20180180 Ver 1_Year 1 Monitoring Report_2020_FINAL_20201109

ID#* 20180180 Version* 1
Select Reviewer:*
Erin Davis
Initial Review Completed Date 11/09/2020
Mitigation Project Submittal-11/9/2020
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?* O Yes a No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
rJ Stream rJ Wetlands [Buffer ❑ Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:*
Cara Conder
Project Information
.............................................................................................................................................................................
ID#:* 20180180
Existing IDf
Project Type: r DMS r Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Hollowell (WLS Neuse 01 UMB)
County: Wayne
Document Information
Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Version: * 1
Existing Version
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: Hollowell _MY1_USACE_2020_FINAL ALL.pdf 18.29MB
Rease upload only one PDF of the complete file that needs to be subrritted...
Signature
Print Name:* Cara Conder
Signature:*
owl

Monitoring Report – MY1
Hollowell Mitigation Project
WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Monitoring Year 1
Calendar Year of Data Collection: 2020

Private Commercial Mitigation Bank for
Stream and Riparian Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Credits
Neuse River Basin (CU 03020201)
USACE Action ID Number: SAW-2017-00159
Wayne County, NC
Data Collection Period: October 2020
Submission Date: November 2020

Prepared for:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403-1343

Prepared by:

Table of Contents
1 Project Summary ................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Project Location and Description .................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives ........................................................................................................ 1
1.3 Project Success Criteria ................................................................................................................. 2
1.3.1 Single-Thread Streams .......................................................................................................... 2
1.3.2 Headwater Streams .............................................................................................................. 3
1.3.3 Wetlands ............................................................................................................................... 4
1.3.4 Vegetation ............................................................................................................................. 4
1.3.5 Visual Assessment ................................................................................................................. 4
2 Project Mitigation Components ............................................................................................................ 5
2.1 Project Components ..................................................................................................................... 5
2.2 Design Approach ........................................................................................................................... 5
2.2.1 Stream ................................................................................................................................... 5
2.2.2 Wetland ................................................................................................................................. 7
3 Monitoring Year 1 Assessment and Results .......................................................................................... 7
3.1 Morphological Assessment ........................................................................................................... 7
3.1.1 Stream Horizontal Pattern & Longitudinal Profile ................................................................ 7
3.1.2 Stream Horizontal Dimension ............................................................................................... 8
3.2 Stream Hydrology ......................................................................................................................... 8
3.2.1 Stream Flow .......................................................................................................................... 8
3.2.2 Bankfull Events ...................................................................................................................... 8
3.2.3 Headwater Stream Channel Formation ................................................................................ 8
3.2.4 Wetland Hydrology ............................................................................................................... 9
3.3 Vegetation ..................................................................................................................................... 9
4 Methods ................................................................................................................................................ 9
5 References .......................................................................................................................................... 10

LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A Background Tables
Table 1 Project Mitigation Components
Table 2 Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3 Project Contacts
Table 4 Project Information and Attributes
Regulatory Meeting Minutes

Appendix B Visual Assessment Data
Figure 1 a & 1b Current Condition Plan View (CCPV)
Photos Stream Station Photographs
Vegetation Plot Photographs
Crossing Photographs
Additional Photos

Appendix C Vegetation Plot Data
Table 5a Planted and Total Stem Counts
Table 5b Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary
Table 5c MY0 Planting Species List

Appendix D Stream Measurement and Geomorphology Data
MY1 Cross-Sections
Table 6a Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table 6b Cross-section Morphology Data
Table 6c Stream Reach Morphology Data

Appendix E Hydrologic Data
Table 7 Verification of Bankfull Events
Figure 2 Surface Flow Data
Figure 3 Flow Gauge Installation Diagram
Figure 4 Rainfall Data
Figure 5 Wetland Gauge Data

1

1 Project Summary
1.1 Project Location and Description
Water and Land Solutions, LLC (WLS) completed the construction and planting of the Hollowell Mitigation
Project (Project) in April 2020. The Project is located approximately seven miles southwest of Goldsboro
in Wayne County, NC (35.35814, -78.11642), in the Neuse River Basin 8-digit HUC 03020201 and NC
Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) sub-basin 03-04-02 (Warm Water Thermal Regime). The
Project is a site within the WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank. This sub-basin spans portions of
Johnston and Wayne Counties and includes the municipalities of Goldsboro, Selma, Pine Level, Mount
Olive and Princeton.
The Project involved the restoration, enhancement, preservation, and permanent protection of eight
stream reaches totaling approximately 8,979 linear feet, and the preservation, re-establishment, and
enhancement of riparian wetlands totaling 10.52 acres. The Project also results in nutrient offset credits,
riparian buffer restoration, and buffer preservation through the Division of Water Resources. The Project
will provide significant ecological improvements and functional uplift through stream and aquatic habitat
restoration, and through decreasing nutrient and sediment loads within the watershed. Figures 1a and 1b
illustrate the project mitigation components.
Monitoring Year 1 (MY1) activities occurred during the last week in October 2020. This report presents
the data for MY1. The Project meets the MY1 success criteria for stream hydrology, stream horizontal and
vertical stability, streambed condition and stability, stream flow, and vegetation. Based on these results,
the Project is expected to meet the Monitoring Year 2 (MY2) success criteria in 2021. For more information
on the chronology of the project history and activity, refer to Appendix A, Table 2. Relevant project contact
information is presented in Table 3 and project background information is presented in Table 4.
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives
The Project will meet the goals and objectives described in the Hollowell Final Approved Mitigation Plan
and will address general restoration goals and opportunities outlined in the NC DMS Neuse River Basin
RBRP (DEQ 2010). More specifically, watershed goals and management strategies will be met by:
• Reducing sediment, soil erosion, turbidity, and nutrient inputs such as nitrogen and phosphorus
to the Neuse River Watershed.
• Restoring, enhancing, preserving, and protecting headwater streams, wetlands, riparian buffers
and aquatic habitat functions.
• Improving riparian corridor management and targeting restoration of impacted streams and
riparian buffer areas.
• Promoting agronomic farm management techniques and implementing agricultural BMPs and
water quality features, such as nutrient management and wetlands restoration.
To accomplish these project-specific goals, the following 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 a more natural headwater flow regime and
overbank flood flows,

2

• Improve bedform diversity by increasing scour pool spacing and depth variability,
• Increase native species riparian buffer and wetland vegetation density/composition along
streambank and floodplain areas that meet requirements of a minimum 50-foot-wide and 210
stems/acre after the monitoring period,
• Improve aquatic habitat and fish species diversity and migration through the addition of in-stream
cover and native woody debris,
Site protection is provided by a 72-acre conservation easement with a minimum width of 50 feet from the
top of the restored stream banks. The easement protects all project streams, wetlands and aquatic
resources in perpetuity.

1.3 Project Success Criteria
The success criteria for the Project follows the approved performance standards and monitoring protocols
from the final approved mitigation plan; which was developed in compliance with the USACE October
2016 Guidance, USACE Stream Mitigation Guidelines (April 2003 and October 2005), and 2008
Compensatory Mitigation Final Rule. Cross-section and vegetation plot data will be collected in Years 0, 1,
2, 3, 5, and 7. Stream hydrology data and visual monitoring will be reported annually. Specific success
criteria components and evaluation methods are described below.
1.3.1 Single-Thread Streams
Stream Hydrology: Four separate bankfull or over bank events must be documented within the seven-year
monitoring period and the stream hydrology monitoring will continue until four bankfull events have been
documented in separate years. Stream hydrology monitoring will be accomplished with pressure
transducers installed in pools and correlating sensor depth to top of bank elevation. Recorded water depth
above the top of bank elevation will document a bankfull event. In addition to the pressure transducers,
traditional cork gauges will be installed at bankfull elevation and will be used to document bankfull events
with photographs.
Stream Profiles, Vertical Stability, and Floodplain Access: Stream profiles, as a measure of vertical stability
and floodplain access will be evaluated by looking at Bank Height Ratios (BHR). In addition, observed
bedforms should be consistent with those observed for channels of the design stream type(s). The BHR
shall not exceed 1.2 along the restored Project stream reaches. This standard only applies to restored
reaches of the channel where BHRs were corrected through design and construction. Vertical stability will
be evaluated with visual assessment, cross sections and, if directed by the IRT, longitudinal profile.
Stream Horizontal Stability: Cross-sections will be used to evaluate horizontal stream stability on restored
streams. There should be little change expected from as-built restoration cross-sections. If measurable
changes do occur, they should be evaluated to determine if the changes represent a movement toward a
more unstable condition (e.g., downcutting, erosion) or a movement towards increased stability (e.g.,
settling, vegetation establishment, deposition along the streambanks, decrease in width/depth ratio).
Cross-sections shall be classified using the Rosgen Stream Classification method and all monitored cross-
sections should fall within the quantitative parameters defined for channels of the design stream type.
Reference photo transects will be taken at each permanent cross-section. Lateral photos should not
indicate excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the streambanks. Photographs will be taken of both

3

streambanks at each cross-section. A survey tape stretched between the permanent cross-section
monuments/pins will be centered in each of the streambank photographs. The water elevation will be
shown in the lower edge of the frame, and as much of the streambank as possible will be included in each
photo. Photographers will attempt to consistently maintain the same area in each photo over time.
Streambed Material Condition and Stability: After construction, there should be minimal change in the
particle size distribution of the streambed materials, over time, given the current watershed conditions
and future upstream sediment supply regime. Because the streambed material and sediment
supply is predominantly sand with minimal gravel, significant changes in particle size distribution and
channel substrate are not expected.
Jurisdictional Stream Flow: Monitoring of stream flow will be conducted to demonstrate that the restored
stream systems classified as intermittent exhibit surface flow for a minimum of 30 consecutive days
throughout some portion of the year during a year with normal or below normal rainfall conditions. Stream
flow monitoring will be accomplished with pressure transducers installed in pools and correlating sensor
depth to the downstream top of riffle elevation. If the pool water depth is at or above the top of riffle
elevation, then the channel will be assumed to have surface flow (Figure 3). The devices will record water
elevation twice per day and will be inspected quarterly to document surface hydrology and provide a basis
for evaluating flow response to rainfall events.
1.3.2 Headwater Streams
Seasonal Flow: Surface flow must be documented using automatic pressure transducers (flow
gauges). Continuous surface water flow within the valley or crenulation must be documented to occur
every year for at least 30 consecutive days during the prescribed monitoring period. This will be
accomplished in the same approach as Jurisdictional Stream Flow above.

Channel Formation: During monitoring years 1 through 4, the preponderance of evidence must
demonstrate a concentration of flow indicative of channel formation within the topographic low-point of
the valley or crenulation as documented by the following indicators:

• Scour (indicating sediment transport by flowing water)
• Sediment deposition (accumulations of sediment and/or formation of ripples)
• Sediment sorting (sediment sorting indicated by grain-size distribution with the primary path of
flow)
• Multiple observed flow events (must be documented by gauge data and/or photographs)
• Destruction of terrestrial vegetation
• Presence of litter and debris
• Wracking (deposits of drift material indicating surface water flow)
• Vegetation matted down, bent, or absent (herbaceous or otherwise)
• Leaf litter disturbed or washed away
During monitoring years 5 through 7, the stream must successfully meet the requirements above and the
preponderance of evidence must demonstrate the development of stream bed and banks as documented
by the following indicators:

4

• Bed and banks (may include the formation of stream bed and banks, development of channel
pattern such as meander bends and/or braiding at natural topographic breaks, woody debris, or
plant root systems)
• Natural line impressed on the bank (visible high-water mark)
• Shelving (shelving of sediment depositions indicating transport)
• Water staining (staining of rooted vegetation)
• Change in plant community (transition to species adapted for flow or inundation for a long
duration, including hydrophytes)
• Changes in character of soil (texture and/or chroma changes when compared to the soils abutting
the primary path of flow)
1.3.3 Wetlands
Wetland Hydrology: The performance standard for wetland hydrology will be a minimum 12 to 16 percent
based on the suggested wetland saturation thresholds for soils taxonomic subgroups provided by the IRT
and on-site wetland reference data. The proposed success criteria for wetland hydrology will be when the
soils are saturated within 12 inches of the soil surface for 12 to 16 percent (27 to 36 days) of the growing
season (March 21 through November 6) based on WETS data table for Wayne County, NC. The saturated
conditions should occur during a period when antecedent precipitation has been normal or drier than
normal for a minimum frequency of 5 years in 10 (USACE, 2005 and 2010b). Precipitation data will be
obtained from the Cherry Research Station near Goldsboro (GOLD), which is approximately 4 miles east
from the Project site and a rain gauge was installed on site.
1.3.4 Vegetation
Vegetation monitoring will occur in the fall each required monitoring year, typically prior to leaf drop.
Plots will be monitored in years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7. Vegetative success for the Project during the intermediate
monitoring years will be based on the survival of at least 320, three-year-old planted stems per acre at
the end of Year 3 of the monitoring period; and at least 260, five-year-old, planted stems per acre that
must average six feet in height at the end of Year 5 of the monitoring period. The final vegetative
restoration success criteria will be achieving a density of no less than 210, seven-year-old planted stems
per acre that must average eight feet in height in Year 7 of monitoring.
1.3.5 Visual Assessment
WLS will conduct visual assessments in support of mitigation performance monitoring. Visual assessments
of all stream reaches will be conducted twice per monitoring year with at least five months in between
each site visit for each of the seven years of monitoring. Photographs will be used to visually document
system performance and any areas of concern related to streambank and bed stability, condition of in-
stream structures, channel migration, active headcuts, live stake mortality, invasive plant species or animal
browsing, easement boundary encroachments, cattle exclusion fence damage, and general streambed
conditions. Permanent photo points will be at the cross-sections, culvert crossings, and Enhancement II
reaches.

