20000846 Ver 1_Monitoring Report 6_20120201

DD- 006 +
, D
FLD 1 2012
DENR -WATER QUALITY
t
WETLANDS AND STQRMWATER BRANCH
Horse Pen Creek (Yr 6),
Brush Creek (Yr 3 Stream Monitoring, Yr 4 Wetland Monitoring)
Brush Creek Line -of -Sight (Yr1)
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Project
2011 Monitoring Report
ECS Project No. 09- 12666F
i'
Guilford County, NC
USACE Permit Number 200021655
DWQ Permit Number 00 -0846
e
Prepared for:
Piedmont Triad Airport Authority
6415 Bryan Boulevard
Greensboro, NC 27425
Prepared by:
EF
===S LLDD
ECS Carolinas, LLP
4811 Koger Blvd
Greensboro, NC 27407
336- 856 -7150

rnn -
ECS CAROLINAS LLP "Setting the Standard for Service"
CARCLONAS Geotechnical o Construction Materials a Environmental ® Facilities NC Registered engineering Firm F -1078
January 25, 2011
Mr. John Thomas
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
Wilmington District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
Reference: 2011 Annual Monitoring Report for Horse Pen Creek and Brush Creek
Mitigation Areas
Piedmont Triad International Airport
Greensboro, North Carolina
USACE Action ID 200021655, DWQ # 00 -0846
ECS Project No. 09- 12666F
Dear Mr. Thomas:
In accordance with Special Conditions "w" and "x" of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USAGE) permit and "6" of the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) permit,
ECS Carolinas, LLP (ECS) has prepared a report for the 2011 annual monitoring for stream
restoration and wetland creation and restoration of the Horse Pen Creek and Brush Creek ,
Mitigation Areas. The enclosed report includes the sixth year of monitoring for Horse Pen
Creek, the fourth year of monitoring for Brush Creek wetlands, the third year of monitoring
for the stream at Brush Creek III and the first year of monitoring for Brush Creek Line -of-
Sight vegetative plantings. Our findings are detailed in the enclosed report.
If there are questions regarding this report, or a need for further information, please contact
us at (336) 856 -7150.
Respectfully submitted,
ECS CAROLINAS, LLP
David S. Brame
Project Manager
cc: Ms. Cyndi Karoly, DWQ
Sue Homewood, DWQ
Mickie Elmore, PTAA
Richard Darling, Baker & Associates
Michael T. Brame
Environmental Department Manager
4811 Koger Blvd., Greensboro, NC 27407 0 (336) 856 -7150 0 Fax [phone] a www.eestimited.com
Asheville, NCeCharlottc. NCoGmensboro. Wo6reowille, SC *Raleigh, NCeSwansboro, NCoWilmington. NC

HORSE PEN CREEK AND BRUSH CREEK STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION PROJECT
MONITORING REPORT
ECS PROJEcr No. 09- 12666F
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0
INTRODUCTION .............................................................................. ..............................2
1.1
Horse Pen Creek .............................................................................. ..............................2
Appendix C:
1.2
Brush Creek ..................................................................................... ..............................2
Monitoring Pebble Counts
1.3
Brush Creek Line -of- Sight .............................................................. ..............................3
Appendix F:
2.0
PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................. ..............................4
Monitoring Vegetative Data Sheets
3.0
MONITORING ACTIVITIES ............................................................ ..............................6
3.1
Horse Pen Creek .............................................................................. ..............................6
3.2
Brush Creek ..................................................................................... ..............................6
3.3
Brush Creek Line -of- Sight .............................................................. ..............................6
4.0
MONITORING RESULTS ................................................................. ..............................6
4.1
Horse Pen Creek .............................................................................. ..............................6
4.2
Brush Creek ..................................................................................... ..............................7
4.3
Brush Creek Line -of -Sight Vegetative Monitoring ........................ ..............................7
5.0
RESTORATION SUCCESS CRITERIA ........................................... ..............................8
5.1
BC -III Stream Dimension ............................................................... ..............................8
5.2
BC -III Stream Pattern and Profile ................................................... ..............................8
5.3
BC -III Stream Bed Material Analysis ............................................. ..............................8
5.4
Photograph Reference Sites.: ........................................................................................
8
5.5
Wetland Hydrology ......................................................................... ..............................8
5.6
Bankfull Events ............................................................................... ..............................9
5.7
Vegetative Sampling ....................................................................... ..............................9
5.8
Benthic Macroinvertebrate Sampling ............................................ .............................11
5.9
Wildlife Observations .................................................................... .............................11
6.0
MAINTENANCE AND CONTINGENCY PLANS ......................... .............................11
6.1
New Development ........................................................................ ...............................
11
6.2
Stream and Wetland Maintenance and Recommendations ............ .............................12
7.0
COMMENTS AND OBSERVATIONS ............................................ .............................12
Appendix A:
Site Plans
Appendix B:
Monitoring Cross Sections
Appendix C:
Monitoring Profile
Appendix D:
Monitoring Pebble Counts
Appendix E:
Monitoring Photographs
Appendix F:
Monitoring Well Data
Appendix G:
Monitoring Vegetative Data Sheets
Appendix H:
Repair Plan
ECS Carolinas, LLP

HORSE PEN CREEK AND BRUSH CREEK STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION PROJECT
MONITORING REPORT
ECS PROJECT No. 09- 12666F
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Horse Pen Creek and Brush Creek Mitigation Areas were identified as having potential to
satisfy the compensatory mitigation requirements of the Piedmont Triad Airport Authority
(PTAA) for impacts resulting from the expansion of their existing facilities. The objective of this
project is to provide stream mitigation units (SMU) and wetland mitigation units (WMU) to the
PTAA to offset impacts in the Cape Fear 03030002 hydrologic unit. The mitigation units
required are being satisfied through the restoration of stream and wetland riparian habitats at
the above referenced sites as specified in US Army Corp of Engineers ( USACE) Permit
Number 200021655 and the NC Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Permit Number 00 -0846.
This report includes the following mitigation monitoring efforts:
• Horse Pen Creek — Year 6 (partial monitoring)
• Brush Creek — Year 3 (stream monitoring), Year 4 (wetland monitoring)
• Brush Creek Line -of -Sight — Year 1 (vegetation monitoring)
1.1 Horse Pen Creek
The fifth year of monitoring of the Horse Pen Creek site (HP -I, HP -II and HP -III) was
completed in 2010. Mitigation monitoring of Horse Pen Creek was terminated following the
fifth year of monitoring with the following exceptions:
• Cattails in HP -I, Wetland 5 and HP -III, Wetland 1 will be controlled;
• The beaver dam in HP -III, lower King George Branch; and,
• Vegetation monitoring in HP-11, jNetlands 2 and 3 will be continued until all
agencies feel the vegetation is stable and mature.
This monitoring report includes the sixth year of monitoring of Horse Pen Creek for the above
referenced exceptions. Correspondence letters from the USACE and DWQ are attached.
1.2 Brush Creek
The construction of the wetlands at the Brush Creek site (BC -I, BC -II and BC -III) was
completed in January and February 2008. The restoration of the stream at BC -III was
completed in February 2009. The project was designed by ECS Carolinas, LLP and
constructed by Shamrock Environmental. This monitoring report includes the fourth year of
monitoring for BC -I, BC -II and BC I II wetlands and the third year of monitoring for the stream at
BC -III.
Due to conditions encountered during construction, the size and extent of wetlands were
altered as necessary. The following alterations were made:
• BC I - Based on the design /permit, the restored wetlands in BC I were scheduled to be
4.66 acres in area. The actual amount of wetlands as surveyed following construction is
4.54 acres.
• BC II — Based on the permit, the created wetlands in BC II were scheduled to be 5.3 acres
in area. The actual amount of wetlands as surveyed following construction is 9.5 acres in
area (less 0.6 acres for USACE Action ID # SAW200641354241 and DWQ # 00- 1632).
ECS Carolinas, LLP 2

HORSE PEN CREEK AND BRUSH CREEK STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION PROJECT
MONITORING REPORT
ECS PROJECT No. 09- 12666F
• BC III - Based on the design /permit, the restored wetlands in BC III were scheduled to be
2.7 acres in area. The actual amount of wetlands as surveyed following construction is
2.06 acres.
• BC III — Based on the permit, 200 linear feet of stream were to be restored. The actual
amount of stream restored as surveyed following construction is 450 linear feet.
Based on the permit, the overall mitigation compliance for BC I, II and III included the
restoration of 7.4 acres of wetland, the creation of 5.3 acres of wetland and the restoration of
200 linear feet of stream. As determined by the survey following construction, 6.6 acres of
wetland have been restored, 9.50 acres of wetland have been created and 450 linear feet of
stream have been restored.
1.3 Brush Creek Line -of -Sight
In November 2009, the PTAA received authorization to cut/clear trees located in certain
preservation tracts that were set aside by PTAA in accordance with the above referenced
permit. The purpose of the project was to clear the line -of -sight (LOS) between the air traffic
control tower and the new Runway 5L/23R and its associated taxiways as required by the
Federal Aviation Administration. As required by the permit modification, the PTAA replanted
the cleared preservation tracts in February/March 2010. The revegetated areas are monitored
in accordance with the Horse Pen Creek and Brush Creek mitigation monitoring requirements.
This report includes the first year of monitoring for the Brush Creek LOS plantings.
ECS Carolinas, LLP

HORSE PEN CREEK AND BRUSH CREEK STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION PROJECT
MONITORING REPORT
ECS PROJECT No. 09- 12666F
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Horse Pen Creek and Brush Creek Stream and Wetland Mitigation Project is located on
parcels southeast and northwest of the Piedmont Triad International Airport (PTIA) in
Greensboro, North Carolina. The Horse Pen Creek and Brush Creek restoration areas, and
Brush Creek LOS areas are identified on Figure 1.
Figure 1: 2010 Aerial Photograph from Guilford County GIS Data Viewer
ECS Carolinas, LLP 4

