A ft Ew = 21.7
Om ax = 1.8 ft g7.0 L BH = 2.0 ft
L BH = 2.5 ft BHR = 1.33
BHR =1,39 96's rg•1YPe
96.0
1
1s ❑
O 2 4 6 8 1O 12 l: _6 1s 2L r
• F
Rq;
RESTORATION
SYSTEMS I LLC

11
4
tr'
r
•
Width
1 .•fir !
A.
Xo
.fit r �# �'•+ g•' r. , '
' 1
o
,FPT
1 7116 t y y.
t• � � 1
• tr
xisting Channel - : _ , , Or40
Cross Section I
• ' •�- :� . • _;fir -
-
.. • _��• R
ENT 10-8
i
0 4 ♦ -�
= •'
�•��-'. a.r., -tea._ ,��..?L _ ��t ,i. �

Swamp Grape Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site
IRT Site Visit: 10-29-2019
NC DMS Contract # 7869 RFP # 16-007705
Attachment;
C.) Revised Mitigation Treatment Figure

4-
Removal of historic
dam across entire valley.
Stream Restoration within
the footprint, and wetland
Re-establishment
Stream Approach E1 vs E2
TBD. Beyond dam, system
dependent on Wilkinson Creek
Legend
Sandy sediment removal could provide
wetland credit if Johnston or Bibb soils
are documented below, Consider
Creation at a 3:1 ratio.
Other pockets of excess legacy sediment
will be documented within the historic
pond bed, and proposed for Creation, if
appropriate.
In general E-1 approach
In . In general E-2 approach w/ small segments of E-2.
w/ small segments of E-1
Wetland gauges will be installed
to monitor the current hydroperiod Final wetland mitigation credit
of jurisdictional wetlands & throughout will be dependent on an approved
the Site. Gauges will be installed prior PJD. Jurisdictional wetlands
UT-3 breached dam to the start ofthe 2020 growing season. affected by existing ditches will be
to -be removed with landowner credited at 1.5:1 under Rehabilitation
consent _
FAA
I
LIT-1 go
Pond Infrastructure removal,
s elimination of Juncus monoculture,
hardwood swamp vegetation,
installation of in -stream structures,
and expansion of hydrology will
provide functional argument for
Rehabilitation and/or Enhancement
��` ;� in pond bottom
Revised Proposed Easement: 25.25 Acres Wetland Mitigation Treatment
Existing Ditches (to -be filled) O Re -Establishment - 1:1 Ratio
Stream Mitigation Treatment O Rehabilitation - 1.5:1 Ratio
Full Restoration Rehabilitation or Enhancement - 2:1 Ratio w/ Justification
E1 Pattern + Dimension Work Creation - 3:1 Ratio
E1 /E2 - Defined & Justified in the Mitigation Plan Preservation - N/A for Crediting
1 Utilize topography at UT-1 & UT-2
confluence to determine the
appropriate channel confluence
M ti
The condition of the upper reach warrants
more than an E2 approach. Dependent upon
detailed topographic survey, RS will work to
provide as much functional lift in this area
as is feasible.
z.
RESTORATION SYSTEMS, LLC
SCALE: 1 in = 188 ft
Swamp Grape. 10-29-2019 Site Visit
1101 HAYNES ST, SUITE 211
DATE. 11-2019
RALEIGH, NC 27604
Proposed Mitigation Treatments
PHONE : [phone]
SITE: L-03-001
FAX . [phone]
This map aid au data sy,crosd wimi, ass s,ppusd ss is w¢n , wai. Rasmraayn systsms, LLC axpr.ssly
dis,laims r.sp,,smoiiy ror damag. or liability f— any daims mat may adss o�� or � ns ass o� mis— d this map. his
Aerial Imagery: (c ) ESRI
ms syis rssp—bility ytms �sa�t, d—mms itms dbta y, this map is —pamis th ms,ssrs.ssds. This map
Feet Coordinate System:
Y
daLnot created as s rv,y data, nor sh,hd itde used as s� it is me user's r,sp—ibiory t, - bit pr,p,r s rv,y
,prepareddyarieensed s,msy,r, M.rs rsgwrsd by iaw.
0 40 80
160 240 320 NAD_1983_SP_NC_FIPS_3200_Ft.

CI.
Proposed Mitieation Credits
Mitigation Type
Quantity
Mit. Ratio
Credits
SMU
I. ft.
-Restoration
1735.8
1.00
1996.2
- E 1
630.1
2.00
362.3
- E 1/ E2
1505.3
7.50
200.7
3,871
2,559.2
Riparian Wetland
Ac.
-Re-Establishment
5.438
1.0
5.44
-Rehabilitation
0.213
1.5
0.14
-Creation
0.555
3.0
0.19
-Enhancement
11.484
3.0
3.83
-Preservation
2.422
10.0
0.24
20.1
9.84
i.
s
---7
R _
Legend
Revised Proposed Easement: 25.25 Acres
Proposed Stream Mitigation Treatment
Full Restoration
E1 Pattern + Dimension Work
EVE2 - Defined & Justified in the Mitigation Plan
Proposed Wetland Mitigation Treatment
Re -Establishment - 1:1 Ratio
Rehabilitation - 1.5:1 Ratio
Enhancement - 3:1 Ratio
Creation - 3:1 Ratio
Preservation - 10:1 Ratio
RESTORATION SYSTEMS, LLC SCALE: 1 in = 250 ft
1101 HAYNES ST, SUITE 211 DATE: 11 -2019
Swamp Grape: Proposed Mitigation
RALEIGH, NC 27604
Post, Second IRT Site Visit
PHONE: [phone] SITE: L-03-001
FAX : [phone]
This ms, and au data a,ntamed mthin aye s,ppried as is w¢n nn war—tv. P,smrannn systems LLC e,,pi-sly
dissiaims r.sp,nsmmty rot damag.sof liability Prom any balms maffi may arise out or r ns vss,r misyss or this map. iris
• me sots t spvnsmoity arms,ssr t, dsrssmms lanthis data vn �s map is—paadie rim me vssrs needs. Tn�s mapsv
vat srea<ed as svmsv da<a, n t snowd it de vssd as s,,h it is me vssrs ons t.spmoity m bl: am pr'Pst sit
da<a,prsparsdevaLsnssd svmey,r M.rs rsgwrsd by law.
Aerial Imagery: (c ) ESRI
Feet Coordinate S stem:
Y
0 62.5 125 250 375 500 NAD_1983_SP_NC_FIPS_3200_Ft.

Appendix L - Construction Plans
Mitigation Plan (Project No. 100115) Appendices
Swamp Grape Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Robeson County, North Carolina September 2020

NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
RESTORATION RESTORATION
ENHANCEMENT -�
\ 1
ENHANCEMENT ENHANCEMENT-/
1 ENHANCEMENT
\1 1 2
WILKINSON CREEK
FEMA EFFECTIVE
100-YR FLOODPLAIN
SITE DATA TABLE
RIVER BASIN
LUMBER
8-DIGIT HUC
3040204
TOTAL DISTURBED AREA
31.41 AC
DMS PROJECT ID NO,
100115
FULL DELIVERY CONTRACT NO.
7869
USACE ACTION ID NO.
SAW-2019-01732
DWR PROJECT NO.
2019-0675
RFP NO,
16-007705
COORDINATE SYSTEM
NAD83 NORTH
CAROLINA STATE
PLANES, US FOOT
pea
P
FysM
'yo
/-SITE
jo
VICINITY MAP
1" = 2000'
CONSTRUCTION PLANS
SWAMP GRAPE SITE
ROBESON COUNTY
DATE: SEPTEMBER 14, 2020
ENHANCEMENT J
1
CONSERVATION �\
EASEMENT
ENHANCEMENT
1
-- \' -----------------
RESTORATION �.
� 1
�T RESTORATION ENHANCEMENT
,• � � J
_ PROPERTY LINE \_
MITIGATION SUMMARY
TRIBUTARY
PROPOSED LENGTH
UT1
2,981 LF
UT2
950 LF
UT3
201
SHEET INDEX
C1.00
EASEMENT AND CONTROL POINTS EXHIBIT
C1.01
INDEX OF SYMBOLS
C5.00
UT 1 PLAN AND PROFILE STATION 0+00TO5+50
C5.01
UT 1 PLAN AND PROFILE STATION 5+50TO 11+00
C5.02
UT 1 PLAN AND PROFILE STATION 11+00TO 16+50
C5.03
UT 1 PLAN AND PROFILE STATION 16+50TO22+00
C5.04
UT 1 PLAN AND PROFILE STATION 22+00TO27+50
C5.05
UT 1 PLAN AND PROFILE STATION 27+50TO33+00
C5.06
UT 1 PLAN AND PROFILE STATION 33+00 TO 34+65.62
C5.07
LIT PLAN AND PROFILE STATiON0+00T05+50
C5.08
UT 2 PLAN AND PROFILE STATION 5+50TO 10+78.12
C5.09
UT3 PLAN AND PROFILE STATION 0+00To2+00.63
C8.00
STREAM DETAILS
C8.01
STREAM DETAILS
C8.02
STREAM DETAILS
C8.03
STREAM DETAILS
C8.04
CULVERT DETAILS
C8.05
CONSTRUCTION NOTES
L5.00
PLANTING PLAN
RESTORATION LEVEL
STREAM (LF)
RIPARIAN WETLAND (AC)
NON -RIPARIAN WETLAND (AC)
RESTORATION
2,403
-
-
ENHANCEMENT 1
1,495
-
-
ENHANCEMENT 11
235
-
-
REESTABLISHMENT
-
5.322
-
REHABILITATION
-
2.730
-
ENHANCEMENT
-
12.336
-
TOTALS
4,133
20.388
-
MITIGATION UNITS
3228.8330
13.3100
-
iJ
McADAMs
The John R. McAdams Company, Inc.
2905 Meridian Parkway
Durham, NC 27713
phone [phone]
fax [phone]
license number: C-0293. C-187
www.mcadamsco.com
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
218 SNOW AVENUE
RALEIGH, NC 27603
CONTACT: GRANT LEWIS
PHONE: [phone]
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
CLIENT
RESTORATION SYSTEMS, LLC
1101 HAYNES ST, SUITE 211
RALEIGH, NC 27604
CONTACT: WORTH CREECH
PHONE: [phone]
TOTAL DISTURBED AREA = 30.23 AC.