5

2 Project Mitigation Components
2.1 Project Components
The Project mitigation components include a combination of Stream Restoration, Enhancement, and
Preservation activities, as well as Riparian Wetland Restoration (Re-establishment), Enhancement, and
Preservation activities, as summarized in the table below.
Table 1. Mitigation Plan Stream Mitigation Credits (SMCs)
Project Reach
Designation Type of Mitigation
Existing
Stream Length
(LF)
Proposed
Stream
Length (LF)
Ratio
Stream
Mitigation
Credits (SMCs)
UT1-R1 Stream Restoration (HW/PI) 2,151 2,131 1:1 2,131
UT1-R2 Stream Restoration (PI) 1,777 2,007 1:1 2,007
UT2-R1 (upper) Stream Preservation 228 228 10:1 23
UT2-R1 (lower) Stream Restoration (HW/PI) 615 615 1:1 615
UT2-R2 Stream Restoration (PI/PII) 1,151 1,151 1:1 1,151
UT2-R3 Stream Enhancement Level II 1,923 1,923 3:1 641
UT2A Stream Restoration (HW/PI) 667 667 1:1 667
UT2B Stream Preservation 257 257 10:1 26
Totals 8,769 8,979 7,261
Note 1: No mitigation credits were calculated outside the conservation easement boundaries.
Note 2: Headwater (HW) stream credits calculated using valley length.

Table 1b. Mitigation Plan Wetland Mitigation Credits (WMCs)
Project Wetland
Area Type of Mitigation
Proposed
Wetland Acreage
(AC)
Ratio
Riparian Wetland
Mitigation Credits
(WMCs)
W1 Wetland Preservation 2.30 10:1 0.23
W2 Wetland Preservation 2.49 10:1 0.25
W2a Wetland Re-establishment 1.59 1:1 1.59
W3 Wetland Enhancement 0.84 3:1 0.28
W3a Wetland Re-establishment 0.77 1:1 0.77
W4 Wetland Enhancement 0.90 3:1 0.30
W4a Wetland Re-establishment 1.63 1:1 1.63
Totals 10.52 5.05

2.2 Design Approach
2.2.1 Stream
The Project stream design approach included a combination of Stream Restoration, Enhancement, and
Preservation activities. Priority Level I Restoration reaches incorporated the design of a single-thread
meandering channel and headwater stream valley, with parameters based on data taken from reference
site comparison, published empirical relationships, NC Piedmont Regional Curves, and hydrologic and
hydraulic analyses. The restoration of planform and dimension, frequent overbank flows and a restored
riparian buffer will provide the appropriate hydrology and sediment transport throughout the project

6

catchments. All non-vegetated areas within the easement were planted with native vegetation and any
areas of invasive species were removed and/or treated.
• Reach UT1-R1 – Reach UT1-R1 begins at the Project limits flowing northwest to reach UT1-R2
totaling 2,131 linear feet of Priority Level I and Headwater restoration. The restoration of UT1-R1
ends near the field edge as the valley turns northeast towards the Neuse River. At this location,
the channel gradually transitions into a single-thread channel and the ditch that flows offsite was
plugged to the property line.

• Reach UT1-R2 – Reach UT1-R2 begins downstream of UT1-R1 and flows northeast to the limits of
the Project. UT1-R2 totals 2,007 linear feet of Priority Level I restoration. Restoration included
excavating a new single-thread channel and plugging adjacent ditches to improve hydrological
function and hyporheic zone interaction.

• Reach UT2-R1 (upper) – UT2-R1 is a perennial stream that begins at a spring head within a mature
forested area. The existing headwater stream and wetland system is higher functioning with a
mature riparian buffer due to minimal historic impacts. UT2-R1 (upper) totals 228 linear feet of
Preservation.

• Reach UT2-R1 (lower) – UT2-R1 (lower) was graded to the natural valley topography from its
existing channelized condition. UT2-R1 (lower) is a mix of Priority Level I and Headwater
restoration of 615 linear feet. The valley bottom was graded to restore the natural
microtopographic variability that is common within headwater systems. The system will be
allowed to maintain a small pilot channel or multi-thread channels and diffuse flow paths.

• Reach UT2-R2 – The restoration of UT2-R2 ties into UT2-R3 as the valley turns to the north
towards the Neuse River. Restoration of UT2-R2 included 1,151 linear feet of Priority Level I and
II single-thread channel restoration.

• Reach UT2-R3 – UT2-R3 includes 1,923 linear feet of Enhancement Level II along the downstream
wooded section. A riparian buffer was planted along the left bank greater than 50 feet wide and
an abandoned culverted crossing was removed to restore a more natural flow path. In-stream
grade control structures were strategically placed along the lower portion to help protect the
existing mussel communities and maintain overbank flooding.

• Reach UT2A – UT2A is graded to the natural valley topography from its existing channelized
condition. UT2A is a mix of Priority I and headwater restoration totaling 615 linear feet. UT2A
starts at the Project limits and flows northeast to the confluence with UT2-R1 (lower).

• Reach UT2B – UT2B is a perennial stream flowing from a man-made pond upstream of the Project
to the confluence of UT2-R2 and UT2-R3. UT2B comprises 257 linear feet of Preservation due to
the stable condition and a mature riparian buffer.

7

2.2.2 Wetland
• Riparian Wetland Restoration (W2a, W3a, and W4a) - Wetland areas W2a, W3a, and W4a
contain soil conditions favorable for both rehabilitating and re-establishing wetlands. As a direct
result of implementing a Priority Level I restoration, ditch plugging, limited soil manipulation (less
than one-foot depth), and revegetation, the wetland hydrology will be restored and allow the
areas to regain their aquatic functions. An overbank flooding regime will be restored throughout
these areas by raising the stream bed elevation to reconnect the floodplain. WLS compared
monitoring data from successful stream and wetland restoration projects in similar headwater
valleys within the same or similar soil types over the past decade, and expects these areas will
experience seasonal wetness for prolonged periods and conditions are favorable to support
appropriate wetland hydrology.

• Riparian Wetland Enhancement (W3 and W4) - As described above, restoration activities include
ditch plugging, minimal grading and blending of microtopography, to provide significant
functional uplift across the project area. This approach will also improve and enhance the
hyporheic zone interaction and hydrology to existing wetland areas W3 and W4. Wetland
enhancement areas were planted with native wet tolerant species. The restoration of the stream
channels will improve areas of adjacent wetlands through higher water table conditions (elevated
stream profile) and a more frequent over-bank flooding regime.

• Riparian Wetland Preservation (W1 and W2) - W2 is an existing riparian wetland system that
begins at a spring head within a mature forested area and W1 is a jurisdictional wetland in a
mature forested area adjacent to Reach UT2-R3. The existing stream and wetland complex is
forested, stable, and undisturbed. These existing headwater stream and wetland systems are
higher functioning with mature riparian buffer due to minimal historic impacts. The wetland
preservation area is protected in perpetuity through a permanent conservation easement. This
approach extends the wildlife corridor throughout the entire riparian valley, while providing a
hydrologic connection and critical habitat linkage within the catchment area.
3 Monitoring Year 1 Assessment and Results
The dates of Year 1 monitoring activities are detailed in Appendix A, Table 2. All Year 1 monitoring data is
presented in this report and in the appendices. The Project is on track for meeting stream and vegetation
interim success criteria. All monitoring device locations are depicted on the CCPV (Figures 1a and 1b).
3.1 Morphological Assessment
3.1.1 Stream Horizontal Pattern & Longitudinal Profile
Visual assessment was utilized for assessment of MY1 horizontal and vertical stream stability. The visual
assessments for each stream reach document MY1 stream channel pattern and longitudinal profiles, and
in-stream structure location/function, which align with the profile design parameters and MY0/baseline
conditions (Appendix D). The MY1 planform geometry and dimensions fall within acceptable ranges of the
design parameters for all restored reaches. Minor channel adjustments in riffle slopes, pool depths and
pattern were observed based on appropriate sediment transport and stream bank vegetation
establishment.

8

Two potential isolated stream problem areas were identified during the visual assessment and are noted
on the CCPV map (Figure 1a). Minor erosion is occurring around a log-weir on UT1-R1 at approximate
station 30 + 90. Also, an area of minor bank erosion is occurring on UT1-R2 at approximate station 40 +
25 where overland flow originating from wetland W4 and W4a is entering the stream. Neither issues affect
the overall stability of the reach and will be monitored closely during MY2. Remedial action will be taken
if necessary and will be noted in future reports. In the interim, additional livestakes will be installed at
both these locations.
WLS staff noted beaver activity on the lower 100 feet of UT1-R2. During MY1, three small dams were
removed on this lower portion. Beaver activity is also occurring on the lower portion of UT2-R2 at the
confluence of UT2-R3. WLS staff have removed one dam structure from UT2-R3. Beaver impacts to the
site were minimal during MY1 and did not negatively affect stream pattern and profile or vegetation on
either reach. WLS will continue to monitor these areas closely and any remedial action taken during MY2
will be noted in future reports.
3.1.2 Stream Horizontal Dimension
The MY1 channel dimensions generally match the design parameters and are within acceptable and stable
ranges of tolerance. Five of the 11 cross-sections are located in headwater restoration reaches and the
remaining six cross-sections are located in Priority I/II single-thread restoration channels. All six of the PI/II
cross-sections show little to no change in the bankfull area and bank height ratios are less than 1.2. It is
expected that over time that some pools may accumulate fine sediment and organic matter; however,
this is not an indicator of channel instability. Maximum riffle depths are also expected to fluctuate slightly
throughout the monitoring period as the channels adjust to the new flow regime and catchment
conditions. Headwater cross-sections are expected to fluctuate throughout the initial monitoring years 1-
4 as the headwater streams exhibit channel formation.
3.2 Stream Hydrology
3.2.1 Stream Flow
The flow gauges on UT1-R2 and UT2-R2 document that the stream exhibited surface flow for a minimum
of 30 consecutive days throughout the monitoring year (Appendix E, Figure 2). Additionally, to determine
if rainfall amounts are normal for the given year, precipitation data was obtained from the onsite rain
gauge, installed near UT2-R2.
3.2.2 Bankfull Events
During MY1, bankfull events were recorded on both pressure transducers (and the associated crest
gauges). UT1-R2 gauge recorded 13 events with a maximum event of 1.7 feet above bankfull elevation
occurring on September 5, 2020. UT2-R2 gauge recorded six events with a maximum event of 1.5 feet
above bankfull occurring on April 30, 2020. The associated data is in Appendix E.
3.2.3 Headwater Stream Channel Formation
During MY1, streams UT1-R1, UT2-R1 and UT2A all exhibited evidence indicative of channel formation
within the topographic low-point of the valley. UT1-R1 and UT2-R1 are exhibiting scour throughout the
reach, sediment deposition and sorting in the channel, wrack lines and presence of litter and debris is
occurring, and the stream has exhibited multiple flow events documented through the installed flow
gauge on the upper third of the reach. UT2A exhibited observable flow during staff visits, destruction of
vegetation and an observable flow path throughout the low-point of the valley.

9

3.2.4 Wetland Hydrology
Data for the eight groundwater wells installed is available in Appendix E. Seven out of the eight wells are
in creditable wetland areas, and the remaining well (Groundwater Well 1) is adjacent to UT1-R2 to
document fluctuations in the hyporheic zone and is not documenting a wetland area. The seven wetland
groundwater wells are all meeting the wetland saturation thresholds of 12 to 16 percent. Groundwater
well locations are shown on Figures 1a and 1b.
3.3 Vegetation
Monitoring of the 24 permanent vegetation plots was completed during the last week of October 2020.
Vegetation data can be found in Appendix C with the associated photos located in Appendix B. The MY1
average planted density is 641 stems per acre, which exceeds the interim measure of vegetative success
of at least 320 planted stems per acre at the end of the third monitoring year. All the vegetation plots met
the interim measure of success for stems per acre. Volunteer species were not noted in MY1 but are
expected to establish in upcoming years.

Visual assessment of vegetation outside of the monitoring plots indicates that the herbaceous vegetation
is becoming well established throughout the project.

A significant population of privet (Ligustrum sinense) was located along the headwater restoration portion
of UT1-R1 prior to construction. Construction activities removed the existing privet within the easement,
and no additional privet treatments were necessary during MY1. This area will be closely monitored during
MY2, and re-sprouts will be treated as needed to prevent further establishment. During MY1 monitoring
activities, WLS staff noted the presence of small isolated populations of common cattail (Typha latifolia)
on the project site. There are no adverse effects associated with the cattail. WLS staff will treat cattails
during the appropriate treatment window during MY2. Any subsequent vegetation management for
problem or invasive species will be included in the MY2 report.
4 Methods
Stream cross-section monitoring was conducted using a Topcon RL-H5 Laser Level. Morphological data
were collected at 11 cross-sections. Survey data were imported into Microsoft Excel® for data processing
and analysis. The stage recorders include an automatic pressure transducer (HOBO Water Level (13 ft)
Logger) set in PVC piping in the channel. The elevation of the bed and top of bank at each stage recorder
location was recorded to be able to document presence of water in the channel and out of bank events.
Visual observations (i.e. wrack or debris lines) and traditional cork crest gauges were also used to
document out of bank events.
Vegetation success is being monitored at a total of 24 permanent vegetation plots. Vegetation plot
monitoring follows the CVS-EEP Level 2 Protocol for Recording Vegetation, version 4.2 (Lee et al. 2008)
and includes analysis of species composition and density of planted species. Data are processed using the
CVS data entry tool. In the field, the four corners of each plot were permanently marked with PVC at the
origin and rebar at the other corners. Tree species and height will be recorded for each planted stem and
photos of each plot are to be taken from the origin each monitoring year.

