20160981 Ver 1_Year 3 Monitoring Report_20211003

Mitigation Project Information Upload
ID#* 20160981 Version* 1
Select Reviewer:*
Erin Davis
Initial Review Completed Date 10/04/2021
Mitigation Project Submittal - 10/3/2021
Is this a Prospectus,Technical Proposal or a New Site?* C' Yes r No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
17. Stream r Wetlands r Buffer r Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:* Email Address:*
Jamey McEachran jmceachran©res.us
Project Information
.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
ID#:* 20160981 Version:*1
Existing ID## Existing Version
Project Type: r DMS C•' Mitigation Bank
Project Name: NeuCon UMBI Uale Stream Mitigation Site
County: Johnston
Document Information
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: Uzzle MY3 Report.pdf 11.59MB
Rease upload only one R7F of the complete file that needs to be submitted...
Signature
Print Name:* Jamey McEachran
Signature:*
fe[Q le.

UZZI,E STREAM
MITIGATION SITE
JOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SAW-2016-01973
YEAR 3 MONITORING REPORT
'd ' xi�'q : ` k `zw is!. -1-0: /` AP I' �f Nt
Y
Ls. YL�C� Yz .�s
1 aP I ,.t;:i. .'-,:.:,:,,-t.-;.-:,tt!p7,'.',--,-4--,A.c.,:6,. ,,''..=4:..', y.lkq44r.H.z--..,
_ 1 •
-
1[yy��..♦ J "� - tt,tr )` m!/�.-• .�` f'f - ' i#. Yi k' -'t s-:
4:2:.."0",,--;:.:T I .-,.7. 4'-'7.Z.Nz.0 .,1iNI .. ,.. '...-VIII' 1-1—. 7.3t. t';Ta',--7.-.'"gi;',---- C-ii.-.11'.:". . ;... —
'-->_____....
/c c =�
--'2, .-40.,,,,'-;--,7'..-1,,/,,,4.eattl.- -:-:::1: ;_f,."4.,---i'7°,4',2:-::rt/' '--",.„,IOW A---;"4,1"-'--*Iroto,;--- :,- - - -'11-
1.,gym•
• Kam..... ".
Provided by:
res
Bank Sponsor: EBX-Neuse I, LLC,
An entity of Resource Environmental Solutions
3600 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 100
Raleigh,NC 27612
919-209-1056
September 2021

Table of Contents
1.0 Project Summary 2
1.1 Project Location and Description 2
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives 2
1.3 Project Success Criteria 3
Stream Success Criteria 3
Vegetation Success Criteria 4
1.4 Project Components 4
1.5 Stream Design/Approach 5
1.6 Construction and As-Built Conditions 6
1.7 Year 3 Monitoring Performance (MY3) 6
Vegetation 6
Stream Geomorphology 6
Stream Hydrology 7
Wetland Hydrology 7
2.0 Methods 7
3.0 References 8
Appendix A: Background Tables
Figure 1: Site Location Map
Table 1: Project Mitigation Assets and Components
Table 2: Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3: Project Contacts Table
Table 4: Project Background Information Table
Appendix B: Visual Assessment Data
Figure 2: Current Conditions Plan View
Vegetation Plot Photos
Monitoring Device Photos
Monitoring 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
Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table 9. Cross Section Morphology Data Table
Cross-Section Plots
Appendix E: Hydrology Data
Table 10. 2021 Rainfall Summary
Table 11. Documentation of Geomorphically Significant Flow Events
Table 12. 2021 Max Hydroperiod
Table 13. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results
MY3 Groundwater Hydrographs
Uzzle 1 Year 3 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site September 2021

1.0 Project Summary
1.1 Project Location and Description
The Uzzle Stream Mitigation Site (the Site), a component of the Neu-Con Stream and Wetland Umbrella
Mitigation Bank, is located in Johnston County, North Carolina, approximately six miles southeast of
Clayton. Water quality stressors currently affecting the Site include livestock production, agricultural
production, and improper flow dynamics due to impervious surface runoff. The Site presents 5,897 linear
feet of stream restoration and enhancement generating 2,876 Stream Mitigation Units (SMU) along Little
Poplar Creek and two unnamed tributaries.
The Site is located in the Neuse River Basin within Cataloging Unit 03020201, TLW 03020201100040,
part of the Neuse Regional Watershed Planning (RWP) area, and the Wake-Johnston Collaborative Local
Watershed Plan (WJCLWP). As part of the RWP and WJCLWP, the Site is located in a sub-watershed
identified as High Priority for stream corridor restoration due to current surrounding land use, hydrologic
impairment due to stormwater runoff,and projected impact from highway development.
Originally,consisting of pasture land and wooded areas,the Site's total easement area is 27.3 acres within
the overall drainage area of 1,312 acres. Grazing livestock historically had access to all stream reaches
within the Site and the lack of riparian buffer vegetation, deep-rooted vegetation, and unstable channel
characteristics contributed to the degradation of stream banks throughout the Site.Prior to restoration work,
erosion and aggradation were especially prominent at the upstream end of the Site where Little Poplar Creek
enters via a culvert under HWY US-70.
The stream design approach for the Site was to combine the analog method of natural channel design with
analytical methods to evaluate stream flows and hydraulic performance of the channel and floodplain. The
analog method involves the use of a reference reach,or"template"stream adjacent to,nearby,or previously
in the same location as the design reach.The template parameters of the analog reach are replicated to create
the features of the design reach. The analog approach is useful when watershed and boundary conditions
are similar between the design and analog reaches. Hydraulic geometry was developed using analytical
methods to identify the design discharge.
The Site will be monitored on a regular basis throughout the seven-year post-construction monitoring
period, or until performance standards are met. 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.
This site is co-located with a DWR Riparian Buffer Bank. The width of the riparian restoration and
enhancement areas where buffer or nutrient offset credits are generated will begin at the most landward
limit of the top of bank and extend landward to a distance of at least 50 feet perpendicular to the streams,
then again 151-200 feet from the top of bank. There will be no overlapping buffer crediting areas with
stream crediting areas between 51-150 feet from the top of bank.
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives
Through the comprehensive analysis of the Site's maximum functional uplift using the Stream Functions
Pyramid Framework, specific attainable goals and objectives will be realized by the Site. These goals
Uzzle 2 Year 3 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site September 2021

address the excess nutrient input, streambank erosion, and sedimentation that were identified as major
watershed stressors in the 2010 Neuse RBRP.
The Site goals are:
• Improve water transport from watershed to the channel in a non-erosive manner in a stable
channel;
• Improve water quality within the restored channel reach and downstream water sources by
reducing sediment and nutrient loads,and increasing dissolved oxygen levels;
• Improve flood flow attenuation on-site and downstream by allowing for overbank flows and
connection to the active floodplain;and
• Improve ecological processes by reducing water temperature,improving terrestrial and
aquatic habitat,and restoring a native plant community.
The Site objectives to address the goals are:
• Design and construct stable stream channels with appropriate pattern,dimension,and profile
based on reference reach conditions;
• Permanently exclude livestock from stream channels and their associated buffers;
• Add in-stream structures and bank stabilization measures to protect restored and enhanced
streams;
• Reduce bank height ratios and increase entrenchment ratios to reference reach conditions;
• Maintain and improve forested riparian buffers to at least 50 feet on both sides of the channel
along all reaches with a coastal plain hardwood riparian community;
• Treat exotic invasive species;and
• Establish a permanent conservation easement on the Site.
Limitations to achieving these watershed goals arise by remaining constrained to our Site boundaries.While
we are restoring the habitat and streams to stable and effective conditions that achieve our goals within the
Site parcels, we are unable to influence the effect of poor riparian buffers and livestock impact in other
areas within the watershed.However,through this Site's connectivity with other projects in the watershed
and responsible stewardship of current restoration projects,overall watershed functionality and health will
improve to meet the RBRP goals.
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.
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
Uzzle 3 Year 3 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site September 2021

