20201357 Ver 1_Draft Prospectus_August2020_20200925

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Draft Prospectus
Private Commercial Mitigation Bank for Stream and Wetland
Compensatory Mitigation Credits
Catawba County, North Carolina
Catawba River Basin (HUC 03050101)
August 2020
Prepared for:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
Prepared by:
WATER & LAND SOLUTIONS
7721 SIX FORKS ROAD, SUITE 130, RALEIGH, NC 27615
(919) 614 - 5111 1 waterlandsolutions.com

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Table of Contents
1
Introduction..........................................................................................................................................5
1.1 Project Overview...........................................................................................................................5
1.2 Bank Site Location.........................................................................................................................5
1.3 Mitigation Goals and Objectives...................................................................................................5
1.4 Watershed Need and Technical Feasibility...................................................................................6
2
Qualifications........................................................................................................................................7
2.1 Bank Sponsor................................................................................................................................7
2.2 Bank Sponsor Qualifications.........................................................................................................7
2.2.1 Representative Mitigation Projects......................................................................................7
3
Bank Establishment and Operation....................................................................................................10
3.1 Site Ownership............................................................................................................................10
3.2 Proposed Service Area................................................................................................................11
4
Ecological Suitability of the Sites........................................................................................................11
4.1 Baseline Conditions — Starker Site..............................................................................................11
4.1.1 Watershed Characterization...............................................................................................11
4.1.2 Physiography, Geology, and Soils.......................................................................................13
4.1.3 Existing Stream Conditions.................................................................................................14
4.1.4 Existing Reach Descriptions................................................................................................15
4.1.5 Existing Wetland Conditions...............................................................................................19
4.2 Regulatory Considerations..........................................................................................................19
4.2.1 Existing Easements & Potential Site Constraints................................................................19
4.2.2 Mineral or Water Rights Assurance....................................................................................19
4.2.3 Hydrologic Trespass............................................................................................................19
4.2.4 Invasive Species Vegetation................................................................................................19
4.2.5 Cultural Resources..............................................................................................................20
4.2.6 Threatened and Endangered Species.................................................................................20
4.2.7 Conditions Affecting Hydrology..........................................................................................20
4.2.8 Adjacent Land Use..............................................................................................................20
5
Mitigation Work Plan..........................................................................................................................21
5.1 Site Design Approach..................................................................................................................
21
5.1.1 Proposed Stream Conditions — Starker Site........................................................................22
Page 2 4

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
5.1.2 Proposed Riparian Wetland Conditions..............................................................................23
6 Credit Determination..........................................................................................................................23
6.1 Proposed Credit Types................................................................................................................23
6.2 Credit Release Schedule..............................................................................................................24
6.3 Initial Allocation of Released Credits..........................................................................................25
6.4 Subsequent Credit Releases........................................................................................................26
6.5 Financial Assurances...................................................................................................................26
7 Long -Term Management.................................................................................................................... 26
7.1 Maintenance...............................................................................................................................26
7.2 Adaptive Management Plan.......................................................................................................27
Tables
Table 1. Parcel Ownership Information.....................................................................................................11
Table 2. Potential Functional Uplift and Ecological Benefits......................................................................12
Table 3. Reach Watershed Drainage & Jurisdictional Status — Starker Site...............................................15
Table 4. NCWAM & NCSAM Summary........................................................................................................15
Table 5. Existing Reach Description — Starker Site.....................................................................................16
Table 6. Proposed Stream Mitigation Credits(SMCs).................................................................................24
Table 7. Proposed Wetland Mitigation Credits(WMCs).............................................................................24
Table 8. Credit Release Schedule................................................................................................................25
Table 9. Routine Maintenance Components..............................................................................................27
Water & Land Solutions Page 3

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Figures
Starker Site
Figure1...............................................................................................................................Service Area Map
Figure2.......................................................................................................................................Vicinity Map
Figure 3.................................................................................................................... Existing Conditions Map
Figure 4.............................................................................................................Water Quality Stressors Map
Figure5a....................................................................................................................1951 Aerial Photograph
Figure5b...................................................................................................................1964 Aerial Photograph
FigureSc ....................................................................................................................1993 Aerial Photograph
Figure5d...................................................................................................................2004 Aerial Photograph
Figure5e...................................................................................................................2012 Aerial Photograph
Figure6.......................................................................................................................................... USGS Map
Figure7......................................................................................................................................... LiDAR Map
Figure8.................................................................................................................................. NRCS Soils Map
Figure9........................................................................................................................ Channel Incision Map
Figure10..................................................................................................................................... Erosion Map
Figure11....................................................................................................................................... FEMA Map
Figure 12.................................................................................................................Mitigation Practices Map
Figure13......................................................................................................................................... BEHI Map
Appendices
Appendix ............................................................................................................... Existing Conditions Data
Part1........................................................................................................................................ Cross Sections
Part 2............................................................................................................NC DWQ Stream Identification Forms
Part3....................................................................................................................................NCWAM/NCSAM Forms
Part4..................................................................................................................................................................BANCS
Part5.............................................................................................................................................Hydric Soils Report
Part6...............................................................................................................................................Particle Summary
Part7..............................................................................................................................................................Photolog
Appendix B.................................................................................................Adjacent Landowner Information
Appendix C.................................................................................................. Landowner Authorization Forms
Page 4 4

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
1 Introduction
1.1 Project Overview
Water & Land Solutions, LLC (WLS) is pleased to submit this draft prospectus for WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella
Mitigation Bank (Bank). WLS proposes to develop this private commercial umbrella mitigation bank to
allow for the addition of future project sites located in the Catawba River Basin, 8-digit Hydrologic Unit
Code (HUC) 03050101. The Bank will initially include one project site named 'Starker Mitigation Site'
(Site). The purpose of the Bank is to provide stream and wetland mitigation credits to compensate for
unavoidable impacts to Waters of the U.S. authorized under section 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act,
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act, and all applicable state statutes.
This prospectus was prepared in accordance with C.F.R. §332.1-8 (2008), Compensatory Mitigation for
Losses of Aquatic Resources, and was based on current United States Army Corps of Engineers —
Wilmington District (USACE) Guidance, which is subject to the approval of the USACE District Engineer
(DE) in consultation with the NC Inter -Agency Review Team (IRT).
1.2 Bank Site Location
ttnrkar Qfv
The Starker Mitigation Site (35.5734°,-81.17304°) is located in Catawba County, North Carolina. The Site
is part of the Catawba River Headwaters Subbasin (HUC 03050101) (Figure 1). The proposed site includes
two Unnamed Tributaries to Mull Creek (referred to in this prospectus as UT1 and UT2), which drain into
Lyle Creek and ultimately Lake Norman. Lyle Creek is listed as WS-IV because it flows into Lake Norman, a
water supply reservoir, approximately four miles downstream of the confluence of Mull Creek and Lyle
Creek. Mull Creek near the project site drains portions of the city of Conover and the town of Claremont.
Both municipalities are experiencing growth into surrounding rural areas, and since the Site is located
between Exits 133 and 135 along Interstate 40 (1-40), the Site is likely a future commercial development
area.
1.3 Mitigation Goals and Objectives
The project mitigation goals are to provide numerous water quality and ecological benefits within the Lyle
Creek and Catawba River watersheds. Major goals for the Catawba River basin, as described in the
Catawba River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP; NCEEP, 2007, amended 2013) include: 1) improved
management of stormwater runoff to Crowder and Catawba creeks, 2) protection of the critical water
supply reservoirs in the region and their immediate riparian zones, and 3) land protection for important
natural and cultural resource sites including the Bunker Hill bridge over Lyle Creek. The proposed Starker
Mitigation Site will restore aquatic habitats that are currently degraded by cattle access and bank erosion;
improve water quality by excluding cattle; restore riparian buffers; stabilize streams that are part of a WS-
IV watershed; serve to continue existing water quality initiatives that are on -going in the watershed; and
enhance/restore riparian wetlands by reconnecting the stream to its historic floodplain.
In the Catawba River Basin wide Water Quality Plan (NCDWQ, 2010), the Lyle Creek Watershed
(03050101140010, Figure 1) is specified for protection efforts that include headwater streams that drain
to Lake Norman, a water supply reservoir. As part of the proposed Project, more than 10,400 linear feet
Water & Land Solutions Page 5

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
of stream (warm water thermal regime) will be stabilized, enhanced, and restored. The Lyle Creek
watershed is described as 39% agricultural land, and a majority of Lyle Creek receives agricultural runoff.
The proposed restoration work for the Project would restore riparian buffers at least 50 feet in width
along all stream reaches. This proposed work will provide significant reductions in nutrients, sediment,
and fecal coliform supplied to Mull Creek, Lyle Creek, and ultimately Lake Norman.
To accomplish these goals, the following site -specific objectives will be measured to document overall
project success:
• Provide a floodplain connection to the incised Project stream reaches by lowering bank height
ratios (BHRs) to less than 1.2, thereby promoting more natural floodplain storage and overbank
flood flows,
• Improve bedform diversity by increasing scour pool to pool spacing and depth variability,
• Increase native species riparian buffer and wetland vegetation density/composition along
streambank and floodplain areas,
• Improve aquatic habitat and fish species diversity and migration through the addition of in -stream
cover and native woody debris,
• Site protection through a 30-acre conservation easement in excess of 50 feet from the top of
banks that will protect all streams, wetlands and aquatic resources in perpetuity.
The preliminary site assessment suggests that the proposed mitigation activities will result in a higher
functioning aquatic ecosystem. The project goals and objectives address water quality stressors by
reducing nutrient and sediment inputs through stream restoration, riparian buffer restoration, and
riparian wetland rehabilitation. Hydrologic functions will be improved by raising the local water table.
The biologic and habitat functions will be improved by the revegetation of the riparian buffers.
Additionally, site protection through a 30-acre conservation easement in excess of 50 feet from the top
of banks, will protect all stream reaches and aquatic resources in perpetuity. These mitigation efforts will
provide a significant ecological benefit with minimal impacts and constraints during a recovery period that
would not otherwise occur through natural processes.
1.4 Watershed Need and Technical Feasibility
As a result of implementing this bank, WLS will restore, enhance, and protect approximately 10,400 linear
feet of stream. In order to appropriately offset unavoidable impacts to Waters of the United States
associated with rapid growth and development, the proposed bank is critical to improving water quality
and protecting aquatic resource functions in this region.
The technical feasibility of the bank is assured due to WLS' extensive experience with stream and wetland
restoration and enhancement in North Carolina and throughout the Southeast. Examples of WLS' success
with stream restoration and enhancement include the WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank and the
WLS Yadkin 01 Umbrella Mitigation Banks. The absence of fatal flaws, such as hydrologic trespass, and the
absence of threatened and endangered species and their habitats means the project is unlikely to be
impeded by resource issues, or by objections from landowners.
Page 6 4

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
2 Qualifications
2.1 Bank Sponsor
This prospectus is submitted on behalf of Water & Land Solutions, LLC (Sponsor), who will serve as the
Sponsor for the WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank. The contact information for the Sponsor is
listed below:
Water & Land Solutions, LLC
c/o Adam V. McIntyre
7721 Six Forks Road, Suite 130
Raleigh, NC 27615
919-614-5111
[e-mail]
2.2 Bank Sponsor Qualifications
WLS is a mitigation provider that concentrates on the production and delivery of quality mitigation credits
and services to clients across multiple regions of the United States. WLS was founded with the purpose
of combining the key components of high quality and successful mitigation sites, including the technical
expertise for mitigation site development, the understanding of land management, and the expertise in
environmental economics and finance. Through its inception WLS has identified, targeted and employed
well -respected practitioners in the mitigation industry who have specifically focused their careers on all
of the unique aspects of successful mitigation project implementation.
Beyond our focus to improve ecological function of impaired systems, WLS has a specific mission to
positively impact people in our industry and the general public through education, partnerships, and
building meaningful relationships. In just over five years since establishment, WLS has grown to a staff of
fourteen people located in Raleigh, North Carolina with satellite offices in Weaverville, North Carolina,
Columbus, Ohio, and Crested Butte, Colorado. WLS staff have been recognized by industry colleagues as
leaders in the development, management, design, permitting, construction, and monitoring of successful
mitigation projects.
2.2.1 Representative Mitigation Projects
WLS staff have extensive experience with stream, wetland, and riparian buffer restoration. Our
staff have been involved with the entire suite of services for hundreds of mitigation projects over
nearly two decades. This experience equates to the successful restoration of hundreds of
thousands of feet of stream and thousands of acres of wetlands. Several project examples are
highlighted below.
Water & Land Solutions Page 7

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Monteith Park Mitigation Site, Charlotte/Mecklenburg Stormwater Services, Huntersville, NC
Monteith Park before restoration (left) and five years after restoration (right)
WLS implemented what is considered to be a unique watershed restoration project in the mitigation
industry. The Monteith Park Mitigation Site (MPMS) is the only project to date in NC that utilized a
watershed restoration approach to generate additional mitigation credits at ratios above and beyond
those typically awarded for traditional stream and wetland restoration activities. The project involved the
Rosgen Priority Level I restoration of 3,550 linear feet of stream, 1.1 acres of wetland restoration, and the
innovative design and installation of five Stormwater Control Devices (bioretention basins) to reduce peak
flows and restore watershed hydrology to predevelopment conditions.
This project met all project milestones and performance standards through the year five monitoring phase
and achieved regulatory closeout in 2019.
Hollowell Mitigation Project, Wayne County, NC
Water & Land Solutions (WLS) has developed a
private commercial mitigation bank as part of the
WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank located in
the Neuse River Basin, 8-digit HUC 03020201. This
basin is located within the rapidly growing
Research Triangle region of North Carolina. The
Hollowell Bank Site drains directly to the Neuse
River, which is listed as 'Class C' and Nutrient
Sensitive Waters per the North Carolina Division of
Water Resources. The Hollowell project will
restore, enhance, preserve and protect over
8,979 linear feet of critical headwater streams that
was in agricultural use. In addition this project will
restore/enhance approximately 10 acres of riparian wetlands.
Page 8 4