CONTROL POINT LOCATIONS
CONTROL POINT
NORTHING
EASTING
ELEVATION
1000
296010.4546
1894884.0842
132.2800
1001
29 6403.6112
189 5135.9198
130.0700
1002
294981.9282
1895894.8641
141.7500
1003
294573.9208
1895563.9834
138.8400
1004
297039 8396
1894095 7179
129 7500
3J
1001
3D
�J
1005 296366.2659 1894627.8878 140.4300 �� \
1006 295704.8246 1895323.6709 134.6800
�J
CE
3C CE - c`Li
CE
CE
37 G
/ 1006
9�
1000
/ "1J
9�
1004
1005 �F
/
GE
CE
CE
/ GE
6- GENERAL NOTES:
GE
1. EXISTING CONDITIONS COMPLETED BY THE JOHN R. MCADAMS COMPANY.
2. COORDINATE SYSTEM: NAD83 NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANES, US FOOT
3. TOPOGRAPHY AND SPOT ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE FROM AN ACTUAL FIELD SURVEY COMPLETED BY K2 DESIGN GROUP.
4. PLANIMETRICS, UTILITIES, INVERTS AND BUILDING INFORMATION (SHOWN FOR REFERENCE) WAS COMPLIED FROM AUTOCAD FILES PROVIDED TO MCADAMS
FROM OTHERS. MCADAMS MAKES NO WARRANTY ABOUT THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION SHOWN PROVIDED BY OTHERS.
5. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, THE SITE CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY ALL SUBSURFACE INFORMATION IN THE PROJECT AREA TO ENSURE ITS ACCURACY AND
DETERMINE ITS ACTUAL FIELD LOCATION.
6. FLOOD NOTE: A PORTION OF THE EASEMENT IS LOCATED IN A SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD ZONE. IT IS LOCATED IN ZONE "AE" AS DEFINED BY F.E.M.A F.I.R.M
COMMUNITY PANEL 43710828800J DATED JANUARY 19, 2005.
T
MCADAMS
The John R. McAdams Company, Inc.
2905 Meridian Parkway
Durham, NC 27713
phone 919, 361, 5000
fax [phone]
license number: C-0293, C-187
www.mcadamsco.com
SWAMP GRAPE MITIGATION PLAN
CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS
ROBESON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
1002
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 100 200 400
1 inch = 200 ft.
PLAN INFORMATION
PROJECT NO. AXI-19010
FILENAME AX119010-ESMT
Ak
CHECKED BY RAS
DRAWN BY SCB
SCALE 1" = 60-
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
DATE 09.14.2020
1003
CONSERVATION EASEMENT
AND CONTROL POINTS EXHIBIT
C1800

LEGEND AND SYMBOLS
LD
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
x x x
x
PROPOSED FENCE
— — —
—
EXISTING FLOODPLAIN
EXISTING PROPERTY LINE
DEMOLITION LINE
cE cE
PROPOSED CONSERVATION EASEMENT
sD sD
EXISTING STORM DRAINAGE
EXISTING STREAM CENTERLINE
PROPOSED STREAM CENTERLINE
250
MAJOR CONTOUR
252
MINOR CONTOUR
250
EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR
252
EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR
i
PROPOSED LOG CROSS VANE
�s
PROPOSED LOG VANE
W W W
W
WETLAND REHABILITATION AREA
APPROVED JD WETLANDS
- �
HYDRIC SOILS
DEPOSITED SEDIMENT
OARD �C
\A
O�oFESS/0• ��
�•'
:•�
- '•� SEAL ��'• -
= 044073 =
•S-\\-) •
0K" ",CCA
T
"
MCADAMS
The John R. McAdams Company, Inc.
2905 Meridian Parkway
Durham, NC 27713
phone 919, 361, 5000
fax [phone]
license number: C-0293, C-187
www.mcadamsco.com
SWAMP GRAPE MITIGATION PLAN
CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS
ROBESON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Axiom Environmental. Inc.
PLAN INFORMATION
PROJECT NO.
AXI-19010
PLAN AND PROFILE
FILENAME
AX119010-PI
LEGEND AND SYMBOLS
CHECKED BY
RAS
DRAWN BY
SCB
SCALE
1"=60' / 1"=50'
C 1 1
DATE
09.14.2020

LU
_
LU r 51
w
LU 4
n
l Z ! PROPOS D /
STREAIv��/L�`
(IYP. )
> L D
DRAINAGE DITCH
\
�i
F -
`�{
/Z EXISTING CULVERT
i ` \
EXISTING STREAM C/L i \ \
\ LD — LD \
LD
B If-E r— �~-PQOPOSED-�EFNCE (?4P
DRAINAGE DITCH = ,4 4.05 J \ ^ \ o
127.59,-
4 J
EXISTING 108" X 84" ELLIPTICAL CMP
TO BE REMOVED AND REPLACED
— — / / s ( __s
— LD — LD / /
PR()P()CFf) ')A" RCP
LENGTH = 38 LF
INV IN1
�Ul—� 12 28.40
RfSE\
-hEkGTIi = 38
'���� r � TTNV—OUT——126.
\ OF BAQl K gY\)
LENGT1'- —38 LF J
\ \ — —IW rN, = 128'50— — _ —
\ \ \ INV OUT=--i28;40
cri
\� DRAINAGE DITCH \ \ 07 SLOG CROSS VANE #107 \
LOG CROSS VANE #2
P SED CONSERVPTI N
\LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE (TYP. \ \ EA M s )
UT1 STRUCTURE LOCATIONS
STRUCTURE TYPE
STATION
ELEVATION
LOG CROSS VANE #1
517.57
127.52
LOG CROSS VANE #2
536.69
127.49
HYDRIC SOILS (TYP.)
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 30 60 120
1 inch = 60 ft.
TOTAL DISTURBED AREA = 30.23 AC.
0+00 1 +00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5+00 5+50
UT 1
STATION 0+00 to 5+50
J
MCADAMS
The John R. McAdams Company, Inc.
2905 Meridian Parkway
Durham, NC 27713
phone 919, 361, 5000
fax [phone]
license number: C-0293, C-187
www.mcadamsco.com
SWAMP GRAPE MITIGATION PLAN
CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS
ROBESON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Axiom Environmental. Inc.
VICINITY MAP
V = 1000'
PLAN INFORMATION
PLAN AND PROFILE
PROJECT NO.
AXI-19010
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY 1
FILENAME
AXI19010-PI
CHECKED BY
RAS
STA.00+00 THRU STA.5+50
DRAWN BY
SCB
SCALE
1"=60' / 1"=50'
C5e00
DATE
09.14.2020 1

CJ�<0 1 ,;� — — �� — — ` — L PROPERTY LINE (TYP.)
\ \ 4D All~ �^ PR"CP9ssEfTC6NSER�ION
�M€�J TYP. \
v ASL
9—j J�1 \mow \G9 1� R�bP�E-0,FENg�IYP_)^
\v 4F�ISTURBSN�E—('fYPL
�— '■
POSED TOP ���AI�?PS�` YP� \ J \ — / /r^ /
—
/ LD _� — _HYDRIC SOILS (TYP-) �� m /
/ . • LOG CROSS VANE #7 _ \\ `
LOG CROSS VANE #3 / LOG CROSS VANE #4 / \ — — _ — n 4
/ _ LOG CROSS VANE #8
/ \ - LOG CROSS VANE #6 , _
LOG'
O CROSS VANE C " —�
L
-7�-
pl /9� r�1.7,�r�1� �/ ��l / .Lq l l r /l�'�l
L / / I / r// r / J / / . EXISTING STREAM C/L
ZEf \FLOG CROSS VANE #9 /
rd �
/ / �iAN MEN1 f f /
F EN ENT f r EGI REST RATI N / / IF^ E f
\ E f f / ETA.=7+81/51 f E f IFj
/ DRAINAGE DITCH TO
BE BAFCKFII LED f #
f
DRAINAGE DITCH TO
BE BACKFILLED
U
U)
EXISTING GRADE IF—Z � o LOG CROSS VANE #5
ALONG PROPOSED w + N
CENTERLINE (TYP.) ^ II o
Z II N LOG CROSS VANE #6
LOG CROSS VANE #3 LOG CROSS VANE #4 = Q w
w LO w LOG CROSS VANE #7
198 Z ., �� SLOG CROSS VANE 48 SLOG CROSS VANE
WETLAND
ND REHABILITATION AREA
%%--IF —E f
/ E�-c
/ � E
f`
f DRAINAGE TILE TO BE
f —�' REMOVED (TYP.)
\� I
ME
NEENEEMENE
®Y■■■■�ll�l■■LJ■■■1■■■■■/�I■■■■■■//,i�■■■■111■1`�■■■
�■■r■■
Illii`��a�i:
�==��
M■■■■■M■■■■■■M■■■■■'ly■■II'..E
'Mil■■■■■■■■
fl■■L■■■■!J■■■■\1■■■
■■■■■
®MEN
■■■■■■■■■MEMMO■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
li■■■
5+50 6+00 7+00 8+00 UT 1 9+00
STATION 5+50 to 11+00
!!j"
J
MCADAMS
The John R. McAdams Company, Inc.
2905 Meridian Parkway
Durham, NC 27713
phone 919, 361, 5000
fax [phone]
license number: C-0293, C-187
www.mcadamsco.mm
SWAMP GRAPE MITIGATION PLAN
CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS
ROBESON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
10+00
121
1 1 +00
Axiom Environmental. Inc.
UT1 STRUCTURE LOCATIONS
STRUCTURE TYPE
STATION
ELEVATION
LOG CROSS VANE 43
555.38
127.46
LOG CROSS VANE #4
646.29
127.31
LOG CROSS VANE #5
864.76
126.93
LOG CROSS VANE #6
885.93
126.67
LOG CROSS VANE #7
919.44
126.41
LOG CROSS VANE #8
968.04
126.08
LOG CROSS VANE #9
1050.77
125.65
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 30 60 120
1 inch = 60 ft.
TOTAL DISTURBED AREA = 30.23 AC.
VICINITY MAP
V = 1000'
N CAR C
OM, 3
q-
NEFX �6D
41
CCA
PLAN INFORMATION
PLAN AND PROFILE
PROJECT NO.
AXI-19010
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY 1
FILENAME
AXI19010-PI
CHECKED BY
RAS
STA. 5+50 THRU STA. 11+00
DRAWN BY
SCB
SCALE
1"=60' / 1"=50'
C 5 0 1
DATE
09.14.2020

