20160980 Ver 1_Year 3 Monitoring Report_20210930

ID#* 20160980 Version* 1
Select Reviewer:*
Erin Davis
Initial Review Completed Date 09/30/2021
Mitigation Project Submittal - 9/30/2021
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?* r Yes r No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
V Stream Pr Wetlands r- Buffer r` Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:*
Jamey McEachran
Project Information
..................................................................................................................................................................
ID#:* 20160980
Existing IDY
Project Type: r DMS r Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Meadow Spring
County: Johnston
Document Information
Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Version:
*1
Existing Version
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: Meadow Spring Year 3 Monitoring Report.pdf 20.01 MB
Rease upload only one RDFcf the conplete file that needs to be subnitted...
Signature
Print Name:* Ryan Medric
Signature:*

MEADOW SPRING MITIGATION SITE
JOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SAW-2016-01989 I NEU-CONSTREAMAND WETLAND UMBI
YEAR 3 MONITORING REPORT
Provided by:
fires
Bank Sponsor: EBX-Neuse I, LLC,
An entity of Resource Environmental Solutions
3600 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 100
Raleigh, NC 27612
919-209-1055
September 2021

Table of Contents
1.0 Project Summary..................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Project Location and Description.............................................................................................. 1
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives.................................................................................................... 2
1.3 Pro_ject Success Criteria............................................................................................................. 2
StreamSuccess Criteria................................................................................................................... 3
WetlandSuccess Criteria................................................................................................................. 3
VegetationSuccess Criteria............................................................................................................. 3
1.4 Project Components.................................................................................................................. 4
1.5 Design/Approach.......................................................................................................................5
Stream.............................................................................................................................................. 5
Wetland............................................................................................................................................ 6
1.6 Construction and As -Built Conditions...................................................................................... 7
1.7 Year 3 Monitoring Performance(MY3).................................................................................... 7
Vegetation........................................................................................................................................ 7
StreamGeomorphology................................................................................................................... 7
StreamHydrology............................................................................................................................ 8
WetlandHydrology.......................................................................................................................... 8
2.0 Methods.................................................................................................................................................. 8
3.0 References............................................................................................................................................... 9
Appendix A: Background Tables
Table 1: Project Mitigation Components
Table 2: Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3: Project Contacts Table
Table 4: Project Background Information Table
Figure 1: Site Location Map
Appendix B: Visual Assessment Data
Figure 2: Current Conditions Plan View
Vegetation Plot Photos
Stream and Vegetation Problem Areas
Appendix C: Vegetation Plot Data
Table 5: Planted Species Summary
Table 6: Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary
Table 7. Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot Species
Appendix D: Stream Measurement and Geomorphology Data
Cross -Section Overlay Plots
Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table 9. Cross Section Morphology Data Table
ADUendix E: Hvdrolo2v Data
Table 10. 2021 Rainfall Data
Table 11. Documentation of Geomorphically Significant Flow Events
Table 12. 2021 Max Hydroperiod
Table 13. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results
MY3 Groundwater Hydrographs
Meadow Spring Year 3 Monitoring Report
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site September 2021

1.0 Proiect Summary
1.1 Project Location and Description
The Meadow Spring Mitigation Site (Site) is located within a watershed dominated by agricultural land use
in Johnston County, North Carolina, approximately three miles north of Smithfield. The project streams
and wetlands were significantly impacted by channelization, impoundment, and cattle access. The project
involves the restoration and protection of streams in the Neuse River watershed and the restoration,
enhancement, and preservation of adjacent riparian wetlands. The purpose of this mitigation site is to
restore, enhance and preserve a stream/wetland complex located within the Neuse River Basin. The Site
was designed in concurrence with the Meadow Spring Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset Mitigation Bank.
The Site lies within USGS Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03020201.
The total easement area is 60.93 acres. The wooded areas along the easement corridor designated for
restoration activities are classified as mixed hardwoods. Invasive species were present throughout the
wooded areas. Restored channels were both laterally and vertically unstable, impacted by cattle, have
disturbed riparian buffers, and did not fully support aquatic life. Previous stream conditions along the
restoration reaches exhibited habitat degradation because of impacts from livestock and impoundment to
promote agricultural activities.
The Meadow Spring Site includes stream Priority I/II Restoration, Enhancement Levels I II and III,
Preservation and wetland re -habilitation, re-establishment, enhancement and preservation. Priority I
Restoration reaches incorporate the construction of a single -thread meandering channel, with parameters
based on data taken from the reference site described above, published empirical relationships, NC Coastal
Plain Regional Curves, and hydrologic and hydraulic analyses.
Wetland re-establishment occurred adjacent to Priority I Restoration reaches. The restoration approach was
to reconnect the floodplain wetlands to the stream, fill existing ditches, rough the floodplain surface, and
plant native tree and shrub species commonly found in small stream swamp ecosystems. The wetland
enhancement treatment included livestock exclusion, improving hydrology via pond removal and ditch
plugging, and planting native tree and shrub species.
The Site will be monitored on a regular basis and a physical inspection of the Site will be conducted at a
minimum of twice per year throughout the seven-year post -construction monitoring period, or until
performance standards are met. These site inspections will identify site components and features that require
routine maintenance. The measure of stream restoration success will be documented by bankfull flows and
no change in stream channel classification. Sand bed channels are dynamic and minor adjustments to
dimension and profile are expected. The measure of vegetative success for the Site will be the survival of
at least 210 seven-year old planted trees per acre with an average height of 10 feet at the end of year seven
of the monitoring period.
Upon approval for closeout by the Interagency Review Team (IRT), the site will be transferred to the North
Carolina Wildlife Habitat Foundation (NCWHF). The NCWHF will be responsible for periodic inspection
of the Site to ensure that restrictions required in the Conservation Easement or the deed restriction
document(s) are upheld. Endowment funds required to uphold easement and deed restrictions will be
negotiated prior to site transfer to the responsible party.
Meadow Spring 1 Year 3 Monitoring Report
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site September 2021

1.2 Project Goals and Objectives
The 2010 Neuse RBRP identified several restoration needs for the entire Neuse River Basin, as well as for
I UC 03020201, specifically. The Site is in HUC 03020201100050 (Meuse River), a Targeted Local
Watershed (TLW) that exhibits both the need and opportunity for wetland, stream, and riparian buffer
restoration. The watershed includes 52 square miles of area, with 31 percent of the 106 stream miles lacking
wooded buffers. Thirty-seven percent of the watershed is used for agricultural purposes with 13 animal
operations occurring in the watershed. Impervious surface near the town of Smithfield is increasing and set
to surpass the critical seven percent benchmark (NCDMS 2010).
The Site was identified as a stream and buffer restoration opportunity to improve water quality, habitat, and
hydrology within the Neuse River Basin. This project is intended to provide Stream Mitigation Units to be
applied as compensatory mitigation for unavoidable authorized impacts to waters of the US under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) and support the overall goal of "no net loss" of aquatic
resources in the United States. The Site is located within the downstream end of I UC 03020201 and
includes an unnamed tributary that directly discharges into the Neuse River. Many of the project design
goals and objectives, including restoration of riparian buffers to filter runoff from agricultural operations
and improve terrestrial habitat, and construction of in -stream structures to improve habitat diversity, will
address the degraded water quality and nutrient input from farming that were identified as major watershed
stressors in the 2010 Neuse RBRP.
The project goals will be addressed through the following project objectives:
• Design and construct stable stream channels with appropriate pattern, dimension, and profile based
on reference reach conditions.
• Exclude livestock permanently from streams and their associated buffers as well as surrounding
wetlands.
• Reduce bank height ratios to less than 1.2 and increase entrenchment ratio to greater than 2.2 in
accordance to the Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update
Guidance.
• Increase forested riparian buffers to at least fifty feet on both sides of the channel along the project
reaches with an appropriate riparian plant community.
• Re-establish, rehabilitate, and enhance riparian wetlands by raising stream bed elevations, plugging
surface ditches, and planting native wetland plant species in order to maintain appropriate soil series
saturation/hydroperiod thresholds during the growing season.
• Preserve and enhance of hydrology in existing riparian wetland seeps.
• Establish a permanent conservation easement on the Site.
• Remove invasive species from the riparian buffer and wetland areas to support the colonization and
survival of native riparian buffer species.
1.3 Project Success Criteria
The Site follows the USACE 2003 Stream Mitigation Guidelines and the "Wilmington District Stream and
Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update" dated October 24, 2016. Cross section and vegetation plot data
will be collected in Years 0, 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7. Stream and wetland hydrology data and visual monitoring
will be reported annually.
Meadow Spring 2 Year 3 Monitoring Report
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site September 2021