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Edwards Full Delivery Projects, DMS, Johnston County, NC
Lake Wendell Mitigation Project before (left) and one year after restoration (right)
WLS is providing turn -key mitigation services for one of the most expansive series of DMS full
delivery projects within adjacent subwatersheds. The projects include Lake Wendell, Pen Dell,
Edwards -Johnson, Odell's House and Buffalo Creek Tributaries Sites (Sites) respectively. The Sites'
subwatersheds expand across several hundred acres within one of the fastest urbanizing areas in
the Triangle region. Upon completion, the five projects will total approximately 22,000 linear feet
of stream, 20 acres of wetlands, and 64 acres of land conversion to be restored, enhanced, and
permanently protected with conservation easements.
Site streams, wetlands, and riparian buffer areas had been severely degraded primarily due to
development, agricultural practices and cattle grazing since the 1950s. In addition, portions of the
stream segments have been impacted due to man-made impoundments. Many of the vegetated
buffers along the stream reaches had been removed for agricultural practices. Wetlands were
historically present throughout the riparian corridor, but had been significantly impacted due to
cattle trampling and channel incision (draining wetland hydrology). Many of the stream systems
have been channelized and incised leading to a significant loss of floodplain functions across the
entire watershed. The comprehensive restoration of these subwatersheds will provide significant
species habitat and water quality improvements to the wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers as
well as the Buffalo Creek watershed. Design and technical approaches include Rosgen Priority Level
I stream restoration, associated riparian wetland restoration, riparian buffer restoration, and the
innovative design and installation of agricultural stormwater BMPs to reduce peak flows and
restore appropriate watershed hydrology.
Water & Land Solutions Page 9

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Scarborough Mitigation Project, Wayne County, NC
Water & Land Solutions (WLS) has
developed a private commercial mitigation
bank as part of the WLS Neuse 02 Umbrella
Mitigation Bank located in the Neuse River
Basin, 8-digit HUC 03020202. This sub -basin
spans portions of Johnston and Wayne
Counties and includes the towns of
Goldsboro, Selma, Pine Level, Mount Olive,
Kinston, and Princeton. The Scarborough
project will restore over 11,300 linear
feet of critical headwater streams, restore
approximately 118 acres of riparian
wetlands, and permanently protect over
230 acres within the conservation easement. The site streams drain directly to the Neuse River which is
listed as 'Class C' and Nutrient Sensitive Waters, per the North Carolina Division of Water Resources. Over
90 percent of the streambanks have inadequate riparian buffers and over 60 percent of the total
stream length is actively subject to on -site water quality stressors resulting from agricultural
practices. Project restoration activities will reduce nutrient and sediment inputs from surrounding
agricultural areas.
3 Bank Establishment and Operation
The Bank will be developed as a private commercial umbrella mitigation bank under an umbrella
mitigation banking instrument (UMBI) to allow for the addition of future mitigation project sites located
in the Catawba River Basin, 8-digit HUC 03050101. The compensatory mitigation credits developed under
the UMBI will be available to public, private, and non-profit customers. The proposed bank sites may
include a combination of stream and wetland restoration, enhancement, and preservation activities,
depending upon the need of the individual aquatic resource to gain the highest ecological lift possible.
The proposed mitigation types, credit ratios, and performance monitoring will follow current USACE
guidance documents as approved by the USACE District Engineer (DE) and IRT.
3.1 Site Ownership
The Sponsor is obtaining legal options to develop the mitigation project with a conservation easement for
each of the property parcels that comprise the site. The Sponsor will record conservation easements in
the county Register of Deeds for the sites upon IRT bank approval. Landowner Agent Authorization forms
are provided in the appendices. The current property owners for the proposed site are listed in Table 1
below.
Page 10 4

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Table 1. Parcel Ownership Information
375210364087
Starker
Hunsucker Farms, LLC
Catawba
236.74
375219523168
Starker
Hunsucker Farms, LLC
Catawba
68.42
375215732614
Starker
Hunsucker Farms, LLC
Catawba
31.70
375216831456
Starker
Hunsucker Farms, LLC
Catawba
0.80
375215534132
Starker
Hunsucker Farms, LLC
Catawba
33.69
375211558910
Starker
Hunsucker Farms, LLC
Catawba
178.82
3.2 Proposed Service Area
The proposed Geographic Service Area (GSA) for the bank is illustrated in Figure 1 and will provide
compensatory mitigation credits for unavoidable, permitted impacts to Waters of the United States in the
Catawba River Basin (8-Digit HUC 03050101). Use of approved mitigation credits from the bank to
compensate for impacts outside the GSA may be considered by USACE on a case -by -case basis. For
example, the Starker site is warm water stream and wetland site and will provide compensatory mitigation
for warm stream impacts and wetland impact. Future sites may be developed in the bank that provide
both warm stream mitigation credits as well as wetland mitigation credits.
4 Ecological Suitability of the Sites
4.1 Baseline Conditions — Starker Site
4.1.1 Watershed Characterization
Table 2 details functional uplift and benefits in the context of the Catawba River Basin Wide Water Quality
Plan (NCDWQ, 2010) and the Lyle Creek Watershed.
Water & Land Solutions Page 11

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Table 2. Potential Functional Uplift and Ecological Benefits
.0 . -0
GoalsObjectives
Status
Goals011111111"W
.. River Basin Restoration
Priorities
(NCEEP, 00.. River
Basin Plan (NCDWQ, 2010)
Protect
Restore and enhance minimum 50-foot
Headwaters and
riparian buffers along all project reaches.
Riparian Buffers
Not Functioning Functioning
Protect riparian buffers with a perpetual
that Drain to Lake
conservation easement.
Norman
•
Restore appropriate aquatic in -stream
habitat.
Protect Important
Natural Resources
•
Restore riparian buffer communities.
Not Functioning
Functioning
■
Reduce sediment loads to downstream
receiving waters from bank erosion
■
Stabilize stream channels on the
Protect Water
property.
Quality within
Restore and protect riparian buffers.
Not Functioning
Functioning
Lake Norman
Exclude cattle and other livestock from
Watershed
streams.
•
Increased riparian wetland function.
Page 12 4

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Additional
..ls Consistent with Protectionof
Catawba River Basin
• Restore and protect riparian buffers.
Nutrient
Exclude cattle and livestock from
Reductions
streams.
Not Functioning
Functioning
• Increase riparian wetland acreage and
function.
• Stabilize stream channels on the
Sediment
property.
Reductions
Stabilize gullies and other eroding areas.
g g
Not Functioning
Functioning
■ Restore and protect riparian buffers.
• Restore appropriate bed form diversity
and in -stream structures to provide
appropriate habitat.
Improved Aquatic
Restore self-sustaining stream channels.
Habitats
Functioning At -Risk
Functioning
Restore riparian buffer vegetation to
provide organic matter and shade.
■ Exclude cattle and other livestock from
streams.
Restore Terrestrial
' Restoration of riparian buffers in wetland
Habitat
and upland areas.
Not Functioning
Functioning
4.1.2 Physiography, Geology, and Soils
As shown in Figure 8, soils in the project area are primarily the Tomlin loam series on the upstream end
of UT1 and UT2, and Codorus loam along the downstream ends of the two tributaries and along the Mull
Creek floodplain. Tomlin soils consist of very deep, well drained soils that are found in Piedmont uplands
and along interfluves, side slopes, and nose slopes. Codorus soils consist of very deep, moderately well
drained to somewhat poorly drained soils that formed in recently deposited alluvial materials along
floodplains. In the wider alluvial valley areas of the site (primarily middle to lower reaches of UT1 and
UT2), soil profiles that are exposed along many eroding stream banks on the site show evidence of upland
sediments that have been deposited over a hydric soil profile. This provides evidence that prior to
significant land use change in the watershed, it is likely that wetland systems were prevalent along both
UT1 and UT2, and remnants of these wetland areas are still present at the Site.
The underlying geology and metamorphic terrane within the Project area is located in the Piedmont
geologic province east of the Blue Ridge Mountains. More specifically, the Project is located in the foothills
of Inner Piedmont and at the Amphibolite and Biotite Gneiss Formation interlayered with minor layers
and lenses of hornblende gneiss, metagabbro, mica schist, and granitic rock (Geologic Map of North
Carolina, NC Geological Survey, 1998).
Water & Land Solutions Page 13

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
4.1.3 Existing Stream Conditions
Field investigations were conducted to evaluateAV
and document the existing conditions of the Site ,.
as well as each Project stream reach. These
studies included cross-section surveys
photographic documentation, pebble counts,
bank erosion documentation and estimations,
and documentation of other observed site�r
conditions and stressors. The assessments were r
originally conducted in November 2014 and were x
confirmed in November 2018 and again in July R.
and August 2019. The results of these.
investigations are summarized in Table 3 andk�"
collected field data are provided in Appendix A.
Areas of documented bank scour and mass Direct cattle access and agricultural runoff to
wasting are provided in Figure 10, areas of proposed stream reaches and wetlands are the
channel incision are provided in Figure 9, and primary water quality stressors.
watershed stressors are illustrated in Figure 4. Finally, the potential of each bank to contribute sediment
to the stream (BEHI) is shown in Figure 13.
UT1 is a transport channel that can be characterized throughout its entire lengths as an incised, partially
entrenched, predominantly sand bed stream with gravel dominant riffles. The overall reach stressors are
agricultural impacts including direct cattle access, anthropogenic channel modification, timbering
practices that have resulted in channel incision, entrenchment, and mass wasting of banks due to channel
evolutionary processes, localized channel scour, and poor riparian habitat on a reach -wide scale. Stressors
along UT1 vary throughout its length; therefore, it has been divided into five sub -reaches for classification
and restoration technique purposes: UT1a, UT1a-1, UT1b, UT1c, and UT1c-1. Reach UT1a begins as a
gullied spring head system. Reach UT1a-1 is direct tributary to Reach UT1a and is an incised spring head
system heavily impacted by livestock. Reach UT1b is a heavily impacted and an incised transport channel.
Reach UT1c is a moderately impacted transitional confluence to Mull Creek. Reach UT1c-1 is a direct
tributary to Reach UT1c and is an incised system impacted by historic agricultural and upstream channel
manipulation. Each reach is discussed in detail in the following paragraphs.
Table 3 and Table 4 present the results of the field evaluations along with the unverified jurisdictional
status of each project reach. Copies of the supporting field assessment forms are available in Appendix A.
Table 3 provides reach designations, approximate drainage area, stream status based on field analysis and
NCDWR stream classification form score.
Page 14 4

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Table 3. Reach Watershed Drainage & Jurisdictional Status — Starker Site
4.1.4 Existing Reach Descriptions
In general, all or portions of the project streams do not function to their full potential. Current conditions
demonstrate significant habitat degradation as a result of impacts from silviculture, agriculture, and water
diversion. Site reaches were assessed using the NC Stream Assessment Method (NC SAM) and wetlands
were assessed using the NC Wetland Assessment Method (NC WAM). NC SAM and WAM rating forms are
included in Appendix A, and results are summarized in Table 4. Morphological parameters are located in
Table 5.
Table 4. NCWAM & NCSAM Summary
LOW --
LOW --
MEDIUM --
MEDIUM --
MEDIUM -
MEDIUM --
- LOW
Water & Land Solutions Page 15

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Table 5. Existing Reach Description — Starker Site
1,100 2.3 7 2.3 Incised E
92 1.9 8 2.2 B (functioning as a G)
2,334 1.1 19 4 F
1,985 1.7 6 3.1 B (functioning as a G)
80 1.1 14 3.5 F
797 1.6 3 3.3 B (functioning as a G)
570 2.2 16 1 C
2,862 1.9 5 1.7 B (Functioning as a G)
UT1a: Reach UT1a begins as a deep gully near Rock
Barn Road on the northern end of the property. The
gully is approximately 12 to 15 feet deep, highly
unstable, and has been used in the past as a dumping"
area for farm trash and waste. At the base of the gully
system, several strong springs originate and form the
headwaters of the UT1 system. Incision of the stream
decreases downstream; however, the system is
incised (BHR > 1.5) along its entire length. Large trees
are present along the banks of the upper portion of
Reach UT1a, but not along the lower portion. From �.
the middle portion of Reach UT1a to the end of the
sub -reach, adjacent riparian wetland areas become Reach UT1a demonstrates the ability to
prevalent due to considerable discharge of
groundwater along the adjacent toe of slopes. enhance significant riparian wetlands.
Wetland areas are currently degraded by
However, the function of these wetlands is being channel incision, loss of vegetation, and
impacted by the incised stream condition and
cattle access.
frequent cattle access which is prevalent along the
entire sub -reach. Reach UT1a ends at the inlet of the culverted crossing for a farm path which provides a
downstream structural grade control point.
UT1a-1: Reach UT1a-1 is a direct tributary to UT1a. UT1a-1 begins as spring head approximately 100 feet
upslope of and near the middle of Reach UT1a. The reach is heavily impacted by cattle and sections of the
streambanks have been completely trampled. The channel has been filled with sediment from the eroding
banks, and flow is diffuse and impeded due to a cattle crossing near the middle of the reach. There are
crayfish and frogs in the reach, but the biological function of the stream has been severely impacted by
sedimentation and habitat degradation. Reach UT1a-1 ends at its confluence with Reach UT1a.
Page 16 4

