20180866 Ver 1_As-Built Plans_2021_20210326

Mitigation Project Information Upload
ID#*
20180866
Select Reviewer:*
Version* 1
Erin Davis
Initial Review Completed Date 03/30/2021
Mitigation Project Submittal - 3/26/2021
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?* r Yes r No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
rJ Stream 17 Wetlands r Buffer r Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:*
Kelly Phillips
Project Information
I D # : *
20180866
Existing ID##
Project Type: C' DMS r Mitigation Bank
Project Name: ShavWs Run Mitigation Site
County: Columbus
Document Information
..................................................................................................................................................................
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation As -Built Plans
File Upload:
Signature
.............................................
Print Name:*
Signature:*
Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Version:
*1
Existing Version
ShavvsRun_100055_AB_2021.pdf 2.72MB
ShawsRun_100055_MY0_2021.pdf 7.11MB
Rease upload only one R]Fof the complete file that needs to be submitted...
Kelly Phillips
.el P1/4os

MY0 FINAL MONITORING REPORT

SHAW’S RUN MITIGATION SITE
Columbus County, North Carolina
Lumber River Basin
Cataloging Unit 03040203

DMS Project No. 100055
Full Delivery Contract No. 7515
DMS RFP No. 16-007337
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2018-01169
DWR Project No. 2018-0866

Data Collection: June 2020-January 2021
Submission: March 2021

Prepared for:

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699-1652

February 26, 2021
Mr. JD Hamby
Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes Street
Suite 211
Raleigh, N.C. 27604

Subject: Draft As-Built Baseline Monitoring Report (MY0) for the
Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site
Lumber River Basin – CU# 03040203– Columbus County
DMS Project ID No. 100055
Contract # 7515

Dear Mr. Hamby:

On January 27, 2021, the NCDEQ – Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) received the Draft
As-Built Baseline Monitoring Report (MY0) for the Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site from Restoration
Systems, LLC.

The report establishes the as-built conditions at the project site. Anticipated mitigation on the site
includes 2,285.000 linear feet of stream restoration for a total of 2,285.000 Stream Mitigation Units
(SMUs) and 5.852 acres of riparian wetland Re-establishment and 0.103 acres of riparian wetland
Preservation for a total of 5.862 Wetland Mitigation Units (WMUs). The following are our
comments on the draft report and as-built/ record drawings:

Vegetation:
The changes in vegetation are shown on the drawings, but not in the report. Describe these
modifications in the baseline, along with justification. Also, Quercus alba is showing on the
planted monitoring table, but not added to planted list on drawings.

Table 6 lists Quercus pagoda with 400 total stems but Sheet 4H shows the total to be 300. Please
update these and provide the correct total.

General: The Mitigation Plan describes floodplain interceptors, and shallow ephemeral pool
features with woody debris in them. Agency comments also discuss the ephemeral pools. Please
call these features out on the figures and describe the structures in the report text.

General – Table 17. Monitoring Summary of the IRT approved mitigation plan indicates pre-
construction benthic macroinvertebrate sampling (Qual 4) would be conducted at two separate

locations. The next scheduled benthic sampling is in year 3 but it would be helpful to include the
pre-construction results in the baseline report. As provided for in Appendix F; please include the
benthic results with habitat assessment forms along with the final electronic support files with
sampling locations and associated data/ graphs.

Section 1.1: Thank you for including a description of the significant deviations made during
construction. Please add a brief narrative describing the woody material added to the riffles.

Plan Sheet 01 - Title Page: Please change the NC DWR number to 2018-0866.

Digital Deliverable:
Please submit the streamflow gauge and rain-soil gauge features with unique ID’s that will relate
to the data.

Note that the table included with the profile figures only shows a subset of the data. Either include
all of the data or remove the tables and include the figure only.

Some of the outer topo lines shown on sheets 4A – 4G appear to be outside of the study area and
are not correctly displayed. Please limit the topo to valid areas.

Provide the .dwg files of the As-Built Plans with the final electronic submittal.
https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/mitigation-services/dms-vendors/rfp-forms-templates

At your earliest convenience, please provide a written response letter addressing the DMS
comments provided and two (2) final hard copies of the revised/ updated As-Built Baseline
Monitoring Report (MY0). The comment response letter should be included in the revised report
after the report cover.

Please also include a final electronic copy of the report with the final electronic support files on a
CD or flash drive. The final deliverables should be sent to my attention (address below). If you
have any questions, please contact me at any time at [phone] or email me at [e-mail] .

Sincerely,

Kelly Phillips
Project Manager
NCDEQ – Division of Mitigation Services
610 East Center Avenue
Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115
[phone]
cc: file

March 10, 2021

Kelly Phillips
Project Manager
NCDEQ – Division of Mitigation Services
610 East Center Avenue
Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115

Subject: Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site: As-Built Comment Responses
DMS Contract #: 7515; DMS Project ID: 100055; RFP # 16-007337

Dear Mr. Philips:

Restoration Systems, LLC is pleased to provide you with the Final As-Built Baseline Monitoring
Report (MY0) for the Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site. We have addressed your comments as
follows.

Vegetation:
The changes in vegetation are shown on the drawings, but not in the report. Describe these
modifications in the baseline, along with justification. Also, Quercus alba is showing on the
planted monitoring table, but not added to planted list on drawings.
A footnote was added to Table 6 explaining the planting modifications from Mitigation Plan to
As-Built. Additionally, the Quercus alba appears to have been mis-identified and has been
changed to Quercus sp. These stems will be more easily identifiable after leaf-out during year 1
monitoring.

Table 6 lists Quercus pagoda with 400 total stems but Sheet 4H shows the total to be 300.
Please update these and provide the correct total.
Sheet 4H has been updated to reflect the correct total of stems planted.

General: The Mitigation Plan describes floodplain interceptors, and shallow ephemeral pool
features with woody debris in them. Agency comments also discuss the ephemeral pools.
Please call these features out on the figures and describe the structures in the report text.
It was determined during site planning and construction that the floodplain interceptors and
ephemeral pools were not necessary, and therefore, they were not constructed.

General – Table 17. Monitoring Summary of the IRT approved mitigation plan indicates
preconstruction benthic macroinvertebrate sampling (Qual 4) would be conducted at two
separate locations. The next scheduled benthic sampling is in year 3 but it would be helpful to
include the pre-construction results in the baseline report. As provided for in Appendix F;

please include the benthic results with habitat assessment forms along with the final electronic
support files with sampling locations and associated data/ graphs.
The preconstruction benthic results were unavailable at the time of the draft submittal;
however, we have received them from the lab and included them in this submittal.
Additionally, the sampling locations have been included on the CCPV and shapefiles were
included in the digital submittal.

Section 1.1: Thank you for including a description of the significant deviations made during
construction. Please add a brief narrative describing the woody material added to the riffles.
The following description of the woody material in the riffles was added to Section 1.1: “This
material consisted of brush, limbs, branches, etc. that were placed in the riffles and covered
with sand substrate to enhance in-stream habitat.”

Plan Sheet 01 - Title Page: Please change the NC DWR number to 2018-0866.
Updated.

Digital Deliverable:
Please submit the streamflow gauge and rain-soil gauge features with unique ID’s that will
relate to the data.
Stream gauge features were labeled based on their respective locations. The rain gauge and
soil temperature logger are in the same location; the erroneous feature in the shapefile was
removed.

Note that the table included with the profile figures only shows a subset of the data. Either
include all of the data or remove the tables and include the figure only.
All of the data is included in the excel file, but it will not all fit on the figure. The data tables
have been removed from the profile figure in the PDF submittal.

Some of the outer topo lines shown on sheets 4A – 4G appear to be outside of the study area
and are not correctly displayed. Please limit the topo to valid areas.
Updated.

Provide the .dwg files of the As-Built Plans with the final electronic submittal.
https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/mitigation-services/dms-vendors/rfp-forms-templates
You will find the .dwg files in the electronic submittal.

MY0 FINAL MONITORING REPORT

SHAW’S RUN MITIGATION SITE
Columbus County, North Carolina
Lumber River Basin
Cataloging Unit 03040203

DMS Project No. 100055
Full Delivery Contract No. 7515
DMS RFP No. 16-007337
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2018-01169
DWR Project No. 2018-0866

Data Collection: June 2020-January 2021
Submission: March 2021

Prepared for:

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699-1652

Prepared by:

And

Restoration Systems, LLC Axiom Environmental, Inc.
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211 218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
Contact: Worth Creech Contact: Grant Lewis
919-755-9490 (phone) 919-215-1693 (phone)
919-755-9492 (fax)

Draft MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100055) Table of Contents page i
Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Columbus County, North Carolina March 2021
TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY......................................................................................................... 1 
1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND, COMPONENTS, AND STRUCTURE .................................................... 1 
1.2 PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................ 3 
1.3 SUCCESS CRITERIA ................................................................................................................ 5 
2.0 METHODS ............................................................................................................................. 6 
2.1 MONITORING ......................................................................................................................... 6 
3.0 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................... 9 

APPENDICES

Appendix A. Visual Assessment Data
Figure 1. Current Conditions Plan View
Table 4A-B. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Table 5. Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Vegetation Plot Photographs
Appendix B. Vegetation Plot Data
Table 6. Planted Bare-Root Woody Vegetation
Table 7. Vegetation Plot Counts and Densities
Table 8. Vegetation Plot Data Table from Vegetation Data Entry Tool
Appendix C. Stream Geomorphology Data
Cross-Sections with Annual Overlays
Longitudinal Profile
Table 9A-B. Baseline Stream Data Summary Tables
Table 10. Cross-Section Morphology Monitoring Summary
Appendix D. Hydrologic Data
Groundwater Gauge Soil Profiles
Appendix E. Project Timeline and Contact Info
Table 11. Project Timeline
Table 12. Project Contacts
Appendix F. Other Data
Preconstruction Benthic Results
Preconstruction Benthic Habitat Assessment Data Forms
Appendix G. As-Built Plan Sheets

Draft MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100055) page 1
Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Columbus County, North Carolina March 2021
1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY
Restoration Systems, LLC has established the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
(NCDMS) Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site.
1.1 Project Background, Components, and Structure
The Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site (hereafter referred to as the “Site”) encompasses 9.44 acres of
disturbed forest and agricultural fields along warm water, unnamed tributaries to Greene Branch.
The Site is located approximately 2 miles west of Chadbourn, NC south of NC Highway 76 in
Columbus County.

Prior to construction, Site land use consisted of agricultural row crops and disturbed forest. Row
crop production extended to, and abutted, ditched stream margins. Herbaceous vegetation and a
few shrubby species grew within the ditches, which were regularly maintained by bush hogging
and herbicide application. As the ditch descended the valley towards Greene Branch, soils change
from the Goldsboro and Lynchburg soil series (moderately well and somewhat poorly drained) to
the Muckalee soil series (poorly drained), and disturbed forest vegetation became more prevalent
along stream margins and floodplains. Stream channels were cleared, dredged and straightened,
plowed annually for row crops, eroded vertically and laterally, and received extensive sediment
and nutrient inputs from agriculture chemicals and sediment. The entire stream channel was
ditched and cleared of vegetation which contributed to sediment export from the Site. In addition,
streamside wetlands were cleared and drained by channel downcutting, drain tile installation, and
adjacent land uses. Preconstruction Site conditions resulted in degraded water quality, a loss of
aquatic habitat, reduced nutrient and sediment retention, and unstable channel characteristics (loss
of horizontal flow vectors that maintain pools and an increase in erosive forces to channel bed and
banks). Site restoration activities restored riffle-pool morphology, aided in energy dissipation,
increased aquatic habitat, stabilized channel banks, and greatly reduced sediment loss from
channel banks.

Proposed Site restoration activities generated 2285.000 Stream Mitigation Units (SMUs) and
5.862 Riparian Wetland Mitigation Units (WMUs) as described in Table 1.

Additional activities that occurred at the Site included the following.
 Planting 7.7 acres of the Site with 8300 stems (planted species are included in Table 6
[Appendix B]).

Deviations from the construction plans included the following.
 Easement was updated from the construction plans. Construction plans had an older
easement that was not the proper (recorded) easement boundary.
 Woody material was placed in the channel riffles. This material consisted of brush, limbs,
branches, etc. that were placed in the riffles and covered with sand substrate to enhance in-
stream habitat.
 Several log cross vanes were not installed due to Site conditions, including low slope
causing the vanes to not be necessary for bank stabilization. Log vanes removed from the
project include stations 0+30, 7+20, 7+85, and 9+10 along UT1, and stations 0+30, 0+80,
1+10, 1+75, 2+05, 2+40, and 4+05 along UT2.
OriginalMitigation Original Original OriginalPlan As‐Built Mitigation Restoration MitigationProject Segment Ft/Ac Ft/Ac Category Level Ratio (X:1) Credits CommentsStreamUT1 1919 1912 Warm R 1.00000 1,919.000UT2 366 366 Warm R 1.00000 366.000Total: 2,285.000WetlandWetland R 5.852 5.852 R REE 1.00000 5.852Wetland E 0.103 0.103 R P 10.00000 0.010Total: 5.862Project CreditsRiparian Non‐Rip CoastalWarm Cool Cold Wetland Wetland MarshRestoration 2,285.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Re‐establishment 5.852 0.000 0.000Rehabilitation 0.000 0.000 0.000Enhancement 0.000 0.000 0.000Enhancement I 0.000 0.000 0.000Enhancement II 0.000 0.000 0.000Creation 0.000 0.000 0.000Preservation 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.010 0.000Totals 2,285.000 0.000 0.000 5.862 0.000 0.000Total Stream Credit 2,285.000Total Wetland Credit 5.862Table 1. Shaw's Run (ID‐100055) Project Mitigation Quantities and CreditsRestoration LevelStream

Draft MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100055) page 3
Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Columbus County, North Carolina March 2021
Site design was completed in March 2019. Construction started on March 13, 2020 and ended
within a final walkthrough on June 25, 2020. The Site was planted on December 20, 2020.
Completed project activities, reporting history, completion dates, project contacts are summarized
in Tables 11-12 (Appendix E).
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives
Project goals were based on the Lumber River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) report (NCEEP
2008) and on-site preconstruction data collection of channel morphology and function observed
during field investigations. The Site is located within Targeted Local Watershed (TLW)
03040203191010 and subbasin 03-07-51. The project is not located within a Local Watershed
Planning area. Project goals identified in the RBRP include the following.

