20201990 Ver 1_Mitigation Project Final Prospectus_20200929

Strickland, Bev
From: Browning, Kimberly D CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)
<[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 10:03 AM
To: Barnes, Kyle W CIV USARMY CESAW (US); Tugwell, Todd J CIV USARMY CESAW (US);
Davis, Erin B; Wilson, Travis W.; Dunn, Maria T.; Haywood, Casey M CIV (USA)
Cc: Bowers, Todd; Lekson, David M CIV USARMY CESAW (US); Wells, Emily N
Subject: [External] RES White Hat Mitigation Project Final Prospectus
Attachments: RES-White Hat_Concept.pdf, White Hat Final Prospectus.pdf
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as
an attachment to [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Attached is the final prospectus and georeferenced map for White Hat, scheduled for Oct 14. We're hoping to
be there by 12:30 but it may be 1:00 depending on how long the Watts site visit goes.
Thanks
Kim
Kim Browning
Mitigation Project Manager, Regulatory Division I U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
-----Original Message -----
From: Matt Butler <mbutler@res. us>
Sent: Monday, September 28, 2020 1:40 PM
To: Browning, Kimberly D CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Cc: Bradley Breslow <[e-mail]>; Benton Carroll <[e-mail]>
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] RE: RES White Hat Mitigation Project Final Prospectus
Kim,
Attached is the georeferenced concept map for White Hat. Below are the meeting coordinates:
36.173493'
-76.330371'
Brad and Ben Carroll will be the RES staff meeting you on -site to walk through with the IRT. They will be on -
site by 12:30 in the event you are ready early (fingers crossed). If you need any additional information, please
let me know.
Thank you,
Matt Butler, PMP
1

Project Manager
RES I res.us
Direct:919.209.1067 1 Mobile:[phone]
Our new office is located at 3600 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 100, Raleigh, North Carolina 27612.
-----Original Message -----
From: Browning, Kimberly D CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2020 11:52 AM
To: Matt Butler <mbutler@res. us>
Cc: Bradley Breslow <[e-mail]>; Benton Carroll <[e-mail]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: RES White Hat Mitigation Project Final Prospectus
Thanks Matt. We're scheduled to be at a DMS site that morning from 10-12:30. So let's plan on meeting there
around 1:00. It might be good to get there a few minutes early in case we're running ahead of schedule. (haha)
Will you please send a georeferenced map and meeting coordinates prior to the site meeting?
Thanks much
Kim Browning
Mitigation Project Manager, Regulatory Division I U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
-----Original Message -----
From: Matt Butler <mbutler@res. us>
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2020 4:33 PM
To: Browning, Kimberly D CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>; Barnes, Kyle W
CIV USARMY CESAW (US) <[e-mail]>
Cc: Bradley Breslow <[e-mail]>
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] RE: RES White Hat Mitigation Project Final Prospectus
Kim & Kyle,
Per your question, below is a brief description of the reference reach that our design team used for the
Prospectus and initial stream design:
We looked at 8 reaches with similar location, drainage area, and topographic position to DC1, 3 reaches
exhibited characteristics we deemed desirable for a reference reach. We found a relatively consistent width to
depth ratio of —10. Many of the reaches had floodplains that were inundated about 6in with shallow
backwater areas observed on several reaches.
Inundation depth can depend on several factors but based on observed water level as well as vegetation and
floodplain debris we are confident that the floodplains often contain shallow standing water. As expected
many of the reaches were straight due to historic straightening however the channel dimensions were
consistent between straight and meandering reaches. Channel pattern was difficult to determine due to
floodplain inundation and tree canopy makes aerial imagery insufficient. However, RES is confident we can
develop a stable channel pattern based on past experience, industry accepted ratios, and modeling. We
characterized the vegetation on these reaches and also completed stream forms to confirm that these were
streams, not wetlands.

I have also attached a few photos taken at one of the reference reaches.
Please let me know if you have any additional questions, and we look forward to meeting with you on October
14th on -site.
Thank you,
Matt Butler, PMP
Project Manager
RES I res.us
Direct:919.209.1067 1 Mobile:[phone]
Our new office is located at 3600 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 100, Raleigh, North Carolina 27612.
-----Original Message -----
From: Browning, Kimberly D CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 8, 2020 11:06 AM
To: Matt Butler <mbutler@res. us>; Barnes, Kyle W CIV USARMY CESAW (US)
<[e-mail]>
Cc: Bradley Breslow <[e-mail]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: RES White Hat Mitigation Project Final Prospectus
Oops, I just remembered this already went out on public notice. Unless things have changed dramatically, we
may not need to do that again.
Kim Browning
Mitigation Project Manager, Regulatory Division I U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
-----Original Message -----
From: Browning, Kimberly D CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)
Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2020 11:04 AM
To: Matt Butler <mbutler@res. us>; Barnes, Kyle W CIV USARMY CESAW (US)
<[e-mail]>
Cc: Bradley Breslow <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: RES White Hat Mitigation Project Final Prospectus
Thanks Matt. Kyle will get that on Public Notice soon and out to the IRT for review. We're looking at trying to
get the IRT out that way for a few site visits either Oct 14, 19, or 21. We'll keep you posted.
By the way, I didn't notice a reference reach mentioned for White Hat. Were you able to locate one?
Thanks
Kim
Kim Browning
Mitigation Project Manager, Regulatory Division I U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
3

-----Original Message -----
From: Matt Butler <mbutler@res. us>
Sent: Friday, September 04, 2020 3:52 PM
To: Barnes, Kyle W CIV USARMY CESAW (US) <[e-mail]>
Cc: Browning, Kimberly D CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>; Bradley
Breslow <[e-mail]>
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] RES White Hat Mitigation Project Final Prospectus
Kyle,
I am pleased to provide you with RES' updated Final Prospectus for the White Hat Mitigation Site. We
appreciate the IRT insight to help make this the most successful site possible. Since this has been delayed with
design updates, please let me know if you would like to schedule a site visit for the IRT to get recalibrated.
If you need any additional information, please let me know.
Thank you,
Matt Butler, PMP
Project Manager
RES I res.us
Direct:919.209.1067 1 Mobile:[phone]
Our new office is located at 3600 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 100, Raleigh, North Carolina 27612.
<BlockedBlocked Blocked https://goo.gl/maps/XGDVHPCGY7az2j3Y9>
4

RES Pasquotank Umbrella Mitigation Bank
White Hat Mitigation Project
Final Prospectus
Pasquotank River Basin
HUC 03010205
Prepared by: Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
fires
Bank Sponsor: Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC
3600 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 100
Raleigh, NC 27612
919-770-5573
September 2020

Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................................1
1.1
Project Description...................................................................................................................1
1.2
Project Location.......................................................................................................................1
1.3
Service Area............................................................................................................................1
1.4
Identified Watershed Needs......................................................................................................1
1.5
Purpose and Objectives............................................................................................................ 2
1.6
Technical Feasibility................................................................................................................
2
1.7
Site Ownership.........................................................................................................................
2
2 QUALIFICATIONS
......................................................................................................................
3
2.1
Bank Sponsor...........................................................................................................................
3
2.2
Bank Sponsor Qualifications....................................................................................................
3
3 EXISTING CONDITIONS............................................................................................................4
3.1
State Classification...................................................................................................................4
3.2
Potential Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S.................................................................................
4
3.3
Existing Stream Reach Conditions............................................................................................
4
3.4
Existing Wetland Conditions.................................................................................................... 6
3.5
Physiography and Soils............................................................................................................
6
3.6
Endangered/Threatened Species............................................................................................... 6
3.7
Vegetation................................................................................................................................7
3.8
Cultural Resources................................................................................................................... 7
3.9
Constraints...............................................................................................................................8
4 PROPOSED BANK CONDITIONS.............................................................................................8
4.1
Conceptual Mitigation Plan......................................................................................................
8
4.1.1
Stream Restoration and Enhancement...............................................................................
9
4.1.2
Wetland Restoration, Enhancement, and Preservation....................................................10
5 MONITORING...........................................................................................................................10
5.1
As -Built Survey.....................................................................................................................10
5.2
Visual Monitoring..................................................................................................................11
5.3
Cross Sections........................................................................................................................11
5.4
Wetland Hydrology................................................................................................................11
5.5
Vegetative Success Criteria....................................................................................................11
5.6
Adaptive Management...........................................................................................................11
6 BANK ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION.......................................................................12
6.1
Establishment and Operation of the Bank...............................................................................12
6.2
Proposed Credit Release Schedule..........................................................................................12
6.2.1
Initial Allocation of Released Credits..............................................................................12
6.2.2
Subsequent Credit Releases............................................................................................13
6.3
Financial Assurances..............................................................................................................14
6.4
Proposed Ownership and Long -Term Management................................................................14
6.5
Assurance of Water Rights.....................................................................................................15
RES Pasquotank Final Prospectus
Umbrella Mitigation Bank i September 2020

List of Figures
White Hat
Figure 1. Project Vicinity Map
Figure 2. USGS Topographic Map
Figure 3. Historical Aerial Imagery
Figure 4. Landowner Map
Figure 5. National Wetlands Inventory Map
Figure 6. Current Conditions Map
Figure 7. LiDAR Map
Figure 8. Soils Map
Figure 9. Constraints Map
Figure 10. Conceptual Plan
Appendices
Appendix A — DWR Stream Determination
Appendix B - NC SAM Forms
Appendix C — Landowner Authorization Forms
Appendix D — Photo Log
RES Pasquotank Final Prospectus
Umbrella Mitigation Bank ii September 2020

I INTRODUCTION
Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC (EBX), a wholly -owned subsidiary of Resource Environmental
Solutions (RES), is pleased to propose the RES Pasquotank Umbrella Mitigation Bank (Bank). The
proposed umbrella structure of the Bank is designed to initially permit one mitigation Project and establish
the umbrella banking instrument for future mitigation Projects. The first project within the Bank is White
Hat, and this Project is identified as having potential to help meet the compensatory mitigation requirements
for stream impacts in hydrologic unit 03010205 of the Pasquotank River Basin.
1.1 Project Description
The White Hat Mitigation Project (Project) is located in Perquimans County, approximately nine miles east
of Hertford, NC (Figures 1 and 2). The Project consists of 76.34 acres of conservation easement contained
within six parcels. The Project is located within a rural area. Land use within the project area is primarily
agricultural and forested and has historically served these purposes (Figure 3).
The Project will involve the restoration and enhancement of Deep Creek, which begins at the western part
of the project area and drains in an easterly direction across the Project to the Little River, eventually
draining to the Albemarle Sound. The conceptual design presents the opportunity to provide up to 7,032.603
stream mitigation units (SMU) and 9.033 wetland mitigation units (WMU) utilizing non-standard buffer
tool guidance, which will be described in detail in the mitigation plan.
1.2 Project Location
To access the Project from the county seat of Hertford, travel east approximately 7.1 miles on New Hope
Road. Turn left on Suttons Lane and continue for another 0.5 miles to the eastern end of the project.
Godfreys Lane will allow access to the western portion of the Project. The latitude and longitude of the
Project are 36.175378°N and-76.329986°W.
1.3 Service Area
This Bank will provide mitigation credits to offset unavoidable impacts to stream and wetland resources
within the Pasquotank 05 River Basin (8-digit USGS HUC 03010205). White Hat is a stream and wetland
project that can provide compensatory mitigation for stream and wetland impacts.
Future projects may be developed in the Bank that provide stream and/or wetland mitigation.
1.4 Identified Watershed Needs
The North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) develops River Basin Restoration Priorities
(RBRP) to guide its restoration activities within each of the state's 54 cataloging units. Agricultural impacts
are prevalent throughout this watershed, including nonpoint source runoff and hydrologic modification.
Priorities in this watershed that this Project will help address include: 1) to promote projects that reestablish
riparian buffer and corridors, 2) projects that address agricultural runoff, as well as stream restoration
projects that reestablish natural pattern, hydrology and habitat, especially in heavily ditched headwater areas
and 3) projects that reestablish floodplains, recreate wetlands, and protect existing wetlands. This Bank
supports the Pasquotank RBRP goals and presents an opportunity to restore and enhance over 7,471 linear
feet of stream and riparian corridor. The proposed Umbrella Bank will provide improvements to water
RES Pasquotank Final Prospectus
Umbrella Mitigation Bank 1 September 2020

quality, hydrologic function, and habitat. The Project will address stressors identified in the watershed
through nutrient removal, sediment removal, runoff filtration, and improved aquatic and terrestrial habitat.
1.5 Purpose and Objectives
The purpose of the proposed Bank is to generate compensatory mitigation credits for inclusion in the RES
Pasquotank Umbrella Mitigation Bank in the Pasquotank River Basin.
The project goals address stressors identified in the watershed, and include the following:
• Improve water transport from watershed to the channel in a non -erosive manner;
• Improve water quality within the restored channel reaches and downstream watercourses by
reducing sediment and nutrient loads;
• Improve flood flow attenuation on site and downstream by allowing for overbank flows and
connection to the active floodplain;
• Improve instream habitat;
• Restore and enhance native floodplain vegetation;
• Improve ecological processes by reducing water temperature, improving terrestrial and aquatic
habitat, and restoring a native plant community; and
• Restore and enhance riparian wetlands.
The project goals will be addressed through the following project objectives:
• Design and reconstruct stream channels sized to convey bankfull flows that will maintain a stable
dimension, profile, and planform based on modeling, watershed conditions, and reference reach
conditions;
• Add in -stream structures and bank stabilization measures to protect restored and enhanced streams;
• Install habitat features such as brush toes, constructed riffles, woody materials, and pools of varying
depths to restored and enhanced streams;
• Reduce bank height ratios and increase entrenchment ratios to reference reach conditions;
• Increase forested riparian buffers to approximately 100 feet on both sides of the channel along the
project reaches with a hardwood riparian plant community;
• Treat exotic invasive species;
• Establish a permanent conservation easement on the Project; and
• Re-establish and enhance riparian wetlands by raising stream bed elevations, plugging surface
ditches, and planting native wetland plant species.
1.6 Technical Feasibility
The technical feasibility of the Bank is assured due to RES' extensive experience with stream and wetland
restoration and enhancement in North Carolina and throughout the Southeast. Examples of EBX's success
with stream restoration and enhancement include Neu -Con and Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Projects. Overall, RES has experience which expands into 11 different river basins throughout North
Carolina, including the Broad, Cape Fear, Catawba, French Broad, Little Tennessee, Lumber, Neuse,
Roanoke, Tar -Pamlico, White Oak, and Yadkin. The absence of threatened and endangered species and
their habitats means the Project is unlikely to be impeded by resource issues.
1.7 Site Ownership
The land required for the construction, management, and stewardship of this mitigation project includes
portions of the parcels listed in Table 1. A landowner map is also provided in Figure 4. EBX has obtained
RES Pasquotank Final Prospectus
Umbrella Mitigation Bank 2 September 2020