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
UT1b: Reach UT1b begins at the culvert outlet of the farm path crossing. The outlet end of the pipe is
perched due to past headcutting of the stream up to the crossing. As a result of the headcutting, incision
along the reach is higher, resulting in greater sediment loss due to bank scour and mass wasting than in
Reach UT1a. Reach UT1b is predominantly wooded; however, trees along the riparian floodplain are
relatively sparse and consist primarily of successional species. Cattle are constantly accessing the wooded
areas for shade and multiple areas along Reach UT1b are active loafing areas with an over -widened
channel and trampled banks. Anthropogenic channel modification is evident with the channel's location
against the right side of the valley, creating areas of mass wasting with bank heights much greater than
those associated with the remainder of the incised channel. The lower section of Reach UT1b has been
fenced off from cattle and has been left for reforestation to occur; however, this area presents the most
active channel evolutionary processes. Numerous tree falls exist and continue to occur where the channel
is actively increasing meander width. Almost all outside bends are characterized by extremely high,
vertical banks with larger trees precariously perched on top. The top third of these banks consist of
exposed roots and overhanging banks with little to no surface protection or rooting depth at the lower
elevations where channel interaction occurs. Where Reach UT1b approaches the 60-inch culvert under I-
40 demarks the end of this sub -reach, the bank height ratio drops to a relatively stable condition and the
substantial erosive forces no longer seem apparent, most likely due to the backwater effects the culvert
during higher flows.
UT1c: Reach UT1c begins at the downstream outlet of the 60-inch culvert under 1-40. The outlet is laid on
a natural bedrock seam which is providing vertical stability, however the increased velocities at the outlet
of this extremely long stretch of culvert are impacting the banks with localized scour. The upper portion
of Reach UT1c is wooded along the right bank, but the forest along the left bank has recently been cleared,
leaving only a thin line of trees. Cattle have been fenced out of this upper part of Reach UT1c. However,
as with the lower portion of Reach UT1b, many of the channel evolutionary processes are manifesting
through mass wasting of outer bends and localized toe scour within riffle and run sections. Much of the
upper section of Reach UT1c contains tree falls and/or debris jams creating localized areas of unstable
vertical banks up and down stream. As Reach UT1c begins to transition to the floodplain of Mull Creek,
cattle access resumes, the riparian buffer is reduced, and human channel modification once again become
apparent through channel straightening. Cattle are using several loafing areas where substantial shade
exists, causing trampled banks. Almost all outer bends through this lower portion of Reach UT1c are
characterized by nearly vertical banks covered by herbaceous vegetation with few moderately sized trees.
An existing farm culvert is in place towards the end of the reach which acts as a pinch point for the stream,
causing localized scour and instability in the banks up and down stream. Finally, the confluence with Mull
Creek is vertically stable as Mull Creek has some bedrock controls within the vicinity of the confluence
that would provide an excellent tie in point with minimal concern of future headcutting.
UT1c-1: Reach UT1c-1 is a direct tributary to UT1c. UT1c-1 begins as spring head approximately 100 feet
upslope of and near the lower end of Reach UT1c. The reach is not currently impacted by cattle but is
incised and actively eroding. Efforts have been made by the landowner to prevent the headcut from
worsening by filling the channel with logs and debris, but the channel still appears to be actively eroding
and downcutting. Based on historical aerial imagery from 1951, it appears that UT1c-1 could have been a
functioning stream before the construction of 1-40. There is evidence that the watershed for the tributary
was split by the highway and the stream was diverted into a ditch that flows into UT1b. Upstream of the
jurisdictional break, the channel appears to have been straightened and filled in. In addition to overland
stormwater flow, UT1c-1 is also fed by groundwater from several streambank seeps. Reach UT1c-1 ends
at its confluence with Reach UT1c.
Water & Land Solutions Page 17

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
UT2a: Similar to UT1 to Mull Creek, UT2 to Mull Creek can be generally characterized as a sand -dominated
transport channel that is spring fed, with significant incision, partial entrenchment, and undergoing many
of the same channel evolution steps present in UT1 to Mull Creek. As with UT1, UT2 to Mull Creek has
experienced stressors associated with agricultural practices: human channel modification, cattle access,
and timbering. UT2 to Mull Creek has been divided into three sub -reaches for the purposes of classifying
the stream and identifying the appropriate restoration techniques. Reach UT2a begins as a small wetland
area that is fed by hill slope springs near the main farmhouse and buildings. At a culverted farm crossing
just downstream, the stream incises greatly due to headcutting that has migrated up the stream system
to the culvert. From the farm crossing culvert down to near the NCDOT right-of-way for 1-40, the stream
is highly incised with extreme bank heights and considerable ongoing scour erosion and mass wasting.
Headcuts are actively moving through this reach. Approximately 50 feet upstream of the NCDOT right-of-
way, the stream has formed an active wetland floodplain within the overly widened channel that is
relatively stable; however, there is still some erosion along the adjacent terrace banks due to overland
flow and runoff.
UT2b: Reach UT2b begins directly below the 1-40 right-of-way and flows approximately 583 feet to a
culverted farm crossing. The reach appears to have over -widened in the past, perhaps due to heavy cattle
access, but has now formed a relatively stable wetland floodplain at a lower elevation. The developing
floodplain is dominated by herbaceous vegetation with little deep rooting woody vegetation established.
Cattle have been excluded from the reach for some time, perhaps because of the high, steep streambanks
that are still eroding in some locations. The sub -reach ends at a culverted farm crossing that appears to
be appropriately sized, but is experiencing some erosion due to poor stabilization practices.
NNIF
"�'' UT2c: UT2c begins at the culverted farm crossing and
extends down to the confluence of UT2 with Mull
Creek. The reach is highly incised along much of its
' - length with considerable areas of bank scour and mass
wasting. The upper 800 feet and lower 700 feet of the
reach have sparse mature trees that offer limited
riparian protection, and cattle have active access to
these areas. The middle 1,300 feet of channel was
cleared of trees in 2009, and the area along the left
stream bank was converted to livestock pasture. The
area along the right streambank has been left fallow
and has repopulated with young successional tree
Reach UT2c, like many of the project species that are approximately ten years of age,
reaches, displays frequent erosion around including significant areas of Chinese privet (Ligustrum
outer meander bends due to land sinense). Much of the channel through the middle and
disturbance, channel incision, loss of buffer, lower portion of UT2c is meandering and eroding,
and frequent cattle access. especially on the outside of meander bends. This
ongoing evolution has left the outer bends
characterized by steep, undercut banks with an herbaceous cover lacking sufficient surface protection or
rooting depth. Where large woody trees are present and an overwidening of the channel exists, small
areas of new floodplain are developing at a lower elevation. However, with the presence of vertical
bedrock grade control, the only means of gaining stability will be to continually stress the outer bends
until an appropriate meander width can be achieved. As UT2c approaches the confluence with Mull Creek,
the channel appears to still be undergoing incision processes. The banks are more vertical with
significantly less vegetation is present. The terminus for UT2c will occur at the farm crossing just upstream
Page 18 4

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
with the confluence with Mull Creek. This culverted crossing is currently providing the stable downstream
grade control point and will serve as a stable end to the UT2 to Mull Creek system.
4.1.5 Existing Wetland Conditions
W1 is a riparian wetland located on UT1a and is approximately 1.18 acres. The wetland has been impacted
by the incised stream condition and extensive cattle access along the entire reach. A preliminary soils
investigation was completed by an LSS (Appendix A). Two soil borings in the study area showed colluvium
material from the surrounding upland that washed in from anthropogenic activities. The colluvium
material in both boring was determined to be hydric and met the F3 Depleted Matrix hydric soil indicator.
WLS will evaluate other potential wetland mitigation areas during project development. If present, it is
anticipated they will be limited to small riparian wetlands/seeps and the primary mitigation treatments
will be rehabilitation, enhancement, and preservation.
4.2 Regulatory Considerations
4.2.1 Existing Easements & Potential Site Constraints
The 1-40 corridor runs through the approximate center of the project area and bisects UT1 and UT2. The
culverts beneath 1-40 will be control points for the proposed stream design work, and the design will tie
into the elevations of the existing culverts. No additional flooding will be created within the 1-40 NCDOT
right-of-way as a result of the project. One power line easement is present to the north of UT1a, but the
easement is located outside of the proposed project limits. No other easements or significant constraints
have been identified for the project. There are commercial or private airports within five miles of the
project site.
4.2.2 Mineral or Water Rights Assurance
There are no known mineral or surface water rights issues within or adjacent to the site properties.
4.2.3 Hydrologic Trespass
Upon review of the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) National Flood Insurance
Program's Digital Flood Insurance Rate Mapping (DFIRM) panel 3710375200J effective September 5, 2007,
UT1 and UT2 are not regulated waters (Figure 11). There are no established Base Flood Elevations (BFEs),
Floodways, or Flood Hazard Zones along the tributaries. However, the portions of Mull Creek that UT1
and UT2 flow into are regulated and therefore the lower 500 feet of UT1 and UT2 are within the flood
hazard zone AE associated within Mull Creek. The proposed restoration work associated with this project
will not include any structure placement, excavation, or fill within the Flood Hazard Zone significant
enough to influence the BFEs of Mull Creek. Therefore, coordination will occur with the local floodplain
manager.
4.2.4 Invasive Species Vegetation
There are currently no substantial communities of invasive plant species within the proposed project
boundaries. Some small, immature Chinese Privet was observed on the project site below 1-40, as well as
some small multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora) plants were observed on the project site above 1-40. These
areas will be monitored by WLS, and any invasive plants found within the project boundary will be treated
Water & Land Solutions Page 19

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
to prevent expansion and establishment of a substantial invasive community. This will allow for a healthy,
native riparian and upland plant community to dominate the area and help prevent future establishment
of invasive species vegetation.
4.2.5 Cultural Resources
This project is not anticipated to have any adverse impacts on cultural or historical resources. On -site
investigations and discussions with the landowner have not revealed any potential resources of this type
on the property. If the project moves forward, WLS will contact the NC State Historic Preservation Office
(SHPO) to ensure no cultural or historical resources will be impacted.
4.2.6 Threatened and Endangered Species
Based on a review of the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) database and IPaC, there are currently four
federally -listed endangered species known to occur in Catawba County: Bog turtle (Glyptemys
muhlenbergii ), Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii), Dwart-flowered heartleaf (Hexastylis
naniflora) and the Northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis). Project implementation is not
anticipated to have a negative impact on these species. WLS will coordinate with the appropriate agencies
should a determination be required for permitting.
4.2.7 Conditions Affecting Hydrology
Six small farm culvert crossings must be accounted for in the stream design (Figure 12). These crossings
will allow livestock and farm equipment to access fields and pastures on either side of the stream reaches.
When necessary to benefit the restoration designs and ensure stream stability, the crossings will be
replaced with appropriately sized pipes set at the correct elevations to promote stability and allow
passage of aquatic life. Stabilization practices will be applied to ensure stable crossings.
4.2.8 Adjacent Land Use
Site -adjacent land use is primarily silviculture and agriculture. However, the surrounding landuse is
transitioning to commercial, residential, and industrial land uses due to its proximity to several population
centers and easily accessible transportation corridors. None of these land uses will have negative impacts
on the operation of the site.
Page 20 4

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
5 Mitigation Work Plan
5.1 Site Design Approach
The Starker Mitigation Site involves the restoration
and enhancement of approximately 10,400 feet of
stream (Figure 12). The proposed Project will improve
the function of existing wetland systems and restore a
stable headwater stream -wetland complex. Aquatic
resources on the Site have been severely impacted by
past channelization, ditching, direct cattle access, loss
of riparian buffers, and past land use.
UT1, including UT1a-1 and UT1c-1, and UT2 are highly
degraded and moderately to highly incised due to past
channelization and/or natural stream incision in
response to land use changes. The design approach for
the entire length of UT1, UT1a-1, UT1c-1, and most of
UT2a and UT2c (Enhancement Level II is proposed for
UT2b) will involve reconnecting the streams to active
floodplains (Priority Level I and II Restoration
Approaches), with a preference for Priority Level I
Restoration when feasible. By reconnecting the streams to a functional floodplain, the following
functional improvements will be achieved:
The Project is experiencing mass wasting of
banks and considerable erosion due to past
channelization and/or natural stream
incision in response to land use changes.
■ Rehabilitation/Enhancement of Adjacent Riparian Wetlands — Based on observed soil
profiles that are exposed along eroding stream banks, it is apparent that wetlands were once
prevalent along much of the Starker Mitigation Site reaches. Numerous groundwater springs
discharge along the toe of adjacent hill slopes, and in some areas are still enough to support
degraded wetland habitats. Raising of the stream beds and reconnection to an active floodplain
will promote higher water table conditions adjacent to the streams and more overbank flooding.
■ Filtration of Flood Flows— Currently, discharges significantly higher than the bankfull discharge
are carried within the incised stream channels. Reconnection to an active floodplain will provide
filtration of flood flows through floodplain vegetation, effectively reducing storm flow energies
and velocities.
■ Improved Buffer Function — Higher water table conditions associated with reconnecting the
floodplain will promote better denitrification of groundwater flowing to the stream channels.
Rehabilitated wetland areas adjacent to the stream will promote increased plant uptake and
retention of surface runoff before reaching the stream channels, minimizing overland flow
velocities while also encouraging nutrient removal processes.
■ Reduced Water Quality Impacts— By simply excluding livestock from the project stream using
fencing and restoring riparian buffers, significant reductions in direct input of nutrients and fecal
coliform will be achieved.
Design approaches will ensure that all excavated floodplain areas allow for the design meander belt width,
plus an additional 1.5 bankfull widths beyond the stream belt width. For most project reaches this equates
to a design floodplain width of between 50 to 70 feet. This width is considered practical and achievable
based on available floodplain widths measured in the field. In some locations, natural pinches in the valley
Water & Land Solutions Page 21