Stream Success Criteria
Four bankfull flow events must be documented within the seven-year monitoring period. The bankfull
events must occur in separate years. Otherwise, the stream monitoring will continue until four bankfull
events have been documented in separate years.
There should be little change in as -built cross -sections. If changes do take place, they should be evaluated
to determine if they represent a movement toward a less stable condition (for example down -cutting or
erosion), or are minor changes that represent an increase in stability (for example settling, vegetative
changes, deposition along the banks, or decrease in width/depth ratio). Cross sections shall be classified
using the Rosgen stream classification method, and all monitored cross -sections should fall within the
quantitative parameters defined for channels of the design stream type. Bank height ratio shall not exceed
1.2, and the entrenchment ratio shall be no less than 2.2 within restored reaches.
Digital images will be used to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or degradation, bank erosion,
success of riparian vegetation, and effectiveness of erosion control measures. Longitudinal images should
not indicate the absence of developing bars within the channel or an excessive increase in channel depth.
Lateral images should not indicate excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the banks over time. A
series of images over time should indicate successional maturation of riparian vegetation.
Wetland Success Criteria
The Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS) has a current WETS table for Johnston County upon
which to base a normal rainfall amount and average growing season. The closest comparable data station
was determined to be the WETS station for Smithfield, NC. The growing season for Johnston County is
233 days long, extending from March 18 to November 6, and is based on a daily minimum temperature
greater than 28 degrees Fahrenheit occurring in five of ten years.
Based upon field observation across the site, the NRCS mapping units show a good correlation to actual
site conditions in areas of the site. Mitigation guidance for soils in the Coastal Plain suggests a hydroperiod
for the Bibb soil of 12-16 percent of the growing season. The hydrology success criterion for the Site is to
restore the water table so that it will remain continuously within 12 inches of the soil surface for at least 12
percent of the growing season (approximately 27 days) at each groundwater gauge location. Based on the
extensive management history of the Site and soil compaction, RES expects a slighty reduced hydroperiod
in the monitoring years 1 and 2.
Vegetation Success Criteria
Specific and measurable success criteria for plant density within the riparian buffers on the site follow
IRT Guidance. Vegetation monitoring plots are a minimum of 0.02 acres in size and cover a minimum of
two percent of the planted area. Vegetation monitoring shall occur annually between July 15 and leaf drop.
The interim measures of vegetative success for the site are the survival of at least 320 planted three-year
old trees per acre at the end of Year 3, 260 five-year old trees that are at least 7 feet tall at the end of Year
5, and the final vegetative success criteria is 210 trees per acre with an average height of ten feet at the
end of Year 7. Volunteer trees are to be counted, identified to species, and included in the yearly
monitoring reports, but do not count towards the success criteria of total planted stems.
Meadow Spring 3 Year 3 Monitoring Report
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site September 2021

1.4 Project Components
The project area is comprised of an easement area along an unnamed tributary to the Neuse River. The
easement is separated by an existing power easement and three agricultural crossings. The project is divided
into northern and southern portions by the existing power easement. The northern portion of the project
includes Reaches S1, S2, S5, S6A and S613. The southern portion of the project includes Reaches S7, S9,
S11, S12 and S13. The stream and wetland mitigation components are summarized below.
Mitigation Plan Stream Credits
Stream Mitigation
Reach
Mitigation Type
Stationing
Existing
Length
(LF)
Design
Length
(LF)
Mitigation
Ratio
Base
SMUs
S 1
Enhancement II
3+50 to 6+00
250
250
2.5:1
100
S2
Enhancement I
6+00 to 11+00
500
500
1.5:1
333
S5
P1 / P2 Restoration
0+76 to 3+07
215
231
1:1
231
S6A
P1 Restoration
11+00 to 24+50
1,220
1,350
1:1
1,350
S613
P1 Restoration
24+50 to 36+26
1,150
1,176
1:1
1,176
S613
Enhancement I
36+26 to 37+93
165
167
1.5:1
111
S7
Enhancement I
38+80 to 48+70
1,035
990
1.5:1
660
S7
Enhancement I
49+40 to 53+80
452
440
1.5:1
293
S9
Enhancement III
53+80 to 60+55
665
675
7.5:1
90
S11
P1 Restoration
60+55 to 71+00
906
1,045
1:1
1,045
S12
Preservation
71+00 to 74+80
380
380
10:1
38
S13
Preservation
9+69 to 14+23
454
454
10:1
45
Total
1 7,392
1 7,658
5,473
Non -Standard
Buffer Width Adjustment*
50
Grand Total Adjusted SMUs
5,523
*The non-standard buffer width adjustment was only performed for reaches S7, S9, S12, S13
Mitigation Plan Wetland Credits
Wetland Mitigation
Wetland
Mitigation Type
Total Acres
Mitigation Ratio
WMUs
WB
Rehabilitation
0.95
1.5:1
0.63
WD
Preservation
0.03
No Credit
No Credit
WE
Preservation
0.09
No Credit
No Credit
WF-A
Preservation
2.00
No Credit
No Credit
WF-B
Enhancement
2.02
3:1
0.67
WG-A
Enhancement
3.68
3:1
1.23
WG-B
Enhancement
18.03
5:1
3.61
WH
Re-establishment
6.84
1:1
6.84
WI
Re-establishment
2.87
2:1
1.44
Total
36.51
14.41
Meadow Spring 4 Year 3 Monitoring Report
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site September 2021

1. S Design/Approach
Stream
The Meadow Spring Site includes Priority I/Priority II Restoration, Enhancement Level I, Enhancement
Level II, Enhancement Level III. Priority I Restoration reaches incorporate the design of a single -thread
meandering channel, with parameters based on data taken from the reference site described above,
published empirical relationships, NC Coastal Plain Regional Curves, and hydrologic and hydraulic
analyses. As a result of the restoration of planform and dimension, frequent overbank flows and a restored
riparian buffer will provide the appropriate hydrology and sediment transport throughout this coastal plain
watershed. All non -vegetated areas within the easement were planted with native vegetation and any areas
of invasive species were removed and/or treated.
• Reach S1 (STA 03+50 to STA 06+00) — Reach beginning at northwestern limits of the project
flowing southeast to Reach S2 totaling 250 linear feet of Enhancement Level II. Row crops and
active pasture were located adjacent to the reach. Enhancement involved revegetating the buffer
with native vegetation.
• Reach S2 (STA 06+00 to STA 11+00) — Reach begins at the downstream end of Reach S1 and
flows southeast through what was active pasture to Reach S6A. Reach S2 totals 500 linear feet of
Enhancement Level L Active pasture and row crops used to surround this reach. Enhancement
involved revegetating the buffer and stream stabilization of localized erosion with the installation
of log cross vanes and sills.
• Reach S5 (STA 00+76 to STA 03+07) — Reach begins north of Reach S6A and flows south through
active pasture to a confluence with Reach S6A totaling 231 linear feet of Priority I and II
Restoration. Active pasture and maintained lawn used to surround this reach. Restoration included
meandering the channel within the valley, backfilling the old stream, reconnecting to its floodplain,
and restoring hydrology to drained wetlands.
• Reach S6A (STA 11+00 to STA 24+50) — Reach begins at the downstream end of Reach S2 and
flows east through what was active pasture, flows adjacent to a farm pond and ends at a confluence
with Reach S5. Reach S6A totals 1,350 linear feet of Priority I Restoration. Restoration included
meandering channel though the natural valley, backfilling the old channel, reconnecting to its
floodplain, removing the old dam, and restoring hydrology to drained wetlands.
• Reach S6B — Section 1 (STA 24+50 to STA 36+26) — Reach begins at the confluence of Reach
S5 and S6A flowing east to the second section of Reach S613. Reach S613-Section I totals 1,176
linear feet of Priority I Restoration. Restoration included meandering the channel within the valley,
backfilling the old stream, reconnecting to its floodplain, and restoring hydrology to drained
wetlands.
• Reach S6B — Section 2 (STA 36+26 to STA 37+93) — Reach begins at the downstream end of
Reach 613-Section I and flows east to the Duke Energy right-of-way. Reach S613-Section 2 totals
167 linear feet of Enhancement Level I. Enhancement included stabilization of localized erosion
by installing log sills, increasing radius of curvature, regrading point bars, removal of invasive
vegetation, and revegetating the buffer.
• Reach S7 (STA 38+80 to STA 53+80) — Reach beginning downstream of the Duke Energy right-
of-way and flows south to Reach S9 totaling 1,430 linear feet of Enhancement Level L A 70-linear
foot easement break is located in this reach to accommodate a proposed farm crossing. Hardwood
forests and active pasture are located adjacent to the reach. Enhancement included stabilization of
localized erosion by installing log vanes, log sills, brush toes, and regrading point bars. As well as
removing dense areas of invasive vegetation and supplementing planting in its place.
Meadow Spring 5 Year 3 Monitoring Report
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site September 2021