UT1 STRUCTURE LOCATIONS
STRUCTURE TYPE STATION ELEVATION
—U PROPOS DFEr1C-E-(;D(P
LD �T �� LOG CROSS VANE #10 1141.33 125.24
i
Pf?OP9SfB -C';A1��ION �w 4�_ �, ,� ,� �^ r f v _ V � �j� � � � � LOG CROSS VANE #11 1162.66 124.97
EASEMF-NT4Ti`-��
\ �/� \ i< �/ — _ — — :19fTS OF DaS SANfE— JJZP.) ^ s / - - -
�\ / \ � / / - � �- LOG CROSS VANE #13 1221.52 124.44
A LD ��� �A — LOG CROSS VANE #14 1245.46 124.17
LD J /0 LOG CROSS VANE #15 1270.22 123.89
_ — �� "� LOG CROSS VANE 416 1293.33 123.63
7� _f �� \ APPROVED JD � � � � +�
r/ r.� .� _ E =zL = _WETLANDS (TYP')' i LOG CROSS VANE #17 1333.11 123.33
C %^�����t _ a� = -/ ' / P /i fantiz nonce inw r u c / `t LOG CROSS VANE #18 1476.93 122 86
F V, / /
r \
CROSS VANE #10
126
BE BACKFILLED
LOG CROSS VANE #11
LOG CROSS VANE #12 LOG CROSS VANE #16 RIFFLE SECTION (TYP.)
— i nn nonce vnnir Ili z
®■■■■■■■aim■■m■■i��■r�■■i�,■e■■■■■■■■■■■■�
iio■r�■■■■■■■■■■■■
■\\■■■■■■■�L��L'�®ECG■■■■■■■■■■■■`��®�■■■rW■■■■■■■■■■■■
11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00
T
"
MCADAMS
The John R. McAdams Company, Inc.
2905 Meridian Parkway
Durham, NC 27713
phone 919, 361, 5000
fax [phone]
license number: C-0293, C-187
www.mcadamsco.com
UT 1
STATION 11+00 to 16+50
SWAMP GRAPE MITIGATION PLAN
CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS
ROBESON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
15+00
120
16+00 16+50
Ak
Axiom Environmental. Inc.
D
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 30 60 120
1 inch = 60 ft.
TOTAL DISTURBED AREA = 30.23 AC.
VICINITY MAP
V = 1000'
PLAN INFORMATION
PLAN AND PROFILE
PROJECT NO.
AXI-19010
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY 1
FILENAME
AX119010-PI
CHECKED BY
RAS
STA. 11+00 THRU STA. 16+50
DRAWN BY
SCB
SCALE
1"=60' / 1"=50'
C5.02
DATE
09.14.2020

L /Q / I L
J
EXISTING BUILDING)
A (TYP.)—/� �-
- / A At
PROPOSED FENS TYP. j / _ — — — — ZIND RESTORATION
EXISTING / / BEGIN ENHANCEMENT 1
STA. 19+96 �3
—1.5" PVC PIPE ELEV. = 120.39
TO BE REMOVED_ —
PROPOSED /
ASTREAM AC/L /
LO�G-C S VAI$E #19 (TYP.)
LOG CROS5�,VANE �2
A pLOG/ V
It
F
HYDRIC SOILS (TYP.) /
PROPOSED GRADE EXISTING GRADE
ALONG PROPOSED ALONG PROPOSED
CENTERLINE (TYP.) CENTERLINE (TYP.)
LOG CROSS VANE #19 LOG CROSS VANE #20
Ln
o�
�t
0
K�
DG RGISS VANE` #26 J
� w
CVvr_U JU — / Z�-
ANDS (TYP.) J / EXISTING PLASTIC PIPE - — \
TO BE REMOVED _
EXISTING BUILDING
(n P) _ \ \ M
�<LIMITS OF DISTUgBANCX\(TYP�) '
P-OPOSED FENCE
r*� rn
to M Z
rn o w
Z + N
LLJ
— 0 RIFFLE SECTION (TYP.)
II II Q
�■■■■■■■■■■■■■��.��.���■�a■■■■■�■�
■■�
►i►■�■����■��■■tea■�■�`���
16+50 17+00
T
"
MCADAMS
The John R. McAdams Company, Inc.
2905 Meridian Parkway
Durham, NC 27713
phone 919, 361, 5000
fax [phone]
license number: C-0293, C-187
www.mcadamsco.com
18+00 19+00 20+00 21 +00
UT 1
STATION 16+50 to 22+00
SWAMP GRAPE MITIGATION PLAN
CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS
ROBESON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
22+00
Ak
Axiom Environmental. Inc.
UT1 STRUCTURE LOCATIONS
STRUCTURE TYPE
STATION
ELEVATION
LOG CROSS VANE #19
1707.55
122.21
LOG CROSS VANE #20
1782.48
121.87
LOG CROSS VANE 421
1863.09
121.45
LOG CROSS VANE #22
1927.01
121.10
LOG CROSS VANE #23
1949.55
120.85
LOG CROSS VANE #24
j 1977.40
j 120.59
LOG VANE #25
2091.69
120.09
LOG CROSS VANE #26
2196.63
119.82
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 30 60 120
1 inch = 60 ft.
TOTAL DISTURBED AREA = 30.23 AC.
VICINITY MAP
V = 1000'
C
N =
�3
NEF:• •�D
41
O'C " CCA
PLAN INFORMATION
PLAN AND PROFILE
PROJECT NO.
AXI-19010
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY 1
FILENAME
AXI19010-PI
CHECKED BY
RAS
STA. 16+50 THRU STA. 22+00
DRAWN BY
SCB
SCALE
1 "=60' / 1"=50'
C5.03
DATE
09.14.2020

't�
EXISTING STREAM C/L
\e1A
w \ w \ \ \ \ \
LOG CROSS'fV9NE—# 9
�\ \ \ \ �ROPOSE 4
'f +f \ \ z, S�f2E 9M C/L \
aZ' `� \ LOOSSVANE #30 \ 'f (TYP.) 'F \ \1O 'f /
1 \ `
44
�LOG\VANE`#3z
ROBS VA 7 END ENHANCEM T 1 w
BEGIN ENHANCEMENT 2
PROPOSED- CONSERG,11110N \ .f — —
'EASEMENTVi
TYP. \
_ =�
/
LIMITS OF DISTUREANCE (TYP.) L� /
w
APPROVED JD \ \ \ \ \
WETLANDS (TYP.)
O N
tD N
N O Z
LOG CROSS VANE #28 z +
w ro EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE N L ALONG PROPOSED
LOG CROSS VANE #27 ` ALONG PROPOSED LOG CROSS VANE #29 C) II Z CENTERLINE (TYP.)
/ CENTERLINE (TYP.) ` Q II _ LOG VANE #31
I�MMM"
0-0-1���:..■.■■.■■■■■■■r,r■■■■■■■■■■■■■inn■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■111■■■■�
r■QI■hlln:iii
►�i�!����\���10���1
■II
■_■_■■■_■_■_'I
■■■■_■■■■_■
22+00 23+00 24+00 25+00
T
"
MCADAMS
The John R. McAdams Company, Inc.
2905 Meridian Parkway
Durham, NC 27713
phone 919, 361, 5000
fax [phone]
license number: C-0293, C-187
www.mcadamsco.mm
UT 1
STATION 22+00 to 27+50
SWAMP GRAPE MITIGATION PLAN
CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS
ROBESON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
26+00
27+00 27+50
Ak
Axiom Environmental. Inc.
UT1 STRUCTURE LOCATIONS
STRUCTURE TYPE
STATION
ELEVATION
LOG CROSS VANE #27
2256.47
119.44
LOG CROSS VANE #28
2355.79
118.99
LOG CROSS VANE #29
2401.50
118.69
LOG CROSS VANE #30
2466.42
118.39
LOG VANE #31
2656.04
117.67
(n
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 30 60 120
1 inch = 60 ft.
TOTAL DISTURBED AREA = 30.23 AC.
VICINITY MAP
V = 1000'
CAR C
e;3
�69
o'r •,, FCCA •S� ��.
PLAN INFORMATION
PLAN AND PROFILE
PROJECT NO.
AXI-19010
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY 1
FILENAME
AXI19010-PI
CHECKED BY
RAS
STA. 22+00 THRU STA. 27+50
DRAWN BY
SCB
SCALE
1"=60' / 1"=50'
C5e04
DATE
09.14.2020

UT1 STRUCTURE LOCATIONS
i'— STRUCTURE TYPE STATION ELEVATION
LOG CROSS VANE #32 3093.77 116.74
IM
/ 1 I
9 ITS gF-'61S BANC,E (TYP) / / � —BN61 RE TORATIO ENT 1 — / \ — II III /Ili\U\\,
\
— J ELEV. = 1 lt6.95 / I A/ III I /IIIII
l/ kOG*CROS ANE #32
\ �� v'-�— BIN NOH NS€M NT 1
2/ / EXISTING STREAM 7C/L II 1 141 II�I
STA = 27+77.2/1 I II II II /ILIIII
ELEV. = 117.43 / / ' / ,t I II
/ I(j II ,111 I
/END ENHANCEMENT 1 V
F
iy
D I /
.5 /
S = �ii4'I 31 +72
ELEV,r 1
�
/
_�
r ,t
PROPOSED
STEAM C/j
it
41
.E
I
APPROVED JD
WETLANDS (TYP.)
CA (V
n I
w +
� pZ o
� w EXISTING GRADE Lq
z +
g ALONG PROPOSED N
_
'q: z
N
oM
� CENTERLINE (TYP.) z+
o
�
z II
II o
F- Q
II z g
Q
_ .
w O II
= w r7
II O
1 19
w rn
w
AL
NG
PR
P
SE
w F
N
w
118
z
o
wZ
117
w
J--
116
115
P
OL
(
)
L G
CR
SS
VA
E
32
114
RIF
FL
S
TI
N
TYP
27+50 28+00
T
"
MCADAMS
The John R. McAdams Company, Inc.
2905 Meridian Parkway
Durham, NC 27713
phone 919, 361, 5000
fax [phone]
license number: C-0293, C-187
www.mcadamsco.com
29+00
30+00
31 +00
UT 1
STATION 27+50 to 33+00
SWAMP GRAPE MITIGATION PLAN
CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS
ROBESON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
32+00
33+00
Ak
Axiom Environmental. Inc.
C)
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 30 60 120
1 inch = 60 ft.
TOTAL DISTURBED AREA = 30.23 AC.
VICINITY MAP
V = 1000'
,`%,%IIII IIIII/
-<N CAR C
QCLso
r .
�3
Le
'% G I NEF:• •� ��
O'C ."CCA S\%,.
PLAN INFORMATION
PLAN AND PROFILE
PROJECT NO.
AXI-19010
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY 1
FILENAME
AXI19010-PI
CHECKED BY
RAS
STA. 27+50 THRU STA. 33+00
DRAWN BY
SCB
SCALE
1"=60' / 1"=50'
C5e05
DATE
09.14.2020

!!j"
J
MCADAMS
The John R. McAdams Company, Inc.
2905 Meridian Parkway
Durham, NC 27713
phone 919, 361, 5000
fax [phone]
license number: C-0293, C-187
www.mcadamsco.com
APPROVED JD
WETLANDS (TYP.)i%C2\!
DNA
n FEMA 1 % ANN (� `IAN
\ FLOODPLAIN I KIN
\ t s A CREEK (TYP. �� y
\
ter;; // r
7 � \
EXISTING RISER PIPE
AND 36" CMP
TO BE REMOVED
s \ LD/G Cf SS N
'E
f
DEPOSITED SEDIMENT FROM DAM
FAILURE TO BE REMOVED FROM
AREA
#3y
__ % —
U _— J �� STA. _ +•65.62
EXISTING STREAM C/L rt ' ��� tiF�LEV �15.67
_ jj /
— in RE
/ / EN kL->
L LLJI�E�N E DEMT
G //ANEX#33 STA. _ 3M,83�' ELE13.fl3J 15
PRPEMEES( 'CONSERVATION
�,
A F
i J LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE (TYP.)
EXISTING GRADE
ALONG PROPOSED---j1—ft1q
CENTERLINE (TYP.)
LOG CROSS VANE #33 ----
POOL (l
I�
E-ME-ENE-Ems.
33+00 34+00
UT 1
STATION 33+00 to 34+65.62
SWAMP GRAPE MITIGATION PLAN
CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS
ROBESON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
35+00
UT1 STRUCTURE LOCATIONS
STRUCTURE TYPE
STATION
ELEVATION
LOG CROSS VANE 433
3307.63
116.15
LOG CROSS VANE #34
3414.91
115.83
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 30 60 120
1 inch = 60 ft.
TOTAL DISTURBED AREA = 30.23 AC.
VICINITY MAP
1" = 1000'
zt-
\A CAR O
.�o
•
;OPOSED GRADE - •Q C � : -
ONG PROPOSED i ` � „ 3 _
NE
NTERLINE (TYP.) vU�r17
c I NEB• .� ,, .
O� '"CCA •S�
Axiom Environmental. Inc.
PLAN INFORMATION
PLAN AND PROFILE
PROJECT NO.
AXI-19010
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY 1
FILENAME
AXI19010-PI
CHECKED BY
RAS
STA. 33+00 THRU STA. 34+65.62
DRAWN BY
SCB
SCALE
1"=60' / 1"=50'
C 5 0 6
DATE
09.14.2020
.