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
topography may necessitate tighter floodplain widths. For excavated floodplain areas, depths will be
undercut so that excavated topsoil can be replaced to approximately S to 10 inches in depth to achieve
final design floodplain grades. Good quality topsoil will be stockpiled separately during construction
activities to be used in the replacement of topsoil in excavated areas. The slopes between the outer edge
of the floodplain grading and the terrace will be a minimum of 5:1, unless natural hill slope topography
dictates the need for steeper slopes.
In -stream structures will be constructed from materials naturally found at the project site such as
hardwood logs and brush, with the use of quarried rock and stone as needed. WLS will use methods of
structure design and construction that have proven successful on numerous past projects, and practices
that have been well received by regulatory agencies.
5.1.1 Proposed Stream Conditions —Starker Site
UT1a: Reach UT1a — Reach UT1a begins as a highly incised channel that becomes less incised as it flows
downstream and opens into an alluvial valley. The extreme incision at the upstream end of the reach will
be addressed by routing storm flows from the ephemeral drainage upstream through the existing gully on
the east side of the headwater system. Rock step structures and a constructed cascade will be used to
step the storm flows down to the existing streambed elevation. The western gully will be stabilized by
installing a gravel drain at the existing channel elevation that will continue to transport spring flow to the
channel, and then filling and sloping the gully area over the gravel drain to stabilize the area without
needing to remove any of the large trees along the top of the bank.
Downstream of the stream head, the bed elevation of the stream will be raised over a distance of
approximately 300 feet to reconnect the stream with its original floodplain. Fill material will be taken from
adjacent upland areas to raise the streambed, and constructed riffle structures will be installed to ensure
bed stability. Woody structures such as toe wood and log vanes, along with bioengineering practices, will
be used to stabilize the outside meander bends and other areas of high bank stress. The design pattern
will follow a meandering plan form through the alluvial valley. This Priority Level I Restoration will be
carried down to the farm crossing at the downstream end of Reach UT1a.
Reach UT1b and Reach UT1c — Due to the highly incised and unstable nature of these stream reaches, a
Priority Level II Restoration approach is proposed for these reaches that will both raise the stream bed
elevation and lower the adjacent floodplain slightly to restore floodplain access. Excavation of a floodplain
at a lower elevation is the most practical approach to restoration since a significant amount of fill material
would be required to raise the streambed and stabilize eroding banks and hill slopes. This approach also
provides the opportunity to remove upland alluvial sediments that have been deposited on the floodplain
as a result of poor land use practices in the past, thus exposing the buried hydric soil layers that are present
along the reaches. Exposing the buried hydric soils, raising the local water table by raising the streambed,
and providing for greater floodplain storage will provide significant uplift of lost riparian wetland function.
Reach UT1a-1 and Reach UT1c-1 — Due to the incised and unstable nature of these stream reaches, a
combination of Priority Level I and II Restoration approaches are proposed that will raise the stream bed
elevation to restore floodplain access. This approach also provides the opportunity to raise the local water
table, providing for greater floodplain storage and a significant uplift of lost riparian wetland function.
Downstream of the stream head for both reaches, the streambed elevation will be raised to reconnect
the stream with its original floodplain. Fill material will be taken from adjacent upland areas to raise the
Page 22 4

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
streambed, and constructed riffle structures will be installed to ensure bed stability. Woody structures
such as toe wood, along with bioengineering practices, will be used to stabilize the outside meander bends
and other areas of high bank stress. The design pattern will follow a meandering plan form through the
alluvial valley. This Priority Level I Restoration will be transitioned down to the confluences with UT1a and
UT1c, respectively, using shallow Priority Level II Restoration only where/if needed.
While this restoration approach requires the removal of some trees along the reaches, tree loss will be
minimized to the extent possible. In many areas, the approach can be applied while working around larger
trees that would provide shade and organic material to the stream after restoration. Trees are most dense
along the lower portion of Reach UT1b; however, tree loss due to bank erosion in this area is significant
under existing conditions. These stream reaches are attempting to form active floodplains at a lower
elevation but are early in the evolutionary process. Therefore, considerable erosion, mass wasting, and
tree loss will continue before the system would begin to approach stability on its own.
Reach UT2a — This reach is the most incised of all the project reaches. Restoration will begin at the
culverted farm crossing at the beginning of the reach, where the existing culvert crossing will be removed,
and the farm path re-routed to above the reach as part of the project. A Priority Level II Restoration
approach will be used, involving raising the stream bed several feet and excavating a bench in some areas
along the right stream bank, which has minimal large trees. The stream will be designed as a step -pool
channel that primarily follows the existing channel alignment, due to the higher slope of the reach and
the need to tie into the road culvert at the downstream end of the reach. Rock cross -vane and constructed
riffles/cascades will be used along the reach to ensure bed stability and arrest the channel incision and
headcutting that is currently occurring along the reach. Near the downstream end of the reach, stable
benches have already formed along the stream; therefore, stabilization practices will focus on minimizing
future downcutting and treating eroding side slopes.
Reach UT2c— The restoration approach for this reach will be the same as the approach described above
for Reaches UT1b and UT1c. However, Reach UT2c has few mature trees along its length, since trees were
timbered along much of the reach within the past 10 years. Within this cutover area, young successional
species have begun to establish along the reach, along with a considerable amount of Chinese privet.
Treatment of invasive species vegetation will be included under the restoration approach, as well as minor
benching along this reach to provide floodplain reconnection, which will promote the restoration of
adjacent riparian wetland functions.
5.1.2 Proposed Riparian Wetland Conditions
Based on a primary assessment by an LSS W1 is suitable for wetland rehabilitation. It is anticipated that
cattle exclusion, raising the stream bed elevation, limited soil alterations, and wetland planting the
hydrology and wetland functions will be fully restored.
6 Credit Determination
6.1 Proposed Credit Types
The work describes a total of more than 10,400 LF of stream restoration and enhancement and 1.18 acres
of wetland rehabilitation. The mitigation approaches described will yield 10,127 warm water thermal
regime stream mitigation credits (SMCs) and 0.786 wetland mitigation credits (WMCs) . Table 6 below
Water & Land Solutions Page 23

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
summarizes the mitigation approaches, lengths, mitigation ratios, and mitigation credits that are expected
from the project.
Table 6.
Stream Restoration
1,238
1:1
1,238
Warm
Stream Restoration
110
1:1
110
Warm
Stream Restoration
2,343
1:1
2,343
Warm
Stream Restoration
2,203
1:1
2,203
Warm
Stream Restoration
96
1:1
96
Warm
Stream Restoration
838
1:1
838
Warm
Stream Enhancement Level II
570
2.5:1
228
Warm
Stream Restoration
3,071
1:1
3,071
Warm
Note 1: No mitigation credits are proposed outside the conservation easement boundaries.
Note 2: Existing and proposed stream lengths were estimated from GIS/GPS data and will be modified after
developing a survey basemap and formal mitigation work plans have been approved by IRT.
All the project stream reaches proposed for mitigation credits are perennial or intermittent streams as
determined using North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) Stream Identification Forms.
�� Wetland Rehabilitation 1.18 1.5:1 0.786
6.2 Credit Release Schedule
All credit releases, except the initial release, will be based on the total number of mitigation credits
generated as reported in the approved final mitigation plan and verified by the as -built survey. The initial
credit release will be based on the proposed restoration lengths (SMCs) as approved in the final mitigation
plan. The credit ledger will be managed by WLS and approved by the USACE District Engineer (DE) and
IRT. The estimated credits will be released following current USACE guidance, as shown in Table 8.
Page 24 4

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Table S. Credit Release Schedule
Site Establishment (as defined in Section 6.3)
15%
15%
15% 15%
Completion of all initial physical and
biological improvements made pursuant to
15%
30%
15% 30%
the Mitigation Plan
Year 1 Monitoring Report demonstrates that
channels are stable and interim performance
10%
40%
10% 40%
standards have been met
Year 2 Monitoring Report demonstrates that
channels are stable and interim performance
10%
50%
10% 50%
standards have been met
Year 3 Monitoring Report demonstrates that
channels are stable and interim performance
10%
60%
15% 65%
standards have been met
Year 4 Monitoring Report demonstrates that
channels are stable and interim performance
5%
°
65/°
5% 70%
(75%*)
standards have been met
Year 5 Monitoring Report demonstrates that
channels are stable and interim performance
10%
°
75/°
15% 85%
(85%*)
standards have been met
Year 6 Monitoring Report demonstrates that
channels are stable and interim performance
5%
80%
5% 90%
° *
(90% )
standards have been met
Year 7 Monitoring Report demonstrates that
channels are stable and interim performance
10%
°
90%
10% 100%
(100%*)
standards have been met
Note: *10% reserve
of credits to be held back until the bankfull event
performance standard has been met.
6.3 Initial Allocation of Released Credits
The standard credit release schedule generated through stream and wetland mitigation projects will
occur upon establishment of the bank site(s), and upon initial satisfactory completion of the following
activities:
1) Execution and Approval of the UMBI by the Sponsor and the USACE.
2) Approval of the Final Mitigation Plan.
3) Confirmation the mitigation bank site has been secured.
4) Delivery of the financial assurances as described in the Mitigation Plan.
5) Recordation of the long-term protection mechanism and title opinion acceptable to the USACE.
6) Issuance of the 404 permit verification for construction of the site, if required.
For mitigation bank sites that include preservation -only credits, 100% of the preservation credits will be
released with the completion of the six criteria stated above.
Water & Land Solutions Page 25

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
6.4 Subsequent Credit Releases
All subsequent credit releases must be approved by the DE, in consultation with the IRT, once
performance standards have been met or exceeded. For mitigation bank site(s), implementation of the
approved Mitigation Plan must be initiated no later than the first full growing season after the date of the
first credit transaction (credit sale). For streams, a reserve of 10% of the site(s) total stream credits will
be released after four bankfull events have occurred, in separate years, provided the channel is stable and
all other performance standards are met. In the event that less than four bankfull events occur during
the monitoring period, release of these reserve credits is at the discretion of the IRT. For headwater
streams (zero order), channel formation and continuous surface water flow within the valley must be
documented to occur every year for at least 30 consecutive days during the prescribed monitoring period.
For wetlands, the site(s) must meet or exceed the percent saturatio n/hydrope riod thresholds for common
wetland soil series in North Carolina.
6.5 Financial Assurances
The bank sponsor will provide financial assurances in the form of a casualty insurance policy or a
performance bond. The financial assurance policy will be submitted for review and approval by the USACE
and Office of General Counsel (OGC) prior to completion of the final UMBI. Upon establishment, the
USACE will hold the original policy document to ensure bank compliance and successful project site
completion. Financial assurances shall be payable at the direction of the USACE to his designee or to a
standby trust. Financial assurances structured to provide funds to the USACE in the event of default by
the Bank Sponsor are not acceptable. A financial assurance must be in the form that ensures that the
USACE receives notification at least 120 days in advance of any termination or revocation.
7 Long -Term Management
7.1 Maintenance
The bank sites will be protected in perpetuity by a recorded conservation easement. The conservation
easement will allow for annual site inspections during the post -construction monitoring period. These
site inspections may identify components and features that require routine maintenance. The site will be
monitored on a regular basis and a physical inspection will take place at least once a year throughout the
post -construction monitoring period until performance standards are met. Routine post -construction
maintenance may include the following components as described in Table 9.
Page 26 4

WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Draft Prospectus
Table 9. Routine Maintenance Components
Stream
Routine channel maintenance and repair activities may include modifying in -stream
structures to prevent piping, securing loose coir matting, and supplemental
installations of live stakes and other target vegetation along the project reaches.
Areas of concentrated stormwater and floodplain flows that intercept the channel
may also require maintenance to prevent bank failures and head -cutting until
vegetation becomes established.
Wetland
Routine wetland maintenance and repair activities may include securing of loose
erosion control matting and supplemental plantings of target vegetation within the
wetland. Areas of concentrated stormwater and floodplain flows that intercept the
wetland may also require maintenance to prevent excess scour.
Vegetation
Vegetation will be maintained to ensure the health and vigor of the targeted plant
community. Routine vegetation maintenance and repair activities may include
supplemental planting, pruning, and fertilizing. Exotic invasive plant species will be
controlled by mechanical and/or chemical methods. Any invasive plant species
control requiring herbicide application will be performed in accordance with NC
Department of Agriculture (NCDA) rules and regulations.
Site Boundary
Site boundaries will be demarcated in the field to ensure clear distinction between
the mitigation site and adjacent properties. Boundaries may be identified by fence,
marker, bollard, post, or other means as allowed by site conditions and/or
conservation easement. Boundary markers disturbed, damaged, or destroyed will be
repaired and/or replaced on an as needed basis.
Stream Crossing
The stream crossing(s) within the site may be maintained only as allowed by the
recorded Conservation Easement, deed restrictions, rights of way, or corridor
agreements.
Upon final IRT approval and project closeout, the site(s) will be transferred to a long-term land steward.
The responsible party for long-term management has not yet been chosen but will be approved by the DE
and IRT prior to the bank establishment. The long-term management and land steward shall be
responsible for periodic/routine inspection of the site(s) to ensure that the conservation easement and/or
the deed restrictions are being upheld. Any endowment funds for the conservation easement and deed
restrictions shall be negotiated prior to site transfer to the responsible party. The management activities
will be conducted in accordance with the terms and conditions of the approved UMBI as agreed to by
WLS, USACE, and the IRT.
7.2 Adaptive Management Plan
In the event the mitigation site or a specific component of the mitigation site fails to achieve the necessary
performance standards as specified in the approved mitigation plan, the Sponsor shall notify the USACE
and coordinate with IRT members to develop a remedial action plan. The Sponsor will also coordinate
with the USACE to obtain authorization and approval to conduct the remedial action. The remedial action
plan should describe the source or reason for the failure, a concise description of the corrective measures
that are proposed, and a time frame for the implementation of the corrective measures. Additional
monitoring, as prescribed by IRT guidance, may also be required to satisfy the performance standards.
Water & Land Solutions Page 27