1. Improve water quality through increased riparian buffer area (Project will restore
approximately 7.7 acres of riparian buffer).
2. Reduce impacts from agricultural practices (Project will remove agricultural row crops
from the Site).
3. Reduce impacts from impervious surfaces (Project will incorporate one marsh treatment
area to treat ditches that receive roadside runoff).
4. Protection of existing resources (Project will be protected with a permanent conservation
easement).

In addition to the defined Cataloging Unit (CU) goals for the Lumber River, additional goals for
the area generally revolve around reduction of stressors to water quality. Stressors and how each
will be addressed by project activities are as follows.

1. Sedimentation - (reduction of 15.8 tons/year after mitigation is complete).
2. Nutrients – (direct reduction of 89 pounds of nitrogen and 156 pounds of phosphorus per
year by removing agricultural row crops; eliminate fertilizer application; and install a
marsh treatment area).
3. Land Use Impacts (imperviousness) – (incorporation of one marsh treatment area to treat
ditches that receive roadside runoff).
4. Stormwater – (reduction of bank height ratio, restoration of wetlands, reforestation, and
installation of a marsh treatment area will reduce stormwater pulses).
5. Lack of Riparian Buffer – (restoration of 7.7 acres of riparian buffer).

Site specific mitigation goals and objectives were developed through the use of North Carolina
Stream Assessment Method (NC SAM) and North Carolina Wetland Assessment Method (NC
WAM) analyses of preconstruction and reference stream systems at the Site (NC SFAT 2015 and
NC WFAT 2010) (see Table 2 below).

Draft MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100055) page 4 Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Columbus County, North Carolina March 2021 Table 2. Summary: Goals, Performance, and Results Targeted Functions Goals Objectives Success Criteria (1) HYDROLOGY (2) Flood Flow (Floodplain Access)  Attenuate flood flow across the Site.  Minimize downstream flooding to the maximum extent possible.  Connect streams to functioning and degraded wetland systems.  Construct new channel at historic floodplain elevation to restore overbank flows and restore jurisdictional wetlands  Plant woody riparian buffer  Cease row crop production within the easement  Deep rip floodplain soils to reduce compaction and increase soil surface roughness  Protect riparian buffers with a perpetual conservation easement  BHR not to exceed 1.2  Document four overbank events in separate monitoring years  Remove agricultural row crops from the easement  Monitoring wells will be successful if the water table is within 12 inches of the soil surface for 12% of the growing season  Vegetation plots will be successful if the plant density is 210 stems per acre with an average plant height of 10 feet at 7 years following planting  Conservation Easement recorded (3) Streamside Area Attenuation (4) Floodplain Access (4) Wooded Riparian Buffer (4) Microtopography Wetland – Surface and Sub-Surface Storage and Retention (3) Stream Stability  Increase stream stability within the Site so that channels are neither aggrading nor degrading.  Construct channels with proper pattern, dimension, and longitudinal profile  Cease row crop production within the easement  Construct stable channels with grade control structures.  Plant woody riparian buffer  Cross-section measurements indicate a stable channel  Visual documentation of stable channels and structures  BHR not to exceed 1.2  ER of 2.2 or greater  < 10% change in BHR and ER in any given year  Remove agricultural row crops from the easement  Vegetation plots will be successful if the plant density is 210 stems per acre with an average plant height of 10 feet at 7 years following planting (4) Stream Geomorphology (1) WATER QUALITY (2) Streamside Area Vegetation  Remove direct nutrient and pollutant inputs from the Site and reduce contributions to downstream waters.  Reduce agricultural land/inputs  Install marsh treatment areas  Plant woody riparian buffer  Restore jurisdictional wetlands adjacent to Site streams o Remove drain tile o Promote overbank flooding by P1 stream restoration.  Remove agricultural row crops from the easement  Monitoring wells will be successful if the water table is within 12 inches of the soil surface for 12% of the growing season  Vegetation plots will be successful if the plant density is 210 stems per acre with an average plant height of 10 feet at 7 years following planting (3) Upland Pollutant Filtration (3) Thermoregulation (2) Aquatic Life Tolerance Wetland - Pathogen, Particulate, Soluble, and Physical Change (1) HABITAT (2) In-stream Habitat  Improve instream and stream-side habitat.  Construct stable channels  Plant woody riparian buffer to provide organic matter and shade  Construct new channel at historic floodplain elevation to restore overbank flows and plant woody riparian buffer  Protect riparian buffers with a perpetual conservation easement  Restore jurisdictional wetlands adjacent to Site streams  Cross-section measurements indicate a stable channel  Visual documentation of stable channels and in-stream structures.  Monitoring wells will be successful if the water table is within 12 inches of the soil surface for 12% of the growing season  Vegetation plots will be successful if the plant density is 210 stems per acre with an average plant height of 10 feet at 7 years following planting  Conservation Easement recorded (3) Substrate (2) Stream-side Habitat (3) Stream-side Habitat (3) Thermoregulation Wetland - Physical Structure, Landscape Patch Structure, and Vegetation Composition

Draft MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 1000585) page 5
Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Columbus County, North Carolina March 2021
1.3 Success Criteria
Project success criteria have been established per the October 24, 2016 NC Interagency Review
Team Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update. Monitoring
and success criteria relate to project goals and objectives. From a mitigation perspective, several
of the goals and objectives are assumed to be functionally elevated by restoration activities without
direct measurement. Other goals and objectives will be considered successful upon achieving
success criteria. The following table summarizes Site success criteria.

Success Criteria
Streams
 All streams must maintain an Ordinary High-Water Mark (OHWM), per RGL 05-05.
 Continuous surface flow must be documented each year for at least 30 consecutive days.
 Bank height ratio (BHR) cannot exceed 1.2 at any measured cross-section.
 Entrenchment ratio (ER) must be no less than 2.2 at any measured riffle cross-section.
 BHR and ER at any measure riffle cross-section should not change by more than 10% from baseline condition
during any given monitoring period.
 The stream project shall remain stable and all other performance standards shall be met through four separate
bankfull events, occurring in separate years, during the monitoring years 1-7.
Wetland Hydrology
 Saturation or inundation within the upper 12 inches of the soil surface for, at a minimum, 12 percent of the
growing season, during average climatic conditions
Vegetation
 Within planted portions of the site, a minimum of 320 stems per acre must be present at year 3; a minimum of
260 stems per acre must be present at year 5; and a minimum of 210 stems per acre must be present at year 7.
 Trees must average 7 feet in height at year 5, and 10 feet in height at year 7 in each plot.
 Planted and volunteer stems are counted, provided they are included in the approved planting list for the site;
natural recruits not on the planting list may be considered by the IRT on a case-by-case basis.
Visual Assessment
 Photographs at vegetation plots and cross sections should illustrate the Site’s vegetative and morphological
stability on an annual basis, including no excessive erosion or degradation on the channel banks, no mid
channel bars, or vertical incision. In addition, grade control structures should remain stable.
Note: BHR will be calculated using procedures outlined in the latest approved guidance from NCDMS.

Draft MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 1000585) page 6
Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Columbus County, North Carolina March 2021
2.0 METHODS
Monitoring will be conducted by Axiom Environmental, Inc. Annual monitoring reports of the
data collected will be submitted to the NCDMS by Restoration Systems no later than December
1st of each monitoring year data is collected. The monitoring schedule is summarized in the
following table.

Monitoring Schedule
Resource Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7
Streams
Wetlands
Vegetation
Macroinvertebrates
Visual Assessment
Report Submittal
*Visual Assessment will be complimented by permanent photographic points located at each permanent cross
section and vegetation plot.
2.1 Monitoring
The monitoring parameters are summarized in the following table.

Draft MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100055) page 7 Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC Columbus County, North Carolina March 2021 Monitoring Summary Stream Parameters Parameter Method Schedule/Frequency Number/Extent Data Collected/Reported Stream Profile Full longitudinal survey As-built (unless otherwise required) All restored stream channels Graphic and tabular data. Stream Dimension Cross-sections Years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7 Total of 10 cross-sections on restored channels Graphic and tabular data. Channel Stability Visual Assessments Yearly All restored stream channels Areas of concern will be depicted on a plan view figure with a written assessment and photograph of the area included in the report. Additional Cross-sections Yearly Only if instability is documented during monitoring Graphic and tabular data. Stream Hydrology Continuous monitoring surface water gauges and/or trail camera Continuous recording through monitoring period Surface water gauges on UT 1 and UT2 Surface water data for each monitoring period Bankfull Events Continuous monitoring surface water gauges and/or trail camera Continuous recording through monitoring period Surface water gauges on UT 1 and UT2 Surface water data for each monitoring period Visual/Physical Evidence Continuous through monitoring period All restored stream channels Visual evidence, photo documentation, and/or rain data. Benthic Macroinvertebrates “Qual 4” method described in Standard Operating Procedures for Collection and Analysis of Benthic Macroinvertebrates, Version 5.0 (NCDWR 2016) Pre-construction, Years 3, 5, and 7 during the “index period” referenced in Small Streams Biocriteria Development (NCDWQ 2009) 2 stations (one at the lower end of UT 1 and one at the lower end of UT 2); however, the exact locations will be determined at the time pre-construction benthics are collected Results* will be presented on a site-by-site basis and will include a list of taxa collected, an enumeration of Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Tricopetera taxa as well as Biotic Index values. Wetland Parameters Parameter Method Schedule/Frequency Number/Extent Data Collected/Reported Wetland Reestablishment Groundwater gauges Years 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 throughout the year with the growing season defined as March 1-November 12 9 gauges spread throughout restored wetlands Soil temperature at the beginning of each monitoring period to verify the start of the growing season (no earlier than March 1), groundwater and rain data for each monitoring period Vegetation Parameters Parameter Method Schedule/Frequency Number/Extent Data Collected/Reported Vegetation establishment and vigor Permanent vegetation plots 0.0247 acre (100 square meters) in size; CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation, Version 4.2 (Lee et al. 2008) As-built, Years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7 7 plots spread across the Site Species, height, planted vs. volunteer, stems/acre *Benthic Macroinvertebrate sampling data will not be tied to success criteria; however, the data may be used as a tool to observe positive gains to in-stream habitat
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8‐digit
Reach 3
Wetland 3
Supporting Docs?
JD Package (App D)
JD Package (App D)
CE Document (App E)
CE Document (App E)
NA
NA
F5/6
0.103
3040203191010
0
Essential Fisheries Habitat No ‐‐
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA or CAMA) No ‐‐
Water of the United States ‐ Section 404 Yes Yes
Water of the United States ‐ Section 401 Yes Yes
Endangered Species Act Yes Yes
Historic Preservation Act Yes Yes
Regulatory Considerations
Parameters Applicable? Resolved?
Soil Hydric Status Hydric
Mapped Soil Series
Post‐project (acres) 5.852 0.103
Wetland Type (non‐riparian, riparian) Riparian riverine
Muckalee
Wetland Summary Information
Parameters Wetland R Wetland E
Dominant Stream Classification (proposed) E/C5 E/C5
Dominant Evolutionary class (Simon) if applicable III/IV III/IV
Valley confinement (Confined, moderately confined, unconfined)
Drainage area (acres) 106.5 24.6
Alluvial, moderately confined to unconfined
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral Perennial/Intermitternt Intermittent
NCDWR Water Quality Classification C, Sw
Post‐project (feet) 1912 366
Pre‐project length (feet) 1474 283
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province Coastal Plain
Reach Summary Information
Parameters UT 1UT 2
Project Drainage Area (acres) 106
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area <2%
 Land Use Classification Cultivated & Other Broadleaf Deciduous Forest
Pre‐project (acres)
Dominant Stream Classification (existing) G5/6
Table 3. Project Attribute Table
Project Name Shaw's Run
County Columbus County, North Carolina
Project Area (acres) 9.44
River Basin Lumber
DWR Sub‐basin 03‐07‐51
Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude decimal degrees) 34.3193ºN, 78.8666 ºW

Draft MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100055) page 9
Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Columbus County, North Carolina March 2021
3.0 REFERENCES

Griffith, G.E., J.M. Omernik, J.A. Comstock, M.P. Schafale, W.H. McNab, D.R. Lenat, T.F.
MacPherson, J.B. Glover, and V.B. Shelbourne. 2002. Ecoregions of North Carolina and
South Carolina. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia.

Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation. Version 4.2. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, Ecosystem Enhancement Program. Raleigh, North Carolina.

North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS). 2014. Stream and Wetland Mitigation
Monitoring Guidelines. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Raleigh,
North Carolina.

North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2016. Standard Operating Procedures
for Collection and Analysis of Benthic Macroinvertebrates (Version 5.0). (online).
Available:
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Environmental%20Sciences/BAU/NCDWR
Macroinvertebrate-SOP-February%202016_final.pdf

North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2009. Small Streams Biocriteria
Development. Available:
http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=2d54ad23-0345-4d6e-82fd-
04005f48eaa7&groupId=38364

North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP). 2008. Lumber River Basin
Restoration Priorities (online). Available:
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Mitigation%20Services/Watershed_Planning/Lumber_River_B
asin/Lumber_RBRP_2008_FINAL.pdf (January 9, 2018).