10

5 References
Lee Michael T., Peet Robert K., Roberts Steven D., and Wentworth Thomas R., 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for
Recording Vegetation Level. Version 4.2
(RBRP) North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP), 2010. Neuse River Restoration Priority
Plan (RBRP).
United States Army Corps of Engineers. 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines, April 2003, U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers. Wilmington District.
United States Army Corps of Engineers. 2016. Notification of Issuance of Guidance for Compensatory
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Conducted for Wilmington District, October 2016, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers. Wilmington District.
Water and Land Solutions, LLC (2019). Hollowell Final Mitigation Plan. USACE, Raleigh, NC.

Appendix A:
Background Tables

Table 1: Project Mitigation Components
Table 2: Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3: Project Contacts
Table 4: Project Information and Attributes
Regulatory Meeting Minutes

Table 1.  Hollowell Mitigation Project (SAW‐2017‐00159)  ‐ Mitigation Assets and ComponentsExisting MitigationFootage PlanAs-Builtor Footage or Mitigation Restoration Priority Mitigation Footage orProject Segment Acreage Acreage Category Level Level Ratio (X:1) Acreage CommentsUT1-R1 2,151 2,131 Warm R HW/PI 1.00000 2,167Full Channel Restoration, Planted Buffer, Permanent Conservation EasementUT1-R21,777 2,007 WarmRPI 1.000002,009Full Channel Restoration, Planted Buffer, Permanent Conservation EasementUT2-R1 (upper)228 228 WarmPN/A 10.00000218Preservation, Permanent Conservation EasementUT2-R1 (lower)615 615 WarmRHW/PI 1.00000633Full Channel Restoration, Planted Buffer, Permanent Conservation EasementUT2-R21,151 1,151 WarmRPI/PII 1.000001,177Dimension and Profile modified in keeping with reference, Planted Buffer, Permananent Conservation EasementUT2-R31,923 1,923 Warm EIIN/A 3.000001,941Supplmentally Planted Buffer, Removed abandoned culvert, Permenant Conservation EasementUT2A667 667 WarmRHW/PI 1.00000665Full Channel Restoration, Planted Buffer, Permanent Conservation EasementUT2B257 257 WarmPN/A 10.00000267Preservation, Permanent Conservation EasementW12.300 2.300 RRP10.000002.300Permanent Conservation EasementW22.490 2.490 RRP10.000002.490Permanent Conservation EasementW2aN/A 1.590 RRRE1.000001.590Limited soil manipulation, Restored groundwater hydrology, PlantingW30.840 0.840 RRE3.000000.840Restored hydrology and PlantingW3aN/A 0.770 RRRE1.000000.770Limited soil manipulation, Restored groundwater hydrology, PlantingW40.900 0.900 RRE3.000000.900Restored hydrology and PlantingW4aN/A 1.630 RRRE1.000001.630Limited soil manipulation, Restored groundwater hydrology, PlantingProject CreditsNon-Rip CoastalWarm Cool ColdRiverine Non-RivWetland MarshRestoration6571.000Re-establishment3.990RehabilitationEnhancement0.580Enhancement IEnhancement II641.000CreationPreservation48.5000.479Totals7,2615.05 0.000 0.000Restoration LevelStream Riparian Wetland
Elapsed Time Since grading complete: 7 months
Elapsed Time Since planting complete: 7 months
Number of reporting Years1:1
Data Collection Completion or
Activity or Deliverable Complete Delivery
Institution Date N/A 7/26/2018
404 permit date N/A 10/22/2019
Restoration Plan N/A 8/1/2019
Final Design – Construction Plans N/A 8/16/2019
Construction N/A 4/21/2020
Containerized, bare root and B&B plantings for reach/segments N/A 4/24/2020
As-built (Year 0 Monitoring – baseline)April-May 2020 7/1/2020
Year 1 Monitoring 10/30/2020 11/6/2020
Year 2 Monitoring
Year 3 Monitoring
Year 4 Monitoring
Year 5 Monitoring
Year 6 Monitoring
Year 7 Monitoring/ Close Out

Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Hollowell Mitigation Project (SAW-2017-00159)
Designer Water & Land Solutions, LLC
7721 Six Forks Rd, Suite 130, Raleigh, NC 27615
Primary project design POC Kayne Van Stell Phone: [phone]
Construction Contractor Wright Contracting, LLC
PO Box 545, Siler City, NC 27344
Construction contractor POC Ross Kennedy Phone: [phone]
Survey Contractor WithersRavenel
115 MacKenan Drive, Cary, NC 27511
Survey contractor POC Marshall Wight Phone: [phone]
Planting Contractor Ripple EcoSolutions, LLC
215 Moonridge Road, Chapel Hill, NC 27516
Planting contractor POC George Morris Phone: [phone]
Seeding Contractor Wright Contracting, LLC
PO Box 545, Siler City, NC 27344
Contractor point of contact Ross Kennedy Phone: [phone]
Seed Mix Sources Green Resource
[phone]
Nursery Stock Suppliers (Bare Roots)Native Forest Nursery Phone: [phone]
Nursery Stock Suppliers (Bare Root/plugs)Mellow Marsh Farm Phone: [phone]
Nursery Stock Suppliers (Live Stakes)Foggy Mountain Nursery
[phone]
Monitoring Performers Water & Land Solutions, LLC
7721 Six Forks Rd, Suite 130, Raleigh, NC 27615
Stream Monitoring POC Emily Dunnigan Phone: [phone]
Vegetation Monitoring POC Emily Dunnigan Phone: [phone]
Wetland Monitoring POC Emily Dunnigan Phone: [phone]

Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Hollowell Mitigation Project (SAW-2017-00159)
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit 03020201
Reach UT2-R1
(upper)
Reach UT2-R1
(lower)Reach UT2-R2 Reach UT2-R3 Reach UT2A Reach UT2B
228 615 1,151 1,923 667 257
unconfined unconfined unconfined unconfined unconfined unconfined
45 ac and 0.070
sq mi N/A 256 ac and 0.400
sq mi
512 ac and 0.800
sq mi
69 ac and 0.108
sq mi
306 ac and 0.478
sq mi
Intermittent Intermittent Perennial Perennial Intermittent Perennial
C, WS-IV C, WS-IV C, WS-IV C, WS-IV C, WS-IV C, WS-IV
E5 (incised) E5 (incised) E5 (incised) E5 E5 (incised) E5
DA/E5 DA/E5 E5/C5 N/A DA N/A
IV/V IV/V IV/V IV/V V V
N/A N/A AE AE N/A AE
W2a W3 W3a W4 W4a
1.59 0.84 0.77 0.9 1.63
RR RR RR RR RR
We KaD, Po Po, AyA Ke, Lv Ke, Lv, To
poorly drained
moderatly well
drained, very
poorly drained
very poorly
drained, well
drained
well drained,
poorly drained
well drained,
poorly drained,
very poorly
drained
Hydric Non-Hyrdric,
Hydric Hydric, Non-Hydric Non-Hydric,
Hydric
Non-Hydric,
Hydric, Hydric
Groundwater,
Surface
Hydrology
Groundwater,
Surface
Hydrology
Groundwater,
Surface Hydrology
Groundwater,
Surface
Hydrology
Groundwater,
Surface
Hydrology
R:Hydro/veg E: hydro/veg R: Hydro/Veg E: Hydro/Veg R: Hydro/veg
Supporting Docs?
PCN
PCN
PCN/Prospectus
PCN/Prospectus
N/A
Floodplain develop
permit
N/A
Stream Classification (existing)E5 (incised) E5 (incised)
Table 4. Project Background Information
Project Name Hollowell Mitigation Project
County Wayne
Project Area (acres) 72.049
River Basin Neuse
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit 03020201170060
DWR Sub-basin 03-04-02
Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude)35.35814⁰, -78.11642⁰
Planted Acreage (Acres of Woody Stems Planted)57 in total and 17 for stream/wetland
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province Inner Coastal Plain
Reach Summary Information
Parameters Reach UT1-R1 Reach UT1-R2
Length of reach (linear feet)2,131 2,007
Project Drainage Area (Acres and Square Miles)184 ac and 0.288 sq. mi (UT1-R1), 512 ac and 0.8 sq.
mi (UT2-R3)
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area <1%
CGIA Land Use Classification 2.01.03, 2.01.01, 3.02 (46% pasture/hay, 24% row
crop, 16% mixed forest)
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
NCDWR Water Quality Classification C, WS-IV C, WS-IV
Valley confinement (Confined, moderately confined, unconfined)unconfined unconfined
Drainage area (Acres and Square Miles)184 ac and 0.288
sq mi
260 ac and 0.406
sq mi
FEMA classification AE AE
Parameters W1 W2
Stream Classification (proposed)DA/E5 E5/C5
Evolutionary trend (Simon)IV/V IV/V
Wetland Summary Information
Mapped Soil Series Bb, Kn CrC2, NoC,
WaD, We
Drainage class poorly drained
moderatly well
drained, well
drained, well
drained, poorly
drained
Size of Wetland (acres)2.3 2.49
Wetland Type (non-riparian, riparian riverine or riparian non-riverine)RR RR
Preservation
Regulatory Considerations
Parameters Applicable? Resolved?
Soil Hydric Status Hydric
Non-Hydric, Non-
Hyrdic, Non-
Hydric, Hydric
Source of Hydrology Groundwater,
Surface Hydrology
Groundwater,
Surface
Hydrology
Restoration or enhancement method (hydrologic, vegetative etc.)Preservation
Essential Fisheries Habitat No N/A
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA or CAMA)No N/A
FEMA Floodplain Compliance Yes Yes
Endangered Species Act Yes Yes
Historic Preservation Act No N/A
Water of the United States - Section 404 Yes Yes
Water of the United States - Section 401 Yes Yes

waterlandsolutions.com | 7721 Six Forks Rd, Ste 130, Raleigh, NC 27615 | 919-614-5111
Meeting Minutes
WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank: Hollowell Mitigation Project
USACE Action ID#: SAW-2017-00159

Subject: NCIRT Hollowell As-Built Baseline Virtual Site Visit
Date Prepared: June 28th, 2020
Meeting Date and Time: June 28th, 2020 10:00 am – 11:00 am
Meeting Location: Virtual Site Visit with Teams & ArcGIS Story Map
Recorded By: Cara Conder
Attendees: USACE: Todd Tugwell, Sam Dailey, Kim Browning, and Casey Haywood
NCDEQ DWR: Erin Davis
WLS: Kayne VanStell, Cara Conder, Daniel Ingram, and Emily Dunnigan
NCWRC: Travis Wilson
USEPA: Todd Bowers
These meeting minutes document notes and discussion points from the North Carolina Interagency
Review Team (NCIRT) As-Built Baseline Virtual Site Meeting for the Hollowell Mitigation Project (Neuse
River Basin, CU 03020201, Warm Water Thermal Regime). Water & Land Solutions, LLC (WLS) submitted
an As-Built Baseline Monitoring Report on July 2nd, 2020 and the virtual site visit was held on July 28th,
2020. The meeting began with a general summary of the overall project construction and discussion of
the story map. These meeting minutes proceed in order of discussion.
1. Erin Davis noted that Sheet 12 BMPs on UT2-R2 were modified from the proposed design. Kayne
VanStell explained this was a field modification based on observed ditch flow and water surface elevations
and changed from two BMPs to one BMP at Station 24+00.
2. Erin Davis noted that Sheets 3-5 on UT1-R1 showed that the channel was deeper than proposed. Kayne
VanStell explained there was slight vertical exaggeration on the plans, but there also was a survey
adjustment (~0.17’) to the vertical datum prior to construction.
3. Erin Davis asked if the flow gauge on UT1-R1 was in a pool. Daniel Ingram stated that it is immediately
downstream of a log grade control structure. Kim Browning noted that flow gauges should not be in a

waterlandsolutions.com | 7721 Six Forks Rd, Ste 130, Raleigh, NC 27615 | 919-614-5111
pool for single-thread channels. Daniel Ingram noted that the flow gauges are in pools, but the elevation
of the pressure transducer and elevation of downstream riffle is surveyed; therefore, the flow is calculated
over the riffle. WLS will include a diagram and measurement of the flow gauges in all future monitoring
reports. Todd Tugwell requested to recalibrate the top of riffle annually and include notes about the riffle
material.
4. Todd Tugwell stated that the pilot channel on headwater reach UT1-R1 seemed large for a channel
constructed as a headwater reach. Kayne VanStell stated the headwater approach was built according to
the mitigation plan and typical headwater valley section, and the channel dimensions will adjust as
vegetation becomes established.
5. Todd Tugwell asked if there were groundwater gauges in the headwater reaches. WLS responded that
there are not groundwater gauges in the headwater reaches. Todd Tugwell noted that WLS might have to
put groundwater gauges in the headwater channels based on field observation and documenting the
stream and wetland complex interaction.
6. Erin Davis asked for a redline vegetation table in the as-built and also noted that there was not a planting
list provided with quantities and species. This was an oversight and WLS has attached the planting list to
this memo.
7. Kim Browning requested a site visit in the fall and Travis Wilson requested a site visit also. Sam Dailey
said she would coordinate with the IRT.
8. Todd Bowers had concerns about the lack of flow and the riffles dry rotting in UT1. Kayne VanStell
responded that UT1 has intermittent flow regime and expect seasonal flow variability. WLS will monitor
flow duration and does not have concerns about meeting this performance standard (30 consecutive days
of flow).
9. Todd Bowers asked about the bank name, and WLS stated that it is an umbrella bank with one site. The
full name is WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank, Hollowell Mitigation Site. This will be corrected in
future monitoring reports.
10. Todd Tugwell asked about the stream credits in Appendix A - Table 1 (mitigation plan vs. as-built
credits). It was reiterated to base the stream credits off the mitigation plan unless there were deviations
to the plans. Table 1 in Appendix A does calculate the credits from the mitigation plan and Table 1 in the
Baseline Report is also based on the mitigation plan.