A+*Py 4
�R
d �3ti7am Stony Point
v~�
F�• , �
Bethlehern
•�,�ry, p Ch u � ah Ra •• . ' 1
rr -
.. fii dnr d 1 O �J•
/-.. .y Park
r 0 %g
> Cn0
a
s 1 •� 3
r•4 Rd& f —
0 St Steph wf�s I
a Project Location:Ir In,
nH«•
gyp. 35043'40.195"N
03050101140010
81 D 10'33.565"W 70 `
a
` ., alaixf
-
s,�.; Qy cor,war - -
& Blyd W 1
Ir r
f Lake Norman
s
ky Newtm � f{
8R Ss P O
$ '�
Q �s
. A
v
fir- �v
2f
N i
s 's'
A � ,
Je
MaidenLenoir--,------ sville
v Morganton
ry� r
a n Sra d
321'l
ole
h' ii
Moor If
LEGEND �� sib �+ i , • l
Conservation Easement X�e f 5helhY - 1Charlotte
Targeted Local Watershed
8-Digit HUC
PREPARED BY:
0 1.5 3 STARKER MITIGATION SITE ECOSYSTEM
Miles SERVICE AREA MAP S + PLANP41NG &
RESTORATION
FIGURE I CATAWBA COUNTY, NC JUNE 2020

m
S� ✓O V � .
has Ch`�ch R 4L-
Ro�K Barn Rd
4
r
c
7
t
�d
LEGEND
Conservation Easement
PREPARED BY:
0 375 750 STARKER MITIGATION SITE ECOSYSTEM
Feet VICINITY MAP A17RESTORATIONPLANNING &
FIGURE 2 CATAWBA COUNTY, NC JUNE 2020

UT1a *
++r`�r+►� UT1a-1�`
Ilk
•! ► • ►� �' r 10
2i UT1 b
S UT2a
41
y
r ` UT2b
LEGEND
Q Conservation Easement . ;(,+
O Bedrock
Project Streams R■!'+w!-`'` r:
Cattle Access
Gully Erosion o
Cattle have access to approximately 52 /o
Existing Farm Crossings of project streams
PREPARED BY.'
o 600 STARKER MITIGATION SITE ECOSYSTEM
Feet WATER QUALITY STRESSORS MAP PLANNING, &
Ar RESTORATION
FIGURE 4 CATAWBA COUNTY, NC JUNE 2020

1i
LEGEND
Conservation Easement
Y
PA
13
PREPARED BY:
0 300 600 STARKER MITIGATION SITE Ar
ECOSYSTEM
Feet HISTORICAL AERIAL MAP (795 7) PLANNING &
RESTORATION
FIGURE 5A CATAWBA COUNTY, NC JUNE 2020

ti
' - , L+ 1,. • wn� •Tye IvT�'���3'1:,s ���-+: •.
-. .Y'AM✓P'.r f�j�
4.w'
.
LEGEND``
Conservation Easement,"' "
PREPARED BY:
0 300 600 STARKER MITIGATION SITE ECOSYSTEM
Feet HISTORICAL AERIAL MAP (1 964) rj" PLANNING, &
RESTORATION
FIGURE 5B CATAWBA COUNTY, NC JUNE 2020

C '
7
t
R
4
Aill
it
a
"�'_'�
t +f ■:ter � *
,r
f
4 .
� � - • t• r
� • fir, �
r
Ift
LEGEND >r=�
Conservation Easement
PREPARED BY:
0 300 600 STARKER MITIGATION SITE ECOSYSTEM
Feet HISTORICAL AERIAL MAP (1 993) ArRESTORATION
PLANNING &
FIGURE 5C CATAWBA COUNTY, NC JUNE 2020

11
T°
dp fw"- 1p't,
L'1
4L
LEGEND
Conservation Easement
PREPARED BY:
0 300 600 STARKER MITIGATION SITE ECOSYSTEM
Feet HISTORICAL AERIAL MAP (2004) PLANNING, &
Ar RESTORATION
FIGURE 5D CATAWBA COUNTY, NC JUNE 2020

AWN
149
wl:
4*
1.4 .
0.1
EX.
A4r '4"a.
dw
kk J.
4
LEGEND . . . . . . .
4."
u.
Conservation Easement
PREPARED BY:
0 300 600 STARKER MITIGATION SITE ECOSYSTEM
Feet HISTORICAL AERIAL MAP (2012) PLANNING &
Ar RESTORATION
FIGURE 5E CATAWBA COUNTY, NC JUNE 2020

r
i
■ ■ UT1 a-1 ,
-UT1a �
�+ 7 UT1 b
� l �
i UT2a '
UT1c ~-
■ 114 a _
UT1 c-1
UT2b'
A
r �
UT2c
�- Reach Drainage Area (acres)
i UT1a 59
UT1a-1 5
i UT1b 193
�
�
UT1c
252
LEGEND
Conservation Easement
Watersheds
UT1c-1
12
UT2a
84
UT2b
112
UT2c
169
0 500 1,000
00 Feet
1 inch = 1,000 feet
STARKER MITIGATION SITE
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
PREPARED BY:
ECOSYSTEM
PLANP41NG &
4j. RLSTOPATICN
FIGURE 6
CATAWBA COUNTY, NC
JUNE 2020

UT1a
UT1 a-1
UT2a
r
UT1 c-1
UT2b
UT1c
UT2c
LEGEND
Conservation Easement
Elevation (ft)
High : 994.035
Low: 848.49 ,o
0 300 600 PREPARED BY:
Feet STARKER MITIGATION SITE ECOSYSTEM
LIDAR MAP PLANNING, &
1 inch = 600 feet Ar RESTORATION
FIGURE 7 CATAWBA COUNTY, NC JUNE 2020

\� r
lir
UT1 a • ,�,
w
A �
UT1 a-1
�►
r
UT1 b
fie' • - .� �-
L �, fI� J. .• !�
\ 7
UT2a ;
�.,�• use
UT2b
fofv"�
. . 1
i
UT
'k
1 c-1
�
• L
UT1c
,t w.
UT2c Reach41076
Channel
cision (ft.)
% Channel
Incision
98%
.: UT1a
UT1a-1
74
80%
UT1b
2168
93%
` I UT1c
LEGEND
1929
97%
UT1c-1
80
100%
Incision R ,}, UT2a
457
57%
0
0%
Project Streams UT2b
2858
100%
Conservation Easement UT2c
Total
8642
88%
PREPARED BY:
ECOSYSTEM
PLANNING&
ArRESTORATION
0 300 600
Feet STARKER MITIGATION SITE
CHANNEL INCISION MAP
1 inch = 600 feet
FIGURE 9 CATAWBA COUNTY, NC
JUNE 2020

'X
X
UT1 a-1
UT
Ok
t _
� . UT2a
r ,
a .
UT1 bA
s
t
'
v- UT1c + r`
UT2b
UT1 c-1
Bank % BanIt
Reach
uTzo w
Erosion (ft.) Erosion
UT1a
1950 89%
LEGEND
UT1a-1
163 89%
UT1b
2765 59%
Project Streams
� ,. �
UT1c
1255 32%
Conservation Easement
UT1c-1
71 44%
Erosion
5ti
UT2a
865 54/
�S''
Mass Wasting
''.
f = . �: �. ,�, '
UT2b
308 27%
Scour
�
..i . _,, �.
UT2c
2536 44%
.
Total
9913 50%
0 300 600
PREPARED BY:
Feet
STARKER MITIGATION SITE
ECOSYSTEM
1 inch = 600 feet
EROSION MAP
PLANNING, &
Ar RESTORATION
FIGURE 10
CATAWBA COUNTY, NC
JUNE 2020

�d ttR �.
► + �i `
' UT1 a-1-
UT1 a �. p•' r
A
A
Y
UT2a o•
rr # A.0�]
34
UT1 c-1
UT2b
s UT1c ;
4 i
a�
UT2c f • �, t
LEGEND
0 Conservation Easement
Project Streams
Flood Zone w •1�
0 Zone AE
® Floodway
• / 5
Zone X, 0.2 PCT ANNUAL CHANCE
FLOOD HAZARD ; •,
0 300 600 PREPARED BY:
STARKER MITIGATION SITE ECOSYSTEM
Feet FEMA MAP PLANNING, &
1 inch = 600 feet Ar RESTORATION
FIGURE 1 1 CATAWBA COUNTY, NC JUNE 2020

r UT1 a
M
UT1 a _1
9 A A�
k .
c-
- ,�
Y. UT2a _ .�k0.�;.� a
.r,'9�W
,r
UT1 c
'- UT1 c-1
UT2b s '
LEGEND
b
Project Streams Y
Conservation Easement `
-
BEHI',�`
Extreme;
Very High
High �Y ' a17
Moderate'
Low
0 300 600 PREPARED BY:
Feet STARKER MITIGATION SITE ECOSYSTEM
BANK EROSION HAZARD INDEX MAP PLANNING, &
1 inch = 600 feet Ar RESTORATION
FIGURE 13 CATAWBA COUNTY, NC JUNE 2020

Appendix A- Existing Conditions Data
WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Prospectus

Starker Mitigation Project

0,
9
9
9
O
CO4-0
9
N 9
W
9
9
9
9
UT1 a
o Ground Points Bankfull Indicators • Water Surface
Points
Wbkf = 4.87 Dbkf = .68 Abkf = 3.31
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Horizontal Distance (ft)

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name:
Reach Name:
Cross Section Name:
Survey Date:
Starker Mitigation Site
UT1
UTla
11/05/2014
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 0 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 0 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1
4.39
95.61
6
4.76
95.24
15
4.81
95.19
24
5.13
94.87
26
5.35
94.65
LB
31
7.39
92.61
LEW
33.8
7.94
92.06
TW
34.2
7.88
92.12
REW
34.5
6.28
93.17
BKF
35.3
6.83
93.72
RB
40
5.34
94.66
50
5.23
94.77
64
5.08
94.92
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
94.28
94.28
94.28
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
93.17
93.17
93.17
Floodprone width (ft)
11.19
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
4.87
2.16
2.71
Entrenchment Ratio
2.3
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.68
0.41
0.89
Maximum Depth (ft)
1.11
0.72
1.11
width/Depth Ratio
7.16
5.26
3.04
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
3.31
0.89
2.42
wetted Perimeter (ft)
5.83
3
4.26
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.57
0.3
0.57
Begin BKF Station
29.63
29.63
31.79
End BKF Station
34.5
31.79
34.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
Shear Stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

UT1 b
o Ground Points Bankfull Indicators • Water Surface
Points
Wbkf = 15.1 Dbkf = .8 Abkf = 12
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100
Horizontal Distance (ft)

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name:
Reach Name:
Cross Section Name:
Survey Date:
Starker Mitigation Site
UT1
UT1b
11/05/2014
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 0 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 0 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
4
5
95
10
5.29
94.71
17
5.77
94.23
LB
20.7
7.12
92.88
22
10.18
89.82
25
10.24
89.76
LEw
32.2
10.39
89.61
Tw
36.5
10.31
89.69
REw
36.78
0
90.51
BKF
37
8.93
91.07
38.4
6.85
93.15
RB
47
6.48
93.52
69
6.29
93.17
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
91.41
91.41
91.41
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
90.51
90.51
90.51
Floodprone width (ft)
15.9
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
15.07
7.52
7.55
Entrenchment Ratio
1.06
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.8
0.75
0.85
Maximum Depth (ft)
0.9
0.84
0.9
width/Depth Ratio
18.84
10.07
8.88
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
12.01
5.62
6.39
wetted Perimeter (ft)
16.12
8.82
8.98
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.75
0.64
0.71
Begin BKF Station
21.71
21.71
29.23
End BKF Station
36.78
29.23
36.78
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
Shear Stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

UT1 c
o Ground Points Bankfull Indicators • Water Surface
Points
Wbkf = 7.74 Dbkf = 1.3 Abkf = 10
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100
Horizontal Distance (ft)