a legal option to develop the mitigation project and protect, with a permanent conservation easement, the
necessary area on the subject parcels.
Table 1. White Hat Landowner Information
7889-62-5550
Ethel Sutton Chappell, William Wray 7889-74-6923
Chappell, Tenants by Entirety 7889-82-4911 Perquimans
7899-03-1867
7889-84-1950
2 QUALIFICATIONS
2.1 Bank Sponsor
All the projects shall be established under the terms and conditions of the RES Pasquotank Umbrella
Mitigation Bank made and entered into by Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC (EBX), acting as the
Bank Sponsor.
Company Name: Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC
Company Address: 3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100, Raleigh, NC 27612
Contact Name: Matt Butler
Telephone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
2.2 Bank Sponsor Qualifications
RES is the nation's largest and most experienced dedicated ecological offset provider. RES develops and
supplies ecological solutions to help public and private sector clients obtain required permits for
unavoidable, project -related impacts to sensitive resources, and maintain regulatory compliance for existing
facilities. RES helps clients proactively manage risk by streamlining permitting processes and limiting
liability and regulatory exposure.
Founded in Louisiana in February of 2007, RES quickly expanded to a statewide footprint of restored
wetlands and streams, and continued to grow organically into Texas, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and
Ohio — serving in each geography a suite of energy, power, industrial and public clients, as well as others
in need of de -risked mitigation solutions for their critical development projects. In December of 2014, RES
acquired industry pioneer EBX, expanding RES' knowledge base and geographic and technical delivery
capabilities into Virginia, Maryland, North Carolina, and South Carolina.
In 2016, KKR announced a major investment in RES. KKR is a leading global investment firm that manages
investments across multiple asset classes including private equity, energy, infrastructure, real estate, credit
and hedge funds. The investment will become part of KKR's Green Solutions Platform, which supports
environmental initiatives at KKR portfolio companies across three areas: eco-efficiency, eco-innovation,
and/or eco-solutions.
In September 2016, RES acquired HGS, LLC, a company focused on providing state-of-the-art water
resource and green infrastructure solutions. This addition bolstered RES' ability to deliver comprehensive
ecological solutions by integrating ecological construction, environmental inspections and maintenance,
shoreline stabilization, stream design, and stormwater and Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)
compliance with RES' current capabilities.
RES Pasquotank Final Prospectus
Umbrella Mitigation Bank 3 September 2020

Now integrated and operating as one, RES is responsible for the following:
■ Restoration of 328 miles of streams
■ Restoration, enhancement, and preservation of 58,024 acres of wetlands
■ Rehabilitation, preservation, and/or management of over 15,000 acres of special -status species
habitat
■ Permitting and development of over 200 permittee-responsible mitigation projects, completed or
in process
■ Successful close-out of 100 mitigation sites
■ Delivery of 20,000 acres of custom, turnkey mitigation solutions
■ Installation or retrofit of over 350 stormwater management facilities
■ Maintenance of 600 commercial, municipal and residential stormwater management facilities
■ Reductions of over 267 tons of water quality nutrients
■ Erosion and sediment control inspections for 400+ active construction sites across eight states
■ Planting of over 17,400,000 trees across all operating regions
■ Supplying compensatory wetland and stream mitigation and nutrient offsets for over 3,434
federal and state permits.
■ Development and operation of nurseries in three states including the largest coastal nursery in
Louisiana
In North Carolina, RES and its affiliated companies have a long history of supplying mitigation contracts
with North Carolina state agencies. With a regional office in Raleigh staffed with full-time professionals,
RES can carry out existing projects, as well as secure and carry out new projects and banks in the State.
3 EXISTING CONDITIONS
3.1 State Classification
The current State surface water classification for Deep Creek is Class SC. Class SC waters are tidal salt
waters protected for secondary recreation such as fishing, boating, and other activities involving minimal
skin contact; fish and noncommercial shellfish consumption; aquatic life propagation; and wildlife.
3.2 Potential Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S.
A detailed wetland delineation was performed on April 24, 2019. The Project was delineated by RES and
approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) during the decision phase of the project. A
Request for a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (JD) was submitted to the USACE on July 3,
2019, followed by a site visit on September 15, 2019. The stream channels were classified using North
Carolina Division of Water Resources (NC DWR) methodology. Stream calls will be verified by the
USACE during the decision phase of the project.
3.3 Existing Stream Reach Conditions
In general, all or portions of the project streams do not function to their full potential. Current conditions
demonstrate significant habitat degradation as a result of impacts from agriculture, historic land uses, and
water diversion. Project reaches were assessed using the NC Stream Assessment Method (NC SAM). NC
SAM rating forms are included in Appendix B, and results are summarized in Table 2. Morphological
parameters are located in Table 3.
RES Pasquotank Final Prospectus
Umbrella Mitigation Bank 4 September 2020

Table 2. White Hat NC SAM Ratings
Reach Rating
DC1-A Low
DC 1-B Low
DC 1-C Low
Reach DC1-A (Deep Creek)
Reach DC1-A is located in the eastern portion of the project and flows south east to an agricultural crossing
(Figure 6). The reach has a juvenile pine forest and a hunting impoundment on its right bank, while the left
bank is bordered by an unmaintained cutover. The entire channel is a modified natural stream and has been
relocated from its historic location and dredged to enhance agricultural and hunting practices. LiDAR data
exemplifies the current channel location within the footprint of the natural landscape elevations (Figure 7).
This reach has been straightened and is oversized with nearly vertical banks and lacks any real aquatic
habitat. The agricultural crossing on the downstream end of the reach contains flash board risers that are
periodically used to modify the water level through the reach to promote agricultural and hunting practices.
The drainage area for the reach is approximately 1,400 acres.
Reach DC1-B (Deep Creek)
Reach DC1-B is located downstream of DC1-A and flows east toward a confluence with DC1-C (Figure
6). The reach has a juvenile pine forest on its right bank, while the left bank is adjacent to active row crops.
The entire channel is a modified natural stream that has been straightened and dredged to enhance
agricultural production. Again, LiDAR data exemplifies the current channel location within the footprint
of the natural landscape elevations (Figure 7). This reach is oversized with nearly vertical banks and lacks
any real aquatic habitat. The drainage area for the reach is approximately 1,550 acres.
Reach DC1-C (Deep Creek)
Reach DC1-C is the most downstream portion of the project located in the eastern limits of the project
(Figure 6). The reach is surrounded on both sides by riparian forest. A grass farm road parallels the
existing channel for the length of the reach partially disconnecting hydrology from the left bank wetland.
The entire channel is a modified natural stream that has been straightened and dredged. The drainage area
for the reach is approximately 1,900 acres. Deep Creek continues approximately 3.5 miles to the confluence
with the Little River.
Table 3. White Hat Existing Morphological Parameters
Drainage Area acres
1,394
1,541
1,911
Cross- Sectional Area (sq ft)
88
79
83
Bank Width ft
26.4
34.9
27.2
Mean Depth ft
3.3
2.3
3.0
Max Depth ft
5.0
2.9
4.3
Wetted Perimeter ft
29.6
36.4
30.1
Hydraulic Radius ft
3.0
2.2
2.7
W/D Ratio
8.0
15.5
9.0
RES Pasquotank Final Prospectus
Umbrella Mitigation Bank 5 September 2020