Species # Planted % Planted
Fraxinus pennsylvanica 2400 5.85%
Betula nigra 3400 8.29%
Quercus nigra 2100 5.12%
Nyssa biflora 1700 4.14%
Platanus occidentalis 2700 6.58%
Liriodendron tulipifera 2800 6.83%
Quercus phellos 2550 6.22%
Quercus alba 1700 4.14%
Quercus bicolor 1700 4.14%
Taxodium distichum 2900 7.07%
Clethra alnifolia 2100 5.12%
Persea palustris 2000 4.88%
Magnolia virginiana 2100 5.12%
Carpinus caroliniana 2900 7.07%
Eubotrys racemosa 2000 4.88%
Cyrilla racemilfora 2100 5.12%
Itea virginica 2000 4.88%
Persea borbonia 90 0.22%Not in mitigation plan planting list
Ulmus americana 275 0.67%Not in mitigation plan planting list
Quercus pagoda 800 1.95%Not in mitigation plan planting list
Quercus michauxii 700 1.71%Not in mitigation plan planting list
Total 41,015
Table 1: Hollowell Mitigation Project
Planting List

Appendix B:
Visual Assessment Data

Figure 1 a & 1b: Current Condition Plan View (CCPV)
Stream Station Photographs
Vegetation Plot Photographs
Crossing Photographs
Additional Photos

")
")
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!.
!>
XW
XW
1
12
13
10
11
Access: 35.354770, -78.127019
UT1-R2
Culvert
W4
W4a
W3a
W3
UT1-R1
FG-1
CG-1
XS-1XS-2XS-3 XS-4XS
-
5
XS
-
6
X
S
-
7
Ditch
PS-1
PS-2
WG-5
WG-4
GG-1
WG-3
WG-2
3
7
9
6
5
4
2
8
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User
Community
FIGURE1aHollowell Mitigation ProjectWayne County, North Carolina
NAD 1983 2011 State Plane
North Carolina FIPS 3200 FT US
USACE
Current Conditions Plan View
Monitoring Year 1
0 250 500
Feet
±
USACE Action ID Number:
SAW-2017-00159
November 2020
MY1
Legend
Conservation Easement
Top of Bank
Stream
Enhancement II
Preservation
Restoration (HW/PI)
Restoration (PI)
Restoration (PI/PII)
Wetland
Re-establishment
Enhancement
Preservation
Culvert
Cross Sections
")Photo Station
!>Flow Gauge
!.Crest Gauge
!.Rain Gauge
XW Stream Problem Areas
!.Groundwater Gauge
Wetland Gauge
!.Success Criteria Met (>12%-16%)
!.Success Criteria Not Met (<12%-16%)
Vegetation Plot
Success Criteria Met
Minor Bank Erosion
@ STA 40+25
Minor Erosion Around Log Weir
@ STA 30+90
")")")!>!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.Access: 35.354368, -78.114349
W2a
W2
UT2-R1 (Upper)
UT2A
UT2-R2 UT2B
Culvert
Culvert
FG-2
CG-2
X
S
-
8 XS-9XS-10XS-11UT2-R1 (Lower)
UT2-R3
Ditch
W1PS-4
PS-3
14
PS-5
WG-6
WG-7
WG-8
17
22
18
16
19
23
15
21
20
24
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User
Community
FIGURE1bHollowell Mitigation ProjectWayne County, North Carolina
NAD 1983 2011 State Plane
North Carolina FIPS 3200 FT US
USACE
Current Conditions Plan View
Monitoring Year 1
0 250 500
Feet±USACE Action ID Number:
SAW-2017-00159
November 2020
MY1
Legend
Conservation Easement
Top of Bank
Stream
Restoration (PI)
Restoration (HW/PI)
Restoration (PI/PII)
Enhancement II
Preservation
Wetland
Re-establishment
Enhancement
Preservation
Water Quality Feature
Culvert
Cross Sections
")Photo Station
!>Flow Gauge
!.Crest Gauge
!.Rain Gauge
Groundwater Gauge
!.Success Criteria Met (>12-16%)
!.Success Criteria Not Met (<12-16%)
Vegetation Plots
Success Criteria Met
UT1‐R1, XS‐1, Upstream (MY‐00)UT1‐R1, XS‐1, Upstream (MY‐01)UT1‐R1, XS‐1, Downstream (MY‐01)UT1‐R1, XS‐1, Downstream (MY‐00)
UT1‐R1, XS‐1, Left Bank (MY‐00)UT1‐R1, XS‐1, Left Bank (MY‐01)UT1‐R1, XS‐1, Right Bank (MY‐01)UT1‐R1, XS‐1, Right Bank (MY‐00)
UT1‐R1, XS‐2, Upstream (MY‐00)UT1‐R1, XS‐2, Upstream (MY‐01)UT1‐R1, XS‐2, Downstream (MY‐00)UT1‐R1, XS‐2, Downstream (MY‐01)
UT1‐R1, XS‐2, Left Bank (MY‐01)UT1‐R1, XS‐2, Left Bank (MY‐00)UT1‐R1, XS‐2, Right Bank (MY‐01)UT1‐R1, XS‐2, Right Bank (MY‐00)
UT1‐R1, XS‐3, Upstream (MY‐00)UT1‐R1, XS‐3, Upstream (MY‐01)UT1‐R1, XS‐3, Downstream (MY‐00)UT1‐R1, XS‐3, Downstream (MY‐01)
UT1‐R1, XS‐3, Left Bank (MY‐00)UT1‐R1, XS‐3, Left Bank (MY‐01)UT1‐R1, XS‐3, Right Bank (MY‐00)UT1‐R1, XS‐3, Right Bank (MY‐01)
UT1‐R2, XS‐4, Upstream (MY‐00)UT1‐R2, XS‐4, Upstream (MY‐01)UT1‐R2, XS‐4, Downstream (MY‐00)UT1‐R2, XS‐4, Downstream (MY‐01)
UT1‐R2, XS‐4, Left Bank (MY‐00)UT1‐R2, XS‐4, Left Bank (MY‐01)UT1‐R2, XS‐4, Right Bank (MY‐00)UT1‐R2, XS‐4, Right Bank (MY‐01)
UT1‐R2, XS‐5, Upstream (MY‐00)UT1‐R2, XS‐5, Upstream (MY‐01)UT1‐R2, XS‐5, Downstream (MY‐00)UT1‐R2, XS‐5, Downstream (MY‐01)
UT1‐R2, XS‐5, Left Bank (MY‐00)UT1‐R2, XS‐5, Left Bank (MY‐01)UT1‐R2, XS‐5, Right Bank (MY‐00)UT1‐R2, XS‐5, Right Bank (MY‐01)
UT1‐R2, XS‐6, Upstream (MY‐00)UT1‐R2, XS‐6, Upstream (MY‐01)UT1‐R2, XS‐6, Downstream (MY‐01)UT1‐R2, XS‐6, Downstream (MY‐00)
UT1‐R2, XS‐6, Left Bank (MY‐00)UT1‐R2, XS‐6, Left Bank (MY‐01)UT1‐R2, XS‐6, Right Bank (MY‐01)UT1‐R2, XS‐6, Right Bank (MY‐00)
UT1‐R2, XS‐7, Upstream (MY‐00)UT1‐R2, XS‐7, Upstream (MY‐01)UT1‐R2, XS‐7, Downstream (MY‐01)UT1‐R2, XS‐7, Downstream (MY‐00)
UT1‐R2, XS‐7, Left Bank (MY‐00)UT1‐R2, XS‐7, Left Bank (MY‐01)UT1‐R2, XS‐7, Right Bank (MY‐01)UT1‐R2, XS‐7, Right Bank (MY‐00)
UT2‐R1 (upper), XS‐8, Upstream (MY‐00)UT2‐R1 (upper), XS‐8, Upstream (MY‐01)UT2‐R1 (upper), XS‐8, Downstream (MY‐01)UT2‐R1 (upper), XS‐8, Downstream (MY‐00)
UT2‐R1 (upper), XS‐8, Left Bank (MY‐00)UT2‐R1 (upper), XS‐8, Left Bank (MY‐01)UT2‐R1 (upper), XS‐8, Right Bank (MY‐01)UT2‐R1 (upper), XS‐8, Right Bank (MY‐00)
UT2A, XS‐9, Upstream (MY‐00)UT2A, XS‐9, Upstream (MY‐01)UT2A, XS‐9, Downstream (MY‐01)UT2A, XS‐9, Downstream (MY‐00)
UT2A, XS‐9, Left Bank (MY‐00)UT2A, XS‐9, Left Bank (MY‐01)UT2A, XS‐9, Right Bank (MY‐01)UT2A, XS‐9, Right Bank (MY‐00)
UT2‐R2, XS‐10, Upstream (MY‐00)UT2‐R2, XS‐10, Upstream (MY‐01)UT2‐R2, XS‐10, Downstream (MY‐01)UT2‐R2, XS‐10, Downstream (MY‐00)
UT2‐R2, XS‐10, Left Bank (MY‐00)UT2‐R2, XS‐10, Left Bank (MY‐01)UT2‐R2, XS‐10, Right Bank (MY‐01)UT2‐R2, XS‐10, Right Bank (MY‐00)
UT2‐R2, XS‐11, Upstream (MY‐00)UT2‐R2, XS‐11, Upstream (MY‐01)UT2‐R2, XS‐11, Downstream (MY‐01)UT2‐R2, XS‐11, Downstream (MY‐00)
UT2‐R2, XS‐11, Left Bank (MY‐00)UT2‐R2, XS‐11, Left Bank (MY‐01)UT2‐R2, XS‐11, Right Bank (MY‐01)UT2‐R2, XS‐11, Right Bank (MY‐00)
Veg Plot 1 (MY‐01)Veg Plot 2 (MY‐01)Veg Plot 1 (MY‐00)Veg Plot 2 (MY‐00)
Veg Plot 3 (MY‐01)Veg Plot 4 (MY‐01)Veg Plot 3 (MY‐00)Veg Plot 4 (MY‐00)
Veg Plot 5 (MY‐01)Veg Plot 6 (MY‐01)Veg Plot 5 (MY‐00)Veg Plot 6 (MY‐00)
Veg Plot 7 (MY‐01)Veg Plot 7 (MY‐00)Veg Plot 8 (MY‐00)Veg Plot 8 (MY‐01)
Veg Plot 9 (MY‐00)Veg Plot 9 (MY‐01)Veg Plot 10 (MY‐00)Veg Plot 10 (MY‐01)
Veg Plot 11 (MY‐00)Veg Plot 11 (MY‐01)Veg Plot 12 (MY‐00)Veg Plot 12 (MY‐01)
Veg Plot 13 (MY‐00)Veg Plot 13 (MY‐01)Veg Plot 14 (MY‐00)Veg Plot 14 (MY‐01)
Veg Plot 15 (MY‐00)Veg Plot 15 (MY‐01)Veg Plot 16 (MY‐00)Veg Plot 16 (MY‐01)
Veg Plot 17 (MY‐00)Veg Plot 17 (MY‐01)Veg Plot 18 (MY‐00)Veg Plot 18 (MY‐01)
Veg Plot 19 (MY‐00)Veg Plot 19 (MY‐01)Veg Plot 20 (MY‐00)Veg Plot 20 (MY‐01)
Veg Plot 21 (MY‐00)Veg Plot 21 (MY‐01)Veg Plot 22 (MY‐00)Veg Plot 22 (MY‐01)
Veg Plot 23 (MY‐00)Veg Plot 23 (MY‐01)Veg Plot 24 (MY‐00)Veg Plot 24 (MY‐01)
PS‐1, Ford Crossing UT1‐R1, Southwest, October 26, 2020 (MY‐01)PS‐1, Ford Crossing UT1‐R1, Upstream, Nov 2, 2020 (MY‐01)PS‐1, Ford Crossing UT1‐R1, Downstream, Nov 2, 2020 (MY‐01)PS‐1, Ford Crossing UT1‐R1, Northeast, October 26, 2020 (MY‐01)
PS‐2, Crossing UT1‐R2, Downstream (MY‐00)PS‐2, Crossing UT1‐R2, Upstream (MY‐00)PS‐2, Crossing UT1‐R2, Upstream, October 26, 2020 (MY‐01)PS‐2, Crossing UT1‐R2, Downstream, October 26, 2020 (MY‐01)
PS‐3, Crossing UT2‐R1, Upstream (MY‐00)PS‐3, Crossing UT2‐R1, Upstream, October 26, 2020 (MY‐01)PS‐3, Crossing UT2‐R1, Downstream (MY‐00)PS‐3, Crossing UT2‐R1, Downstream, October 26, 2020 (MY‐01)
PS‐4, Crossing @ Ditch, Upstream (MY‐00)PS‐4, Crossing @ Ditch, Upstream, October 26, 2020 (MY‐01)PS‐4, Crossing @ Ditch, Downstream (MY‐00)PS‐4, Crossing @ Ditch, Downstream, October 26, 2020 (MY‐01)
PS‐5, UT2‐R3, Upstream, August 4, 2020 (MY‐00)PS‐5, UT2‐R3, Upstream, October 26, 2020 (MY‐01)PS‐5, UT2‐R3, Downstream, August 4, 2020 (MY‐00)PS‐5, UT2‐R3, Downstream, October 26, 2020 (MY‐01)
UT1‐R1, log‐vane piping, STA 30 + 90UT1‐R1, log‐vane piping, STA 30 + 90UT1‐R2, bank erosion STA 40 + 25UT1‐R2, bank erosion STA 40 + 25
UT1‐R1, view upstream. Photo 11/2/2020UT1‐R1, view upstream. Photo 11/2/2020UT1‐R2, view upstream. Photo 11/2/2020UT1‐R2, view downstream. Photo 11/2/2020
UT2‐R2, view downstream. Photo 11/2/2020UT2‐R1, view upstream. Photo 11/2/2020Ditch north of UT2A, view upstream. Photo 11/2/2020UT2A, view downstream. Photo 11/2/2020