• Reach S9 (STA 53+80 to STA 60+55) — Reach beginning at the downstream end of Reach S7 and
flowing south to Reach SI I totaling 675 linear feet of Enhancement Level III. Hardwood forests
and active hog lagoons are located adjacent to the reach. Enhancement included invasive treatment
and supplemental planting.
• Reach S11 (STA 60+55 to STA 71+00) — Reach beginning at the downstream end of Reach S9
and flows southeast to Reach S12 totaling 1,045 linear feet of Priority I Restoration. Hardwood
forests and grassed fields were located adjacent to the reach. Restoration included meandering the
channel within the valley, backfilling the old channel, reconnecting to its floodplain, and improving
hydrology to drained wetlands.
• Reach S12 (STA 71+00 to STA 74+80) —Reach beginning at the downstream end of Reach S11
and flows southeast toward the Neuse River floodway totaling 380 linear feet of Preservation.
Hardwood forests are located adjacent to the reach. Preservation included invasive treatment and
buffer/stream protection.
• Reach S13 (STA 9+69 to STA 14+23) - Reach beginning downstream of the large wetland slough
along the Neuse River floodplain totaling 454 linear feet of Preservation. Preservation included
invasive treatment and buffer/stream protection.
Wetland
The Meadow Spring Site offers a total ecosystem restoration opportunity. As such, the wetland restoration
and enhancement are closely tied to the stream restoration. The Site provides 14.41 WMUs through a
combination of wetland re-establishment, rehabilitation, and enhancement.
Because of the sites observed soil characteristics and landscape position, a combination of wetland re-
establishment, rehabilitation, and enhancement was incorporated. In wetlands WH, the non jurisdictional
area, hydrologic restoration, at a credit ratio of 1:1, was accomplished by plugging the existing incised
channel to restrict drainage and allowing a natural hydroperiod to return. In addition, re -constructing a
stream channel at a higher bed elevation in the natural valley, backfilling to create shallow depressions
within the old channel, and the removal of spoil from pond excavation along the floodplains aids in the
restoration of a natural floodplain surface relative to the surrounding landscape. Due to compaction and
long-term agricultural use, a shallow ripping of the surface along the contour to a depth of eight to ten
inches creates adequate porosity for infiltration and storage, provides microtopographic relief, and should
improve vegetative survival and growth.
As part of the wetland re-establishment in wetland WI, at a credit ratio of 2:1, the pond was removed. The
construction of a farm pond has altered surface drainage and placed spoil across the floodplain. The stream
was reconnected to the floodplain and in addition to out of bank events the large perennial spring serves as
a source for hydrology for the re-established wetlands. Retention and storage within the floodplain has
returned to a natural state having an increased hydroperiod.
In wetland WF-B, a credit ratio of 3:1 was implemented for wetland enhancement. This wetland has been
impacted by channel incision and active management for agriculture in the past. The wetland mitigation
treatment consisted of reconnecting the stream to the floodplain and replanting disturbed areas. These
activities result in a much healthier, better functioning wetland.
In wetland WG, the large disturbed Neuse River floodplain area, a credit ratio of 3:1 was implemented for
wetland enhancement in the areas that are planted (WG-A) and an enhancement credit ratio of 5:1 in the
areas not planted (WG-B). This wetland has been actively managed for agriculture and waterfowl through
drainage manipulations and tree clearing. The wetland mitigation treatment was primarily re -planting the
disturbed areas, plugging the main ditch, and removing existing berms within the wetland. These activities
result in a large floodplain slough with a diversity of microhabitats.
Meadow Spring 6 Year 3 Monitoring Report
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site September 2021

1.6 Construction and As Built Conditions
Stream construction and planting was completed in June 2019. The Meadow Spring Mitigation Site was
built to design plans and guidelines. A redline version of the as -built survey is included with the sealed plat
in the As -Built Baseline Monitoring Report. Project credits are based on design centerline, but as -built
stream lengths are shown on Table 1.
1.7 Year 3 Monitoring Performance (MY3)
The Meadow Spring Year 3 Monitoring activities were performed in June and September 2021. All MY3
data is present below and in the appendices. The Site is on track to meeting vegetation, stream, and wetland
interim success criteria.
Vegetation _
Monitoring of the 18 permanent vegetation plots and three random vegetation plots was completed during
September 2021. Vegetation data are in Appendix C, associated photos are in Appendix B, and plot
locations are in Appendix B. MY2 monitoring data indicates that 20 of the 21 plots are exceeding the
interim success criteria of 320 planted stems per acre. Planted stem densities ranged from 283 to 850 planted
stems per acre with a mean of 674 planted stems per acre across all the plots. Vegetation Plot 18 did not
meet the success criteria with 283 stems per acre. A total of 22 species were documented within the plots.
The average height in the plots was 5.1 feet.
Visual assessment of vegetation outside of the monitoring plots indicates that the herbaceous vegetation is
becoming well established throughout the project. An area of Chinese privet was treated in Wetland G in
June 2021. A couple areas of Chinese privet remain along S6 and S9 (Appendix B). These areas will be
treated in 2022 and treatments will continue as needed throughout the monitoring period. Visual
assessments of the easement boundary found no encroachments or evidence of cattle entry.
RES performed supplemental plantings in January 2021. The supplemental planting included planting 1,100
bareroot trees in areas where vegetation plots were less than 600 stems per acre in MY2. RES supplemental
planted with six-foot willow poles in Wetland G. This area experiences flooding up to seven feet deep, so
RES planted species tolerant to flooded conditions. Vegetation Plot 18, in this area, did not meet success in
MY3, however RES placed Random Vegetation Plot 3 directly adjacent to VP 18 and it exceeded success
criteria.
Stream Geomorphology
Geomorphology data for MY3 was collected during June 2021. Summary tables and cross section plots are
in Appendix D. Overall, the MY3 cross sections relatively match the as -built conditions. Minor adjustments
are expected during the first few years after construction. In WI, Cross Sections 2, 4, 7, and 18
experienced about one foot of change in dimension. These areas did not change much in MY2 and MY3.
Additionally, erosion is seen around the log sill at Cross Section 16. Bank height ratios remain less than 1.2
and entrenchment ratios greater than 2.2 on restoration reaches.
Visual assessment of the stream channel was performed to document signs of instability, such as eroding
banks, structural instability, or excessive sedimentation. The channel is transporting sediment as designed
and will continue to be monitored for aggradation and degradation. The problem areas along the bottom of
S2 and throughout S6A were repaired in My3. They were a series of eroded banks on meander bends and
Meadow Spring 7 Year 3 Monitoring Report
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site September 2021

around structures. These banks were hand graded back, repaired with brush mattresses, and livestakes. RES
plans to replace the eroded log sill on Cross Section 16.
Stream Hydrology
Two stage recorders were installed in June 2019 to document bankfull events. One stage recorder on Reach
S613 and one stage recorder on Reach 511. The stage recorder on Reach S613 recorded one bankfull event
in MY3 with the highest being 0.09 feet above top of bank. The stage recorder on Reach S11 recorded 5
bankfull events with the highest being 8.48 feet above top of bank. Reach S 11 experiences extreme flooding
from backwater of the Neuse River. Stage recorder locations can be found on Figure 2 and associated data
is in Appendix E.
Wetland Hydrology
MY3 data showed seven of the 11 groundwater wells met the 12 percent hydroperiod success criteria. Of
the four that did not meet the 12 percent hydroperiod, only Groundwater Well 7 was less than five percent
hydroperiod. Groundwater Well 7 had less than five percent hydroperiods three years in a row. RES plans
to add an additional plug to the adjacent ditch to discourage drainage in this area. Hydroperiods ranged
from seven to 52 percent with the reference well documenting a one percent hydroperiod. RES expects the
hydroperiods to continue to increase in subsequent years. Groundwater well locations can be found on
Figure 2 and the data is in Appendix E.
2.0 Methods
Stream monitoring was conducted using a Topcon GTS-312 Total Station. Three-dimensional coordinates
associated with cross-section data were collected in the field (NAD83 State Plane feet FIPS 3200).
Morphological data were collected at 24 cross -sections. Survey data were imported into CAD, ArcGIS®,
and Microsoft Excel® for data processing and analysis. The stage recorders include an automatic pressure
transducer set in PVC piping in the channel. The elevation of the bed and top of bank at each stage recorder
location was recorded to be able to document presence of water in the channel and out of bank events.
Visual observations (i.e. wrack or debris lines) will also be used to document out of bank events.
Vegetation success is being monitored at 18 permanent monitoring plots and three random monitoring plots.
Vegetation plot monitoring follows the CVS-EEP Level 2 Protocol for Recording Vegetation, version 4.2
(Lee et al. 2008) and includes analysis of species composition and density of planted species. Data are
processed using the CVS data entry tool. In the field, the four corners of each plot were permanently marked
with PVC at the origin and metal conduit at the other corners. Photos of each plot are to be taken from the
origin each monitoring year. The random plots are to be collected in locations where there are no permanent
vegetation plots. Random plots will most likely be collected in the form of 100 square meter belt transects
with variable dimensions. Tree species and height will be recorded for each planted stem and the transects
will be mapped and new locations will be monitored in subsequent years.
Wetland hydrology is monitored to document success in wetland restoration and enhancement areas where
hydrology was affected. This is accomplished with 11 automatic pressure transducer gauges (located in
groundwater wells) that record daily groundwater levels. Ten have been installed within the wetland
crediting area and one within reference wetland areas. One automatic pressure transducer is installed above
ground for use as a barometric reference. Gauges are downloaded quarterly and wetland hydroperiods are
calculated during the growing season. Gauge installation followed current regulatory guidance. Visual
observations of primary and secondary wetland hydrology indicators are also recorded during quarterly site
visits.
Meadow Spring 8 Year 3 Monitoring Report
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site September 2021