HORSE PEN CREEK AND BRUSH CREEK STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION PROJECT
MONITORING REPORT
ECS PROJECT No. 09- 12666F
The Horse Pen Creek mitigation site includes HP -I, HP -11 and HP -III located to the southeast
of the airport on Ballinger Road near its intersection with Chimney Rock Road.
The Brush Creek mitigation site includes BC -1, BC -11 and BC -III located to the northwest of the
airport. BC -1 is a restored wetland that includes two cells that contain approximately 4.54
acres. BC -II is a created wetland that is 9.5 acres in area. BC -111 is situated in the former
roadway of Old Oak Ridge Road and consists of approximately 2.06 acres of restored wetland
and approximately 450 linear feet of restored stream channel.
The Brush Creek Line -of -Sight revegetation areas include LOS -1, LOS -11 and LOS -111 located to
the northwest of the airport along Brush Creek.
Figure 2 is a site location map (USGS Topographic Map, Guilford, North Carolina Quadrangle)
that identifies the project areas. The site plans are included in Appendix A.
Figure 2 — Site Location Map
ECS Carolinas, LLP 5

HORSE PEN CREEK AND BRUSH CREEK STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION PROJECT
MONITORING REPORT
ECS PROJECT No. 09- 12666F
3.0 MONITORING ACTIVITIES
3.1 Horse Pen Creek
This monitoring report includes the sixth year of monitoring of Horse Pen Creek for:
• Cattails in HP -I, Wetland 5 and HP -III, Wetland 1;
• The beaver dam in HP -III, lower King George Branch; and,
- • Vegetation monitoring in HP -II, Wetlands 2 and 3.
The monitoring included visual observations and vegetation counts (Appendix G) in pre-
established plots.
3.2 Brush Creek
Year four monitoring was completed for the wetlands at BC -I, BC -II and BC -III. Year three
monitoring was completed for the restored stream at BC -III. The monitoring was performed
between September and November 2011. Hydrology was monitored throughout 2011. The
data analyzed includes stream channel cross sections (Appendix B) and stream channel
profiles (Appendix C) with a virtual reference station (VRS), pebble counts (Appendix D) with a
gravelometer, photographs (Appendix E) taken with a digital camera, monitoring well data
(Appendix F) collected from pre - established wells, and vegetation counts (Appendix G) in pre -
established plots and transects. Observations of structures, vegetation and problem areas
were made throughout the data collection process and are documented in this report.
3.3 Brush Creek Line -of -Sight
Year one monitoring was completed for the revegetated wetlands cleared for line -of -sight
(LOS I, LOS -II and LOS -III). The monitoring included visual observations and vegetation
counts (Appendix G) in pre - established plots.
4.0 MONITORING RESULTS
4.1 Horse Pen Creek
Cattails in HP -I. Wetland 5 and HP -III, Wetland 1
Cattails were treated in these two areas by Riverworks in September 2011 using a spray
application of Imazapyr (1.5% Solution) and Glyphosate (0.75% Solution). The spray
application targeted cattails with an emphasis on protecting woody vegetation in the wetland
cells. A visual observation to determine the effectiveness of the spray application will be
conducted in the spring of 2012.
Beaver Dam in HP -III, Lower King George Branch
The USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) assisted PTAA in eradicating
beavers from Lower King George Branch in July 2011. After the beavers were trapped the
beaver dam was removed by hand by the USDA. The beaver dam did not create concerns
with stream stability. ECS has inspected Lower King George Branch on multiple occasions
since that time. The most recent inspection was performed on January 12, 2012. To date,
there have been no new beaver dams observed in Lower King George Branch.
ECS Carolinas, LLP

HORSE PEN CREEK AND BRUSH CREEK STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION PROJECT
MONITORING REPORT
ECS PROJECT NO. 09-12666F
Vegetation Monitoring In HP -II, Wetlands 2 and 3
Vegetation counts were conducted in HP -II, Wetlands 2 and 3 in pre - established sampling
plots to monitor the survival success of wetland vegetation. It was established during the site
close -out visit with Mr. John Thomas with the USACE and Ms. Sue Homewood with the
NCDWQ in the summer of 2011 that vegetative monitoring of these two areas should be
continued until approval by the agencies. The sampling plots in HP -II, Wetlands 2 and 3
indicated 300 and 400 trees per acre, respectively. Based on the vegetation counts, these two
areas meet the success requirement of >260 trees per acre at the end of five years. The data
resulting from sampling of vegetative plots in HP -II, Wetlands 2 and 3 can be found in
Appendix G.
4.2 Brush Creek
The stream profile and cross sections were surveyed at BC -III. Graphs depicting the survey
results of stream channel cross sections are included in Appendix B and stream channel
profiles are included in Appendix C. The results of the surveying do not reveal significant
changes from the as -built surveys. The survey data indicates stable cross sections with no
significant widening or increases in depth. Erosion is apparent on the left bank downstream
from cross -vein 3. Repairs are necessary to prevent further erosion of the stream bank. See
Appendix H for recommended repairs.
Based on a comparison of the as -built data, there has been little to no change in the
streambed material in the riffle and pool sequences. Graphs of pebble counts at each of the
cross sections are included in Appendix D.
Monitoring well data indicates that hydrology is present at levels above the monitoring success
requirements in 13 of the 14 monitoring wells that are located in the three wetland areas. MW
2 in BC -III was below monitoring success requirements. Graphs showing water levels in each
of the wetland monitoring wells are included in Appendix F.
Based on vegetative sampling, BC -I, BC -II and BC -III are each within the success range for
vegetative criteria. Additional planting in 2012 is not recommended. Wetland vegetation data
is included in Appendix G.
4.3 Brush Creek Line -of -Sight Vegetative Monitoring
Based on vegetative sampling, LOS -I, LOS -II and LOS -III are each within the success range
for vegetative criteria. Additional planting in 2012 is not recommended. Wetland vegetation
data is included in Appendix G.
ECS Carolinas, LLP

HORSE PEN CREEK AND BRUSH CREEK STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION PROJECT
MONITORING REPORT
ECS PROJECT No. 09- 12666F
5.0 RESTORATION SUCCESS CRITERIA
5.1 BC -111 Stream Dimension
Cross section data was collected at established monitoring locations using a geophysical
virtual reference system (VRS). Two cross sections were analyzed using Microsoft Excel
software and compared to as -built data. Graphs of the resulting data are included in Appendix
B. The cross sectional dimensions of the streams are consistent with the as -built data.
Changes that are evident in the cross section data are the result of repairs that were made to
Cross Vane 2 during 2010. The data does not reveal significant widening or increases in
depth.
Although it is not apparent from the survey data, erosion was observed on the left bank
downstream from cross -vein 3. Repairs are necessary to prevent further erosion of the stream
bank. The repair is currently being scheduled. See Appendix H for recommended repairs.
5.2 BC -111 Stream Pattern and Profile
Stream pattern and profile data was collected for the entire length of BC -III using a
geophysical VRS. Data collected included thalweg depth, inverts of in- stream structures,
water surface elevation, and low top of bank elevation. This data was analyzed using
Microsoft Excel software and compared to as -built data. This data is presented in graphs
located in Appendix C. Changes were not observed in the thalweg depth or in the stream
- , pattern. Elevation and slope of the riffle and pool sections are consistent with previous
monitoring data.
5.3 BC -111 Stream Bed Material Analysis
Stream bed material analysis was completed for BC -III at each permanent cross section. A
gravelometer was used to determine pebble size. Based on a comparison of the as -built data,
there has been little or no change in the stream bed material in the riffle and pool sequences.
Graphs of pebble counts at each of the cross sections are included in Appendix D.
5.4 Photograph Reference Sites
Photographs were taken using a digital camera and these photographs are documented in the
Photo Log in Appendix B. The wetland photographs were taken in September. The stream
photographs were taken in December. The photograph locations are identified in the photo
logs and the site plans in Appendix A.
5.5 Wetland Hydrology
Wetland hydrology has been analyzed using monitoring wells with data loggers. Several
monitoring wells were installed in each of the wetlands. The locations of monitoring wells are
identified on the site plans (Appendix A). Data loggers gather water level readings at 7:00 AM
each day. The information from the wells is downloaded monthly, and the resulting data has
been analyzed using Microsoft Excel software to determine the average depth to groundwater.
The graphs depicting this analysis are located in Appendix C.
Thirteen of the fourteen wetland monitoring wells met the wetland success criteria during
2011. Based on local weather data (NOAA.gov), this area of North Carolina was under
"abnormally dry" to "moderate drought" conditions during the majority of the 2011 growing
ECS Carolinas, LLP

HORSE PEN CREEK AND BRUSH CREEK STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION PROJECT
MONITORING REPORT
ECS PROJECT NO. 09-12666F
season. During a year with normal precipitation, there is potential that the well would meet the
wetland hydrology success criteria.
5.6 Bankfull Events
Several bankfull events have occurred since construction. Photographs documenting bankfull
events that occurred in 2011 are included in Appendix E.
5.7 Vegetative Sampling
Vegetation sampling plots were established to monitor the survival success of wetland
vegetation in the Horse Pen Creek and Brush Creek restoration sites. The locations of these
plots were random but distributed across the planted portions of the site (see photos in
Appendix B). The data resulting from the sampling of the vegetative plots can be found in
Appendix G.
5.7.1 HP -II, Wetlands 2 and 3 (Year 6)
Vegetation counts were conducted in HP -II, Wetlands 2 and 3 in pre - established sampling
plots to monitor the survival success of wetland vegetation. It was established during the site
close -out visit with Mr. John Thomas with the USACE and Ms. Sue Homewood with the
NCDWQ in the summer of 2011 that vegetative monitoring of these two areas should be
continued until approval by the agencies. The sampling plots in HP-11, Wetlands 2 and 3
indicated 300 and 400 trees per acre, respectively. Based on the vegetation counts, these two
areas meet the success requirement of >260 trees per acre at the end of five years. The data
resulting from sampling of vegetative plots in HP -II, Wetlands 2 and 3 can be found in
Appendix G.
5.7.2 BC I, II and III (Year 4)
Based on the sampling, BC -I, BC -II and BC -III are within the success range for vegetative
criteria. Tables 1, 2 and 3 show the current wetland stocking levels.
Table 1. Observed planted trees per plot
TREES OBSERVED
0.162 ACRES /PLOT
and corresponding stocking
STOCKING LEVEL (PER ACRE)
Plot 1
9
556
Plot 2
12
741
Plot 3
7
432
Plot 4
4
247
Average
494
Success criteria at the end of year 4 is >288 trees per acre.
ECS Carolinas, LLP 9

HORSE PEN CREEK AND BRUSH CREEK STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION PROJECT
MONITORING REPORT
ECS PROJEcr No. 09- 12666F
Table 2. Observed planted trees per plot
TREES OBSERVED
(0.162 ACRES /PLOT )
and corresponding stocking levels
STOCKING LEVEL (PER ACRE)
Plot 1
9
494
556
Plot 2
8
LOS -I, Plot 3
494
Plot 3
7
9
432
Plot 4
9
309
556
Success criteria at the end of year 4 is >288
trees per acre.
LOS -II, Plot 4
9
Average
LOS -III, Plot 1
9
509
Success criteria at the end of year 4 is >288 trees per acre.
Table 3. Observed planted trees per plot
TREES OBSERVED
0.162 ACRES /PLOT '
and corresponding stocking levels —
STOCKING LEVEL (PER ACRE)
Plot 1
18
494
1111
Plot 2
4
LOS -I, Plot 3
247
556
LOS -II, Plot 1
9
556
Average
1
309
679
Success criteria at the end of year 4 is >288
trees per acre.
5.7.3 Line -of -Sight I, II and III (Year 1)
Based on the sampling, LOS -I, LOS -II and LOS -III are within the success range for vegetative
criteria. Table 4 shows the current wetland stocking levels.
Table 4. Observed
planted trees per plot and corresponding stocking levels —
• • •
TREES OBSERVED
0.162 ACRES /PLOT STOCKING LEVEL (PER ACRE)
LOS -I, Plot 1
8
494
LOS -I, Plot 2
6
370
LOS -I, Plot 3
9
556
LOS -II, Plot 1
9
556
LOS -II, Plot 2
5
309
LOS -II, Plot 3
11
679
LOS -II, Plot 4
9
556
LOS -III, Plot 1
9
556
LOS -III, Plot 2
12
741
Average
535
Success criteria at the end of year 1 is >320
trees per acre.
ECS Carolinas, LLP 10

HORSE PEN CREEK AND BRUSH CREEK STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION PROJECT
MONITORING REPORT
ECS PROJECT No. 09- 12666F
5.8 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Sampling
Benthic macro - invertebrates sampling is not required for this site and sampling was not
c conducted.
5.9 Wildlife Observations
During the various monitoring events, ECS observed various wildlife at the site. ECS has
observed the following wildlife species or evidence of the following wildlife species on the site:
Mallard ducks;
Blue and Green Herons;
Various Songbirds;
Whitetail Deer;
Crayfish;
Minnows; and
Frogs.
6.0 MAINTENANCE AND CONTINGENCY PLANS
-J 6.1 New Development
- Horse Pen Creek
' Based on correspondence with the USACE and the DWQ; the Horse Pen Creek mitigation site
compliance monitoring was terminated in 2011 with the exception of:
• Cattails in HP -I, Wetland 5 and HP -III, Wetland 1;
• A beaver dam in HP -III, Lower King George Branch; and,
: ' Wetland vegetation in HP -II, Wetlands 2 and 3.
Cattails were treated in HP -I, Wetland 5 and HP -III, Wetland 1 in September 2011. A visual
observation to determine the effectiveness of the spray application will be conducted in the
spring of 2012.
A beaver dam and beavers were removed from HP -III, Lower King George Branch by the
USDA in July 2011. To date, there have been no beaver dams observed in Lower King
George Branch.
Vegetation counts were conducted in HP -II, Wetlands 2 and 3. Based on the vegetation
i counts, these two areas meet the success requirement of >260 trees per acre at the end of
five years.
Brush Creek
At the end of the fourth year of monitoring, herbaceous wetland vegetation is prevalent
throughout the wetlands in BC -I, BC -II and BC -III. The woody vegetation requirements have
been met for the fourth year of monitoring. No additional planting is recommended at this
time.
ECS Carolinas, LLP 11

HORSE PEN CREEK AND BRUSH CREEK STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION PROJECT
MONITORING REPORT
ECS PROJECT No. 09- 12666F
Thirteen of the fourteen wetland monitoring wells met the wetland success criteria during
2011. Based on local weather data (NOAA.gov), this area of North Carolina was under
"abnormally dry" to "moderate drought' conditions during the majority of the 2011 growing
season. During a year with normal precipitation, it is possible that the well would meet the
wetland hydrology success criteria.
At the end of the third year of monitoring of the stream at BC -III, survey results have indicated
no significant changes in stream stability. However, visual observations have identified an
area of erosion that needs repair. The area is located on the left bank down stream from cross
vein 3.
6.2 Stream and Wetland Maintenance and Recommendations
Horse Pen Creek
No repairs /maintenance is recommended at this time. The PTAA will evaluate and report on
the effectiveness of the cattail treatment in HP -I, Wetland 5 and HP -III, Wetland 1 during the
spring of 2012.
Brush Creek
No wetland vegetation /hydrology maintenance is recommended at this time. Stream
maintenance is recommended to repair an area of erosion located on the left bank down
stream from cross vein 3. Recommended repairs are included in Appendix H and are
currently being scheduled. The repair will be evaluated and its condition reported during the
2012 monitoring period.
Brush Creek Line -of -Sight Vegetative Plantings
No repairs /maintenance is recommended at this time.
7.0 COMMENTS AND OBSERVATIONS
Horse Pen Creek
Areas of concern identified during the July 2011 close -out site walk with the USACE and the
NC DWQ have been addressed. Future monitoring of these areas does not appear to be
warranted. The PTAA will evaluate and report on the success of cattail treatment conducted in
2011. Provided that cattail removal is successful, it is recommended that the exceptions
placed on the compliance monitoring of Horse Pen Creek by the USACE and NC DWQ be
terminated.
Brush Creek
The overall stability of the Brush Creek site and vegetative growth has improved during each
of its first four years. Each of the wetlands has met the vegetative success requirements
during the first four years of monitoring. The majority of the wetlands have met the hydrology
success requirements. The stream appears stable except for one area of bank erosion.
Repairs to the bank are currently being scheduled. No additional repairs or maintenance are
recommended at this time.
ECS Carolinas, LLP 12

Channel Alitigation Monitoring Sheets I, II, III, :�\D IV
Monitoring Data Record
Project Title-. Brush Creek Stream and Wetland Mitigation Project
COE Action ID: 200021655
Stream Name: Brush Creek
DWQ Number:
00 -0846
City, County and other Location Inforinatlon: Greensboro, Guilford County, PTIA
Date Construction Completed: February 2008.
Monitoring Year: ( 4 ) of 5
Ecoregion: Central Piedmont
8 digit HUC unit
03030002
USGS Quad Name and Coordinates: Guilford, NC Quad
36° 06' 56 21" N
79° 56' 1.10" W
Rosgen Classification: C4/1
Length of Project: Apprx. 450 Ut 16 l Acres Wtlnd ** Urban or Rural:
Urban
Watershed Size: 4.4 Sq Miles
Monitoring DATA collected by: ECS Carolinas, LLC
Date: 2008, 2009, 2010
Applicant Information:
Name: Ms Lisa Elmore c/o Piedmont Triad International Airport
Address: PO Box 35445
Telephone Number.- 336 - 665 -5600
Email address:
Consultant Information:
Name: ECS Carolinas, LLC
Address-. 4811 Koger Boulevard
Telephone Number: 336 - 856 -7150
Enlail address: dbramepecslimited com
Project Status: Year Three Monitoring * **
•Ionitoring Level required by COE and DWQ (404,'Sect. 10 permit / 401 Cert.: 1 2 3
Monitoring Level 3 requires completion of Section 1 (circle one)
Monitoring Level 2 requires completion of Section 1 mid Section 2
Monitoring Level 1 requires completion of Section 1, Section 2 and Section 3
If biological monitoring is required by DVrQ, then Section 4 should also be completed
Section 1. PHOTO REFERENCE SITES
(Houitoring at all lin els must complete this section)
Attach site map showing the location and angle of all reference photos with a site designation (name,
niunber, letter, etc.) assigned to each reference photo location. Photos should be provided for all structures and cross section
locations, should show both banks and include an upstream and downstream view. Photos taken to docuunent physical stability
should be taken in winter. Photos taken to document vegetation should be taken in summer (at representative locations). Attach
photos and a description of each reference photo or location. 'We recommend the use of a photo identification board in each
photo to identify location.
I Total number of reference photo locations at this site: 40 (See Appendix A and Appendix B)
'- Dates reference photos have been taken at this site: September - November
Individual from whom additional photos can be obtained (name, address, phone):
j David Brame -- 4811 Koger Boulevard, Greensboro, NC 27407 -- 336 - 856 -7150
Other Information relative to site photo reference: None
If required to complete Level 3 monitoring only stop here; othernise, complete section 2.
"The total wetland area of 16 1 acres includes 6 6 acres of restored wetland and 9 5 acres of created wetlands
** *This is the 3rd year of monitoring for the wetlands at BC -1, BC -II and BC -III This is the second year of monitoring for the restored stream at BC -III

Section 2. PLANT SURA VAL
Attach plan sheet indicating plots and sample area locations and reference photos.
Snr x vnl nlnts-
DATE:
Area within the easement is:
Area sampled by siuNival lots:
See
Report
Number of survival plots sampled:
Random or nonrandom site selection:
% Coverage within su vival plots is:
_
Range of stuvival for all plots:
Photos of reference plots taken: ves�no
Provide a written description of specific data or findings and photos as needed for clarity.
Uve Stake rnnnk- Zone 1
DATE:
Area within the easement is:
Area sampled for stake sunival:
See
Report
Number of plots sampled:
Random or nonrandom site selection:
Average number of sluviving stakes:
_
Range of stuvival for all plots:
Range of survival for all plots:
Provide a written description of spec data or findings as needed for clarity.
Tree counts: Zone 2
DATE:
Area within the easement is:
Area sampled for tree stm ival:
See
Report
Number of plots sampled:
Random or nonrandom site selection:
Average mtmber of suniving trees:
_
Range of stuvival for all plots:
Provide a written description of specific data or findings as needed for clarity_
Bankfull Events:
Date measured: None June 5, 2009 Sept 30, 2010 Sept 23, 2011
Method of Verification: None I Photographed Photographed Photo — See Rpt
CONIIV=S: See
If required to complete Level 1 and Level 2 monitoring only stop here; othertivise, complete section 3.

Section 3. CHA.N1TEL STABEUW
Attach plan sheet(s) indicating the locations of cross - sections and beginning and ending of longitudinal profiles if the entire
reach is not profiled. Year to year changes in cross - sections, longitudinal profile and bed material should be plotted and
submitted_ Comparison overlays from previous years for profile and cross - section monitoring should be provided.
Cross - sections: attach plots of each cross - section showing year to year changes.
Provide the following data for each cross - section:
Date measured
Station Number
Station Number
Avg. slope riffles: as-built/present
Station Niunber
Station Number
Ave_ sloe pools: as-built/present
Cross - section being measured
Number of riffles: as-built/present
Report
Number of pools: as-built/present
Is water piping
D16: as-built/present
Cross - sectional area: as-built/present
See
Report
through or around
D84: as-built/present
Bank-full width: as-built.,'Present
Floodprone Width: as-built/present
structure?
Each station
Areas of concern
Width/depth: as-built/present
and photographed.
in report.
Head cut or dovAn
cut present9
Entrenchment ratio: as-built/present
Bank or scour
Stream Type: as -built esent*
erosion esent?
* only required for riffle cross- sections
Longitudinal profiles: attach plots of the longitudinal profile showing year to year changes and the locations of installed or
natural structures that affect profile.
Date measured
Station Number
Station Number
Avg. slope riffles: as-built/present
Station Niunber
Station Number
Ave_ sloe pools: as-built/present
See
Number of riffles: as-built/present
Report
Number of pools: as-built/present
Is water piping
Report
Pebble counts: Attach a printout of pebble count data and a graphical plot of bed material show-mg the ctuuulative % finer than
X millimeters and the number of particles in standard size classes. Year to year changes in bed material should also be plotted
and nrovided_
Date measured
Station Number
Station Number
Station Number
Station Niunber
Station Number
Structure Type
Cross - section being measured
See
Report
Is water piping
D16: as-built/present
D50: as- built/ resent
through or around
D84: as-built/present
structure?
Each station
Areas of concern
Visual Inspection: The entire stream project as well as each in- stream structure and bank stabilization/revetment structure must
be evaluated and problems addressed.
Date Inspected
Station Number
Station Number
Station Number
Station Niunber
Station Number
Structure Type
Is water piping
through or around
structure?
Each station
Areas of concern
has been evaluated
are discussed
and photographed.
in report.
Head cut or dovAn
cut present9
Bank or scour
erosion esent?
Other problems
noted?
NOTE: Attach separate narrative sheets to each monitoring report describing/discussing the overall
monitoring results. Include the identification of specific problem areas /channel &Au es,
estimated cause and proposed/required remedial action. This should include a brief discussion of any parameter that
has changed significantly from as- built. (See success criteria discussion in Section 11.)

May 24, 2011
United States Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Raleigh, NC 27587
Michael Baker Engineering
8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 200
Cary, NC 27518
919 -463 -5488
FAX [phone]
North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources; Division of Water Quality
Winston -Salem Regional Office
585 Waughtown Street
Winston- Salem, NC 27107 -2241
Attention: Mr. John T. Thomas, Jr., Ms. Sue Homewood
Subject: Wetland and Stream Mitigation for Runway 5L/23R, Overnight Express Air
Cargo Sorting and Distribution Facility, and Associated Developments at
Piedmont Triad International Airport
USACE Action ID No. 200021655
DWQ File No. 00 -0846
On behalf of the Piedmont Triad Airport Authority (PTAA), I am hereby requesting termination
of the compliance monitoring program for the Horsepen Creek wetland and stream mitigation
sites based on attainment of success criteria and your field review of May 24, 2011; with the
following exceptions:
• Cattails in HP -1, Wetland 5 and HP -3, Wetland 1 will be controlled;
• A new beaver dam in HP -3, lower King George Branch, will be removed and beaver(s)
trapped;
• Vegetation monitoring in HP -2, Wetlands 2 and 3 will be continued.
Please contact me <rdarling9mbakerco02.com, 919 - 459 -9009> or David Brame
dbrameAecslimited.com, 336 - 856 -7150> at your convenience with any questions or comments
and thank you for your continued attention to this important project.
Sincerely,
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING
Richard B. Darling
Environmental Manager
::1/T: IN
cc: Mickie Elmore, PTAA
David Brame, ECS
Z 1104066 - P 01104066 - GSO Program Management1003 -0000 00022 (404_401)IMdigahonWorsepen CreeklMonitonngReductAonRequest docx

NT-oA
q �
��sTntes ui �� • •
Regulatory Division
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
69 DARLINGTON AVENUE
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403 -1343
Action ID: SAW- 2000 -21655
Mr. Mickie L. Elmore
Piedmont Triad Airport Authority
Post Office Box 35445
Greensboro, North Carolina 27401
Dear Mr. Elmore:
July 7, 2011
Reference the Department of the Army (DA) permit issued on December 8, 2003, which
authorized the discharge of 1,450,399 cubic yards of clean fill material into 23.93 acres of
jurisdictional waters of the United States, including wetlands subject to our regulatory authority
pursuant to Section 404 of the CIean Water Act. The project will impact 12,719 linear feet (1.25
acres) of Brush Creek and its unnamed tributaries, and 22.68 acres of wetlands adjacent to those
streams. This discharge of fill is associated with plans for the proposed construction of the new
runway 5L/23R, a new overnight express air cargo sorting and distribution facility, and
associated development at Piedmont Triad International Airport (PTIA), located off Bryan
Boulevard, in Greensboro, Guilford County, North Carolina.
Reference is also made to onsite mitigation site inspections conducted on May 24, 2011, by
myself and Richard Darling (your consultant for the project) and your letter received on July 6,
2011.
By copy of this letter; we concur that you have completed referenced DA permit requirements to
monitor the Horsepen Creek wetland and stream mitigation sites attaining special condition
success criteria requirements with the following exceptions:
• Cattails in HP -1, Wetland 5 and HP -3, Wetland I will be controlled;
• A new beaver dam in HP -3, lower King George Branch, will be removed, beavers
trapped, and site monitored to assure no further beaver activity;
• Vegetation monitoring in HP -2, Wetlands 2 and 3 will be continued associated with the
ongoing Brush Creek wetland mitigation sites monitoring.
Accordingly, with action on the identified exceptions no further monitoring of the Horsepen
Creek wetland and stream mitigation sites will be required.

Should you have questions, contact Mr. John Thomas, Raleigh Regulatory Field Office at
telephone [phone], Extension 25,
Copy furnished:
Richard Darling
Michael Baker Engineering
8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 200
Cary, NC 27518
Sincerel , 4 1
J homas
•oject Manager, Raleigh Regulatory
Field Office
2

t—
r!
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
July 21, 2011
Mr. Richard Darling
Michael Baker Engineering
8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 200
Cary, NC 27518
Re: Horsepen Creek Mitigation Site for Runway 5L/23R
Piedmont Triad International Airport
Guilford County
DWQ # 2000 -0846
Dear Mr. Darling:
The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Winston -Salem Regional Office has reviewed the Year 5 monitoring results for the above -
referenced site. In addition, a site visit was conducted on May 24, 2011 with you and John Thomas with the USACE. The Division
is in receipt of your letter dated May 24, 2011 requesting termination of the compliance monitoring program for this site with the
following exceptions:
• Cattails in HP -1, Wetland 5 and HP -3, Wetland 1 will be controlled;
• The beaver dam in HP -3, lower King George Branch has been removed and beaver trapped;
• Vegetation monitoring in HP -2, Wetlands 2 and 3 will be continued until all agencies feel the vegetation is stable and mature.
The long -term protection mechanisms included in the approved Mitigation Plan will remain in effect in perpetuity.
If you have any questions related to our comments or this mitigation project, please feel free to contact Sue Homewood at 336 -771-
4964 or sue.homewood @ncdenr.gov.
Cc: John Thomas, USACE Raleigh Regulatory Field Office (via email)
Mickie Elmore, PTAA, PO Box 35445, Greensboro NC 27401
DWQ -WSRO
DWQ - 401 Wetlands Unit File Copy
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, Winston -Salem Regional Office
Location- 585 Waughtown St Winston - Salem, North Carolina 27107
Phone: 336 - 771 -50001 FAX [phone] Customer Service- 1- 877 - 623 -6748
Internet www.ncwaterquality.org
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer
Sincerely,
Sue Homewood
DWQ Winston -Salem Regional Office
NorthCarolina
Naturally

I_1 »:101I91 PIRO
SITE PLANS

)
>1 ) 2 ) §
�§
�§
♦
\
| � _ ��� ■
2
.... . d / \
\
| � ^ � f�� ^ � � ■ / \ § \§
| m, LL
\cz
\ (\
� � ■ $: _ \
� - -- \
�!$
I
�

A �
3
I
`N IF ^d'
■ I
I
a6 /
� t
lel
I
gi
d
°o
n
\ DIM!
!
sr :a5��
LP

1�
I
a
peon J�
1 � �
1
1
1 je
s
I •
I �
I
13 _
I �
I � �
I •
I .
I_
F
E
/
°"' . 1
� 1
/ I
/ 3
I /
/
/
8
z � e
2 s °
§ § §g 6 q
u .4R 3 9 m m C
I
€ I
y 3
.e

G
z
a
U
W O
M z
7
�mm °x
� 4
CXb
i131n08 abl?Il •N
0 8
z�
<z
� a -
OU
O
<v
2m o
U F R1
1 ix V
a �
0.
zCe
I
e I
i tom.
/ W
FW
/ / Q
m' 5

/ \
/ \\ -j a
\ a
/ \ QUO O
�a z
vim0 a
z �
l \
\ I
\ I
\ t
\ o
\ z�
I \ ¢ N
I \\ < Q
I
\ c7 m o
w m
/
/ I
I 8 I
I 3 I
I j
I I
I I
I I
1
Q I /
O \
m I /
4 I /
m I i
I /
I /
I /
I /
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I �
I \
I \
I \
i \
I \
I \
I \
I I

Q
z
5 m S
O
axz G
y a
z
w �
c7
/ I
SO
/ � a
/ f
g
/
/ z a
0
o o
\-�
cn
\ /
z /
\ U
tib
1�9
M i � � Q♦ e ®�

z
LN. TRIAD BLVD
a O
ICI
y a
O
I
I�
I MM1
Ijl W
I
i
I � I
I � �
O
p �5 ..4
q m a k?
On
i s
o -
a
� F
�C l�
i UUU
i
i
t
�6
8
I �3
' � a
i R o z o
i

APPENDIX B
MONITORING CROSS SECTIONS

f�
r
1
U
m
I
C9 (0 (d (0
I
4
I f
Ln o Ln o
m 00 OD
(1=1) UOl;ene13
0
0
rn
0
0
co
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
m
U
C
N
0
0
0
0
0
Cl)
0
0
N
0
0
0
C� CY) 0) C:) O N U
r- . O (,.j N
M IT
d U
O
� L O V U
M N
N � � U
rn
Not��rnMU
'IT 00 rj N
Cl) V (n (�
0)
O
cc) � U
M r-- �'j N
m M (O U
N
Q
m
Q �_ m
uD c Of
�i.°acQ a
m ti
a (a O` � CD
V ~
7 Q C E
p L
O
cu
C O 'p N N
o0mEL �w65

a
N
a,
U
CD
N Cl)
m ca ca
� f0 (0 a3
I
I
a)
c
Q
()
0_
N
a)
c
co
U)
O
U
O
U)
m
n
a)
O
N
I �
ca
U)
co
I �
I �
rn
c
cu
U
a�
cu
I w
II H
0
Z
I
ICI
I
�n o 0 0
rn rn o 0
n n n n
(3d) UORBAe13
0
n
0
0
0
uo
0
v
0
Cl)
0
N
0
0
LL
d
u
c
N
0
NC)00MM0
ai ob U) ai o
h r- zr — N M U
0
OOOOCOU
r 6 6 U) I-- N
N� V— N Cy) U
N . O 0O0 U
—O � L.0 0 N N
N U
r
rn
O
i
N t� N 00 U
0o m
LO Ul N C)
Q
M
a) O
Q
aci a
m
°o L)~
2 n— c E
a r
0 c O CO
o O
as —
— c
0UmLL W(A

APPENDIX C
MONITORING PROFILE

Y
C
O7
r,
u
4)
O
L
a
M
N
co
' 3
d
U
t
H
3
m �
0
•
•
- - - - A
•
•
it
i�
i
•
O
O
v
O
cII)
O
O
m
O
Ln
N
N
U
C
03
A
O
N 75
c
cu
r
U
Cl
LO
VII
O
Co
O
LO
I
I
O
O O O 00 00 tl-
00 f- 1- Il- I- I-
(g) Uogen913

•L
Q.
U
w
L
a
C
r.+
C
J
T
U
m
r
r
O
N
C) LO (n U')
C) rn am e0
co I- I- r-
( ;3) UOIIBA013
C) LO
o
0
0
v
0
r
N
M
m
C
C
N
N
N
N
O
N
N
C) LO (n U')
C) rn am e0
co I- I- r-
( ;3) UOIIBA013
C) LO
o
0
0
v
0
LO
M
O
N
N
O
O
N
CO
D
M
O
O
Cl
O
R
M
d
O
O
N
.'
N
_
O
O
N
M
N
O
O
0
O
N
t9
d
C
o
am
CD M
0
N N
N
U
N
O
O
C,4
M
D
O
r
O
O
L-
R
a>
CD
}
rn
0
O
N
O
Lo
m
rn
—
LL
04
C)
N
CO
O
O
O
O
m
UJ
Q
4)
(n
y
0
C)
O
�5
O
LO
a0:a
°'
('
a
CL
0
0
0
0
CO
0)
�
E
E
>
>
0
0
Qazz
0

APPENDIX D
MONITORING PEBBLE COUNTS

100%
90%
80%
70%
m
w
60%
w
2 50%
iv
CL
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011 Bankfull Channel Pebble Count, BC -III Cross Section 1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
particle size (mm)
--O—cumulative % —# of particles
35
30
25
20 3
0
v
m
15 a
m
10
5
Size (mm)
D16
0.51
D35
1.4
D50
2.5
D65
45
D84
96
D95
150
Size Distribution
As -Built (1 -09)
Type
mean 7.0
silt/clay
6%
dispersion 21.7
sand
43%
skewness 0.30
gravel
22%
cobble 29%
boulder 0%
Type
silt/clay
As -Built (1 -09)
Yr 10 1-09)
Yr 2 01 -10)
Yr 3 (12 -11)
10%
5%
4%
6%
sand
85%
85%
41%
43%
gravel
5%
10%
26%
22%
cobble
0%
0%
28%
29%
boulder
0%
0%
0%
0%
bedrock
0%
1 0%
1 0%
1 0%

100%
90%
80%
70%
c
m
L
c 60%
c
50%
CL
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2011 Bankfull Channel Pebble Count, BC -III Cross Section 2
auunay aaiu yiarci wvvic uvuuw
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I I
I I
I I
m M 0
0.01 0.1 1 .10 100 1000 10000
particle size (mm)
}cumulative % # of particles
18
16
14
12
7
C
3
10
0
v
8
CD
6
4
2
Size (mm)
D16
8.3
D35
15
D50
24
D65
56
D84
110
D95
160
Size Distribution
mean
30.2
dispersion
3.7
skewness
0.09
Type
silt/clay 4%
sand 4%
gravel 58%
cobble 33%
boulder 0%
Type
silt/clay
As -Built 0 -09)
Yr 1 (11 -09)
Yr 2 01 -10)
Yr 3 (12 -11)
4%
4%
1%
4%
sand
2%
7%
5%
4%
gravel
64%
69%
59%
58%
cobble
29%
22%
32%
33%
boulder
1%
1%
0%
0%
bedrock
0%
0%
0%
0%

APPENDIX E
MONITORING PHOTOGRAPHS

N
O
N
z
A
a
�a
�o
A
W
W
A
W
x
U
d
N
U N
CU
OA
w �
3 �
o °~
A
m�
� 3
a -d
cn
ae �
� U
U
� 3
oa �
O M
o U
Qr M
U

F
z
w
Uo
� N
M
N
a
w
w
F
a
w
U
a�
W
N
O
O
G1.
U
Y
W
�I
�M
W
r�
O
Y
O
A�
W

z
w
��
U o
� N
M
N
a
w
as
w
F
a
w
U
GC1
a�
W
m
N
O
O
a
U
GO
Y
W
x
GG
0
0
a
U
Pq

MITIGATION AREA BC -I PHOTOS

■
ill *
0

F
z
0
U
O
F
O
�x
U a''
OC1 �W
a
d
zA
d
W
F
W
I
an
c
�U
3
a�
N
C
O
a
0
0
a
b
a
3
0
0
a
O
O
bA
C
�U
3
a�
N
Q
O
a
O
0
a
r;
b
0
3
0
0
a
a�
3
on
c
�U
W
3
N
O
a
0
0
a
b
3
0
0

H
z
0
U
O
H
O
�x
U py
a
d
A
z
a
H
a�
bA
C
'U
w
3
a�
a
'o
a
0
0
N
'O
U
'3
0
0
0
a
0
'U
3
a�
c
'o
a
0
0
a
N
b
a�
N
3
0
0
a
U

F
z
0
U
O
F
O
�x
U p"'
A dd
a
d
A
z
d
a
F
J,
a�
a0
O
�U
w
3
N
At
O
O
a
O
O
a
N
4t
.O
i�
N
3
0
0
a
0
C
�U
w
3
N
Q
�O
f1,
O
O
L1,
N
'C
N
3
M
0
0
a
U

O
F
O
x
a
Q
U�
i
a
F
W
cd"
bD
0
0
a
N
'O
N
3
0
0
a
a.
�b
0
0
a
b
3
M
0
0
a
U

MITIGATION AREA BC -II PHOTOS

M�
W
a
U�A
A
z
a
H
w
J
a�
wD
Q
�U
3
a�
a
'o
a
0
0
a
b
3
N
O
O
a
.1:
O
C
�
"..
'U
Mg
3
r:
c
0
a
0
0
a
b
a�
3
0
0
a
m
O
O
a
U
CG

a
4V

EH
z
0
U
O
H
O
�x
~a
UQ
zA
d
a
H
w
a�
M
�U
3
a�
ri
a
'o
a
0
0
a
b
a�
3
0
0
0
a
0
'U
3
a�
ri
0
'o
a
0
0
a
b
a�
3
0
0
a
U
GU

F-F
z
0
U
O
H
O
�x
•a
U�
A�
d
A
z
a
H
w
r
G
a�
bA
U
3
0
0
a
0
0
a
b
3
0
0
a
0
�U
w
3
c
0
0
0
-o
3
M
0
0
A..
5
0
V)
w 'v
3
a�
U
W

MITIGATION AREA BC -III PHOTOS

ri
i

1-\
F+
z
0
U
O
E�
O
�x
�a
�LTj
A
z
a
H
c�
a�
on
C
�U
3
a�
N
O
O
0.
O
O
a
b
3
O
O
a,
O
r_
�U
Ag
3
a�
N
O
O.,
O
O
a
3
O
Y
O
a
U

O
F
O
x
a
~o
U E"
�W
O
a
U
i Flo
v�
X
U
a1
a�
a
0
U
N
O
N
� an
Cq �
N A
O
O
a�
3
a�
a
v�
J
l•J
0
0
>r
U
N
y
ti
O
2M
x
= w
o c
� o
r. -v
O
o •�
U
a W
U
r
a
O
w
R
a,
r:
X
U
Oq
a�
4
a
0
U
N
O
U
U
oA
00 �
ri
o �
0
i1+ .�

O
H
O
x
a
�z
~C)
U E''
�W
O
a
U
N
U
O
O
a
N
O
O
U
N
ti
O
U
U
0 w
o
O
w�
rl
N
U
GG
0
O
N
Q
O
i+
U
N
O
U
N
a0,
� 3
� o
N b
O
0.—
U
a
U
sa.
0
W
P
c
�U
w

0
O
x
�a
�W
U�
O
a
U
a0
C
•U
C�
�i
N
n
U
U
Cq
N
N
ti
O
F,
U
x
a�
a�
U
N cd
O 'O
� �bA
a •�
a
r
U
by
Q
4
I
b
3
0
b
U
W

O
O
x
0-.4a
�W
U�
Oq �
O
a
U
bq
C
'U
W
�i
U
N
? R
U
WE
C-4
_N
v, y
O U
a�
c�
U c.
GQ
o�
a •�
on
'U
w
N
U
U
N
U
O
w
U
a�
a�
U
rn
rn
0
o
o �
a�
U
F
ao
w 4
F
r;
c
3
0
b

O
H
O
x
�a
�W
V�
a.1 �
O
a
U
'ob
on
�U
W
N
M
U
M
It
N
G."
C�
y
ti
O
U
0
0
O
a
on
0
�U
A
bD
M
U
M
O
U
o�
O
0
a
v

BRUSH CREEK LINE -OF- SIGHT PHOTOS

F
x
w
O
W
z
a
O
F
O
x
a
rm
a�
oq
0
�U
W
3
a�
r-:
0
'o
a,
0
0
a
v�
O
a
N
O
O
.0
a
0
'U
w
3
a�
a
'o
a
0
0
v�
O
a
r:
0
0
a
CIO
O
a

M
O
H
F O
w
O
w
z
a
a�
on
a
�U
W
3
N
�O
a
0
0
A,
v�
O
a
N
O
O
a
0
�U
3
a�
N
r.+
�O
a
0
0
a
v�
O
a
0
0
O

H
x
w
0
w
z
a
aq
'U
w
3
'o
0
0
a
O
a
N
O
O
a
0
'U
w
3
c
'o
a
0
0
a
O
a
0
0
o.
w
O
a

H
H O
xa
w�0
w
z
a
a�
04
w
3
a�
Y
'o
a
0
Y
0
a.
v�
O
a
N
O
O
a
0
�U
w
3
a�
Y
c
'o
a
0
Y
0.
O
Y
A
rA
O
a

F
w
O
W
a
O
H
O
a
d
zd
d
a
F
Y
a�
an
a
�U
W
3
a�
N
Y
�O
(1,
O
Y
O
a
va
O
N
O
O
a
0
co
�U
w
3
N
Y
•O
a
0
Y
0
a
O
a
0
Y
0
a
O
.a

'MI 1
w -
C%1
O
O
a

ir e
A
OL v
LP -1-11
-
#pz
ILI,

_ r
s 0 - WF --.
J '
;�4

f a
K
i.
a
r
1
Y
k.
•
f a
K
i.
a
r
1
Y
k.

APPENDIX F
MONITORING WELL DATA

T
2d
7
O
0
U
m
�rT -i-I I T -T -T T 1 I 1- 1 I 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I 11 I 1 I
OOI�C fl��fiMN�O�NM�t!') COf�0000�NM�t� COf�0000�NM��COI�0000�NM
'''''''' '— �� N N N N N N N N N N M M M M
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
(sayOUI) U01jena13
a)
m
E o
a) N
L) o0
a)
.fl
E O
O r,:
Z
a)
O O
+- N
U
O
N
E o
CL
a) N
Q�
in
=3o
O N
Q
r
r C
M N
E
co
� N
U
T �
fB O
= r
Cl O
Q N
L �
i O
f0 N
r
(0
:3 O
� N
a)
LL
(0
=3 O
C: N
fB
co
(D cn IOU
cm ccm
Or 0
�rT -i-I I T -T -T T 1 I 1- 1 I 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I 11 I 1 I
OOI�C fl��fiMN�O�NM�t!') COf�0000�NM�t� COf�0000�NM��COI�0000�NM
'''''''' '— �� N N N N N N N N N N M M M M
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
(sayOUI) U01jena13
a)
m
E o
a) N
L) o0
a)
.fl
E O
O r,:
Z
a)
O O
+- N
U
O
N
E o
CL
a) N
Q�
in
=3o
O N
Q
r
r C
M N
E
co
� N
U
T �
fB O
= r
Cl O
Q N
L �
i O
f0 N
r
(0
:3 O
� N
a)
LL
(0
=3 O
C: N
fB

R7
d
CD
O
0
U
m
001-C DLO IT MN�-Or--NMqT LACOIl- a0 CF) 0 NM,q-ln COr-0000 NMIt LO tOfl- 0O00 NM
NNCVCVN('MMMCM
r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r
(SO43Ul) U011BA813
L
a)
Eo
U N
0
L
�
E O _
a) N
O ti
Z
ti
L
a)
0
U N
0
a)
E O
CL (6
/A L
W
��
=3o
O N
Q
O .@
04 E
H
a)
c O
� N
L
Ca O
v
QO
Q N
L �
i O
cu N
2
CD
L O
N
a)
LL
r
O
C N
N
IF,
man
il
EN
I
001-C DLO IT MN�-Or--NMqT LACOIl- a0 CF) 0 NM,q-ln COr-0000 NMIt LO tOfl- 0O00 NM
NNCVCVN('MMMCM
r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r
(SO43Ul) U011BA813
L
a)
Eo
U N
0
L
�
E O _
a) N
O ti
Z
ti
L
a)
0
U N
0
a)
E O
CL (6
/A L
W
��
=3o
O N
Q
O .@
04 E
H
a)
c O
� N
L
Ca O
v
QO
Q N
L �
i O
cu N
2
CD
L O
N
a)
LL
r
O
C N
N

.O
O
U
m
lilt
4
4.
oil
IIIIIIII
IPPMMMI
W.
"Pop
Me Ira
OPP
UJ
....
OOP_ (Ot.f)Iq MN�O�NM�fInCOf�0000TNMgl wr*-000O�NM gq,OW11- mmav -- M
N(VNNNNNNNNMC'MCMC7
(SO43UI) uOIJen913
L
a)
E
a) N
L)
a) 00
AL,
W �
EO
a) N
O r,.:
Z
ti
(D
_C,�
0
U N
O
m r.
EO
a) N
Q
m
(n L
CD
_T_
�o
OF N
Q
��
O .@
N E
H
ui
a)
c O
:3 N
N
QO
Q N
L �
i O
(0 N
i O
� N
a)
LL
C�
N
f0

It
d
C
C
O
U
m
OTC OC n�MN�O�NM��C 01�a0OO�NM�t !')COf�ODOO.— NM��COI�OOOO�NM
NNNCVNMMMCM
(sagDUI) uOIJEA919
a�
Eo
N N
M
0
N �
NO
0
Z
N �
0 O
+� N
U
L
E
N N
c�
C0
c�
Do
O N
Q
CO � �
� C
O
CN
L
W
c O
:3 N
LO
c4 O
2N
= r
Q O
Q N
L
O
c0 N
2
Co T--
L O
L N
N
LL
N r"
=3 O
C: N
co
women
4CM coo))
E-
r
MW
OTC OC n�MN�O�NM��C 01�a0OO�NM�t !')COf�ODOO.— NM��COI�OOOO�NM
NNNCVNMMMCM
(sagDUI) uOIJEA919
a�
Eo
N N
M
0
N �
NO
0
Z
N �
0 O
+� N
U
L
E
N N
c�
C0
c�
Do
O N
Q
CO � �
� C
O
CN
L
W
c O
:3 N
LO
c4 O
2N
= r
Q O
Q N
L
O
c0 N
2
Co T--
L O
L N
N
LL
N r"
=3 O
C: N
co

T-
O
U
m
COI-C Otf) �MN�O �NM�It )COt�0000�- NMtt�CpI�0000�NMd lnCD1�0000�NM
f I I I . . . I CVNNNNCVCVNNCVC'MCMMM
(sag3UI) UOIIena13
a)
Eo
a) N
U
a) co
-�
a) C14
Z
_�
0
U N
O
m
=3o
� N
7
Q
=3o
F-
L
a)
c O
:3 N
L�
N
QO
Q N
L �
i O
CU N
2
SI-
CU
i O
N
a)
U-
CO
=3 O
C N
(B
ii
III
1111111111111111111
poll
pip
11111111now-
Emmonammmowd
-
IN
MOM
-1"
Naomi
COI-C Otf) �MN�O �NM�It )COt�0000�- NMtt�CpI�0000�NMd lnCD1�0000�NM
f I I I . . . I CVNNNNCVCVNNCVC'MCMMM
(sag3UI) UOIIena13
a)
Eo
a) N
U
a) co
-�
a) C14
Z
_�
0
U N
O
m
=3o
� N
7
Q
=3o
F-
L
a)
c O
:3 N
L�
N
QO
Q N
L �
i O
CU N
2
SI-
CU
i O
N
a)
U-
CO
=3 O
C N
(B

3
0
U
m
-ill
own
PIP
Aipl llmoimo:: m -
,moo::iiiii�r�lr�f
mm
X1111 III�IIII�111 ������ --
11
__■_■111'1
II ■ ■ ■11� ■ ■����iiil li!'::�::i�
-- '111�Allliii�
ilil 11111IT;�a1�
1111 IIIIAII���;;;
IRS!
n�� = =� - •
■�'
lop! ■••
CO
Im
!eM,
J-
/�
rA� �-.i ■�1I
11Nil
LU
:�� ■��� INK
Opp( pl[) dMN�O�NMdtnC pf�oO00�NM�� c0I�a0rnO�NMd�c�I�a000�NM
NNNNCMMMCM
(SO43UI) U01jen813
a)
E
U N
a) 06
a)
m
N
a)
o
Z
a)
O 0 N
O
E o
a) N
Q
CL
C/) L_
O
N�
O
7 O N
Q
5 N
,6,
a)
C: CD
=3 N
CU O
N
v
Qo
Q N
O
(d N
2
i>_,�
M�
` O
� N
a)
LL
=3 O
C N
(0

V
d
.O
i
U
m
L
(D
Eo
N N
U
N CO
^L,
W �
E O
(D N
O1--
Z
ti
L
O C)
� N
U
O
O �
EO
O N
Q C6
O
co L
7 O
OF N
Q
CO
C
O
CN E
H
LCD
N �
C O
3 N
L
CU CD
2N
= r
Q O
Q N
r
O
f9 N
2
I
Co •-
O O
N
N
U-
CU
O O
OOf�C fl��MN�O�NM��C OI�0000�NM��C4f�0�00�NM� '�COf�0000�NM O N
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ��- �- •- �- �- �--•- �- �- NNNNNNNNNNMMMM f0
(sa43UI) UOIjBA9j3

le
a�
C
O
U
m
CC) I -(OLr),t'MNr— O NM itLO COf-0000 NM' U) CO I-000O�NM cTLOCDr-OO CF) O�NM
' ' CVC C?C?C?
(sayOuI) u01;enal3
L
a�
E
N N
N M
L
N
-
E O _
> N
O
Z
ti
N �
0
U N
O
E
N N
0-
N
♦A L
CD
c
:3 O
O N
a
N
L,
c o
� N
U-i�
r
(6 N
Q O
Q N
L �
O
(0 N
N
O
� N
N T
LL
CB
O
N
(6
ME
--
logo
III'
=-
IN
cc 0
o
a
Co UJ
CC) I -(OLr),t'MNr— O NM itLO COf-0000 NM' U) CO I-000O�NM cTLOCDr-OO CF) O�NM
' ' CVC C?C?C?
(sayOuI) u01;enal3
L
a�
E
N N
N M
L
N
-
E O _
> N
O
Z
ti
N �
0
U N
O
E
N N
0-
N
♦A L
CD
c
:3 O
O N
a
N
L,
c o
� N
U-i�
r
(6 N
Q O
Q N
L �
O
(0 N
N
O
� N
N T
LL
CB
O
N
(6

Y?"
a�
.O
C
O
T
U
m
W
N
L �
2 E
M d
O
C Z
O C
N O
fC H
0 CO
d �
d � O
M C Co
Im Q
SE m 3
(QO d ` O
Q t L-
0 3 — Q1Q
� 0 In Lu
L
E O
a) N
U
U 06
0
L
N �
E O
N N
O ti
Z
L
a
O O
�-. N
U
O
N �
E O
N N
C
Q
N
(n L
c
O
T N
7
a
�o
=3 N
H
a) r
c O
:3 N
L
(B O
= r
O
Q
a N
t �
U O
(6 N
Z>
(9 �
` O
N
N
LL
-Cu
O
OOt�C fl��MN�O�NM��C Of�o000�NM�1 'tnC01�0000.- NM�tnCOI�0000�NM C N
CVNNNNN(VNNMMMCM (a
(sayOUl) UOIIBAel3

.O
O
U
m
di
T ill pmmw
MIAMI CO
WIN 0
awpq
ch
For
a�
E o
U N
0 M
N N
Z
-0 C) O N
O
N N
Q(
//) L
cn
c
0) O N
=
Q
� (D
a) �
C: C)
� N
L�
ca O
2N
QO
Q N
L �
O
(0 N
CU
O
Q N
N
LL
�C)
OOf�C fl��tMN�O�NM��C Of�000 )O�NM��Cflf�o�00�NMICtLOCflI�0000�NM C: N
NNNNNNMCMCMM
(SO43UI) u01jena13

0
.O
0
U
m
lilt
1111111111111111111111111111111
MUM
cm
map
WAR
uE
rip
Y
Ill
OOf�C O��MNr- O�- NM��C OI�OOOO�NM�� COI�O�OO�NM'�t�COf�D000�NM
- ��------- N1V1V1VNNNNNNMMMM
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
(S8g3Uj) u01jen913
a�
E o
N N
0 M
E O
O
Z
N `-
O
U N
O
N .-
m
a) O CN
a
CL (
co
T�
�o
O N
7
Q
CO 4)
� r
C
:3 O
CN
U-i,
c O
=3 N
L�
cU O
N
Q O
Q N
t �
2 O
m N
2
L, �
cu
7 O
- N
(L) -:
LL
s�
(�
O
N
cv

Co
O
O
U
m
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiillillillillillilI
PM
rA�=
1M
Awl
001-C DLn I-MN�O�NMqTIACOP- 0000�NM tn Cp�0000�N MIT V)(DI-0000�NM
NC'MMMCM
(sa43UI) U01lenal3
a)
Eo
a) N
U
a) Oo
i
m
-
EO _
() N
O r--
Z
r
N �
0
U N
O
CL Qc
♦/) L
W
c�
:3o
O N
Q
9+
r �
=3 O .@
H
LO r-
C O
=3 N
L6 �-
N
r
Q O
Q N
t
i

0
O
i
U
m
I --- r--7 11 T I I I I I I I I I 1 1 -I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I
OOf�C�lt) �MN�O�NM�t�C OI�00OO� NM11,owrl- 00OOr.-NMd' Owl- wmor NM
- r- ��NNCVCVCVNNNNNMM(MCM
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
(S94OUI) UOIIBA813
L
(D
Eo
N N
U
N 00
N �
E O
N N
O P,:
Z
O
O N
O
N N
Q�
W
N�
D O
O N
7
Q
N E
L
N �
C O
=3 N
Lfi�
�O
N
= r
Q O
Q N
L �
O
(0 N
2
(6
L O
.Q N
N
LL
(Q �
::3 O
N
(0
mill
o
wo
co
MD 0
I --- r--7 11 T I I I I I I I I I 1 1 -I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I
OOf�C�lt) �MN�O�NM�t�C OI�00OO� NM11,owrl- 00OOr.-NMd' Owl- wmor NM
- r- ��NNCVCVCVNNNNNMM(MCM
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
(S94OUI) UOIIBA813
L
(D
Eo
N N
U
N 00
N �
E O
N N
O P,:
Z
O
O N
O
N N
Q�
W
N�
D O
O N
7
Q
N E
L
N �
C O
=3 N
Lfi�
�O
N
= r
Q O
Q N
L �
O
(0 N
2
(6
L O
.Q N
N
LL
(Q �
::3 O
N
(0

i
C
O
U
m
cD w
N y
t �
E
R d
O
� Z
O C
N O
to H
O c0
N O
Wd O O
C V C 0
C
Cy GN C
C9�mw
O�f�C flLf') �MN�O�NM��( OI�OOOO�NM�I .C)COI�000Oc- NM��CDI�OOOOrNM
NNNNNNNNNNM(MMM
t l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l
(sOyOUI) UOIIBA813
L
a�
E
O N
U
N pp
0
L
N
Eo
N N
O
Z
L
C
Oo
..r N
U
O
O
- _
Eo
N N
.r
Q
O
♦A L
O
� N
Q
CO r d
C
O N
H
L
c o
3 N
M
CCU N CD
G
' —
Q O
Q N
L �
C. O
m N
2
` O
N
O
LL
1
3 O
C N
(D

MONITORING VEGETATIVE DATA SHEETS

HPC2 WETLAND VEGETATION PLOT 2
Tree Type
Tree
Number
Date
10/06/2006
09/27/2007
09/24/2008
08/17/2009
10/11/2010
07/05/2012
Planted S. Unknown
1
A
F
A
F
Planted S. Unknown
2
A
F
A
P
Planted Sp. 2 Unknown
3
A
F
Swamp Chestnut Oak
4
A
F
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Swamp Chestnut Oak
5
A
F
A
F
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Green Ash
6
A
G
A
P
A
P
A
P
Willow Oak
7
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Green Ash
8
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Swamp Chestnut Oak
9
A
G
A
G
Green Ash
10
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
# of Living Trees
General Notes- Live Trees Were Tagged on 10/06.
10/06 Notes: 2 other planted trees that were dead
plot area appears to be representative of entire cell
Restoration Area 2

HPC2 WETLAND VEGETATION PLOT 3
Tree Type
Tree
Number
Date
10/06/2006
09/27/2007
09/24/2008
08/17/2009
10/11/2010
07/05/2012
Green Ash
1
A
F
D
Green Ash
2
A
F
D
Green Ash
3
A
F
D
Shumard Oak
4
A
F
D
Green Ash
5
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Green Ash
6
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Shumard Oak
8
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Shumard Oak
9
A
I G
A
IG
A
G
A
G
Green Ash
10
A
I G
A
IG
A
G
A
G
Green Ash
11
A
I G
A
IG
A
G
A
G
Volunteer Birch
12
A
IG
A
G
A
G
Volunter Green Ash
13
A
G
A
G
A
G
# of Living Trees 41
1
01
1
61
8
8
8
General Notes:
Restoration Area 2

Z
n
Q c
O O
M
O
M
I
W N
� W
N y
w d
o
�
c0 cc)
W c
o
O
O O
O
Q O
M y
M
O W aW
� W
� H a
N
N
F-
co ao
Cl)
W c
o
H J
O
c
Q o
O O
M
O
V
a
W N
� � W
O H a
N H
w d
H
P- co
W c
o
H J
O
n
Q cc
O O
Lo O
O
r-
Cl) Cl)
Cl)
co d H
O H a
O
N y
d
h CO
Cl)
W c
O
H J
O
d a
Q O
O
N O
O
N
F a
C)
N
cF.
m
O
m
W
o
F J
O
N 2
Q co
LO O
N
N N
d
H a
�
O
N c
J
O
� �
u y
W d
o
H H
a
�
=
U
Q
N co
lC
m
N
_O _O
N
d d
H
H
r)
C
f0
W
U
Q
U
L
3
a)
M
C
[0
N
O
a
M
"O
C
(0
N
N
C
f0
3
CL
2
O
m
C
�c
O
E
N
d
E
O
U
to
C
lC
CL
O
N
C
f6
E
a)
m
C
O
.0
O
2

BC I WETLAND VEGETATION PLOT 1
Tree Type
Tree
Number
Date
09/27/2008
09/11/2009
09/15/2010
08/16/2011
River Birch
1
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
River Birch
2
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
River Birch
3
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Shumard Oak
4
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Black Willow
5
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Shumard Oak
6
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Green Ash
7
A
F
A
F
A
F
A
G
Black Willow
8
A
G
Shumard Oak
9
A
G
# of Living Trees 7 7 7 9
General Notes: status: A= Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor
2011 - Nat Regen Maple observed - not recorded

BC I WETLAND VEGETATION PLOT 2
Tree Type
Tree
Number
Date
09/27/2008
09/11/2009
09/15/2010
08/16/2011
Shumard Oak
1
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Shumard Oak
2
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Shumard Oak
3
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Persimmon
4
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Green Ash
5
A
G
D
D
A
G
Persimmon
6
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Shumard Oak
7
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Nat Re en Green Ash
8,9,10
A
G
A
G
Persimmon
11
A
F
Persimmon
12
A
F
# of Living Trees 7 6 9 12
General Notes: status: A= Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor

BC I WETLAND VEGETATION PLOT 3
Tree Type
Tree
Number
Date
09/27/2008
09/11/2009
09/30/2010
08/16/2011
Green Ash
1
A
F
A
G
A
G
A
G
Green Ash
2
A
F
A
G
A
G
A
G
Green Ash
3
A
F
A
G
A
G
A
G
Green Ash
4
A
F
A
G
A
G
A
G
Green Ash
5
A
F
A
G
A
G
A
G
Green Ash
6
A
F
I A
F
A
G
A
G
Green Ash
7
A
F
A
F
A
F
A
G
# of Living Trees
General Notes: status: A= Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor

BC I WETLAND VEGETATION PLOT 4
# of Living Trees
General Notes: status: A= Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor
- -
00
©00000
.. • .
©000000��
.. • .
00�00000�
PIT - T. 6-
# of Living Trees
General Notes: status: A= Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor

0
n
Q o
Lo r-
N
UD IT
IT
y
N
O
N
m
04
04
o
O r
M
_ w
m CU
o �
a�
m
a
Q
N O N O
co
M � M
Q
M
ui o
d n
O
H o
O
N
c
o
N
U N
l9 N
O �
O
o
c) ti M 0
0 00
Q
qT co 'T M
M
N
N
~
O
O
N
J
f'. (O I- LC)
Ln
N
o
m d
o d
F H
_o
n
N N N O
a0
� � � °
IT
N N
~
C00 :)
O
N rn
c
J
U)
10
N
o
_ w
m a>
o �
H F-
CD
O
�
c
N
O
c
N _
O
w H
N (0
Y —
m N
s
N
N M IT
m
O O O O
N in
aaaa
�
U)
O
O_
N
Q
E
(o
v7
7
a
N(0
w
TX)
N
O
z
T
a
m
y
LO
N
O N
f\A Q
N N
U O
Q H
N 00
(O V-
C) O
O O

BC II WETLAND VEGETATION PLOT 1
Tree Type
Tree
Number
Date
09/27/2008
08/17/2009
10/04/2010
09/12/2011
Shumard Oak
1
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
River Birch
2
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Shumard Oak
3
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Shumard Oak
4
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Shumard Oak
5
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
River Birch
6
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Overcup Oak
7
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Nat Re en Green Ash
8
A
G
A
G
Nat Re en Green Ash
9
A
G
A
G
# of Living Trees
General Notes: status: A= Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor

BC II WETLAND VEGETATION PLOT 2
Tree Type
Tree
Number
Date
09/27/2008
08/17/2009
10/04/2010
09/12/2011
Shumard Oak
1
A
G
A
G
A
I G
A
G
Shumard Oak
2
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Shumard Oak
3
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Shumard Oak
4
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Overcup Oak
5
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Overcup Oak
6
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Shumard Oak
7
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Swamp Chestnut Oak
8
A
G
A
G
Shumard Oak
9
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
got Living I rees 9 V is is
General Notes: status: A= Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor

BC II WETLAND VEGETATION PLOT 3
Tree Type
Tree
Number
Date
09/27/2008
08/17/2009
10/04/2010
09/12/2011
Persimmon
1
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Persimmon
2
A
G
A
F
A
F
A
F
Green Ash
3
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Green Ash
4
A
F
A
F
A
F
A
F
Persimmon
5
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Green Ash
6
A
G
A
G
A
G
Swamp Chestnut Oak
7
A
F
A
F
A
F
A
F
Red Maple
8
A
G
# of Living Trees
General Notes: status: A= Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor

BC II WETLAND VEGETATION PLOT 4
Tree Type
Tree
Number
Date
09/27/2008
08/17/2009
10/04/2010
09/12/2011
Shumard Oak
1
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Shumard Oak
2
A
F
A
G
A
G
A
G
Shumard Oak
3
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Shumard Oak
4
A
F
A
G
A
G
Shumard Oak
5
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Persimmon
6
A
P
A
F
A
F
A
F
Swamp Chestnut Oak
7
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Natural Re en Red Maple
8
A
G
A
G
A
G
Natural Re en Red Maple
9
A
G
A
G
A
G
Natural Re en Red Maple
10
A
G
A
G
A
G
# of Living Trees
10 10
General Notes: status: A= Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor

0
�a
Q o
tLo0)M�
_ N y
r ED
Nc
r
J
O
O a0 fl- O
Ch
M
m d
O �
F H
0
CD a
N Co N I�
O
O
Q
v Lo v Co
O d
O ~ �
N
N
16 N
I� W
C '7
_ Cl)
f0 C
O .?
F J
O
a�n
Q O
4Zo 4CO
LO
N N
O
Nc
J
6
# y
CO
c)
f0 �
O .
H H
O
o a
C
CCiLOCCiM
CCD
Q Q
IT Cn IT IT
v
N y
OD
F- .0
O
N �
c
J
o
f� O ti
O
M
� �
—
C13 m
o N
H H
CO
is
C
Y `
f0
C
` C
O
U O —
m
L ~
7
O
U
Q
N
N M It
U) N
0 0 0 0
O
C
aaaa
t- a�
U
m
C_
3
cn
CO
N
O �
N
d
y Q
N O
In Q
C-4 OD
Q r (o
O O O
CL C) O
E
N
Cn
�O
a
N
to
7
to
7
c0
LC)
N
O
z

BC III WETLAND VEGETATION PLOT 1
Tree Type
Tree
Number
Date
09/27/2008
08/25/2009
10/03/2010
09/13/2011
Shumard Oak
1
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Swamp Chestnut Oak
2
A
G
A
F
A
F
A
F
Swamp Chestnut Oak
3
A
G
A
F
A
F
A
F
Shumard Oak
4
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Black Willow
5
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Shumard Oak
6
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Red Maple Nat Re en
7 -13.
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Green Ash Natural Re en
14 -17.
A
G
A
G
A
G
A
G
Black Willow Natural Re en
18
A
G
A
G
A
G
# of Living Trees 17 18 18 18
General Notes: status: A= Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor

BC III WETLAND VEGETATION PLOT 2
# of Living Trees 4 3 3 4
General Notes: status: A= Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor
" Replanted in Feb 2009 following stream work
=.6110F.1
-
0��000000
-
©��000000
# of Living Trees 4 3 3 4
General Notes: status: A= Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor
" Replanted in Feb 2009 following stream work

1- rn
Q N C~O
y O
� � C
Q H O
N
y
# ~ , N IT
�
O
a
_o
Q) CL
CCU
CO
g °
CO
Nr
m
ayi N
Q
� a
H a
0 m
Q
~_
N c
a) cu
J
O
co
M
r
d CB
r-
N
`
#
_ y
N C �'
U Q
f0 N
O �
,O
H H
(0
i
O
(0
N O Qj
m
CL
In
N O
00
a O
_
`' 0c)
F- z
m
N N
r
y
N cc
Q H a
O
N
J
- Ch
_
o
N
6
a C` ODD
Q O Q N to
a°i m
~ .0
m
c
H H
�
O
a
c
m
� a
0 m
~_
a) cu
d CB
CO N
`
N C �'
U Q
,O
(0
i
N
_ _
(0
N O Qj
m
0
p
N O
a a
F- z
T
U
N
7
CA
Cu
N
O �
a
� Q
Q FO
—
N
CO N
� C'7
Q Co

LOS I WETLAND VEGETATION PLOT 1
# of Living Trees
General Notes- • status: A= Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor
- - - -- - - - - -- - - --
# of Living Trees
General Notes- • status: A= Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor

LOS I WETLAND VEGETATION PLOT 2
# of Living Trees
General Notes: status: A =Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor
-
- .
# of Living Trees
General Notes: status: A =Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor

LOS I WETLAND VEGETATION PLOT 3
# of Living Trees
General Notes: status: A= Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor
-
# of Living Trees
General Notes: status: A= Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor

LOS II WETLAND VEGETATION PLOT 1
# of Living Trees 9
General Notes. status: A= Alive, D =Dead
condition. G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor
ff IMETMIM
# of Living Trees 9
General Notes. status: A= Alive, D =Dead
condition. G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor

LOS II WETLAND VEGETATION PLOT 2
# of Living Trees 5
General Notes. status: A= Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor
MR; •
# of Living Trees 5
General Notes. status: A= Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor

LOS II WETLAND VEGETATION PLOT 3
# of Living Trees 11
General Notes: status- A= Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor
re
# of Living Trees 11
General Notes: status- A= Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor

LOS II WETLAND VEGETATION PLOT 4
# of Living Trees
General Notes: status: A= Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor
fir-Mr, IT •
-
# of Living Trees
General Notes: status: A= Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor

LOS III WETLAND VEGETATION PLOT 1
# of Living Trees 9
General Notes: status. A= Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor
•
00���������
# of Living Trees 9
General Notes: status. A= Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor

LOS III WETLAND VEGETATION PLOT 2
# of Living Trees 12
General Notes: status: A= Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor
KRI
UZI MI I I I I I Lei I
TO
# of Living Trees 12
General Notes: status: A= Alive, D =Dead
condition: G =Good, F =Fair, P =Poor

to
O
EL
_N
Q
E
m
U)
N
7
in
O
Z
_O
d
N
U
Q
N
(O
O
O
C
(6
O
J
C
7
N
f6
N
Q
O
H
O
LO
O
B
m n
U C
Q O
LO
O ai
N
_
O
F
N
N
m
o �
_ rn
m c
H J
_O
N d
U C
Q O
N �
N N
� l0
r
F �
O
N
N
N
o �
0
# rn
W c
o .?
F- J
0
a� n
U C
Q O
N
_M
O
~ �
N
w
o
_ rn
m c
o .>
H J
_O
N a
U C
Q O
N
y N
O
~
N
N
N
O �
# ~
_ 03
f6 C
O ,>
H J
O
CL
�O(flCflO W(OCO�
to
Q O'T
LO
M M� M� ti
M
.o
C'7 U
O N
� m
r
H a
O
N
CD
N
~
y
W Cfl O Q) lf) 0 0 CN
000
_ rn
o .>
F J
ca
C
N
O
L
M
-
O
O
C
C
N
O
_
04
r N M `- N co .- +�
m
f6
FLFLE aaa
U
N
O.
a)
000000000
m
to
O
EL
_N
Q
E
m
U)
N
7
in
O
Z
_O
d
N
U
Q
N
(O
O
O
C
(6
O
J
C
7
N
f6
N
Q
O
H
O
LO
O

APPENDIX H
BC -III REPAIR PLAN

I / v -

L
Q
O.
Y _
c
-- - - \
\ • 3
�b \
\
7
a
H�
� Il
MV
W
0
a x °z F
� a
4' W
<g
N
a�
o0
I I I I
I I I
I I I I
I 1 I
I I I
g I I
Q V
y
•�
O �¢
a
o
I � Iy1
I I
0.
Q
U
•�
U
I I I I
I I I
�
L.
y
/',
�
a'
I I I I
I
U
U
I' I I I
� I
�•^
N
Q
Y
aj
O
I I I
x
>
'Ln
—
I
aj
ccT
s
y 0
o
d I
G
O
I I I
I I I I
I I
I I I
O
u
C
E
c
y
'M
_
G
cz
U
L
Q
O.
Y _
c
-- - - \
\ • 3
�b \
\
7
a
H�
� Il
MV
W
0
a x °z F
� a
4' W
<g
N
a�
o0
Q V
O �¢
a
o
0.
Q
U
`e