Z \ PR OSED—00`NSERqTi6�
EASWENff
—L4m TS_OF 'B+Sj R�ISEE
APPROVED JD
\ ,WETLANDS (TYP.)
//� EXISTING 2-24" CPP
BEGIN ESTORATI /� 3� // / i -- — CULVERTS
ST . = 1 +18.80 /30� / / / a it _ ��— / / / TO BE REMOVED
IO VAN #1 / G / e \ �.
b \
EXISTING STREAM C/L
" / 1 / HYDRIC SOILS (TYP.) c `
INV IN = 124.0® / r/ UT2
INV OUT =11r23..5/ L� / / / STA. _ 2.37
+CE
NiT IN EXISTING BUILDING
LF ELLIPTICAL RCS S INV SIU�3. (TYP.)
SPAN = 9.42'
RISE = 6'
INV IN = 123.00
INV OUT = 122,50
J
McADAMS
0+00 1 +00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5+00 5+50
UT 2
STATION 00+00 to 5+50
The John R. McAdams Company, Inc.
2905 Meridian Parkway
Durham, NC 27713
phone 919, 361, 5000
fax [phone]
license number: C-0293, C-187
www.mcadamsco.com
SWAMP GRAPE MITIGATION PLAN
CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS
ROBESON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Axiom Environmental. Inc.
UT2 STRUCTURE LOCATIONS
STRUCTURE TYPE
STATION
ELEVATION
LOG VANE #1
102.95
122.15
D
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 30 60 120
1 inch = 60 ft.
TOTAL DISTURBED AREA = 30.23 AC.
VICINITY MAP
V = 1000'
.%�N CAC
R
�3
'% G I NEF:• •� ��
O� ''' CCA •S\
PLAN INFORMATION
PLAN AND PROFILE
PROJECT NO.
AXI-19010
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY 2
FILENAME
AX119010-PI
CHECKED BY
RAS
STA.00+00 THRU STA.5+50
DRAWN BY
SCB
SCALE
1"=60' / 1"=60'
C5e07
DATE
09.14.2020

,�1D
\ \ 1 U L+ ITSl of jS; U BANCE(LYP/ %/ / / / / E`�C�✓ P
\ POPO RS1fD_ZONSERVATIO17EXISTING PLASTIC PIPE /moo/
EAS€ME4"TYP — — _ TO BE REMOVED
—— — — — — — APPROVED JD
Sao -WETLANDS (TYP.)/P/ /Ink
/ EXISTING BUILDING AND
WALKWAY TO BE REMOVrp
ED
-'OG CROSS VANE #6 � \
/LOC,.0 S\ AN 5 6
LOG tiROSS VANE #3
L CROSS VAN j#4
\ \ ✓ L �� / s J / / / \I 'END ENHANCEMEN
P
A- -
P EXISTING STREAM C/L
P
\ \ P EXISTING
1 \ P 1.5" PVC PIPE
1 ' TO BE REMOVED
9 � � III � P
/ P LOG CROSS�VAIF #2
PPROPOSED p
J / / STREAM C/L /
(TYP.)
P
LOG CROSS VANE #2
PROPOSED GRADE
ALONG PROPOSED
122 CENTERLINE (TYP.)
121
120
119
118
5+50 6+00
!!j"
J
MCADAMS
The John R. McAdams Company, Inc.
2905 Meridian Parkway
Durham, NC 27713
phone 919, 361, 5000
fax [phone]
license number: C-0293, C-187
www.mcadamsco.mm
O
p
N
LOG CROSS VANE #3 0
w
z+
��
O C0
w
II
OfII
O ;
z
S
I P �
J �
END -RESTORATION 1
E�Gl`N ENHANCEMENT 1
STA. = 8+03.1 ¢ —
ELEV.
/ STA. = 10+78.12
ELEV. = 119.17
P
/ P
l
P1 1 I 1
P u+
LOG CROSS VANE #5
EXISTING GRADE r- a;
ALONG PROPOSED z o+
CENTERLINE (TYP.)
Q II II
UT2 STRUCTURE LOCATIONS
STRUCTURE TYPE
STATION
ELEVATION
LOG CROSS VAN E #2
651.31
121.12
LOG CROSS VANE #3
686.22
120.83
LOG CROSS VANE #4
742.61
120.53
LOG CROSS VANE #5
1 1006.57
119.68
LOG CROSS VANE #6
1 1043.45
1 119.37
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 30 60 120
1 inch = 60 ft.
TOTAL DISTURBED AREA = 30.23 AC.
u
_ Z w VICINITY MAP
0 z 120 V = 1000'
Paa
`�,.�N CAR �.,, C
VA 4 117 �
O� E
L G CROSS VANE #6
7+00 8+00 9+00 10+00 1 1 +00
G1NE
0
STATION 5+50 to 10+78.12 �O
SWAMP GRAPE MITIGATION PLAN
CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS
ROBESON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Axiom Environmental. Inc.
PLAN INFORMATION
PLAN AND PROFILE
PROJECT NO.
AXI-19010
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY 2
FILENAME
AX119010-PI
CHECKED BY
RAS
STA. 5+50 THRU STA. 10+78.12
DRAWN BY
SCB
SCALE
1"=60' / 1"=50'
C5e08
DATE
09.14.2020

EXISTING STREAM C/L
g
I
I
/*
ANE #2
9 N \
BEGIN ENHANCEMEN 1 r
STA. = 0+00.00 — L CR
ELEV. = 119.89 �9
I � �
I I �
C> \
I \ 1
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE (TYP) 1 I
APPROVED JD -----
WETLANDS (TYP.)
T
McADAMs
The John R. McAdams Company, Inc.
2905 Meridian Parkway
Durham, NC 27713
phone 919, 361, 5000
fax [phone]
license number: C-0293, C-187
www.mcadamsco.com
POOL (TYP
LOG CROSS VAN[
\ \ A
'ALI \
EGIN RESTgrRATION
TA. = 1 +32.6 \
11
X
I&I I qM NN 1
N, \ LOG CROSS VANE #3 \
PROPOSED STREAM C,/L (TYP,)
CONSERVATION I III
T TYP.) I
I
\ I END RfkSTORATIO
\ STA.=12+00.63
I I ELEV. 119.16
1
I
�o
MATCH LINE -SEES \
- � SHEET
0
0
M — 0
LUG UNUSS
VANL �fJ
z
CN
cD
0
+
M z
w EXISTING GRADE +
O) O
0
z 0
ai
II z ALONG PROPOSED w
0 +
II
= CENTERLINE z II
II o N
II
cn Qf
121-
w
LOC
VA
E#
w
Q
w
120
1
z
120
117
1
RI
FLE
SEC
ION (TYP)
PRO
OSED GRA
E
#1
ALONG
PROPOSED
CEN
ERLINE (TYP.)
0+00 1 +00
UT 3
STATION 00+00 to 2+00.63
SWAMP GRAPE MITIGATION PLAN
CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS
ROBESON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
2+00 2+00.63
Ak
Axiom Environmental. Inc.
UT3 STRUCTURE LOCATIONS
STRUCTURE TYPE
STATION
ELEVATION
LOG CROSS VANE #1
28.37
119.83
LOG VANE #2
104.13
119.51
LOG CROSS VANE #3
155.99
119.42
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 15 30 60
1 inch = 30 ft.
TOTAL DISTURBED AREA = 30.23 AC.
VICINITY MAP
V = 1000'
PLAN INFORMATION
PLAN AND PROFILE
PROJECT NO.
AXI-19010
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY 3
FILENAME
AXI19010-PI
CHECKED BY
RAS
STA. 00+00THRU STA. 2+00.63
DRAWN BY
SCB
SCALE
1"=30' / 1"=40'
C5e09
DATE
09.14.2020 1