3.0 References
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual,
Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Harman, W., R. Starr, M. Carter, K. Tweedy, M. Clemmons, K. Suggs, C. Miller. 2012. A Function -
Based Framework for Stream Assessment and Restoration Projects. US Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC EPA 843-K-12-006.
Lee Michael T., Peet Robert K., Roberts Steven D., and Wentworth Thomas R., 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol
for Recording Vegetation Level. Version 4.2
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS). "Neuse River Basin Restoration Priorities
2010." (Amended 2018).
Peet, R.K., Wentworth, T.S., and White, P.S. (1998), A flexible, multipurpose method for recording
vegetation composition and structure. Castanea 63:262-274
Resource Environmental Solutions (2018). Meadow Spring Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Final
Mitigation Plan.
Rosgen, D. (1996), Applied River Morphology, 2nd edition, Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, CO.
Schafale, M.P. 2012. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina, Third Approximation.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, NCDENR, Raleigh, NC.
US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 2003. April 2003 NC Stream Mitigation Guidelines.
USACE. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Atlantic
and Gulf Coastal Plain Region (Version 2.0), ed. J. S. Wakeley, R. W. Lichvar, and C. V. Noble.
ERDC/EL TR-10-20. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center.
USACE, 2016. Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update.
Meadow Spring 9 Year 3 Monitoring Report
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site September 2021

Appendix A
Background Tables

C
to
C
.i
Q
H
3
0
m
w
a
a
a
o
a
o
a
_
a
o
>
>
d
o
as
as
as
E
E
m
m
61
0
0
o
m>
E
Z
a
a
a
a
a
Y
E
E
E
a
.�
a
o
0
0
0
0
o
m
m
W
W
W
o
z
CO
0
>
m
>
m
>
m
>
>
>
+�
>
m
m
m
d
as
w
as
w
as
w
>
N
E
.>
o
a'�
z
z
z
m
E
z
o
o
o
0
o
Z
o
0
Y
z
z
E
aE
m
-
o
0
0
n
.o
o
o
o
.�
O
()
'>
Z
—
N
tr
tr�
C7
C7
C7
0
>
>
0
0
0
U
0
o
0
o
a
0
•
•
•
a3
a3
a3
'�
o
'�
o
LL
a3
a3
a3
'0
'0
'0
a3
E
E
E
Q
Y
6I
LL
-
>
>o
__=
m=
a
a
a
o
o
a
LL
LL
LL
O
O
O
LL
LL
—
�
-W
a
O
o
a,
a
a
`o 0
N
m
00 O
M
00
�
�
W
r
W L0
0 M
- O
m
O
N
N
O
co
CO
M
O
V
co
0
co
a)
O U
N LO
N
co
O
O
M
O O
O
N
M
(O
N
Q O Q
LL
.�.
O M
pow
O
O
0
O
M
O M
O (h
C,O
Lo
O V
M
CO N
N
O
N
co
V
ID)a) ))
a:
MM
N
M
N
cLo
co
O CC
O
M
CO
C)
O
Z
O
Z
o
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
o
0
0
0
0
0
0"
0
0
jp
0000000
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
p
Ln
a)
U
M
co
O
N
O� O
0
0
O
O
O
Ln
0
0
0.
O
(�
(�
O
O
O
O
O
Q
Q
N
ds
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
>
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
0
N
O
O
O
0
0
o o
o
0
N
a)
a)
E
E
m
m
m
m
E
a)
a)
a) a)
a)
a)
0 o
U
U
o
0
o
0
0
0
o
Z
a)
Z
a)
- Z
o
a)
0
Z
0
U
U
C
U
C
Q
J
to
N
to
N
a) to
L N
to
N
to
N
a)
L
fo
C
C
C
d
d
d
d
d
W
C
W
C
W
N
W
W
W
W
W
w
° o
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
0
0
M
O
O
0
0
O
O
OCO
mcVo
0p)
O
M
M
(Od)V
I�n
Op
L()
O O
O O
O
O
N
O
N
O
co
O
(O
co
N
O U
lQEL
0 0 0
a) a3
y0
O
O
Ln
N
00
Ln
M
N
Ln
(O
O
V
Q Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
to O a)
0
N
O
Ln
N
N
-
O
O
0
V
CO
0
O
m
CO
M
0
V
Z Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
LL Ll Qo
C
E
0
CV
LO
Q
N
N
co
0] W
W
Q
0]
Q
0]
_
vW
W
�
(D
(D
Cn
Cn
U)
Cn
Cn
U)
LL
0
2
Ll

Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Meadow Spring Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
Elapsed Time Since grading complete: 2 years 4 months
Elapsed Time Since planting complete: 2 years 4 months
Number of reporting Years : 2
Activity or Deliverable
Data Collection
Complete
Completion or
Delivery
Restoration Plan
NA
Sep-18
Final Design — Construction Plans
NA
Mar-19
Stream Construction
NA
Jun-19
Site Planting
NA
Jun-19
As -built (Year 0 Monitoring — baseline)
May-19
Jun-19
Year 1 Monitoring
Dec-19
Jan-20
Supplemental Livestake Planting
NA
Mar-20
Supplemental Planting
NA
Apr-20
Invasive Treatment
NA
May-20
S7 Brushtoe and WB Rill Repair
NA
Oct-20
Year 2 Monitoring
XS: Jul-20
VP: Sept-20
Oct-20
Supplemental Planting
NA
Jan-21
S2 and S6-A Stream Hand Repairs
NA
Mar-21
Invasive Treatment
NA
Jul-21
Year 3 Monitoring
XS: Jun-21
VP: Se t-21
Sep-21
Year 4 Monitoring
Year 5 Monitoring
Year 6 Monitoring
Year 7 Monitoring
= The number of reports or data points produced excluding the baseline

Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Meadow Spring Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
Designer
WK Dickson and Co., Inc. / 720 Corporate Center Dr., Raleigh,
NC 27607
Primary project design POC
David Perry
Construction Contractor
Wright Contracting, LLC / 453 Silk Hope Liberty Rd, Siler City,
NC 27344
Construction contractor POC
[phone]
Survey Contractor
Matrix East, PLLC / 906 N. Queen St., Suite A, Kinston, NC
28501
Survey contractor POC
James Watson, PLS
Planting Contractor
H&J Forestry
Planting contractor POC
Matt Hitch
Seeding Contractor
Wright Contracting
Contractor point of contact
[phone]
Seed Mix Sources
Green Resource [phone]
Nursery Stock Suppliers
Arborgen [phone]
Monitoring Performers
RES / 302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110, Raleigh, NC 27605
Stream Monitoring POC
Ryan Medric [phone]
Wetland Monitoring POC
Ryan Medric [phone]
Vegetation Monitoring POC
JRyan Medric [phone]

Table 4. Project Background Information
Project Name
Meadow Spring
County
Johnston
Project Area (acres)
60.9
Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude)
Latitude: 35.5437 N Longitude:-78.3303 W
Planted Acreage (Acres of Woody Stems Planted)
22.8
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province
Rolling Coastal Plain
River Basin
Neuse
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit
03020201
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit
03020201100050
DWR Sub -basin
03-04-02
Project Drainage Area (Acres and Square Miles)
379 ac (0.592 sqmi)
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area
<1 %
CGIA Land Use Classification
Forest (45%) Agriculture (37%)
Reach Summary Information
Parameters
S1
S2
S5
S6A
S613-1
S6B-2
S7
S9
I S11
S12
S13
Length of reach (linear feet)
250
500
231
1,350
1,176
165
1,430
675
1,045
38
45
Valley confinement (Confined, moderately confined, unconfined)
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
Drainage area (Acres and Square Miles)
36ac,
0.06sgmi
46ac,
0.07sgmi
36ac,
0.06sgmi
97ac,
0.15sgmi
171ac,
0.27sgmi
171ac,
0.27sgmi
278ac,
0.43sgmi
337ac,
O.53sgmi
379ac,
O.59sgmi
410ac,
0.64sgmi
31ac,
0.05sgmi
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral
I
I
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
NCDWR Water Quality Classification
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
Stream Classification (existing)
F5
C
F4
F4
F4-E4
F4-E4
E4
E5
E5
F5
F5
Stream Classification (proposed)
E5
E4/5
E4/5
E4/5
E4/5
E5
Evolutionary trend (Simon)
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
FEMA classification
---
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
Regulatory Considerations
Parameters
Applicable?
Resolved?
Supporting
Docs?
Water of the United States - Section 404
Yes
Yes
SAW-2016-
01989
Water of the United States - Section 401
Yes
Yes
DWR # 16-
0980
Endangered Species Act
Yes
Yes
Mit Plan
Appendix B
Historic Preservation Act
Yes
Yes
Mit Plan
Appendix B
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA or CAMA)
No
N/A
N/A
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
N/A
N/A
N/A
Essential Fisheries Habitat
No
N/A
N/A

3.
6
I
c
3
a
1 UTage Rd
m �
dya �a6 �O
o^
�Py
C °e
yo
o„
ebl
00
yRy
Laurel Or
3 i
�1 5 Law
Stephenson Or
Mobile Or
Booker Dairy Rd Ext
Shady Lane Or
A 2 1
NHartley Dr u a S4nriseq ye 6 op, 0 Booker Da4y R x: m ..
II Sto 3------___t1 E#t
U o n Sunselq�e
a Booker Dairy Rd' _
Stancil St v
o a
Pace St Smithfield Azaleao a0�
Re—atun o g\
Whitley Dr E�crefr Area Y Ua`C
C� O
S tri cklantl Or 3 parkway Dr
�� Or
West DastleDr sae
antl St Smithfield
Holland Or �c
P�
0
i okwood Oa
tia a D 6a; hill
�r/lo/i Dr o �n9ha`�e\ /.ig,. o,
m� Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS,el:hiermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri
q 1ph Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong);Esri Korrea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC,
OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community
N
Date: 10/13/2020
Figure 1 -Site Location Map
w e Drawn by: RTM
Meadow Spring Mitigation Site
s Checked by: BPB rLms
0 1,000 2,000
Johnston County, North Carolina
1 inch = 2,000 feet
Feet
Legend
Conservation Easement
CCPV Index Sheet
L --- i
S
a
c� t
�p'Py 1t
l
ro
easo
l) Dr
Bullalo Rd
a
'
o
T
0°
m
F
f
-
N
D