3.4 Existing Wetland Conditions
National Wetland Inventory (NWI) mapping depicts one area of wetlands within the project limits, in reach
DC1-C. The primary wetland area is PFOIAd (Palustrine, Forested, Broad -Leaved Deciduous, Temporary
Flooded, Partially Drained/Ditched). Additionally, there is a small portion of PFO1 Cd (Freshwater
Forested/Shrub Wetland) on the eastern -most corner of the Project easement (Figure 5). Within the NWI
mapped wetland, in the mapped area PFOlAd, areas of existing wetlands are present that have been
impacted by past farming and logging practices, such as ditches, berms, and channel relocation (Figure 6).
Upstream of these wetlands, hydric soil has been drained and does not appear to meet all required
hydrologic parameters.
3.5 Physiography and Soils
The Project is located in the Chesapeake -Pamlico Lowlands and Tidal Marshes level IV ecoregion within
the Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain level III ecoregion. These occur on the lowest marine terraces with
elevations ranging from sea level to 25 feet. This ecoregion consists of nearly level plains with some broad
shallow valleys, seasonally wet soil, brackish and fresh streams, and broad estuaries affected by wind tides.
These low-lying areas are underlain by unconsolidated sediments. Poorly drained soils are common and
there is a mix of coarse and finer textured soils. The Project is in the Coastal Plain geologic belt and consists
of sand, clay, gravel, and peat.
Project soils are mapped by the Natural Resources Conservation Service NRCS as Chapanoke silt loam,
Perquimans silt loam, and Roanoke silt loam within the easement (Figure 8). Chapanoke silt loam occurs
on 0-2% slopes, is a somewhat poorly drained soil, and is found on flats. Chowan silt Loam occurs on 0-
2% slopes, is very poorly drained, and is found in flood plains. Perquimans silt loam occurs on 0-1 % slopes,
is a poorly drained soil, and is found on flats or depressions on marine terraces. Roanoke silt loam occurs
on 0-2% slopes, is a poorly drained soil, and is found on flats or depressions on marine terraces (Table 4).
Table 4. White Hat Mapped Soil Series
.. Unit
Map Unit Name IN
.
ologic
Lands.capql
ymbol
Class
Somewhat
Status
Soil Group I&
Setting
Flats
Ch
Chapanoke silt loam
poorly drained
Not Hydric
C/D
Ver poorly
Flood Plains
CO
Chowan silt loam
wined
Hydric
A/D
Flats and
Pe
Perquimans silt
Poorly drained
Hydric
C/D
Depressions on
loam
Marine
Terraces
Flats and
Ro
Roanoke silt loam
Poorly drained
Hydric
C/D
Depressions on
Marine
Terraces
3.6 Endangered/Threatened Species
Plants and animals with a federal classification of endangered or threatened are protected under provisions
of Sections 7 and 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. The US Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) database (accessed 21 April 2019) lists the red knot (Calidris canutus rufa) and West Indian
RES Pasquotank Final Prospectus
Umbrella Mitigation Bank 6 September 2020

manatee (Trichechus manatus) as endangered species in Perquimans County, North Carolina (Table 5).
The Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) is protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
(BGPA) and prohibits take of bald and golden eagles. No protected species or potential habitat for protected
species was observed during preliminary Project evaluations.
In addition to the USFWS database, the NC Natural Heritage Program (NHP) GIS database was consulted
to determine whether previously cataloged occurrences of protected species were mapped within one mile
of the project. Results from NHP indicate that there are no known occurrences of state threatened or
endangered species within a two-mile radius of the project area. Based on initial site investigations, no
impacts to state protected species are anticipated as a result of the proposed project.
Habitat may be improved or created for species that require riverine habitat by improving water quality, in -
stream and near -stream forage, and providing stable conditions not subject to regular maintenance. The
decision phase of the project will include USFWS coordination to confirm these findings.
Table 5. Federally Protected Species in Perquimans County
im
Vertebrate:
ederal .. itat Record
name Jtatus Tresent Status
Bald eagle
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
BGPA
No
Current
Red knot
Calidris canutus rufa
T
No
Current
West Indian manatee
Trichechus manatus
E
No
Current
E = Endangered
T = Threatened
BGPA = Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
3.7 Vegetation
The Project is characterized primarily by row crop production with areas of disturbed riparian forest
regeneration. Much of the left bank is unvegetated and currently in soybean or corn production, while a
large portion of the right bank is also in row crop production. However, the downstream portion of the
Project has some forested vegetation, including slash pine (Pinus elltiottii), persimmon (Diospyrus
virginia), winged elm (Ulmus alata), live oak (Quercus virginiana), bald cypress (Taxodium distichum),
red maple (Acer rubrum), and sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua). Some exotics were noted, mostly
Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense).
3.8 Cultural Resources
On April 21, 2019, the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) website
(http://gis.ncdcr.gov) database was reviewed to determine if any listed or potentially eligible historic or
archeological resources in the proposed Project existed. This search revealed three occurrences near the 0.5
mile radius project boundary. The James Whedbee House (PQ0262), the Whedbee Cemetery (PQ0261) and
the Gregory House (PQ0079) are located within 0.5 mile of the project area but are not on the National
Registered List. There is a third occurrence within the 0.5 mile radius from the Project but further area than
the other two houses. The Project will not threaten or impact these historic locations. The environmental
screening phase of the Project will include SHPO coordination to confirm these findings.
RES Pasquotank Final Prospectus
Umbrella Mitigation Bank 7 September 2020

3.9 Constraints
There are a few constraints to the Project. The Project is not in a drainage district. Also, no overhead or
underground utilities are located within the proposed buffer. No existing land uses (such as residential) will
constrain the proposed mitigation design. Most of the Project (Deep Creek) is within the mapped FEMA
100-year floodplain (Figure 9). The design and permitting of the mitigation work will include coordination
with the Perquimans County Floodplain Administrator and a No -Rise Certification or CLOMR/LOMR will
be secured. Construction access along the enhancement reach (DC1-C) may be constrained by existing
mature hardwood vegetation.
There is one degraded culvert crossing that will be improved along the Project as part of the construction.
Also, there are multiple ditches flowing into the Project that will be redirected or plugged based on detailed
survey and design.
4 PROPOSED BANK CONDITIONS
4.1 Conceptual Mitigation Plan
The Project presents the opportunity to provide 7,033 SMUs and 9 WMUs. These will be derived from a
combination of stream restoration and enhancement and wetland restoration and enhancement. Table 6
details the mitigation types and SMUs generated. Table 7 details the wetland mitigation types and WMUs
generated. The proposed conceptual design plan is shown in Figure 10.
Table 6. White Hat Proposed Stream Mitigation Summary
Reach
Stream
Mitigation
Mitigatiod
Length (LF)
Ratio
Base
SMUs
DC1-A
Restoration
3,459
1:1
3,459.000
DC1-B
Restoration
1,929
1:1
1,929.000
DC1-C
Enhancement II
2,083
3:1
694.333
TOTAL
7,471
6,082.333
Credit Loss in Required Buffer
-155.960
Credit Gain for Additional Buffer
1,106.230
Total Adjusted SMUs
7,032.603
RES Pasquotank Final Prospectus
Umbrella Mitigation Bank 8 September 2020