*TYPICAL POOL CROSS-SECTION ORIENTATION IS FOR A MEANDER BEND
*TYPICAL POOL CROSS-SECTION ORIENTATION IS FOR A MEANDER BEND
TOWARD STREAM RIGHT AND
SHALL BE MIRRORED
FOR MEANDER BENDS
TOWARD STREAM RIGHT AND
SHALL BE MIRRORED
FOR MEANDER BENDS
TOWARDS STREAM LEFT*
WFPA
TOWARDS STREAM LEFT*
WFPA
C/L
C/L
VARIES
WPOOL
VARIES
VARIES
WPOOL
VARIES
/
R/ES
S
�R�ES
�R�ES
1 % MIN.
-
1 % MIN.
1 % MIN.
-
1 % MIN.
dMAX �,
dMAX
WPOOL
= 8.9 ET
2 2'
WPOOL
= 9.9 ET
2.0'
dMAX
= 0.9 FT
dMAX
= 1.0 FT
WFPA
= 100 FT
WFPA
= 150 FT
TYPICAL POOL
TYPICAL POOL
WFPA
WFPA
VARIES
WBKF
VARIES
VARIES
WBKF
VARIES
\ES
APR
q77
ROES
R
1 % MIN.
1 % MIN.
% MIN.
1 % MIN.
3.
WSkf
- 7.4 FT
4.4i dMAX
�
WSkf
- 8.3 FT
3.9 dMAX
dMAX
- 0.7 FT
_
dMAX
- 0.8 FT
Abkf -
3.9 SF
Abkf
- 4.9 SF
dMEAN
WFPA
= 0.5 FT
- 100 FT
TYPICAL RIFFLE
dMEAN
WFPA
= 0.6 FT
- 150 FT
TYPICAL RIFFLE
UT
1- UPSTREAM
UT 2
N.T.S.
N.T.S.
*TYPICAL POOL CROSS-SECTION ORIENTATION IS FOR A MEANDER BEND
*TYPICAL POOL CROSS-SECTION ORIENTATION IS FOR A MEANDER BEND
TOWARD STREAM RIGHT AND SHALL BE MIRRORED
FOR MEANDER BENDS
TOWARD STREAM RIGHT AND SHALL BE MIRRORED
FOR MEANDER BENDS
TOWARDS STREAM LEFT*
WFPA
TOWARDS STREAM LEFT*
WFPA
L
VARIES
WPOOL
VARIES
VARIES
WPOCL
VARIES
�gR/ S
T
/ S
I
PFz�ES
1 % MIN.
-
1 % MIN.
1 % MIN.
-
1 % MIN.
dMA� X
dMAX ,3
WPOOL
= 1E.1 FT
3 7
WPOOL
= 11.5 FT
2.7'
dMAX
= 1.6 FT
dMAX
= 0.9 FT
WFPA
= 150 FT
TYPICAL POOL
WFPA
= 150 FT
TYPICAL POOL
C/L
C/
VARIES
WFPA I
WBKF
VARIES
VARIES
W
W
VARIES
�`��������
S
vgRIES
♦♦��,•�N CAR �p
�Ayl
PR\E
PR\ES ��• •, s.. ••��
1 % MIN.
_
-
1 % MIN.
1
% MIN.
4z'F
dpM�AX
= 1.24FTIFT
7.4' dMAX
Whkf =
9.6 FT
5.4'
dMAx%3
v
A,,, =
12.9 SF
1.0 FT
dMAX =
Abkt
0.9 FT
6.6 SF
G
dMEAN
WFPA
=
= 150 FT
TYPICAL RIFFLE
=
dMEAN
= 0.7 FT
TYPICAL RIFFLE
i N��,'e•
.,�'••....••♦♦.♦
UT 1-DOWNSTREAM
WFPA =
15o FT
UT 3
p %,; CA S�, 0'�
N.T.S.
N.T.S.
J
McADAMS
The John R. McAdams Company, Inc.
2905 Meridian Parkway
Durham, NC 27713
phone 919, 361, 5000
fax [phone]
license number: C-0293, C-187
www.mcadamsco.com
SWAMP GRAPE MITIGATION PLAN
CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS
ROBESON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PLAN INFORMATION
PROJECT NO. AXI-19010
FILENAME AX119010-DI
CHECKED BY RAS
DRAWN BY SCB
SCALE N.T.S.
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
DATE 09.14.2020
STREAM
DETAILS
C8,.00

GENERAL NOTES:
1. A LOG CROSS VANE IS A GRADE CONTROL, IN -STREAM STRUCTURE THAT DIRECTS STREAM FLOW AWAY FROM THE STREAM BANKS AND IN TOWARD THE CENTER OF THE CHANNEL.
2. ELEVATION CONTROL POINTS SHALL BE DESIGNATED AT THE UPSTREAM INVERT (CENTER) OF THE CROSS VANE TO ESTABLISH PART OF THE PROFILE. AN OTC H MAYBE CUT INTO THE LOG AT THE
INVERT LOCATION, POOL ELEVATION CONTROL POINTS OR EXCAVATION TO A SPECIFIED MAXIMUM POOL DEPTH SHALL BE DESIGNATED TO ESTABLISH THE REMAINING PROFILE. SURVEY OF
CONTROL POINTS SHALL BE REQUIRED TO ESTABLISH ACCURATE INSTALLATION WITHIN THE TOLERANCE SPECIFIED BY THE DESIGNER.
3. THE VANE ARM SHALL INTERCEPT THE STREAM BANK AT A HEIGHT EQUAL TO BETWEEN % BANKFULL STAGE AND BANKFULL STAGE. ELEVATION CONTROL POINTS MAYBE ESTABLISHED AT THE
LEFT AND RIGHT STREAM BANK/VANE ARM INTERCEPT POINTS. THE VANE ARM INTERCEPT LOCATION MAY BE OTHERWISE DESCRIBED BY ITS RELATIONSHIP TO BANKFULL STAGE OR BY THE
LENGTH AND SLOPE OF THE VANE ARM. BANKFULL IS NOT NECESSARILY THE TOP OF THE STREAM BANK SLOPE.
4. IF THE PLANS DESIGNATE THE USE OF MULTIPLE LOG CROSS VANES A TABLE OF ALL STATION LOCATIONS AND CONTROL POINT ELEVATIONS SHALL BE PROVIDED IN THIS DETAIL OR PROVIDED
ELSEWHERE IN THE PLANS AND REFERENCED HEREIN.
5. TYPICAL RIFFLE AND POOL CROSS SECTIONS SHALL BE PROVIDED ELSEWHERE IN THE PLANS TO ESTABLISH THE DIMENSIONS OF THE CHANNEL GRADING INTO WHICH THE LOG CROSS VANES ARE
TO BE INSTALLED.
6. LOGS SHALL BE RELATIVELY STRAIGHT HARDWOOD, RECENTLY HARVESTED AND BE A MINIMUM OF 18" DIAMETER. THE LENGTH SHALL BE SUCH THATTHE LOG IS BURIED INTO THE SOIL OF THE
STREAM BANK (ON ONE END) AND STREAM BED (ON THE OTHER END) A MINIMUM DISTANCE AS SPECIFIED BY THE DESIGNER. THE INVERT LOG SHALL BE EQUAL TO THE STREAM BED WIDTH AS
DEPICTED IN THE RIFFLE TYPICAL SECTION.
7. A SINGLE LOG MAY BE USED IN LIEU OF A HEADER/FOOTER LOG COMBINATION. A DOUBLE FOOTER LOG MAY BE REQUIRED IN SAND BED STREAMS.
8. NON -WOVEN GEOTEXTILE FABRIC OF A TYPE AND SIZE SPECIFIED BY THE DESIGNER SHALL BE USED TO SEAL THE GAPS BETWEEN THE LOG(S) AND THE STREAM BED, UNDER THE COARSE BACKFILL
MATERIAL. THERE SHALL BE NO FILTER FABRIC VISIBLE IN THE FINISHED WORK; EDGES SHALL BE FOLDED, TUCKED, OR TRIMMED AS NEEDED.
9. BACKFILL OF THE LOG CROSS VANE SHALL BE OF A TYPE, SIZE, AND GRADATION AS SPECIFIED BY THE DESIGNER. NATIVE CHANNEL MATERIAL BACKFILL SHALL BE PLACED TO ATHICKNESS EQUAL
TO THE DEPTH OF THE HEADER (AND ANY FOOTER) LOGS AND SHALL EXTEND OUT FROM THE VANE ARMS TO THE STREAM BANK AND UPSTREAM A DISTANCE SPECIFIED BY THE DESIGNER.
10. AS AN OPTION, FLAT -SIDED BOULDERS OF A SIZE (LENGTH, WIDTH, AND THICKNESS) AS SPECIFIED BY THE DESIGNER MAY BE PLACED AS BALLAST ON TOP OF THE STREAM BANK SIDE OF THE
EMBEDDED VANE ARMS. DUCK BILL ANCHORS MAY BE USED IN LIEU OF BALLAST BOULDERS.
11. DUCKBILL ANCHORS WITH GALVANIZED CABLE ATTACHED (OF A GAGE ADEQUATE TO SECURE THE SPECIFIED DIAMETER LOG) MAY BE USED TO SECURE LOGS INTO THE STREAM BED AND/OR
BANKS TO THE SPECIFIED DEPTH. FLAT SIDED BOULDERS (LENGTH, WIDTH, AND THICKNESS SPECIFIED BY DESIGNER) CAN BE USED IN LIEU OF THE LOG INVERT/DUCKBILL ANCHOR SYSTEM.
CONSTRUCTION GUIDELINES:
1. THE VANE ARMS OF THE LOG CROSS VANE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED FIRST, FOLLOWED BY THE LOG INVERT.
2. OVER -EXCAVATE STREAM BED TO A DEPTH EQUAL TO THE TOTAL THICKNESS OF THE HEADER (AND FOOTER IF SPECIFIED) LOGS.
3. PLACE VANE ARM FOOTER LOGS, IF SPECIFIED. THE SLOPE OF THE VANE ARM IS MEASURED ALONG THE VANE ARM WHICH IS INSTALLED AT AN ANGLE TO THE STREAM BANK AND PROFILE.
4. INSTALL VANE ARM HEADER LOG ON TOP OF AND SET SLIGHTLY FORWARD OR BACK FROM THE FOOTER LOG.
5. INSTALL INVERT LOG AND DUCKBILL ANCHOR.
6. NAIL FILTER FABRIC TO THE HEADER LOG USING A GALVANIZED NAIL WITH A PLASTIC CAP. THE SIZE AND GAGE OF NAIL AND NAIL SPACING SHALL BE SPECIFIED BY THE DESIGNER.
7. PLACE COARSE BACKFILL BEHIND LOG(S) ENSURING THAT ANY VOIDS BETWEEN THE LOGS ARE FILLED.
8. IF ANY EROSION CONTROL MATTING IS SPECIFIED FOR USE IN THE VICINITY OF THE VANE ARM INTERCEPT POINTS, ALL MATTING EDGES SHALL BE NEATLY SECURED AROUND THE LOGS.
BACKFILLED AND -
COMPACTED WITH
NATIVE CHANNEL
MATERIAL
T
FLOW
3
Wbkf 3 Wbkf 3 Wbkf
�
Y
�
Y
Lm
Z
Z
m
D
NON WOVEN
GEO—TEXTILE
FABRIC (TYP.)
LOG SILL
HEADER LOG
COIR LOG
RIFFLE MATERIAL-\
#57 STONE/NATIVE
CHANNEL MATERIAL
NON WOVEN
GEO-TEXTILE FABRIC
(TYP.)
TOOTER LOG
/ �„ HEADER LOG
COIR-
0 R .� HEADER LOG LOG
2' MIN. OOL
JS
SCOUR
POOL
> I I I I I I
McADAMS
TOOTER LOG
(TYP.)
PLAN VIEW
FOOTER LO
STREAMBED
ELEVATION
LOG CROSS VANE DETAIL
N.T.S.
The John R. McAdams Company, Inc.
2905 Meridian Parkway
Durham, NC 27713
phone 919, 361, 5000
fax [phone]
license number: C-0293, C-187
www.mcadamsco.com
TOP OF BANK
FLOW (BANKFULL)
SCOUR
POOL
STREAMBED
ELEVATION
SECTION A - A
TOP OF BANK
(BANKFULL)
GROUND
�EXISTING
(TYP.)
C7 _ BACKFILLED AND COMPACTED
WITH NATIVE CHANNEL
MATERIAL
NON WOVEN
GEO-TEXTILE FABRIC
(TYP.)
SECTION B - B
NOTE: GEOTEXTILE FABRIC (NON -WOVEN) SHALL CONFORM TO THE FOLLOWING SPECIFICATIONS.
MECHANICAL PROPERTIES
TEST METHOD
UNIT
MINIMUM AVERAGE ROLL
VALUE
MD
CD
GRAB TENSILE STRENGTH
ASTM D 4632
N (Ibs)
912 (205)
912 (205)
GRAB TENSILE ELONGATION
ASTM D 4632
%
50
50
TRAPEZOID TEAR STRENGTH
ASTM D 4533
N (Ibs)
356 (80)
356 (80)
CBR PUNCTURE STRENGTH
ASTM D 6241
N (Ibs)
2225 (500)
APPARENT OPENING SIZE (AOS)i
ASTM D 4751
mm (U.S. SIEVE)
0.18 (80)
PERMITTIVITY
ASTM D 4491
sec -i
1.1
FLOW RATE
ASTM D 4491
I/min/m' (gal/min/ft')
3870 (95)
UV RESISTANCE (AT 500 HOURS)
ASTM D 4355
% STRENGTH RETAINED
70
1ASTM D 4751: ACE IS A MAXIMUM OPENING DIAMETER VALUE
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
TEST METHOD
UNIT
TYPICAL VALUE
WEIGHT
ASTM D 5261
g/m' (oz/yd')
271 (8.0)
THICKNESS
ASTM D 5199
mm (mils)
1.8 (72)
ROLL DIMENSIONS (WIDTH X LENGTH)
—
ft
12.5 X 360 15 X 300
ROLL AREA
—
m' (yd')
418 (500)
ESTIMATED ROLL WEIGHT
—
kg (Ib)
120 (265)
SWAMP GRAPE MITIGATION PLAN
CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS
ROBESON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NON -WOVEN GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS
4
Axiom Environmental. Inc.
PLAN INFORMATION
PROJECT NO.
AXI-19010
FILENAME
AXI19010-DI
CHECKED BY
RAS
DRAWN BY
SCB
SCALE
N.T.S.
DATE
09.14.2020
STREAM
DETAILS
C8e01