North Carolina Stream Functional Assessment Team. (NC SFAT 2015). N.C. Stream Assessment
Method (NC SAM) User Manual. Version 2.1.

North Carolina Wetland Functional Assessment Team. (NC WFAT 2010). N.C. Wetland
Assessment Method (NC WAM) User Manual. Version 4.1.

Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North
Carolina: Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of
Parks and Recreation, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources. Raleigh, North Carolina.

Draft MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100055) page 10
Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Columbus County, North Carolina March 2021
Simon A, Hupp CR. 1986. Geomorphic and Vegetative Recovery Processes Along Modified
Tennessee Streams: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Disturbed Fluvial Systems. Forest
Hydrology and Watershed Management. IAHS-AISH Publ.167.

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1990. Soil Survey of Columbus County, North
Carolina. Soil Conservation Service.

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2017. Web Soil Survey (online). Available:
https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm [May 7, 2018]. United States
Department of Agriculture.
Draft MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100055) Appendices
Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Columbus County, North Carolina March 2021

Appendix A
Visual Assessment Data

Figure 1. Current Conditions Plan View
Tables 4A-B. Stream Visual Stability Assessment
Table 5. Visual Vegetation Assessment
Vegetation Plot Photographs
#*#*!!!!!!!!!^_!(!(!(!(!(!(!(^_^_XS-2XS-5X S -7
XS-6XS-3XS-8X S -4XS-9
1
7
3
5
26
4
GW -9
GW -8
GW -7
GW -6 GW -5
GW -4
GW -3
GW -2
GW -1XS-1X
S
-
1
0
NCCG IA
FIGU R E
Dra wn b y:
Da te:
Sca le :
Pro jec t N o.:
KRJ
Mar 2021
1:1400
18-014
Tit le:
Pro jec t:
Pre pa red fo r:
Columbus C ounty, NC
SH AW 'S RUNSTREAMAND WE T LANDMITIGATION S I TE
Curr entConditionsPlan View
1³Lege nd
Sh aw 's Ru n Ea seme n t = 9 .4 4 acStream Re sto ra ti on
Stre a m Ge n er at in g No Cr ed itWetland Re e st ab li shm e n tWetland Pre se rvat io n
Ve ge ta ti o n Pl ot s M ee ti n g Su cce ss Cri te ri a in MY 0 (2 02 1 )
!(Ve ge ta ti o n Pl ot Ori gi n s
Cro ss-S e ct io n s
!Gro un d wa te r Ga u ge
#*Stre a m F lo w G au g e
^_Rai n Ga ug e / So il Te m p e rat ur e Lo g ge r
^_Pre -Co n st ru ctio n Be n th ic S a mpl in g L oca ti on s
0 300 600150Feet
U T -1
UT-2
Table 4A.  Visual Stream Stability Assessment
Reach UT 1
Assessed Stream Length 1912
Assessed Bank Length 3824
Bank Surface Scour/Bare 
Bank
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth 
and/or surface scour 0 100%
Toe Erosion
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely.  
Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable 
and are providing habitat.
0 100%
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical ‐ rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse 0 100%
0 100%
Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across 
the sill. 36 36 100%
Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not 
exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring 
guidance document) 
36 36 100%
Table 4B.  Visual Stream Stability Assessment
Reach UT 2
Assessed Stream Length 366
Assessed Bank Length 732
Bank Surface Scour/Bare 
Bank
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth 
and/or surface scour 0 100%
Toe Erosion
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely.  
Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable 
and are providing habitat.
0 100%
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical ‐ rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse 0 100%
0 100%
Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across 
the sill. 9 9 100%
Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not 
exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring 
guidance document) 
9 9 100%
% Stable, 
Performing as 
Intended

Totals  
Major Channel Category Metric
Number 
Stable, 
Performing as 
Intended
Total Number 
in As‐built
Amount of 
Unstable 
Footage
Amount of 
Unstable 
Footage

Totals  
% Stable, 
Performing as 
IntendedMetric
Number 
Stable, 
Performing as 
Intended
Total Number 
in As‐builtMajor Channel Category
Table 5.  Visual Vegetation AssessmentPlanted acreage7.7Bare Areas Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material. 0.10 acres 0.00 0.0%Low Stem Density Areas Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on current MY stem count criteria. 0.10acres 0.00 0.0%0.00 0.0%Areas of Poor Growth Rates Planted areas where average height is not meeting current MY Performance Standard. 0.10 acres 0.00 0.0%0.00 0.0%Easement Acreage 9.44Invasive Areas of ConcernInvasives may occur outside of planted areas and within the easement and will therefore be calculated against the total easement acreage. Include species with the potential to directly outcompete native, young, woody stems in the short‐term or community structure for existing communities.  Species included in summation above should be identified in report summary.  0.10 acres 0.00 0.0%Easement Encroachment AreasEncroachment may be point, line, or polygon. Encroachment to be mapped consists of any violation ofrestrictions specified in the conservation easement. Common encroachments are mowing, cattle access,vehicular access. Encroachment has no threshold value as will need to be addressed regardless of impactarea. none# Encroachments notedCombined Acreage% of Easement AcreageVegetation Category DefinitionsMapping Threshold% of Planted Acreage                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  Total                                                                                                                                                                Cumulative TotalVegetation Category DefinitionsMapping ThresholdCombined Acreage
Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site
MY0 (2021) Vegetation Monitoring Photographs (taken January 6, 2021)
Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site Appendix A: Visual Assessment Data
MY0 Monitoring Report –January 2021
Plot 7
Plot 1 Plot 2
Plot 3 Plot 4
Plot 5 Plot 6
Draft MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100055) Appendices
Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Columbus County, North Carolina March 2021

Appendix B
Vegetation Data

Table 6. Planted Bare-Root Woody Vegetation
Table 7. Vegetation Plot Counts and Densities
Table 8. Vegetation Plot Data Table from Vegetation Data Entry Tool
Draft MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100055) Appendices
Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Columbus County, North Carolina March 2021
Table 6. Planted Bare Root Woody Vegetation
Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site
Species Total*
Acres 7.7
Betula nigra 800
Celtis laevigata* 100
Cephalanthus occidentalis 800
Cornus amomum 700
Diospyros virginiana* 300
Fraxinus pennsylvanica 300
Liriodendron tulipifera 500
Nyssa sylvatica 1000
Platanus occidentalis 1000
Quercus laurifolia 400
Quercus lyrata* 400
Quercus nigra 300
Quercus pagoda* 400
Quercus phellos 300
Taxodium distichum 1000
TOTALS 8300
Average Stems/Acre 1078
*Several species included in the Mitigation Plan planting list, including Quercus michauxii and Sambucus
canadensis, were not available for planting and were replaced with these comparable species for as-built planting.
Draft MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100055) Appendices
Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Columbus County, North Carolina March 2021
Table 7. Planted Vegetation Totals
Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site
Plot # Planted Stems/Acre Success Criteria Met?
1 688 Yes
2 607 Yes
3 648 Yes
4 567 Yes
5 607 Yes
6 769 Yes
7 567 Yes
Average Planted Stems/Acre 636 Yes

Table 8.  Vegetation Plot Data Table from Vegetation Data Entry Tool7.72020‐12‐21#N/A#N/A2021‐01‐060.0247Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted TotalBetula nigra river birch Tree FACW11 44Celtis laevigata sugarberry Tree FACW 4 422112222Celtis occidentalis common hackberry Tree FACU11Cephalanthus occidentalis common buttonbush Shrub OBL 1 1Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub FACW 1 122Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree FAC 1 1Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree FACW 2 2 1 1Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree FACU 3 3 1 13322Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree FAC 4 411 33Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 1 1111166Quercus lyrata overcup oak Tree OBL 1 1 1 1Quercus nigra water oak Tree FAC111144 22 11Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak Tree FACW1122Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FACW 2 22211Quercus sp.3311 77331122Taxodium distichum bald cypress Tree OBL 6 6 10 103344Sum Performance Standard 17 17 15 15 16 16 14 14 15 15 19 19 14 1417 15 16 14 15 19 14688 607 648 567 607 769 567963797624 40 62 50 20 32 292212211000000017 15 16 14 15 19 14688 607 648 567 607 769 567963797624 40 62 50 20 32 2922122110000000Date of Current SurveyPlot size (ACRES)Planted AcreageDate of Initial PlantDate(s) of Supplemental Plant(s)Date(s) MowingStems/AcreSpecies CountDominant Species Composition (%)Average Plot Height% InvasivesMitigation Plan Performance StandardCurrent Year Stem CountStems/AcreSpecies CountDominant Species Composition (%)Average Plot Height% InvasivesPost Mitigation Plan Performance StandardCurrent Year Stem Count1). Bolded species are proposed for the current monitoring year, italicized species are not approved, and a regular font indicates that the species has been approved.2). The "Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan" section contains only those species that were included in the original approved mitigation plan. The "Post Mitigation Plan Species" section includes species that are being proposed through a mitigation plan addendum for the current monitoring year (bolded) , species that have been approved in prior monitoring years through a mitigation plan addendum (regular font), and species that are not approved (italicized).3). The "Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" section is derived only from stems included in the original mitigation plan, whereas the "Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" includes data from mitigation plan approved, post mitigation plan approved, and proposed stems.Veg Plot 5 F Veg Plot 6 F Veg Plot 7 FIndicator StatusVeg Plot 1 F Veg Plot 2 F Veg Plot 3 F Veg Plot 4 FScientific Name Common Name Tree/ShrubSpecies Included in Approved Mitigation Plan
Draft MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100055) Appendices
Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Columbus County, North Carolina March 2021

Appendix C
Stream Geomorphology Data

Cross-Sections with Annual Overlays
Longitudinal Profile
Table 9A-B. Baseline Stream Data Summary Tables
Table 10. Cross-Section Morphology Monitoring Summary