Appendix C:
Vegetation Monitoring Plot
Data

Table 5a: Planted and Total Stem Counts
Table 5b: Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary
Table 5c: MY0 Planting Species List

CVS Project Code 4.  Project Name: Hollowell Mitigation ProjectTable 5a: Planted and Total Stem CountsPnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all TAronia arbutifolia Red Chokeberry Shrub 1 1 1Betula nigra river birch Tree 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam Tree 1 1 1 2 2 2Cephalanthus occidentalis common buttonbush ShrubClethra alnifolia coastal sweetpepperbush ShrubCornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub 1 1 1 1 1 1Cyrilla racemiflora swamp titi ShrubFraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree 3 3 3 1 1 1Ilex glabra inkberry ShrubItea virginica Virginia sweetspire ShrubLiriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2Magnolia virginiana sweetbay Tree222Nyssa biflora swamp tupelo Tree 1 1 1Persea borbonia redbay tree 2 2 2 3 3 3Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree 2 2 2Quercus alba white oak Tree 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1Quercus bicolor swamp white oak Tree 2 2 2Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1Quercus nigra water oak Tree 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak Tree222Quercus phellos willow oak Tree 2 2 2Taxodium distichum bald cypress Tree 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 5 5 5Ulmus americana American elm Tree 1 1 1Viburnum nudum possumhaw Shrub 1 1 111 11 11 16 16 16 15 15 15 17 17 17777101010 999 999445.15 445.15 445 647.5 647.5 647 607.03 607 607 687.97 687.97 6880.02 0.02 0.02 0.02Species countStems per ACRE004‐01‐0001 004‐01‐0002 004‐01‐0003 004‐01‐0004111 1Scientific Name Common NameSpecies TypeStem countsize (ares)size (ACRES)
CVS Project Code 4.  Project Name: Hollowell Mitigation ProjectTable 5a: Planted and Total Stem CountsPnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all TAronia arbutifolia Red Chokeberry Shrub 2 2 2Betula nigra river birch Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam Tree 1 1 1Cephalanthus occidentalis common buttonbush ShrubClethra alnifolia coastal sweetpepperbush Shrub 3 3 3Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub 1 1 1 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2Cyrilla racemiflora swamp titi ShrubFraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree 5 5 5 2 2 2Ilex glabra inkberry Shrub 1 1 1Itea virginica Virginia sweetspire Shrub111Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree 1 1 1Magnolia virginiana sweetbay TreeNyssa biflora swamp tupelo Tree111Persea borbonia redbay tree 2 2 2Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree111Quercus alba white oak Tree111Quercus bicolor swamp white oak TreeQuercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree 1 1 1 2 2 2Quercus nigra water oak Tree 1 1 1Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak TreeQuercus phellos willow oak Tree 1 1 1Taxodium distichum bald cypress Tree 5 5 5 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1Ulmus americana American elm Tree 3 3 3Viburnum nudum possumhaw Shrub 3 3 3 1 1 115 15 15 18 18 18 11 11 11 11 11 117 77 7 77 7 77 9 99607.03 607.03 607 728.434 728.43 728.4 445.15 445.2 445 445.15 445.154 445.20.02 0.02 0.02 0.02004‐01‐0005 004‐01‐0006 004‐01‐0007 004‐01‐00081111Species TypeStem countsize (ares)size (ACRES)Species countStems per ACREScientific Name Common Name
CVS Project Code 4.  Project Name: Hollowell Mitigation ProjectTable 5a: Planted and Total Stem CountsPnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all TAronia arbutifolia Red Chokeberry Shrub 2 2 2 3 3 3Betula nigra river birch Tree 2 2 2 3 3 3Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1Cephalanthus occidentalis common buttonbush ShrubClethra alnifolia coastal sweetpepperbush Shrub 3 3 3Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub 2 2 2 5 5 5Cyrilla racemiflora swamp titi ShrubFraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1Ilex glabra inkberry ShrubItea virginica Virginia sweetspire ShrubLiriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree 2 2 2 2 2 2Magnolia virginiana sweetbay Tree 1 1 1Nyssa biflora swamp tupelo TreePersea borbonia redbay treePlatanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree 1 1 1 3 3 3Quercus alba white oak TreeQuercus bicolor swamp white oak Tree 1 1 1 2 2 2 4 4 4Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak TreeQuercus nigra water oak Tree 1 1 1Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak Tree 2 2 2 1 1 1Quercus phellos willow oak TreeTaxodium distichum bald cypress Tree 1 1 1 3 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 3Ulmus americana American elm Tree 2 2 2 1 1 1Viburnum nudum possumhaw Shrub14 14 14 17 17 17 12 12 12 15 15 15999777 666 666566.56 566.56 567 687.97 687.97 688 485.62 485.62 486 607.03 607.03 6070.02 0.02 0.02 0.02004‐01‐0009 004‐01‐0010 004‐01‐0011 004‐01‐0012111 1Species TypeStem countsize (ares)size (ACRES)Species countStems per ACREScientific Name Common Name
CVS Project Code 4.  Project Name: Hollowell Mitigation ProjectTable 5a: Planted and Total Stem CountsPnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all TAronia arbutifolia Red Chokeberry Shrub 1 1 1 2 2 2Betula nigra river birch Tree 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 4 4 4Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam TreeCephalanthus occidentalis common buttonbush ShrubClethra alnifolia coastal sweetpepperbush Shrub 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub111Cyrilla racemiflora swamp titi Shrub 1 1 1Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree222Ilex glabra inkberry Shrub 1 1 1Itea virginica Virginia sweetspire ShrubLiriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2Magnolia virginiana sweetbay Tree 2 2 2Nyssa biflora swamp tupelo Tree 1 1 1Persea borbonia redbay tree 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1Quercus alba white oak TreeQuercus bicolor swamp white oak Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree111Quercus nigra water oak Tree 3 3 3Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak Tree 1 1 1Quercus phellos willow oak Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1Taxodium distichum bald cypress Tree 6 6 6 2 2 2 2 2 2Ulmus americana American elm Tree 1 1 1Viburnum nudum possumhaw Shrub 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 1 1 115 15 15 13 13 13 18 18 18 15 15 157 7 7 9 9 9 12 12 12 10 10 10607.03 607.03 607 526.09 526.1 526 728.43 728.4 728.4 607.03 607 6070.02 0.02 0.02 0.02004‐01‐0013 004‐01‐0014 004‐01‐0015 004‐01‐00161111Species TypeStem countsize (ares)size (ACRES)Species countStems per ACREScientific Name Common Name
CVS Project Code 4.  Project Name: Hollowell Mitigation ProjectTable 5a: Planted and Total Stem CountsPnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all TAronia arbutifolia Red Chokeberry Shrub 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2Betula nigra river birch Tree 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam Tree 1 1 1Cephalanthus occidentalis common buttonbush Shrub 1 1 1 1 1 1Clethra alnifolia coastal sweetpepperbush Shrub 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub 1 1 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 2 2 2Cyrilla racemiflora swamp titi ShrubFraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree 2 2 2 2 2 2Ilex glabra inkberry Shrub 2 2 2Itea virginica Virginia sweetspire Shrub 1 1 1Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree 3 3 3Magnolia virginiana sweetbay TreeNyssa biflora swamp tupelo Tree 1 1 1 3 3 3 1 1 1Persea borbonia redbay tree 1 1 1Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2Quercus alba white oak Tree 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1Quercus bicolor swamp white oak Tree 1 1 1Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree 1 1 1Quercus nigra water oak Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak Tree111Quercus phellos willow oak Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1Taxodium distichum bald cypress Tree 5 5 5 1 1 1 4 4 4Ulmus americana American elm Tree 1 1 1Viburnum nudum possumhaw Shrub 1 1 120 20 20 25 25 25 13 13 13 17 17 1711 11 11 15 15 15 9 9 9 11 11 11809.37 809.37 809 1011.7 1011.7 1012 526.09 526.1 526.1 687.966 688 6880.02 0.02 0.02 0.02004‐01‐0017 004‐01‐0018 004‐01‐0019 004‐01‐00201111Species TypeStem countsize (ares)size (ACRES)Species countStems per ACREScientific Name Common Name
CVS Project Code 4.  Project Name: Hollowell Mitigation ProjectTable 5a: Planted and Total Stem CountsPnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all TAronia arbutifolia Red Chokeberry Shrub 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2Betula nigra river birch Tree 1 1 1 2 2 2Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam TreeCephalanthus occidentalis common buttonbush ShrubClethra alnifolia coastal sweetpepperbush Shrub 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 3Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub 2 2 2 1 1 1 4 4 4 5 5 5Cyrilla racemiflora swamp titi ShrubFraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree 1 1 1Ilex glabra inkberry Shrub 1 1 1Itea virginica Virginia sweetspire ShrubLiriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree 2 2 2 1 1 1 3 3 3Magnolia virginiana sweetbay Tree 1 1 1Nyssa biflora swamp tupelo Tree 1 1 1Persea borbonia redbay treePlatanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree 1 1 1 3 3 3Quercus alba white oak Tree 1 1 1 2 2 2Quercus bicolor swamp white oak Tree 1 1 1Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree 1 1 1 4 4 4Quercus nigra water oak Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak Tree 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1Quercus phellos willow oak Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1Taxodium distichum bald cypress Tree 3 3 3 1 1 1 3 3 3 2 2 2Ulmus americana American elm Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1Viburnum nudum possumhaw Shrub20 20 20 17 17 17 18 18 18 17 17 1714 14 14 11 11 11 9 9 9 7 7 7809.37 809.37 809 687.97 688 688 728.434 728.43 728 688 687.97 6880.02 0.02 0.02 0.02004‐01‐0021 004‐01‐0022 004‐01‐0023 004‐01‐00241111Species TypeStem countsize (ares)size (ACRES)Species countStems per ACREScientific Name Common Name
CVS Project Code 4.  Project Name: Hollowell Mitigation ProjectTable 5a: Planted and Total Stem CountsPnoLS P‐all T PnoLS P‐all TAronia arbutifolia Red Chokeberry Shrub 23 23 23 24 24 24Betula nigra river birch Tree 34 34 34 31 31 31Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam Tree777999Cephalanthus occidentalis common buttonbush Shrub222333Clethra alnifolia coastal sweetpepperbush Shrub 22 22 22 25 25 25Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub 37 37 37 34 34 34Cyrilla racemiflora swamp titi Shrub111555Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree 20 20 20 29 29 29Ilex glabra inkberry Shrub 5 5 5 11 11 11Itea virginica Virginia sweetspire Shrub222777Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree 22 22 22 30 30 30Magnolia virginiana sweetbay Tree666555Nyssa biflora swamp tupelo Tree 9 9 9 24 24 24Persea borbonia redbay tree 12 12 12 15 15 15Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree 19 19 19 14 14 14Quercus alba white oak Tree 12 12 12 19 19 19Quercus bicolor swamp white oak Tree 13 13 13 17 17 17Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree 12 12 12Quercus nigra water oak Tree 15 15 15 16 16 16Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak Tree 13 13 13 4 4 4Quercus phellos willow oak Tree999333Taxodium distichum bald cypress Tree 62 62 62 61 61 61Ulmus americana American elm Tree 11 11 11 22 22 22Viburnum nudum possumhaw Shrub 12 12 12 17 17 17380 380 380 425 425 42524 24 24 23 23 23640.8 640.8 640.8 716.6 716.6 716.6Annual MeansMY1 (2020) MY0 (2020)24 240.59 0.59Species TypeStem countsize (ares)size (ACRES)Species countStems per ACREScientific Name Common Name
Table 5b: Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary Table
Plot #Planted 
Stems/Acre
Volunteers/
Acre
Total 
Stems/Acre
Success 
Criteria 
Met
Average 
Stem Height 
(ft)
1 445 0 445 Yes 1.8
2 648 0 648 Yes 1.8
3 607 0 607 Yes 1.7
4 688 0 688 Yes 1.7
5 607 0 607 Yes 1.8
6 728 0 728 Yes 1.9
7 445 0 445 Yes 1.4
8 445 0 445 Yes 1.3
9 567 0 567 Yes 1.7
10 688 0 688 Yes 1.3
11 486 0 486 Yes 2.0
12 607 0 607 Yes 2.0
13 607 0 607 Yes 1.6
14 526 0 526 Yes 1.8
15 728 0 728 Yes 1.1
16 607 0 607 Yes 1.4
17 809 0 809 Yes 1.7
18 1012 0 1012 Yes 1.8
19 526 0 526 Yes 1.4
20 688 0 688 Yes 1.7
21 809 0 809 Yes 1.5
22 688 0 688 Yes 1.5
23 728 0 728 Yes 1.8
24 688 0 688 Yes 2.0
Project 
Average 641 0 641 Yes 1.5
Species Common Name # Planted % Planted
Betula nigra River Birch 3,400 8.29%
Platanus occidentalis Sycamore 3,400 8.29%
Carpinus caroliniana Hornbeam/Ironwood 2,900 7.07%
Taxodium distichum Bald Cypress 2,900 7.07%
Liriodendron tulipifera Tulip Poplar 2,800 6.83%
Fraxinus pennsylvanica Green Ash 2,400 5.85%
Viburnum nudum Possomhaw Viburnum 2,206 5.38%
Magnolia virginiana Sweetbay Magnolia 2,100 5.12%
Quercus nigra Water Oak 2,100 5.12%
Itea virginica Virginia Sweetspire 1,902 4.64%
Quercus alba White Oak 1,700 4.15%
Quercus bicolor Swamp White Oak 1,700 4.15%
Clethra alnifolia Sweet‐pepper Bush 1,620 3.95%
Quercus phellos Willow Oak 1,600 3.90%
Aronia arbutifolia Red Chokeberry 1,419 3.46%
Cornus amomum Silky Dogwood 1,312 3.20%
Ulmus americana American Elm 1,175 2.87%
Nyssa biflora Swamp Tupelo 1,050 2.56%
Ilex glabra Inkberry 841 2.05%
Quercus pagoda Cherrybark Oak 800 1.95%
Quercus michauxii Swamp Chestnut Oak 700 1.71%
Persea borbonia Redbay 408 0.99%
Ceplalanthus occidentalis Buttonbush 400 0.98%
Cyrilla racimiflora Swamp Titi 173 0.42%
TOTAL 41,006 100.00%
Plant Species Summary
Table 5c: Hollowell Mitigation Project
Species Common Name Stems % Planted
Mitigation 
Plan 
Percent
Betula nigra River birch 3400 8.29%7%
Platanus occidentalis Sycamore 3400 8.29%7%
Carpinus caroliniana Ironwood 2900 7.07%6%
Taxodium distichum Bald cypress 2900 7.07%5%
Liriodendron tulipifera Tulip poplar 2800 6.83%7%
Fraxinus pennsylvanica Green ash 2400 5.85%7%
Viburnum nudum Possomhaw viburnum 2206 5.38% 0%
Magnolia virginiana Sweetbay magnolia 2100 5.12%6%
Quercus nigra Water oak 2100 5.12%5%
Itea virginica Sweetspire 1902 4.64%6%
Quercus alba White oak 1700 4.15%5%
Quercus bicolor Swamp white oak 1700 4.15%5%
Clethra alnifolia Sweet pepperbush 1620 3.95%6%
Quercus phellos Willow oak 1600 3.90%5%
Aronia arbutifolia Red chokeberry 1419 3.46% 0%
Cornus amomum Silky dogwood 1312 3.20% 0%
Ulmus americana American elm 1175 2.87% 0%
Nyssa biflora Swamp tupelo 1050 2.56%5%
Ilex glabra Inkberry 841 2.05% 0%
Quercus pagoda Cherrybark oak 800 1.95% 0%
Quercus michauxii Swamp chestnut oak 700 1.71% 0%
Persea borbonia Redbay 408 0.99% 0%
Ceplalanthus occ Buttonbush 400 0.98% 0%
Cyrilla racimiflora Swamp Titi 173 0.42%6%
Persea palustris Swamp bay 0 0.00% 6%
Eubotrys recemosus Swamp doghobble 0 0.00% 6%
TOTAL 41,006 100%
Red‐line Planting List
Table 5c: Hollowell Mitigation Project