GENERAL NOTES
1. LOG VANES WILL BE ANGLED @20-30° FROM STREAM BANK.
2. LOG VANES SHALL BE LARGE ENOUGH TO OCCUPY30F THE POOL MAXIMUM DEPTH.
3. LOG VANE WILL BE SLOPED AT 2-7%.
4. SEED AND SOIL STABILIZATION MATTING WILL BE PLACED ALONG STREAM BANKS FOR STABILIZATION PURPOSES WHERE DISTURBANCES HAS OCCURRED AS A RESULT STRUCTURE INSTALLATION.
CONSTRUCTION GUIDELINES:
1. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES SHOULD BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH AN APPROVED EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN (ESPCP)
2. FLOW FROM THE STREAM SHOULD BE DIVERTED AWAY FROM THE WORK AREA IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROVED ESPCP AND THE SITE SHOULD BE DEWATERED.
3. LOG VANES SHOULD BE ANGLED 20 TO 20 DEGREES FROM THE UPSTREAM BANK. LOG VANE ARMS SHOULD BE INSTALLED WITH A VERTICAL ANGLE ALONG THE VANE ARM RANGING FROM TWO TO
SEVEN PERCENT. LOG VANES SHOULD SPAN APPROXIMATELY ONE-HALF TO TWO-THIRDS OF THE BANKFULL CHANNEL WIDTH.
4. EXCAVATE THE TRENCH AND PREPARE THE ARE ALONG THE STREAMBANK AND IN THE STREAMBED FOR PLACEMENT OF FOOTER ROCKS. FOOTER ROCKS SHOULD BE INSTALLED AT BOTH THE
STREAMBANK AND THALWEG LOCATIONS TO INSURE PROPER FOOTING OF THE LOG VANE STRUCTURE AND TO ELIMINATE SCOUR AT KEY TIE-IN POINTS.
5. PLACE LOG ONTO THE FOOTER ROCKS SUCH THAT THE LOG VANE ARM THAT TIES INTO THE STREAMBANK WILL BE INSTALLED AT THE BANKFULL ELEVATION AND THE OTHER END OF THE LOG VANE
ARM WILL BE EMBEDDED INTO THE STREAMBED AT THE THALWEG ELEVATION AND WILL BE LOCATED WITHIN THE MIDDLE THIRD OF THE BANKFULL CHANNEL WIDTH.
6. ANCHOR ROCKS SHOULD BE INSTALLED ON TOP OF BOTH ENDS OF THE LOG VANE. ANCHOR STONES IN THE STREAMBED WILL BE OFFSET TO THE UPSTREAM SIDE OF THE LOG VANE AND PLACED TO
MINIMIZE ROLLING OF ANCHOR STONE AND WILL NOT PROTRUDE FROM THE STREAMBED ELEVATION MORE THAN ONE-THIRD THE THICKNESS OF THE ANCHOR ROCK. ANCHOR ROCKS WILL BE PLACED
ALONG THE STRFAMBANK POSITION OF THE LOG VANE ARM IN SIMILAR FASHION AND WILL NOT EXTEND MORE THAN ONE-THIRD THE THICKNESS OF THE ANCHOR ROCK,
7. THE LOG VANE ARM THAT TIES INTO THE STREAMBANK SHOULD EXTEND A MINIMUM OF 5 TO 6 FEET INTO THE STREAMBANK. ADDITIONALLY THE THALWEG END OF THE STRUCTURE SHOULD BE
EMBEDDED A MINIMUM OF 2 TO 3 FEET. WHEN TWO OR SMALLER LOGS ARE USED TO ACCOMPLISH THE DESIGN SPECIFICATION OF THE LOG VANE, THE LOGS SHOULD BE SECURED TOGETHER WITH
CABLES OR REBAR MATERIAL BASED UPON MANUFACTURING SPECIFICATIONS. LOG VANES SHOULD BE ANCHORED INTO THE STREAMBED WITH SUPPORT PILINGS AND/OR DUCKBILL ANCHORS WITH
LENGTHS EXCEEDING THE POTENTIAL OF LONG-TERM BED DEGRADATION AND/OR SCOUR DEPTHS.
8. PLACEMENT OF SALVAGED STREAMBED MATERIAL OBTAINED DURING TRENCH EXCAVATIONS WILL BE PLACED ALONG THE UPSTREAM SIDE OF THE LOG VANE ARM AND BETWEEN THE STREAMBANK
TO CREATE A UNIFORM SLOPE BETWEEN THE LOG VANE ARM AND THE STREAMBANK. AT THE MINIMUM, STREAMBED GRAVEL WILL BE PLACED TO THE ELEVATION OF THE SLOPING LOG VANE ARM ON
THE UPSTREAM SIDE OF THE LOG VANE.
9. SOIL STABILIZATION MATTING WILL BE INSTALLED ALONG THE STRLAMBANKS IN THE AREA OF DISTURBANCES AND SHOULD BE SEEDED, MULCHED, AND PLANTED WITH APPROVED LANDSCAPING.
10. REMOVE THE APPROVED ESPCP DEVICES UPON STABILIZATION OF THE CHANNEL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROVED PLAN.
���A \ F1 W
ANCHOR STONES 20•_30•
CONTROL POINT TO BE —
LOCATED APPROXIMATELY
AT CHANNEL MID —POINT
RIGHT BANKFULL
ELEVATION LINE
T
McADAMS
STREAMBED MATERIAL TO BE USED TO
BACKFILL BEHIND LOG VANE ARM AND
BRING TO ELEVATION OF LOG VANE ARM
LEFT BANKFULL
ELEVATION LINE
PLAN VIEW
The John R. McAdams Company, Inc.
2905 Meridian Parkway
Durham, NC 27713
phone 919, 361, 5000
fax [phone]
license number: C-0293, C-187
www.mcadamsco.com
CONTROL POINT TO BE
LOCATED APPROXIMATELY AT
CHANNEL MID —POINT
BANKFULL/FLOODPLAIN�
ELEVATION
ANCHOR STONE TO-_�_rr�
PRESENT IN MIDDLE�—
THIRD OF CHANNEL ATI_
STREAMBED ELEVATION 'I I1=11 =1
THIS PORTION OF -
LOG ANCHORED IN
CHANNEL BED
LOG VANE DETAIL
N.T.S.
WBKF
BANKFULL/FLOODPLAIN
ELEVATION
ANCHOR STONE
EROSION CONTROL
BLANKET (TYP.)
SEE DETAIL SHEET CX.XX
SECTION A'- A'
THIS PORTION OF LOG
SECURED BY ANCHOR STONE.
ANCHOR STONE INSTALLED AT
APPROX. FLOODPLAIN GRADE
SWAMP GRAPE MITIGATION PLAN
CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS
ROBESON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PLAN INFORMATION
PROJECT NO. AXI-19010
FILENAME AX119010-DI
CHECKED BY RAS
DRAWN BY SCB
SCALE N.T.S.
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
DATE 09.14.2020
CAR C
C -
��73
**""' F % ,A, S, �•�`�`.
STREAM
DETAILS
C8e02