Table 7. White Hat Proposed Wetland Mitigation Summary
Wetland
Mitigation
Acres
Ratio
Base
WMUs
WC
Re-establishment
5.07
1:1
5.070
WD
Enhancement
2.44
3:1
0.814
WE
Enhancement
2.67
3:1
0.893
WF
Enhancement
4.18
3:1
1.396
WG
Enhancement
1.56
3:1
0.522
WH
Enhancement
0.99
3:1
0.331
WJ
Enhancement
0.02
3:1
0.009
WK
Enhancement
0.0005
3:1
0.0002
TOTAL
16.97
9.033
4.1.1 Stream Restoration and Enhancement
Current stream conditions along the proposed restoration reaches demonstrate significant habitat
degradation as a result of impacts from agricultural land use, channel modification, and water diversion,
Additionally, the riparian buffer is in poor condition throughout most of the project area.
Stream restoration and enhancement efforts along Deep Creek will be accomplished through analyses of
geomorphic conditions and watershed characteristics. The design approach applies a combination of
analytical and reference reach -based design methods that meet objectives commensurate with both
ecological and geomorphic improvements. Proposed treatment activities may range from minor bank
grading and planting to re-establishing a stable planform and hydraulic geometry. For reaches requiring full
restoration, natural channel design concepts will be applied and verified through rigorous engineering
analyses and modeling. The objective of this approach is to design a geomorphically stable channel that
provides habitat improvements and ties into the existing landscape. The Project will include Restoration
and Enhancement Level I. A conceptual plan view is provided in Figure 10.
The Project has been broken into the following design reaches:
Reach DC1-A
Because the channel has been realigned from its historic position, the design approach will include
relocating the proposed channel back to the natural valley. Priority Level I Restoration is proposed for
Reach DC1-A, which will entail raising the channel bed and restoring a stable single tread channel through
the existing floodplain. The existing channels will be backfilled with material excavated from onsite to the
elevation of the floodplain in areas adjacent to the new channel. Woody debris will be installed throughout
the reach to improve aquatic habitat. A minimum 100-foot buffer will be established and planted with native
riparian vegetation, but buffers will exceed 100 feet in many areas. Invasive species will be treated.
Reach DC1-B
Because the channel has been realigned from its historic position, the design approach will include
relocating the proposed channel back to the natural valley. Priority Level I and II Restoration is proposed
for Reach DC1-B, which will entail raising the channel bed and restoring a stable single tread channel
RES Pasquotank Final Prospectus
Umbrella Mitigation Bank 9 September 2020

through the existing floodplain. The restoration will begin as priority I restoration and transition to priority
11 as it moves downstream in order to tie to the existing channel bed at its confluence with DC1-C. The
existing channels will be backfilled with material excavated from onsite to the elevation of the floodplain
in areas adjacent to the new channel. Woody debris will be installed throughout the reach to improve aquatic
habitat. All ditch flows entering the site will be directed to treatment areas before being directed to the new
channel. The existing roadway on the left bank will be removed as part of this restoration. A minimum 100-
foot buffer will be established and planted with native riparian vegetation, but buffers will exceed 100 feet
in many areas. Invasive species will be treated.
Reach DC1-C
Stream Enhancement Level II is proposed for Reach DC1-C. These areas are stable but are partially
dislocated from existing wetlands on the north side by an existing farm road. Enhancement activities will
include partial removal of the existing road to improve connection between the channel and the northern
wetland. Woody debris structures will also be installed along this reach to improve in channel habitat.
Wetland enhancement is also proposed along this reach. The existing farm road will be planted as part of
this enhancement effort. Invasive species will also be treated.
4.1.2 Wetland Restoration, Enhancement, and Preservation
The proposed wetland enhancement and preservation is closely tied to the stream restoration. The
proposed stream design is expected to enhance wetland hydrology and vegetation throughout the corridor
of the stream restoration and enhancement. Re-establishment and enhancement activities will include:
reconnecting low-lying areas of hydric soil with the floodplain along restoration reaches, creating a rough
soil surface to aid infiltration, and planting native tree species. There is likely to also be some areas of
wetland restoration. The appropriate wetland treatment will be refined during the mitigation plan phase.
5 MONITORING
Proposed monitoring for the initial stream mitigation Project is presented below. Wetland mitigation
monitoring will be specified in Project specific Instrument Modification and Mitigation Plan. Stream
stability, hydrology, and vegetation survival will be monitored across the project to determine the success
of the stream and buffer mitigation. Wetland success will be monitored using automatic recording pressure
transducer gauges installed in representative locations across the enhancement/restoration areas and
reference wetland. Monitoring and performance standards will follow the guidance provided in the 2016
USACE Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update. Stream stability will
be monitored with cross section surveys and visual assessment stream walks. Vegetation survival rates will
be monitored using vegetation plots over approximately two percent of the planted area.
5.1 As -Built Survey
An as -built survey will be conducted following construction to document channel size, condition, and
location on constructed or modified channels. The survey will include a complete profile of thalweg, water
surface, bankfull, and top of bank to compare with future geomorphic data. Longitudinal profiles will not
be required in annual monitoring reports unless requested by the USACE. Stream channel stationing will
be marked with stakes placed near the top of bank every 200 feet.
RES Pasquotank Final Prospectus
Umbrella Mitigation Bank 10 September 2020

5.2 Visual Monitoring
Visual monitoring of all mitigation areas will be conducted a minimum of twice per monitoring year by
qualified individuals. The visual assessments will include vegetation density, vigor, invasive species, and
easement encroachments. Visual assessments of stream stability will include a complete streamwalk and
structure inspection. Digital images will be taken at fixed representative locations to record each monitoring
event, as well as any noted problem areas or areas of concern. Results of visual monitoring will be presented
in a plan view exhibit with a brief description of problem areas and digital images. Photographs will be
used to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or degradation, bank erosion, success of riparian
vegetation, and effectiveness of erosion control measures. Longitudinal photos should indicate the absence
of developing bars within the channel or an excessive increase in channel depth. Lateral photos should not
indicate excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the banks over time. A series of photos over time
should indicate successional maturation of riparian vegetation.
5.3 Cross Sections
Permanent cross -sections will be installed at an approximate frequency of one per 20 bankfull widths with
half in pools and half in shallows. All cross-section measurements will include bank height ratio and
entrenchment ratio. Cross -sections will be monitored annually. There should be little change in as -built
cross -sections.
5.4 Wetland Hydrology
Wetland hydrology will be monitored to document hydric conditions in the potential wetland restoration
areas. This will be accomplished with automatic recording pressure transducer gauges installed in
representative locations across the restoration areas and reference wetland. The gauges will be downloaded
quarterly and wetland hydroperiods will be calculated during the growing season. Gauge installation will
follow current IRT guidance. Visual observations of primary and secondary wetland hydrology indicators
will also be recorded during quarterly Project visits.
5.5 Vegetative Success Criteria
Vegetation monitoring plots will be a minimum of 0.02 acres in size and cover approximately two percent
of the planted area. The following data will be recorded for all trees in the plots: species, height, planting
date (or volunteer), and grid location. Monitoring will occur each year during the monitoring period. The
interim measures of vegetative success for the Project will be the survival of at least 320 planted three-year
old trees per acre at the end of Year 3 and 260 five-year old trees per acre with an average of 7 feet in height
at the end of Year 5. The final vegetative success criteria will be the survival of 210 trees per acre with an
average height of 10 feet at the end of Year 7 of the monitoring period. Invasive and noxious species will
be monitored and controlled so that none become dominant or alter the desired community structure of the
Project. If necessary, EBX will develop a species -specific control plan.
5.6 Adaptive Management
If, during the course of annual monitoring, it is determined that the project's ability to achieve performance
standards are jeopardized, RES will notify the USACE of the need to develop a Plan of Corrective Action.
Remedial action required will be designed to achieve the success criteria specified previously, and will
include identification of the causes of failure, remedial design approach, work schedule, and monitoring
RES Pasquotank Final Prospectus
Umbrella Mitigation Bank 11 September 2020