Appendix B
Visual Assessment Data

O
-O
.0) O
T
�i U Y
_ C
Z
9
O
O
(n
.- •- •- •-
`O
o.
N N �j !0 N N !0 F> N N N NID
65 w a+
°� °� s s w s s s m
c T o
o
(�
m
U M M m K K K w w d '� K N K w w w d U d
K
0>"IIa"OIOOOBOIo"IIIIIIII®��®®�
m
LiM
y
1
h �
Am

-O
O
22
(n
_
Z `O C
9
O
U
W O a 1/1 N N D d <d+ N N N D O V
�p C
>
a
iu~> o U U U 10 m
W aEof
�mm00�'If'If �'O'0Ofwwwa`C)
Df n u5 v
0>"IIa"01000001o"IIIIIIII®��®®•
F
� \riFy
Lw z
a

Meadow Spring MY3 Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
Vegetation Plot 1 (9/28/2021)
Vegetation Plot 3 (9/28/2021)
Vegetation Plot 5 (9/28/2021)
Vegetation Plot 2 (9/28/2021)
Vegetation Plot 4 (9/28/2021)
r �
yp'.
_ _.
a
a.'
J
Vegetation Plot 6 (9/28/2021)

Vegetation Plot 7 (9/28/2021)
Vegetation Plot 9 (9/28/2021)
Vegetation Plot 11 (9/28/202 1)
Vegetation Plot 8 (9/28/2021)
Vegetation Plot 10 (9/28/2021)
Vegetation Plot 12 (9/28/2021)

Vegetation Plot 13 (9/28/2021)
Vegetation Plot 15 (9/28/2021)
Vegetation Plot 14 (9/28/2021)
Vegetation Plot 16 (9/28/2021)
i
1;
I
3 4+ x1
�wii
i l L
Vegetation Plot 17 (9/28/2021) Vegetation Plot 18 (9/28/2021)

4
�p
!

Stream Problem Areas
Meadow S
I Feature Issue / Location I Photo I
Bank Erosion around Log Sill / XS16
Vegetation Problem Areas
Meadow Suring
I Feature Category / Location / Size I Photo I
Invasive Species / S6 / 0.36 acres
Invasive Species / S9 / 1.50 acres

Appendix C
Vegetation Plot Data

Appendix C. Vegetation Plot Data
Table 5. Planted Species Summary
Common Name
Scientific Name
Total Stems Planted
Water Oak
Quercus nigra
3,500
Swamp Chestnut Oak
Quercus michauxii
2,700
Sycamore
Platanus occidentalis
2,300
Baldcypress
Taxodium distichum
21000
Green Ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
2,000
Overcup Oak
Quercus lyrata
2,000
Willow Oak
Quercus phellos
2,000
Persimmon
Diospyros virginiana
2,000
Swamp Tupelo
Nyssa bi ora
2,000
Water Tupelo
Nyssa aquatica
1,700
Yellow Poplar
Liriodendron tuli i era
1,600
Crab Apple
Malus angustifolia
800
S Dogwood
Cornus amomum
800
Flowering Dogwood
Cornus florida
800
Buttonbush
Ce halanthus occidentalis
700
Blackgum
Nyssa sylvatica
600
American Plum
Prunus americana
500
American Hazelnut
Corylus americana
400
River Birch
Betula nigra
400
Elderberry
Sambucus nigra
100
Total
28,900
Planted Area
31.39
As -built Planted Stems/Acre
921
* Includes 8.6 acres of supplemental planting

Appendix C. Vegetation Plot Data
Table 6. Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary
Plot #
Planted
Stems/Acre
Volunteer
Stems/Acre
Total
Stems/Acre
Success
Criteria
Met?
Average
Planted Stem
Height (ft)
1
850
324
1174
Yes
6.7
2
526
1052
1578
Yes
4.5
3
647
0
647
Yes
6.9
4
486
0
486
Yes
3.1
5
486
0
486
Yes
4.8
6
647
0
647
Yes
6.0
7
688
0
688
Yes
5.6
8
688
0
688
Yes
7.6
9
607
1942
2550
Yes
2.1
10
809
728
1538
Yes
4.0
11
850
971
1821
Yes
5.6
12
809
0
809
Yes
5.5
13
769
0
769
Yes
5.2
14
567
162
728
Yes
4.4
15
486
324
809
Yes
4.1
16
364
121
486
Yes
4.6
17
526
0
526
Yes
3.8
18
283
0
283
No
3.9
R1
324
0
324
Yes
5.4
R2
324
0
324
Yes
3.6
R3
445
0
445
Yes
6.5
Project Avg
674
267
847
Yes
5.1

11111111111111111111111111111111
�=iiiiii�iiiiii
ii
��IIIIII�IIIII,
m■11111
���rm���rm■
r�
��IIIIII-IIIII���II
t�llllll-IIIII���II
t�llllll-IIIIIt��ll
�-IIIIII�IIIII���II
��IIIIII�IIIIIt��ll
t�llllll�lllll,��ll
t-IIIIII�IIIIIt��ll
�-IIIIII�IIIII���II
■-111111_IIIII■��11
tl
IIIIIIIIIIIt
��IIII��III�I�I��II
ii
■IIIIII�IIIII�IO�II
■IIIIII�IIIII�I��II
■IIIIII�IIIII�I��II
■IIIIII�IIIII�I
II
IIInnrIIIIIIIrIrnIIIIIr
ro
�nnr��nrn�t
r_
■IIIIII�IIIII�I��II
■IIIIII�IIIII�I��II
�111111�11111�1
IB
illllllIIIIIIillllIIIIIl
li
�Illlll�lllll�i
11
�111111�11111�1
1
I■IIIIII�IIIII�I��II
i°
NIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIN�
iiiii■111111�11111�11111
iiIIIIIIiiiiiIIIIIi
IN
t�llllll�lllll�
I
II��II
I�II�

Appendix D
Stream Measurement and
Geomorphology Data

o
ow
olo
`
o
N
m
2E
m
wmo—�!!�,
N
m
o
I Im
moN7
m
o
om
.E
0
I
w 2E I
I I
I I
I I
I
o
No
o
m
wN
m 00
oo
IN I
I
I -TT
w
7
A 00
w
N
o N
NA
o
N
No
o
o
o
.
.
. .
. .
. .
.
. .
. .
.
. .
. .
.
.
. .
. .
. .
.
. .
. .
.
. .
. .
'o
/�\��\�\�
N
o o
&/
u)
wm
N
oo
6 6
—
o.
7
W NA
m
.
. .
. .
.
E
E
m
. .
.
. .
. .
.
. .
. .
.
E
. 2E
m co
w 1
I'llo-I
co o
. .
. .
.
. .
. .
.
c6 u)
im
i i
i i
i
Nw
�2
o o
o o
o
o
I w
o
.
. .
. .
. .
.
. .
. .
.
. .
. .
.
u
u
o
7
o o
cc
7
7 7 7
Mwgwgzff�w��
Zol
w
Cwm.
w
c
w
M23
'o
wMco�cwgo
c
w c
c
0 TM
x
m cc
E
.5
u5
30� 0,
5
0
o
w
h3
, m
w .
m
o
>w w
—
3�
cw
2
w 0
o
'o —
w
-.
�o
CC 0
CM h3
OE
Cm
j3
-0
cm
:Ei 0 .0
0
E:
c
10
wc
MW
E 0
c
o
8
mc
c
c)
E' -
�o
m E
_MT
E
Ic
0
E-
c

o oo
0 .
o
N
o
o
o m
o
mm
ood
No
�-ON
do
2 c6
Icj
I'lo-I'll
N
imi
F
q;o
1. o
o ,
m o
I ,
o
� ol
o
.
�2
.E
m
0
—O.Nmo—
S
000
i o
o
m
m
w o
�2 w
m
m N
o
-
— —
oo
oo
o
— —
— —
— —
IN
—
o m
. .
.
. .
. .
. .
.
. .
. .
. .
. .
16
. .
— —
.
. .
. .
. .
.
. .
. .
. .
— —
. .
—
— —
o
— —
-
N
M
0 0
o o
M
U)
I
2E oo--
o
7
w NA
E <
,
E
wm
M
E
. 2E
U)
W.0
co
c6
a
0
U)
.2
—
— —
— —
— —
— —
—
— —
— —
0
.
0
m.
o
NA
'm
mU
m
lo
IN f
lco
ITH
o
o
o
x
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
.
. .
. .
. .
.
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
2E w
o.,
�2 oj
N
I
NNN
'6 NA
I
ITH
I
I
I I
I
u
u
— —
— —
— —
— —
— —
EF EF
cc
cF
cF
o o
EF EF
E
EF o
E
w
w o
�
w
w
w
o
w
o
o
w
o Tm
x
2E IS
E
.5
U5
3o� o'
5 2
ow
-0
h3
, m
w .
m
0>w
w
—
w
.
w o
o
'o
o
18
�o
h3
-o
0
:Ei 0 .0
E:
oo
mw
E o
o
8
E:
C)
h3
in
E-
E
o
E
o
E2
E-

o.
�o .
. .
. .
0
Im
mN
w
o
So
�jo
1,�
f2j.
I
N o
N
w
1.
2E
o
w
.E
0
w
2E m.Oo
o
�2 m
oO
�-D
wm .
. .
. .
oo,
rn
I I
m
I I
1wi
lol
w
m o
m
N
I I
N
I I
N
Nm 'N
ml
0
- -
lo
m
o
o
- -
m
- -
- -
- -
. .
.
. .
. .
. .
.
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
.
. .
. .
. .
.
. .
. .
. .
. .
c�
q
o
o
N
IN
No
-1-o
o
o
o o
w o
o
o
o.
N
N
W NA
E CO
'6
2wE
2E
I'l-o-o
co
O 10
N
N N
N N
N N
co
.6 U.
I
. .
. .
. .
. .
.
. .
. .
.
F--
0
o
o o
o
w
N o
N
m
o
w w
oo.
0
,
u
m
m
_-o
oo
x
.
. .
. .
. .
.
. .
. .
.
. .
. .
. .
.
. .
. .
. .
. .
I
. .
I
N
. 2E
ol
o
m
16
w
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
o o
o
0
w
w o
� -
w
w
o
w
o
w
'o mw
x
2mE ol
E
.5
5)
w �
h3
>w
0
2
w o
'
o
8'
0
m
, 0
o
o
m
m
h3 wm
��
-o
o,
2m
is
o� o
'o
C)
Im
_1
E o
0
m m
o.
w
C)
Im
o
m o Im
m
E
Tm-
rc
-
I 1
18. 1
1 1
1 1
1
m

0 .
om .
. .
. .
0
m o
m
w
o
W
of2jol-I
Iml
F
N N
w
MW
i iiiiii
1
2-E oO.o
o
N N
o
o
.E
mO
0
.wq,mw.-o
2E co
0.
I IT
o-I-I
oo
m oll
IwI
m.
W
N
o N
o
— —
�W
1
M N
Mo
1 o
o
1
— —
— —
— —
— —
.
. .
. .
. .
.
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
oo
.
. .
. .
. .
.
. .
. .
. .
m
. .
't
1
O
m
Ao
N
o N
M
N
0 0
o o
1w
o.
N�
E
E
U)
o I
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
oco
c6
m. o
om
A —IN
o NA
m
N
Nw
U)
o.
U
I
m
w
o o
oo
x
2E
A
A
HTI
INI
u
u
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
i ccc
cc
cF
cF
o o
EF EF
EF o
E
i5
w
9w 9
Z
w
I
o
w
-m
w
t5
zu 0
o
o
-d
w
-
o mw
x
m 'o
2
E
.5
5)
3o
o
o
o
h3
E
m
-
'm
>w
-
w
2
w o
o
'o
o
w
�o
0
h3
o
j3
-o
w
>
w
0 .0
o
Ua
mw 2E
E o
0
o
C)
E- --
mw
koa
m E
m
Tm-
o oE
.1
E2
E-

( \
_z
z
z zo
)§
_
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\(
\\\\\\\\
o
}
��\\,®n\\(\,�:�,ee�\\��,���:�\\
�,��,�e,\\
o
,\\0e
CiA
(/m\\
\\\\m��
z
z z
,
,,��\\
:z
(
oo
\\�\\\\\\�
\\\\\\\\\�\\\\\\\\\�\
\\\}\\\\�
\
\\\\\\A
\
00
)�(�—
;
( \
\
_
_
_
oo
\ \\�\\\\\�u
o
\\\\\\\\�u\}�\\\\\�
�\
\\\\\\\\u
\
\\\\\\\\
\\\\\\
\\\,,m
\\\\\
\\\\
t
�\\
,
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
o
))
!&&%yf))
))
)f&yff))
)ff
yf{)))
$));f]\\
$));f]\\
$))yf]\\
$))yf]\\!
cc
���\\\
\���\\\
\���\\\
\���\\\
\��
\\\\
k
k
k
k
k
0

E
N
a
O
l0
N
x
W
00
m
L
I
_
I
N
N
I
N
oN
O1
M
--
�
co
�
O
I
co
co
O
I
w
U
O
M
N
v'�
N
a,
Cl)
o Y
C
o
v
o
N
"o
°O
N
O
I
„r
0
0
I
U
N
N
fn
I
�
co
r
o
o
cy
o
0
I
0
0
U
I
N
N
d
00
0)
n
N
m
N
N
U
0
o
N fl
o
.y
N
�N
L
N
I I
7�
'�l
'
FBI
cu
oco,w
�
�
o
I
co
I
I
I
�
A
O
I
'IT
((0
(UO
(MO
(NO (O
0
(11) uoi;enal3
O
c
O �
ct
cz c
cz
� O
4.1
cz
U U
CZ
N pp
,y
cz O
w
C
cz
cz
c
cz
cz
cz
0
0 0

E
E
�
k
_
co
\
:
\
_
\
£
§
j
c
'
c
|
I
k
7
E
co
\j
~
u
® 2\\
^
J
\ \|(
.
$
0
2
0cu
&
\
q
u
OO//
\\
LO
§
_
§
\
a
%]
e
\/
m
|�
�
�
/ /
)
/ )
/
\ /
dugegg
/
2
\
/
2
q
_
.a
(
/
/
2
-
A
\;
-4
\
\
)
�
§
=
g
§
/
\
g
/
k
®
\
\
/
\
. §
\
g
\
z
_
\
/
k
§
_

E
E
�
k
_
�
m
®
-
|
,
r
t
�
\
f
)
co/
[
J
�
E
|
|
co
§
co
k
m
o
r
)
\
\ F\0
�
A
\
7
n
o
|
_
�
)
�
00
f
\\
/
\)
�
2
�
%co
/
\
`
�/
co
�
|I
I
§ /
/
'IT/
)
) /
dugegg
\
2
\
2
/
�
n
.e
(
2
/
/
6
/
4
«
\
w
/
\
\
g
\
&
&
\
\
§
§t\
\
\
\
\
§
g
/
&
%
\
CZ
■
_
\
/
7
ƒ
®
\
_
©
\
\
. 2
g
z
_
\
/
k
§
■
§ \

E
E
�
k
_
x
2
!
-
\
�
-
\
u
2
\
�
]
a
)
#
,
2
%
7
o
e
/
t/)
x
x
p/
r
x
x
§
�
/
\
/
�
CD
I
oc
7
§
\
\
\
\
�
=
j
\
�
�
\
/
\
1
_
E
/
�
C
ƒ
-
-
-
.R2R
%
\
i
}
r.
�
z
\
\
§
g
|
§
d
/
\
_
,
\
z
e
_
\
\
\
co
|
§
/
z
o
k
2
_
dugegg

O
N
X
x
W
l0
OO
N
i
x
m
LD
N
V
N
O
co
co
I
LO
C
co
O
co
N
fn
o
O Y
N
o
O
I•
U
�
N
N �
0
'
I•
�
U
to
fn
I•
v m
N N
I
I:
u
N
m
Q
I•
00
rn
I.
O
N a
Q-
O
fnLD
O LL
I•
�O
I•
N
I
om
I�
N O
I•
O Q
Cl)
I
I•
I'
O
I
I
M
Ln
N
Ln
O
Ln
M
V
00
V
r
V
Ln
(11)
uOi;enal3
H
C
O
O
z.
cz
'�
WCC
M
oU
c
cz
cz
R.
cyj
7-r
cz
o
�
w
w
cz
m
cz
cz
W
cz
W

E
E
�
k
_
\
\
\
_
\
k
ƒ
%
0
/
§
\
k
m
/
|
$
o
�
o
\ /
o
G
\
\ \
(
�
�
|
/
/
%
§
m
[
/
§
�
�
|�
a
[
\
e
m
|
/
)
)
/
?
?
}
dugegg
/
2
\
2
/
2
�
_
.a
\
f
f
}
}
'-
g
]
j
4.1
:
=
g
§
/
\
�
/
/
/
/
g
k
®
\
}
\
k
§
\
\
g
/
§
\
_

N
Q
O
N
x
X
W
o
•�
•I
0
>
rxi
LD
N
V
N
O
N
rn
c
M
�
Ico
C
O
(co
U
V/
O
Cl)
O y
04
v%
O
N (6
m
04
-i
c�i
Icap
v m
0
d
Ids
N
Q
'
O c
ai
00
p OL
N O
Q�
0
O
LL
(�
LO
�
O
I
3
I
O m
(O
O X
N O
O Q
•�
•I
O
I
O O)
V
OD
r�
V V
(O
V
In
V
V
V
m
V
(11)
uOi;enal3
H
c
0
-71-
rn
/�
l—
00
rn
O
S.
a
H
O
/y1
Y
Y
Y
z
�
x
z
p
cz
cz
M
4W
W
�Q

O
l0
N
�-I
x
W
o
00
LO
N
I
m
N
X
Q
rn
I
00
co
I
o
I
I
O
a
I
(D
co
U
y
M
O
Vi
Z
Z
00
O
co
co
r�
r
n
o
,u^
v/
0
I
N
O
U
r—
N
o
CN
I
�
0
I
O
I�
N
N
00
rn
C
N
ti
ti
ti
ti
,^
�
r
�y
cz
N
p
N
cC
4.1
w
dco
o
o
Ucz
I
I
z
A
0
c
c
r-
(0
U)
c
�Q
(11) uOi;enal3
O
O cz