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name:
Reach Name:
Cross Section Name:
Survey Date:
Starker Mitigation Site
UT1
UT1C
11/05/2014
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 0 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 0 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1
5.42
94.58
7
5.3
94.7
19
5.08
94.92
LB
21
6.52
93.48
25
8.26
91.74
26.3
8.84
91.16
BKF
27
10.04
89.96
LEw
30.6
10.49
89.51
Tw
33.4
10.11
89.89
REw
34.3
8.31
91.69
38
5.36
94.64
RB
46
5.04
94.96
53
5
95
70
5.13
94.87
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
92.81
92.81
92.81
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
91.16
91.16
91.16
Floodprone width (ft)
13.16
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
7.73
3.87
3.86
Entrenchment Ratio
1.7
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
1.3
1.25
1.34
Maximum Depth (ft)
1.65
1.6
1.65
width/Depth Ratio
5.95
3.09
2.88
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
10.04
4.85
5.19
wetted Perimeter (ft)
9.26
6.18
6.27
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
1.08
0.79
0.83
Begin BKF Station
26.3
26.3
30.17
End BKF Station
34.03
30.17
34.03
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
Shear Stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

1
UT2a
o Ground Points Bankfull Indicators • Water Surface
Points
Wbkf = 3.63 Dbkf = 1.07 Abkf = 3.88
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100
Horizontal Distance (ft)

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name:
Reach Name:
Cross Section Name:
Survey Date:
Starker Mitigation Site
UT2
UT2a
11/05/2014
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 0 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 0 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
18
0.44
99.56
22
2.19
97.81
26
5.03
94.97
30
7.8
92.2
33
9.2
90.8
37
10.22
89.78
40
11.3
88.7
42
11.84
88.16
LB
44
13.5
86.5
45
0
84.89
BKF
46
16.48
83.52
LEw
47
16.5
83.5
Tw
48
16.48
83.52
REw
49
14.31
85.69
52
11.72
88.28
RB
55
9.3
90.7
59
7
93
63
6.28
93.72
69
6.1
93.9
80
5.33
94.67
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
86.28
86.28
86.28
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
84.89
84.89
84.89
Floodprone width (ft)
5.55
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
3.63
1.97
1.66
Entrenchment Ratio
1.53
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
1.07
1.03
1.12
Maximum Depth (ft)
1.39
1.39
1.39
width/Depth Ratio
3.39
1.92
1.48
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
3.88
2.02
1.85
wetted Perimeter (ft)
5.21
4.06
3.93
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.74
0.5
0.47
Begin BKF Station
45
45
46.97
End BKF Station
48.63
46.97
48.63
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0

Shear Stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

Al�a:7
o Ground Points * Bankfull Indicators
Wbkf = 7.79
Dbkf = .4
• Water Surface
Points
7 Abkf = 3.63
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Horizontal Distance (ft)

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name:
Reach Name:
Cross Section Name:
Survey Date:
Starker Mitigation Site
UT2
UT2b
11/05/2014
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 0 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 0 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
3
5.11
94.89
7
5.38
94.62
10.3
5.52
94.48
LB
13.3
7.14
92.86
15
8.05
91.95
17
9.33
90.67
LEw
17.6
9.39
90.61
Tw
19.7
9.29
90.71
REw
23.7
8.63
91.37
BKF
28.5
8.35
91.65
31.3
8.2
91.8
36.3
0
96.8
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
92.13
92.13
92.13
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
91.37
91.37
91.37
Floodprone width (ft)
16.97
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
7.79
7.24
0.55
Entrenchment Ratio
2.18
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.47
0.5
0.05
Maximum Depth (ft)
0.76
0.76
0.09
width/Depth Ratio
16.57
14.54
11
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
3.63
3.61
0.02
wetted Perimeter (ft)
8.06
7.59
0.65
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.45
0.48
0.04
Begin BKF Station
15.91
15.91
23.15
End BKF Station
23.7
23.15
23.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
Shear Stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

UT2c
o Ground Points * Bankfull Indicators
Wbkf = 5.76
• Water Surface
Points
Dbkf = 1.12 Abkf = 6.47
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Horizontal Distance (ft)

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name:
Reach Name:
Cross Section Name:
Survey Date:
Starker Mitigation Site
UT2
UT2c
11/05/2014
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 0 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 0 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
10
4.01
95.99
20
4.98
95.02
29
6.43
93.57
LB
30.1
7.5
92.5
BKF
32
8.87
91.13
LEw
33.4
9.03
90.97
Tw
35.1
8.99
91.01
REw
36.2
6.84
93.16
38
4.35
95.65
RB
42
4.33
95.67
46
4.36
95.64
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
94.03
94.03
94.03
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
92.5
92.5
92.5
Floodprone width (ft)
10.68
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
5.76
2.88
2.88
Entrenchment Ratio
1.85
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
1.12
0.94
1.31
Maximum Depth (ft)
1.53
1.48
1.53
width/Depth Ratio
5.14
3.07
2.2
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
6.47
2.7
3.77
wetted Perimeter (ft)
7.13
4.81
5.28
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.91
0.56
0.71
Begin BKF Station
30.1
30.1
32.98
End BKF Station
35.86
32.98
35.86
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
Shear Stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

NC DWQ Strum Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: q Project/Site: wmr
I" � ^ County:
Evaluator:
Total Points: Stream Dete alftn1Gi
Stream is at least intermittent 5 Ephemeral nte7Zitten
if ? 19 or perennial if >_ 30*
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal -1
1a- Continuity of channel bed and bank
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
_ ripple -pool sequence
A. Particle size of stream substrate
5. Active/relict floodplain
6. Depositional bars or benches
7. Recent alluvial deposits
8. Headcuts
9_ Grade control
10. Natural valley
11. Second or greater order channel
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
_1 _ A -
Latitude: '; `7 Z ( �, (_X
Longitude: -g (, 1`75Z4
role one) Other
Perennial I e.g. Quad Name:
Absent
Weak
Moderate
5tror
0
1
2
3.
0
1
2y
3
0
1
2
3
0
1
3
0
1
2
3
0
1
2
3
0
1
2
3
0
2
3
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
.5
1
1.5
Na=O
f
Yes-3
VI VIV
0
1
L
3
12, Presence of Baseflow
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
5
1
0.5
0
15_ Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5'
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
1
1.5
17_ Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
es = 3
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1.5
24, Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACVI(= 0.75; OBL =1. Othel;a�
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p_ 35 of manual_
Notes:
Sketch: j��7 i 5{�si'r� 'ro+ cC'q l l CU nc_(Ltt� oow�l L 19 01 JIFMJ'^-
��� � COh���� f (L+, ! i� �`rL Ji���S 1 �D►N`i�� illw���?CGT � �MDEi� l���r�' ` v'
bo�. J �`C��1 ��, � � �` � i� �QGiQ�C�' � �4��•d�� �'(OS/'? S �/� �Q�C!`��v1p� � ��.� t

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: �' `� Project/Site' Latitude: r -7 961 f
Evaluator: T_ r� County: Cd vcv._ Longitude: - �3 (,16-7 -1 7
Total Point*; �� Stream Dete n-igircle one) Other
Stream is at least intermittent Ephemeral Intermittent Yerennial e.g. Quad Name:
if? 19 or Derennial if? 30'
A. Geomorphology(Subtotal =^�
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong(1)
1"Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
0
1
3
ripple -pool sequence
1
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
5. Activelrelict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
,
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel No Yes = 3
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
12. presence of Baseflow
0
1
l 2 i
3
13, Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
C 3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.!
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.-1
1
1.5
17_ Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
(3)
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20_ Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
CO)1
2
3
22_ Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
A
0.5
1.5
24_ Amphibians
0,5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0j
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0.
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See
p_ 35 of manual.
-
Notes:
Sketch: l
Vir'i0r+ ��s� c3-
f

North Carolina Division of Water Quality -Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date, //� 1
Project: t� tJ�`
Latitude:
Evaluator:
Site: V '
Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream is Least intermittent
County:
Other
at y
?
d 1�
e.g. Quad Name:
If>_l9 or erennial if?30
A. Geomorphology ( Subtotal = 1'
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1 a. Continuous bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity
0
1
2
3. In -Channel structure: riffle -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting
0
1
2
5. Active/relic flood lain
0
1
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
2
3
7. Braided channel
0
1
2
3
8. Recent alluvial deposits
1
2
3
9a. Natural levees
OD
1
2
3
10. Headcuts
0
CILD
2
3
11. Grade controls
0
0.5
1
1.
12. Natural valley_or drainageway
0
0.5
1
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence.
No
Yes = 3
a Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual.
B Hydrology Subtotal =
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
14. Groundwater flow/discharge
0
1
2
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs. since rain, or
Water in channel - dry or growing season
0
1
2
3~7
16. Leaflitter
1.5
1
;_0.5
0
17. Sediment on plants or debris
0
[Q„5.
1
1.5
18. Or anic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines
0.5
1
1.5
19. H dric soils redoximor hic features resent?
No = 0
Yes 1.5
C. Biolo Subtotal =
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
20 . Fibrous roots in channel
2
1
0
21 . Rooted plants in channel
2
1
0
22. C rayf is
0.5
1
1.5
23. Bivalves
0
1
2
3
24. Fish
0
1
1.5
25. Amphibians
0
1
1.5
26. Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
0
0.5
1
1.5
27. Filamentous algae; periphon
0
= 1 . ;
2
3
28, Iron Oxidizing bacteria/fungus
r'G3
0.5
1
1.5
29 . Wetland plants in streambed
FAC=0.5; FACW=0.75; O =1.5; SAV=2.0;
Othe `0
.items ev and e t Locus on trig presence or upland plants, Item LH locuses on the presence or aquatic or Wetland
plants.
Notes: (U a back side of this form for additional notes.) ketch:
/00 DLO csAvl% r

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date: ! �� J L f
Project: 0"T" 4, (� J! S' f; .(t
Latitude:
Evaluator:
Site: UTZ U tr-
Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent r�
.r+
1 �
County: e W 1�}
a R^
Other
e.g. Quad Name:
lf?19or erenniali MO -96/
A. Geornor holo Subtotal =
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Stro
1a. Continuous bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity
0
1
2
3. In -Channel structure: riffle -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sortie
0
f1
2
3
5. Active/relic flood fain
0
1
2
0 1
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
.-2-')
3
7. Braided channel
0
1
2
3
8. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1--)
2
3
9a. Natural levees
0'-
1
2
3
10. Headcuts
0
1
2
n
11. Grade controls
0
0.5
(0
1.5
12. Natural valley or drainageway
0
0.5
1
1.5
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence.
No l 0
Yes = 3
a Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual.
B H drolo Subtotal =
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
14. Groundwater flow/discharge
0
1
�2
3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs. since rain, or
Water in channel - dry or growing season
0
1
2
3
16. Leaflitter
1.5
�_
0.5
0
17. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
18. Organic debris lines or piles Wrack lines
0 )
1
1.5
19. H dric soils redoximor hic features resent?
No = 0
Yes =1.5 `
C. Biology Subtotal =
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
20 . Fibrous roots in channel
i 3
2
1
0
21 . Rooted plants in channel
3
2
1
0
22. Crayfish
Liz
0.5
1
1.5
23. Bivalves
1
2
3
24. Fish
0.5
1
1.5
25. Amphibians
_G
l0.5
1
1.5
26. Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
0
Y5
1
1.5
27. Filamentous algae;. periphyton
0
1
2
3
28. Iron Oxidizing bacteria/fungus
0
0.5 "
1
1.5
29 . Wetland plants in streambed
FAC=0.5; FACW=0.75; OBL=1.5; SAV=2.0;
Other--
r-- --
.Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29
plants.
Notes: (Use back side of this form for additional notes.)
on the presence of aquatic or wetland
Sketch;
�6, �; A I'NX IMA.4 50.�+ je.; �csw b_�ti C'iaSS n� culvtr'�

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
Accompanies user rvianuai version a.0
USACE AID #
NCDWR#
Project Name
Starker
Date of Evaluation
6/10/2020
Applicant/Owner Name
WLS
Wetland Site Name
ST-W1
Wetland Type
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Daniel Ingram, WLS
Level III Ecoregion
Piedmont
Nearest Named Water Body
Mull Creek
River Basin
Catawba
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
03050101
County
Catawba
NCDWR Region
Winston-Salem
I-1 Yes M No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Longitude (deci-dearees)
35.726000.-81.175052
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
Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the
assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment
area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
❑A ❑A Not severely altered
®B ®B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub).
Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot
deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
❑A ❑A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ❑B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
®C ®C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change)
(examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3. Water Storage/Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
3a. ❑A ❑A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
❑B ❑B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
❑C ®C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®D ❑D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. ❑A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
❑B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
®C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

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

9. Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
❑A Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
®B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
❑C Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
®A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
❑B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
❑C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT
WC
FW (if applicable)
❑A
❑A
❑A
>_ 500 acres
❑B
❑B
❑B
From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C
❑C
❑C
From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D
❑D
❑D
From 25 to < 50 acres
❑E
❑E
❑E
From 10 to < 25 acres
❑F
❑F
❑F
From 5 to < 10 acres
®G
❑G
❑G
From 1 to < 5 acres
❑H
❑H
❑H
From 0.5 to < 1 acre
El
®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
T
o ❑A ®A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
cc ❑B ❑B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U ®C ❑C Canopy sparse or absent
S
o ❑A ❑A Dense mid-story/sapling layer
Cn
®B ®B Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
El ❑C Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
❑A ❑A Dense shrub layer
1E ❑B ®B Moderate density shrub layer
Cn ®C ❑C Shrub layer sparse or absent
-a ®A ®A Dense herb layer
_ ❑B ❑B Moderate density herb layer
❑C ❑C Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
®B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
❑C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
❑A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion — wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
❑A ®B ❑C ❑D
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion,
man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
❑A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
®B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes
Wetland is severly disturbed by long-term conversion to pasture.