Station Elevation
0.0 90.8 90.9
3.3 90.9 1.0
6.1 90.9 90.1
7.8 90.9 90.9
8.9 90.7 0.7
9.8 90.3 3.7
10.6 90.1
11.6 90.1
12.6 90.1
13.2 90.3
14.1 90.4 *Photos taken June 26 2020
15.0 90.7
16.0 90.9 E/C 5
17.5 91.0
19.4 91.1
22.5 90.9
Stream Type
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Hieght Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
Feature Riffle
Date:12/16/2020
Field Crew:Perkinson, Harris, D. Lewis
Site Shaw's Run
Watershed:Lumber River Basin, 03040203
XS ID UT1, XS -1, Riffle
90
91
92
0 10 20 30Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Shaw's Run, UT1, XS -1, Riffle
Bankfull
MY-00 12/16/20
Station Elevation
0.0 90.9 90.9
3.1 91.1 1.0
5.4 91.0 89.7
7.4 90.9 90.9
8.5 90.7 1.2
9.0 90.3 5.7
9.9 90.0
10.6 89.9
11.5 89.7
12.3 89.8
13.0 89.8 *Photos taken June 26 2020
13.6 90.0
14.4 90.6 E/C 5
15.0 91.2
16.2 91.4
18.1 91.4
20.2 91.6
Field Crew:
Pool
Shaw's Run
Lumber River Basin, 03040203
UT1, XS - 2, Pool
Site
Watershed:
XS ID
Bankfull Elevation:
SUMMARY DATA
Feature
Bank Hieght Ratio:
Date:
Stream Type
12/16/2020
Perkinson, Harris, D. Lewis
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
89
90
91
92
0 10 20 30Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Shaw's Run, UT1, XS -2, Pool
Bankfull
MY-00 1/21/20
Station Elevation
0.0 92.6 92.2
3.5 92.5 1.0
5.3 92.3 90.8
6.0 92.1 92.2
6.5 91.9 1.4
7.0 91.5 6.1
8.1 91.0
9.0 90.8
10.0 90.8
10.8 91.2
11.4 91.7 *Photos taken June 26 2020
12.4 91.8
13.0 92.2 E/C 5
14.5 92.4
16.7 92.6
18.6 92.6
Site Shaw's Run
Watershed:Lumber River Basin, 03040203
XS ID UT1, XS - 3, Pool
Feature Pool
Date:12/16/2020
Field Crew:Perkinson, Harris, D. Lewis
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Hieght Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
Stream Type
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
SUMMARY DATA
90
91
92
93
0 10 20Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Shaw's Run, UT1, XS -3, Pool
Bankfull
MY-00 1/21/20
Station Elevation
0.0 92.8 92.3
3.2 92.8 1.0
5.7 92.6 91.5
6.8 92.5 92.3
7.3 92.2 0.8
8.0 92.2 2.5
8.6 91.9
9.0 91.7
9.7 91.5
10.4 91.5
11.2 91.5 *Photos taken June 26 2020
11.8 92.1
12.7 92.3 E/C 5
13.9 92.3
16.4 92.4
19.0 92.6
Site Shaw's Run
Watershed:Lumber River Basin, 03040203
XS ID UT1, XS - 4, Riffle
Feature Riffle
Date:12/16/2020
Field Crew:Perkinson, Harris, D. Lewis
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Hieght Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
Stream Type
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
SUMMARY DATA
91
92
93
94
0 10 20Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Shaw's Run, UT1, XS -4, Riffle
Bankfull
MY-00 1/21/20
Station Elevation
0.0 94.1 93.8
2.7 94.1 1.0
5.0 94.2 92.6
6.3 93.8 93.8
7.0 93.5 1.2
7.7 93.3 5.6
8.2 93.1
9.0 92.9
9.6 92.6
10.5 92.9
11.6 92.8 *Photos taken June 26 2020
12.2 92.9
12.2 92.9 E/C 5
13.4 93.4
14.0 93.7
14.6 93.8
16.0 93.8
18.0 93.9
20.0 94.0
21.2 94.0
Site Shaw's Run
Watershed:Lumber River Basin, 03040203
XS ID UT1, XS - 5, Pool
Feature Pool
Date:12/16/2020
Field Crew:Perkinson, Harris, D. Lewis
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Hieght Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
Stream Type
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
SUMMARY DATA
92
93
94
95
0 10 20 30Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Shaw's Run, UT1, XS -5, Pool
Bankfull
MY-00 1/21/20
Station Elevation
0.0 94.3 94.2
1.7 94.3 1.0
3.6 94.3 93.1
5.1 94.2 94.2
5.9 93.8 1.0
6.0 93.8 4.8
6.9 93.7
7.7 93.1
8.5 93.1
9.5 93.3
10.2 93.3 *Photos taken June 26 2020
10.9 93.5
11.3 93.8 E/C 5
12.1 93.8
13.1 94.1
13.8 94.3
15.3 94.3
17.0 94.4
19.3 94.4
Site Shaw's Run
Watershed:Lumber River Basin, 03040203
XS ID UT1, XS -6, Riffle
Feature Riffle
Date:12/16/2020
Field Crew:Perkinson, Harris, D. Lewis
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Hieght Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
Stream Type
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
SUMMARY DATA
93
94
95
96
0 10 20 30Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Shaw's Run, UT1, XS -6, Riffle
Bankfull
MY-00 1/21/20
Station Elevation
0.0 95.8 95.6
2.6 95.8 1.0
4.8 95.8 94.3
6.1 95.8 95.6
6.7 95.1 1.4
7.3 94.7 5.6
7.7 94.6
8.4 94.3
9.2 94.3
9.9 94.3
10.4 94.6 *Photos taken June 26 2020
11.1 94.8
12.0 95.3 E/C 5
12.9 95.6
13.6 95.7
15.4 95.7
17.8 95.7
20.4 95.7
Site Shaw's Run
Watershed:Lumber River Basin, 03040203
XS ID UT1, XS - 7, Pool
Feature Pool
Date:12/16/2020
Field Crew:Perkinson, Harris, D. Lewis
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Hieght Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
Stream Type
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
SUMMARY DATA
94
95
96
97
0 10 20 30Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Shaw's Run, UT1, XS -7, Pool
Bankfull
MY-00 1/21/20
Station Elevation
0.0 95.5 95.6
0.3 95.5 1.0
3.8 95.5 94.8
5.5 95.7 95.6
6.7 95.6 0.8
7.6 95.2 3.2
8.0 94.9
8.7 94.9
9.2 94.8
9.9 95.1
10.5 95.1 *Photos taken June 26 2020
11.0 95.1
11.9 95.2 E/C 5
12.7 95.4
14.3 95.6
15.7 95.7
18.8 95.9
Site Shaw's Run
Watershed:Lumber River Basin, 03040203
XS ID UT1, XS -8, Riffle
Feature Riffle
Date:12/16/2020
Field Crew:Perkinson, Harris, D. Lewis
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Hieght Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
Stream Type
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
SUMMARY DATA
94
95
96
97
0 10 20Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Shaw's Run, UT1, XS -8, Riffle
Bankfull
MY-00 1/21/20
Station Elevation
0.0 94.5 94.4
2.6 94.5 1.0
5.1 94.5 93.4
5.9 94.2 94.4
6.6 93.7 0.9
7.1 93.7 2.4
8.0 93.4
8.7 93.8
9.2 93.9
9.9 94.4
10.4 94.4 *Photos taken June 26 2020
11.2 94.4
12.9 94.7 E/C 5
15.2 94.9
Site Shaw's Run
Watershed:Lumber River Basin, 03040203
XS ID UT2, XS - 9, Pool
Feature Pool
Date:12/16/2020
Field Crew:Perkinson, Harris, D. Lewis
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Hieght Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
Stream Type
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
SUMMARY DATA
93
94
95
96
0 10 20Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Shaw's Run, UT2, XS -9, Pool
Bankfull
MY-00 1/21/20
Station Elevation
0.0 94.7 94.6
1.8 94.7 1.0
4.1 94.7 94.1
5.7 94.6 94.6
6.0 94.1 0.5
6.9 94.1 1.8
8.2 94.1
8.8 94.2
9.6 94.4
10.6 94.7
12.3 94.7 *Photos taken June 26 2020
14.9 95.0
E/C 5
Site Shaw's Run
Watershed:Lumber River Basin, 03040203
XS ID UT2, XS -10, Riffle
Feature Riffle
Date:12/16/2020
Field Crew:Perkinson, Harris, D. Lewis
Bankfull Elevation:
Bank Hieght Ratio:
Thalweg Elevation:
LTOB Elevation:
Stream Type
LTOB Max Depth:
LTOB Cross Sectional Area:
SUMMARY DATA
94
95
96
0 10 20Elevation (feet)Station (feet)
Shaw's Run, UT2, XS -10, Riffle
Bankfull
MY-00 1/21/20
8687888990919293940 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000Elevation (feet - arbitrary)Distance (feet)Shaw's Run, UT 1 (Sta 00+00 to 10+00)Baseline Profile 2020"Bed Baseline 12/16/2020""Water Surface Baseline 12/16/2020"
90919293949596971000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000Elevation (feet - arbitrary)Distance (feet)Shaw's Run, UT 1 (Sta 10+00 to 19+47)Baseline Profile 2020"Bed Baseline 12/16/2020""Water Surface Baseline 12/16/2020"
92939495960 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400Elevation (feet - arbitrary)Distance (feet)Shaw's Run, UT 2 (Sta 00+00 to 3+78)Baseline Profile 2020"Bed Baseline 12/16/2020""Water Surface Baseline 12/16/2020"
Parameter
Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n
Bankfull Width (ft)4.1 5.9 6.9 6.1 7 5.6 8.2 4
Floodprone Width (ft)5.4 7 9.4 30 70 100.0 100.0 4
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.5 0.5 0.8 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.6 4
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.6 0.8 1.2 0.6 0.8 0.7 1.0 4
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 2.5 4.8 4
Width/Depth Ratio 5.3 10.9 14.9 12 16 12.7 17.7 4
Entrenchment Ratio 4.6 7.6 10.6 4.6 10.6 12.2 17.9 4
Bank Height Ratio 2.8 3.4 4.7 1.00 1.2 1.0 1.0 4
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
Sinuosity (ft)
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
 Other
Parameter
Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n
Bankfull Width (ft)5.2 7.9 8.3 3.6 4.2 4.5 4.5 1
Floodprone Width (ft)7 9 12 30 70 100.0 100.0 1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.5 1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.8 1.8 1
Width/Depth Ratio 24.6 56.9 62.6 12 16 11.2 11.2 1
Entrenchment Ratio 1.0 1.2 1.6 7.6 17.8 22.0 22.0 1
Bank Height Ratio 6.0 6.8 9.5 1.0 1.2 1.0 1.0 1
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
Sinuosity (ft)
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
 Other
Table 9A.  Baseline Stream Data Summary 
Shaw's Run ‐ UT 1
1.15
0.0033 0.0029 0.004
1 1.15
2.82.8 2.8
C 5G 5/6 E/C 5
Pre‐Existing Condition (applicaple)
Monitoring Baseline 
(MY0)Design
 Table 9B.  Baseline Stream Data Summary 
Shaw's Run ‐ UT 2
Pre‐Existing Condition (applicaple) Design
Monitoring Baseline 
(MY0)
F 5/6 E/C 5 E/C 5
0.9 0.9 0.9
1.00 1.15 1.15
0.01 0.0087 0.0028
MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+Bankfull Elevation (ft) ‐ Based on AB‐Bankfull1 Area90.8892.29Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area1.001.00Thalweg Elevation90.15 89.75 90.801 91.46 92.647LTOB2 Elevation90.88 90.94`92.21 92.29 93.805LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)0.74 1.19 1.41 0.83 1.16LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)3.7 5.7 6.1 2.5 5.6MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+Bankfull Elevation (ft) ‐ Based on AB‐Bankfull1 Area94.1695.6094.60Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area1.001.001.00Thalweg Elevation93.11 94.26 94.79 93.44 94.054LTOB2 Elevation94.16 95.61 95.60 94.37 94.60`LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)1.05 1.35 0.81 0.93 0.54LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)4.8 5.6 3.2 2.4 1.81.301.80Bankfull Elevation (ft) ‐ Based on AB‐Bankfull1 AreaBank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 AreaThalweg ElevationLTOB2 ElevationLTOB2 Max Depth (ft)LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)Note: The smaller the channel the closer the survey measurements are to their limit of reliable detection, therefore inter‐annual variation in morphological measurement (as a percentage) is by default magnified as channel size decereases.  Some of the variability above is the result of this factor and some is due to the large amount of depositional sediments observed.      UT 1 ‐ Cross Section 6 (Riffle) UT 1 ‐ Cross Section 7 (Pool) UT 1 ‐ Cross Section 8 (Riffle) UT 2 ‐ Cross Section 9 (Pool) UT 2 ‐ Cross Section 10 (Riffle)  Table 10.  Monitoring Data ‐ Cross Section Morphology Monitoring Summary(Shaw's Run/ DMS:100055)    UT 1 and UT 2UT 1 ‐ Cross Section 1 (Riffle) UT 1 ‐ Cross Section 2 (Pool) UT 1 ‐ Cross Section 3 (Pool) UT 1 ‐ Cross Section 4 (Riffle) UT 1 ‐ Cross Section 5 (Pool)The above morphology parameters reflect the 2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS, the IRT and industry mitigation providers/practitioners.  The outcome resulted in the focus on three primary morphological parameters of interest for the purposes of tracking channel change moving forward. They are the bank height ratio using a constant As‐built bankfull area and the cross sectional area and max depth based on each years low top of bank.  These are calculated as follows:1‐BankHeight Ratio (BHR) takes the As‐built bankful area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation.  For example if the As‐built bankfull area was 10 ft2, then the MY1 bankfull elevation would be adjusted until the calculated bankfull area within the MY1 cross section survey = 10 ft2.  The BHR would then be calculated with the difference between the low top of bank (LTOB) elevation for MY1 and the thalweg elevation for MY1 in the numerator with the difference between the MY1 bankfull elevation and the MY1 thalweg elevation in the denominator.  This same process is then carried out in each successive year.2  ‐LTOB Area and Max depth ‐These are based on the LTOB elevation for each years survey (The same elevation used for the LTOB in the BHR calculation).  Area below the LTOB elevation will be used and tracked for each year as above.  The difference between the LTOB elevation and the thalweg elevation (same as in the BHR calculation) will be recroded and tracked above as LTOB max depth.       
Draft MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100055) Appendices
Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Columbus County, North Carolina March 2021

Appendix D
Hydrologic Data

Groundwater Gauge Soil Profiles

AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
Project/Site:Shaw's Run Mitigation Site
County, State:Columbus, NC
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:GW1 / 34.316986, -78.868041
Investigator:Lewis
Color %Color %
0-6 10YR 3/2 100 --Silty Clay
6-10 10YR 3/2 95 10 YR 5/6 5 Silty Clay
10-24 10YR 7/2 85 10 YR 5/6 15 Silty Clay Loam
24-30 10YR 6/1 95 10 YR 5/6 5 Silty Clay Loam
30+10YR 6/1 80 10 YR 5/6 20 Silty Clay
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number:1233
Signature:
Name/Print:W. Grant Lewis
Notes:
Depth (inches)
Matrix Mottling
Texture
SOIL BORING LOG
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
Project/Site:Shaw's Run Mitigation Site
County, State:Columbus, NC
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:GW2 / 34.316982, -78.867904
Investigator:Lewis
Color %Color %
0-6 10YR 3/2 100 --Silty Clay
6-12 10YR 3/2 97 10 YR 5/6 3 Silty Clay Loam
12-20 10YR 6/2 90 10 YR 5/6 10 Silty Clay Loam
20+10YR 6/1 85 10 YR 5/6 15 Silty Clay Loam
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number:1233
Signature:
Name/Print:W. Grant Lewis
Matrix Mottling
Depth (inches)Texture
Notes:
SOIL BORING LOG
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
Project/Site:Shaw's Run Mitigation Site
County, State:Columbus, NC
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:GW3 / 34.317982, -78.866867
Investigator:Lewis
Color %Color %
0-18 10YR 3/2 100 --Silty Clay Loam
18-22 10YR 7/1 60 10YR 5/1 37 Silty Clay Loam
10YR 5/6 3
22+10YR 6/1 85 10YR 5/6 15 Silty Clay
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number:1233
Signature:
Name/Print:W. Grant Lewis
Notes:
Depth (inches)
Matrix Mottling
Texture
SOIL BORING LOG
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
Project/Site:Shaw's Run Mitigation Site
County, State:Columbus, NC
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:GW4 / 34.318016, -78.866232
Investigator:Lewis
Color %Color %
0-6 10YR 6/1 100 --Sand
6-12 10YR 7/1 45 10YR 6/2 30 Silty Clay
10YR 6/6 25
12-20 10YR 7/1 40 10YR 6/2 30 Silty Clay
10YR 6/6 30
20+10YR 5/1 85 10YR 6/6 15 Silty Clay
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number:1233
Signature:
Name/Print:W. Grant Lewis
Notes:
Depth (inches)
Matrix Mottling
Texture
SOIL BORING LOG
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
Project/Site:Shaw's Run Mitigation Site
County, State:Columbus, NC
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:GW5 / 34.318454, -78.866495
Investigator:Lewis
Color %Color %
0-18 10YR 3/2 100 --Silty Clay
18-24 10YR 7/1 95 10 YR 6/6 5 Silty Clay
24+10YR 6/1 60 10YR 6/6 40 Clay Loam
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number:1233
Signature:
Name/Print:W. Grant Lewis
Notes:
Depth (inches)
Matrix Mottling
Texture
SOIL BORING LOG
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
Project/Site:Shaw's Run Mitigation Site
County, State:Columbus, NC
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:GW6 / 34.319385, -78.86652
Investigator:Lewis
Color %Color %
0-24 10YR 4/1 100 --Silty Clay Loam
24+10YR 4/1 95 10YR 6/4 5 Silty Clay Loam
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number:1233
Signature:
Name/Print:W. Grant Lewis
Notes:
Depth (inches)
Matrix Mottling
Texture
SOIL BORING LOG
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
Project/Site:Shaw's Run Mitigation Site
County, State:Columbus, NC
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:GW7 / 34.31974, -78.86708
Investigator:Lewis
Color %Color %
0-4 10YR 4/2 100 --Sand
4-10 10YR 4/2 95 10yr 5/4 5 Sand
10-18 10YR 7/1 40 10YR 6/2 35 Sandy Loam
10YR 5/4 25
18+10YR 7/2 60 10YR 5/1 30 Silty Clay
10YR 5/6 10
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number:1233
Signature:
Name/Print:W. Grant Lewis
Notes:
Depth (inches)
Matrix Mottling
Texture
SOIL BORING LOG
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
Project/Site:Shaw's Run Mitigation Site
County, State:Columbus, NC
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:GW8 / 34.320205, -78.865515
Investigator:Lewis
Color %Color %
0-10 10YR 4/1 100 --Clay Loam
10-24 10YR 6/2 85 10YR 5/6 15 Sandy Clay Loam
24+10YR 6/2 80 10YR 5/6 15 Clay Loam
10YR 7/1 5
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number:1233
Signature:
Name/Print:W. Grant Lewis
Notes:
Depth (inches)
Matrix Mottling
Texture
SOIL BORING LOG
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919-215-1693
Project/Site:Shaw's Run Mitigation Site
County, State:Columbus, NC
Sampling Point/
Coordinates:GW9 / 34.320366, -78.865344
Investigator:Lewis
Color %Color %
0-14 10YR 4/1 100 --Clay Loam
14-22 10YR 6/2 90 10YR 5/6 10 Sandy Clay Loam
22+10YR 6/2 85 10YR 5/6 15 Clay Loam
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist
Number:1233
Signature:
Name/Print:W. Grant Lewis
Notes:
Depth (inches)
Matrix Mottling
Texture
SOIL BORING LOG
Draft MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100055) Appendices
Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Columbus County, North Carolina March 2021