N
N
Q
o
c6
o�
X
W
0
V
rxi
LD
N
V
N
0
N
co
L6
(o
c
Cl)
0
U
O
O y
U)
Cl)
o
m
N
L
I�
N
o
or
N N
N
N
�
O) a)
pp
o O
L
N O
Q
0
O
(n
LO
LL
�
0
I
r
rn �
00
0
(D
N i
O Q
� Q
Cl)
II
0
I
V M
N
O
LO
M
V
V V
V
V
V
cc2
(11) uoi;enal3
ram"
O
O
cz
���
z
-�
�
x
cz
u
7-r
cz
cz
O
U
cz
�
y�
w
cz
cz
4:
W
L:
�Q
O
o cz

E
�
k
_
xco
2
{
\
\
\
2
\
_
k
\
{
ƒ
2
%
c
\
0
a
\
/
)
m
®
\
-
(
/
\
\
/
/
/
\
/
�
o
\ /
\
�
\
2
2
©
)
i
j
)
&
2
/CL
�
f
j
%
\
ƒJR2R
§
|
2
]
\
\
\
\
j
4.1
z
j
2
a
[
/
z
§
g
#
®
e
t
e
\
\
\
_
|
2
g
/
m
_
�
/
/
®
o
k
_
dugegg

N
a
O
l0
N
x
W
00
o
LO
I
m
N
o
I
I
~
I
co
I
O
I
o
d
CO
U
cn
co
oc
�
`-i
co
vi
I
O
co
�
o
CD
Cl)
I
I
y
O
I
U
N
o
N
i
N
O
m
04
Z
Z
Z
c-1
cal
o
toI
N
}
�
�
U
I
�
N
I
'
oc
00
rn
C
i
�
0
CL
in
N
L
.�
5
5
}C,
o
O
o
cz
cz
co
cz
O
4.
N
O
M
00 r
O
In
(11)
uOi;enal3
cz
4+ U
U cz
C U
U 0p
cz
z
c o
� w
cz
w v
'cz
C
U �
cz
cz
c
cz
0
00

E
�
k
_
\
:
:
\
)
/
:
\
)
:
a
®
:
:
§
c
\
2
:
E
2
r
|
m
)
:
m
m
§
:
/
f
m
§]
\\
o
§
A
=
t ]
�
t
CN
�
U
t
k
m
/
{{
�E
7
�
2
�
a
)
%]
2
\/
m
|�
�
�
o
= e
w
a
o
k
u mg
\
/
b
/
/
_
\
\
�
\
�
�
�
�
�
6
\
Q
n
�
^
r
�
\
§
a
A
a
2
\
\
<
<
»
m
g
4
4
//
a
2
Z
2�
\
f
f
f
\
\
z
§
=
g
§
/,
;
g
g
/
4
/
9
\
\
g
§
/
_
j
5
_
j
\
m

E
E
�
k
_
I�
\
\
�
?
�
t
�
f
%
�
e
m
k
c
\
/
m
o
i
_
o
% ¥
04
co
o
t G
(
m
,
]
2
u
|
/
/
R
CL
m
/
\
§
�
�
§
\
e
m
|
0
dugegg
/
2
\
2
/
2
n
\
\
k
f
©
f
\
}
g
§
=
g
;
/
\
\
\
/
\
\
k
�
\
\
\
k
\
\
z
\
f
a
k
_

E
E
�
k
_
co
\
04
2
Cl)\
c
|
/
§
co
k
o
m
Cl)
cl
® _040
^
\�:
co
m
j
k
&
J
}
/00
CL
%
\j
�
a
}
%]
2
co\/
o
�
k u
mg
�
|
�
7
a
!
�
�
�
�
!
7
■
!
|
�
7
a
!
i
■
/
2
\
/
2
#
\
.e
�
2
/

E
�
k
_
\
:
r
a
S
co\
�
C.0
|
co
I
�(
Cl)
Cl)
%
f
\ \
/
�,
o
`
7|(
§
C
)
/
t
\j
�
—
�
�
]
� `
�)
§
ƒ
Cl)
|
�
o
dugegg
/
2
\
2
\
%
_
9\
9
t
f
(
f
\
\
/
2
\
\
A
_
/
n
/
f
}
}
g
)
4.1
\
g
/
/
\
g
k
�
\
}
\
k
\
\
zcz
\
i
_
§
k
_
§ \
g g

O
N
1
m
x
W
Oo
�
m
I
L
I
I
N
I
o
E
�
co
ch
rl
I
�
�
O
f3
CO
Co
00
O
W
w
N
I
Cl)
n
w
Cl)
O
co
Cl)
�
I
O Co
I
a�
N N
I
O
L
0
U
~
N
cu
¢
00
00
M
1p
N
N
M
M
I
N fl
U
Ny
�o
�o
iL
I
fn
o
ct
fC
7�
I
04
I
I
�_
cz
cz
I
o
In
V
m
N
O
O)
(O
N
N
N
N
(11)
uOi;enal3

E
E
�
k
_
-
,�
-
\
\
�
�
�
\
�
A
�
t
%
\
/
m
'�
Cl)
§
9
$
0
]
\
® /2
� �|)§
)
/
k
§ \
m
/
o
2
e
%�
R /
Cl)
\ /
o
�
dugegg
/
2
\
2
/
2
�
\
3
(
°
7
z/
m
m
z
g
g
)
�
;
g
#
®&
t
}
®
\
\
?
\
©
�
)
_
k
§
_

E
�
k
_
x
2
�
f
\
)
2
\
]
\
k
\
ƒ
2
�
%
o
a
/
e
x
x
2
2
2®
2
2
2
c
co
co
\
/
.2
k
/
/
2
m
§
® »
o
»
R
S
C.4
�
� )
i
a
�
�
i
°\ow-
-
o
A
z
z
R
x
x
/
/
3
3
a
a©»»
/
%
_
_
e
—
e
-
_g
�
\
|m
o
—
\
■
dugegg
§ \
g g

N
CL
O
N
I
m
w
00
LD
I
I
N
o
rn
co
r�
I
N
0
(O
co
U
M
✓�
N
GO
�
�
�
y
,M-i
�
,M-i
�j
rn
co
v�
c
co
o
p
I
i.
u
cq
cA
I
oco
N m
cA
I
N
N
�Nh, 0
UI
�
�
�
I
I
�
fn
N
0
t
I
V
N
d
o
o
I
Oo
°'
InN
A
6
c
L
oO Q
N
��
I
Q
I
LD
O
O
.-I
Y
^
•-.
•-.
� m
(o
o
�
o
,�
ccz
I
co
�¢
I
I
I
�
O
(O
in
'ITm
N
i-
(11) uOl;enal3

N
a
O
l0
N
l0
W
OO
l0
N
3
5
LID
IT
N
m
I
N
o
I
O
eq
co
I
O
I
O
co
N
N
V
O
co
co
ch
�
v
O
I
U
o
cCD
o
N
N
O
U
N
O
04
co
N N
�
I
�
0
U
I
I
�
IN
�
�
I
ao
�
i
0
I
N
in
LO
$
O
O
;l.
4.1
O
G%
14
o
I
I
40
A
�
O
In
V
M N
O
(O
(11) uOi;enal3

E
�
k
_
x
2
�
\
\
2
\
\
�
/
®
/
�
±
/
eq
%
a
0
\
/
Q
§
co
co\
/
k
/
$
O
a »
'
S
§
�
a
�
�
/
/
m
/
_
_
e
—
e
-R
R
�
�
a
\
\
2
®
\
o
/
■
dugegg
§ \
g g

E
�
k
_
x
2
\
\
2
r
t
/
\
o
2
q
co
�
J
ƒ
/
�
q
t
co-
§
co
(
$
/
)
\
=
z
a
3
\
m
)]
|
o
\ /\0
2
a
6
\
|
�
5
%
CN
n
<
J
)$
z
o
a%
g
A
//
o 2
CL
/R
\ j
J
R
0
0 co
e
/ R
\<
m
|
\
/
�
§
Q
_
/
o
/
■
dugegg
g g

E
�
k
_
(
2
:�
\
-
\
�
\
:�
n2
co
�
2
§
2
/
|
%
f
\
e
f
z
r
2
q
m
®
\
§
t
e
$
m
04
§ ]
/
\ /\0
lk
|}
.
g
\
9
a\
4
w
A
�
C,4
�
t
°
S&
)
a
9@$
r
a
3
a
3
n
w\
g
/
A
E
'
r
\ j
-R
R
2
:
■
S
S
±
.»
�
\
( �
% �
\
e
§ 6
)�
�<
9
/
Q
\
®
$
/
0
2
■
dugegg
g g

E
O
l0
N
x
W
Oo
o
Ln
I
m
N
X
°
�
a
�
Q
co
I
I
N
I
p
aco
DD
N
Z
Z
-T
Z
Z
O
C
co
co
O
U
(V
M
Vl
U)
O
I
Z
Z
'
Z
y
Z
N
O
(�
N
O
N
U
�
O
O
N
�
U
�
N
�
cd
M
Vl
�
M
Z
Z
Oo
rn
n
L
Q
I
I
o
N
�
Y
Y
LO
>-
c
G
C75
O
O
^�
C75
o
N
ce
o5
4
O
0
V)
,
W
O
O
I
co
co
cC
x
W
O
I�
O
Ln
V
m
N
�Q
(11) uOi;enal3