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name ST-W1
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Date of Assessment 6/10/2020
Assessor Name/Organization Daniel Ingram, WLS
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO
Sub -function Ratina Summa
Function
Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -surface Storage and
Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Soluble Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
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 MEDIUM
Landscape Patch Structure Condition LOW
Vegetation Composition Condition LOW
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 SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user mianuai version &. 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):
Starker - UT1 a
3. Applicant/owner name:
WLS
5. County:
Catawba
7. River basin:
Catawba
2. Date of evaluation: 6/10/2020
Assessor name/organization:
Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad:
Daniel Ingram, WLS
Mull Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.726211,-81.175387
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): UT1a 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 1000
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 5 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 8 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 miz) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 miz)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ®Water Supply Watershed (❑I ❑II ❑III ®IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ®No
1. Channel Water — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction — assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not A
3. Feature Pattern — assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not A
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile — assessment reach metric
®A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
❑B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability — assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
®C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A
Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
❑B ❑B
Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
®C ®C
Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
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 m W ❑F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) m ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
❑B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent g Y ❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation Y LC ❑I Sand bottom
❑C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) r o ❑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)
1la. ❑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/am phi pod/crayfish/shri mp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/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. Basef low 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 Starker - UT1 a Date of Assessment 6/10/2020
Stream Category Pb1 Assessor Name/Organization
Daniel Ingram, WLS
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
YES
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NO
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
NA
(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
LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
HIGH
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
LOW
(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 FORM
Accompanies user mianuai version &. 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):
Starker - UT1 b
3. Applicant/owner name:
WLS
5. County:
Catawba
7. River basin:
Catawba
2. Date of evaluation: 6/10/2020
Assessor name/organization:
Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad:
Daniel Ingram, WLS
Mull Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.723099,-81.172985
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): UT1 b 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 1300
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 5 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 16 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 miz) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 miz)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ®Water Supply Watershed (❑I ❑II ❑III ®IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ®No
1. Channel Water — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction — assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not A
3. Feature Pattern — assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not A
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile — assessment reach metric
®A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
❑B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability — assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
®C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A
Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
❑B ❑B
Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
®C ®C
Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
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 m W ❑F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) m ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
❑B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent g Y ❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation Y LC ❑I Sand bottom
❑C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) r o ❑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)
1la. ❑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/am phi pod/crayfish/shri mp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/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?
ON ON
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. Basef low 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 Starker - UT1 b Date of Assessment 6/10/2020
Stream Category Pb1 Assessor Name/Organization
Daniel Ingram, WLS
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
YES
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NO
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
NA
(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
LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
HIGH
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
LOW
(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 FORM
Accompanies user mianuai version &. 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):
Starker - UT1 c
3. Applicant/owner name:
WLS
5. County:
Catawba
7. River basin:
Catawba
2. Date of evaluation: 6/10/2020
Assessor name/organization:
Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad:
Daniel Ingram, WLS
Mull Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.718361,-81.167831
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): UT1 c 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 1600
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 6 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 20 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 miz) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 miz)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ®Water Supply Watershed (❑I ❑II ❑III ®IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ®No
1. Channel Water — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction — assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not A
3. Feature Pattern — assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not A
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile — assessment reach metric
®A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
❑B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability — assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
®C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A
Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
❑B ❑B
Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
®C ®C
Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
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 m W ❑F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) m ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
❑B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent g Y ❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation Y LC ❑I Sand bottom
❑C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) r o ❑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)
1la. ❑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/am phi pod/crayfish/shri mp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/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?
ON ON
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. Basef low 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 Starker - UT1 c Date of Assessment 6/10/2020
Stream Category Pb1 Assessor Name/Organization
Daniel Ingram, WLS
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
YES
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NO
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
HIGH
(4) Microtopography
NA
(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
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
HIGH
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
MEDIUM
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall
MEDIUM

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user mianuai version &. 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):
Starker - UT2a
3. Applicant/owner name:
WLS
5. County:
Catawba
7. River basin:
Catawba
2. Date of evaluation: 6/10/2020
Assessor name/organization:
Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad:
Daniel Ingram, WLS
Mull Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.721032,-81.177925
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): UT2a 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): 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 miz) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 miz)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ®Water Supply Watershed (❑I ❑II ❑III ®IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ®No
1. Channel Water — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction — assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not A
3. Feature Pattern — assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not A
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile — assessment reach metric
®A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
❑B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability — assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
®C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A
Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
❑B ❑B
Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
®C ®C
Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
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 m W ❑F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) m ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
❑B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent g Y ❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation Y LC ❑I Sand bottom
❑C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) r o ❑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)
1la. ❑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/am phi pod/crayfish/shri mp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/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?
ON ON
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. Basef low 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 Starker - UT2a Date of Assessment 6/10/2020
Stream Category Pb1 Assessor Name/Organization
Daniel Ingram, WLS
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
YES
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NO
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
HIGH
(4) Microtopography
NA
(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
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
HIGH
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
MEDIUM
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall
MEDIUM

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user mianuai version &. 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):
Starker - UT2b
3. Applicant/owner name:
WLS
5. County:
Catawba
7. River basin:
Catawba
2. Date of evaluation: 6/10/2020
Assessor name/organization:
Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad:
Daniel Ingram, WLS
Mull Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.718917,-81.177166
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): UT2b 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 500
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 2 ❑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 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 miz) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 miz)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ®Water Supply Watershed (❑I ❑II ❑III ®IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ®No
1. Channel Water — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction — assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not A
3. Feature Pattern — assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not A
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile — assessment reach metric
❑A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
®B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability — assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
®B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction - streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A
Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
®B ®B
Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
❑C ❑C
Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
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 m W ❑F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) m ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
®B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent g Y ❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation Y LC ❑I Sand bottom
❑C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) r o ❑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)
1la. ❑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/am phi pod/crayfish/shri mp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/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?
ON ON
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. Basef low 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 Starker - UT2b Date of Assessment 6/10/2020
Stream Category Pb1 Assessor Name/Organization
Daniel Ingram, WLS
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
YES
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NO
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
HIGH
(4) Microtopography
NA
(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
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
HIGH
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
MEDIUM
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall
MEDIUM

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user mianuai version &. 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):
Starker - UT2c
3. Applicant/owner name:
WLS
5. County:
Catawba
7. River basin:
Catawba
2. Date of evaluation: 6/10/2020
Assessor name/organization:
Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad:
Daniel Ingram, WLS
Mull Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.715549,-81.176016
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): UT2c 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 2200
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 5 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 10 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 miz) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 miz)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ®Water Supply Watershed (❑I ❑II ❑III ®IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ®No
1. Channel Water — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction — assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not A
3. Feature Pattern — assessment reach metric
®A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
❑B Not A
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile — assessment reach metric
®A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
❑B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability — assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
®C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A
Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
❑B ❑B
Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
®C ®C
Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
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 m W ❑F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) m ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
❑B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent g Y ❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation Y LC ❑I Sand bottom
❑C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) r o ❑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)
1la. ❑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/am phi pod/crayfish/shri mp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/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?
ON ON
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. Basef low 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 Starker - UT2c Date of Assessment 6/10/2020
Stream Category Pb1 Assessor Name/Organization
Daniel Ingram, WLS
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
YES
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NO
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
HIGH
(4) Microtopography
NA
(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
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
HIGH
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
MEDIUM
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall
MEDIUM

Banks Assessment for Non -point source
Consequences of Sediment (BANCS)
Starker: Existing Conditons
Bank Erosion Hazard
Stream Index Near Bank Shear Erosion Rate
Sub -Reach Length (ft)* (BEHI) Category Stress (Tons/yr)
UT1a
Left Bank 1025
Low
Very Low
0.10
47
Extreme
Very Low
5.88
Right Bank 825
Low
Very Low
0.08
145
Moderate
Very Low
0.29
111
Extreme
Very Low
13.90
subtotal 20
UT1b
Left Bank 94
Low
Very Low
0.04
1212
Moderate
Very Low
0.75
723
High
Very Low
3.66
370
Extreme
Very Low
46.98
Right Bank 111
Low
Very Low
0.02
1209
Moderate
Very Low
5.34
621
High
Very Low
13.36
422
Extreme
Very Low
116.43
subtotal 187
UT1c
Left Bank 1362
Moderate
Low
10.64
410
High
Low
10.89
250
Extreme
Low
126.98
Right Bank 1379
Moderate
Low
10.22
307
High
Low
7.73
347
Extreme
Low
167.13
subtotal 334
Reach UT1 Total 540
UT2a
Left Bank 85
Low
Very Low
0.02
246
High
Very Low
4.31
324
Very High
Very Low
30.53
159
Extreme
Very Low
35.67
Right Bank 115
Low
Very Low
0.02
264
High
Very Low
4.74
329
Very High
Very Low
31.80
104
Extreme
Very Low
23.94
subtotal 131
UT2b
Left Bank 424
Moderate
Low
2.37
160
High
Low
3.04
Right Bank 421
Low
Low
0.05
106
Moderate
Low
0.12
53
High
Low
0.20
subtotal 6
UT2c
Left Bank 1609
Moderate
Moderate
12.09
930
High
Moderate
18.63
258
Extreme
Moderate
80.74
Right Bank 1495
Moderate
Moderate
20.21
926
High
Moderate
33.39
412
Extreme
Moderate
232.09
subtotal 397
Reach UT2 Total 534
Project Total 1074

Banks Assessment for Non -point source
Consequences of Sediment (BANCS)
Starker: Design
Bank Erosion Hazard
Stream Index Near Bank Shear Erosion Rate
Sub -Reach Length (ft)* (BEHI) Category Stress (Tons/yr)
UT1a
Left Bank 1076 Low Very Low 0.11
Right Bank 1076 Low Very Low 0.11
subtotal 0
UT1b
Left Bank 2355 Low Very Low 0.94
Right Bank 2355 Low Very Low 0.52
subtotal 1
UT1c
Left Bank 2054 Low Low 1.61
Right Bank 2054 Low Low 1.52
subtotal 3
Reach UT1 Total 5
UT2a
Left Bank 815 Low Very Low 0.15
Right Bank 815 Low Very Low 0.15
subtotal 0
UT2b
Left Bank 583 Low Low 0.33
Right Bank 583 Low Low 0.06
subtotal 0
UT2c
Left Bank 2812 Low Moderate 3.52
Right Bank 2812 Low Moderate 6.34
subtotal
10
Reach UT2 Total
11
Proiect Total
15

HYDRIC SOIL & SITE INVESTIGATION
Hunsucker Tract
Catawba County, North Carolina
Prepared for:
Ecosystem Planning & Restoration
559 Jones Franklin Road, Suite 150
Raleigh, NC 27606
Prepared by:
324 Blackwell Street, Suite 1200
Durham, NC 27701
[phone]
Michael G. Wood
January 3, 2019

INTRODUCTION
Ecosystem Planning & Restoration (EPR) is investigating the feasibility of stream and riparian
wetland mitigation within the Catawba River Basin. The project site was accessed from Rock
Barn Road, Catawba County, NC. Three Oaks Engineering (Three Oaks) has been retained to
perform a Hydric Soil & Site Investigation that describes and classifies the soil within the study
area to make a determination as to its present and/or past hydric status.
The Study Area is a 1.18-acre wetland delineated by EPR that is a lightly wooded pasture
adjacent to a UT to Mull Creek. The UT is mostly incised.
METHODOLOGY
Prior to performing the evaluation, NRCS soil maps and USGS topographic maps were reviewed.
The field investigation was performed on October 12, 2018, by Michael G. Wood, LSS. Soils were
evaluated via hand -turned soil auger borings. Each boring was classified based on soil
characteristics indicating the hydric soil status. Boring locations were located with a GPS Unit
with sub -meter accuracy and are shown on the attached figure. Hydric soil status is based upon
the NRCS Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States - A Guide for Identifying and
Delineating Hydric Soils (Version 8.1, 2017).
RESULTS
Two (2) soil borings were advanced within the Study Area (Figure 1), both of which had colluvium
material from the surrounding uplands that washed in from anthropogenic activities. The
amount of colluvium varied from 8-13 inches. The colluvium material in both borings was
determined to be hydric. The original soil below the colluvium also was determined to have
been hydric. In all cases, hydric soil indicator F3 Depleted Matrix was the best match.
F3 Depleted Matrix. A layer that has a depleted matrix with 60 percent or more chroma
2 or less that has a minimum thickness of either:
a. 5 cm (2 inches) if the 5 cm starts at a depth of <10 cm (4 inches) from the soil
surface, or
b. 15 cm (6 inches), starting at a depth of <25 cm (10 inches) from the soil
surface.
CONCLUSION
Borings 1 and 2 are prime candidates for wetland rehabilitation. It is anticipated that through
removal of the cattle, raising the stream level, limited soil alterations, and re -vegetation, the
hydrology will be restored and allow the wetland to regain its normal functions.
Hunsucker Tract Hydric Soil & Site Investigation January 3, 2019
Three Oaks Job 18-795 1

The findings presented herein represent Three Oaks' professional opinion based on our Hydric
Soil & Site Investigation and knowledge of the current regulations regarding wetland mitigation
in North Carolina and national criteria for determining hydric soil.
Hunsucker Tract Hydric Soil & Site Investigation January 3, 2019
Three Oaks Job 18-795 2

�1 B2 .
_A `
U. 'I
}
1
I
Z
1.18 Acres
Soil Borings
Existing Wetlands
-.,
NG ente far`Ga Fa -d Information si
Hydric Soil Investigation
Hunsucker Farm
Catawba County, North Carolina
Date: January 2019
Scale: 0 25 50 Feet
1 1 1
Job "O-: 18a95
Drawn By: hecked By:
ETM r MG
Figure

UTi a & UT16
001 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Size (mm)

UT1c
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Size (mm)

UT2a
001 0.1 1 10 10D 1000 1000D
Particle Size (mm)

UT2c
001 01 , 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Size (mm)

jvb '`'Ywfl lti ( .ti 4r t j p. - 'fir -tom fi` Y ,fr
wo
��
�. � � �°�C,
_
�� �� tea.✓`
k-
r
x - ram.
S4
r
C`-.
}1'A y�y�jj
�Yi a w • Tit
.. t � -t -t: , y•i - elf

STARKER STREAM RESTORATION SITE
AUGUST 2019
CATAWBA COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
UT 1 A - FACING UPSTREAM -- ERODING
UT 1 A - FACING UPSTREAM - CROSSING AT
STREAM BANKS AND FINE SEDIMENT IN CHANNEL DOWNSTREAM END OF UT 1 A, RIPARIAN WETLAND
REACH UT 1 A-1
UT 1 A-1 -FACING UPSTREAM - CONFLUENCE
WITH UT 1 A
USED AS A WALLOW AREA FOR CATTLE
UT 1 A- 1 -FACING UPSTREAM -INCISED
CHANNEL
APPENDIX A 2

SI
s
� 1
fie.^, `•� ��yy
�.
�ry 4 �
Y �� � �
��
�iT.... . • yam` ,..
ti ti v
_
A
P

�.'^_--?' �,.g7�as� � , s �r'` :rx����Y r � •• AA�_ g �"�{?�'x `y' �+�y�- �� x� �: �a
-
,,,� f•E'r '4 � .i�

�� `SLY "?fir= .� :w� � � • �" 4� 4. :
Of
AT
lis *l,
`
ss
!^ A 11
t.
i'
-� f-9747
Shy
S
.ate
� �ti
�'F�
."r •�`G

STARKER STREAM RESTORATION SITE
AUGUST 2019
CATAWBA COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
REACH UT 1 C
UT 1 C - FACING UPSTREAM -- PERCHED
CULVERT CROSSES UNDER 1-40
UT 1 C -- FACING DOWNSTREAM -- ERODING
BANKS AND EXPOSED ROOTS
UT 1 C -FACING UPSTREAM -LARGE CUT BANK, UT 1 C -FACING UPSTREAM -UNDERCUT TREES,
ACTIVELY ERODING
FINE SEDIMENT DEPOSITS
APPENDIX A 6

STARKER STREAM RESTORATION SITE
AUGUST 2019
CATAWBA COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
UT 1 C -- FACING UPSTREAM -- TREES FALLING
INTO CHANNEL, FINE SEDIMENT DEPOSITS
UT 1 C -- FACING UPSTREAM -- DEBRIS IN
CHANNEL, ERODING STREAMBANK
UT 1 C - FACING DOWNSTREAM -- LARGE
ERODING CUT BANK
FIR
UT 1 C - FACING DOWNSTREAM -- UNDERCUT
STREAMBANK
APPENDIx A 7
UT 1 C - FACING DOWNSTREAM -- UNDERCUT
STREAMBANK
APPENDIx A 7

STARKER STREAM RESTORATION SITE
AUGUST 2019
CATAWBA COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
UT 1 C -- FACING UPSTREAM -- FENCE DEBRIS IN
CHANNEL
UT 1 C - FACING DOWNSTREAM - ERODING
STREAM BANKS DOWNSTREAM OF CROSSING
UT 1 C -- FACING DOWNSTREAM - ERODING
STREAMBANK, JUST UPSTREAM OF CROSSING
NEAR XS UT 1 C
UT 1 C - FACING DOWNSTREAM - ERODING
STREAMBANK DOWNSTREAM OF CROSSING
APPENDIX A 8

STARKER STREAM RESTORATION SITE
AUGUST 2019
CATAWBA COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
REACH UT 1 C-1
UT 1 C- 1 -FACING UPSTREAM -- CONFLUENCE
WITH UT 1 C
UT 1 C- 1 -- FACING UPSTREAM -- ERODING
STREAMBANKS, FINES SEDIMENT IN CHANNEL
�ky�I
k "
y r
e'I'I
UT 1 C-1 - FACING UPSTREAM - INCISED
CHANNEL, ERODING STREAMBANK
APPENDIX A 9

STARKER STREAM RESTORATION SITE
AUGUST 2019
CATAWBA COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
REACH UT2A
UT2A -- FACING DOWNSTREAM -- WATER
PONDED UPSTREAM OF BLOCKED CULVERT AT
UPSTREAM END OF UT 1 A
UT2A - FACING DOWNSTREAM - INCISED
CHANNEL, ERODING BANKS
UT2A -- FACING DOWNSTREAM -- TREES
COLLAPSED INTO CHANNEL
UT2A - ERODING GULLEY THAT DRAINS TO
PROJECT STREAM
APPENDIX A 10

�i
\
i�4 I
(` Af
r
a
fit' �
�- - . _ _ `4 �:F���'d� .y .. -_
s �y'�yy',,�p• �� _! yam'\\
. i- a�. ' T e.... , � u''Y'tiaJfn•6. ^

STARKER STREAM RESTORATION SITE
AUGUST 2019
CATAWBA COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
UT213 -- FACING UPSTREAM
REACH UT2C
UT2C -- FACING UPSTREAM --- ARMORED
CULVERT AT CROSSING UPSTREAM OF UT2C
UT213 -- FACING UPSTREAM
UT2C -- FACING DOWNSTREAM - STEEP
STREAMBANKS, CATTLE IMPACTS
APPENDIX A 12

STARKER STREAM RESTORATION SITE
AUGUST 2019
CATAWBA COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
UT2C -- FACING DOWNSTREAM - DEBRIS AND
FINE SEDIMENT IN STREAM
UT2C -- FACING DOWNSTREAM - FENCE LINE,
CATTLE HAVE ACCESS TO UPSTREAM SECTION OF
REACH
UT2C -- FACING DOWNSTREAM - STEEP
STREAMBANKS, CATTLE IMPACTS
UT2C -- FACING DOWNSTREAM - ERODING
STREAMBANKS, DOMINANT INVASIVE SPECIES
APPENDIX A 13

STARKER STREAM RESTORATION SITE
AUGUST 2019
CATAWBA COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
UT2C -- FACING DOWNSTREAM - FENCE LINE,
CATTLE HAVE ACCESS TO UPSTREAM SECTION OF
REACH
UT2C - FACING DOWNSTREAM - BANK
EROSION, ACCUMULATION OF FINE SEDIMENT
UT2C -- FACING DOWNSTREAM - ERODING
STREAMBANKS, DOMINANT INVASIVE SPECIES
UT2C - FACING DOWNSTREAM - BANK
EROSION, ACCUMULATION OF FINE SEDIMENT
APPENDIX A 14

Appendix B- Adjacent Landowner
Information
WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Prospectus

Appendix B- Adjacent Landowner Information
Table 1. Starker- Adjacent Landowner Information
Susan L. Bolick
Gail E. Murray & Mitzi J. Yount
Elizabeth Anne Smyre
Robert K. & Karen O. Isesnhour
GLL & TEG, LLC
Kenneth R. Cline, Sr.
Gene E. Monday
Marth Wilkins Brock
Timothy E. Carpenter
John Christopher Hoffman
Wesley B. Spencer
Richard W. Dugger
Dan Alan Hunsucker
Thomas Wayne Hoffman
Just Real Estate, Inc.
Barbara Ingold Wilcox Revocable Living Trust
Bobby Ray Snipes, Jr.
Mavis S. Bumgarner Heirs
Aaron Daniel Carpenter
Phyllis M. Brown
3687 Rock Ridge Road, Conover, NC 28613
646 Museum Dr, Charlotte, NC 28207
P.O. Box 188, Claremont, NC 28610
2977 Dogwood Dr, Claremont, NC 28610
2258 US Hwy 70 SE, Hickory, NC 28602
3041 Peachtree St Ext, Claremont, NC 28610
P.O. Box 877, Claremont, NC 2860
1927 Hampstead Rd, Rock Hill, SC 29732
2727 Sigfield Dr, Claremont, NC 28610
202 W 8t" St, Newton, NC 28658
2488 Birdie Lane NE, Conover, NC 28613
2655 Gettysburg PI, Claremont, NC 2860
3216 John Daniel Dr NE, Conover, NC 28613
3734 Barn Rd NE, Conover, NC 28613
3741 Rock Barn Rd NE, Conover, NC 28613
P.O. Box 325, Conover, NC 28613
3854 Rock Barn Rd NE, Conover, NC 28613
P.O. Box 1422, Claremont, NC 28610
2711 Sigfield Dr, Claremont, NC 28610
2757 Sigfield dr, Claremont, NC 28610

Casey Robert Dupell
Building Systems of Catawba, LLC
Charles Edwin Parkhurst Heirs
Carol H. Preston
Boyce Roop Hollar, Jr.
M & A Realty, LLC
M & A Investments
Hanes Companies, Inc.
William Mackie Hunsucker
2783 Sigfield Dr, Claremont, NC 28610
P.O. Box 3409, Hickory, NC 28603
5493 Little Mountain Rd, Catawba, NC 28069
1013 3rd Ave NW, Conover, NC 28613
2029 Conover Blvd E, Conover, NC 28613
P.O. Box 1479, Conover, NC 28613
3624 Bermuda Dr NE, Conover, NC 28613
P.O. Box 757, Carthage, MO 64836
840 Hamilton St, Newton, NC 28658
Linda Mingus Elliot & 2405 St. Johns Church Rd NE, Conover, NC
Fred Allen Hunsucker Revocable Life Insurance Trust 28613
Harvey Dallas Sigmon 3028 Balls Creek Rd, Newton, NC 28658
Rock Barn Properties, Inc. 3791 Clubhouse Dr, Conover, NC 28613
Jerry Nye Parkhurst 2369 St. Johns Church Rd NE, Conover, NC
28613
Note: Listed in the table above are all the names and mailing addresses for all the landowners adjacent to
the Starker Mitigation Site.

Appendix C- Landowner Authorizations
Forms
WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Prospectus

Starker Mitigation Project

WATER & LAND SOLUTION
7721 SIX FORKS ROAD, SUITE 130, RALEIGH, NC 2761;
(919) 614 - 5111 1 waterlondsolutions.com
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
DEED BOOK 2785 PAGE NO. 1153 PARCEL ID: 375210364087
STREET ADDRESS: 3223 John Daniel Road, Conover NC
DEED BOOK 2785 PAGE NO. 1148 PARCEL ID: 375219523168
STREET ADDRESS: 3 tracts off E I40, Conover NC
DEED BOOK 3269 PAGE NO. 1875 PARCEL ID: 375215732614
STREET ADDRESS: 31.70 acres off E 140, ClaremoLlnt NC
DEED BOOK 3269 PAGE NO. 1875 PARCEL ID: 375216831456
STREET ADDRESS: 3069 Peach Tree Street Ext, ClaremoLlnt NC
DEED BOOK 3068 PAGE NO. 571 PARCEL ID: 375215534132
STREET ADDRESS: 3 tracts off E 140, Conover NC
DEED BOOK 2785 PAGE NO. 1163 PARCEL ID: 375211558910
STREET ADDRESS: 3728 Rock Barn Road NE. Conover NC

WATER & LAND SOLUTION!
7721 SIX FORKS ROAD, SUITE 130, RALEIGH, NC 27615
(919) 614 - 5111 1 waterlandsolutions.com
Please Print:
Property Owner: Hunsucker Legacy Farms, LLC/dba Hunsucker Farms, LLC
Manager: Dan A. Hunsucker
The undersigned, registered property owners of the above noted property, do hereby
authorize
V e�7G -- of W Q4Q,,Y- cA/id Lo j �otu-�V4 S
(Contractor / Agent)
(Name of consulting firm)
to review my property and to act on my behalf to take all actions necessary for the
processing, issuance and acceptance of necessary permits and/or certifications and any and
all standard and special conditions attached. This authorization allows the individual to
represent on my behalf to the necessary Government agency personnel for the proposed
property.
Property Owner's Address (if different than property above):
3223 John Daniel Drive NE, Conover, NC 28613
Telephone: [phone]
We hereby certify the above information submitted in this application is true and accurate
to the best of our knowledge.
=r'
Dan hunsuc' :r (Aug21, 202016:18 EDT)
Authorized Signature
Date: Aug 21, 2020
Authorized Signature
Date:
Page 2

Starker -Landowner Authorization
Final Audit Report 2020-08-21
Created: 2020-08-21
By: Catherine Manner ([e-mail])
Status: Signed
Transaction ID: CBJCHBCAABAAsOgjxhvb8Rf2ebn6QfOX. 7uOiUFQdZzm
"Starker -Landowner Authorization" History
Document created by Catherine Manner ([e-mail])
2020-08-21 - 8:12:33 PM GMT- IP address: 174.108.239.26
Document emailed to Dan hunsucker ([e-mail]) for signature
2020-08-21 - 8:13:24 PM GMT
Email viewed by Dan hunsucker ([e-mail])
2020-08-21 - 8:15:33 PM GMT- IP address: 71.81.244.211
Document e-signed by Dan hunsucker ([e-mail])
Signature Date: 2020-08-21 - 8:18:14 PM GMT - Time Source: server- IP address: 71.81.244.211
Signed document emailed to Dan hunsucker ([e-mail]) and Catherine Manner
([e-mail])
2020-08-21 - 8:18:14 PM GMT
a Adobe Sign