Appendix E
Project Timeline and Contact Info

Table 11. Project Timeline
Table 12. Project Contacts
Table 11.  Project Timeline
Data Collection Task Completion or
Activity or Deliverable Complete Deliverable Submission
Project Instituted NA 20‐Apr‐18
Mitigation Plan Approved NA 02‐Dec‐19
Construction (Grading) Completed NA 25‐Jun‐20
Planting Completed NA 20‐Dec‐20
As‐built Survey Completed Jan‐21 Jan‐21
MY‐0 Baseline Report Jan‐21 Mar‐21
Table 12.  Project Contacts
Provider Restoration Systems
1101 Haynes Street, #211
Raleigh, NC 27604
Raymond Holz
Mitigation Provider POC 919‐755‐9490
Designer Axiom Environmental
218 Snow Ave
Raleigh, NC 27603
Grant Lewis
Primary project design POC 919‐215‐1693
Construction Contractor Land Mechanics
126 Circle G Lane
Willow Spring, NC 27592
Loyde Glover
919‐639‐6132
Shaw's Run Mitigation Site/100055
Draft MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100055) Appendices
Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Columbus County, North Carolina March 2021

Appendix F
Other Data

Preconstruction Benthic Results
Preconstruction Benthic Habitat Assessment Data Forms

AXIOM, SHAWS RUN, COLUMBUS CO., NC, BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES COLLECTED 6/9/2020.
PAI ID NO 53928 53929
STATION UT-1 UT-2
DATE 6/9/2020 6/9/2020
SPECIES
Tolerance
Value
Functional
Feeding
Group
ARTHROPODA
Crustacea
Isopoda Asellidae SH
Caecidotea sp.8.4 CG 4
Amphipoda CG Crangonyctidae
Crangonyx sp.7.2 CG 1
Insecta
Hemiptera Corixidae PI 1
Coleoptera Dytiscidae P
Copelatus sp.2 3
Neoporus sp.5 1
Thermonectus sp.P 2
Uvarus sp.1 Hydrophilidae P
Enochrus sp.8.5 CG 1 1
Tropisternus sp.9.3 P 4 9
Diptera Chironomidae
Chironomus sp.9.3 CG 10 40
Goeldichironomus sp.46 4
Psectrotanypus sp.1 Psychodidae CG
Pericoma sp.CG 1 Sciomyzidae 2
TOTAL NO. OF ORGANISMS 66 68
TOTAL NO. OF TAXA 7 12
EPT TAXA 0 0
9.24 8.78BIOTIC INDEX ASSIGNED VALUES
PAI, Inc.Page 1 of 1 Axiom shaws run 6 20CL
3/06 Revision 7
Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet
Coastal Plain Streams
Biological Assessment Unit, DWQ
Directions for use: The observer is to survey a minimum of 100 meters with 200 meters preferred of stream, preferably in an
upstream direction starting above the bridge pool and the road right-of-way. The segment which is assessed should represent average
stream conditions. To perform a proper habitat evaluation the observer needs to get into the stream. To complete the form, select the
description which best fits the observed habitats and then circle the score. If the observed habitat falls in between two descriptions,
select an intermediate score. A final habitat score is determined by adding the results from the different metrics.
Stream_.‘1Qtt!`y taw Location/road: 04Qd190 Ax (Road Name )County. 6I(U+K1,45
TOTAL SCORE .3,4
Date e)‘Q ° 6 oq
CC#03090dO3 Basin L k. r p, Subbasin
Observer(s) l C.1- Type of Study: 0 Fish C1Benthos ❑ Basinwide ❑Special Study (Describe)
Latitude-3 K -) I n3 Longitude 75-$6107 I Ecoregion: ❑ CA 0 SWP ❑ Sandhills 0 CB
Water Quality: Temperature °C DO mg/1 Conductivity (corr.) µS/cm pH
Physical Characterization: Visible land use refers to immediate area that you can see from sampling location. Check off what
you observe driving thru the watershed in watershed land use.
Visible Land Use: ¶ %Forest /0 %Residential %Active Pasture er--% Active Crops
%Fallow Fields % Commercial %Industrial %Other - Describe:
Watershed land use 0 Forest 0 Agriculture ❑Urban ❑ Animal operations upstream
Width: (meters) Stream ( Channel (at top of bank) 1, a Stream Depth: (m) Avg . Max I C—
❑ Width variable ❑Braided channel ❑Large river >25m wide
Bank Height (from deepest part of channel to top of bank): (m) j —
Flow conditions : ❑High ,ONorma1 ❑Low
Channel Flow Status
Useful especially under abnormal or low flow conditions.
A. Water reaches base of both banks, minimal channel substrate exposed X,
B. Water fills >75% of available channel, or <25% of channel substrate is exposed 0
C. Water fills 25-75% of available channel, many logs/snags exposed 0
D. Root mats out of water 0
E. Very little water in channel, mostly present as standing pools 0
Turbidity: ❑Clear oil Slightly Turbid ❑Turbid ❑Tan 'c ❑Milky ❑Colored (from dyes) ❑Green tinge
Good potential for Wetlands Restoration Project?? • YES 0 NO
Details Prwjlri5 rl 54 ear., a'-+/ wit,i cam.ned/e,=
❑Channelized ditch
[242eeply incised -steep, straight banks ❑Both banks undercut at bend
❑Recent overbank deposits ❑Bar development
❑Excessive periphyton growth ❑Heavy filamentous algae growth
Manmade Stabilization:
Weather Conditions:
❑Channel filled in with sediment
❑Sewage smell
❑Y: ❑Rip -rap, cement, gabions 0 Sediment/grade-control structure ❑Berm/levee
I Pr, f do ( Photos: ON ❑Y ❑Digital 035mm
Remarks: (1 doe t P— tc r ,. j r
TYPICAL STREAM CROSS SECTION DIAGRAM ON BACK

I. Channel Modification
Score
A. Natural channel -minimal dredging 15
B. Some channelization near bridge, or historic (>20 year old), and/or bends beginning to reappear.. �110
C. Extensive channelization, straight as far as can see, channelized ditch ( J
D. Banks shored with hard structure, >80% of reach disrupted, instream habitat gone 0
Remarks Subtotal
II. Instream Habitat: Consider the percentage of the reach that is favorable for benthos colonization or fish cover. If >50% of the
reach is snags, and 1 type is present, circle the score of 16. Definition: leafpacks consist of older leaves that are packed together and
have begun to decay (not piles of leaves in pool areas). Mark as Rare, Common, or Abundant.
/ticks Snags/logs Undercut banks or root mats Macrophytes kLeafpacks
AMOUNT OF REACH FAVORABLE FOR COLONIZATION OR COVER
>50% 30-50% 10-30% <10%
Score Score Score Score
4 or 5 types present 20 15 10 5
3 types present 18 13 ,..,8q 4
2 types present 17 12 l% 3
1 type present 16 11 6 2
No substrate for benthos colonization and no fish cover 0
❑ No woody vegetation in riparian zone Remarks
Subtotal 7
III. Bottom Substrate (silt, clay, sand, detritus, gravel) look at entire reach for substrate scoring.
A. Substrate types mixed Score
1. gravel dominant 15
2. sand dominant 13
3. detritus dominant 7
4. silt/clay/muck dominant 4
B. Substrate homogeneous
1. nearly all gravel �2
2. nearly all sand 7
3. nearly all detritus 4
4. nearly all silt/clay/muck 1 Remarks Subtotal 1y
`
IV. Pool Variety Pools are areas of deeper than average maximum depths with little or no surface turbulence. Water velocities
associated with pools are always slow.
A. Pools present Score
1. Pools Frequent (>30% of 100m length surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes 10
b. pools about the same size (indicates pools filling in) 8
2. Pools Infrequent (<30% of the 100m length surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes
b. pools about the same size 4
B. Pools absent
1. Deep water/run habitat present 4
2. Deep water/run habitat absent 0
Subtotal
Remarks Page Total 'a C

V. Bank Stability and Vegetation Score Score
A. Banks stable or no banks, just flood plain
1. little or no evidence of erosion or bank failure, little potential for erosion 10 10
B. Erosion areas present
1. diverse trees, shrubs, grass; plants healthy with good root systems 9 9
2. few trees or small trees and shrubs; vegetation appears generally healthy 7 7
3. sparse vegetation; plant types and conditions suggest poorer soil binding 4 4
4. mostly grasses, few if any trees and shrubs, high erosion and failure potential at high flow I O
5. little or no bank vegetation, mass erosion and bank failure evident 0
Remarks
Total b
VI. Light Penetration (Canopy is defined as tree or vegetative cover directly above the stream's surface. Canopy would block out
sunlight when the sun is directly overhead).
Remarks
Score
A. Stream with good canopy with some breaks for light penetration 10
B. Stream with full canopy - breaks for light penetration absent 8
C. Stream with partial canopy - sunlight and shading are essentially equal 7
D. Stream with minimal canopy - full sun in all but a few areas
E. No canopy and no shading 0
Subtotal
Vil. Riparian Vegetative Zone Width
Definition: A break in the riparian zone is any area which allows sediment to enter the stream. Breaks refer to the near -stream portion
of the riparian zone (banks); places where pollutants can directly enter the stream.
Lft. Bank Rt. Bank
Score Score
A. Riparian zone intact (no breaks)
1. zone width > 18 meters 5 5
2. zone width 12-18 meters 4 4
3. zone width 6-12 meters 3 3
4. zone width < 6 meters 2 2
B. Riparian zone not intact (breaks)
1. breaks rare
a. zone width > 18 meters 4 4
b. zone width 12-18 meters 3 3
c. zone width 6-12 meters 2 2
d. zone width < 6 meters 1. 1
2. breaks common
a. zone width > 18 meters 3 3
b. zone width 12-18 meters 2
c. zone width 6-12 meters t'
d. zone width < 6 meters 0 0
Total
Remarks
Page Total 8
TOTAL SCORE 33

Extreme High Water A. A. A re
lvti
Typical Stream Cross-section
fit
I alikV."`
` Normal Flow
/ �y`�+�w Upper Bank 4111V4■i /
Lower
Bank
Normal High Water
Stream Width
38
This side is 45° bank angle.