J
McADAMS
nU611*1 l
1. AN EROSION CONTROL BLANKET SHALL BE USED TO STABILIZE THE NEWLY CONSTRUCTED
CHANNEL FROM THE TOP OF BANK TO TOE OF SLOPE AND SHALL BE 100%
BIODEGRADABLE.
2. THE CHANNEL SIDE SLOPES SHALL BE FINE GRADED, SEEDED, FERTILIZED, AND LIMED
PRIOR TO INSTALLING THE EROSION CONTROL BLANKET. REMOVE ROOTS, TWIGS, AND
OTHER DEBRIS WHICH WOULD CAUSE BULGES IN THE MATTING AS WELL AS PREVENT THE
MATTING FROM BEING LAID FLUSH TO THE FINISHED SURFACE.
3. KEY -IN EDGES OF MATTING A MINIMUM OF 6 INCHES INTO FINISHED GRADE. LAY
MATTING SHINGLED DOWNSTREAM TO UPSTREAM, OVERLAPPING AT EDGES A MINIMUM
OF 1 FOOT.
4. INSTALL STAKES TO ENSURE GOOD GROUND CONTACT OF THE MATTING TO WITHSTAND
MEDIUM TO HIGH FLOWS. STAKES SHALL BE 100% BIODEGRADABLE AND INSTALLED PER
THE MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE
MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDED DENSITY AND PATTERN.
5. KEY -IN EDGES OF MATTING A MINIMUM OF 6 INCHES, PARTICULARLY NEAR RESTORATION
STRUCTURES, BOULDERS, LOGS, ETC. CHECK MATTING FOR LOOSE ENDS, FLAPS, OR OTHER
WEAKNESSES OR DAMAGE WHICH MAY CAUSE ITTO BECOME LOOSE UNDER FLOW
CONDITIONS.
6. THE EROSION CONTROL BLANKET SHALL CONSIST OF A MACHINE -PRODUCED BLANKET
MADE OF COCONUT FIBER AND BE EQUIVALENT OR BETTER THAN THE FOLLOWING
SPECIFICATION. SOIL STABILIZATION MATTING WHICH USES PLASTICS, METALS, OR OTHER
MAN-MADE MATERIALS IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE MATERIAL WILL NOT BE
PERMITTED.
WEIGHT = 13.6 OZ/SY
TENSILE STRENGTH DRY (ASTM D 4595) = 780 LBS/FT MACHINE DIRECTION
744 LBS/FT CROSS DIRECTION
TENSILE STRENGTH WET (ASTM D 4595) = 672 LBS/FT MACHINE DIRECTION
648 LBS/FT CROSS DIRECTION
ELONGATION FAILURE WET (ASTM D 4595) =
OPEN AREA = 65%
RECOMMENDED SHEAR STRESS = 3LBS/SQ.FT.
RECOMMENDED FLOW = 8FT/S
RECOMMENDED SLOPE </= 1:1
MINIMUM TWINE COUNT PER FOOT = 15X14
The John R. McAdams Company, Inc.
2905 Meridian Parkway
Durham, NC 27713
phone 919, 361, 5000
fax [phone]
license number: C-0293, C-187
www.mcadamsco.com
30% MACHINE DIRECTION
28%CROSS DIRECTION
BANKFULL STAGE
BLANKET
KEYED 6" MIN
-aEM
1' MIN
I'
EROSION CONTROL BLANKET
BLANKET KEYED 6" MIN
CROSS-SECTION VIEW
OVERLAP ROLL EDGES
1 FOOT MINIMUM (TYP.)
6 INCH DEEP (MIN.)
KEY IN TRENCH }
+ + + + O
+ + + + O +
PREPARED SLOPE + + + +
WITH SEED IN PLACE + +
(TYP.)
EROSION CONTROL BLANKET DETAILS
N.T.S.
SWAMP GRAPE MITIGATION PLAN
CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS
ROBESON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SLOPE APPLICATION ISOMETRIC VIEW
FILL MAT VOIDS
F SPECIFIED
6 IN MIN. OVERLAP
AT ROLL END (TYP.)
Axiom Environmental. Inc.
PLAN INFORMATION
PROJECT NO.
AXI-19010
FILENAME
AX119010-DI
CHECKED BY
RAS
DRAWN BY
SCB
SCALE
N.T.S.
DATE
09.14.2020
STREAM
DETAILS
C8e03

PROPOSED GROUND
(TYP.)
PROPOSED ROAD ELEV = EL. 135.00
24" RCP
INV IN = 128.50
INV OUT = 128.40
11 I I1111
' 11=1 11=
T
"
MCADAMS
SPAN = 9.42'
RISE = 6'
INV IN = 126.50
INV OUT = 126.40
SPAN = 9.42'
RISE = 6'
INV IN = 123.00
INV OUT = 122.50
The John R. McAdams Company, Inc.
2905 Meridian Parkway
Durham, NC 27713
phone 919, 361, 5000
fax [phone]
license number: C-0293, C-187
www.mcadamsco.mm
l-1 24" RCP
111 128.50
INV OUT =128.40
INV IN = 128.50
INV OUT = 128.40
SPAN = 9.42'
RISE = 6'
INV IN = 126.50
INV OUT = 126.40
UT 1 CULVERT CROSSING
N.T.S.
ACCESS ROAD CROSSING
1 1—I I I-1 1 1-
-_ 15" RCP
=1 INV IN = 124.00
III INV OUT = 123.50
INV IN = 124.00
INV OUT = 123.50
SPAN = 9.42'
RISE = 6' INV IN 123.00
UT 2 CULVERT CROSSING
=
INV OUT = 122.50 N.T.S.
SWAMP GRAPE MITIGATION PLAN
CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS
ROBESON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PROPOSED GROUND
(TYP.)
Axiom Environmental. Inc.
PLAN INFORMATION
PROJECT NO.
AXI-19010
FILENAME
AX119010-DI
CHECKED BY
RAS
DRAWN BY
SCB
SCALE
N.T.S.
DATE
09.14.2020
CAR �''� �C
QUO`
73
'% G I NE�• •� ��
O'C CCA •s�
'�hrn��
CULVERT
DETAILS
C8,.04

CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE:
1. OBTAIN PLAN APPROVAL AND OTHER APPLICABLE PERMITS.
2. OBTAIN AN APPROVED (STAMPED) EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN AND KEEP IT ON -SITE EITHER IN THE INSPECTION
BOX, CONSTRUCTION OFFICE, OR WITH THE CONTRACTOR..
3. SCHEDULE AND HOLD AN ON -SITE PRE -CONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE AT LEAST ONE WEEK PRIOR TO BEGINNING ANY
LAND -DISTURBING ACTIVITIES. THE CONFERENCE SHOULD BE ATTENDED BY THE NC DEMLR EROSION CONTROL INSPECTOR,
THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR, ANY SUBCONTRACTORS, THE ENGINEER, AND A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE OWNER.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY "NC811" (811) OR (1-800-632-4949) AT LEAST 3 FULL BUSINESS DAYS PRIOR TO BEGINNING
CONSTRUCTION OR EXCAVATION TO HAVE EXISTING UTILITIES LOCATED. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT ANY LOCAL
UTILITIES THAT PROVIDE THEIR OWN LOCATOR SERVICES INDEPENDENT OF "NC811". REPORT ANY DISCREPANCIES TO THE
ENGINEER IMMEDIATELY.
5. ALL DIMENSIONS AND GRADES SHOWN ON THE PLANS SHALL BE FIELD VERIFIED BY THE CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO
CONSTRUCTION. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER IF ANY DISCREPANCIES EXIST PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH
CONSTRUCTION, FOR NECESSARY PLAN OR GRADE CHANGES. NO EXTRA COMPENSATION SHALL BE PAID TO THE
CONTRACTOR FOR ANY WORK DONE DUE TO DIMENSIONS OR GRADES SHOWN INCORRECTLY ON THESE PLANS IF SUCH
NOTIFICATION HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN.
6. ESTABLISH CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE AND STAGING AREA.
7. INSTALL SILT FENCE, INLET PROTECTION, SEDIMENT TRAPS, DIVERSION DITCHES, TREE PROTECTION, AND OTHER MEASURES
AS SHOWN ON PLANS, CLEARING ONLY AS NECESSARY TO INSTALL THESE DEVICES.
8. LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE SHALL BE MARKED BY SAFETY FENCING EITHER WITH SILT FENCE OR ORANGE TREE PROTECTION
FENCE.
9. USE THE AREA DESIGNATED ON THE PLANS FOR ALL STAGING ACTIVITIES RELATED TO THE PROJECT.
10. PARK ALL CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT, INCLUDING TRUCKS AND HEAVY EQUIPMENT WITHIN THE LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE.
11. WHEN ACCESS TO A CONSTRUCTION AREA REQUIRES CROSSING A DELINEATED JURISDICTIONAL FEATURE, IMPACTS SHALL
BE MINIMIZED BY PLACING A TEMPORARY STREA/WETLAND CROSSING ACROSS THE FEATURE PRIOR TO ACCESSING THE
AREA WITH HEAVY EQUIPMENT PER APPROVED PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS.
12. INSTALL REMAINING EROSION CONTROL MEASURES. CLEAR AND GRUB ONLY AS NECESSARY TO INSTALL THESE DEVICES.
13. BEGIN GRADING ACTIVITIES. IN GENERAL, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL WORK FROM UPSTREAM TO DOWNSTREAM AND
CONSTRUCTION IN A LIVE CHANNEL UTILIZE A PUMP -AROUND OR FLOW DIVERSION MEASURE AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS.
MAINTAIN AND ADJUST E & SC MEASURES AS GRADING PROGRESSES.
14. CONTRACTOR SHALL BEGIN CONSTRUCTION ON MAIN STEM REACHES AND PROCEED IN A DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION UNTIL
THE REACH IS COMPLETED. THE CONTRACTOR MAY CONCURRENTLY WORK ON SEPARATE REACHES AS LONG AS NO MORE
IS DISTURBED THAN CAN BE STABILIZED IN THAT SAME DAY. TRIBUTARIES TO THE MAIN STEMS CAN THEN BE
CONSTRUCTED TO MAKE STABLE CONFLUENCES WITH THE MAIN STEM REACHES.
15. AFTER EXCAVATING THE CHANNEL TO DESIGN GRADES, INSTALLING IN -STREAM STRUCTURES, SEED AND MULCH, MATTING,
AND TRANSPLANTS, THE NEW CHANNEL CAN RECEIVE FLOW AFTER APPROVAL BY THE ENGINEER.
16. WATER WILL BE TURNED INTO THE CONSTRUCTED CHANNEL ONCE THE AREA IN AND AROUND THE NEW CHANNEL HAS
BEEN STABILIZED. NO WATER SHALL BE TURNED INTO ANY SECTION OF CHANNEL PRIOR TO THE CHANNEL BEING
COMPLETELY STABILIZED WITH ALL STRUCTURES INSTALLED.
17. ANY GRADING ACTIVITIES ADJACENT TO THE STREAM CHANNEL SHALL BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO TURNING WATER INTO THE
NEW STREAM CHANNEL SEGMENTS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT GRADE OR ROUGHEN ANY AREAS WHERE EXCAVATION
ACTIVITIES HAVE NOT BEEN COMPLETED.
18. CONTRACTOR SHALL IMPROVE AND CONSTRUCT THE FARM ROADS AND CROSSINGS BY INSTALLING CULVERTS, STABILIZING
SIDE SLOPES, AND MODIFYING THE FARM ROAD BED ACCORDING TO THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS.
19. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DILIGENTLY AND CONTINUOUSLY MAINTAIN ALL EROSION CONTROL DEVICES AND STRUCTURES.
20. FOR PHASED EROSION CONTROL PLANS, CONTRACTOR SHALL MEET WITH EROSION CONTROL INSPECTOR PRIOR TO
COMMENCING WITH EACH PHASE OF EROSION CONTROL MEASURES.
21. STABILIZE SITE AS AREAS ARE BROUGHT TO FINISHED GRADE. AT THE CONCLUSION OF GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OR IF
LAND -DISTURBING ACTIVITY STOPPED FOR MORE THAN 14 CONSECUTIVE CALENDAR DAYS, PERMANENT VEGETATIVE
COVER SHALL BE INSTALLED.
22, CONTRACTOR SHALL PLANT WOODY VEGETATION AND LIVE STAKES, ACCORDING TO PLANTING DETAILS AND
SPECIFICATIONS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE THE LIVE STAKING AND REFORESTATION (BARE -ROOT PLANTING)
PHASE OF THE PROJECT AND APPLY PERMANENT SEEDING AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME OF YEAR.
23. COORDINATE WITH EROSION CONTROL INSPECTOR PRIOR TO REMOVAL OF ANY EROSION CONTROL MEASURES.
24. STABILIZE ALL DISTURBED AREAS. REMOVE STAGING AREA AND CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE.
25. REMOVE ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AND CALL THE NO DEMUR OFFICE FOR FINAL INSPECTION ONCE PERMANENT
VEGETATION HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
26. DEMOBILIZE ALL EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS FROM SITE.
27. ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE N. C. EROSION AND SEDIMENT
CONTROL PLANNING AND DESIGN MANUAL.
J
McADAMS
The John R. McAdams Company, Inc.
2905 Meridian Parkway
Durham, NC 27713
phone 919, 361, 5000
fax [phone]
license number: C-0293, C-187
www.mcadamsco.com
CHANNEL CONSTRUCTION (PUMP AROUND):
1. INSTALL PUMP AROUND ALONG 200' TO 300' OF STREAM CHANNEL, OR NO MORE THAN CAN BE
CONSTRUCTED IN ONE (1) WORKING DAY.
2. WORK SECTIONS THAT INVOLVE THE CONSTRUCTION OF A CONFLUENCE OR TWO REACHES MAY REQUIRE
THE USE OF TWO PUMP -AROUND OPERATIONS.
3. HARVEST MATERIAL FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE EXISTING CHANNEL TO BE PLACED IN THE BOTTOM OF
THE PROPOSED CHANNEL. THIS SHALL INCLUDE THE SURFACE MATERIAL AND UP TO ONE (1) FOOT
BELOW TO INCLUDE THE HYPORHEIC ZONE. ADDITIONAL RIVER STONE SHALL BE MIXED WITH EXISTING
CHANNEL MATERIAL AS NECESSARY.
4. IN -STREAM STRUCTURES WILL BE INSTALLED ACCORDING TO THE DETAILS PRESENTED ON SHEET C8.01
AND SHEET C8.02.
S. FILL EXISTING CHANNEL ON THE SAME WORKING DAY AS COMPLETING THE PROPOSED CHANNEL. IN NO
EVENT SHALL THE EXISTING CHANNEL BE FILLED PRIOR TO THE COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION OF THE
CORRESPONDING PROPOSED CHANNEL.
6. ANY EXCAVATED MATERIAL CONTAINING MANMADE MATERIAL IS NOT SUITABLE MATERIAL FOR
CHANNEL FILL AND MUST BE DISPOSED OF OFFSITE UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY OWNER.
7. IN ANY SECTION WHERE THE NEW CHANNEL ALIGNMENT CROSSES THE EXISTING CHANNEL A CLAY PLUG
WILL BE INSTALLED IN THE EXISTING CHANNEL.
S. THE PROPOSED CHANNEL BANKS SHALL BE STABILIZED WITH EROSION CONTROL MATTING AND
TEMPORARY SEEDING UPON COMPLETION OF EACH SECTION AS PER DETAIL ON SHEET C8.03.
9. COMPLETE ALL EARTHWORK, STRUCTURE INSTALLATION, AND STABILIZATION IN THE PUMP AROUND
AREA.
10. AT A MINIMUM, 20-FOOT LENGTHS OF EXISTING CHANNEL SHOULD BE FILLED EVERY 50-FEET OR AS
DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
11. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY ENGINEER UPON DISCOVERY OF ANY CONSTRAINTS DISCOVERED IN THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPOSED CHANNEL OR STRUCTURE PLACEMENT AND ADJUSTMENTS CAN BE
MADE ON SITE.
12. GRADING OF THE PROPOSED FLOODPLAIN MAY NEED TO BE DELAYED UNTIL AFTER WORK IN
SUBSEQUENT SECTIONS HAS BEEN COMPLETED, ESPECIALLY NEAR CONFLUENCES. HAUL ROADS AND
TEMPORARY SILT FENCE MAY ALSO NEED TO BE REMOVED BEFORE THE PROPOSED FLOODPLAIN CAN BE
COMPLETED AND/OR UNUSED EXISTING CHANNEL CAN BE FILLED.
TEMPORARY SEEDING SCHEDULE:
GENERAL NOTES:
1. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY LICENSES AND PERMITS REQUIRED TO
COMPLETE THE WORK INCLUDED IN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS ATTHE CONTRACTOR'S
EXPENSE.
2. IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO VERIFY THAT THEY AND THEIR
SUBCONTRACTOR'S HAVE THE CORRECT/MOST UP-TO-DATE PLANS AVAILABLE.
3. CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS SHALL BE CARRIED OUT IN SUCH A MANNER THAT EROSION
AND WATER POLLUTION IS MINIMIZED.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL MINIMIZE DISTURBANCE TO EXISTING BUFFER VEGETATION AND
CONSTRUCTION CORRIDOR TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICAL.
5. THERE MAY BE WETLANDS WITHIN THIS SITE. IT IS THE OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR
WETLANDS JURISDICTION AND PERMIT DISTURBANCE PRIOR TO ANY GRADING ACTIVITY.
6. IF THE CONTRACTOR, IN THE COURSE OF WORK, FINDS ANY DISCREPANCIES IN THE PLANS OR
NOTES GIVEN BY THE PROJECT ENGINEER, IT SHALL BE HIS/HER DUTY IMMEDIATELY INFORM
THE PROJECT ENGINEER, IN WRITING, AND THE PROJECT ENGINEER WILL PROMPTLY VERIFY
THE SAME. ANY WORK DONE AFTER SUCH DISCOVERY, UNTIL AUTHORIZED, WILL BE AT THE
CONTRACTOR'S RISK.
7. ANY DAMAGE TO PRIVATE PROPERTY AND/OR EXISTING UTILITIES INCURRED DURING
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES SHALL BE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR.
TEMPORARY SEEDING SHALL BE APPLIED AS NEEDED DURING CONSTRUCTION TO STABILIZE BARE OR DISTURBED AREAS OF SOIL AND AT THE COMPLETION OR ALL
GRADING AND EARTHWORK ACTIVITIES WITHIN A PARTICULAR AREA OF THE SITE. PERMANENT SEED MAY BE DISTRIBUTED WITH TEMPORARY SEED UPON THE FINAL
APPLICATION OF TEMPORARY SEED.
CFFFIII I(; FIATF
HVV 17-L\rrt ID
AUG 15 -APR 15
APR 15 -AUG 15
APR 15 - AUG 15
SEEDING METHODS
SEEDING MIXTURE
RYE (GRAIN)
WHEAT
GERMAN MILLET
BROWNTOP MILLET
APPLICATION RATE
30 LBS/AC
30 LBS/AC
10 LBS/AC
10 LBS/AC
1. EVENLY APPLY SEED USING A CYCLONE SEEDER, DRILL, CULTIPACKER SEEDER, OR HYDROSEEDER. THIS MUST BE DONE WITHIN 48 HOURS OF LAND DISTURBING
ACTIVITIES.
2. MULCH WITH CLEAN WHEAT STRAW.
3. AFTER SEEDING, APPLY MULCH TO AREAS UNDER HARSH CONDITIONS SUCH AS AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN GRADED, OR THOSE WHICH WILL RECEIVE CONCENTRATED
FLOWS. ,AREAS CONSIDERED TO BE UNDER HARSH CONDITIONS WILL BE CONSIDERED THE AREAS GRADED FOR THE WETLAND VALLEY.
4. RESEED AND MULCH AREAS WHERE SEEDLING EMERGENCE IS LESS THAN 80% COVERAGE, OR WHERE EROSION OCCURS, AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. DO NOT MOW.
PROTECT FROM TRAFFIC AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
NOTES
1. TEMPORARY ANNUAL SEED SELECTION SHOULD BE BASED ON SEASON OF PROJECT INSTALLATION.
2. 4 SINGLE SPECIES FOR TEMPORARY COVER IS ACCEPTABLE
3. IN SOME CASES WHERE SEASONS OVERLAP, A MIXTURE OF TWO OR MORE SPECIES MAY BE NECESSARY. HOWEVER, APPLICATION RATES SHOULD NOT EXCEED THE
TOTAL RECOMMENDED RATE PER ACRE.
4. TEMPORARY SEED SHOULD BE MIXED AND APPLIED SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH THE PERMANENT SEED MIX IF OPTIMAL PLANTING DATES ALLOW.
SWAMP GRAPE MITIGATION PLAN
CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS
ROBESON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Axiom Environmental. Inc.
PLAN INFORMATION
PROJECT NO.
AXI-19010
FILENAME
AXI19010-DI
CHECKED BY
RAS
DRAWN BY
SCB
SCALE
N.T.S.
DATE
09.14.2020
CONSTRUCTION
NOTES
C8e05

-,ram
L
1h�4
N
i egetalitam:l stwiulinn
C%prcd� (�irm(tin;rm(p*
Coastal Plain Small
Stream 5naw
Stream -side
Assemblage'"
I MAL
-Area(acres)
3-.i
17.4
2.8
22..5
Species
7phw0.(1'
�-t3rl,il
=planted"
of total
#planted"
%oftotal
#planted
-
Wampblackgum(Vyssabifjara)
391
2366
20
190
10
2948
Bald cypress (7'asadium disirchrrrrr)
391
25
2366
20
190
10
2948
1-upelo gum (.Vssa aquativa )
391
25
—
—
—
391
Pundcypress (Tarodiumascendens)
391
25
--
--
--
391
Water oak (Quercas nigr a)
1775
15
190
10
1965
Willowcak(Crrer-cusph€llos)
--
—
1775
15
190
10
1965
ti hurrnrd oak(Quereasschrrmardh
1183
10
190
10
1374
:A awfican An (Umus anvvrcana }
1193
10
190
10
1374
Shagbark hickwy (Caryaovara)
1183
10
190
10
1374
IMac kwillow ($aTixnigra)
—
—
190
10
190
Tag alder { Ilnas semrlata)
190
10
190
Bunonbush (Cephalanthus occideniahi 1
—
190
10
190
T(T1.11.
1564
100
11832
100
1904
100
15300
111mic J at a dcmif y of M steals. acre
' y Plar4(x1 HI a(il'i] ill or 2720 st vrns auty
LEGEND
Easement Boundary = —24.4 ac
Streamslde Assemblage
Coastal Rain Small Stream Swamp
Cypress Gum Swamp
— 2
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 100 200 400
1 inch = 200 ft.
U
C
E
w
E
0
Q
U
n
O U E
E y
O O
o�m
U R n
d N
N N
N O
E C V
N z
m V E
'6 E
m
g t
E
v m E10
L N
O
C
Ol
z
a
J
a
z
O
V)
z z
a a
IVr1 a
aU
MEMEME
laaaaa
�c =
Zz
� 0
� Z
Wvo
a�z
0 a�
�zco
boa
U 0f
a
a
Iv�_)
a OJ
a O
2 6
Z
a�
a