Appendix E
Hydrology Data

Table 10. 2021 Rainfall Summary
Month
Average
Normal Limits
JoCo Airport
Station Precipitation
30 Percent
70 Percent
January
4.24
3.24
4.93
4.32
February
3.64
2.51
4.34
4.89
March
4.57
3.44
5.33
2.10
April
3.24
1.99
3.92
0.58
May
4.17
2.91
4.96
1.60
June
4.14
2.70
4.97
5.14
July
5.43
3.48
6.53
7.27
August
4.58
3.05
5.49
2.93
September
4.54
2.26
5.55
0.80
October
3.16
1.89
3.81
NA
November
2.95
1.86
3.55
NA
December
3.05
2.02
3.65
NA
Total
47.71
31.35
57.03
29.63
Above Normal Limits
Below Normal Limits
Table 11. Documentation of Geomorphically Significant Flow Events
Year
Number of Bankfull
Events
Maximum Bankfull
Height (ft)
Date of Maximum Bankfull
Event
Stage Recorder S6B
MYl 2019
0
0.00
N/A
MY2 2020
5
0.75
2/7/2020
MY3 2021
1
0.09
7/9/2021
Stage Recorder S11
MY12019
2
0.77
9/5/2019
MY2 2020
12
11.00
2/29/2020
MY3 2021
5
8.48
1/4/2021

Table 12.
2021 Max Hydroperiod (Growing Season 18-Mar through 6-Nov, 233 days)
Success Criterion 12%
Well ID
Wetland
ID
Wetland
Treatment
Consecutive
Cumulative
Occurrences
Days
Hydroperiod
%
Days
y
Hydroperiod
GW1
I WI
E (3:1)
20
8
83
35
14
GW2
WI
E (3:1)
94
40
186
80
2
GW3
WB
RH (1.5:1)
35
15
98
42
12
GW4
WH
RE (1:1)
16
7
61
26
11
GW5
WH
RE (1:1)
16
7
44
19
14
GW6
WH
RE (1:1)
53
23
118
50
5
GW7
I WH
RE (1:1)
9
4
26
11
7
GW8
WF-B
E (3:1)
54
23
140
60
7
GW9
WGA
E (3:1)
122
52
185
79
2
GW10
WGB
E (5:1)
53
23
146
63
5
GWII
WF-A
p
31
13
100
43
9
RGWI
WF-A
p
2
1
11
5
12
<5% 1 5-11% 1>12%
Table 13.
Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results
Meadow Spring
Well ID
Wetland
ID
Wetland
Treatment
H dro eriod % ; Success Criteron 12%
Year 1
2019
Year 2
2020
Year 3
2021
Year 4
2022
Year 5
2023
Year 6
2024
Year 7
2025
GW1
WI
E
9
6
8
GW2
WI
E
17
26
40
GW3
WB
RH
7
17
15
GW4
WH
RE
2
5
7
GW5
WH
RE
2
8
7
GW6
WH
RE
8
23
23
GW7
WH
RE
2
4
4
GW8
WF-B
E
8
18
23
GW9
WGA
E
19
81
52
GW10
WGB
E (5: 1)
8
26
23
GWII
WF-A
p
10
22
13
RGWI
WF-A
p
2
5
1

(smpui) uoi;e;idl3OJd
O O o
N O O O O O O O O O O O
O W r (O In V (M N O
I
I
I
N
I
I
I
I
I
O
I
I
C
O
N
f3
N
�
rV,
00
V
O
'i
cn
I
cu
cu
c
O
�
o
L
r
Q
d
Q
0
C
0
o
G
�
�
04
I
I
O
N
I
co
I
I
I
I
I
N
I
I
I
N
I
O
O O O O O O O
(say3ui) uoi;enBIB aa;empunoaE)

(segmi) uoge;idi3oad
O O o
N O O O O O O O O O O O
O W r (O In V (M N O
I
I
I
N
I
I
I
I
I
O
I
I
C
N
ao
c�
co
_
I
'i
Q
I
co
af
O
0
LO
0
r
Q
I
0
�
U
0
�
�
N
I
O
I
N
I
I
I
co
I
I
N
I
I
I
I N
------------
I
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
(soy3ui) uoi;enBIB ao;empunoaE)

(segmi) uoi;e;idi3oad
O O o
N O O O O O O O O O O O
O W r (O In V (M N O
I
I
I
N
I
I
I
I
I
O
I
I
C
O
0')
M
in
I
ao
'i
Q
cu
co
cu
I;
C
�
o
LO
r
O
d
I
o
C
o
0
G
�
�
04
I
I
O
I
N
I
I
I
co
I
I
N
I
I
I
I
I
N
I
I
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
(soy3ui) uoi;enBIB ao;empunoaE)

(segmi) uoi;e;idi3oad
0 0 0
N O O O O O O O O O O O
O W r (O In V (M N O
I
I
I
N
I
I
I
I
I
O
I
I
C
O
N
�
00
V
'i
cu
I
cu
of
,
LO
0
I
I
0
�
U
0
�
�
N
I
o
N
I
I
I
co
I
I
N
I
N
I
I
O
O O O O O O O
(soy3ui) uoi;enBIB ao;empunoaE)

(segmi) uoi;e;idi3oad
O O o
N O O O O O O O O O O O
O W r (O In V (M N O
I
I
I
N
I
I
I
I
O
I
I
C
O
00
C
�
'i
cu
Cl)
cu
cu
LO
Q
d0
I
C
�
U
o
G
�
�
N
I
I
o
N
co
I
I
I
I
N
I
N
O
O O O O O O O
(soy3ui) uoi;enBIB ao;empunoaE)

(segmi) uoi;e;idi3oad
O O o
N O O O O O O O O O O O
O W r (O In V (M N O
I
I
I
N
I
I
I
I
I
O
I
I
c
O
I
(a
I
�_
00
�
I
�
'i
Q
ILO
Cl)
cocu
L
r
O
d
I
o
C
o
0
G
�
�
04
I
I
O
I
N
I
I
I
co
I
I
N
I
I
I
I
I
N
I
I
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
(soy3ui) uoi;enBIB ao;empunoaE)

(segmi) uoi;e;idi3oad
O O o
N O O O O O O O O O O O
O W r (O In V (M N O
I
I
I
N
I
I
I
I
I
O
I
I
I
I
I
00
V
�
_
�
I
CL
cu
E
•O
I
I
�
cu
O
V
LO
Q
A�
W
I
0
C
o
0
G
� �
r
N
I
o
N
co
I
I
I
N
I
I
N
I
O
O O O O O O O
(soy3ui) uoi;enBIB ao;empunoaE)

(segmi) uol;e;ldl3oad
O O O O O O O O O'
00 I� M In V M N O O O O O O O O O O O
I
I
I
N
I
I
I
I
I
O
I
�
o
I
I
I
0')
CO
L
00
�
'i
Q
O
0
af
.T
0
I
LO
�
r
Q
0
U
0
�
04
O
I
�
I
I
N
I
I
I
M
N
I
I
I
I
I
I N
I
I
I
0
0 o m O O O O o O O
(say3ui) u014en813 ao;empunoaE)

(SOegmi) uoi4e4!dl3oad
O O O O O o
(O In V M N O O O O O O O O O O O
I
I
I
N
I
I
I
I
I
O
I
I
c
o
I
I
I
00
'i
Q
I
co
cu
i
r
Q
G�
C
I
Q
o
o
0
G
�
�
04
I
I
O
I
N
I
I
co
I
N
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
N
I
I
0
o0 O O O o o O O
(say3ui) u014en813 ao;empunoaE)

(segmi) uoi;e;idi3oad
O O O O o
V M N O O O O O O O O O O O
O W r (O Ln V (M N O
I
I
I
N
I
I
I
I
O
I
I
Ell.
00
V
w
O
=
I
.0
Q
�
5
cu
m
�
p
0
Lf
r
I
�
0
0
U
C
G
G
I
o
r
N
'
I
C
N
I
I
I
I
I
N
I
I
I
I
I
N
I
I
0
rn O O O O O O O
(soy3ui) uoi;enBIB ao;empunoaE)

(segmi) uol;e;ldl3oad
O O O O o
V M N O O O O O O O O O O O
O W r (O In V (M N O
I
I
I
N
I
I
I
I
I
O
IMal
I
C
O
m
I
r
acu
�
C
3
w
�
cn
I
I
� 0
af
T
0
O
�
I
L
�
r
0
U
C
G
G
r
C
�
o
'N
N
I
I
I
I
I
N
I
I
I
I
I
N
I
I
0
O O O O O O O
(say3ui) u014en813 ao;empunoaE)

(segmi) uol;e;ldl3oad
O O O O O O O O O'
00 I� M In V M N O O O O O O O O O O O
I
I
I
N
I
I
I
I
I
O
I
I
0')
r
�
00
LL
LU
c
3
W
af
W
�
�
I
'i
=af
I
;
w
?�
p
I
LO
°
o
�
2-
0
QCi
o
G
�
N
co
O
N
N
I
N
I
I
0
O o O O O o O O O o
LO
(say3ui) u014en813 ao;empunoaE)