Appendix D:
Stream Measurement and
Geomorphology Data

MY1 Cross-Sections
Table 6a: Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table 6b: Cross-section Morphology Data
Table 6c: Stream Reach Morphology Data

Project NameHollowell Mitigation ProjectCross Section IDXS-1Reach IDUT1-R1Channel TypeHeadwaterField CrewK. Obermiller, E. DunniganBankfull Elevation (ft)82.6Low Bank Height Elevation (ft)82.7Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.5Low Bank Height (ft)0.6Bank Height Ratio 1.2Bankfull X-section Area (ft²)1.2% Change Bank Height Ratio20.0%Looking DownstreamDimension Data Summary: MY1 20208182838485860 1020304050607080Elevation (feet)Width (feet)XS-1 Headwater, STA 19+45 MY0MY1Bankfull ElevationFloodprone AreaHollowell Mitigation ProjectOctober 2020Water and Land SolutionsMY1 ReportMonitoring Year 1 of 7
Project NameHollowell Mitigation ProjectCross Section IDXS-2Reach IDUT1-R1Channel TypeHeadwaterField CrewK. Obermiller, E. DunniganBankfull Elevation (ft)78.6Low Bank Height Elevation (ft)78.5Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.6Low Bank Height (ft)0.5Bank Height Ratio 0.9Bankfull X-section Area (ft²)3.5% Change Bank Height Ratio10.0%Looking DownstreamDimension Data Summary: MY1 20207677787980810 1020304050607080Elevation (feet)Width (feet)XS-2 - Headwater, STA 27+80 MY0MY1Bankfull ElevationFloodprone AreaHollowell Mitigation ProjectOctober 2020Water and Land SolutionsMY1 ReportMonitoring Year 1 of 7
Project NameHollowell Mitigation ProjectCross Section IDXS-3Reach IDUT1-R1Channel TypeHeadwaterField CrewK. Obermiller, E. DunniganBankfull Elevation (ft)77.8Low Bank Height Elevation (ft)77.8Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.5Low Bank Height (ft)0.5Bank Height Ratio 1.0Bankfull X-section Area (ft²)1.7% Change Bank Height Ratio0.0%Looking DownstreamDimension Data Summary: MY1 20207677787980810 1020304050607080Elevation (feet)Width (feet)XS-3 Headwater, STA 30+50 MY0MY1Bankfull ElevationFloodprone AreaHollowell Mitigation ProjectOctober 2020Water and Land SolutionsMY1 ReportMonitoring Year 1 of 7
Project NameHollowell Mitigation ProjectCross Section IDXS-4Reach IDUT1-R2Channel TypeSingle-threadField CrewK. Obermiller, E. DunniganBankfull Elevation (ft)74.9Low Bank Height Elevation (ft)75.0Bankfull Max Depth (ft)1.0Low Bank Height (ft)1.1Bank Height Ratio 1.1Bankfull X-section Area (ft²)4.3% Change Bank Height Ratio10.0%Looking DownstreamDimension Data Summary: MY1 20207374757677780 1020304050Elevation (feet)Width (feet)XS-4 Riffle, STA 38+30 MY0MY1Bankfull ElevationFloodprone AreaHollowell Mitigation ProjectOctober 2020Water and Land SolutionsMY1 ReportMonitoring Year 1 of 7
Project NameHollowell Mitigation ProjectCross Section IDXS-5Reach IDUT1-R2Channel TypeSingle-threadField CrewK. Obermiller, E. DunniganBankfull Elevation (ft)75.1Low Bank Height Elevation (ft)74.9Bankfull Max Depth (ft)1.2Low Bank Height (ft)1.1Bank Height Ratio 0.9Bankfull X-section Area (ft²)6.8% Change Bank Height Ratio10.0%Looking DownstreamDimension Data Summary: MY1 20207273747576770 1020304050Elevation (feet)Width (feet)XS-5 Pool, STA 38+60 MY0MY1Bankfull ElevationFloodprone AreaHollowell Mitigation ProjectOctober 2020Water and Land SolutionsMY1 ReportMonitoring Year 1 of 7
Project NameHollowell Mitigation ProjectCross Section IDXS-6Reach IDUT1-R2Channel TypeSingle-threadField CrewK. Obermiller, E. DunniganBankfull Elevation (ft)72.5Low Bank Height Elevation (ft)72.5Bankfull Max Depth (ft)1.3Low Bank Height (ft)1.3Bank Height Ratio 1.0Bankfull X-section Area (ft²)7.1% Change Bank Height Ratio0.0%Looking DownstreamDimension Data Summary: MY1 20207071727374750 1020304050Elevation (feet)Width (feet)XS-6 Pool, STA 48+25 MY0MY1Bankfull ElevationFloodprone AreaHollowell Mitigation ProjectOctober 2020Water and Land SolutionsMY1 ReportMonitoring Year 1 of 7
Project NameHollowell Mitigation ProjectCross Section IDXS-7Reach IDUT1-R2Channel TypeSingle-ThreadField CrewK. Obermiller, E. DunniganBankfull Elevation (ft)72.0Low Bank Height Elevation (ft)72.0Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.7Low Bank Height (ft)0.7Bank Height Ratio 1.0Bankfull X-section Area (ft²)3.0% Change Bank Height Ratio0.0%Looking DownstreamDimension Data Summary: MY1 20207071727374750 1020304050Elevation (feet)Width (feet)XS-7 Riffle, STA 49+40 MY0MY1Bankfull ElevationFloodprone AreaHollowell Mitigation ProjectOctober 2020Water and Land SolutionsMY1 ReportMonitoring Year 1 of 7
Project NameHollowell Mitigation ProjectCross Section IDXS-8Reach IDUT2-R1Channel TypeHeadwaterField CrewK. Obermiller, E. DunniganBankfull Elevation (ft)87.3Low Bank Height Elevation (ft)87.1Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.4Low Bank Height (ft)0.4Bank Height Ratio 1.0Bankfull X-section Area (ft²)3.5% Change Bank Height Ratio0.0%Looking DownstreamDimension Data Summary: MY1 20208586878889900 1020304050607080Elevation (feet)Width (feet)XS-8 Headwater, STA 13+60 MY0MY1Bankfull ElevationFloodprone AreaHollowell Mitigation ProjectOctober 2020Water and Land SolutionsMY1 ReportMonitoring Year 1 of 7
Project NameHollowell Mitigation ProjectCross Section IDXS-9Reach IDUT2AChannel TypeHeadwaterField CrewK. Obermiller, E. DunniganBankfull Elevation (ft)85.2Low Bank Height Elevation (ft)85.1Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.7Low Bank Height (ft)0.6Bank Height Ratio 0.9Bankfull X-section Area (ft²)2.0% Change Bank Height Ratio10.0%Looking DownstreamDimension Data Summary: MY1 20208384858687880 1020304050607080Elevation (feet)Width (feet)XS-9 Headwater, STA 13+40 MY0MY1Bankfull ElevationFloodprone AreaHollowell Mitigation ProjectOctober 2020Water and Land SolutionsMY1 ReportMonitoring Year 1 of 7
Project NameHollowell Mitigation ProjectCross Section IDXS-10Reach IDUT2-R2Channel TypeSingle-ThreadField CrewK. Obermiller, E. DunniganBankfull Elevation (ft)80.3Low Bank Height Elevation (ft)80.2Bankfull Max Depth (ft)1.1Low Bank Height (ft)1.0Bank Height Ratio 0.9Bankfull X-section Area (ft²)3.8% Change Bank Height Ratio10.0%Looking DownstreamDimension Data Summary: MY1 20207879808182830 1020304050Elevation (feet)Width (feet)XS-10 Pool, STA 27+85 MY0MY1Bankfull ElevationFloodprone AreaHollowell Mitigation ProjectOctober 2020Water and Land SolutionsMY1 ReportMonitoring Year 1 of 7
Project NameHollowell Mitigation ProjectCross Section IDXS-11Reach IDUT2-R2Channel TypeSingle-ThreadField CrewK. Obermiller, E. DunniganBankfull Elevation (ft)80.3Low Bank Height Elevation (ft)80.2Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.8Low Bank Height (ft)0.7Bank Height Ratio 0.9Bankfull X-section Area (ft²)3.7% Change Bank Height Ratio10.0%Looking DownstreamDimension Data Summary: MY1 20207879808182830 1020304050Elevation (feet)Width (feet)XS-11 Riffle, STA 28+00 MY0MY1Bankfull ElevationFloodprone AreaHollowell Mitigation ProjectOctober 2020Water and Land SolutionsMY1 ReportMonitoring Year 1 of 7
ParameterParameterReach ID: UT1-R1 (Headwater)Reach ID: UT1-R2Dimension (Riffle)Min MaxMin MaxDimension (Riffle)Min MaxMin MaxBankfull Width (ft)- 4.6 4.5 6.6Bankfull Width (ft)- 7.6 6.3 9.8Floodprone Width (ft)20.0 40.0 32.3 63.2Floodprone Width (ft)30.0 60.0 - 50.0Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)- 0.3 0.3 0.5Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)- 0.6 0.5 0.6Bankfull Max Depth (ft)- 0.4 0.4 0.9Bankfull Max Depth (ft)- 0.7 0.8 0.9Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)- 1.2 1.2 3.5Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)- 4.4 3.7 4.1Width/Depth Ratio- 18.0 12.4 21.8Width/Depth Ratio- 13.0 11.8 15.0Entrenchment Ratio4.3 8.6 7.1 9.6Entrenchment Ratio4.0 7.9 6.8 7.7Bank Height Ratio- 1.0 1.0 1.0Bank Height Ratio- 1.0 - 1.0ProfileProfileRiffle Length (ft)30.0 70.0 27.0 71.7Riffle Length (ft)22.0 43.0 23.3 40.4Riffle Slope (ft/ft)0.003 0.004 0.001 0.004Riffle Slope (ft/ft)0.003 0.004 0.002 0.005Pool Length (ft)10.0 20.0 15.2 23.4Pool Length (ft)25.0 40.0 20.2 37.0Pool Max Depth (ft)0.4 0.8 0.7 1.0Pool Max Depth (ft)1.2 1.4 1.2 1.5Pool Spacing (ft)40.0 100.0 55.5 99.9Pool Spacing (ft)27.0 53.0 42.9 79.0PatternPatternChannel Beltwidth (ft)--- -Channel Beltwidth (ft)30.0 55.0 44.0 52.8Radius of Curvature (ft)--- -Radius of Curvature (ft)15.0 23.0 15.9 23.7Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft)--- -Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft)2.0 3.0 2.4 2.5Meander Wavelength (ft)--- -Meander Wavelength (ft)53.0 100.0 81.9 101.4Meander Width Ratio--- -Meander Width Ratio4.0 8.0 10.3 13.0Transport Parameters Transport ParametersBoundary Shear Stress (lb/ft2)Boundary Shear Stress (lb/ft2)Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfullMax part size (mm) mobilized at bankfullStream Power (W/m2)Stream Power (W/m2)Additional Reach ParametersAdditional Reach ParametersRosgen ClassificationRosgen ClassificationBankfull Velocity (fps)Bankfull Velocity (fps)Bankfull Discharge (cfs)Bankfull Discharge (cfs)SinuositySinuosityWater Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)Table 6a. Baseline Stream Data Summary Hollowell Mitigation ProjectDesign Baseline Design Baseline0.060.060.120.120.800.803.003.00<2<2<2<2DA/E5DA/E5E5/C5E5/C52.52.54.34.31.01.02.12.10.0040.0040.0040.0031.181.191.031.040.0040.0030.0040.004
ParameterParameterReach ID: UT2-R1 (Headwater)Reach ID: UT2-R2Dimension (Riffle)Min MaxMin MaxDimension (Riffle)Min MaxMin MaxBankfull Width (ft)- 4.5 - 16.0Bankfull Width (ft)- 7.0 - 7.4Floodprone Width (ft)20.0 40.0 - 33.7Floodprone Width (ft)25.0 45.0 - 50.0Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)- 0.3 - 0.2Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)- 0.5 - 0.5Bankfull Max Depth (ft)- 0.4 - 0.5Bankfull Max Depth (ft)- 0.7 - 0.9Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)- 1.1 - 3.5Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)- 3.8 - 3.7Width/Depth Ratio- 18.0 - 72.8Width/Depth Ratio- 13.0 - 15.0Entrenchment Ratio4.3 8.6 - 2.1Entrenchment Ratio3.6 6.4 - 6.8Bank Height Ratio- 1.0 - 1.0Bank Height Ratio- 1.0 - 1.0ProfileProfileRiffle Length (ft)30.0 70.0 55.6 71.4Riffle Length (ft)22.0 43.0 30.8 46.5Riffle Slope (ft/ft)0.004 0.005 0.003 0.006Riffle Slope (ft/ft)0.005 0.008 0.003 0.007Pool Length (ft)10.0 20.0 20.7 29.3Pool Length (ft)23.0 42.0 16.0 37.2Pool Max Depth (ft)0.4 0.8 0.6 1.4Pool Max Depth (ft)1.2 1.4 0.9 1.6Pool Spacing (ft)40.0 100.0 71.2 72.3Pool Spacing (ft)27.0 50.0 35.6 74.0PatternPatternChannel Beltwidth (ft)----Channel Beltwidth (ft)27.0 55.0 34.2 51.0Radius of Curvature (ft)----Radius of Curvature (ft)14.0 21.0 14.9 20.2Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft)----Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft)2.0 3.0 2.0 2.7Meander Wavelength (ft)----Meander Wavelength (ft)50.0 100.0 88.8 96.8Meander Width Ratio----Meander Width Ratio3.8 7.8 12.0 13.1Transport ParametersTransport ParametersBoundary Shear Stress (lb/ft2)Boundary Shear Stress (lb/ft2)Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfullMax part size (mm) mobilized at bankfullStream Power (W/m2)Stream Power (W/m2)Additional Reach ParametersAdditional Reach ParametersRosgen ClassificationRosgen ClassificationBankfull Velocity (fps)Bankfull Velocity (fps)Bankfull Discharge (cfs)Bankfull Discharge (cfs)SinuositySinuosityWater Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)Design BaselineDesign BaselineTable 6a. Baseline Stream Data Summary Hollowell Mitigation Project0.120.120.06 0.062.82 2.821.41 1.41<2 <2<2 <2E5/C5 E5/C5DA/E5 DA/E53.003.001.11.10.80.80.90.90.0040.0060.0050.0051.161.171.071.070.0040.0050.0050.006
ParameterReach ID: UT2A (Headwater)Dimension (Riffle)Min Max Min MaxBankfull Width (ft)- 4.6 - 7.0Floodprone Width (ft)20.0 50.0 - 67.1Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)- 0.3 - 0.3Bankfull Max Depth (ft)- 0.6 - 0.6Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)- 1.2 - 2.0Width/Depth Ratio- 18.0 - 24.8Entrenchment Ratio4.3 10.8 - 9.6Bank Height Ratio- 1.0 - 1.0ProfileRiffle Length (ft)30.0 70.0 31.8 58.6Riffle Slope (ft/ft)0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002Pool Length (ft)10.0 20.0 20.2 31.8Pool Max Depth (ft)0.7 1.1 0.9 1.3Pool Spacing (ft)30.0 60.0 40.9 50.0PatternChannel Beltwidth (ft)----Radius of Curvature (ft)----Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft)----Meander Wavelength (ft)----Meander Width Ratio----Transport ParametersBoundary Shear Stress (lb/ft2)Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfullStream Power (W/m2)Additional Reach ParametersRosgen ClassificationBankfull Velocity (fps)Bankfull Discharge (cfs)SinuosityWater Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)Design BaselineTable 6a. Baseline Stream Data Summary Hollowell Mitigation Project0.040.040.530.53<2<2DADA1.61.61.41.40.0020.0021.011.020.0020.002
ParametersBase MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+Bankfull Width (ft) 4.5 4.46.6 15.06.2 6.3Floodprone Width (ft) 32.3 32.563.2 58.944.8 44.8Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.3 0.30.5 0.20.3 0.3Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.4 0.50.9 0.60.6 0.5Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)1.2 1.23.5 3.51.7 1.7Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 16.7 15.612.4 63.821.8 22.9Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 7.1 7.49.6 3.97.3 7.1Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.21.0 0.91.0 1.0d50 (mm) <2 <2<2 <2<2 <2ParametersBase MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+Bankfull Width (ft) 8.2 7.29.8 15.78.6 11.2Floodprone Width (ft) 50.0 50.048.1 48.139.1 39.4Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.5 0.50.7 0.40.8 0.6Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.8 1.01.3 1.21.4 1.3Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)4.3 4.36.8 6.87.1 7.1Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 15.4 12.114.1 36.510.4 17.7Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 6.1 6.94.9 3.14.6 3.5Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.11.0 0.91.0 1.0d50 (mm) <2 <2<2 <2<2 <2ParametersBase MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+Bankfull Width (ft) 6.3 6.816.0 19.17.0 11.0Floodprone Width (ft) 41.4 41.034.4 43.867.1 61.4Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.5 0.40.2 0.20.3 0.2Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.8 0.70.5 0.40.6 0.7Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)3.0 3.03.5 3.52.0 2.0Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 13.1 15.472.8 104.824.8 60.4Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 6.6 6.02.1 2.39.6 5.6Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.01.0 1.01.0 0.9d50 (mm) <2 <2<2 <2<2 <2ParametersBase MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY+Bankfull Width (ft) 7.9 10.07.4 11.5Floodprone Width (ft) 36.2 35.550.0 50.0Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.5 0.40.5 0.3Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.9 1.10.9 0.8Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)3.8 3.83.7 3.7Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 16.6 26.315.0 35.2Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 4.6 3.66.8 4.4Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1.0 0.91.0 0.9d50 (mm) <2 <2<2 <2Cross Section 9 (Headwater)Cross Section 10 (Pool) Cross Section 11 (Riffle)Cross Section 1 (Headwater) Cross Section 2 (Headwater) Cross Section 3 (Headwater)Cross Section 6 (Pool)Cross Section 4 (Riffle) Cross Section 5 (Pool)Cross Section 8 (Headwater)Cross Section 7 (Riffle)Table 6b. Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary (Dimensional Parameters – Cross Sections)Hollowell Mitigation Project
ParameterReach ID: UT1-R1 (Headwater)Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min MaxProfileRiffle Length (ft)27.0 71.7Riffle Slope (ft/ft)0.00144 0.00409Pool Length (ft)15.2 23.4Pool Max depth (ft)0.7 1.0Pool Spacing (ft)55.5 99.9PatternChannel Beltwidth (ft)--Radius of Curvature (ft)--Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)--Meander Wavelength (ft)--Meander Width Ratio--Additional Reach ParametersRosgen ClassificationSinuosity (ft)Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)BF slope (ft/ft)3Ri% / Ru% / P% / G% / S%3SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% / Be%3d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 /2% of Reach with Eroding BanksChannel Stability or Habitat MetricBiological or OtherTable 6c. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Summary Hollowell Mitigation ProjectBaseline MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5DA/E50.00351.040.0035Pattern and Profile data will not typically be collected unless visual data, dimensional data or profile data indicate significant deviations from baseline conditions
ParameterReach ID: UT1-R2Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min MaxProfileRiffle Length (ft)23.3 40.4Riffle Slope (ft/ft)0.0020 0.0052Pool Length (ft)20.2 37.0Pool Max depth (ft)1.2 1.5Pool Spacing (ft)42.9 79.0PatternChannel Beltwidth (ft)44.0 52.8Radius of Curvature (ft)15.9 23.7Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)2.4 2.5Meander Wavelength (ft)81.9 101.4Meander Width Ratio10.3 13.0Additional Reach ParametersRosgen ClassificationSinuosity (ft)Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)BF slope (ft/ft)3Ri% / Ru% / P% / G% / S%3SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% / Be%3d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 /2% of Reach with Eroding BanksChannel Stability or Habitat MetricBiological or OtherBaseline MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5Table 6c. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Summary Hollowell Mitigation ProjectE5/C50.00301.190.0031Pattern and Profile data will not typically be collected unless visual data, dimensional data or profile data indicate significant deviations
ParameterReach ID: UT2-R1 (Headwater)Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min MaxProfileRiffle Length (ft)55.58 71.37Riffle Slope (ft/ft)0.0030 0.0059Pool Length (ft)20.72 29.3Pool Max depth (ft)0.59 1.43Pool Spacing (ft)71.24 72.25PatternChannel Beltwidth (ft)--Radius of Curvature (ft)--Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)--Meander Wavelength (ft)--Meander Width Ratio--Additional Reach ParametersRosgen ClassificationSinuosity (ft)Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)BF slope (ft/ft)3Ri% / Ru% / P% / G% / S%3SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% / Be%3d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 /2% of Reach with Eroding BanksChannel Stability or Habitat MetricBiological or OtherTable 6c. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Summary Hollowell Mitigation ProjectBaseline MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5DA/E50.00461.070.0057Pattern and Profile data will not typically be collected unless visual data, dimensional data or profile data indicate significant deviations from
ParameterReach ID: UT2-R2Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min MaxProfileRiffle Length (ft)30.77 46.5Riffle Slope (ft/ft)0.0031 0.00721Pool Length (ft)16.0 37.2Pool Max depth (ft)0.9 1.6Pool Spacing (ft)35.6 74.0PatternChannel Beltwidth (ft)34.2 51.0Radius of Curvature (ft)14.9 20.2Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)2.0 2.7Meander Wavelength (ft)88.8 96.8Meander Width Ratio12.0 13.1Additional Reach ParametersRosgen ClassificationSinuosity (ft)Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)BF slope (ft/ft)3Ri% / Ru% / P% / G% / S%3SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% / Be%3d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 /2% of Reach with Eroding BanksChannel Stability or Habitat MetricBiological or OtherBaseline MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5E5/C51.170.00550.0054Table 6c. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Summary Hollowell Mitigation ProjectPattern and Profile data will not typically be collected unless visual data, dimensional data or profile data indicate significant deviations
ParameterReach ID: UT2AMin Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min MaxProfileRiffle Length (ft)31.8 58.6Riffle Slope (ft/ft)0.00167 0.00235Pool Length (ft)20.2 31.8Pool Max depth (ft)0.9 1.3Pool Spacing (ft)40.9 50.0PatternChannel Beltwidth (ft)--Radius of Curvature (ft)--Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)--Meander Wavelength (ft)--Meander Width Ratio--Additional Reach ParametersRosgen ClassificationSinuosity (ft)Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)BF slope (ft/ft)3Ri% / Ru% / P% / G% / S%3SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% / Be%3d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 /2% of Reach with Eroding BanksChannel Stability or Habitat MetricBiological or OtherMY2 MY3 MY4 MY5Table 6c. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Summary Hollowell Mitigation Project0.0019DA1.020.0020Baseline MY1Pattern and Profile data will not typically be collected unless visual data, dimensional data or profile data indicate significant deviations from baseline

Appendix E:
Hydrologic Data

Table 7: Verification of Bankfull Events
Figure 2 Surface Flow Data
Figure 3 Flow Gauge Installation Diagram
Figure 4 Rainfall Data
Figure 5 Wetland Gauge Data

Date of Collection
Date of 
Occurrence Method Photos
Measurement 
above bankfull 
(feet)
7/7/2020 4/30/2020 Pressure Transducer 0.495
7/7/2020 5/20/2020 Pressure Transducer 0.142
7/7/2020 6/17/2020 Pressure Transducer 0.38
10/26/2020 8/4/2020 Pressure Transducer 0.665
10/26/2020 8/9/2020 Pressure Transducer 0.272
10/26/2020 8/20/2020 Pressure Transducer 0.327
10/26/2020 9/5/2020 Pressure Transducer 1.701
10/26/2020 9/11/2020 Pressure Transducer 0.778
10/26/2020 9/17/2020 Pressure Transducer 0.526
10/26/2020 9/25/2020 Pressure Transducer 0.429
10/26/2020 9/29/2020 Pressure Transducer 0.702
10/26/2020 10/11/2020 Pressure Transducer 0.194
10/26/2020 10/25/2020 Pressure Transducer 0.273
10/26/2020 Unknown Cork Gauge Yes 1.4
Table 7A: Verification of Bankfull Events ‐ UT1‐R2
Hollowell Mitigation Site ‐ WLS Neuse 01 Bank
10/26/2020
Date of Collection
Date of 
Occurrence Method Photos
Measurement 
above bankfull 
(feet)
7/7/2020 Unknown Cork Gauge Yes 0.72
7/7/2020 4/30/2020 Pressure Transducer 1.498
7/7/2020 5/20/2020 Pressure Transducer 0.658
7/7/2020 5/28/2020 Pressure Transducer 0.206
7/7/2020 6/17/2020 Pressure Transducer 0.834
10/26/2020 8/4/2020 Pressure Transducer 1.353
10/26/2020 8/9/2020 Pressure Transducer 0.284
10/26/2020 Unknown Cork Gauge Yes 0.55
Table 7B: Verification of Bankfull Events ‐ UT2‐R2
Hollowell Mitigation Site ‐ WLS Neuse 01 Bank
7/7/2020 10/26/2020
Figure 2: Surface Flow Data and Crest Gauge Data
Hollowell Mitigation Site – MY1: 2020

0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
5/20/20205/27/20206/3/20206/10/20206/17/20206/24/20207/1/20207/8/20207/15/20207/22/20207/29/20208/5/20208/12/20208/19/20208/26/20209/2/20209/9/20209/16/20209/23/20209/30/202010/7/202010/14/202010/21/2020Daily Rainfall (inches)Stream Depth (Feet)Hollowell UT1-R1 Flow Gauge
Rainfall Sensor Depth Downstream Riffle
Maximum Consecutive Days of Flow: 54 days (May 20 -July 12)
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
5/20/20205/27/20206/3/20206/10/20206/17/20206/24/20207/1/20207/8/20207/15/20207/22/20207/29/20208/5/20208/12/20208/19/20208/26/20209/2/20209/9/20209/16/20209/23/20209/30/202010/7/202010/14/202010/21/2020Daily Rainfall (inches)Stream Depth (Feet)Hollowell UT2-R1 Flow Gauge
Rainfall Sensor Depth Downstream Riffle
Maximum Consecutive Days of Flow: 56 days (May 20 -July 14)

0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
4/27/20205/4/20205/11/20205/18/20205/25/20206/1/20206/8/20206/15/20206/22/20206/29/20207/6/20207/13/20207/20/20207/27/20208/3/20208/10/20208/17/20208/24/20208/31/20209/7/20209/14/20209/21/20209/28/202010/5/202010/12/202010/19/202010/26/2020Daily Rainfall (inches)Stream Max Depth (Feet)Hollowell UT1-R2 Crest Gauge
Daily Rainfall Stream Max Depth Bankfull Depth
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
4/27/20205/4/20205/11/20205/18/20205/25/20206/1/20206/8/20206/15/20206/22/20206/29/20207/6/20207/13/20207/20/20207/27/20208/3/20208/10/20208/17/20208/24/20208/31/20209/7/20209/14/20209/21/20209/28/202010/5/202010/12/202010/19/202010/26/2020Daily Rainfall (inches)Stream Max Depth (Feet)Hollowell UT2-R2 Crest Gauge
Daily Rainfall Stream Max Depth Bankfull Depth
FLOW GAUGE #1 - UT1-R1
Flow Depth = (Sensor Depth + Top) - Elevation of
Riffle Flow Depth = (4.88 + 4.15) - 8.19
Flow Depth = 0.84 feet
FLOW
RIFFLE
POOL
RIFFLE
TOP OF FLOW GAUGE
HEIGHT. = 4.15
BASEFLOW SENSOR DEPTH = 4.88ELEVATION OF DOWN
STREAM RIFFLE = 8.19
Figure 3: Flow Gauge Diagrams
FLOW GAUGE #2 - UT2-R1
Flow Depth = (Sensor Depth + Top) - Elevation of
Riffle Flow Depth = (4.80 + 4.56) - 8.76
Flow Depth = 0.60 feet
FLOW
RIFFLE
POOL
RIFFLE
TOP OF FLOW GAUGE
HEIGHT = 4.56
BASEFLOW SENSOR DEPTH = 4.80ELEVATION OF DOWN
STREAM RIFFLE = 8.76
Month 30th Percentile 70th Percentile Observed Monthly Rainfall
Jan‐20 3.34 5.05 3.86
Feb‐20 2.24 4.18 4.44
Mar‐20 2.36 4.05 2.80
Apr‐20 2.67 4.41 4.40
May‐20 2.91 4.86 5.22
Jun‐20 2.60 4.97 5.37
Jul‐20 4.33 6.26 3.81
Aug‐20 4.62 6.39 5.66
Sep‐20 4.26 8.31 7.36
Oct‐20 1.42 4.00 2.14
Nov‐20 1.61 3.96 **
Dec‐20 2.44 4.42 **
**Incomplete Month
*30th and 70th percentile data collected from weather station CLAY ‐ Central Crops Research Station in Clayton, NC. 
Figure 4: Monthly Rainfall Data
Hollowell Mitigation Site
MY1 2020
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
Jan‐20 Feb‐20 Mar‐20 Apr‐20 May‐20 Jun‐20 Jul‐20 Aug‐20 Sep‐20 Oct‐20 Nov‐20 Dec‐20Rainfall Total (inches)Monthly Rainfall
Observed Monthly Rainfall 30th Percentile 70th Percentile
Figure 5: Groundwater Gauge Data
Hollowell Mitigation Site – MY1: 2020
•All Groundwater and Wetland Gauges were installed April 27, 2020.
•Data was last collected October 26, 2020.
•Growing season for Wayne County runs from March 21st to November 6th.
*Groundwater Gauge 1 is not located in a wetland crediting area
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
-50
-45
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
4/27/20205/4/20205/11/20205/18/20205/25/20206/1/20206/8/20206/15/20206/22/20206/29/20207/6/20207/13/20207/20/20207/27/20208/3/20208/10/20208/17/20208/24/20208/31/20209/7/20209/14/20209/21/20209/28/202010/5/202010/12/202010/19/202010/26/2020Daily Rainfall (inches)Groundwater Depth (inches)Hollowell Groundwater Gauge 1
Rainfall Groundwater Depth Ground Level 12" Below Surface Growing Season
9 days, 3.9% of the Growing Season
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
4/27/20205/4/20205/11/20205/18/20205/25/20206/1/20206/8/20206/15/20206/22/20206/29/20207/6/20207/13/20207/20/20207/27/20208/3/20208/10/20208/17/20208/24/20208/31/20209/7/20209/14/20209/21/20209/28/202010/5/202010/12/202010/19/202010/26/2020Daily Rainfall (inches)Groundwater Depth (inches)Hollowell Wetland Gauge 2 -W4
Rainfall Groundwater Depth Ground Level 12" Below Surface Growing Season
79 days, 34.2% of the Growing Season
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
-14
-12
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
4/27/20205/4/20205/11/20205/18/20205/25/20206/1/20206/8/20206/15/20206/22/20206/29/20207/6/20207/13/20207/20/20207/27/20208/3/20208/10/20208/17/20208/24/20208/31/20209/7/20209/14/20209/21/20209/28/202010/5/202010/12/202010/19/202010/26/2020Daily Rainfall (inches)Groundwater Depth (inches)Hollowell Wetland Gauge 3 -W4a
Rainfall Groundwater Depth Ground Level 12" Below Surface Growing Season
183 days, 79.2% of the Growing Season
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
4/27/20205/4/20205/11/20205/18/20205/25/20206/1/20206/8/20206/15/20206/22/20206/29/20207/6/20207/13/20207/20/20207/27/20208/3/20208/10/20208/17/20208/24/20208/31/20209/7/20209/14/20209/21/20209/28/202010/5/202010/12/202010/19/202010/26/2020Daily Rainfall (inches)Groundwater Depth (inches)Hollowell Wetland Gauge 4 -W3
Rainfall Groundwater Depth Ground Level 12" Below Surface Growing Season
71 days, 30.7% of the Growing Season
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
4/27/20205/4/20205/11/20205/18/20205/25/20206/1/20206/8/20206/15/20206/22/20206/29/20207/6/20207/13/20207/20/20207/27/20208/3/20208/10/20208/17/20208/24/20208/31/20209/7/20209/14/20209/21/20209/28/202010/5/202010/12/202010/19/202010/26/2020Daily Rainfall (inches)Groundwater Depth (inches)Hollowell Wetland Gauge 5 -W3a
Rainfall Groundwater Depth Ground Level 12" Below Surface Growing Season
78 days, 33.8% of the Growing Season
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
-14
-12
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
4/27/20205/4/20205/11/20205/18/20205/25/20206/1/20206/8/20206/15/20206/22/20206/29/20207/6/20207/13/20207/20/20207/27/20208/3/20208/10/20208/17/20208/24/20208/31/20209/7/20209/14/20209/21/20209/28/202010/5/202010/12/202010/19/202010/26/2020Daily Rainfall (inches)Groundwater Depth (inches)Hollowell Wetland Gauge 6 -W2
Rainfall Groundwater Depth Ground Level 12" Below Surface Growing Season
183 days, 79.2% of the Growing Season
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
-14
-12
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
4/27/20205/4/20205/11/20205/18/20205/25/20206/1/20206/8/20206/15/20206/22/20206/29/20207/6/20207/13/20207/20/20207/27/20208/3/20208/10/20208/17/20208/24/20208/31/20209/7/20209/14/20209/21/20209/28/202010/5/202010/12/202010/19/202010/26/2020Daily Rainfall (inches)Groundwater Depth (inches)Hollowell Wetland Gauge 7 -W2a
Rainfall Groundwater Depth Ground Level 12" Below Surface Growing Season
183 days, 79.2% of the Growing Season
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
4/27/20205/4/20205/11/20205/18/20205/25/20206/1/20206/8/20206/15/20206/22/20206/29/20207/6/20207/13/20207/20/20207/27/20208/3/20208/10/20208/17/20208/24/20208/31/20209/7/20209/14/20209/21/20209/28/202010/5/202010/12/202010/19/202010/26/2020Daily Rainfall (inches)Groundwater Depth (inches)Hollowell Wetland Gauge 8 -W1
Rainfall Groundwater Depth Ground Level 12" Below Surface Growing Season
29 days, 12.6% of the Growing Season
Monitoring Gauge Name 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Mean
Groundwater Gauge 1 3.9%
Wetland Gauge 2 34.2%
Wetland Gauge 3 79.2%
Wetland Gauge 4 30.7%
Wetland Gauge 5 33.8%
Wetland Gauge 6 79.2%
Wetland Gauge 7 79.2%
Wetland Gauge 8 12.6%
Max Consecutive Hydroperiod
Meets 12% hydroperiod
Fails to meet 12% hydroperiod
Saturation within 12 Inches of Soil Surface (Percent of Growing Season 3/21-11/6)
CRONOS Station: GOLD - Cherry Research Station