criteria that will take into account physical and climatic conditions. If needed, a corrective action plan will
be created to change the management of the Project, to meet success criteria. Once the Corrective Action
Plan is prepared and finalized RES will:
1. Notify the USACE as required by the Nationwide 27 permit general conditions.
2. Revise performance standards, maintenance requirements, and monitoring requirements as
necessary and/or required by the USACE.
3. Obtain other permits as necessary.
4. Prepare Corrective Action Plan for review and approval by IRT.
5. Implement the Corrective Action Plan.
6. Provide the IRT a Record Drawing of Corrective Actions. This document shall depict the extent
and nature of the work performed.
6 BANK ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION
6.1 Establishment and Operation of the Bank
Bank parcels shall be established under the terms and conditions of the RES Pasquotank Umbrella
Mitigation Banking Instrument (UMBI) made and entered into by and among EBX, LLC, and the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
the National Marine Fisheries Services, the North Carolina Division of Water Resources, and the North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, collectively, the Interagency Review Team.
6.2 Proposed Credit Release Schedule
All credit releases will be based on the total credit generated as reported in the approved mitigation plan of
the project. Under no circumstances shall any mitigation project be debited until the necessary DA
authorization has been received for its construction or the District Engineer (DE) has otherwise provided
written approval for the project in the case where no DA authorization is required for construction of the
mitigation project. The DE, in consultation with the IRT, will determine if performance standards have
been satisfied sufficiently to meet the requirements of the release schedules below. In cases where some
performance standards have not been met, credits may still be released depending on the specifics of the
case. Monitoring may be required to restart or be extended, depending on the extent to which the Project
fails to meet the specified performance standard. The release of project credits will be subject to the criteria
described in Table 8 & 9.
6.2.1 Initial Allocation of Released Credits
The initial allocation of released credits, as specified in the mitigation plan can be released by the IRT with
written approval of the DE upon satisfactory completion of the following activities:
a) Execution of the UMBI by the Sponsor and the USACE
b) Approval of the final mitigation plan
c) Mitigation site must be secured
d) Delivery of financial assurances
e) Recordation of the long-term protection mechanism and title opinion acceptable to the USACE
f) Issuance of the 404-permit verification for construction of the Project, if required
RES Pasquotank Final Prospectus
Umbrella Mitigation Bank 12 September 2020

6.2.2 Subsequent Credit Releases
The second credit release will occur after the completion of implementation of the Mitigation Plan and IRT
approval of the Baseline Monitoring Report and As -built Survey. All subsequent credit releases must be
approved by the DE, in consultation with the IRT, based on a determination that required performance
standards have been achieved. As projects approach milestones associated with credit release, the Sponsor
will submit a request for credit release to the DE along with documentation substantiating achievement of
criteria required for release to occur. This documentation will be included with the annual monitoring
report.
Table 8. Stream Credit Release Schedule
Releas-4
Milestonell
Credit Release Activity I
Interim
Releast
1
Project Establishment (includes all required criteria
o
/0
0
15 /o
stated above)15
2
Completion of all initial physical and biological
o
15 /0
0
30 /o
im rovements made pursuant to the Mitigation Plan
3
Year 1 monitoring report demonstrates that channels
are stable and interim performance standards have
10%
40%
been met
Year 2 monitoring report demonstrates that channels
4*
are stable and interim performance standards have
10%
50%
been met
Year 3 monitoring report demonstrates that channels
5
are stable and interim performance standards have
10%
60%
been met
6*
Year 4 monitoring report demonstrates that channels
65%
are stable and interim performance standards have
5%
(75%**)
been met
7
Year 5 monitoring report demonstrates that channels
o
are stable and interim performance standards have
10%
(85 % *o*)
been met
8
Year 6 monitoring report demonstrates that channels
80%
are stable and interim performance standards have
5%
(90%**)
been met
9
Year 7 monitoring report demonstrates that channels
90%
are stable and interim performance standards have
10%
(100%**)
been met project has received close-out approval.
*Please note that cross section and vegetation plot data may not be required with monitoring reports submitted
during these monitoring years unless otherwise stated by the Mitigation Plan or directed by the IRT.
**10% reserve of credits to be held back until the bankfull event performance standard has been met.
Table 9. Wetland Credit Release Schedule
RES Pasquotank Final Prospectus
Umbrella Mitigation Bank 13 September 2020

Release I _E -A
Milestone Credit Release Activity,
Total Released
3 Year 1 monitoring report demonstrates that channels
are stable and interim performance standards have
10% 40%
been met
4
Year 2 monitoring report demonstrates that channels
are stable and interim performance standards have
10%
50%
been met
5
Year 3 monitoring report demonstrates that channels
are stable and interim performance standards have
15%
65%
been met
6*
Year 4 monitoring report demonstrates that channels
are stable and interim performance standards have
5%
70%
been met
Year 5 monitoring report demonstrates that channels
7
are stable and interim performance standards have
15%
85%
been met
8*
Year 6 monitoring report demonstrates that channels
are stable and interim performance standards have
5%
90%
been met
9
Year 7 monitoring report demonstrates that channels
are stable and interim performance standards have
10%
100%
been met project has received close-out approval.
6.3 Financial Assurances
The Sponsor shall provide financial assurances in the form of a Performance Bond to the IRT sufficient to
assure completion of all mitigation work, required reporting and monitoring, and any remedial work
required. Financial assurances shall be payable at the direction of the USACE to his designee or to a standby
trust. Financial assurances structured to provide funds to the USACE in the event of default by the Bank
Sponsor are not acceptable. A financial assurance must be in the form that ensures that the USACE receives
notification at least 120 days in advance of any termination or revocation.
6.4 Proposed Ownership and Long -Term Management
EBX, LLC, acting as the Bank Sponsor, will establish a Conservation Easement, and will monitor the
Project for a minimum of seven years. The Mitigation Plan will provide detailed information regarding
bank operation, including long term management and annual monitoring activities, for review and approval
by the IRT. Upon approval of the projects by the IRT, the project will be transferred to a long-term land
steward. The long-term steward shall be responsible for periodic inspection of the project to ensure that
restrictions required in the Conservation Easement or the deed restriction document(s) are upheld.
Endowment funds required to uphold easement and deed restrictions shall be negotiated prior to Project
transfer to the responsible party.
The Bank Sponsor will ensure that the Conservation Easement will allow for the implementation of an
initial monitoring phase, which will be developed during the design phase and conducted by the Bank
Sponsor. The Conservation Easement will allow for yearly monitoring and, if necessary, maintenance of
the project during the initial monitoring phase. These activities will be conducted in accordance with the
RES Pasquotank Final Prospectus
Umbrella Mitigation Bank 14 September 2020

terms and conditions of the RES Pasquotank Umbrella Mitigation Bank made and entered into by EBX,
LLC and USACE.
6.5 Assurance of Water Rights
Sufficient water rights exist to support the long-term sustainability of the Project, as there are no "severed"
rights on the property
RES Pasquotank Final Prospectus
Umbrella Mitigation Bank 15 September 2020

Figures
Figure 1. Project Vicinity Map
Figure 2. USGS Topographic Map
Figure 3. Historical Aerial Photography
Figure 4. Landowner Map
Figure 5. National Wetlands Inventory Map
Figure 6. Current Conditions Map
Figure 7. Lidar Map
Figure 8. Soils Map
Figure 9. Constraints Map
Figure 10. Conceptual Plan

J � �
~ ELIZABETH CITY CG AIR STATION/MUNI
old US
yp*s
�S Ra
_ %
L
'p f r
aMEADSTOWN AIRSTRIP +;
m �
C d d
O
Nev: Hope
Legend
, 4i
Proposed Easement
Pasquotank River Basin: 03010205060020
White Hat Mitigation
d
Project
8 Digit HUC: 03010205
+�
Elizabeth
city
High Quality Water Management Zone
w
5 Mile Aviation Zone
d
ih a�4+Y`� •Y` a�1.+Y. a�4+Y.� +Y.0
INC NHP Element Occurrence (July 2018)-
u d do d do
INC DMS Conservation Easement
Water Supply Watershed
Other Managed Area NHP July 2018)
p p
(NC
Airport''''
;
" Date: 8/25/2020
Figure 1 - Vicinity Map
" FDrawn by: EJU res
White Hat Mitigation Project
s Checked by: JRM
0 0.5 1
Perquimans County, North Carolina 1;ncn =1 mile
Mile

Le-gend
Proposed Easement
Drainage Areas 11
+��*�ai�:il�i�i�\i II
/Yt�a ����i�
•Jr 0 1,000
Figure 2 - USGS Map Date: 8/25/2020
Nixonton Quadrangle (1982)
Drawn by: EJU
2,000 I White Hat Mitigation Project I Checked by: JRM
Perquimans County, North Carolina 1 1 inch = 2,000 feet
0
fires
fires

t
Alk

A.
Ah

vMvM
Proposed Easement
Hiah: 5.17176 m
M I' =OF A me
Date: 8/25/2020
Drawn by: EJU

AREA OO F MINIMAL FL • DD HAZARD zone
Aft

Appendix A- NC DWR Stream Determination

Dc,
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
1�=• P L� E
Date: %? 2� I V
ProjectlSite: ��� �. • .
Latitude:
Evaluator: '
County:, I'�
Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
Stream Determination ('
Ephemeral Intermitten Perennial
Other
if _ 19 orperennial if _ 30* ✓✓✓
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomor holo (Subtotal =__Ilsw
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1 a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
'0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
-1)
2
3
8. Headcuts
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1 1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No =
Yes = 3
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual -�
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 1� , G ] ? I
12. Presence of Baseflow
01
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
'1 E
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
-1.
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
1 0.5
1
`1.
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
es =
G. 131010gy (Subtotal t`-) }
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
C 3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
r-
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
`-1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
15
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

Appendix B- NC SAM Forms

Tiz 4; 1 cx.
NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM 1
►ccompanies User Manual Version 2.1 i
USACE AID #: NCDWR #
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property,
identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for
detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes" section if supplementary measurements were
performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): �} 2. Date of evaluation:
3. Applicant/owner name: 4. Assessor name/organization:
5. County: �' ,�; N rr 1,4 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: on USGS 7.5-minute quad:
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach):
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet):
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at tQp of bank (feet): 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? []Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: EpVerennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑Mountains (M) []Piedmont (P) ❑Inner Coastal Plain (1) ter Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic
valley shape (skip for ❑a ❑b
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) []Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 m12) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi2) []Size 4 (Z 5 mi2)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ❑Yes []No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑I ❑11 []III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes []No
1. Cbannel Water - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
�d Water throughout assessment reach.
B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
[� Not A
3. ture Pattern - assessment reach metric
r
Not majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
4. F ture Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming,
over widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of
these disturbances).
❑B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
Uh < 10% of channel unstable
10 to 25% of channel unstable
C > 25% of channel unstable
vii

6. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
❑B JW Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area,
leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
❑C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision,
disruption of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples:
impoundments, intensive mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a
man-made feature on an interstream divide
Water Quality Stressors — assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
IB
eck all that apply.
A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes" section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
X(G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded mafsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
Ell Other: /I (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
❑J Little to no stressors
Recent Weather — watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a
drought.
Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑C No drought conditions
9. Large or D rigorous Stream — assessment reach metric
❑Yes o Is stream too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natur -stream Habitat Types — assessment reach metric
10a. as []No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Gheck all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses ca [IF 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(including liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) -0 W ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
❑B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent B ❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation W r c ❑I Sand bottom
❑C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) t m ❑J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
❑D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots ❑K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
XE Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****
11, Bedform and Substrate — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
YvGf� 1 es ❑No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
✓✓✓""" 11 b. ?edform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
❑A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
QW Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. IA riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach — whether or not submerged.
Check at least one box in each row. Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare (R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%,
Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ >
NP
R
C
A
P
El
11
El
1:1
11
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
70%. Cumulative percentages should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
Bedrock/saprolite
Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
Gravel (2 — 64 mm)
Sand (.062 — 2 mm)
Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
Detritus
Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. []Yes [:]No Are pools filled with sediment?
viii

12.
Aquatic LLi€e — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. &es ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ❑No Water Other: .
12b." Yes C]No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
3 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
Adult frogs
❑ Aquatic
tic reptiles
❑ AAquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ El Beetles (including water pennies)
❑ ❑Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicula)
❑ []Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans (true flies)
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ Vosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/tadpoles
❑ ❑Snails
❑ ❑Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland
runoff.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
3 ❑B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
�rW Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil
rJ�J
compaction, livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water z 6 inches deep
i013 � I
Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
❑Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
16. BaseflovJ Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
fck all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods affecting assessment reach (ex: beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
;D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
❑E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
OF None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
❑C Urban stream (Z 24% impervious surface for watershed)
D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
F None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
Stream shading is appropriate for the stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
Degraded (example: scattered trees)
C Stream shading is gone or largely absent

19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
❑A []A a 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑ From 50 to < 160 feet wide
W ❑C C ❑C C From 30 to < 50 feet wide q %.r ,0 I V11'
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D From 10 to < 30 feet wide 1
❑E =mt ❑E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Eauffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB ' CIO ❑A ature forest
❑B B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
❑C ❑C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑9 ❑D Maintained shrubs
PE ❑E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream
is within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22: ❑
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB LB RB
[]A[]A QA.� ❑❑❑
A ❑A Row crops
A❑B B B B B Maintained turf
C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
V❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
(Abuts), does not abut but
LB1144
❑A r 7. Y9 Medium to high stem density
B B Low stem density
❑C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. ontinuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
❑A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
EIB B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
❑B JX13 Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
❑C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of, planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. []Yes JNo Was conductivity measurement recorded?
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E a 230
Notes/Sketch:

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM���
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USAGE AID #: _ NCDWR #
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minu top, aphic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property,
identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for
detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes" section if supplementary measurements were
performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION: p-
1. Project name (if any): NO, 2. Date of evaluation: p
3. Applicantlowner name: 4. Assessor name/organization:
5. County: yid eve �'J i.r 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: 4 on USGS 7.5-minute quad:
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lowWr nd of assessment reach):
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): _ 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet):
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel widthop of bank (feet): _ 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: erennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑Mountains (M) ❑Piedmont (P) ❑Inner Coastal Plain (1) [Auter Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic
valley shape (skip for ®a ❑b
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 miZ) ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mil) ❑Size 3 0.5 to < 5 miZ s
( ) ❑Size 4 (z 5 mi )
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? JYes []No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
El Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters []Water Supply Watershed (❑I ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat []Primary Nursery Area [I High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑LAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species: WNW
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/suf;l,.lementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ❑No
1. nnel Water- assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
A Water throughout assessment reach.
�
B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb irN
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris
beaver dams).
Not A
3. F ture Pattern - assessment reach metric
A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
B Not A
4. F ture Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming,
d over widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of
these disturbances).
❑B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability -assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
DA < 10% of channel unstable
sd1W 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C > 25% of channel unstable
vii

6. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
R
�An
i4 Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
❑B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area,
leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
❑C ❑C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision,
disruption of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples:
impoundments, intensive mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a
man-made feature on an interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors — assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
eck all that apply.
Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
tc Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes" section.
Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
H Degraded r�narphrveaetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
❑I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
❑J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather — watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a
9r ught.
A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑C No drought conditions
9. Large orngerous Stream — assessment reach metric
❑Yes Is stream too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural I stream Habitat Types — assessment reach metric
10a. es ❑No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses m ❑F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(including liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) W ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
❑B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent 09❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
Co C
vegetation Y t C ❑I Sand bottom
❑C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) W ❑J 5°k vertical bank along the marsh
❑D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots ❑K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
Little or no habitat
*******************************"*REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedfonn and Substrate —assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Soler 11a. Tes ❑No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
l l b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
❑A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
OB Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
Ot Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. I riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach — whether or not submerged.
Che at least one box in each row. Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare (R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%,
Abuncs (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP C A P
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
❑ ❑S ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Gravel (2 — 64 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Sand (.062 — 2 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Detritus
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
l ld. []Yes ❑No Are pools filled with sediment?
viii

-12. Aquatic Lff essment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. OXes VW Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as des ribed in the U r Mappual? /
If No, sel t one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ❑No Water ther: ��,wK CyLI�IYIIsF � 111
12b. Vkes ❑No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (Ifolk'
in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 Ll,-- Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ QA t frogs
❑ DA is reptiles
Elquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ❑Beetles (including water pennies)
❑ ❑Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T]) �A
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicula) S,V`
❑ []Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans (true flies)
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑ ges/mosquito larvae
❑LUMosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ Mussels/Clams (not Corbcula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/tadpoles
❑ []Snails
❑ ❑Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland
runoff.
LB RB
❑A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
FIB 98 Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil
compaction, livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage - streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
ConsiderV
Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB5A '
Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water Z 6 inches deep
❑B ❑B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
❑C ❑C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence -streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
� _ VAre wetlands present in the streamside area?
16. Baseflow Contributors - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
,ChAfGk all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods affecting assessment reach (ex: beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
C
fF None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors - assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
❑C Urban stream (Z 24% impervious surface for watershed)
XD Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
qtl None of the above
18. Shading - assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
❑A Stream shading is appropriate for the stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
Degraded (example: scattered trees)
If Stream shading is gone or largely absent

19, Buffer Width - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) startii the top of bank out
It
&
to the list Brea .
Vegetated WoodedLB
#.
�1
[:]AR5C ❑A LB
RB/
L�
>_ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑B ❑B
❑B
From 50 to < 100 feet wide
❑C ❑C ❑C
❑C
From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ❑D/]D
From 10 to < 30 feet wide
Elff- ❑E [e
❑E
< 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB R
[]AA Mature forest
❑B ❑B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
❑C ❑C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑¢/ ❑D Maintained shrubs
U ❑E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but
is within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22: ❑
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LBrE
B LB RB LB RBZ
A ❑A ❑A ❑A —A . Row crops
B ❑B ❑B ❑B Ly8 Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Medium to high stem density
❑B ❑B Low stem density
❑C ❑C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider wheth vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
[]AA The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
K/ ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition - First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment read habitat.
LB FHB/
❑A A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
❑B t. Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
t t species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
❑C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity - assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes ❑No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E z 230
Notes/Sketch:

,y a
NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1� d C....
USACE AID #: NCDWR #
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property,
identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for
detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes" section if supplementary measurements were
performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATI9N-
1. Project name (if any):`. _`` 2. Date of evaluation:
3. Applicant/owner name: 4. Assessor name/organization: r ( r <
5. County: 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: on USGS 7.5-minute quad:
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach):
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
Site number (show on attached map): 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet):
Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of an (feet): ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. hannel width at top of bank (feet): 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? []Yes ONo
14. Feature type: ❑Perennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑Mountains (M) ❑Piedmont (P) ❑Inner Coastal Plain (1) [outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic
valley shape (skip for ❑a� ❑b
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mil) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mil) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mi2)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ❑Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
[]Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑I ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish 0303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
El Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ❑No
1. Channel Water —assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction — assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
j� Not A
3. Feaire Pattern — assessment reach metric
A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
❑B Not A
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile — assessment reach metric
EK Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming,
over widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of
these disturbances).
❑B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability — assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
acti4e bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
E�A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C > 25% of channel unstable
vii

6. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑ ESA Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
[213 ❑B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area,
leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
❑C ❑C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision,
disruption of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples:
impoundments, intensive mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a
man-made feature on an interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors — assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Cheek all that apply.
El'A- Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑D Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes" section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
❑G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
Ell Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
❑J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather — watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a
drqAght.
A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑C No drought conditions
9. Large or D,p�ngerous Stream — assessment reach metric
❑Yes ZNo Is stream too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural Jn-stream Habitat Types — assessment reach metric
10a. OYes ❑No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Cfjteck all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses h ❑F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(including liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) .9 E ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
❑B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent >u ❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation tC ❑I Sand bottom
❑C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) t W ❑J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
❑D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots L) 2 ❑K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E Little or no habitat
****************"**"***********REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS*******"*******'""********
11. Bedform and Substrate — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
_1 -1-1-a:--❑Yes [ No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
❑A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
❑B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
TVC Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
r i
11c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach — whether or not submerged.
Check at least one box in each row. Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare (R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%,
Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Gravel (2 — 64 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Sand (.062 — 2 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Detritus
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
mad-- eYes -TQNo Are pools filled with sediment?
viii

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

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

Appendix C- Landowner Authorization Forms

Landowner Authorization Form
Site: White Hat
Property Legal Description
Deed Book/Page: 287/562
County: Percluimans
Parcel ID Numbers: 7889-62-5550, 7889-74-6923, 7889-84-1950, 7889-82-4911, 7899-03-1867
Street Address: 105 Sutton's Lane. Hertford. NC
Property Owner: Ethel Sutton Chappell: husband. William Wray Chappell, Tenants by Entirety
The undersigned, registered property owner of the above property, do hereby authorize
Resource Environmental Solutions, the NC Division of Water Resources, and the US Army Corps of Engineers,
their employees, agents or assigns to have reasonable access to the above referenced property for the evaluation of
the property as a potential stream, wetland, and or riparian buffer restoration project, including conducting stream
and or wetland determinations and delineations, as well as issuance and acceptance of any required permit(s) or
certification(s).
Property Owner Address: 105 Sutton's Lane. Hertford. NC 27944
UWe hereby certify the above information to be true and accurate to the best of my/our knowledge.
(Property Owner Authorized Signature)
(Property Owner Printed Name)
(Property Owner Authorized Signature)
(Property Owner Printed Name)
4846-3189-9210,v. 1
Date
Date

Appendix D- Photo Log

-�l
DC 1-A — Looking Upstream
8/28/2018
DC1-A — Looking Towards the Right Bank
8/28/2018
DC 1-B — Looking Downstream
8/28/2018
DC1-A — Looking Upstream
8/28/2018
DC 1-A — Looking at the Right Bank
8/28/2018
DC1-B — Looking at the Left Bank
8/28/2018