20040667 Ver 1_Mitigation Evaluation_20090601

Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
C Division of Water Quality
Date of Office Review: ?0 7 (J L Evaluator's Name(s): U Z ?i 1
Date of Report: MA , Report for Monitoring Year:
Date .of Field Review:
Other Individuals/Agencies Present:
Evaluator's Name(s):
Weather Conditions (today & recent):
Directions to Site: From Wilkesboro/Hwy 421 right on NC16 for 3.5m to Miller's Crk inter., left on Old Hwy 421 for 2.6m, right on
Purlear Rd for.8m, at stop sign at church left & follow Purlear .6m to inter wNannoy Maxwell Rd. Project
M.... ?.,.. L...... #&-.;..1... rr U........ 0.4
1. Office Review Information:
Project Number: 20040667 Project History
Project Name: Purlear Creek-Phase 2 Event Event Date
County(ies): Wilkes
Basin & subbasin: Yadkin 03040101
Nearest Stream: Purlear Creek
Water Quality Class of Nearest Stream: C
Mitigator Type: EEP/WRP
DOT Status: DOT
Total Mitigation on Site
Wetland: 1.05 acres
Stream: 2620 linear feet
Buffer:
Nutr. Offset:
Report Receipt: Monitoring 4/14/2008
C

Approved mitigation plan available? Yes No
Monitoring reports available? Ye No
Problem areas identified in reports? Yes No
Problem areas addressed on site? es No
Mitigation required on site: 'Add significant project-related events: reports,
Associated impacts (if knowny received, construction, planting, repairs, etc.
During office review, note success criteria,and evaluate each component based on monitoring report
results. Record relevant data in Sections II and III.
On back of sheet, note other information found during office review and/or to be obtained during site visit.
II. Summary of Results:
Monitoring Success Success
Mitigation Component Year (report) (field) Resolved
20040667-1 2620 linear feet Stream Restoration
1i
20040667-2 1.05 acres Wetland Restoration
I ? 1
d-
ti

Cap?? ?iID ??'?L'
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007)
Page 1 of 2
Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
MITIGATION SUCCESS:
Compared to the approved mitigation plan, this project is: successful partially successful unsuccessful
List specific reasons for lack of success for this project:
Additional comments (e.g. DWQ follow-up actions, recommendations, etc.):
Page 2 of
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) 2
Stream Mitigation Component Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
Component: 2620 linear feet Stream Restoration Component ID: 20040667-1
Description:
Location within project:
III. Success Criteria Evaluation:
STREAMBANK STABILITY - Approved Success Criteria:
none listed
Are streambanks stable? Yes No
If no, provide description and notes regarding stability issues:
STRUCTURES - Approved Success Criteria:
none listed
List all types of structures present on site:
Are the structures installed correctly? Yes No
Are the structures made of acceptable material? Yes No
(Unacceptable materials include: railroad ties, concrete with rebar, etc.
Are the structures located approximately where shown on the plan? Yes No
Are the structures stable (e.g. erosion, deposition, etc.)? Yes No
Provide description and notes regarding problematic structures:
FEATURES - Approved Success Criteria:
none listed
Are riffles and pools in approximately the correct locations Yes No
Is the final sinuosity and gradient designed approximately to plan specifications? Yes No
Any evidence of vegetation growing on the stream bed or in the thalweg Yes No
Percentage of the restoration reach that has: Flowing water Ponded areas
Describe any stream features that provide evidence of unstable stream reaches (e.g. mid-channel bars,
downstream meander migration, chute cutoff formation, etc.):
AQUATIC BIOTA - Approved Success Criteria:
none listed
Is aquatic life present in the channel? Yes No
Description of taxa observed, incl. quantities of individuals and general distribution of biota. Include a brief
description of the sampling methodology.
List any remaining aquatic biota issues to address (e.g. erosion, discharges or toxicants, etc.):
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 1 of 2
Stream Mitigation Component Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
VEGETATION - Approved Success Criteria: Dominant Plant Species
Species Story TPAP/ cover
Monitoring report indicates success? Yes n?
NQ
Jr-
Average TPA for entire site (per report
c
Observational field data agrees? Yes No ch
based on community composition? Yes No
based on TPA and/or % cover? Yes No
Vegetation planted on site? Yes No
V ,
Date of last planting:
Vegetation growing successfully? Yes No i
General observations on condition of riparian/buffer areas (e.g. buffer width, overall health of vegetation,
etc.):
?a 6d qx L,
Specific vegetation plots or site locations with little to no vegetation:
Estimated acreage or site percentage of unvegetated areas:
Invasive species on site (species, location(s), and % cover):
i
List any remaining vegetation issues to address (e.g. plant survival, concer s, etc.):
?? ? ?/ III
MITIGATION SUCCESS:
Compared to the approved mitigation plan, this component is: successful partially successful unsuccessful
List specific reasons for lack of success for this component:
\dditional comments (e.g. DWQ follow-up actions, recommendations, etc.):
l?
r?
Use the definitions in the joint state/federal stream mitigation guidelines to determine the correct type of
mitigation used for this component.
During site visit, document representative conditions and areas of concern. Observe preservation and
enhancement areas that may not have specific success ui:aria. Label and attach photos to this report.
Attach maps showing photo locations, problem areas, grid/or important stream features.
Additional notes related to evaluation of this component:
Page 2 of 2
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007)
f
t
Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
Component: 1.05 acres Wetland Restoration Component ID: 20040667-2
Description: D. 21 (,-c_ zec r `? <a,g14 r?V'e r L4111 L.-- t ?? 1 ?i? e a? K %c,lk-
Location within project:
III. Success Criteria Evaluation: 40
HYDROLOGY - Approved Success Criteria:
? Wejland Hydrology Indicators:
?
none listed ? Inundated (pocsze?)

? ? Saturated in upper 12 inches
Monitoring report indicates success a No Drift lines
Observational field data agrees? a No Drainage patterns in wetlands
based on mitigation plan? es No Sediment deposits
based on wetland type? es No Water marks
List any remaining hydrology issues to address (e.g. remaining ditches, excessive water, etc.):
- k \5 u ;CX ?, q -C C Cx'1 2?JC1-t , 1 Y^2C ?L SIGH i?r"l Ct? , ? ?l?' +"
i
i
SSOOILS - Approved Success Criteria:
Are soils hYdric or becoming hYdric? Yes No
List indicators of hydric soils:
List any remaining soil issues to address (e.g. erosion, upland areas, etc.):

-
VEGETATION - Approved Success Criteria: Dominant Plant Species
none listed Species Story TPA/'/ cover
(x)? ? VA)V5 / 3--2-5 v?o 1 lem
`alt i5 '-t, tom' Srq
Monitoring report indicates success? Yes N 'CCLL cr P, \IJ ? (ilCt '? }
Average TPA for entire site (per report): o",- "-A ?':U -C.)
Observational field data agrees? Yes No
IQ
S'
??
based on community composition? Yes No .
7
r
based on TPA and/or % cover? Yes No '
Wit 1 0? 0?A
? U71 ?? ?tDw
Vegetation planted on site? Yes No
Date of last planting: ?t) 1E'rS -aktrou?? C'r
Vegetation growing successfully? Yes No m-IICO?oLx-S \F--C Lk u A- C'-C?s
Specific vegetation plots or site locations with little to no vegetation:-
v?,?' ?,r-e sta.\enar- ow
Estimated acreage or site percentage of unvegetated areas: 2
Invasive species on site (species, location(s), and % cover):
List any remaining vegetation issues to address (e.g. plant survival, concerns, etc.):

(iC kS
Y?O-A??e )
6LA-
?.tc Spa
i
a'V? S
Page 1 of 2
Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007)
Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table
NC Division of Water Quality
NCWAM - Approved Success Criteria or Evaluative echniques: NCWAM Type on Site:
Coastal
Riverine
Monitoring report indicates success? Yes No Riparian
Observational field data agrees? Yes No Non-riparian (wetter)
Attach NCWAM analysis results to this r port. Non-riparian (drier)
List any remaining NCWAM issues t address (e.g. functionality, developing wetland type, etc.):
MITIGATION SUCCESS:
Compared to the approved mitigation plan, this component is: ccess I partially successful unsuccessful
List specific reasons for lack of success for this component:
Additional comments (e.g. DWQ follow-up actions, recommendations, etc.):
I, jr1? C 2, ?fY?? W ??"?'??
During site visit, document representative conditions and areas of concern. Observe preservation and
enhancement areas that may not have specific success criteria. Label and attach photos to this report.
Attach maps showing photo locations, areas of concern, and important field observations.
Additional notes related to evaluation of this component:

Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 2 of 2