3/06 Revision 7
5 TT4_
Habitat Assessment Field -Data Sheet
Coastal Plain Streams
Biological Assessment Unit, DWQ
Directions for use: The observer is to survey a minimum of 100 meters with 200 meters preferred of stream, preferably in an
upstream direction starting above the bridge pool and the road right-of-way. The segment which is assessed should represent average
stream conditions. To perform a proper habitat evaluation the observer needs to get into the stream. To complete the form, select the
description which best fits the observed habitats and then circle the score. If the observed habitat falls in between two descriptions,
select an intermediate
score. A final habitat score is determined by adding the results from the different metrics.
Stream ; ! w ; 11...x. T-�Location/road: (i'1 _ -. r) 4(Road Name - ru wC 1 )County (0 I U {,,t "/ 4 5
TOTAL SCORE
Date � OC, OCk
CC# © 0 DJ d 3 Basin LU 12 Qr'^
Observer(s) Type of Study:
0 Fish
Latitude 39 .31 ? t 0 Longitude �+ D 66GO'(
Water Quality: Temperature _ °C DO
Subbasin 03-07-54
1pBenthos 0 Basinwide ❑Special Study (Describe)
Ecoregi9n: 0 CA 0 SWP 0 Sandhills 0 CB
V Cq-aItwct veri
— mg/1 Conductivity (corr.) - µS/cm pH —
Physical Characterization: Visible land use refers to immediate area that you can see from sampling location. Check off what
you observe driving thru the watershed in watershed land use.
Visible Land Use: %Forest 10 %Residential %Active Pasture gS % Active Crops
%Fallow Fields % Commercial %Industrial %Other - Describe:
Watershed land use 0 Forest 0 Agriculture ❑Urban 0 Animal operations upstream
Width: (meters) Stream_ • Channel (at top of bank) 1- Stream Depth: (m) Avg ' Max
.'Width variable ❑Braided channel ❑Large river >25m wide
Bank Height (from deepest part of channel to top of bank): (m)
5-
Flow conditions : ❑High fdNormal ❑Low
Channel Flow Status
Useful especially under abnormal or low flow conditions.
A. Water reaches base of both banks, minimal channel substrate exposed .0'
B. Water fills >75% of available channel, or <25% of channel substrate is exposed ❑
C. Water fills 25-75% of available channel, many logs/snags exposed 0
D. Root mats out of water 0
E. Very little water in channel, mostly present as standing pools 0
Turbidity: ❑Clear I'Slightly Turbid ❑Turbid ❑Tannic ❑Milky ❑Colored (from dyes) ❑Green tinge
Good potential for Wetlands Restoration Project?? RYES ❑ NO
Details • - -•, a- d ..
❑Channelized ditch
,eeply incised -steep, straight banks ❑Both banks undercut at bend ❑Channel filled in with sediment
❑Recent overbank deposits ❑Bar development ❑Sewage smell
❑Excessive periphyton growth ❑Heavy filamentous algae growth
Manmade Stabilization: IIN ❑Y: ❑Rip -rap, cement, gabions 0 Sediment/grade-control structure ❑Ben /levee
Weather Conditions: ((.P — Photos: yN ❑Y ❑Digital 035mm
Remarks:
TYPICAL STREAM CROSS SECTION DIAGRAM ON BACK

I. Channel Modification
5'Z tT
Score
10
A. Natural channel -minimal dredging
B. Some channelization near bridge, or historic (>20 year old), and/or bends beginning to reappear..
C. Extensive channelization, straight as far as can see, channelized ditch
D. Banks shored with hard structure, >80% of reach disrupted, instream habitat gone
Remarks
Score
15
10
Subtotal c
II. Instream Habitat: Consider the percentage of the reach that is favorable for benthos colonization or fish cover. If >50% of the
reach is snags, and 1 type is present, circle the score of 16. Defmition: leafpacks consist of older leaves that are packed together and
have begun to decay (not piles of leaves in pool areas). Mark as Rare, Common, or Abundant.
Sticks Snags/logs Undercut banks or root mats Macrophytes ,'Leffpacks
AMOUNT OF REACH FAVORABLE FOR COLONIZATION OR COVER
>50% 30-50% 10-30% <10%
Score Score Score Score
4 or 5 types present 20 15 10 5
3 types present 18 13 8 4
2 types present 17 02 7 3
1 type present 16 11 6 2
No substrate for benthos colonization and no fish cover 0
0 No woody vegetation in riparian zone Remarks
Subtotal %pk
III. Bottom Substrate (silt, clay, sand, detritus, gravel) look at entire reach for substrate scoring.
A. Substrate types mixed Score
1. gravel dominant 1
2. sand dominant (13)
3. detritus dominant
4. silt/clay/muck dominant
B. Substrate homogeneous
1. nearly all gravel
2. nearly all sand
3. nearly all detritus
4. nearly all silt/clay/muck
Remarks
12
7
4
1
Subtotal 13
IV. Pool Variety Pools are areas of deeper than average maximum depths with little or no surface turbulence. Water velocities
associated with pools are always slow.
A. Pools present
1. Pools Frequent (>30% of 100m length surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes
b. pools about the same size (indicates pools filling in) 8
2. Pools Infrequent (<30% of the 100m length surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes 6 b. pools about the same size
B. Pools absent
1. Deep water/run habitat present 4
2. Deep water/run habitat absent 06
Subtotal
Remarks Page Total 3 Co

V. Bank Stability and Vegetation
A. Banks stable or no banks, just flood plain
1. little or no evidence of erosion or bank failure, little potential for erosion
B. Erosion areas present
1. diverse trees, shrubs, grass; plants healthy with good root systems
2. few trees or small trees and shrubs; vegetation appears generally healthy
3. sparse vegetation; plant types and conditions suggest poorer soil binding
4. mostly grasses, few if any trees and shrubs, high erosion and failure potential at high flow
5. little or no bank vegetation, mass erosion and bank failure evident 0
Score Score
10 10
9 9
9
Total
Remarks — 12-vW r-c.)Itc ihctklaS i —G4
VI. Light Penetration (Canopy is defined as tree or vegetative cover directly above the stream's surface. Canopy would block out
sunlight when the sun is directly overhead).
Remarks
A. Stream with good canopy with some breaks for light penetration
B. Stream with full canopy - breaks for light penetration absent
C. Stream with partial canopy - sunlight and shading are essentially equal
D. Stream with minimal canopy - full sun in all but a few areas
E. No canopy and no shading
Score
10
8
7
Subtotal O),
VII. Riparian Vegetative Zone Width
Definition: A break in the riparian zone is any area which allows sediment to enter the stream. Breaks refer to the near -stream portion
of the riparian zone (banks); places where pollutants can directly enter the stream.
A. Riparian zone intact (no breaks)
1. zone width > 18 meters
2. zone width 12-18 meters
3. zone width 6-12 meters
4. zone width < 6 meters
B. Riparian zone not intact (breaks)
1. breaks rare
a. zone width > 18 meters
b. zone width 12-18 meters
c. zone width 6-12 meters
d. zone width < 6 meters
2. breaks common
a. zone width > 18 meters
b. zone width 12-18 meters
c. zone width 6-12 meters
d. zone width < 6 meters
Remarks /04 L1.j /- 4 ce6-CAI e
(y y
r- -! 'f t -F P t
Lft. Bank Rt. Bank
Score Score
5 5
4 4
3 3
2 2
4 4
3 3
2 2
1• 1
3 3
2 2
Total
Page Total C k
TOTAL SCORE

Typical Stream Cross-section
Extreme High Water
Normal High Water
IY°rmal Flow �:••
Stream Width
lamer
Bank
Upper Bank
This side is 45° bank angle.

Draft MY0 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100055) Appendices
Shaw’s Run Mitigation Site Restoration Systems, LLC
Columbus County, North Carolina March 2021

Appendix G
As-Built Plan Sheets

1
DocuSign Envelope ID: 33AE8BF5-199D-43B6-9361-1FE2CC17F8E7
GO
MITIGATION
VICINITY MAP
Not to Scale
u
NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES
AS -BUILT PLANS
SHA WS RUN MITIGATION SITE
LOCATION: COLUMBUS COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
TYPE OF WORK: STREAM RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENT (CLEARING,
GRUBBING, GRADING, EROSION CONTROL AND PLANTING)
CSX Railroad
F 1 1
I`1
•
Tn
a
O
Shaws Run Mitigation Site
Columbus County
DMS ID #: 100055
DMS Contract #: 0007515
Lumber 03040203
USACE Action #: SAW-2018-01196
DWR Project #: 2018-0866
Latitude: 34.313
Longitude: -78.8666 (WGS84)
GRAPHIC SCALES
50 25 0
50
100
iI
fill
PLANS
50 25 0 50
100
PROFILE (HORIZONTAL)
10 5 0 10 5
PROFILE (VERTICAL)
Braswell Rd
BEGIN -UT 2-
STA 0+4/
END -UT I -
STA 19+99
SR 1414
BEGIN -UT 1-
STA 0+00
UT 2 d
END -UT 2-
STA 4+29
1
UT 1
r
v
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE: 7.73 AC
sy
-D
UT 1
0
PROPOSED LENGTH OF -UT 1- = 1999 LF
PROPOSED LENGTH OF -UT 2-= 388 LF
TOTAL STREAM LENGTH = 2428 LF
RESTORATION LEVEL
STREAM (linear footage)
RIPARIAN WETLAND (acreage)
NONRIPARIAN WETLAND (acreage)
RESTORATION
2367
5.850
0.000
ENHANCEMENT
0
0.000
0.000
PRESERVATION
0
0.100
0.000
TOTALS
2367
5.950
0.000
MITIGATION UNITS
2367SMUs
5.860 RIPARIAN WMUS
NONRIPARIAN WMUs
la
Z
Axiom Environmental
218 Snow Ave
Raleigh, NC 27603
GRANT LEWIS
PROJECT DESIGNER
INDEX OF SHEETS
SHEET NUMBER
01
02
03
04A THRU 4G
04H
SHEET
Title Sheet
Symbology
Easement
As -Built Structures
As -Built Planting Table
SURVEYORS CERTIFICATION(S)
Surveyor's disclaimer: No attempt was made to locate any cemeteries, wetlands, hazardous material
sites, underground utilities or any other features above, or below ground other than those shown.
However, no visible evidence of cemeteries or utilities, aboveground or otherwise, was observed by
the undersigned (other than those shown).
I certify that the survey is of an existing parcel or parcels of land or one or more existing easements
and does not create a new street or change an existing street.
I JOHN A. RUDOLPH , certify that this plat was prepared under my supervision from an actual field
survey made under my supervision, of as -built conditions.
That the boundaries not surveyed are clearly indicated as such and were plotted from information as
referenced hereon; That the ratio of precision as calculated was 1:7,500* and that the
global navigational satellite system (GNSS) was used to perform this survey and the following
information was used:
Class of Survey: CLASS B (HORIZONTAL) CLASS B (VERTICAL)
Positional Accuracy: 0.12 feet (HORIZONTAL)
Type of GPS field procedure: RTK
Dates of survey: June & July 2020
Datum/Epoch: NAD 1983(2011)
Published/Fixed Control Use• OPUS
Geoid Model- 2012E CONUS
Combined Grid Factor 0.99990680 GROUND TO GRID
Units. US SURVEY FEET
That this plat meets the requirements of the standards of practice for land surveying in North
Carolina. Witness my hand and seal this 04th day of November 2020
SEAL OR STAMP
0\\IIIII/0 //
-c'\ CARn;'o,
\ Doc Signed by:
. ,)eluk, !Wilk
1C9D7386B9B645D...
L-4194
42-
0 4/0 SURv'• pq:
/ ,1' 1LEY RHO `\
///111111\\\\\ 3/3/2021
L-4194
Professional Land Surveyor
Prepared In the Office of:
SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
TEL [phone]
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
EiS
RESTORATION
SYSTEMS ILLC
Restoration Systems
1101 Haynes St.
Suite 211
Raleigh, NC 27604
WORTH CREECH
SITE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER
JOSHUA G. DALTON, P.E.
PROJECT ENGINEER
License Number
RECORD DRAWING
(111II
\\ CAR, /7.
�DocuSigned by:
LD.,14-0A
-'•--1089AD8C14994C3...
.J t _
2697I =
y UA G,DP\
////IIII11\\\\
\
3/3/2021
DATE:

DocuSign Envelope ID: 33AE8BF5-199D-43B6-9361-1FE2CC17F8E7
RECORD DRAWING
CONVENTIONAL PLAN SHEET SYMBOLS
SHEET NAME SHEET NUMBER
-o
N
0_
a
a
-a
N0
0¢ m
\ 3 i
wn KrL
rxn
BOUNDARIES AND PROPERTY:
State Line
County Line
Township Line
City Line
Reservation Line
Property Line
Existing Iron Pin
Computed Property Corner
Property Monument
Parcel/Sequence Number
Existing Fence Line
Proposed Fence Gate
0
EIP
0
ECM
x x x
Proposed Barbed Wire Fence
Existing Wetland Boundary
Proposed Wetland Boundary
Existing Endangered Animal Boundary
Existing Endangered Plant Boundary
Existing Historic Property Boundary
BUILDINGS AND OTHER CULTURE:
Gas Pump Vent or U/G Tank Cap
Sign
Well
Small Mine
Foundation
Area Outline
Cemetery
Building
School
Church
Dam
WLB
WLB
EAB
EPB
HPB
0
0
0
t
HYDROLOGY:
Stream or Body of Water
Hydro, Pool or Reservoir
Jurisdictional Stream
Buffer Zone 1
Buffer Zone 2
is
Flow Arrow —
Disappearing Stream
Spring
Wetland
Proposed Lateral, Tail, Head Ditch
BZ 1
BZ 2
» > >
FHW
RIGHT OF WAY & PROJECT CONTROL:
Secondary Horiz and Vert Control Point
Primary Horiz Control Point
Primary Horiz and Vert Control Point
•
•
0
Note: Not to Scale *S. U.E. = Subsurface Utility Engineering
Exist Permanent Easment Pin and Cap
New Permanent Easement Pin and Cap
Vertical Benchmark
Existing Right of Way Marker
Existing Right of Way Line
New Right of Way Line
New Right of Way Line with Pin and Cap
New Right of Way Line with
Concrete or Granite RAW Marker
New Control of Access Line with
Concrete C/A Marker
Existing Control of Access
New Control of Access
Existing Easement Line
New Conservation Easement
New Temporary Drainage Easement
New Permanent Drainage Easement
New Permanent Drainage / Utility Easement
New Permanent Utility Easement
New Temporary Utility Easement
New Aerial Utility Easement
m
0
0 w
0 0
c
ROADS AND RELATED FEATURES:
Existing Edge of Pavement
Existing Curb —
Proposed Slope Stakes Cut
Proposed Slope Stakes Fill
Proposed Curb Ramp
Existing Metal Guardrail
Proposed Guardrail
Existing Cable Guiderail
Proposed Cable Guiderail
Equality Symbol
Pavement Removal
VEGETATION:
Single Tree
Single Shrub
Hedge
Woods Line
Orchard
Vineyard
EXISTING STRUCTURES:
MAJOR:
Bridge, Tunnel or Box Culvert
Bridge Wing Wall, Head Wall and End
MINOR:
Head and End Wall
Wall —
E
E
TDE
PDE
DUE
PUE
TUE
AUE
c
F
T T T T
n n n
€3 0 0 0
Vineyard
CONC
CONC WW
/ CONC HW
1
Pipe Culvert
Footbridge
Drainage Box: Catch Basin, DI or JB
Paved Ditch Gutter
Storm Sewer Manhole
Storm Sewer
UTILITIES:
POWER:
Existing Power Pole
Proposed Power Pole
Existing Joint Use Pole
Proposed Joint Use Pole
Power Manhole
Power Line Tower
LB
Power Transformer
U/G Power Cable Hand Hole
H—Frame Pole
U/G Power Line LOS B (S.U.E.*)
U/G Power Line LOS C (S.U.E.*)
U/G Power Line LOS D (S.U.E.*)
TELEPHONE:
Existing Telephone Pole
WATER:
Water Manhole
Water Meter
Water Valve
Water Hydrant
t
0
U/G Water Line LOS B (S.U.E*)
U/G Water Line LOS C (S.U.E*)
U/G Water Line LOS D (S.U.E*)
Above Ground Water Line
GAS:
Gas Valve
Gas Meter
0
0
0
A/c Water
U/G Gas Line LOS B (S.U.E.*)
U/G Gas Line LOS C (S.U.E.*)
U/G Gas Line LOS D (S.U.E.*)
Above Ground Gas Line
SANITARY SEWER:
Sanitary Sewer Manhole
Sanitary Sewer Cleanout
U/G Sanitary Sewer Line
0
A/C Cad
Above Ground Sanitary Sewer
OO
0
55
A/C Sanitary Sewer
SS Forced Main Line LOS B (S.U.E.*)
SS Forced Main Line LOS C (S.U.E.*)
FSB
F55
PROJECT NAME:
DMS ID #: /00055
SYMBOLOGY 0/A
SHAWS RUN MITIGATION SITE
COUNTY: COLUMBUS DATE: 202/
SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
*
•
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
TEL [phone]
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
SS Forced Main Line LOS D (S.U.E.*)
MISCELLANEOUS:
Utility Pole
Utility Pole with Base
Utility Located Object
Utility Traffic Signal Box
Utility Unknown U/G Line LOS B (S.U.E.*)
U/G Tank; Water, Gas, Oil
Underground Storage Tank, Approx. Loc.
A/G Tank; Water, Gas, Oil
Geoenvironmental Boring
U/G Test Hole LOS A (S.U.E.*)
Abandoned According to Utility Records
End of Information
Riffle Rip Rap
Log Vane
Log Cross Vane
Step Pool Structure
Stream Plug
FSS
•
0
0
0
euTL
AATUR
E.O.I.
gAg �gi %gf %gam
oO01 o0 090 00<
Floodplain Interceptor
Proposed Fence
Limits of Disturbance
AS -BUILT:
Stream Centerline
Stream Top of Bank
Stream Gauge
Groundwater Gauge
Benthic & Water Quality Station
Origin Point on CVS Plots
CVS Plots
Cross Section
Begin
End
/// li ll /_ l i lTi
— LOD —
0
# •
- Ai
0
Adjusted Stream Structure
Not Constructed
XS-10 R
X

DocuSign Envelope ID: 33AE8BF5-199D-43B6-9361-1FE2CC17F8E7
RECORD DRAWING
SHEET NAME SHEET NUMBER
EASEMENT
SHAWS RUN MITIGATION SITE
100' 50' 0 100' 500'
1111111111 \11
SCALE: 1"=200'
SURVEY INFORMATION PROPERTY/
EASEMENT PROVIDED BY:
K2 DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
5688 U.S. HIGHWAY 70 EAST
GOLDSBORO, NC 27534
PROJECT NAME:
DMS ID #: 100055
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
COUNTY: COLUMBUS
DATE:
2021
SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
. ' 905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
,j/// • ENGTELI919FIRMB59-2243 LIICENSE NO. C-890 7606
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED

DocuSign Envelope ID: 33AE8BF5-199D-43B6-9361-1 FE2CC17F8E7
25' 12.5' 0 25' 50'
IIIII1IIII\1/1
SCALE: 1"= 50'
oa%
SHEET
NAME
AS —BUILT
STRUCTURES
SHEET NUMBER
4A
PROJECT NAME:
SHAWS RUN MITIGATION SITE
DMS ID #: 100055
COUNTY: COLUMBUS DATE 202/
_PSH_04A.dgn
_1_05
W
MATCHLINE SEE SHEET zIF
rn
LOG CROSS VANE
STRUCTURE NOT
NECESSARY DUE TO
FIELD CONDITIONS
sOs
SHAW, MICHAELCk
BK: 577 PG:5/3 O
i
hMARSH TREATMENT
AREA
c
LIMITS OF //
DISTURBANCE START RESTORATION
ySTA 0+00 -UT 1-
F
GGW-8
W-9
LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION
LOG CROSS
VANE (TYP)
0
WETTED
PERIMETER
LOG CROSS
VANE W/DROP
LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION
-UT 1- STRU CI'6J RE LOCATIONS
STR. TYPE
NORTHING
EASTING
Prop Elevation
AB Survey
Elevation
LOG CROSS VANE
207,641 .08
2,040,560.33
95.32
95.54
LOG CROSS VANE
207,626.66
2,040,552.22
95.29
LOG CROSS VANE W/DROP
207,618.78
2,040,533.51
95.24
95.36
LOG CROSS VANE
207,596.19
2,040,520.06
95.08
95.26
LOG CROSS VANE
207,583.88
2,040,503.15
95.03
95.08
LOG CROSS VANE
207,568.02
2,040,465.84
94.93
95.11
LOG CROSS VANE W/DROP
207,546.55
2,040,444.04
94.86
95.03
LOG CROSS VANE
207,526.47
2,040,407.99
94.65
94.73
LOG CROSS VANE
207,500.08
2,040,367.42
94.52
94.66
LOG CROSS VANE
207,461 .74
2,040,334.31
94.37
94.56
LOG CROSS VANE
207,455.58
2,040,325.06
94.29
94.41
100
2_C
START RESTORA
STA 0+00 -UT 1-
ELEV 95.36
■\L
111_■
III MI
PROP THALWEG
EXST GROUND
AT PROP THAI WFC
►- LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE
o �
INV IN
PERMANENT CROSSING
1@42" CMP
1@18" CMP FLOODPLAIN
PIPE ON EACH SIDE
ALL PIPES BURIED 20%
16' TOP WIDTH (TYP)
AS BUILT CE
r ALONG DESI
ALIGNMENT
��-111111111111111111111111111
111111111E MII■11111111111111111111111111111
E
SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
lir
•
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
TEL [phone]
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
&ECORD DRAWIN
\
p0
REMOVE
\
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
.0A01111111///,
,-DocuSigned by:
Jr,3i>�a G 044-OA
1089AD8C14994C3...
SEAL 72.
26971 =
/ VCI NEI\
H0/1 r, IO P` -
3/3/2021
DATE:
THE EASEMENT WILL NOT BE FENCED.
THE EASEMENT BOUNDARY WILL BE
MARKED APPROPRIATELY.
WOODY DEBRIS ADDED
TO RIFFLES FOR HABITAT PURPOSES
TOPOGRAHY OUTSIDE
OF SURVEY LIMITS BASED ON
NC SPATIAL DATA QL2 LIDAR
85
0
+50 01 +50 02
+50 03
+50

DocuSign Envelope ID: 33AE8BF5-199D-43B6-9361-1 FE2CC17F8E7
PSH 04S.dgn
-UT 1-STRUCTURE LOCATIONS
STR. TYPE
NORTHING
EASTING
Prop Elevation
AB Survey
Elevation
LOG CROSS VANE
207,443.71
2,040,316.03
94.26
94.24
LOG VANE ARM
207,434.62
2,040,302.82
94.22
94.33
LOG CROSS VANE W/DROP
207,405.43
2,040,300.39
94.16
94.45
LOG CROSS VANE
207,380.09
2,040,300.44
93.99
94.15
LOG CROSS VANE
207,359.29
2,040,315.16
93.93
94.10
LOG CROSS VANE W/DROP
207,314.62
2,040,325.79
93.80
94.09
LOG CROSS VANE
207,241.16
2,040,306.57
93.56
93.78
LOG CROSS VANE
207,217.36
2,040,300.71
93.50
93.78
LOG CROSS VANE
207,178.35
2,040,291.16
93.39
93.66
LOG
ILL EXISTING
CHANNEL
qT
SEE
4)G CROSS
VepI E W/
NEE T
E
-UT 1-STRUCTURE LOCATIONS
STR. TYPE
NORTHING
EASTING
Prop Elevation
AB Survey
Elevation
LOG CROSS VANE
207,130.04
2,040,292.19
93.27
LOG CROSS VANE
207,101.86
2,040,285.00
93.19
93.58
LOG CROSS VANE
207,072.92
2,040,293.28
93.12
LOG CROSS VANE
207,051.40
2,040,294.03
93.06
93.36
LOG CROSS VANE
206,996.09
2,040,286.34
92.89
93.21
LOG CROSS VANE
206,968.31
2,040,285.74
92.82
93.10
LOG CROSS VANE
206,950.03
2,040,278.00
92.77
LOG CROSS VANE
206,922.82
2,040,288.79
92.70
92.86
END RESTORATION
STA 4+29 -UT 2-
STA 5+22 -UT 1-
E
LOG CR
W
6
LOG CROSS VANE
STRUCTURE
NECESSARY DUE
FIELD CONDITIONS
1 11 L/
RIMETER
-UT 2- STRUCTURE LOCATIONS
STR. TYPE
NORTHING
EASTING
Prop Elevation
AB Survey
Elevation
LOG CROSS VANE
207,353.00
2,040,243.71
94.07
94.26
LOG CROSS VANE
207,324.35
2,040,295.66
93.87
94.02
LOG CROSS VANE
207,319.13
2,040,311.85
93.84
95
90
11
95
90
EXST GROUND UT 2
AT PROP THALWEG ' 11 t\1 1
3
i
11
MN
11MN
\-PROP THALWEG
A
111111
NamIF LiNE
-
+50
1<=51
STA 4
SIAb
IA
AS -BUILT CENTERLINE
ALONG DESIGN
ALIGNMENT
LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION
SHAW, MICHAEL W
BK: 577 PG: 5/3
LIMITS OF
� DISTURBANCE
CROSS
(2) LOG V
STRUCTURES NOT
NECESSSARY DUE TO
IELD \ONDITIONS
00
k
3
LOG CROSS
VANE (TYP)
WETTED i
PERIMETER LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE
LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION
LOG
ST
ECES
FIELD
25' 12.5' 0
£8 4YN
25'
50'
1111
1111
SCALE: 1"= 50'
SHEET NAME
SHEET NUMBER
AS -BUILT STRUCTURES 4B
PROJECT NAME: SHAWS RUN MITIGATION SITE
DMS ID #: 100055 COUNTY: COLUMBUS DATE 202/
SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
•
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
TEL [phone]
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
THE EASEMENT WILL NOT BE FENCED.
THE EASEMENT BOUNDARY WILL BE
MARKED APPROPRIATELY.
ROSS VANE
UCTURE NOT
ARY DUE TO
CONDITIONS
RECORD DRAWING
i\
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
-DocuSigned by:
J03l>�a G D44-en
1089AD8C14994C3...
SEAL 7
2697 1
;4/C I N E�
°,4 G. P`',
3/3/2021
DATE:
Ns),
WOODY DEBRIS ADDED
TO RIFFLES FOR HABITAT PURPOSES
TOPOGRAHY OUTSIDE
OF SURVEY LIMITS BASED ON
NC SPATIAL DATA QL2 LIDAR
95
END RESTORATION
STA 4+29 -UT 2-
ELEV 93.78
90
■■■
■■
■■
■■
■■
■■
UT - 2
UT
UI1
F 93 39
)S CROUND
T PROP 1HALWE(U
L
R
P
THH
ALWEG
rt
5+
95
90
r
+50
04
+50
05 + 50
06 + 50
07
+50
08
+50
09
+50