1.2, and the entrenchment ratio shall be no less than 2.2 within restored reaches. Channel stability should
be demonstrated through a minimum of four bankfull events documented in the seven-year monitoring
period.
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.
Vegetation Success Criteria
Specific and measurable success criteria for plant density within the riparian buffers on the Site will follow
IRT Guidance.Vegetation monitoring plots will be a minimum of 0.02 acres in size,and cover a minimum
of two percent of the planted area and there will be a minimum of four plots.Vegetation monitoring will
occur between July 1st and leaf drop. The interim measures of vegetative success for the site will be the
survival of at least 320 planted three-year old trees per acre at the end of Year 3, 260 five-year old trees
at the end of Year 5 that are at least 7 feet tall, and the final vegetative success criteria will be 210 trees
per acre with an average height of 10 feet at the end of Year 7. Height measurement success criteria do
not apply to the understory trees or shrubs. Volunteer trees will be counted, identified to species, and
included in the yearly monitoring reports, but will not be counted towards the success criteria of total
planted stems.Additionally,no species may account for over 50 percent of total stems at a given plot.
1.4 Project Components
The Site is comprised of two easement sections,separated by a newly built ford crossing along Little Poplar
Creek. The stream reaches include Little Poplar Creek(LP1, LP2, LP4, LP5, and LP7)and two unnamed
tributaries (LP3 and LP6), split into seven reaches by treatment type and location. The stream mitigation
components are summarized below. Mitigation credits presented below are based upon the Approved
Mitigation Plan. The Project is co-located with a DWR Riparian Buffer Bank. The width of the riparian
enhancement areas where buffer credits are generated begin at the most landward limit of the top of bank
and extend landward to a distance of at least 50 feet perpendicular to the streams and from 151 —200 feet.
The buffer from 50— 150 feet is used to generate credit using the non-standard buffer credit calculation.
Therefore,there is no overlap of buffer crediting areas and stream crediting areas.
Uzzle 4 Year 3 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site September 2021

Mitigation Plan Credits
Mitigation Stationing Pre- Design Mitigation Base
Reach Type (Design) Construction Length Ratio SMUs
Length(LF) (LF)
LP1 Restoration 1+24 to 07+53 766 629 1: 1 629
LP2 Enhancement II 07+53 to 23+72 1,619 1,619 1 : 2.5 648
LP3 Enhancement II 0+50 to 1+92 142 142 1 : 2.5 57
LP4 Enhancement II 23+72 to 29+31 559 559 1 : 2.5 223
LP5 Enhancement II 29+31 to 36+45 714 714 1 : 2.5 286
LP5 Enhancement II 37+06 to 52+50 1,544 1,544 1 : 2.5 618
LP6 Enhancement II 0+22 to 4+00 378 378 1 : 2.5 151
LP7 Enhancement II 52+50 to 55+62 312 312 1 : 2.5 125
Totals 6,034 5,897 2,736
Credit Loss in Required Buffer -150
Credit Gain for Additional Buffer 289
Total Adjusted SMUs 2,876
*SMUs are adjusted in accordance with Section XI(C)-"Procedures to Calculate Credits for Non-standard Buffer Widths",
published in the October 2016 Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update.A detailed description
of the methodology and calculations is described in the Mitigation Plan.
1.5 Stream Design/Approach
Stream restoration and enhancement efforts along the tributaries at the Uzzle Stream Mitigation Site were
accomplished through analyses of geomorphic conditions and watershed characteristics. The design
approach applied a combination of analytical and reference reach-based design methods that meet
objectives commensurate with both ecological and geomorphic improvements. For Reach LP1, natural
design concepts were applied and verified through rigorous engineering analyses and modeling. The
objective of this approach is to build a geomorphically stable channel that provides habitat improvements
and ties into the existing landscape.
The Uzzle Stream Mitigation Site has been broken into the following reaches:
Reach LP1 (Priority I Restoration)
Reach beginning downstream of US HWY 70 at the northern project limits flowing south to Reach LP2.
Wooded active pasture was located adjacent to the reach.Priority I Restoration was performed along Reach
LP1 to address channel degradation and bank erosion caused by cattle access and high energy storm flows
from the upstream culvert.The design approach included meandering the channel within the natural valley,
aligning the channel with the upstream culvert,backfilling the existing stream,reconnecting the channel to
its floodplain, and excluding livestock from the stream. A minimum 50-foot buffer was established and
planted with native riparian vegetation. Woody debris and grade control structures were installed along the
bed to improve in-stream habitat and stability. The watershed that drains to the upper end of the project is
approximately 1,124 acres,and land use is primarily agricultural. The drainage area at the downstream end
of the reach is 1,174 acres.
Uzzle 5 Year 3 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site September 2021

Reaches LP2,LP3,LP4,LPS,LP6,and LP7 (Enhancement II)
Treatment of these reaches included treatment of invasive vegetation, debris removal, pocketed areas of
supplemental planting,and livestock exclusion.A minimum 50-foot buffer was established along the reach
and was planted with native riparian vegetation where existing vegetation was non-native or limited density.
The drainage area at the downstream end of the reaches is 1,312 acres.A rock ford crossing was constructed
at the crossing in the middle of Reach LP5. Both Reaches LP5 and LP6 right bank have less than 50 feet
buffers, but they run parallel to a 50 feet utility easement corridor that is fully vegetated maintained
herbaceous cover with some foot paths.
1.6 Construction and As-Built Conditions
Stream construction and planting was completed in May 2019.The Uzzle Mitigation Site was built to design
plans and guidelines. Project credits are based on design centerline, but as-built stream lengths are shown
on Table 1. The as-built survey was included in the Baseline Monitoring Report and includes a redlined
version.
1.7 Year 3 Monitoring Performance(MY3)
The Uzzle Year 3 Monitoring (MY3) activities were performed in June and September 2021. All Year 3
monitoring data is presented below and in the appendices. The Site is on track to meet vegetation and
stream interim success criteria.
Vegetation
Monitoring of the four permanent 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. MY3
monitoring data indicates that all plots are exceeding the interim success criteria of 320 planted stems per
acre. Planted stem densities ranged from 364 to 607 planted stems per acre with a mean of 526 planted
stems per acre across the permanent plots. A total of 11 species were documented within the plots.
Volunteer species were noted in two plots,with an average of 20 stems per acre. The average stem height
in the vegetation plots was 4.6 feet. A few willow livestakes were added to Vegetation Plot 1 in the wet
area in March 2020.
Visual assessment of vegetation outside of the monitoring plots indicates that the herbaceous vegetation is
becoming well established throughout the project. RES performed supplemental planting of about 40
bareroot trees in early 2021. This planting occurred in and around VP3. MY3 visual assessments of the
easement boundary found no encroachments or evidence of cattle entry. Photos of the fence line and
crossing can be found in Appendix B.A small repair was being performed in the utility easement adjacent
to the project in mid-2020, however, there was no sign of excess sediment runoff or concentrated flow
through the riparian area. A few small areas of re-sprouted Chinese privet observed in 2019 in the lower
section of the easement were treated in early 2020 and again in May of 2021 and will continue as needed
throughout the monitoring period.
Stream Geomorphology
Geomorphology data for MY3 was collected during June 2021. Summary tables and cross section plots are
in Appendix D.Overall the baseline cross sections and profile on the restoration reach relatively match the
design. The cross sections on the Enhancement II reaches were included to monitor the changes in
dimension post cattle exclusion and riparian planting. This year's conditions show that shear stress and
Uzzle 6 Year 3 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site September 2021

velocities have been reduced for all restoration/enhancement reaches. All reaches were designed as very
coarse sand bed channels and remain classified as very coarse sand bed channels post-construction.
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.Cross Sections 1 and 2 showed signs of
bank erosion along the right bank in MY3. Cross Section 2 also has a Bank Height Ratio of 1.3. RES
believes this erosion was caused by a log sill directly upstream of Cross Section 1 that was angled slightly
towards the point bar and by the low survival rate of the livestakes planted during construction. RES
performed a supplemental livestake planting in March 2020 which included these two erosion areas;
continued planting of more shade adapted livestake species will be attempted in the future.These areas will
be monitored closely and if conditions worsen in the following monitoring years RES will perform
additional adaptive management.
Stream Hydrology
The stage recorder on LP1 recorded six bankfull events in MY3. The highest event was 1.36 feet above the
top of bank and occurred in June 2021.There has been at least three bankfull events in three separate years
of monitoring. The gauge location can be found on Figure 2,a photo is in Appendix B,and the hydrology
data is in Appendix E.
Wetland Hydrology
Two groundwater wells monitor wetland hydrology in the existing wetland on site. Groundwater Well 1
recorded a 1% hydroperiod and Groundwater Well 2 recorded a 19% hydroperiod. This is the third year
Groundwater Well 1 has had a 1% hydroperiod. RES expects the hydroperiods to increase in future
monitoring years as the site adjusts. However, if this well continues to show low hydroperiods, RES will
install an additional gauge in the area to see if this is just a localized issue or a problem with the well
installation. 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 eight cross-sections. Survey data were imported into CAD,ArcGIS®,
and Microsoft Excel®for data processing and analysis. The stage recorder includes an automatic pressure
transducer flow gauge. The flow gauge was installed within the channel and will record water depth at an
hourly interval.A surveyed elevation was recorded at the bed and top of bank at the stage recorder elevation
to detect bankfull events.
Vegetation success is being monitored at four permanent 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.
Wetland hydrology is monitored to document maintenance of jurisdictional groundwater levels in the
stream restoration area (as requested by NCIRT). This is accomplished with two automatic pressure
transducer gauges (located in groundwater wells) that record daily groundwater levels. One automatic
pressure transducer is installed above ground for use as a barometric reference. Gauges are downloaded
Uzzle 7 Year 3 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site September 2021

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.
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
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).Uzzle Stream 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.
Uzzle 8 Year 3 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site September 2021

Appendix A
Background Tables

Legend
Gor,l•
Conservation Easement
7
a
US Highway 70 W
15 W
7, 1
❑
%:::::
2
µ® r
t
Ryb
7
- <s Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri
s, Japan, METI, Esri China(Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri(Thailand), NGCC,
�4. OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS User Community
N
Date: 6/25/2019
*���� �•�L� Figure 1 -Site Location Map
�atit wi��� ili w e Drawn by: RTM
oiralLv,�i .-4v+L-j.' Uzzle Stream Mitigation Site Ores
.4.'�# 0 500 1,000 Checked by: BPB
Johnston County, North Carolina
1 inch=1,000 feet
Feet

Table 1. Uzzle-Mitigation Assets and Components
Existing Mitigation
Footage Plan Mitigation As-Built
or Footage or Mitigation Restoration Priority Mitigation Plan Footage or
Project Segment Acreage Acreage Category Level Level Ratio(X:1) Credits Acreage Comments
Full Channel Restoration,Planted Buffer,Exclusion of Livestock,Permanent
LP1 766 629 Warm R 1 1.00000 629.000 629 Conservation Easement
Exclusion of Livestock,Permanent Conservation Easement,Supplemental
LP2 1619 1619 Warm ElI NA 2.50000 647.600 1619 Planting
Exclusion of Livestock,Permanent Conservation Easement,Supplemental
LP3 142 142 Warm ElI NA 2.50000 56.800 142 Planting
Exclusion of Livestock,Permanent Conservation Easement,Supplemental
LP4 559 559 Warm ElI NA 2.50000 223.600 559 Planting
Exclusion of Livestock,Permanent Conservation Easement,Supplemental
LP5 714 714 Warm ElI NA 2.50000 285.600 714 Planting
Exclusion of Livestock,Permanent Conservation Easement,Supplemental
LP5 1544 1544 Warm ElI NA 2.50000 617.600 1544 Planting
Exclusion of Livestock,Permanent Conservation Easement,Supplemental
LP6 378 378 Warm ElI NA 2.50000 151.200 378 Planting
Exclusion of Livestock,Permanent Conservation Easement,Supplemental
LP7 312 312 Warm ElI NA 2.50000 124.800 312 Planting
Project Credits
Stream Riparian Wetland Non-Rip Coastal
Restoration Level Warm Cool Cold Riverine Non-Riv Wetland Marsh
Restoration 629.000
Re-establishment
Rehabilitation
Enhancement
Enhancement I
Enhancement II 2107.200
Creation
Preservation
Total 2736.200
Credit Loss in Buffer -150
Credit Gain in Buffer 289
Total Adjusted SMUs 2876

Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Uzzle Mitigation Site
Elapsed Time Since grading complete: 2 years 5 months
Elapsed Time Since planting complete: 2 years 5 months
Number of reporting Years : 3
Data Collection Completion or
Activity or Deliverable Complete Delivery
Mitigation Plan NA Dec-18
Final Design—Construction Plans NA Apr-19
Stream Construction NA May-19
Site Planting NA May-19
As-built (Year 0 Monitoring — baseline) May-19 Jul-19
Year 1 Monitoring Dec-19 Dec-19
Supplemental Livestaking NA Mar-20
Invasive Treatment NA May-20
Year 2 Monitoring : Sep-20 Oct-20
VP
VP: Sep-20
Invasive Treatment NA May-21
Year 3 Monitoring XS: June-21 Sep-21
VP: 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
Uzzle Mitigation Site
Designer WK Dickson and Co., Inc. /720 Corporate Center Dr., Raleigh,
NC 27607
Primary project design POC David Perry
Construction Contractor KBS Earthwork Inc. /5616 Coble Church Rd., Julian, NC
27283
Construction contractor POC Kory Strader [phone]
Survey Contractor Matrix East, PLLC / 906 N. Queen St., Suite A, Kinston, NC
28501
Survey contractor POC Chris Paderick, PLS
Planting Contractor H&J Forestry
Planting contractor POC Matt Hitch
Seeding Contractor KBS Earthwork Inc. /5616 Coble Church Rd., Julian, NC
27283
Contractor point of contact Kory Strader [phone]
Seed Mix Sources Green Resource [phone]
Nursery Stock Suppliers Arborgen [phone]
Monitoring Performers RES/ 3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100, Raleigh, NC 27612
Stream Monitoring POC Ryan Medric [phone]
Vegetation Monitoring POC Ryan Medric [phone]

Table 4.Project Background Information
Project Name Uzzle
County Johnston
Project Area(acres) 27.3
Project Coordinates(latitude and longitude) Latitude:35.4754 N Longitude:-78.3117 W
Planted Acreage(Acres of Woody Stems Planted) 3.6
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province Coastal Plain
River Basin Neuse
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit I 03020201 USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit I 03020201100040
DWR Sub-basin 03-04-02
Project Drainage Area(Acres and Square Miles) 1,312 ac(2.05 sqmi)
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area 6%
CGIA Land Use Classification Forest(49%)Agriculture(28%)Residential/Urban(16%)
Reach Summary Information
Parameters LP1 LP2 LP3 LP4 LP5 LP6 LP7
Length of reach(linear feet) 629 1619 142 559 2258 378 312
Valley confinement(Confined,moderately confined,unconfined) --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Drainage area(Acres and Square Miles) 1124 1174 23 1202 1296 42 1312
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral P P I P P I P
NCDWR Water Quality Classification --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Stream Classification(existing) E5 E5 G5 C5 E5 G5 C5
Stream Classification(proposed) E5 --- --- --- --- --- ---
Evolutionary trend(Simon) --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
FEMA classification AE AE AE AE AE AE AE
Regulatory Considerations
Parameters Applicable? Resolved? Supporting
Docs?
Water of the United States-Section 404 Yes Yes SAW-2016-
01973
Water of the United States-Section 401 Yes Yes DWR#16-
0981
Endangered Species Act Yes Yes USFWS
(Corr. Letter)
Historic Preservation Act Yes Yes SHPO(Corr.
Letter)
Coastal Zone Management Act(CZMA or CAMA) No N/A N/A
FEMA Floodplain Compliance Yes Yes No-Rise Cert
Essential Fisheries Habitat No N/A N/A

Appendix B
Visual Assessment Data

r i
.
'l, . 4: ,,,iiii . 6 res
_ . . , ..
•
�1117i1 � + :1 1Rt i
I.. , , t A.° a ,"
' ;It.- - i - N
a ____....
.. , .
,.,. .4 '. '... . • • :' i,-
, ,1 iitt
daso
If
,`:. �' �11 ;� E
e4 /// -�� ��r GW-1 �� vd
tRf � F ' 3 �� �3 4 s
!�� 'y�^^i L" 0 125 250
ISI
401e
i F%P / t - O, Feet
p
-.;,`A\�?�?'''q.,, ... o Figure 2
673 Current Conditions
z pf,"" �.,1. Plan View
", , , .
. ,
� ls
,A,
s . , MY3 2021
, ,
f ,........)\...„., ,L., . ,., / Uzzle Stream
w 1t
Mitigation Site
.:::„.4x :...„. ,
w,./4., ,i:,
, 4, ..4. .
'� ..
��f.
..,
/5 ' oom o Johnston County, NC
w ',..I �� Date: 9/20/2021 Drawn by:RTM
1 �f
� i .T �' ' , 414)7•A Lat:35.590264 Long:-78.394629
�'" �, LEGEND
'�•., ,fir '^ (� rr
A� ! :� ��,' , �o ,�`. Conservation Easement
# �f z. ` >� �' Vegetation Plot
FFr T 4 io
-->
b y
I I >320 stems/acre,._ ` + As-built Top of Bank
`q� ` ,
�� 4 R f �� , r f < s »' - >� `,� VA Existing Wetland
, �, v. r� ._
��,� .7.: Cr::toni
i; q 0 w t - �i - -
• Mitigaiton Plan Centerline
f Fi .t-' rk ' �' Restoration
' okz iti.c,?fie:. ' ,t. . r .,. 4, . , Enhancement II
,-;,,,,,,, ' '-.,,, ate, t tot, Fx „
.� t �'" ,
...
O Stage Recorder
� �, or s .
F
r ' N.; qFA'''. -- ti
�- t F
����, � Groundwater Well
`f �, ''�, z�,� t '� �m. :V F�jt r-,.: �- r r. t .:,µt, •.` ` ;.. Y t •y �•.,�' �' " :3; 1�-- /.� ::� _ � . 1 • >5% Hydroperiod
�f �,,. , .,, e, F t r �Tw ► ( ! Y • <5% Hydroperiod
,8,, r
!:', *e ii'7,:.,.%..%,,,1.4,,, ,,, „. , R,J.-
,mow fKff A
ffillP
f F�ftta
_ F y �'" Vegetation Condition Assessment
F
rs ►F t e o" p r'� —
^11�5�, Present Maral Absent
H Target Community
r w inal
,.', ;', C. .. Q Absent No Fill gl
q . ✓ • . - •N Present K )� x� �K}�{?
v
F

Uzzle MY3 Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
3� n
. ' '.11, ' ; ..ti, It 1.4 '71 ,.ill ,?,'' '•••,.'..:-vi,'"'4', ''i'l.1'li' ; j1.'-1' , '.',A, -,'-'',.'.'
/r.
t,
�, him � �' 1 �;-';.... . . ' '• . . : ;t.'44 ..k.,•!.' '..' ....,-; i id.e. '',...to LE•*,-;',',,,: ' At . - .. -•.:-: `-'1.-- -
� 4
��
•� ' +2 ' rr. > • -. x+s _ sip`
b}}
i "� .w �s. ?iir�a.' c:, :::.,,,,,,.,..7.0,:„.:1„._ ,,,,,,,,,,,,„. _, „:„.,. ...4.4::::::::.i.,5„;„.. , .. .F, .,_____,_ i� �y� wc y� ��
Vegetation Plot 1 (09/01/202I) Vegetation Plot 2 (09/01/202 I
P
h
•
S¢%^ tt s �y a�'w•ey fi ¢''s . 4 4, /�.& e�1 y � � y'V�.ay. -f 4'[\ y�,,-[[ i
1 s l e i �r "v j`wi
y '' ""v ,�r' '. ��s ..#1?'k ,9y} Jasy ,, ''i 1yt�a a .d yy1�y i�'.`€,--mac` 1'' "`lot { t �lyy }`
� � Rry . . 4 l7 (., 2 i L.A `x • J�`.p��A' :� �-/p��Ii l�P S i �` e`iYe�, t wk �MHY { n•1-4 •
ps'.f .SST 4 t' .�/ � TP h + kCil £\r T „Y-
•
Vegetation Plot 3 (09/01/2021) Vegetation Plot 4 (09/30/2020)

Uzzle Monitoring Device Photo
_' -R.�`>` :� �` '`y..i ,_, t ryop, --..,;:c.---- : .',.,:c,.':-_ °---c.tr-"---„-.„w,,...' 1.,..:',..,p.opr.z:.14,,-- '7,..f.:iI;...AV.-,y7/ ;":
� "! �'M l-
b
'''''''.4.6°4;11N '''=,<,''., .: !.,'.',. .''''.-A—,..,-....:::;.f-:;- • .1,, ,,ri,,,.. :_t.e-,_,,;,‘,. , ,..:
k 1
ri
•
' - �.• =d ' �'',-,::
/ �•. a Y �,l�'��a r �" . "sue` ��
°,,:.- u`&�,- h i / ,t x Via,
4.fr.---,,,#,:ii,.-Is-.4,t, 4,„„:„4:6,.., - P. 444-- : 'T. , - --. .',.','
Its
- is �.4 .
:.. ;d�� • 'tin
Stage Recorder LP1 (09/01/2021)

Uzzle MY3 Monitoring Photos
. .. , .
....!
;.....,.-,. .II
....
... • .-..- .. .. ,..,..
- .,..-
1
...mir
. •. __ ...
..•
. .. . ..:.
,, - ,• •
•••
. ..
... :11
•,.--
• . --....0
. .'t-.-:..„....-- - . ..."-, • • ---
,. , t.;.•.•. _:-A• '
.-..,
•. - --'.!..g..-•• . -• .•
... •-, .._,,„ - .
• ,, .
----.
..!,- .. .. . ....
444•-
.
. .
.-- .
•--4 ....„,,, -
.... ,
•., .,
• - -• - --- - ., . --0-7- 7
- -
../'.,,....7.4..-:.?1,it4..--.:. . -- • .
Fence Line near LP3 (09/01/2021) Fence near:in,e..... t L:3 (09.../01/2021).: , . ..,.
.,.. •.,. Li.,--,---r.--f-- .14.T.-.:•.'
.. ,.. :... ••_... ••,7-1.0.:,....;.-in 1---,.....• •• .
• .... ...... ..»....7.
-1.1
. 4-,..r.o- •-
...•
.• dr• . .4
,-
. -__ • . , .
- --•4•(a-
' •
. .,if -z••• L't1.4...,; - -
'it',, :,.. .-,- ...1 .!I ft 6• ,,..1., _ , -14.; ,...Pt -t- '3". • '
- •• :Of
. •
. •
' ..:•\ . •:—. . - .2-': . 41q*.s
- ..:-..,-...:.- •n. .d'!"....L.•.-_.76:...1e4U.......4•:,...-...;•-•E 7..k.._.....-.7....i.1,,. •.'.. •-• -'-..-.-2.4 • . . .
.,..144..,...
..-:. _-...,:.•.•i'4;-.'-'-' -.1'..:A:.7'. -;:4k•,.i.-...ii.,-.10:.*':-.:;!-Vi0.- 7•!....i•r_oci _ •
.•:,,-. ..--4:_a;:, -,•,-,*•,,i..4ote --,*:.:itriN,...,-:,-f•tirti .„.,.],
_ .„.. ,.,.... .• ..t..,4,, fv-... •--.,.....:;,-.5..... ••----, A,.. ..„-T
r _--------_:4;
•S--• -- ±,•-f t •r- l• ;•-•' b' ••••••• '-•..:•r'n'''...•''.1. Piii* •••• - ,
a•-44,- ' ' ; ' ' •
t.,...,.....,.... ....,...„"m...N...-Pkrit. _ • -.F. ......... _.......6::. ......,-.4 ...............„,,.:.. . . ..: .• • .c.-,_., 1.--:-....:'.' . ,,,../...-.D......717,-,:,.--. '''
,.:4,7' ."';.•'...:,,' 77;...W!...-7.-;.;:-.V.'•,,;•.'"?-1.00.,-7,1... •...L-'' :;•'',Iik 7.4:4;-•,.,,,..li.....tor --• - . . -i---,1 ' ? •`•;--.:`y;`A, -- --.-•,,-' , •
'X'.-'5;•••* --...",.1*-F, . .
-4-1'..--r • -, • 7 --..%. 1,p,t4 •d• - •-•-;-,:,,-: ..,,-hivi:•.`•,:-,:,-
•'1,5 ."%fp,-, .... .t.ig-3-'-.4-•• .-4t, ...-4-,0-1'":,•':-..-. .:XII., : -iet: :. •11- .- --- .;t, ,;471-N.4... -,--.N---"urr.t"f'z',' ,-- ..
.7,-.Wjx..:,:-.."-F-:--4 -ir444,-irct-i.i., . 'P%—,41-1&5 A-AtItt ,,..* •..... -.•-Lk4 _ a 7 , •,:::v .• • :„_•-•.••'v...-4-7x.:5; ..c. ,•!,,, ,..., --,,,.... . • -,•
.-'.L7,0.-......--:,.,,•...:.4.,-;-.,..--4,,:-- .....,-:• ,,-;;,..-... •,....7.-, ... 0.:-••!: • ..,i,i-,--. .,r•-•...,r ...-.:,+ .•-, •••':, ,. 7:-.: -7',,,,.: • - ,•-'r...'; -
.::.'SP '-7"---"-''..'-:.-• -'''17'4*.•.° .:r..4-r!l'fl:i..1.'''''':'''-'71..'4-1115 ::-%:'-'-':r1": '.-- :...'1"ts::11:::1110.11;;LIIP5 (09;01;2021) . .
0
ki :•1......„Aar- -,-.-••.
-'--
Crossing in.ig"..:1On-g LP; (i4049--/-0 1/22.02 1)

.... I �. Via. lL *!
1 1.
,. ...,L,, „:. ,,. ._.,Iki. ;, , ,. ,,. .. _t,
. , ,,...,.... .i. '1%. I' ' li: , ,-_.• " ''' : .i
iiii
': - _ +.. ,,, '+ .:-.-, ?_ :.._.
% -_ y • . r-_y�. .'ti ,,,may,-'..::.�'•
}-�. +'S.-may N�wYa
•
ii
yy�� 1-
-
""-ND.*:.--
,�. • i
;S
t
, •
„...,, ,,-.-:`,,,- • , - 16 .4,
Fence Line at top of Easement(09/01/2021)

Stream Problem Areas
Uzzle
Feature Issue/Location Photo
_ Aa.
Minor Bank Erosion/XS 1 &2
+_; - .. ;�� ���- tip. ..• _. ., -

Appendix C
Vegetation Plot Data

Table 5. Planted Species Summary
Common Name Scientific Name Total Stems Planted
Water Oak Quercus nigra 1,800
Swamp Chestnut Oak Quercus michauxii 1,100
Sycamore Platanus occidentalis 900
Bald Cypress Taxodium distichum 800
Willow Oak Quercus phellos 700
Blackgum Nyssa sylvatica 700
Green Ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica 600
Silky Dogwood Cornus amomum 600
River Birch Betula nigra 500
Overcup Oak Quercus lyrata 400
Tuliptree Liriodendron tulipifera 400
Flowering Dogwood Cornus florida 400
Buttonbush Cephalanthus occidentalis 300
Persimmon Diospyros virginiana 300
American Hazelnut Corylus americana 300
Total 9,800
Table 6. Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary
Planted Volunteer Total Success Avergae
Plot# Criteria Stem
Stems/Acre Stems/Acre Stems/Acre
Met? Height(ft)
1 364 0 364 Yes 3.7
2 567 40 607 Yes 5.5
3 567 0 567 Yes 3.6
4 607 40 647 Yes 5.2
Project Avg 526 20 546 Yes 4.6

Table 7. Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot Species
05302019-01-0001 05302019-01-0002 05302019-01-0003 05302019-01-0004 MY3(2021) MY2(2020) MY1(2019) MYO(2019)
Scientific Name Common Name Species Type PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T
Betula nigra river birch Tree 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 8 8 8 10 10 10
Cephalanthus occidentali common buttonbush Shrub 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1
Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 4 4 4 5 5 5 8 8 8 5 5 5
Cornus florida flowering dogwood Tree 1 1 1
Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2
Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 8 8 8 7 7 7 7 7 7 6 6 6
Liquidambarstyraciflua sweetgum Tree 2
Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree 1 1 2 2 5 4 4 8 8 8 8
Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 13 13 13
Platanus occidental is American sycamore Tree 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 10 10 10 9 9 9 12 12 12 18 18 18
Quercus oak Tree 3 3 3 35 35 35
Quercus lyrata overcup oak Tree 2 2 2 1 1 1
Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree 1 1 1 3 3 3 4 4 4 5 5 5 6 6 7 1 1 1
Quercus nigra water oak Tree 2 2 2 2 2 2
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree 4 4 4 8 8 8
Salixnigra black willow Tree 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3
Taxodium distichum bald cypress Tree 3 3 3 5 5 6 3 3 3 3 3 3 14 14 15 14 14 14 16 16 16 16 16 16
Stem count 9 9 9 14 14 15 14 14 14 15 15 16 52 52 54 56 56 59 78 78 85 127 127 127
size(ares) 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4
size(ACRES) 0.0247105 0.0247105 0.0247105 0.0247105 0.0988422 0.0988422 0.0988422 0.0988422
Species count 5 5 5 5 5 5 8 8 8 5 5 6 10 10 11 11 11 11 14 14 15 15 15 15
Stems per ACRE 364 364 364 567 567 607 567 567 567 607 607 647 526 526 546 567 567 597 789 789 860 1285 1285 1285

Appendix D
Stream Measurement and
Geomorphology Data

Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Uzzle Mitigation Site- Reach LP1
Parameter I Gauge2 I Regional Curve I Pre-Existing Condition* I Reference Reach(es)Data I Design I Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate-Shallow Only LL UL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SDb n Min Mean Med Max SDb n Min Med Max Min Mean Med Max SDb n
Bankfull Width(ft) --- --- --- --- --- 7.6 --- --- --- 10.8 --- --- 12.2 --- --- --- 12.2 --- 12.0 12.3 --- 12.5 --- 2
Floodprone Width(ft) --- --- 150.0 --- --- --- >50 --- --- >50 --- --- --- 150.0 --- >50 --- --- >50 --- 2
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) --- --- -- --- 1.6 --- --- 1.3 --- --- 1.4 --- --- --- 1.3 --- 0.9 1.0 --- 1.1 --- 2
1Bankfull Max Depth(ft) --- --- 2.1 --- --- --- 1.8 --- --- 2.0 --- --- --- 1.6 --- 1.4 1.5 --- 1.6 --- 2
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2) --- --- --- --- --- 12.4 --- --- --- 14.7 --- --- 15.8 --- --- --- 15.5 --- 11.7 12.7 --- 13.7 --- 2
Width/Depth Ratio --- --- 4.6 --- --- --- 7.9 --- --- 9.4 --- --- --- 9.6 --- 10.6 12.0 --- 13.4 --- 2
Entrenchment Ratio --- --- 19.7 --- --- --- >2.2 --- --- >2.2 --- --- --- 12.3 --- >4 --- --- >4.3 --- 2
'Bank Height Ratio --- --- 1.1 --- --- --- 1.0 --- --- 1.1 --- --- --- 1.0 --- 1.0 --- --- 1.0 --- 2
Profile
Shallow Length(ft) 5 --- --- 18 --- --- 5 --- --- 23 --- --- --- --- --- 10.9 33.2 32.1 67.8 16.3 9
Shallow Slope(ft/ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 0.0001 0.0097 0.0042 0.0314 0.0121 9
Pool Length(ft) 20 --- --- 45 --- --- 11.6 --- --- 45.6 --- --- --- --- --- 10.0 23.1 20.0 40.0 8.8 11
Pool Max depth(ft) --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Pool Spacing(ft) 35 --- --- 56 --- --- 37.2 --- --- 55.7 --- --- --- --- --- 27.0 64.7 60.5 102.0 22.4 11
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth(ft) 4 --- --- 16 --- --- 9 --- --- 57 --- --- 17 --- 63 17 --- --- 63 --- ---
Radius of Curvature(ft) 18 --- --- 37 --- --- 10 --- --- 28 --- --- 20 --- 45 20 --- --- 45 --- ---
Rc:Bankfull width(ft/ft) 2.4 --- --- 4.9 --- --- 0.9 --- --- 2.6 --- --- 1.6 --- 3.7 1.6 --- --- 3.7 --- ---
Meander Wavelength(ft) 56 ---
100 --- --- 49 --- --- 170 --- --- 51 --- 131 51 --- --- 131 --- ---
Meander Width Ratio 0.5 --- --- 2 --- --- 1.6 --- --- 5.3 --- --- 1.4 --- 5.2 1.4 --- --- 5.2 ---
Transport parameters
Reach Shear Stress(competency)lb/f2 --- --- ---
Max part size(mm)mobilized at bankfull --
Stream Power(transport capacity) W/m2 --- --
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification E5 E4/5 E5
Bankfull Velocity(fps) --- --- ---
Bankfull Discharge(cfs) --- --- ---
Valley length(ft) 560 842 560 ---
Channel Thalweg length(ft) 852 995 691 ---
Sinuosity(ft) 1.52 1.18 1.23
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) -- 0.29 --- ---
Channel slope(ft/ft) 0.0055 0.003 0.0039 ---
3Bankfull Floodplain Area(acres) --- --
4%of Reach with Eroding Banks --- ---
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric --- ---
Biological or Other --- ---
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be tilled in.
*=Reach was split into 4 segments for the purpose of pre-existing data collection.
1=The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile. 2=For projects with a proximal USGS gauge in-line with the project reach(added bankfull verification-rare).
3.Utilizing XS measurement data produce an estimate of the bankfull floodplain area in acres,which should be the area from the top of bank to the toe of the terrace riser/slope.
4=Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey for comparison to monitoring data; 5.Of value/needed only if then exceeds 3

Table 9. Monitoring Data - Cross Section Morphology Data Table
Project Name (Uzzle)
Cross Section 1 (Pool -LP1) Cross Section 2 (Riffle-LP1) Cross Section 3 (Riffle-LP1) Cross Section 4(Pool -LP1) Cross Section 5(Riffle-Reach 2 -Ell)
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull'Area --- --- --- 232.0 --- --- --- 232.3 232.2 231.8 231.2 231.0 230.9 230.8 230.8 230.5
Bank Height Ratio --- 1.0 1.0 1.4 1.3 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.1 --- ---
Thalweg Elevation 230.1 230.2 229.7 229.9 230.9 230.8 230.2 230.2 229.4 229.3 229.3 229.3 227.4 227.7 228.0 228.1
Low TOB2 Elevation 232.6 232.6 232.6 232.7 232.3 232.2 232.4 232.2 231.0 231.0 230.9 231.0 230.2 230.2 230.3 230.0 No Morphological Parameters were determined for
Low TOB2 Max Depth(ft) 2.5 2.3 2.9 2.8 1.4 1.4 2.2 2.1 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.7 2.9 2.5 2.3 2.0 the Enhancement II reaches
Low TOB2 Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 19.1 19.4 26.9 28.1 11.7 11.2 19.7 17.8 13.7 14.8 14.8 15.8 18.5 16.6 15.1 12.2
Floodprone Width --- >50 >50 >50 >49.5 >50 >50 >50 >51.2 ---
Bankfull Width --- 12.5 13.1 11.2 11.1 12.0 12.1 11.9 11.7 --- ---
Entrenchment Ratio --- >4.0 >3.8 >4.5 >4.5 >4.3 >4.2 >4.3 >4.4 --- ---
Cross Section 6(Riffle-LP5-Eli) Cross Section 7 (Riffle-LP5-Eli) Cross Section 8(Run -LP7 -Eli)
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull'Area
Bank Height Ratio
Thalweg Elevation
Low TOB2 Elevation No Morphological Parameters were determined for No Morphological Parameters were determined for No Morphological Parameters were determined
Low TOB2 Max Depth(ft) the Enhancement II reaches the Enhancement II reaches for the Enhancement II reaches
Low TOB2 Cross Sectional Area(ft2)
Floodprone Width
Bankfull Width
Entrenchment Ratio
1 -Uses the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2-Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
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.

•.•10,v. :ii')
•
•
n J, 4 i za r
e fir d.
Upstream Downstream
Uzzle-Reach LP1 -Cross Section 1 -Pool -Restoration
235
234
233 L� ' 1
° 232 — — — — -- ,► -- — — — — — -- — — — -
w 231 lillkishanr /v
230
229
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance(ft)
MY0-2019 MY1-2019 MY2-2020 MY3-2021 — — —Approx.Bankfull
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 1 (Pool)
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull'Area --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Bank Height Ratio' --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Thalweg Elevation 230.1 230.2 229.7 229.9
LowTOB2 Elevation 232.6 232.6 232.6 232.7
LowTOB2 Max Depth(ft) 2.5 2.3 2.9 2.8
LowTOB2 Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 19.1 19.4 26.9 28.1
Floodprone Width' --- --- --- -- --- --- ---
Bankfull Width' --- --- --- -- --- --- ---
Entrenchment Ratio' --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
1-Uses the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2-Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

1
q,';
Ar
''his r d�
iS- 4;ff r ',,,_ v
Upstream Downstream
Uzzle-Reach LP1 -Cross Section 2- Riffle-Restoration
235
234
233 1 : T
230
229
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance(ft)
MY0-2019 MY1-2019 MY2-2020 - -MY3-2021
Low TOB - - -Approx.Bankfull Floodprone Area 3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 2 (Rife)
V ' Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull'Area 232.31 232.2 231.8 231.2
Bank Height Ratio' 1.0 1.0 1.4 1.3
Thalweg Elevation 230.9 230.8 230.2 230.2
Low TOB2 Elevation 232.3 232.2 232.4 232.2
Low TOB2 Max Depth(ft) 1.4 1.4 2.2 2.1
Low TOB2 Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 11.7 11.2 19.7 17.8
Floodprone Width' >50 >50 >50 >49.5
Bankfull Width' 12.5 13.1 11.2 11.1
Entrenchment Ratio' >4.0 >3.8 >4.5 >4.5
1-Uses the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2-Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

\
s a`�" ' '" i�,,,� -ar`. M` .-
'ia "''.`° tUfa 'i.* *-'= '
r">?'lam'n f.''v`�@ate °'"' T :ryY� 1Y` ' \ \\�..
•
�. *'i ''' s� • .yam 4' ,..
-.._-_Air -.�:`... ' o' tL •.. ;. R:.. ' _ .i'1�• .: E '.- _ ems' \' _ '.�
Upstream Downstream
Uzzle-Reach LP1 -Cross Section 3-Riffle -Restoration
234
233
232
° 231 ......... --
ru
w 230
229
228 ,
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance(ft)
MY0-2019 -MY1-2019 MY2-2020 -MY3-2021
Low TOB - - -Approx.Bankfull Floodprone Area
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 3 fRiffle)
Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull'Area 231.00 230.9 230.8 230.8
Bank Height Ratio' 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.1
Thalweg Elevation 229.4 229.3 229.3 229.3
LowTOB2 Elevation 231.0 231.0 230.9 231.0
LowTOB2 Max Depth(ft) 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.7
Low TOB2 Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 13.7 14.8 14.8 15.8
Floodprone Width' >50 >50 >50 >51.2
Bankfull Width' 12.0 12.1 11.9 11.7
Entrenchment Ratio' >4.3 >4.2 >4.3 >4.4
1-Uses the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2-Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

f ,ks ,,,y
'` i ' - ,:�, "'�"fir r:z 74: "f .„. m l s
. z e a r r -.. '
‘k-H'- '' _ .1/4\____ :I. . 1 ' ,,orke-41.7 W--5-111,-- ,,,-,4,..;0 , r ,-4s1.,.- - ,.:-_,;,°:,-,;_,-,„.,H,..,.-:',, _ L ", ,,,;:„.- ;
Upstream Downstream
Uzzle-Reach LP1 -Cross Section 4-Pool - Restoration
233
232
231 1111111.1.1111111111111111414111111 -......----
° 230
m
w 229
228 \q'/'
227
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 51 54 57 60 63
Distance(ft)
MY0-2019 — -.MY1-2019 MY2-2020 MY3-2021 — — —Approx.Bankfull
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 4 (Pool)
Base MYI MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull'Area --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Bank Height Ratio' --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Thalweg Elevation 227.4 227.7 228.0 228.1
Low TOB2 Elevation 230.2 230.2 230.3 230.0
Low TOB2 Max Depth(ft) 2.9 2.5 2.3 2.0
Low TOB2 Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 18.5 16.6 15.1 12.2
Floodprone Width' -- --- -- -- --- --- ---
Bankfull Width' -- --- -- -- --- --- ---
Entrenchment Ratio' -- -- --- --- --- --- ---
1-Uses the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2-Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

lF Sd :!ti 'AV - r.7 t 'l 14 - ] ,1" '. 6y"`� %fi7.r
t h ' ,0 7' FI ' ` C"'
1 " �'� , k �a O r p ` 1 i
t
i
j.
t
z f
i
Upstream Downstream
Uzzle- Reach LP2-Cross Section 5-Riffle - Enhancement II
230
229
228
iK
c
4 227 \
w 226
225
224
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance(ft)
-MY0-2019 MY1-2019 MY2-2020 MY3-2021
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 5 iffle)
Base I MYl I MY2 I MY3 I MY5 I MY7 I MY+
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull'Area
Bank Height Ratio'
Thalweg Elevation
Low TOB2 Elevation
Low TOB2 Max Depth(ft) No Morphological Parameters were determined for the Enhancement II reaches
Low TOB2 Cross Sectional Area(ft2)
Floodprone Width'
Bankfull Width'
Entrenchment Ratio'
1-Uses the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2-Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Y
h
Upstream Downstream
Uzzle-Reach LP5-Cross Section 6-Riffle- Enhancement II
225
224
223
$ 222
o '
> 221
220
219
218
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance(ft)
MY0-2019 MY1-2019 MY2-2020 MY3-2021
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 6 Riffle)
Base I MY1 I MY2 I MY3 I MY5 I MY7 I MY+
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull'Area
Bank Height Ratio'
Thalweg Elevation
Low TOB2 Elevation
Low TOB2 Max Depth(ft) No Morphological Parameters were determined for the Enhancement II reaches
Low TOB2 Cross Sectional Area(ft2)
Floodprone Width'
Bankfull Width'
Entrenchment Ratio'
1-Uses the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2-Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

6 ` qy 1�
Upstream Downstream
Uzzle-Reach LP5-Cross Section 7-Riffle - Enhancement II
219
218
217
I
215
214
213
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance(ft)
�MY0-2019 MY1-2019 MY2-2020 MY3-2021
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 7 Riflle)
Base I MY1 I MY2 I MY3 I MY5 I MY7 I MY+
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfull'Area
Bank Height Ratio'
Thalweg Elevation
LowTOB2 Elevation
Low TOB2 Max Depth(ft) No Morphological Parameters were determined for the Enhancement II reaches
Low T OB2 Cross Sectional Area(ft2)
Floodprone Width'
Bankfull Width'
Entrenchment Ratio'
1-Uses the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2-Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

w 17 w � t 'ir x' , �1 r
r a e {'
1 :.-
.i�mom' lRy-' - ✓4 -� !��L'�-j ♦ .. _.
•
Upstream Downstream
Uzzle -Reach LP7-Cross Section 8-Run - Enhancement II
215
214
213
° 212
1
w 211411111111
210
209 ,
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance(ft)
�MY0-2019 MY1-2019 MY2-2020 MY3-2021
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 8(Run)
Base I MY1 I MY2 I MY3 I MY5 I MY7 I MY+
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-Bankfullr Area
Bank Height Ration
Thalweg Elevation
Low TOB2 Elevation
Low TOB2 Max Depth(ft) No Morphological Parameters were determined for the Enhancement II reaches
Low TOB2 Cross Sectional Area(ft2)
Floodprone Width'
Bankfull Width'
Entrenchment Ratio'
1-Uses the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2-Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Appendix E
Hydrology Data

Table 10.2021 Rainfall Summary
Normal Limits Clayton Station
Month Average
30 Percent 70 Percent Precipitation
January 4.24 3.24 4.93 NA
February 3.64 2.51 4.34 6.22
March 4.57 3.44 5.33 3.86
April 3.24 1.99 3.92 1.18
May 4.17 2.91 4.96 2.35
June 4.14 2.70 4.97 5.59
July 5.43 3.48 6.53 16.17
August 4.58 3.05 5.49 4.08
September 4.54 2.26 5.55 0.21
October 3.16 1.89 3.81 ---
November 2.95 1.86 3.55 ---
December 3.05 2.02 3.65 ---
Total 47.71 31.35 57.03 39.66
Above Normal Limits Below Normal Limits
Table 11.Documentation of Geomorphically Significant Flow Events
Number of Bankfull Maximum Bankfull Date of Maximum Bankfull
Year Events Height(ft) Event
Stage Recorder LP1
MY1 2019 5 1.21 7/23/2019
MY2 2020 6 1.70 9/1/2020
MY3 2021 6 1.36 7/27/2021

Table 12.
2021 Max Hydroperiod (Growing Season 18-Mar through 6-Nov, 233 days)
Consecutive Cumulative
Well ID Occurrences
Da s Hydroperiod Days Hydroperiod
Y (%) Y (%)
GW1 3 1 18 8 13
GW2 45 19 118 50 9
Table 13.
Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results
Uzzle
Hydroperiod(%)
Well ID Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7
(2019) (2020) (2021) (2022) (2023) (2024) (2025)
GW1 1 1 1
GW2 23 23 19

MY3 2021 Uzzle GW1
10 - 12.0
_ Growing Season
- - 11.0
0 - . ++ - 10.0
I
I
9.0
ins _ I
v -10 I i 1 I I- 8.0
C •——— 1— —� _,�--, — —
T N
• :: - 7.0 v
Ok 1 _
20 = l \II \10 kliiii (k 1- 11, 'tt
6.0 1.c0
L -
i1
illikjil
14 • L ,
L
O 30 _ Mw K l ' 4.0 d
V
- 3.0
-40 - 2.0
- 1111
+ J' - 1.0
- - II IL .. 14 IL lad ILL. hi1 .. Li .0l iL _�L- L0.0
10/1 11/1 12/1 1/1 2/1 3/1 4/1 5/1 6/1 7/1 8/1 9/1 10/1 11/1 12/1
Months
Clayton Daily Rainfall —GW1

MY3 2021 Uzzle GW2
10 - 12.0
_ Growing Season
- - 11.0
0 - - 10.0
III - 9.0
--- )1 b4ININitllii 111)1 II\ii :1111011 ill,
s -10 - I 1 I 1 i 8.0
t) - j
ins
_ i
1 a)_ - , - 7.0 0
0 - IA C
- -
d -20 - i 6.0 0
LT] - '
L - y�i
3 = « I t \ I 5.0
a)7 -30 _ . - 4.0 d
O _
'L^
V
- - 3.0
-40 - - 2.0
- - 1.0
-50L Al .. IJ III ! L i�i. . LJli .i .d . id_4 1 0.0
10/1 11/1 12/1 1/1 2/1 3/1 4/1 5/1 6/1 7/1 8/1 9/1 10/1 11/1 12/1
Months
Clayton Daily Rainfall -GW2