DocuSign Envelope ID: 33AE8BF5-199D-43B6-9361-1 FE2CC17F8E7
SHEET NAME
SHEET NUMBER
MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 4G
LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE
LOG CROSS
VANE W/DROP
*uu -UT 1-
GW-
LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION
THE EASEMENT WILL NOT BE FENCED.
THE EASEMENT BOUNDARY WILL BE
MARKED APPROPRIATELY.
•
77 LI'- 'OSS ` WETTED
"OO ROP \ F PERIMETER
SHAW, MICHAEL W
77 PC: 5/3 LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE
LOG CROSS
VANE (TYP)
.,y;,;\77
FILL EXISTING CHANNEL
GW-
•
-UT 1-STRUCTURE LOCATIONS
STR. TYPE
NORTHING
EASTING
Prop Elevation
AB Survey
Elevation
LOG CROSS VANE W/DROP
206,809.88
2,040,312.71
92.41
92.66
LOG CROSS VANE W/DROP
206,761.76
2,040,293.42
92.18
92.45
LOG CROSS VANE
206,717.30
2,040,218.07
91.75
92.03
LOG CROSS VANE
206,685.15
2,040,167.88
91.61
91.69
LOG CROSS VANE
206,666.26
2,040,149.17
91.56
91.69
LOG CROSS VANE
206,655.85
2,040,127.61
91.51
91.73
LOG CROSS VANE
206,631.62
2,040,117.21
91.45
91.52
LOG CROSS VANE W/DROP
206,616.50
2,040,091.02
91.18
91.44
0 Or
LO
W
Qw
�0
W
zw
J
0
0
0
LOG CROSS
LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION ' VANE W/DROP
STREAM PLUG
3
3
3
LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE
3
25' 12.5' 0
25'
50'
IIII
IIII
SCALE: 1"= 50'
AS -BUILT STRUCTURES
4C
PROJECT NAME: SHAWS RUN MITIGATION SITE
DMS ID #: 100055 COUNTY: COLUMBUS DATE 202/
SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
TEL[phone]
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
RECORD DRAWINIII
STREAM PLUG
E
00
o .r-
00
LLI
Qw
uJ
J
0
0
0
0
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
.‘AAIII111l1/,,
r DocuSigned by:
J01L .. G D.,W,
qq%
`-1089AD8C14994C3... , -
SEAL
269T 1 =
3/3/2021
DATE:
WOODY DEBRIS ADDED
TO RIFFLES FOR HABITAT PURPOSES
TOPOGRAHY OUTSIDE
OF SURVEY LIMITS BASED ON
NC SPATIAL DATA QL2 LIDAR
=MN
MEM
u
AS -BUILT CE 4,'1!1 1-
ALONG DESI
EX5- r,R U D ALIGNMENT
•1 IIII
MINIM
Ad
J'I•1.M1 r!IVVA _
0)
0
LSD 0
W
w
n
w
0
J
0
100
95
■
90
85
+50 10 +50 11 +50 12 +50 13 +50 14 +50 15

DocuSign Envelope ID: 33AE8BF5-199D-43B6-9361-1 FE2CC17F8E7
105
100
95
90
115
N
LIM1iS�OF CONIST/UCTION
LIMITS ?F�
DISIRBA CE
/ LOG CROSS
VANE W/DROP
15
FILL EXISTING CHANNEL
SHAW, MICHAEL W
BK: 577 PG: 5/3
END STEP POOL
STRUCTURE 7/z��
BEGIN STEP POOL
STRUCTURE
co LOG CROSS
VANE W/DROP
LOG CROSS
VANE W/DROP
3
GW-1
•
WETTED
PERIMETER
3
\-UTi-SOTRUCTURE
LOCATIONS
DISTURBANCE
STR. TYPE
N RTHIN
EASTING
Prop Elevation
AB Survey
Elevation
LOG CROSS VANE W/DROP
206,535.55
2,040,051.65
91.18
91.01
LOG CROSS VANE W/DROP
206,428.51
2,039,974.74
90.68
90.59
LOG CROSS VANE W/DROP
206,411.24
2,039,939.81
91.10
90.55
LOG CROSS VANE W/DROP
206,350.11
2,039,820.04
90.63
89.88
DROP STRUCTURE
206,346.73
2,039,791.84
89.64
89.47
DROP STRUCTURE
206,320 16
2,039,732.38
88.11
+50
..
MN
EXST GROUND
AT PROP THALWEG
16 +50
..
\
..
rgENN
■
UT 1
P
RO
17 +50
P
T
..
HALWEG
.E,
■
18
3
■T„
25' 12.5' 0
1111111111
SCALE: 1"= 50'
+50
25'
SHEET NAME
SHEET NUMBER
AS -BUILT STRUCTURES 4D
PROJECT NAME: SHAWS RUN MITIGATION SITE
DMS ID #: 100055 COUNTY: COLUMBUS
DATE: 202/
SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
• 1
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
TEL [phone]
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
RECORD DRAM=
END RESTORATION
STA 19+99 -UT 1-
19
+50
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
—DocuSigned by:
J03l>�a G Daly -en
1/4-1089AD8C14994C3...
SEAL
26971
/' \\\
///'//III I III/�\\\
3/3/2021
DATE:
THE EASEMENT WILL NOT BE FENCED.
THE EASEMENT BOUNDARY WILL BE
MARKED APPROPRIATELY.
WOODY DEBRIS ADDED
TO RIFFLES FOR HABITAT PURPOSES
20
TOPOGRAHY OUTSIDE
OF SURVEY LIMITS BASED ON
NC SPATIAL DATA QL2 LIDAR
05
00
95
85

DocuSign Envelope ID: 33AE8BF5-199D-43B6-9361-1 FE2CC17F8E7
25' 12.5' 0
�IIII�IIII
25'
50'
SHEET NAME
SHEET NUMBER
AS —BUILT STRUCTURES 4E
PROJECT NAME: SHAWS RUN MITIGATION SITE
100055 COUNTY: COLUMBUS DATE: 202/
LIMITS OF REMOVE
DISTURBANCE
IN IN
44,67
PERMANENT CROSSING
1@30" CMP
1@18 CMP FLOODPLAIN
PIPE ON EACH SIDE
ALL PIPES BURIED 20%
12' TOP WIDTH (TYP)
/
/
/
/ /
/ /
/ /
/
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
/
/
/
LOG CR055 VANE
STRkJCT(JRE NOT
NECE,S'SRY DUE TO
FIELD ,CONDITIONS
/
// (2) LOG CROSS VANE
STRUCTURES NOT
SHMEMSARYW DUE TO
/ BKFLPC�ILNDITIONS
/
/ /
/
efrA,
•
ART
AO
2
SEA
FILL EXISTIN
CHANNE
OG CROSS
VANE (TYP)
LOG VA
OO ��, ARM (T
SG
ESTORATION
41 -UT 2-
E
P)
SCALE: 1" = 50'
RECORD DRAWING
�, •
RG
LOG CROSS VAN
STRUCTURE NOT
NECESSARY DUE TO
F+�LD CONDITIONS
W-7
LO
(2) LOG CROSS VANE V
STRUCTURES NOT
NECESSARY DUE TO
FIELD CONDITIONS
0y
WETTED
PERIMETER
CROSS
W/DROP
LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE
LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION
SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
1
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
TEL [phone]
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
THE EASEMENT WILL NOT BE FENCED.
THE EASEMENT BOUNDARY WILL BE
MARKED APPROPRIATELY.
WOODY DEBRIS ADDED
TO RIFFLES FOR HABITAT PURPOSES
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
111111,,.
—DocuSigned by:
2
"-1089AD8C14994C3... 9 '
SEAS 7
26971
3/3/2021
DATE:
-UT 2- STRUCTURE LOCATIONS
a STR. TYPE
NORTHING
EASTING
Prop Elevation
AB Survey
Elevation
LOG CROSS VANE
207,545.16
2,040,070.07
95.01
96.49
LOG CROSS VANE
207,538.54
2,040,070.67
94.99
96.06
LOG CROSS VANE
207,515.43
2,040,076.09
94.92
LOG CROSS VANE
207,504.87
2,040,075.57
94.89
94.95
LOG CROSS VANE
207,494.41
2,040,083.89
94.86
94.97
LOG CROSS VANE
207,479.89
2,040,085.33
94.82
LOG CROSS VANE
207,467.04
2,040,096.75
94.78
94.90
LOG CROSS VANE W/DROP
207,454.70
2,040,100.05
94.75
LOG CROSS VANE W/DROP
207,446.26
2,040,112.04
94.68
94.70
LOG CROSS VANE W/DROP
207,434.93
2,040,118.29
94.61
94.70
LOG CROSS VANE W/DROP
207,427.45
2,040,131.26
94.54
94.49
LOG CROSS VANE W/DROP
207,422.48
2,040,137.82
94.48
LOG CROSS VANE W/DROP
207,412.23
2,040,141.97
94.40
94.35
LOG VANE ARM
207,407.84
2,040,161.05
94.33
LOG VANE ARM
207,396.00
2,040,183.97
94.26
10
10
9
9
5
AK
I K1 51 KA I ION
STA p -LT 74
EV
�O
+4
ZL
G4.0
0
1
7
ST
E
AM
+50
CR
S
S
U1
2
EXST GROUN
AT PROP THALWE
■■
01 +50
P
RO
P
AS
A
TI- ALWE
02
-BU
G
L-
C
Er
EN
E
5
T
ER
LI
E
+50
■
■■
03
TOPOGRAHY OUTSIDE
OF SURVEY LIMITS BASED ON
NC SPATIAL DATA QL2 LIDAR
105
R5

DocuSign Envelope ID: 33AE8BF5-199D-43B6-9361-1FE2CC17F8E7
25' 12.5' 0 25' 50'
hnr11H
SCALE: 1" = 50'
SHEET NAME SHEET NUMBER
AS -BUILT STRUCTURES 4F
PROJECT NAME: SHAWS RUN MITIGATION SITE
DMS ID #: 100055 I COUNTY: COLUMBUS I DATE: 202/
W
W
m
i
SHAW, MICHAEL W
BK:577 PG:5/3
7
THE EASEMENT WILL NOT BE FENCED.
THE EASEMENT BOUNDARY WILL BE
MARKED APPROPRIATELY.
7
4111
MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 4A
LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE
SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
. ' 905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
,j/// • ENGTELi919FIRMB59-2243 LIICENSE NO. C-890 7606
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
RECORD DRAWINr
7
7
7
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
,-DocuSigned by:
Jo3(>w.,GDiL
1089AD8C14994C3... 9
SEAL-
= 26971 = _
VCJN���o�
A G, D P�
//I
3/3/2021
DATE:
TOPOGRAHY OUTSIDE
OF SURVEY LIMITS BASED ON
NC SPATIAL DATA QL2 LIDAR

DocuSign Envelope ID: 33AE8BF5-199D-43B6-9361-1FE2CC17F8E7
2
o
C3
CL
m
CO
a
CT)
NN2
M3
N
\LL
MCI)
SHAW. M/CHAEL W
BK:577 PG:5/3
W
25' 12.5' 0 25' 50'
SCALE: 1"=50'
THE EASEMENT WILL NOT BE FENCED.
THE EASEMENT BOUNDARY WILL BE
MARKED APPROPRIATELY.
/ /
7 / / / �/
/ / G@/
/ / / / /
/ / / / /
/ / ill/ / / / GW-4—
MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 4C
\ LIMITS OF
NDISTURBANCE
\
RECORD DRAWING
92
SHEET NAME SHEET NUMBER
AS -BUILT STRUCTURES 4G
PROJECT NAME: SHAWS RUN MITIGATION SITE
DMS ID #: 100055 I COUNTY: COLUMBUS I DATE 2021
SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
. 905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
7606
TEL)
j/// • ENGI919FIRMB59-2243 LIICENSE NO. C-890
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
-DocuSigned by:'
JoAmi G D.JA-on
//
-1089AD8C14994C3... "7 %
SEAS
//oS<NCI NE�o�
///11,111 G110\`\\
3/3/2021
DATE:
TOPOGRAHY OUTSIDE
OF SURVEY LIMITS BASED ON
NC SPATIAL DATA QL2 LIDAR

DocuSign Envelope ID: 33AE8BF5-199D-43B6-9361-1 FE2CC17F8E7
SHEET NAME SHEET NUMBER
AS -BUILT PLANTING 41-1
PROJECT NAME: SHAWS RUN MITIGATION SITE
DMS ID #: 100055 COUNTY: COLUMBUS DATE: 202/
DESIGN PLANTING LIST
Vegetation Association
Coastal Plain Small
Stream Swamp Forest*
Mesic-Mixed Hardwood
Forest*
Stream -side
Assemblage**
LOLA .
Area (acres)
3.7
2.1
1.5
7.3
Species
# planted*
% of total
# planted*
% of total
# planted*"
% of total
# planted
Bald cypress (Taxodium distichum)
503
20
--
--
408
10
911
Black gum (Nyssa sylvatica)
503
20
--
--
408
10
911
Swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii)
252
10
143
10
--
--
394
Laurel oak (Quercus laurifoha)
252
10
143
10
--
--
394
River birch (Betula nigra)
252
10
143
10
408
10
802
Tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera)
252
10
143
10
--
--
394
Water oak (Quercus nigra)
--
--
143
10
--
--
143
Willow oak (Quercus phellos)
--
--
143
10
--
--
143
Green ash (Fraxinuspennsylvanica)
252
10
286
20
--
--
537
Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis)
252
10
286
20
408
10
945
Sillcy dogwood (Corpus amomum)
--
--
--
--
612
15
612
Black willow (Salix nigra)
--
--
--
--
612
15
612
Buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis)
--
--
--
--
612
15
612
Elderberry (Sambucus canadensis)
--
--
--
--
612
15
612
TOTAL
2516
100
1428
100
4080
100
8024
* Planted at a density of 680 stems/acre.
** Planted at a density of 2720 stems/acre.
SUNGATE DESIGN GROUP, P.A.
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
905 JONES FRANKLIN ROAD
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27606
TEL [phone]
ENG FIRM LICENSE NO. C-890
RECORD DRAWING
AS —BUILT PLANTING LIST
Species
# Planted
Bald cypress (Taxodium distichum)
1000
Blackgum(Nyssa sylvatica)
1000
Swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii)
Laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia)
400
River birch (Betula nigra)
800
Tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera)
500
Water oak (Quercus nigra)
300
Willow oak (Quercus phellos)
300
Green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica)
300
Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis)
1000
Silky dogwood (Comus amomum)
700
Black willow (Salixnigra)
Buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis)
800
Elderberry (Sambucus canadensis)
Sugarberry (Celtis laevigata)
100
Persimmon (Diospyros virginiana)
300
Overcup Oak (Quercus lyrate)
400
Cherrybark Oak (Quercus pagoda)
400
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED