WLS CAT01 Starker_Final Mitigation Plan

August 20, 2021
US Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Division, Wilmington District
Attn: Kim Browning
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
RE: WLS Responses to NCIRT Review Comments Regarding the WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella
Mitigation Bank (UMBI) Final Mitigation Plan Approval for the Starker Mitigation Project, USACE
AID# SAW-2020-01540, Catawba River Basin, Cataloging Unit 03050101, Catawba County, NC
Dear Ms. Browning:
Water & Land Solutions, LLC (WLS) is pleased to provide our written responses to the North Carolina
Interagency Review Team (NCIRT) review comments dated June 16, 2021 regarding the Draft Mitigation
Plan for the Starker Mitigation Project. We are providing our written responses to the NCIRT's review
comments below, which includes editing and updating the Final Mitigation Plan and associated
deliverables accordingly. Each of the NCIRT review comments is copied below in bold text, followed by
the appropriate response from WLS in regular text:
USACE Comments (Kim Browning):
L. UMBI: The correct agency representatives are
a. Corps: Kim Browning, Wilmington District Mitigation Office, 3331 Heritage Trade
Drive, Suite 105, Wake Forest, NC 27587
b. USFWS: Replace Claire Ellwanger with Holland Youngman
C. NMFS: Replace Ken Riley with Twyla Cheatwood
Response: These agency representatives have been updated in the UMBI.
5100: During the IRT site visit rehabilitation was discussed for Wetland A, with wetland
enhancement inside the wood line. I would welcome the inclusion of this area in the
mitigation plan for credit, particularly since Section 6 refers to wetland enhancement as
being one of the critical benefits of stream restoration, provided a wetland gauge be
installed prior to construction to document existing conditions and demonstrate
functional uplift. Response: At this time WLS will not be requesting any wetland credit for the
project. It was determined that Wetland A did not provide enough credit to make it feasible to add
to the bank. WA is limited in size and uplift. Language has been added to section 6 making it clear
that no credit is being sought for WA.
General: I appreciate the level of detail and site -specific information provided. Response:
Thank you.
4. Section 3.6.2: Please discuss the survey results for the dwarf -flowered heartleaf. Response: A
survey for dwarf -flowered heartleaf was conducted on April 15, 2021, with no individuals found.
The results are now included in Section 3.6.2 as well as the letter from US Fish and Wildlife Service
which is included in appendix G.

S. Section 4 and Table 7 references the stream functions pyramid and function -based goals as
a way to measure functional uplift. Physiochemical and biological functions are benefits
that are presumed and will not be measured by monitoring. Unless you intend to
demonstrate actual uplift in biology and water quality, I recommend that these sections be
reworded to state that uplift in these areas is implied. Response: Section 4.1.1 has been
updated as well as Table 7.
6. Table 7: The landscape connectivity benefits related to biology are listed as "...the
restored stream bed will allow animals to have easier access to a drinking water source."
It's not appropriate for livestock to use the mitigation site streams as a source of water. It
would be more appropriate to discuss aquatic species in this section. Response: This
section has been updated and now discusses the benefits of aquatic and terrestrial species
migration. Livestock will not have access to any part of the restored channels.
7. Table 8: Why are the proposed credits approximately 300 LF less than the existing length? Is
this to account for stream crossings? The areas that are not credited but are park of this
project should be listed as non -credited LF in this table. Response: The non -credited length
was not included in the proposed credits. The non -credited linear footage is now included as a
separate column in this table.
8. Sections 6.3 and 9.1.3: Is a rain gauge proposed to be installed on site to demonstrate
normal rainfall conditions? If so, please indicate its location on Figure 10. Additionally,
obtaining precipitation data from the Oxford RS is acceptable, but should that data not be
available, we feel that the Hickory Airport Station that is 12.5 miles away is too far to
accurately represent site conditions. Response: An onsite rain gage will be added on the project
site to collect rainfall data. If there is a malfunction or data gap in the onsite data, the Oxford RS
data will be used. The Hickory Airport station has been removed.
9. Section 6.3.1: Development within the watershed is a major consideration for this project
and it's understood that increases to runoff patterns were accounted for when considering
higher/steeper discharge curves and additional grade control structures. Were allowances
for increased floodplain width and storage considered.100-150 ft buffers would be
beneficial on this site. Response: The design incorporates adequate bench and floodplain widths
to reduce velocities and shear stresses on the channel, both pre- and post -development. The buffer
widths provided will be adequate for protecting the stability of the channel and were negotiated
with the landowner. Buffer widths of at least 50 feet are provided but will exceed 50 feet, up to 70
feet, in many locations. These proposed buffer widths satisfy current regulatory guidance.
10. Section 6.4.1: Please include the location of the reference sites used. Additionally, add
a figure that shows the location of the reference sites in relation to the project site.
Response: The reference reach locations have been added to Section 6.4.1. Figure 1a was created
to show the reference reach locations in relation to the project site.
11. Section 6.5: Please show these water quality treatment areas on Figures 9 & 10 and verify
that they will not be placed in jurisdictional waters. Response: The water quality features have
been added to Figures 9 & 10. These water quality features are not located in jurisdictional waters.
12. Table 16 and Design Sheet 3A: The Note indicates that species may change due to
refinement or availability. Please notify the IRT if species are substituted, and red -line in
the As -Built. Response: The note has been edited to indicate WLS will provide a red -line of the
plating list in the as -built report.
13. Section 6.6: Since both Piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest and Mixed-Mesic Hardwood
Forest target communities are proposed, these areas should be differentiated on Design
sheets 28-31. It's also recommended to include a figure that shows the different planting
zones. Response: The design sheets 28-31 have been updated and figure 11 has been added to the
GIS figures to show the planting zones within the conservation easement. The planting areas
shown are approximate and field conditions at the time of planting will dictate final planting
zones.

14. Section 6.6.1: Vegetation planting must be conducted between November 15 and March 15.
Response: WLS proposes that the planting be completed by the start of the growing season in
Catawba County, March 30th (per WETS data). The planting date has been updated in section 6.6.1.
15. Page 39: Japanese stiltgrass should be added to this section. Response: Japanese stilt grass has
been added to the invasive species section. WLS is not proposing stiltgrass treatment unless it
threatens success of the planted trees.
16. Section 6.7.4: I appreciate the detail in this section. Under Land Use Development, please
discuss the potential for future utility/sewer/greenway installation. The IRT is approached
numerous times a year with encroachment requests and it would be beneficial to anticipate
these concerns now. Response: Expanded discussion about future land use development has
been added to Section 6.7.4.
17. Table 18, page 42: Livestock exclusion fencing is listed as a routine maintenance
component; however, it's unclear on the figures and design sheets where fencing will be
installed/is existing. Response: Livestock fencing will only be installed if the landowner keeps
cattle on the property. Figure 10 now shows where fencing would potentially be installed. Fencing
will be installed outside the conservation easement and will ultimately be the responsibility of the
landowner to abide by the easement restrictions.
18. Page 43, Jurisdictional Stream Flow: Please note that the 30-days of consecutive flow should
be viewed as a minimum threshold and not a goal. Streams that are currently listed as
perennial are expected to have nearly constant flow all year. Response: WLS understands that
30 days of consecutive flow is the minimal number of days for an intermittent stream and will use
gauges to monitor the entire growing season.
19. Page 43, Photo Documentation: Please include a statement regarding stability of crossings.
Response: A statement about crossing stability by photo documentation has been added to Section
8.1.
20. Section 9.1: This section discusses Enhancement Level II. Please confirm that all reaches
will involve a restoration approach. Response: This statement was outdated language from the
prospectus and has been removed. All stream reaches in this project are proposed as restoration.
21. Section 9.2: It's unclear which areas of vegetation are considered preservation areas.
a. Volunteer species on the approved planting list may be counted towards success after
being present for two years. Response: Section 9.2 has been updated to state that volunteer
species on the approved planting list may be counted towards success criteria after surviving
two years. Figure 11 had been added to show the planting and preservation zones inside the
conservation easement.
22. Section 10 and Appendix D: Please include the Long -Term Endowment calculation
spreadsheet which shows how the amount of $61,297 was calculated (annual monitoring,
signage replacement, travel, legal fees, cap rate, etc.). Response: The endowment calculation
spreadsheet has been added to Appendix D.
23. Section 12, Financial Assurances:
a. Performance and construction bonds are preferable to casualty insurance. Some
concerns to consider with the use of casualty insurance include: The assurances need to
be structured so that the timeframes in the effective coverage periods allow the IRT
time to conduct reviews of the as -built and monitoring reports. Ideally, coverage for the
different periods should only terminate once we have provided approval of the as -built
or monitoring reports. Related to this, planting completion poses a potential issue. The
timeframes included in the insurance policy that only cover construction through, for
example, April 1st would obviously be insufficient since the IRT would never approve
as -built until after the site work is complete (including planting). Response: WLS has
utilized both performance bonds and casualty insurance on projects and prefers casualty
insurance because of the longer and seamless coverage. WLS notes the concerns raised, but
can address those concerns with the specific insurance policy. The casualty insurance will be
structured to allow effective coverage periods that take into account review times for as -built

and monitoring reports. Also, a draft policy will be sent to you for review before execution.
Though the dates become more concrete once the policy is closer to being finalized, an
example schedule for Starker would be:
Construction: 10/15/21 to 6/15/23
MY1: 6/15/23 to 6/15/24
MY2: 6/15/24 to 6/15/25
MY3: 6/15/25 to 6/15/26
MY4: 6/15/26 to 6/15/27
MY5: 6/15/27 to 6/15/28
MY6: 6/15/28 to 6/15/29
MY7: 6/15/29 to 6/15/30
This schedule essentially has an extra year of monitoring coverage because MY1 would be in
2023, however the review of the report could go into early 2024. Also, coverage terminates
only after the USACE as -built approval is sent to the insurance company. Coverage can be
extended if needed, but this schedule fully accounts for construction and report review.
b. The financial assurance section does include a cost breakdown and a provision for
contingency/remedial action of $104,000, but this amounts to only 8% of the cost of
construction, which seems inadequate. This amount also diminishes across the life of
monitoring, so there is even less contingency funding available toward the end of the
project. Response: A review of recent mitigation plans' financial assurances (EPR, RES,
Wildlands) that are similar in size to Starker showed a range of $0 for contingency, 5.3%, and
8%. WLS proposes to keep the contingency at 8% of the construction costs, which are
conservatively priced. The contingency and monitoring costs should decrease across the life of
the project because the monitoring costs and need for maintenance/contingency decrease.
WLS has revised the contingency to keep the $104,000 for MY1-MY3, which are the most likely
years for maintenance. Then the policy would decrease in MY4 for the contingency. This will
be addressed during the review of the draft casualty insurance policy, but below is what the
coverage would look like:
MY1: 6/15/23 to 6/15/24 $304,000
MY2: 6/15/24 to 6/15/25 $275,429
MY3: 6/15/25 to 6/15/26 $246,858
MY4: 6/15/26 to 6/15/27 $197,487
MY5: 6/15/27 to 6/15/28 $148,115
MY6: 6/15/28 to 6/15/29 $98,744
MY7: 6/15/29 to 6/15/30 $49,373
24. Correspondence from USFWS and NCWRC is attached for reference.
USACE Comments (Casey Haywood):
1. Pg. 1 Intro: Please include site location and directions in the introduction. Response: The site
location and directions are in Section 2.1.
2. Pg. 19 3.6.3 Conditions Affecting Hydrology- It would be helpful discuss the size and type of
culverts in this section. Response: Culverts were changed to corrugated plastic pipe and the text
in Section 3.6.3 was updated.
3. Pg. 23 Table 8 Proposed Stream Mitigation Credits: Recommend indicating P1/P2
restoration for project reaches. Also recommend identifying P1/P2 reaches on the
Proposed Mitigation Map, Figure 9. Response: Table 8 has been updated and the reaches on
figure 9 have been updated to show P1/P2 restoration approaches.
4. Pg. 28 Section 6.2.1 Stream Design Reach Summary
a. S100- in section 3.6.3 Conditions Affecting Hydrology: S100 has one crossing being
replaced and one crossing was being added as a potential future crossing. There are no
discussion/details given for the culvert being replaced on this reach. Please provide
further detail (size/type). Response: Section 100 (North of I-40, below the crossing) gives

detail of the culvert being replaced. The existing farm crossing culvert at station 21+94.21 will
be replaced with a 48-inch corrugated pipe. There is a second break in the conservation
easement at station 37, this easement break is for a potential future crossing. No crossing will
be constructed in this location at this time.
b. It seems that many of the culverts being installed are smooth -wall HDPE. Please note
that HDPE is the least preferred of all hydraulic structure materials because the smooth
walls do not provide any roughness and do not hold substrate material. Response: The
proposed culverts were switched to corrugated plastic pipe.
5. Pg. 38 The narrative mentions both Piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest on narrow
stream floodplains and Mixed-Mesic Hardwood Forest (Piedmont Subtype) on adjacent
side slopes.
a. IRT encourages separating planting zones for wetlands, riparian areas, uplands, and
streamside assemblages. Recommend adding a figure/map that identifies the
planting zones. Response: Design sheets 28-31 have been updated to show separate
planting zones and Figure 11 has been added to the GIS figures to show the planting zones
within the conservation easement. Planting zones are approximate and final planting zones
will be determined post -construction based on site conditions.
b. Recommend adding wetland indicator status to the planting list on Table 16 and on
design sheet 3A. Response: The wetland indicator status has been added to Table 16.On
page 3J of the plan set you will find the same table.
6. Pg. 38 Section 6.6.1 Planting Materials and Methods:
a. Please note that vegetation planting/replanting must be conducted between November
15 and March 15 in order to be counted toward success for the subsequent growing
season. Response: WLS proposed that the planting be completed by the start of the growing
season in Catawba County, March 301h (per WETS data). The planting date has been updated in
Section 6.6.1.
b. Please include discussion in the text how you plan to treat/manage the existing fescue.
Response: In areas of undisturbed pasture WLS will assess fescue treatment options prior to
planting. This has been updated in Section 6.6.1 under the invasive species section.
c. During the September 30, 2020 site visit, IRT noted many black walnut species- Please
include discussion in the narrative that existing black walnut may be removed as
needed. It may also be helpful to add this to Table 18. Routine Maintenance Components.
Response: During construction black walnut species will be removed as much as possible. Black
walnut will be monitored post construction and treated if threating the success of planted
vegetation. Language has been added to Section 6.6.1.
7. Pg. 42-43 Section 8.1 Stream Performance standards
a. Please note that ER must be no less than 1.4 at any measured riffle cross-section on B-
type reaches and no less than 2.2 on C-type reaches where ER is altered to reference
condition through design and construction. Response: WLS notes these conditions and the
proposed design parameter can be found in Table 10.
b. Please add to the performance standards that BHR and ER at any measured riffle cross-
section should not change by more than 10% from baseline conditions during any
monitoring interval. Response: Section 8.1 has been updated with this language.
8. Pg. 46 Section 9.2 Vegetation Monitoring: What will the total planted acreage be for the site?
Response: The total planted acreage for the site will be approximately 27.7 acres. Final planting
zones will be determined based on as -built conditions.
9. Figure 8 and Table 9 stream lengths and credits do not match. Please update for consistency.
Response: The table has been removed from Figure 8.
10. Figure 10 Proposed Monitoring Map: Please mark location of photo points to include
crossings and culverts. Recommend adding a footnote to the figure if cross -sections are
being used as fixed photo points. Response: Photo points have been added to Figure 10.
11. Appreciate flow gauges on 5101,102, & 103 in the upper third of the reach.

Response: Thank you.
12. Appreciate that veg plot locations capture the various soil types and encompass portions of
the existing wetlands.
Response: Thank you.
13. Recommend adding some photos in the narrative. Response: Thank you for the suggestion and
we will add more photos into the narrative of our future mitigation plans. A photo log can be found
in Appendix H.
14. Please verify if the wetland groundwater gauge recommended on S100 during the
September 30, 2020 site visit was installed. Even though wetland credit is not being pursued
it is important to document existing conditions to demonstrate functional lift and ensure
that there is no net loss of wetlands as a result of restoration. Response: Since WLS is no longer
proposing wetland credit for the Starker site and therefore a wetland gauge was not installed after
the IRT site visit. WLS will add a wetland gauge now to capture winter 2021 and spring 2022 data
to ensure that there is no net loss of wetlands as a result of the stream restoration project.
WRC Comments (Travis Wilson):
1. The culverts are currently designed as smooth wall HDPE. CMP or RCP should be used for
pipe culverts. HDPE smooth wall pipes do not allow for any roughness and will not retain
substrate in the structure. Additionally, due to the smooth wall and common algae
accumulation these structures are not suitable for reptile and amphibian passage, which
is a concern with the potential future development mentioned in the mitigation plan.
Response: All proposed culverts were switched to corrugated plastic pipe.
2. "Future Crossing" located at approximate station 36+70 on S100. The preference would
be to include this crossing within the conservation easement, but as non -credited, in
order for the site to be reviewed and monitored if a crossing is eventually installed at this
location. Another option would be to include the design and installation of this crossing
during site construction. Allowing an easement break for a small crossing that could have
limited project impact review with the new culvert could result in an inadequate and
improperly installed structure that would result in adverse impacts upstream and
downstream into the credited portions of the mitigation site. Response: WLS prefers to
keep the easement break at the future location crossing instead of having the crossing as a non -
credited area within the easement. This crossing will only be developed in the future if
development occurs on the property. If development does occur, the crossing would be a
DOT/utility crossing and therefore would need to be designed and permitted to regulatory
specifications.
3. The downstream culvert at the end of S100 at station 67+90 is shown as a 36" CMP, much
smaller than the structures upstream on this reach. Unless prohibited due to a change in
landowners the preference would be to include a new properly sized and installed
crossing at this location. By replacing this structure with an upgraded structure, it will
reasonably preclude future problems associated with maintaining an old undersized
structure. Response: This culvert will be replaced and has been appropriately sized and set at
the correct elevations to promote stability and allow aquatic passage.
4. As for the I-40 culverts it looks like the channel design will repair the perched condition
by bringing the water surface elevation back into the culvert invert. Additional armoring
(below the substrate) of the outlet pool may be necessary to insure long-term stability.
Outlet stability and downstream stability is the primary concerns at the I-40 culverts, due
to the culvert length, slope, and watershed size aquatic organism passage is unlikely.
Response: Further plunge pool details and symbology have been added to the plan set to show
additional armoring. The additional armoring will also be clarified to the contractor.

DWR Comments (Erin Davis):
1. DWR appreciates the discussion of potential surrounding land use changes throughout
the document, including consideration of both rural and urban regional curves in the
stream design. Response: Thank you.
2. Page 19, Section 3.6.3 - Figure 8 shows an existing culvert within the proposed CE along
S200 (lower), but no culvert at the bottom of S200. This is inconsistent with the section
text. Also, please verify that the existing culvert(s) to remain are properly sized and in
good condition. Response: Figure 8 and the text have been updated. All culverts proposed to
remain will be replaced with properly sized corrugated plastic pipe.
3. Page 20, Section 4 - This section notes that functional objectives will be measured to
document project success. How will native woody debris be measured to document
biological function success? How do the functional design objectives in Table 6 relate to
the potential function uplift and measurement methods in Table 19? Response: WLS is not
proposing that level 4 and 5 functional categories are measured. The text in Section 4 has been
updated to reflect this.
4. Page 21, Section 4.1.1- This section states that restoration activities "will likely" provide
functional uplift within the Level 4 and 5 categories. Please clearly note whether these
categories will be included in monitoring to demonstrate project success. Response:
Section 4.1.1 has been updated to clearly state that any Level 4 and 5 function -based parameters
and monitoring activities will not be tied to performance standards nor are required to
demonstrate success for credit release. Any Level 4/5 uplift is implied and anticipated by the
restoration work.
5. Page 22, Table 7 - Under Landscape Connectivity, what animals drinking from the stream
are being referenced? Is this the best example of biology benefits from landscape
connectivity? Response: This section has been updated and now discusses the benefits of
aquatic and terrestrial species migration.
6. Page 23, Table 8 - Six of the nine reaches show a reduction in length from existing to
proposed creditable stream channel. Do the crossings account for the total differences or
will the proposed stream design result in a reduction of jurisdictional waters? Response:
Table 8 has been updated and now shows proposed uncreditable length in its own column. No
mitigation credits were calculated outside of the conversation easement.
7. Page 24, Section 6 - Please confirm the 9,965 LF of stream restoration referenced
includes 308 LF of non-credit stream restoration. Response: Table 8 has been updated and
shows there is a total of 9,656.73 SMCs and 464.61 uncredited length.
8. Page 29 - During the IRT prospectus site walk, we discussed our concern about post -
construction flow along S101, S102 and S103 where the streambed will be significantly
raised. Flow gauges should be located to demonstrate sufficient flow throughout these
reaches to meet performance standards. Response: Figure 10 shows a flow gauge located in
S101, S102 and S103. These reaches will be monitored to ensure sufficient flow and that
performance standards are met.
9. Page 29 - DWR appreciates the statement to minimize tree loss to the extent possible.
From DWR's perspective this does not need to include protecting black walnut (site- wide
comment). Response: WLS understands that black walnut should not be protected onsite. Black
walnut will be removed as needed during construction and monitored post -construction to
ensure it does not threaten successful establishment of planted trees.
10. Page 36, Section 6.4.1- UT to Little Fisher River was identified as a reference quality
stream even with the disturbance noted? Response: Yes, the stream was reference reach
quality and a good representation of a single -thread channel with a smaller drainage area. The
disturbance was located downstream and was not included in the survey.
11. Page 37, Section 6.5 - There are no details or callouts in the design sheets for floodplain
interceptors or grass swales. Response: These areas are represented in the plan set with the

note, "stabilize connection into proposed channel." Additional details and design guidance will
be added to the design sheets for these areas when grading is complete.
12. Page 38-39, Tables 16 & 17 - Please include wetland indicator status for species in both
tables. Response: The wetland indicator status for each species has been added to both Tables
16 and 17.
13. Page 38, Table 16 - Were species present at the two stream reference sites considered in
developing the planting list? Please clarify whether the Mixed-Mesic Forest and Alluvial
Forest are two distinct target communities to be established within the project site or two
community types used to develop a single target community for the project site. If two
distinct target communities are proposed, Sheets 28 - 31 should show the different
planting zones. Response: WLS did not utilize a reference vegetation site. The planting list was
developed using relevant literature. There will be two distinct target communities and they are
now shown on plan sheets 28-31.
14. Page 38, Section 6.6.1- DWR maintains that March 15th should be the planting target end
date. Response: WLS proposed that the planting be completed by the start of the growing
season in Catawba County, March 30th (per WETS data). The planting date has been updated in
Section 6.6.1.
15. Page 39, Table 17 - The seed mix composition is primarily FAC/FACU. Given the existing
wetland and proposed floodplain reestablishment, will these species provide adequate
cover for the expected range of soil wetness conditions? Response: Table 17 species have
been updated and now include species that are FACW, FAC and FACU. This will promote
successful ground cover across a range of as -built conditions.
16. Page 39, Invasive Species - Will fescue be treated prior to or during construction?
Response: In areas of undisturbed pasture WLS will assess fescue treatment options prior to
planting.
17. Page 40, Section 6.7.1- On the as -built drawings, please callout depressional area
locations (including partially filled channel/ditch areas) greater than 14 inches deep.
Response: This language has been added to Section 6.7.1 and the depressional areas will be
called out on the as -built plans.
18. Page 43, Jurisdictional stream flow - Please clarify that is an annual performance
standard during the monitoring period. Response: Stream flow will be monitored and
assessed annually during the monitoring period.
19. Page 43, Section 8.2 - Recommend rephrasing so stems counted aren't restricted to 3- yr,
5-yr and 7-yr old trees. Replanted stems can count towards success two years after
planting. Response: Section 8.2 language has been updated so stem counted aren't restricted to
3, 5 and 7 year old trees and now can include replated and volunteers trees that are minimum
two years old.
20. Page 44, Section 9.1- There are no Enhancement II reaches identified within this project.
Response: This statement was outdated language from the prospectus and has been removed.
All stream reaches in this project are proposed as restoration.
21. Page 46, Section 9.2 - Will there be undisturbed wooded preservation areas? Sheets 28 -
31 show the entire site being planted. Response: There will be a small amount of undisturbed
wooded preservation areas. These areas are now shown on the design sheets 28-31 and in
Figure 10. Final limits of preservation will be determined prior and during construction to
minimize removal of desirable mature trees.
22. Page 48, Table 19 - Under Establish Riparian Buffer Vegetation, please note the vigor
requirement. Response: The vigor (height) requirement has been added under Section 8.2 and
updated in Table 19.
23. Figure 9 - There is no callout for the removal of the lower 5200 culvert shown on Figure
8. Please confirm. Response: There is a non-functional washed-out culvert at the downstream
end of S200 below the limits of construction. The culvert is not impeding stream flow and will
not be removed during construction. The callout in the design plans indicate this culvert will

remain. Figure 9 and Section 3.4.2 has been updated to reflect this.
24. Figure 10 -
a. Please show locations of proposed pressure transducers/crest gauges along 5100
and 5200 to adequately demonstrate bankfull events. Response: The locations of the
crest gauges/transducers are now shown on Figure 10.
b. Please note or show locations of proposed fixed photo locations, including at
cross -sections, veg plots and stream crossings. Response: The photo point locations
have been added to the stream crossings and a note has been added stating that cross -
sections will also be used as photo point locations.
c. There appears to be no veg plots proposed in existing wooded areas. Since all
project streams are proposed for restoration, DWR would expect at least some of
these wooded areas to be disturbed/cleared during construction and require
replanting. Additionally, Sheets 28 - 31 show the entire conservation easement
being planted. Please confirm that the number of veg plots meet the minimum
monitoring criteria for the project planting area. If portions of the site will not be
planted, please identify those areas on Sheets 28 - 31 and include a total area
calculation reference in the mit plan narrative. Please redistribute veg plots to
adequately cover the project site, including adding a plot to the 5100 section
below the second crossing north of I-40. Response: Plan sheets 28-31 have been
updated to show the approximate planting zones. Two more vegetation plots were
added for a total of 24 plots. A plot has been added below the second crossing north of I-
40. The vegetation plots were redistributed across the site to adequately cover the
project site.
25. Please add or modify a figure to show the locations of the two reference sites in relation
to the project site. Response: Reference reaches are now shown in Figure 1a.
26. Sheet 1A - Is there a difference between the two j-hooks or two rock steps listed in the
legend? Response: On the plan sheets the structures are drawn with their correct rock sizes. As
the stream width increases downstream, more rocks are added to the structures.
27. Sheet 3A - What species are proposed for the live staking and toewood live cuttings?
Response: Section 6.6.1 states that the species proposed for live staking are black willow and
silky willow.
28. Sheet 2H - Please confirm the proposed culverts will be buried in compliance with DWR's
GC-4134 general condition #11. Response: All proposed culverts have been updated and are
in compliance with the DWR's GC-4134 general condition #11.
29. Sheet 2K - Have proposed ditch plug locations been identified? Response: Ditch plugs are
used anywhere that the old channel crosses the proposed channel. The channel fill is shown in
the design sheets.
30. Sheet 2L - Please confirm there is only one ditch callout for the project, Sheet 17.
Response: There are two areas called out to be stabilized on Sheet 17 that are not a standard
ditch. The standard ditch detail was added just in case the contractor needed to utilize it with
guidance from the engineer. Additional details and design guidance will be added to the design
sheets for these water quality treatment areas when grading in complete. There are six water
quality treatment features for S100 and six water quality treatment features on S200 of active
erosion due to overland flow and highway ditches on I-40.
31. Sheet 4 - Please provide context and construction details for the Berm. I don't believe this
feature was mentioned in the plan narrative. Also, please callout the gravel drain feature
noted in Section 6.2.1. Response: Additional details and design guidance will be added to the
design sheets for the berm when grading is complete.
32. Sheets 4, 7, 9, 10, 17, 18, 19 - Please provide a typical detail(s) for the proposed "stabilize
connections". Based on the total number of these features, I'm assuming these are the
water quality treatment features noted in Section 6.5. Considering five of these features

originate at or beyond the easement boundary, DWR is concerned that they may act as a
simple rock lined conveyance which would bypass the reforested buffer meant to
improve water quality. DWR would like to see a design that as described in the narrative
will "dissipate energy and gradually step-down to the stable design streams," as well as
trap excessive sediment inputs. Response: Additional details and design guidance will be
added to the design sheets for these water quality treatment areas when grading in complete.
The designs will dissipate energy and gradually step-down these areas based on the slope and
drainage area that are in these areas to prevent gullying and erosion on the proposed stream.
33. Sheet 6 - Were alternatives to a smooth wall culvert considered? Are there any aquatic
passage concerns with using smooth wall HDPE? Response: The proposed culverts were
switched to corrugated plastic pipe.
34. Sheet 9 - Will the proposed constructed riffle adequately stabilize the easement break for
the landowner's current site use? Response: Yes, this crossing is a potential future crossing
that will not be utilized by the current landowner.
35. Design Sheets - Please show floodplain grading lines on the final plans. The narrative
notes a minimum 1.5 bankfull width floodplain design in most areas, which DWR
appreciates. DWR was also glad to see a gentler slope planned between floodplain and
terrace areas where feasible. Response: A preliminary limit of disturbance has been added to
the design plans to demonstrate a floodplain of an additional 1.5 bankfull widths on both sides
of the restored channel for excavated areas. This will be represented in the final grading plans.
All terrace slopes will be maximum 4:1 according to the typical sections on Sheet 2, unless local
constraints dictate a steeper terrace slope.
36. Design Sheets - Is any fencing proposed? If so, please include an overall fencing concept
plan with approximate locations of existing (to remain) and proposed fencing. Please
ensure there is adequate safe access points for regulatory agency and long- term steward
representatives to walk the site. Response: After the GIS figures you will now find a cattle
exclusion plan. This plan shows where the proposed fencing will be located as well as proposed
gate locations. Note: fencing will only be constructed at the direction of the landowner where
they intend to continue livestock grazing.
37. DWR really appreciated the level of detail and site specific discussion provided in this
project draft mitigation plan, particularly in the site constraints, regulatory
considerations, and project risks and uncertainties sections. Response: Thank you.
EPA Comments CTodd Bowers):
Note: It is understood that site visits may have been made by IRT members and other project
managers during the development of site feasibility to provide mitigation credit. In that regard,
I feel it is necessary to mention that I have not been on -site during this process and that my
comments may reflect a lack of on -site observation and evaluation.
1. General Comment: I really appreciate the sponsors consideration in addressing future
development near and/or adjacent to the site within the drainage area for both of the
main streams. Also appreciate the consideration of the potential widening of Interstate
40 in Catawba County as a very real possibility and that appropriate setbacks were
utilized. Response: Thank you.
2. General Comment: I almost overlooked the site photos (Appendix H) which some may
have been useful in the main body of the document to enhance the narrative. Great
illustration of the many stressors on and instabilities of the streams in the Starker
Project. Response: Thank you for the suggestion and we will plan to add more photos into the
narrative in future mitigation plans.

3. Section 1.3/Page 6: The project does not involve stream enhancement as all streams are
undergoing Priority 1 or 2 restoration. Response: Section 1.3 has been updated and now
clearly states that the mitigation approach will be restoration.
4. Section 2.1/Page 7: The lat/long for the site is erroneous. Response: The lat/long has been
corrected.
5. Section 3.4.2: Recommend reorganizing the stream nomenclature by addressing each
stream segment by a name and reach #. The additional crossing language is confusing as
there are multiple existing crossings along each main stem along with a new one that is
being proposed. Example: S1 Reaches 1-5, S2 Reach 1, S2 Reach 2, S2 Reach 3 instead of
"north of or "below" crossings. Consider renaming tributaries as S3, S4 and S5. Clearly
identify each Reach segment on the maps of Figures 8 and 9. This will make all the tables
much easier to read too. Response: At this time WLS already has an approved PJD for this
project and have been told previously to not change the reach names after the PJD because it
makes permitting difficult for the USACE. We will take the suggestion into consideration on
future mitigation projects.
6. Figure 9: Stream lengths and credits do not match Table 8 in Section 5.1. Recommend
that Restoration Priority 1 and 2 approaches are highlighted in Figure 9. Response: The
table has been removed from Figure 9. Figure 9 as been updated to show should P1 and P2
approaches.
7. Section 3.6.3/Page 19: I appreciate the plain language that states that the 60-foot
crossing widths are based on future development of adjacent parcels and not due to
landowner preference. Response: Thank you.
B. Section 6.1/Page 25: As the anticipated floodplain is between 50 to 70 feet along most of
the project reaches, was the Conservation Easement width designed to encompass the
stream floodplains? Response: The Conservation Easement width was designed to encompass
the minimal buffer width based on current regulatory guidance. In most areas this will
encompass the proposed floodplain width. The very downstream ends of S100 and S200 are on
the Mull Creek geomorphic floodplain and the proposed easement will not encompass the
entire floodplain width.
9. Section 6.1/Page 25: Along with topsoil stockpiling for reapplication in P2 restoration
reaches is there any plan for soil amendments in these areas to promote vigorous plant
growth? Response: If needed soil testing will be conducted during construction to determine if
any soil amendments are needed to promote plant growth. The language in the relevant section
has been updated.
10. Table 10: I am a bit suspect of the listed Drainage Areas that don't seem to change much
moving downstream. I may have missed it, but I don't see design discharge (Max Q) listed
anywhere in this table. I understand design discharge is well addressed in later tables
(13 and 14). Response: The different reaches were broken into sub -reaches due to different
design approaches. Therefore, there is some repetitive drainage areas in the table between the
sub -reaches.
11. Section 6.2.1: Reiterating my comment on renaming the streams across the site to
remove confusion between text, tables and figures. Sequentially numbering the Reaches
along each main stem will reduce confusion with current and proposed crossings and
locations. Response: At this time WLS already has an approved PJD for this project and have
been told previously to not change the reach names after the PJD because it makes permitting
difficult for USACE. We will take the suggestion into consideration on future mitigation
projects.
12. Section 6.3.1/Page 32: Once again I appreciate the sponsors consideration of future
development along with regional curves and reference reaches when designing the
stream parameters. Response: Thank you.
13. Section 11/Page 49: "physical inspection of the site will take place at least once a year
throughout the post -construction monitoring period" is in conflict with Section 7 that

states: "Project will be monitored on a regular basis and a physical inspection of the
Project will take place at least twice a year throughout the post -construction monitoring
period until performance standards are met" Response: Section 11 has been updated to
state that a physical inspection of the site will happen minimum twice per year until the
performance standards are met.
14. Given the existing wetlands currently within the conservation easement and the
potential for flooding in the downstream reaches near Lyle Creek, I recommend adding
the wetland indicator status to each species being considered for planting. Recommend
considering differing planting zones (currently a single zone) if significant hydrologic
regimes exist or may develop along the riparian buffer within the easement.
Recommend adding a simpler vegetation planting map as a Figure since the plan sheets
were very cumbersome to view due to size. Response: The wetlands indicators have been
added to Table 16 and 17. The plan set and Figure 11 now show the different planting zones.
Please contact me if you have any additional questions or comments.
Sincerely,
Water & Land Solutions, LLC
Catherine Manner
Project Manager
Water and Land Solutions, LLC
7721 Six Forks Road, Suite 130
Raleigh, NC 27615
Office Phone: [phone]
Mobile Phone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project
WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Catawba County, North Carolina
Private Commercial Mitigation Bank for
Stream Compensatory Mitigation Credits
Catawba River Basin, HUC 03050101
Warm Water Thermal Regime
USACE Action ID Number: SAW-2020-01540
Prepared for:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403-1343
Prepared by:
WATER & LAND SOLUTIONS
7721 SIX FORKS ROAD, SUITE 130, RALEIGH, NC 27615
(919) 614 - 5111 1 waterlandsolutions.com
August 2021

Table of Contents
1 Introduction..........................................................................................................................................6
1.1 Background...................................................................................................................................6
1.2 Bank Sponsor................................................................................................................................
6
1.3 Mitigation Goals and Objectives...................................................................................................6
2 Bank Establishment and Operation......................................................................................................7
2.1 Site Selection.................................................................................................................................7
2.2 Service Area..................................................................................................................................8
2.3 Site Protection Instrument............................................................................................................8
2.4 Watershed Need and Feasibility...................................................................................................8
3 Baseline Information.............................................................................................................................9
3.1 Watershed Characterization.........................................................................................................9
3.1.1 Surface Water Classification.................................................................................................9
3.1.2 Jurisdictional WOTUS............................................................................................................9
3.1.3 NC SAM and NC WAM...........................................................................................................9
3.2 Land Use and Development Trends............................................................................................10
3.3 Landscape Characteristics...........................................................................................................10
3.3.1 Physiography and Geology..................................................................................................10
3.3.2 Soils.....................................................................................................................................10
3.3.3 Climate................................................................................................................................11
3.3.4 Existing Vegetation.............................................................................................................11
3.4 Existing Stream Conditions.........................................................................................................13
3.4.1 Geomorphic Assessment....................................................................................................13
3.4.2 Existing Reach Descriptions................................................................................................14
3.4.3 Sediment Supply, Delivery and Storage..............................................................................17
3.5 Potential Site Constraints............................................................................................................17
3.5.1 Existing Easements on the Site...........................................................................................17
3.5.2 Utility Corridors within the Site..........................................................................................18
3.5.3 Mineral or Water Rights Assurance....................................................................................18
3.5.4 FEMA Floodplain Compliance and Hydrologic Trespass.....................................................18
3.5.5 Invasive Species Vegetation................................................................................................18
3.5.6 Potential Future Land-Use..................................................................................................18
3.6 Regulatory Considerations..........................................................................................................19
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 2

3.6.1 Cultural Resources..............................................................................................................
19
3.6.2 Threatened and Endangered Species.................................................................................19
3.6.3 Conditions Affecting Hydrology..........................................................................................
19
3.6.4 Adjacent Land Use..............................................................................................................
20
4 Functional Uplift Potential..................................................................................................................20
4.1.1 Restoration Potential and Project Benefits Summary........................................................20
5 Determination of Credits....................................................................................................................
23
5.1 Proposed Mitigation Credit Types..............................................................................................
23
5.2 Credit Release Schedule..............................................................................................................23
6 Mitigation Work Plan..........................................................................................................................24
6.1 Design Approach.........................................................................................................................
25
6.2 Design Criteria Selection.............................................................................................................26
6.2.1 Stream Design Reach Summary..........................................................................................28
6.3 Flow Regime................................................................................................................................31
6.3.1 Regional Curve Comparison................................................................................................31
6.3.2 Channel Forming Discharge................................................................................................32
6.3.3 Channel Stability and Sediment Transport Analysis...........................................................
34
6.4 Reference Sites...........................................................................................................................
36
6.4.1 Reference Streams..............................................................................................................36
6.5 Water Quality Treatment Features.............................................................................................
37
6.6 Vegetation Plan...........................................................................................................................37
6.6.1 Planting Materials and Methods.........................................................................................38
6.7 Site Construction Methods.........................................................................................................40
6.7.1 Site Grading and Construction Elements............................................................................40
6.7.2 Stream, Wetland and Floodplain Improvement Features..................................................40
6.7.3 Construction Feasibility.......................................................................................................40
6.7.4 Future Project Risks and Uncertainties...............................................................................40
7 Maintenance Plan...............................................................................................................................41
8 Performance Standards......................................................................................................................42
8.1 Streams.......................................................................................................................................42
8.2 Vegetation...................................................................................................................................43
8.3 Invasive Species..........................................................................................................................43
9 Monitoring Plan..................................................................................................................................44
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project
Page 3

9.1 Stream Monitoring......................................................................................................................44
9.1.1 Hydrologic Monitoring........................................................................................................44
9.1.2 Geomorphic Monitoring.....................................................................................................44
9.1.3 Flow Duration Monitoring...................................................................................................46
9.2 Vegetation Monitoring................................................................................................................46
9.3 Visual Assessment Monitoring....................................................................................................47
10 Long -Term Management Plan............................................................................................................48
11 Adaptive Management Plan...............................................................................................................49
12 Financial Assurances...........................................................................................................................49
13 References.......................................................................................................................................... 51
Tables
Table 1. Parcel Ownership Information.......................................................................................................8
Table 2. NCSAM/NCWAM Summary..........................................................................................................
10
Table 3. Existing Project Site Vegetation...................................................................................................12
Table 4. Reach Watershed Drainage & Jurisdictional Status for Project Reaches.....................................13
Table 5. Existing Channel Morphology Summary......................................................................................14
Table 6. Function -Based Goals and Objectives Summary..........................................................................20
Table 7. Project Benefits Summary............................................................................................................22
Table 8. Proposed Stream Mitigation Credits(SMCs)................................................................................23
Table 9. Credit Release Schedule...............................................................................................................24
Table 10. Proposed Design Parameters.....................................................................................................27
Table11. Stream Sub-Reaches....................................................................................................................28
Table 12. Flow Level and Ecological Role...................................................................................................31
Table 13. North Carolina Rural and Urban Piedmont Regional Curve Equations......................................32
Table 14. Design Discharge Analysis Summary..........................................................................................33
Table 15. Boundary Shear Stress and Stream Power.................................................................................35
Table 16. Reference Reach Data Comparison............................................................................................37
Table 17. Proposed Riparian Buffer Bare Root Plantings...........................................................................38
Table 18. Proposed Riparian Buffer Permanent Seeding...........................................................................39
Table 19. Routine Maintenance Components...........................................................................................42
Table 20. Proposed Monitoring Plan Summary.........................................................................................48
Table 21. Financial Assurances...................................................................................................................50
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project
Page 4

Figures
Figure1.........................................................................................................................Project Location Map
Figure 1a......................................................................................................................Reference
Reach Map
Figure2...............................................................................................................................Service
Area Map
Figure3...........................................................................................................
USGS Topographic Quad Map
Figure4..................................................................................................................................
NRCS Soils Map
Figure5.........................................................................................................................................
LiDAR Map
Figure6.......................................................................................................................
FEMA Floodplain Map
Figure 7a, 7b, 7c, 7d
......................................................................................................... Historic Aerial Map
Figure8....................................................................................................................
Existing Conditions Map
Figure9..................................................................................................................Proposed
Mitigation Map
Figure 10..............................................................................................................
Proposed Monitoring Map
Figure11............................................................................................................................Planting
Plan Map
Exhibit............................................................................................................................Cattle
Exclusion Plan
Appendices
AppendixA........................................................................................................................ Design Plan Sheets
Appendix B................................................................................................... Existing Conditions Information
AppendixC..........................................................................................................................Site Analysis Data
Appendix D........................................................................................................... Site Protection Instrument
Appendix E............................................................................................................ USACE Assessment Forms
AppendixF..................................................................................................................... WOTUS Information
Appendix G...............................................................................................................Agency Correspondence
AppendixH...........................................................................................................................Site Photographs
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project
Page 5

1 Introduction
1.1 Background
Water & Land Solutions, LLC (WLS) is submitting this mitigation plan for the Starker Mitigation Project
("Project") under the WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank ("Bank"). The proposed Bank is being
developed as a private commercial umbrella mitigation bank to allow for the addition of future mitigation
sites located in the Catawba River Basin, 8-digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03050101 (Figure 2). The
purpose of the Bank is to provide stream and wetland mitigation credits to compensate for unavoidable
impacts to Waters of the U.S. authorized under sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act, Section 10
of the Rivers and Harbors Act, and all applicable state statutes. The Project is providing 9,656.73 warm
thermal regime stream mitigation credits and 29.91 acres of easement that will be protected in
perpetuity.
This mitigation plan was prepared in accordance with C.F.R. §332.1-8 (2008), Compensatory Mitigation
for Losses of Aquatic Resources, and was based on current United States Army Corps of Engineers —
Wilmington District (USACE) Guidance, which is subject to the approval of the USACE District Engineer
(DE) in consultation with the North Carolina (NC) Inter -Agency Review Team (IRT).
1.2 Bank Sponsor
WLS will serve as the Bank Sponsor for the WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank, Starker Mitigation
Site. The contact information for the sponsor is listed below:
Water & Land Solutions, LLC
Attn: Catherine Manner
7721 Six Forks Rd, Suite 130
Raleigh, NC 27615
Phone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
1.3 Mitigation Goals and Objectives
The Project mitigation goals are to provide numerous water quality and ecological benefits within the Lyle
Creek sub -basin and Catawba River watersheds. Major goals for the Catawba River basin, as described in
the Catawba River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP; NCEEP, 2007, amended 2013) include: 1) improved
management of stormwater runoff to Crowder and Catawba creeks, 2) protection of the critical water
supply reservoirs in the region and their immediate riparian zones, and 3) land protection for important
natural and cultural resource sites including the Bunker Hill bridge over Lyle Creek. The Project will:
• Restore aquatic habitats that are currently degraded by cattle access and bank erosion.
• Improve water quality by excluding cattle.
• Restore riparian buffers.
• Stabilize streams that are part of a WS-IV watershed.
• Serve to continue existing water quality initiatives that are on -going in the watershed.
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 6

• Enhance/restore riparian wetlands by reconnecting the stream to its historic floodplain.
In the Catawba River Basin wide Water Quality Plan (NCDWQ 2010), the Lyle Creek Watershed
(03050101140010, Figure 1) is specified for protection efforts that include headwater streams that drain
to Lake Norman, a water supply reservoir. As part of the proposed Project, 9,965 linear feet of stream
(warm water thermal regime) will be stabilized and restored. The Lyle Creek watershed is 39% agricultural
land, and a majority of Lyle Creek receives agricultural runoff. The proposed restoration work for the
Project would restore riparian buffers at least 50 feet in width along all stream reaches. This proposed
work will provide significant reductions in nutrients, sediment, and fecal coliform supplied to Mull Creek,
Lyle Creek, and ultimately Lake Norman.
To accomplish these goals, the following site -specific objectives will be measured to document overall
project success:
• Provide a floodplain connection to the incised Project stream reaches by lowering bank height
ratios (BHRs) to less than 1.2, thereby promoting more natural floodplain storage and overbank
flood flows,
• Improve bedform diversity by increasing scour pool to pool spacing and depth variability,
• Increase native species riparian buffer and wetland vegetation density/composition along
streambank and riparian areas,
• Improve aquatic habitat and fish species diversity and migration through the addition of in -stream
cover and native woody debris,
• Site protection through a 29.91-acre conservation easement with minimum 50-foot riparian
buffers from the top of banks along all streams in perpetuity.
The existing conditions site assessment suggests that the proposed mitigation activities will result in a
higher functioning aquatic ecosystem. The project goals and objectives address water quality stressors by
reducing nutrient and sediment inputs through stream restoration, riparian buffer restoration, and
riparian wetland rehabilitation. Hydrologic functions will be improved by raising the local water table. The
biologic and habitat functions will be improved by the revegetation of the riparian buffers.
Additionally, a 29.91-acre conservation easement will protect stream reaches and aquatic resources in
perpetuity. These mitigation efforts will provide a significant ecological benefit with minimal impacts and
constraints during a recovery period that would not otherwise occur through natural processes.
2 Bank Establishment and Operation
2.1 Site Selection
The Project site is located in Catawba County, North Carolina (35.727984°,-81.176076°). The site is part
of the Catawba River Headwaters Subbasin, HUC 03050101 (Figure 1). The proposed site includes two
unnamed tributaries to Mull Creek (5100 and 5200), Mull Creek drains into Lyle Creek and ultimately Lake
Norman on the mainstem of the Catawba River. Mull Creek, near the project site, drains portions of the
City of Conover and the Town of Claremont. Both municipalities are experiencing growth into surrounding
rural areas, and the Project directly abuts both sides of Interstate 40 (1-40) between mile markers 133 and
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 7

135. The site is currently in agricultural use but is potentially a future commercial/residential development
area.
To get to the site from Raleigh get on 1-40 West. Use right three lanes to take exit 131 for 1-40 West
towards 1-785 N/Greensboro/Winston-Salem. Take exist 133 for Rock Barn Rd, take a left and the site is
located at the first right off of Rock Barn Rd, John Daniels Drive.
2.2 Service Area
The proposed Geographic Service Area (GSA) for the Bank is illustrated in Figure 2 and will provide
compensatory mitigation credits for unavoidable, permitted impacts to Waters of the United States in the
Catawba River Basin (8-Digit HUC 03050101). Use of approved mitigation credits from the bank to
compensate for impacts outside the GSA may be considered by USACE on a case -by -case basis. The Project
will provide compensatory mitigation for warm stream impacts. Future sites may be developed in the
Bank that provide both warm and cool stream mitigation credits as well as wetland mitigation credits.
2.3 Site Protection Instrument
The Sponsor has obtained agent authorization forms and option agreements to purchase a conservation
easement for each of the property parcels that comprise the Project. Copies of the agent authorization
forms and draft conservation easement are provided in Appendix D. The Sponsor shall record a
conservation easement with the Catawba County Clerk that has been approved by the USACE, in
coordination with the IRT, and provide a copy of the recorded conservation easement to the USACE. The
current property owner for the Project site is listed in Table 1 below.
Table 1. Parcel Ownership Information
375210364087
375219523168
Hunsucker Farms, LLC 375215732614 29.91 03599/0062-0065
375216831456
375215534132
375211558910
The conservation easement will ensure that the site will be protected in perpetuity from land uses that
are inconsistent with the UMBL Apart from USACE-approved activities (in coordination with the IRT), the
site shall not be disturbed by activities that would adversely affect the intended extent, condition, or
function of the bank. The conservation easement shall not be removed or modified without prior written
approval of the USACE.
2.4 Watershed Need and Feasibility
As a result of implementing this Project, WLS will restore and protect 9,965 linear feet of stream. The
restoration will offset unavoidable impacts to Waters of the United States associated with rapid growth
and development and improve and protect aquatic resource functions in the region.
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project
Page 8

The technical feasibility of the bank is assured due to WLS' extensive experience with stream and wetland
restoration and enhancement in North Carolina and throughout the Southeast. Examples of WLS' success
with stream restoration and enhancement include the WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank and the
WLS Yadkin 01 Umbrella Mitigation Banks. The absence of fatal flaws, such as hydrologic trespass, and the
absence of threatened and endangered species and their habitats means the project is unlikely to be
impeded by resource issues, or by objections from landowners.
3 Baseline Information
WLS performed an existing conditions assessment for the site by compiling and analyzing baseline
information, aerial photography, and field data. The purpose of this assessment was to determine how
aquatic resource functions have been impacted within the catchment area. Parameters such as watershed
drainage area, percent impervious cover, land use, climate, and hydrology were evaluated. The following
sub -sections further describe the existing site conditions, degrees of impairment, and primary controls
that were considered for developing an appropriate restoration design approach.
3.1 Watershed Characterization
3.1.1 Surface Water Classification
The site includes two unnamed tributaries to Mull Creek, which drains into Lyle Creek and ultimately Lake
Norman. Lyle creek is listed as WS-IV (Water Supply IV- Highly Developed) and flows into Lake Norman, a
water supply reservoir, approximately four miles downstream of the confluence of Mull Creek and Lyle
Creek.
3.1.2 Jurisdictional WOTUS
WLS investigated on -site jurisdictional WOTUS using the USACE Routine On -Site Determination Method.
This method is defined in the 1987 USACE Wetlands Delineation Manual and subsequent Eastern
Mountain and Piedmont Regional Supplement. Stream classification utilized the NCDWQ Stream
Identification Form. Potential jurisdictional (JD) wetland areas as well as upland areas were classified using
the USACE Wetland Determination Data Form. The results of the on -site field investigation indicated that
all Project reaches were determined to be jurisdictional stream channels. In addition, five jurisdictional
wetland areas were delineated within the proposed Project area (See Figure 8) located on floodplains (WA
is 1.2 acres, WB is 0.03 acres, WC is 0.03 acres, WD is 0.03 acres, and WE is 0.04 acres). All of these
jurisdictional wetlands are inside the proposed conservation easement. WLS received a preliminary
jurisdictional determination (PJD) from the USACE in March 2021 and supporting documents and agency
correspondence are provided in Appendix F.
3.1.3 NC SAM and NC WAM
WLS completed stream and wetland assessments using the NC Wetland Assessment Method (NC WAM,
Version 5.0, 2015) and NC Stream Assessment Method (NC SAM, Version 2.1, 2015). WLS evaluated the
NC WAM and NC SAM metrics relevant to the Project wetland areas and stream reaches (See Appendix
Q. The Project reaches all scored 'low' due to previous dredging, lack of buffer, and water quality stressors
from agriculture, and altered stream morphology. Wetland area WA, WB, WC and WE rated 'medium' due
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 9

to some disturbed conditions. Wetland area WD rated 'low' due to poor habitat conditions. The ecological
assessments also incorporated qualitative and quantitative observations using historic aerials, field
evaluations, and detailed topographic survey data collected across the site. The conclusions from these
assessments help describe the current stream and wetland conditions and functional ratings, however,
these methods are not intended for determining mitigation success on the site.
Table 2. NCSAM/NCWAM Summary
Note: Three smaller sub -reaches (5101, 5102, and S103) were not scored due
to minimal length in the project area.
3.2 Land Use and Development Trends
A historical aerial review from 1951 to present (Figures 7a-7d) was conducted to document landscape
changes in the watershed. Prior to the development of 1-40 in 1960 the area consisted mostly of row crop
and pasture. In 1960, interstate 40 was built through Catawba county (Figure 7b) dissecting the project
site. Other than the disturbance of 1-40, the land uses in this watershed have mostly remained stable since
1950, including the stream buffer surrounding the project site. It is anticipated this watershed will
ultimately be developed and include residential single family and multi -family homes as well as light
industrial space. A highway commercial space is also being developed on the property adjacent to the
project site.
3.3 Landscape Characteristics
3.3.1 Physiography and Geology
The site is in the Northern Inner Piedmont Level IV Ecoregion. This area has higher elevations with more
rugged topography than other areas of the Piedmont as well as mostly mesic soils rather than thermic
soils. More specifically, this area consists of Amphibolite and Biotite Gneiss ('CZab') (Geologic Map of
North Carolina, NC Geological Survey, 1998). Streams in this area usually have a higher gradient than
streams in the Outer Piedmont and contain mountain type macroinvertebrate species. (Griffith et al,
2002).
3.3.2 Soils
Soils at the site were initially determined using NRCS soil survey data for Catawba County (NRCS Catawba
County Soil Survey, 1975). As shown on the NRCS Soils Map (Figure 4), existing floodplain soils around the
reaches are mostly within the mapping units TmD, TmC, TmB, TmE and CsA. TmD soils are described as
Tomlin loam (10 to 15 percent slopes), TmC is described as Tomlin loam (6 to 10 percent) and TmE soils
are described as Tomlin loam (15 to 25 percent slopes). TmD, TmC and TmE are found on hillslopes and
ridges and the soils parent material is saprolite derived from diorite and gabbro or diabase or gneiss. TmB
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 10

soils are described as Tomlin loam (2 to 6 percent slopes) and are found on interfluves. CsA soils are
described as Codorus loam (0 to 2 percent slopes), and these soils are found on floodplains and are
frequently flooded, the parent material is loamy alluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock.
On -site soils investigations were conducted to identify potential hydric soils in October 2018 by licensed
soil scientist (LSS), Michael G. Wood, LSS with Three Oaks Engineering (See Hydric Soils Report in Appendix
B). The findings were based on hand -turned auger borings and indicate the presence of hydric soils along
the floodplains at the top of reach 5100. The hydric soils status is based upon the Field Indicators of Hydric
Soils in the United States (USDA, NRCS, 2018, Version 8.2).
3.3.3 Climate
Catawba County has a warm moderately humid climate with hot summers, minimal snowfall and no dry
season (NRCS, 1975). The average growing season for the Project site is 205 days, beginning mid -April and
ending in late October (NRCS Catawba County Soil Survey). The average annual precipitation in the Project
area is approximately 49.2 inches with a consistent monthly distribution, except for convective storm
events or hurricanes that occur during the summer and fall months. Over the past 48 months, the Rain
gauge at Oxford Rs near Claremont, NC has recorded 119.31 inches of rain (USGS).
3.3.4 Existing Vegetation
Historic land management surrounding the Project area has been primarily for agricultural purposes. Prior
to anthropogenic land disturbances, the riparian vegetation community likely consisted of Mesic Mixed
Forest (Piedmont subtype) in the uplands with Alluvial Forest and Piedmont Bottomland Forest in the
lower areas and floodplains (Schafale, 2012). The existing vegetation within the Project area consists of
open pastureland with a mature canopy with a limited understory adjacent to the streams (Table 3).
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 11

Table 3. Existing Project Site Vegetation
Red maple
Acerrubrum
Red cedar
Juniperus virginiana
Yellow -poplar
Liriodendron tulipifera
Red oak
Quercus falcata
American sycamore
Plantanus occidentalis
River birch
Betula nigra
White pine
Pinus strobus
Black walnut
Juglan nigra
White oak
Quercus alba
Black willow
Salix nigra
Pawpaw
Asimina triloba
American holly
Ilex opaca
Black cherry
Prunus serotina
Multiflora rose
Rosa multiflora
Hazel alder
Alnus serrulata
Spicebush
Lindera benzoin
Chinese privet
Ligustrum sinense
Muscadine
Vitis rotundifolia
Japanese honeysuckle
Lonicera japonica
Common greenbrier
Smilax rotundifolia
Meadow garlic
Allium canadense
Tall fescue
Festuca arundinacea
Highbush blackberry
Rubus argutus
Canada goldenrod
Solidago canadensis
Soft rush
Juncus effusus
Agricultural Fields: Currently, most field areas surrounding the Project area are used for cattle grazing
and the vegetation within open field areas is primarily comprised of fescue with scattered canopy trees
adjacent to the stream.
Mixed Hardwood Forest: The mature canopy is dominated by red maple, yellow poplar, red oak, white
oak, and black walnut. Woody shrub species include papaw, black willow, black cherry, hazel alder, and
spicebush. Vine species include honeysuckle and muscadine. Herbaceous species include various sedges,
rush, fescue, and blackberry.
Invasive Species Vegetation: The invasive species vegetation present on the Project site are primarily,
Chinese privet, Japanese stiltgrass (Microstegium vimineum), kudzu (Pueraria montana), and multiflora
rose (Rosa multiflora).
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project
Page 12

3.4 Existing Stream Conditions
3.4.1 Geomorphic Assessment
WLS conducted geomorphic and ecological assessments of the Project reaches to determine the current
stream function, channel stability, and the impact of past and current land use on the Project site's aquatic
resources. From historical aerial research, evidence was found to demonstrate that most of the Project
area has been heavily impacted from historic and current land use practices, including interstate highway
development. A further review of topographic maps, field investigation of on -site features, similar stream
and wetland reference conditions, and LiDAR survey data provide clear evidence that the existing channel
patterns that appear to be indicative of valley signatures, valley slopes, and drainage basins that likely
supported headwater stream and wetland systems with associated bottomland hardwood forest.
The tributaries within the Project boundary flow directly to Mull Creek. The streams at the Project were
broken down into nine reaches [S100 (N of 1-40, above crossing), S102, S103, S100 (N of 1-40, below
crossing), S100 (S of 1-40), S101, S200 (N of 1-40), S200 (S of 1-40, above crossing), and S200 (S of 1-40,
below crossing)] totaling approximately 9,965 linear feet of existing streams. Table 4 provides reach
designations, approximate drainage area, stream status based on field analysis and NCDWR stream
classification form score.
Table 4. Reach Watershed Drainage & Jurisdictional Status for Project Reaches
5/0.008 Intermittent
2.5/0.004 Intermittent
35.5
28.5
22.0
193/0.30 Perennial 35.5
252/0.39 Perennial 35.5
12/0.02 Intermittent 29.0
84/0.13 Perennial 34.5
169/0.26 Perennial 34.5
Note: Watershed drainage area was approximated based on topographic and LiDAR information and
compared with USGS StreamStats at the downstream end of each reach.
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 13

Table 5 characterizes the existing stream morphology based on general descriptions, channel evolution
(Simon, 1989) and Rosgen stream classification (Rosgen, 1994).
Table S. Existing Channel Morphology Summary
3.4.2 Existing Reach Descriptions
S100 (North of 1-40, above crossing): Reach S100
begins as a deep gully near Rock Barn Road on the
northern end of the property. The gully is
approximately 12 to 15 feet deep, highly unstable,
and has been used in the past as a dumping area for
farm trash and waste. At the base of the gully
system, several strong springs originate and form the -tip
headwaters of the S100 system. Incision of the
stream decreases downstream; however, the system
is incised (BHR > 1.5) along its entire length. Large
trees are present along the banks of the upper Reach S100 demonstrates the ability to
portion of S100, but not along the lower portion. enhance riparian wetlands through stream
From the middle portion of S100 to the end of the restoration and buffer plantings.
reach, adjacent riparian wetland areas occur due to considerable discharge of groundwater along the
adjacent toe of slopes. The function of these wetlands is being impacted by the incised stream condition
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 14

and frequent cattle access which is prevalent along the entire reach. S100 above the crossing ends at the
inlet of a 24 inch diameter culverted crossing for a farm path which provides a downstream structural
grade control point.
S102: Reach S102 is a direct tributary to S100. S102 begins as a spring head approximately 100 feet
upslope of and near the middle of S100 above 1-40. The reach is heavily impacted by cattle and sections
of the streambanks have been completely trampled. The channel has been filled with sediment from the
eroding banks, and flow is diffuse and impeded due to cattle crossing near the middle of the reach. There
are crayfish and frogs in the reach, but the biological function of the stream has been severely impacted
by sedimentation and habitat degradation. Reach S102 ends at its confluence with Reach S100.
S103: Reach S103 is a short tributary to S100, which starts at a large headcut where the adjacent slope
has failed. There was water flowing for much of its length during site visits, though the streambed
sediments are largely influenced by large scale erosion of the adjacent upland soils.
S100 (North of 1-40, below crossing): This reach begins at the culvert outlet below the farm path crossing.
The pipe is perched due to a past headcut. As a result of the headcutting, incision along the reach is higher,
resulting in greater sediment loss due to bank scour and mass wasting than in Reach S100 (above
crossing). This section of S100 is predominantly wooded; however, trees along the riparian floodplain are
relatively sparse and consist primarily of successional species. Cattle are constantly accessing the wooded
areas for shade and multiple areas along this section of S100 and are active loafing areas with an over -
widened channel and trampled banks. Anthropogenic channel modification is evident with the channel's
location against the right side of the valley, creating areas of mass wasting with bank heights much greater
than those associated with the remainder of the incised channel. The lower section of S100 closer to 1-40
has been fenced off from cattle and has been left for reforestation to occur; however, this area presents
the most active channel evolutionary processes. Numerous tree falls exist and continue to occur where
the channel is actively increasing meander width. Almost all outside bends are characterized by extremely
high, vertical banks with larger trees precariously perched on top. The top third of these banks consist of
exposed roots and overhanging banks with little to no surface protection or rooting depth at the lower
elevations where channel interaction occurs. Where Reach S100 approaches the 72-inch diameter culvert
under 1-40, the bank height ratio drops to a relatively stable condition and the substantial erosive forces
no longer seem apparent, most likely due to the backwater effects the culvert during higher flows.
S100 (South of 1-40): Reach S100 begins at the downstream outlet of the 72-inch diameter culvert under
1-40. The outlet is laid on a natural bedrock seam which is providing vertical stability, however the
increased velocities at the outlet of this extremely long stretch of culvert are impacting the banks with
localized scour. The upper portion of S100 below 1-40 is wooded along the right bank, but the forest along
the left bank has recently been cleared, leaving only a thin line of trees. Cattle have been fenced out of
this upper part of S100 south of 1-40. However, as with the lower portion of S100, many of the channel
evolutionary processes are manifesting through mass wasting of outer bends and localized toe scour
within riffle and run sections. Much of the upper section of S100 south of 1-40 contains tree falls and/or
debris jams creating localized areas of unstable vertical banks up and down stream. As S100 begins to
transition to the floodplain of Mull Creek, cattle access resumes, the riparian buffer is reduced, and human
channel modification once again become apparent through channel straightening. Cattle are using several
loafing areas where substantial shade exists, causing trampled banks. Almost all outer bends through this
lower portion of S100 are characterized by nearly vertical banks covered by herbaceous vegetation with
few moderately sized trees. An existing 36-inch diameter CMP farm culvert is in place towards the end of
the reach which acts as a pinch point for the stream, causing localized scour and instability in the banks
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 15

up and down stream. Finally, the confluence with Mull Creek is vertically stable as Mull Creek has some
bedrock controls within the vicinity of the confluence that would provide an excellent tie in point with
minimal concern of future headcutting.
S101: Reach 5101 is a direct tributary to 5100. 5101 begins as spring head approximately 100 feet upslope
of and near the lower end of Reach 5100. The reach is not currently impacted by cattle but is incised and
actively eroding. Efforts have been made by the landowner to prevent the headcut from worsening by
filling the channel with logs and debris, but the channel still appears to be actively eroding and
downcutting. Based on historical aerial imagery from 1951, it appears that 5101 could have been a
functioning stream before the construction of 1-40. There is evidence that the watershed for the tributary
was split by the highway and the stream was diverted into a ditch that flows into 5100 north of 1-40 below
the crossing. Upstream of the jurisdictional break, the channel appears to have been straightened and
filled. In addition to overland stormwater flow, 5101 is also fed by groundwater from several streambank
seeps. Reach 5101 ends at its confluence with Reach 5100.
S200 (North of 1-40): Similar to 5100 to Mull Creek, S200 to Mull Creek can be generally characterized as
a sand -dominated transport channel that is spring fed, with significant incision, partial entrenchment, and
undergoing many of the same channel evolution steps present in 5100 to Mull Creek. As with 5100, 5200
to Mull Creek has experienced stressors associated with agricultural practices: human channel
modification, cattle access, and timbering. Reach 5200 north of 1-40 begins as a small wetland area that is
fed by hill slope springs near the main farmhouse and buildings. At a 21-inch culverted farm crossing just
downstream, the stream incises greatly due to headcutting that has migrated up the stream system to
the culvert. From the farm crossing culvert down to near the NCDOT right-of-way for 1-40, the stream is
highly incised with extreme bank heights and considerable ongoing scour erosion and mass wasting.
Headcuts are actively moving through this reach. Approximately 50 feet upstream of the NCDOT right-of-
way, the stream has formed an active wetland floodplain within the overly widened channel that is
relatively stable; however, there is still some erosion along the adjacent terrace banks due to overland
flow and runoff.
S200 (South of 1-40, above crossing): This reach begins directly below the 1-40 right-of-way and flows
approximately 583 feet to a culverted farm crossing. The reach appears to have over -widened in the past,
perhaps due to heavy cattle access, but has now formed a relatively stable wetland floodplain at a lower
elevation. The developing floodplain is dominated by herbaceous vegetation with little deep rooting
woody vegetation established. Cattle have been excluded from the reach for some time, perhaps because
of the high, steep streambanks that are still eroding in some locations. This section ends at a culverted
farm crossing that appears to be appropriately sized, but is experiencing some erosion due to poor
stabilization practices.
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 16

Reach 5200, like many of the project
reaches, displays frequent erosion around
outer meander bends due to land
disturbance, channel incision, loss of buffer,
and frequent cattle access.
S200 (South of 1-40, below crossing): This section
begins at the culverted farm crossing and extends
down to the confluence of 5200 with Mull Creek. The
culvert is a 60-inch CMP. The reach is highly incised
along much of its length with considerable areas of
bank scour and mass wasting. The upper 800 feet and
lower 700 feet of the reach have sparse mature trees
that offer limited riparian protection, and cattle have
active access to these areas. The middle 1,300 feet of
channel was cleared of trees in 2009, and the area
along the left stream bank was converted to livestock
pasture. The area along the right streambank has been
left fallow and has repopulated with young
successional tree species that are approximately ten
years of age, including significant areas of Chinese
privet. Much of the channel through the middle and
lower portion of S200 is meandering and eroding,
especially on the outside of meander bends. This
ongoing evolution has left the outer bends characterized by steep, undercut banks with an herbaceous
cover lacking sufficient surface protection or rooting depth. Where large woody trees are present and an
overwidening of the channel exists, small areas of new floodplain are developing at a lower elevation.
However, with the presence of vertical bedrock grade control, the only means of gaining stability will be
to continually stress the outer bends until an appropriate meander width can be achieved. Towards the
lower portion of 5200 there is a 36-inch diameter culvert that is not functional and has eroded around the
culvert but is not disrupting flow. This culvert is outside the proposed conservation easement and is below
the limits of construction and will not be replaced or repaired as part of the mitigation project. As 5200
approaches the confluence with Mull Creek, the channel appears to still be undergoing incision processes.
The banks are more vertical with significantly less vegetation is present. The terminus for S200 will occur
at the farm crossingjust upstream with the confluence with Mull Creek. This culverted crossing is currently
providing the stable downstream grade control point and will serve as a stable end to the S200 to Mull
Creek system.
3.4.3 Sediment Supply, Delivery and Storage
5100 and S200 are sand bed streams with gravel dominated riffles. The current farming activities, livestock
access, lack of adequate natural woody riparian buffer vegetation, past land disturbances, and stream
instability create a larger sediment supply through the project area.
3.5 Potential Site Constraints
3.5.1 Existing Easements on the Site
The 1-40 corridor runs through the approximate center of the project area and bisects 5100 and 5200. The
culverts beneath 1-40 will be control points for the proposed stream design work, and the design will tie
into the elevations of the existing culverts. No additional flooding will be created within the 1-40 NCDOT
right-of-way because of the project. The project engineer will coordinate with NCDOT to ensure the design
is acceptable and the conservation easement provides suitable spacing for future ROW maintenance or
expansion. The current ROW is approximately 350 feet wide at the culvert crossings.
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 17

3.5.2 Utility Corridors within the Site
One power line easement is present to the north of 5100, but the easement is located outside of the
proposed project limits. No other easements or significant constraints have been identified for the project.
The Sponsor will coordinate with the landowner regarding future development access and utilities to
utilize proposed easement crossings. There are no commercial or private airports within five miles of the
project site.
3.5.3 Mineral or Water Rights Assurance
There are no mineral or water rights issues within or adjacent to the Project site properties.
3.5.4 FEMA Floodplain Compliance and Hydrologic Trespass
Review of the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) National Flood Insurance Program's
Digital Flood Insurance Rate Mapping (DFIRM) panel 3710375200J, effective September 5, 2007, found
that 5100 and S200 are not regulated waters. There are no established Base Flood Elevations (BFEs),
Floodways, or Flood Hazard Zones along the tributaries. However, portions of Mull Creek that 5100 and
S200 flow into are regulated; therefore, the lower 300 ft of 5100 and S200 are within the flood hazard
zone AE associated with Mull Creek. The proposed restoration work associated with this project will not
include any structure placement, excavation, or fill within the Flood Hazard Zone significant enough to
influence the BFEs of Mull Creek. A floodplain development permit is being prepared to submit to the
local floodplain manager for work on 5100 and 5200. Due to the steep step pool system upstream on 5100
and 5200, hydrologic trespass will not occur.
3.5.5 Invasive Species Vegetation
There are currently no substantial communities of invasive plant species within the proposed project
boundaries; however, some areas of invasive species vegetation have begun to establish on S200 south
of 1-40 above the crossing, mainly Chinese privet and Japanese stiltgrass. There is also an area of
established Kudzu located on S200 north of 1-40 right above the DOT right of way. In addition, several
small areas of multiflora rose plants were observed on the project site above 1-40. These areas will be
monitored by WLS, and any invasive plants found within the project boundary will be treated to prevent
expansion and establishment of a substantial invasive community. This will allow for a healthy, native
riparian and upland plant community to dominate the area and help prevent future establishment of
invasive species vegetation.
3.5.6 Potential Future Land -Use
Future site constraints include, but are not limited to development, silviculture, and infrastructure
maintenance. Historic aerial imagery indicates that the Project area has been used extensively for
agricultural purposes. The surrounding areas remain in an agricultural community with some neighboring
forested property. There is potential for the area surrounding the easement to be developed in the future.
The project area is adjacent to 1-40 which could potentially be widened at a later date. To account for this
possibility the conservation easement starts 25 ft from the start of the right of way. Project reaches were
designed to be self -maintaining and resilient in a dynamic landscape. Riparian buffers in excess of 50 feet
will protect the project reaches from changes in watershed hydrologic regimes.
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 18

3.6 Regulatory Considerations
3.6.1 Cultural Resources
This project is not anticipated to have any adverse impacts on cultural or historical resources. On -site
investigations and discussions with the landowner have not revealed any potential resources of this type
on the property. EPR (consultant) conducted a search of the project area using the State Historic
Preservation Office's HPOweb database. No structures listed on the NRHP, or those eligible for listing,
were found in the project boundary or within a one -mile radius. The NRHP report can be found in
Appendix G.
3.6.2 Threatened and Endangered Species
Based on a review of the US Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation
(IPaC) database, there are currently four federally -listed threatened or endangered species known to
occur in the project vicinity: bog turtle (Glyptemys muhlenbergii), Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus
schweinitzii), dwarf -flowered heartleaf (Hexastylis naniflora) and the Northern long-eared bat (Myotis
septentrionalis). The Northern long-eared bat (NLEB) was recently listed as an endangered species and
the Project is located within the USFWS habitat range and white -nose syndrome zone per Final 4(d) rule
(USFWS, 2019). The Project site is not near any known hibernation or maternity sites, nor is Catawba
County listed as one of the counties for confirmed hibernation and maternity sites. It is not anticipated
that the proposed mitigation activities will take place within known hibernacula or remove known
occupied maternity roost trees. WLS will coordinate with the appropriate agencies should a determination
be required for permitting. The USFWS encourages avoiding tree cutting from May 15-August 15 if
possible.
Project implementation is not anticipated to have a negative impact on these species. EPR sent letters to
USFWS and the NC Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) and is in coordination concerning the
Schweinitz's sunflower and dwarf -flowered heartleaf. A survey for Schweinitz's sunflower was conducted
on September 29, 2020, with no individuals found. A survey for dwarf -flowered heartleaf was conducted
on April 15, 2021, with no individuals found. EPR also conducted a one -mile radius search of the project
area using the Natural Heritage Program of North Carolina (NCNHP) database and no occurrences were
found in the project boundary. IPaC report, NCNHP report, USFWS response and NCWRC response can
be found in Appendix G.
3.6.3 Conditions Affecting Hydrology
Seven crossings must be accounted for in the stream design: two crossings will be removed near the origin
of S200 (north of 1-40) and on S200 (south of 1-40, below existing crossing), three crossings will be replaced
(two on 5100 and one on 5200), one potential future crossing will be added on 5100 (north of 1-40, below
existing crossing) and one existing culvert will remain at the bottom of 5200 (Figure 8). The constructed
crossings will allow livestock and farm equipment to access fields and pastures on either side of the stream
reaches. The replaced or added culverted crossings will be range from 48" — 60" corrugated plastic pipe
and are appropriately sized and set at the correct elevations to promote stability and allow passage of
aquatic life. Stabilization practices will be applied to ensure stable crossings. The crossings are 60-feet
wide and located in easement breaks to allow for future residential and commercial development.
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 19

3.6.4 Adjacent Land Use
Site -adjacent land use is primarily silviculture and agriculture. However, the surrounding land use is
transitioning to commercial, residential, and industrial land uses due to its proximity to several population
centers and easily accessible transportation corridors. None of these land uses will have negative impacts
on the function of the Project and the stream channel design contemplates the potential future runoff
conditions.
4 Functional Uplift Potential
Harman et al. (2012) provides a framework for conducting function -based assessments to develop project
goals and objectives based on a site's restoration potential and functional uplift. The framework is based
on the Stream Functions Pyramid (SFP) which is a conceptual model that can be used to better define
project goals and objectives by linking them to stream functions. Stream functions are separated into a
hierarchy of functions and structural measures, ranging from Level 1 to Level 5 and include the following
functional categories: Hydrology (Level 1), Hydraulic (Level 2), Geomorphic (Level 3), Physiochemical
(Level 4), and Biological (Level 5). Function -based goals and objectives were considered that relate
restoration activities to the appropriate parameters from the SFP framework, which are based on existing
conditions, site constraints and overall restoration potential. To accomplish these site -specific goals, the
following functional objectives of level 1-3 will be monitored to document overall project success as
described in Table 6.
Table 6. Function -Based Goals and Objectives Summary
Improve Base Flow
Reconnect Floodplain / Increase
Floodprone Area Widths
Improve Bedform Diversity
Increase Lateral Stability
Establish Riparian Buffer Vegetation
Improve and/or remove existing stream
crossings and restore a more natural flow
regime and aquatic passage.
Lower BHRs to <1.2 and increase ERs to >_2.2
Increase riffle/pool percentage and pool -to -
pool spacing ratios.
Reduce BEHI/NBS streambank erosion rates
comparable to reference condition and stable
cross-section values.
Plant or preserve native species vegetation a
minimum 50' wide from the top of the
streambanks with a composition/density
comparable to downstream reference
condition.
4.1.1 Restoration Potential and Project Benefits Summary
Restoration projects commonly provide functional lift of Level 2 and 3 parameters. To achieve goals in
Levels 4 and 5, a combination of reach scale restoration and upstream watershed health must be
measurable and sustainable.
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project
Page 20

It is expected the Project will reduce pollutant loads, including sediment and nutrients, improving overall
aquatic functions. Given the landscape position and catchment size, the restoration activities will likely
provide functional lift within the physicochemical and biological functional categories. However, Level
and 5 function -based parameters and monitoring activities will not be tied to performance standards
nor required to demonstrate success for credit release.
The Project will provide numerous water quality and ecological benefits within the watershed. While
many of these benefits focus on the Project area, others, such as nutrient removal, sediment reduction,
and improved aquatic and terrestrial habitat, others have more far-reaching effects that extend
downstream. The expected project benefits and ecological improvements are summarized in Table 7.
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 21

Table 7. Project Benefits Summary
Restoring and enhancing 50-foot natural riparian buffers and alleviating concentrated flow
points will decrease the volume and intensity of runoff into the system.
Restoration practices will restore proper floodplain connection by establishing stable bank
height ratios and entrenchment ratios.
Floodplain connectivity will allow for more surface area for surface storage and retention.
Raising and reconnecting the restored stream bed will promote higher water table
conditions and more hyporheic exchange.
A stable sinuosity for valley type and slope will allow for a natural self-sustaining system.
Decreasing stream bank erosion, connecting with the floodplain, and excluding cattle from
the stream will decrease the sediment coming from the restored system into Mull Creek.
Restoring and enhancing 50-foot natural riparian buffers will allow for canopy cover and
large woody debris in the system.
The use of woody in -stream structures will ensure channel stability while also providing
large woody debris.
Benefits will be achieved by the exclusion of cattle from streams and restore functional
buffers of sufficient width along all stream reaches to provide nutrient reductions.
Benefits will be achieved by exclusion of cattle from the stream, restore functional buffers of
sufficient width along all stream reaches, and stabilize stream bank erosion to provide
sediment reductions.
Benefits will be achieved by Restored buffers which will provide shade, reduce water
temperatures, and increase dissolved oxygen concentrations. The restored stream bed will
promote higher water table conditions and facilitate denitrification.
Benefits will be achieved by restoration of appropriate habitats, reduce sediment and
nutrient loads, exclude cattle from streams, and provide increased shading and organic
material inputs for aquatic organisms.
Benefits to landscape connectivity will be achieved by restoring a healthy stream corridor,
promoting aquatic and terrestrial species migration and protecting their shared resources in
perpetuity.
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 22

5 Determination of Credits
The Project consists of all Stream Restoration to achieve the highest ecological lift possible. The proposed
mitigation credit types, ratios and design approaches were discussed with the IRT during the prospectus
site visit and described further in the meeting minutes located in Appendix G.
5.1 Proposed Mitigation Credit Types
Proposed mitigation credit types are Restoration Stream Mitigation Credits (SMCs) (warm thermal
regime). See Tables 8 for the proposed credit summary.
Table 8. Proposed Stream Mitigation Credits (SMCs)
Stream Restoration
1,127
1,169.54
68.69
1:1
1,169.54
(PI/P2)
Stream Restoration
98.96
1:1
98.96
110
25.44
(P2)
Stream Restoration
56.44
1:1
56.44
81
0
(P2)
Stream Restoration
2,490
2,117.61
103.41
1:1
2,117.61
(PI/P2)
Stream Restoration
1,829
1,888.07
85.88
1:1
1,888.07
(PI/P2)
Stream Restoration
79.57
1:1
79.57
96
0
(P2)
Stream Restoration
785
704.85
56.18
1:1
704.85
(P2)
Stream Restoration
550
491.16
110.61
1:1
491.16
(P1)
Stream Restoration
2,897
3,050.53
14.40
1:1
3,050.53
(PI/P2)
Note: No mitigation credits were calculated outside the conservation easement boundaries.
5.2 Credit Release Schedule
All credit releases will be based on the total number of mitigation credits generated as reported in the
approved mitigation plan and verified by the as -built survey. The initial credit release will be based on the
proposed stream mitigation credits (SMCs) as approved in the final mitigation plan. The credit ledger will
be managed by WLS and approved by the USACE District Engineer (DE) and IRT. The estimated credits will
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project
Page 23

be released following current USACE guidance, as shown in Table 9 below. For example, 10% of SMCs will
be withheld until four bankfull events, in separate monitoring years, have been documented. The initial
credit release milestone shall include: approval of UMBI, approval of final mitigation plan, securing the
Project site, financial assurances delivery, long-term protection mechanism delivery, title opinion delivery,
and issuance of 404/401 permits necessary for construction.
Table 9. Credit Release Schedule
Project Site Establishment (as defined
above)
15%
15%
Completion of all initial physical and
biological improvements made pursuant
15%
30%
to the Mitigation Plan
Year 1 Monitoring Report demonstrates
that streams are stable and interim
10%
40%
performance standards have been met
Year 2 Monitoring Report demonstrates
that streams are stable and interim
10%
50%
performance standards have been met
Year 3 Monitoring Report demonstrates
that streams are stable and interim
10%
60%
performance standards have been met
Year 4 Monitoring Report demonstrates
that streams are stable and interim
5%
65%
performance standards have been met
(75%-)
Year 5 Monitoring Report demonstrates
that streams are stable and interim
10%
75%
performance standards have been met
(S5%-)
Year 6 Monitoring Report demonstrates
that streams are stable and interim
5%
SO%
(90%*)
performance standards have been met
Year 7 Monitoring Report demonstrates
that streams are stable and interim
10%
90%
performance standards have been met
(100%*)
Note: *10% reserve of credits to be held back until the bankfull event performance
standard has been met.
6 Mitigation Work Plan
The mitigation work plan will involve the restoration of approximately 9,965 linear feet of stream channel.
WLS's comprehensive design approach utilizes common restoration practices and will appropriately
address the jurisdictional streams and wetlands at the site, including protecting or enhancing riparian
buffers along all of the Project stream reaches and wetlands, thus providing the maximum functional uplift
with the goal of returning natural/historic functions to a former degraded aquatic resource. The design
approach and mitigation work plan are described in the following subsections.
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 24

6.1 Design Approach
The Project involves the restoration of approximately 9,965 feet of stream (Figure 9). The proposed
Project will improve the function of existing wetland systems and restore a stable headwater stream -
wetland complex. Aquatic resources on the site have been severely impacted by past channelization,
ditching, direct cattle access, loss of riparian buffers, and past land use.
S100 and S200, including S101, S102 and S103 are highly degraded and moderately to highly incised due
to past channelization and/or natural stream incision in response to land use changes. The design
approach for the entire length of S100 and S200 will involve reconnecting the streams to active floodplains
(Priority Level I and II Restoration Approaches), with a preference for Priority Level I Restoration when
feasible. No wetland credit is requested for WA due to its small size and existing jurisdictional status.
There will be minimal functional uplift in WA and therefore it is not a viable addition to the bank. By
reconnecting the streams to a functional floodplain, the following functional improvements will be
achieved:
■ Rehabilitation of Adjacent Riparian Wetlands— Based on observed soil profiles that are exposed
along eroding stream banks, it is apparent that wetlands were once prevalent along much of the
Project reaches. Numerous groundwater springs discharge along the toe of adjacent hill slopes,
and in some areas are still enough to support degraded wetland habitats. Raising of the stream
beds and reconnection to an active floodplain will promote higher water table conditions adjacent
to the streams and more overbank flooding.
■ Filtration of Flood Flows — Currently, discharges significantly higher than the bankfull discharge
are carried within the incised stream channels. Reconnection to an active floodplain will provide
filtration of flood flows through floodplain vegetation, effectively reducing storm flow energies
and velocities.
■ Improved Buffer Function — Higher water table conditions associated with reconnecting the
floodplain will promote better denitrification of groundwater flowing to the stream channels.
Rehabilitated wetland areas adjacent to the stream will promote increased plant uptake and
retention of surface runoff before reaching the stream channels, minimizing overland flow
velocities while also encouraging nutrient removal processes.
■ Reduced Water Quality Impacts — By simply excluding livestock from the project stream using
fencing and restoring riparian buffers, significant reductions in direct input of nutrients and fecal
coliform will be achieved.
Design approaches will ensure that all excavated floodplain areas allow for the design meander belt width,
plus an additional 1.5 bankfull widths. For most project reaches this equates to a design floodplain width
of between 50 to 70 feet. This width is considered practical and achievable based on available floodplain
widths measured in the field. In some locations, natural pinches in the valley topography may necessitate
tighter floodplain widths. For excavated floodplain areas, depths will be undercut so that excavated
topsoil can be replaced to approximately 8 to 10 inches in depth to achieve final design floodplain grades.
Native organic topsoil will be stockpiled separately during construction activities to be used in the
replacement of topsoil in excavated areas. The slopes between the outer edge of the floodplain grading
and the terrace will be a maximum of 4:1 unless natural hill slope topography dictates the need for steeper
slopes. If needed, soil testing will be conducted to determine if soil amendments are necessary to promote
plant growth.
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 25

In -stream structures will be constructed from materials naturally found at the project site, such as
hardwood logs and brush, supplemented with the use of quarried rock and stone as needed. WLS will use
methods of structure design and construction that have proven successful on numerous past projects,
and practices that have been well received by regulatory agencies.
The design approaches for the reaches were determined using drainage areas, regional curve analysis,
slopes, and site constraints. The construction drawings provided in Appendix A describe the proposed
construction methods including channel sizing, planimetric geometry, slopes, instream structures, and
elevations of all pertinent features. Data characterizing the existing, proposed, and design morphological
characteristics for each reach can be found in Appendix C. The design approach for each reach is described
in the table and sections below.
6.2 Design Criteria Selection
The design criteria (Table 10) were selected based off the regional curve analysis, reference reach data,
and professional judgement as described in Section 6.4. Site constraints and slopes for each reach are
described in Table 10 and the following sections. Table 11 provides the design stationing for reach
designations.
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 26

m
N
O
m
W
N
O
N
Ol
O
N
V
ti
z
z
z
Z1
O
1
ti
O
O
N
V
w
of
N
O
N
O
ti
v
m
O
.
mO
O
N
N
O
ti
O
oi
O
A
A
O
O
N
vt
m
O
O
vl
ti
O
O
O
m
mLq
N
Lq
n
O
Lq
ti
vt
O
N
V
1
Lq
Q
Z
Q
Z
Q
Z
-O O
00
W
ti
N
O
O
O
ri
O
V
m
N
^
m
O
ti
ti
A
N
ti
O
ti
O
v
m
O
O
of
ti 00
O
O
N
N
O
O
O
ei
O
m
V
m
N
ifl
O
O
0
V
ti
z
z
z
^O N
O
O
ti
O
p
O
rl
ti
O
Q
m
vl
.ti
N
Lq
Q
Q
Q
0 w p
of
O
O
Q
N
n
O
vt
V
ti
Z
Z
Z
.y O
O
N
Vl
O
.ti
`i
O O
.ti
O
O
V
m
Z
O
- a+
m E
O
I�
V
V
ti
Z
Z
y
O
ti
p
O
O
N
O
V
m
Ol
V
N
V
ti
Z
Z
Z
0 N
Ip
W
ti
N
O'
O
rl
Ol
lD
lD
V
N
ti
v
m
O
OJ
m V
O
NC;
m
O
V
of
N
p
I�
O
N
N
O
vt
N 0O
� 0
O
A
A
ti
p
N
t+l
O O
O
m
m
^
lD
Ol
^
of
N
N
Q
Q
Q
00
OJ
N
O'
O
N
oi
O
Ol
of
V
ti
Z
Z
Z
ti
O
O
rl
m
V
n
lD
N
Ol
O
ti
N
A
N
N
A
ti
I
O
v
m
O
O
OJ
Lq
m
O
O
N
Ol
00
O
O
N
O
O
O
�
Y Y
V
O
vt
ui
V
N
N
N
N
N
Q
Q
Q
O N N
O
O
N
N
O
C5
Y
m E
m
Z
Z
Z
.ti O
O
O
o
'
av+ Y
V
vt
V
N
Q
Q
Q
Z
�O N
O
o
N
O
m E
m
Z
Z
.4 O
O
o
T
O
ti
v
m
O
of
O
N O
O
N
N
O
O
O
V
m
N
16
V
O
A
N
A
ti
p
O
vt
O
O
vt
O
0
m
N
in
m
N
N
N
Lq
Q
Q
Q
m
W
N
O
ti
O
m
tDC5
T
ti
Z
Z
Z
ti
O
O
Ol
O
O
Q
m
N
Lq
w
m
ti
N
fV
Q
Q
Q
m N
O
of
N
O
O
of
o
w
V1
wo
ti
T
v
ei
z
z
z
.� 4 0
O
.-I
o
O
io
N

Table 11. Stream Sub -Reaches
S100- North of 1-40, above crossing
1
10+00 - 12+19.11
S100- North of 1-40, above crossing
2
12+19.11 - 15+90.41
S100- North of 1-40, above crossing
3
15+90.41 - 21+90
S102
1
10+00 - 11+24.4
S103
1
10+00 - 10+56.44
S100- North of 1-40, below crossing
1
21+90 - 39+78.11
S100- North of 1-40, below crossing
2
39+78.11 - 44+59.24
S100- South of 1-40
1
48+11.78 - 64+91.96
S100- South of 1-40
2
64+91.96 - 67+90.6
S101
1
10+00 - 10+79.57
S200 North of 1-40
1
10+00 - 10+65.17
S200 North of 1-40
2
10+65.17 - 17+61.03
S200 South of 1-40, above crossing
1
20+60.46 - 24+03.22
S200 South of 1-40, above crossing
2
24+03.22 - 25+93.7
S200 South of 1-40, below crossing
1
25+93.7 - 53+68.35
S200 South of 1-40, below crossing
2
53+68.35 - 57+27.15
6.2.1 Stream Design Reach Summary
Restoration
S100 (North of 1-40, above crossing)
This section of S100 (North of 1-40, above crossing) is broken into three design reaches described below.
S100 begins as a highly incised channel that becomes less incised as it flows downstream and opens into
an alluvial valley. The extreme incision at the upstream end of the reach will be addressed by routing
storm flows from the ephemeral drainage upstream through the existing gully on the east side of the
headwater system. Reach 1 is a step -pool channel through the existing gully on the east side of the
headwater system that will consist of rock step structures and constructed riffles/cascades to step storm
flows down to the existing streambed elevation. The western gully will be stabilized by installing a gravel
drain at the existing channel elevation that will continue to transport spring flow to the channel, and then
filling and sloping the gully over the gravel drain to stabilize the area without needing to remove any of
the large trees along the top of the bank.
Downstream of the stream head, Reach 2 will begin and the bed elevation of the stream will be raised
over a distance of approximately 370 feet to reconnect the stream with its original floodplain and is
designed as a Bc channel due to a constrained valley. Fill material will be taken from adjacent upland areas
to raise the streambed, and constructed riffle structures will be installed to ensure bed stability. Woody
structures such as toe wood and log vanes, along with bioengineering practices, will be used to stabilize
the outside meander bends and other areas of high bank stress. Downstream of the constrained valley,
reach 3 begins and is designed as a C channel as the design pattern will follow a meandering plan form
through the alluvial valley. This Priority Level I Restoration will be carried down to the farm crossing.
S100 (North of 1-40, below crossing)
This section of S100 is broken into two design reaches described below. Due to the highly incised and
unstable nature of these stream reaches, a Priority Level I and 11 Restoration approach is proposed that

will both raise the stream bed elevation and lower the adjacent floodplain slightly to restore floodplain
access. Excavation of a floodplain at a lower elevation is the most practical approach to restoration since
a significant amount of fill material would be required to raise the streambed and stabilize eroding banks
and hill slopes. This approach also provides the opportunity to remove upland alluvial sediments that have
been deposited on the floodplain as a result of poor land use practices in the past, thus exposing the
buried hydric soil layers that are present along the reaches. Exposing the buried hydric soils, raising the
local water table by raising the streambed, and providing for greater floodplain storage will provide
significant uplift of lost riparian wetland function. The existing farm crossing culvert at station 21+94will
be replaced with a 48-inch diameter corrugated pipe. There is a second break in the conservation
easement at station 37+00, this easement break is for a potential future crossing. No crossing will be
constructed in this location at this time. Reach 1 will be designed as a C channel and the design pattern
will follow a meandering plan form through the alluvial valley. This reach section will be carried down until
it is needed to drop to connect back into the existing 1-40 culvert. Reach 2 will be designed as a B channel
with frequent pools, constructed riffles, rock structures, and steps to dissipate energy.
S100 (South of 1-40)
This section of S100 design is similar to that used for S100 north of 1-40, below the existing crossing, and
is broken into two design reaches described below. The restoration approach will begin by raising the
elevation of the stream to the culvert. Due to the highly incised and unstable nature of these stream
reaches, a Priority Level II Restoration approach is proposed to both raise the stream bed elevation and
lower the adjacent floodplain slightly to restore floodplain access. Excavation of a floodplain at a lower
elevation is the most practical approach to restoration since a significant amount of fill material would be
required to raise the streambed and stabilize eroding banks and hill slopes. This approach also provides
the opportunity to remove upland alluvial sediments that have been deposited on the floodplain as a
result of poor land use practices in the past, thus exposing the buried hydric soil layers that are present
along the reaches. Exposing the buried hydric soils, raising the local water table by raising the streambed,
and providing for greater floodplain storage will provide significant uplift of lost riparian wetland function.
Reach 1 will be designed as a C channel and the design pattern will follow a meandering plan form through
the alluvial valley. This reach will be carried down until it is needed to drop to connect back into the
existing farm culverts at the end of S100. Reach 2 will be designed as a B channel with frequent pools,
constructed riffles, rock structures and steps to dissipate energy.
S101 and S102
Due to the incised and unstable nature of these stream reaches, a combination of Priority Level I and II
Restoration approaches are proposed that will raise the stream bed elevation to restore floodplain access.
This approach also provides the opportunity to raise the local water table, providing for greater floodplain
storage and a significant uplift of lost riparian wetland function.
Downstream of the stream head for both reaches, the streambed elevation will be raised to reconnect
the stream with its original floodplain. Fill material will be taken from adjacent upland areas to raise the
streambed, and constructed riffle structures will be installed to ensure bed stability. Woody structures
such as toe wood, along with bioengineering practices, will be used to stabilize the outside meander bends
and other areas of high bank stress. The design pattern will follow a meandering plan form through the
alluvial valley. This Priority Level I Restoration will be transitioned down to the confluences with S100
using shallow Priority Level II Restoration only where/if needed.
While this restoration approach requires the removal of some trees along the reaches, tree loss will be
minimized to the extent possible. In many areas, the approach can be applied while working around larger
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 29

trees that would provide shade and organic material to the stream after restoration. Trees are most dense
along the lower portion of S100 north of 1-40 below the crossing; however, tree loss due to bank erosion
in this area is significant under existing conditions. These stream reaches are attempting to form active
floodplains at a lower elevation but are early in the evolutionary process. Therefore, considerable erosion,
mass wasting, and tree loss will continue before the system would begin to approach stability on its own.
S103
Due to the unstable nature of this stream reach, a combination of Priority Level I and II Restoration
approaches will raise the stream bed elevation to connect to S100 using shallow Priority Level 11
Restoration only where/ if needed. The stream will be designed as a step -pool channel that primarily
follows the existing channel alignment. Rock step structures and a constructed cascade will be used to
step storm flows down to the S100 design streambed elevation.
S200 (North of 1-40)
This section of S200 is broken into two design reaches described below. This section is the most incised of
all the project reaches. Restoration will begin above the culverted farm crossing at the beginning of the
reach, where the existing 21 inch diameter culvert crossing will be removed, and the farm path re-routed
to above the reach as part of the project. Reach 1 will be designed as a step -pool channel that consists of
rock step structures and a constructed cascade that will be used to step storm flows down. Reach 2 is
designed as a B channel with a Priority Level II Restoration approach, involving raising the stream bed
several feet and excavating a bench in some areas along the right stream bank, which has minimal large
trees. Reach 2 primarily follows the existing channel alignment, due to the higher slope of the reach and
the need to tie into the 1-40 road culvert at the downstream end of the reach. Rock structures and
constructed riffles/cascades will be used along the reach to ensure bed stability and to arrest channel
incision and headcutting that is currently occurring along the reach. Near the downstream end of the
reach above 1-40, stable benches have already formed along the stream; therefore, in this location,
stabilization practices will focus on minimizing future downcutting and treating eroding side slopes.
S200 (South of 1-40, above crossing)
This section of S200 will be broken into two design reaches described below. The restoration approach
will begin by raising the elevation of the stream to the culvert. The design floodplain will connect into the
existing benches that have formed to provide better floodplain connection. Constructed riffle structures
will be installed to ensure bed stability. Reach 1 is designed as a meandering C channel. Woody structures
such as toe wood and log vanes, along with bioengineering practices, will be used to stabilize the outside
meander bends and other areas of high bank stress. The design pattern will follow a meandering plan
form through the alluvial valley. Reach 2 is designed as a Bc channel due to a constrained valley going into
the proposed farm crossing. This Priority Level II Restoration will be carried down for both reaches. Some
areas of invasive species vegetation have begun to establish, mainly Chinese privet and Japanese
stiltgrass. Treatment of invasive species vegetation will be included under the restoration approach. The
culvert crossing is a 60-inch smooth wall HDPE.
S200 (South of 1-40, below crossing)
This section of S200 will be broken into two design reaches described below. The restoration approach
for this reach will be the same as the approach described above for S100 south of 1-40. However, this
section of S200 has few mature trees along its length since trees were timbered along much of the reach
within the past 10 years. Within this cutover area, young successional species have begun to establish
along the reach, along with a considerable amount of Chinese privet. Treatment of invasive species
vegetation will be included under the restoration approach, as well as minor benching along this reach to
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 30

provide floodplain reconnection, which will promote the restoration of adjacent riparian wetland
functions.
6.3 Flow Regime
A majority of stream miles (>80 percent) in North Carolina are classified as headwater streams (drainage
area <3.9 mi2), however, less than 10 percent of the 284 USGS stream gages in North Carolina are located
on headwater streams (EFSAB, 2013). WLS recognizes the importance of these stream flow variables and
the ecological role they play in supporting high functioning steam and wetland systems, especially in
urbanizing watersheds. As such, flow monitoring will be conducted to demonstrate that the restored
stream systems exhibit seasonal base flow during a year with normal rainfall conditions. The surface flow
documentation methods are further described in Section 9. Table 12 summarizes the basic flow levels and
ecological roles the restoration design will provide after Project implementation.
Table 12. Flow Level and Ecological Role
-Provide year-round habitat for aquatic organisms (drying/inundation pattern)
-Maintain suitable conditions for water temperature and dissolved oxygen
-Provide water source for riparian plants and animals
-Enable movement through stream corridor and refuge from predators
-Support hyporheic functions and aquatic organisms
-Shape and maintain physical stream channel form
-Create and maintain pools, in -stream and refuge habitat
-Redistribute and sort fine and coarse sediments
-Reduce encroachment of vegetation in channel and establishment of exotic
species
-Maintain water quality by flushing pollutants
-Maintain hyporheic connection by mobilizing bed and fine material
-Create in -channel bars for seed colonization of native riparian plants
-Deposition of fine sediment and nutrients on floodplain
-Maintain diversity, function, and health of riparian floodplain vegetation
-Create streamside habitat, new channels, sloughs, and off -channel rearing
habitat through lateral channel migration and avulsion
-Recharge floodplain and storage processes
-Recruitment of native wood and organic material into channel
6.3.1 Regional Curve Comparison
Regional curves developed by Dunne and Leopold (1978) relate bankfull channel dimensions to drainage
area and are based on the channel forming discharge theory, which states that one unique flow can yield
the same channel morphology as the full range of flows. Gage station analyses throughout the United
States have shown that the bankfull discharge has an average return interval of 1.5 years or 66.7% annual
exceedance probability on the maximum annual series (Dunne and Leopold, 1978; Leopold, 1994).
Hydraulic geometry relationships are empirically derived and can be developed for a specific river or
extrapolated to a watershed in the same physiographic region with similar rainfall/runoff relationships
(FISRWG, 1998). The NC Rural Piedmont Regional Curve (Harman et al., 1999), unpublished NC Piedmont
Regional Curve (NRCS, Walker, private communication, 2015) and NC Urban Piedmont Regional Curve
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 31

(Doll, 2002) were used for comparison when estimating bankfull discharge. The NC Rural and Urban
Piedmont Regional Curves and bankfull hydraulic geometry equations are shown in Table 13.
Table 13. North Carolina Rural and Urban Piedmont Regional Curve Equations
Qbkf = 55.31 Aw" R2=0.97 Qbkf = 89.04 Aw 0.12 R2=0.91 Qbkf = 306.80 Aw 0.63 R2=0.94
Abkf = 19.23 Aw 1.61 R2=0.97 Abkf = 21.43 Aw 0.68 R2=0.95 Abkf = 60.34 Aw 0.61 R2=0.95
Wbkf = 17.41 Aw0.31 R2=0.79 Wbkf = 11.89 Aw0.43 R2=0.81 Wbkf = 24.39 Aw0.33 R2=0.88
Dbkf = 1.09 Aw0.29 R2=0.80 Dbkf = 1.50 Aw0.32 R2=0.88 Dbkf = 2.43 Aw0.33 R2=0.87
It's important to note these tributaries are classified as first and second order streams, and generally
smaller headwater streams can be poorly represented on the regional curves. Based on our experience,
both the published Rural and Urban NC Piedmont Regional Curve Equations overestimate bankfull
discharge and channel dimensions for smaller ungaged streams, such as those present at the Project site.
Due to the development occurring within the project watershed, WLS compared both the NC Piedmont
Rural and Urban Regional Curves to assist in the channel design process. The proposed channel geometry
was adequately sized to accommodate both current and potential future development by allowing natural
channel responses over time without compromising overall stability. Throughout many of the project
reaches, WLS increased channel cross sectional geometry slightly above thresholds in both the
unpublished and published rural regional curves, but still within acceptable confidence intervals. This
approach will allow project reaches to adapt to changing watershed conditions (i.e. increasing
imperviousness) and climate fluctuations while still allowing frequent storm events access to floodplains
during flows above bankfull, and maintain a healthy aquatic and terrestrial ecosystem.
6.3.2 Channel Forming Discharge
A hydrologic analysis was completed to estimate and validate the design discharge and channel geometry
required to provide more frequent overbank flows and floodplain inundation. Cross -sections were
identified and surveyed to represent reach -wide conditions. Additional bankfull estimation methods, such
as the commonly accepted Manning's equation, were compared to help interpret and adjust field
observations to select the appropriate design criteria and justification for the design approach.
The bankfull flows in gaged watersheds within the NC Rural Piedmont study documented return intervals
(RI) that range from 1.1 to 1.8, with a mean of 1.4 years (Harman et al, 1999). EPR also compared the 2-
year flow frequency using the published USGS regression equation for small rural streams (DA <_3 mil)
within the Piedmont hydrologic area of North Carolina (USGS, 2014). As expected, these values fall slightly
above the published bankfull discharge, but were extrapolated to represent a wider range of flows. WLS
then compared lower flow frequencies in the 1.0-yr, 1.2-yr, and 1.5-yr RI range versus survey data, and
field observations (See Appendix C).
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 32

Table 14. Design Discharge Analysis Summary
Note 1: Published NC Piedmont Regional Curve (Harman et al., 1999).
Note 2: Unpublished Revised NC Rural Piedmont Regional Curve developed by NRCS (A. Walker personal communication,
2015).
Note 3: Bankfull discharge estimates vary based on Manning's Equation for the representative riffle cross -sections.
Bankfull stage roughness estimates (n-values) ranged from approximately 0.020 to 0.023 based on channel slopes, depth,
bed material size, and vegetation influence.
Note 4: USGS rural regression equation for 2-year flood recurrence interval, Q2
=163(DA)^0.7089*10^(0.0133*(IMPNLCD06)) for small rural streams (USGS, 2011)
Note 5: NC USGS rural regression equation extrapolated for 1.2- and 1.5-year flood recurrence interval (USGS, 2011)
After considering these estimation methods and results (geometry measurements, regional curves, flow
frequency and USGS regional regression equations), WLS estimated the design discharge using values
between the published NC Rural and Urban Piedmont Regional Curves and Manning's equation to select
the appropriate design dimensions and flows rates that best correspond to the design channel that will
convey the 1.2-yr to 1.5-yr RI. The design discharge analysis summary is provided in Appendix C.
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 33

6.3.3 Channel Stability and Sediment Transport Analysis
A channel stability and sediment transport analysis was performed to ensure that the stream restoration
design creates a stable channel that does not aggrade or degrade over time. The existing reaches exhibit
signs of degradation rather than aggradation. Sediment supply to the Project is expected to be
transportable since there is little evidence of aggradation within the Site. The shear stress and maximum
particle size entrained were calculated and compared with the sub -pavement and pavement/active riffle
samples collected from the existing reaches as shown in Appendix C. Particles will be entrained near the
riffle d50 and d84 during a bankfull flow event. This analysis provides evidence that the stresses predicted
for the design channels will be within the range of stable values calculated for similar stream systems. The
full sediment transport analysis is provided in Appendix C along with the sub -pavement and pavement
sample results.
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 34

E \ \ m / k 2 \ y ® ° \ \ � k/_/y /\ / % \ /\ c
c= E£ a ) a k A u \ 3 / 6 L k /
6 / E = c 2 = — _ — _ _ } )
� @ e @ \ ] / \ \ 7 k = a _ 2 z % c
E %) % \ w \ % \ _ § § § c ®4 E / 7 A
g/ 5 g 6= 6/ 6 g/\ 3>\ k# f# f a

6.4 Reference Sites
6.4.1 Reference Streams
The rural Piedmont regional curve (Harman, 1999) was used to verify bankfull discharge and area on
project streams. However, the dataset used to create the regional curve only contains two sites with
drainage areas less than 2 square miles. Additionally, data collected in Surry County indicates that the
rural Piedmont regional curve may overestimate bankfull dimensions for sites with drainage areas less
than 10 square miles.
Rather than relying on a single reference reach for design criteria, the design criteria applied to the Project
are based on surveys of multiple reference reaches conducted in the past, two new reference reach sites
(described below), published reference reach data, and design criteria and monitoring data from past
successful restoration projects performed throughout the Piedmont region of North Carolina. Reference
data compiled and presented by Lowther (2008) for similar stream types, drainage areas, and slopes
within the Piedmont of North Carolina were reviewed to evaluate appropriate ranges of sinuosity and
pattern data. Lowther evaluated 19 reference reach streams across the Piedmont of North Carolina — our
assessment only focused on the streams in the western portion of the presented data set that were closest
to the project site. Because the ranges provided by this analysis were quite wide, EPR evaluated this
reference information against past completed stream restoration projects that have performed well and
have been tested by significant storm events.
For the smaller streams on the project site, two potential reference sites were located, both of which are
on private property and require permission to access. The first site, UT to Paul's Creek, has a drainage
area of 0.14 square miles and is located northwest of Mount Airy. The site had consistent bankfull
indicators throughout the reach but was impacted by a gravel road running down the hillslope to a
neighboring agricultural field. Rapid methods were used to collect a riffle cross-section and the difference
between water surface and bankfull features to provide a small drainage area point to the regional curve
data. The second site, UT to Little Fisher River, has a drainage area of 0.02 square miles and is located
southwest of Mount Airy.
The UT to Little Fisher River reference site was surveyed in detail and was separated into two reaches and
EPR collected longitudinal profiles and cross sections within both reaches. While there was flowing water
in both reaches, the two reaches are separated by a dry section of channel (14 feet in length) where the
flow was subterranean during both site visits. The upstream reach (riffle 1 and pool 1) was within a
colluvial valley draining to the large Little Fisher River floodplain. The downstream reach (riffle 2) consisted
of 40 feet of a single -thread sandy channel on the Little Fisher River floodplain before a collapsed
pedestrian/ATV crossing disrupts the channel and the flow disperses into a wetland. Geomorphic data are
summarized for both of these reaches below. Reference reach locations can be seen on Figure 1a.

Table 16. Reference Reach Data Comparison
Step -
Stream Type (Rosgen)
pool
Bankfull Mean Velocity, Vbkf (ft/s)
Width to Depth Ratio, W/D (ft/ft)
16.13
Entrenchment Ratio, Wfpa/Wbkf (ft/ft)
. 81
Riffle Max Depth Ratio, Dmax/Dbkf
1.44
Bank Height Ratio, Dtob/Dmax (ft/ft)
Meander Length Ratio, Lm/Wbkf
'
Radius of Curvature Ratio, Rc/Wbkf
'
Meander Width Ratio, Wblt/Wbkf
:
'
1.04
Sinuosity, K
1.3
Valley Slope, Sval (ft/ft)
0.0611
Channel Slope, Schan (ft/ft)
0.047
Pool Max Depth Ratio, Dmaxpool/Dbkf
Pool Width Ratio, Wpool/Wbkf
Pool -Pool Snacine Ratio. Lns/Wbkf
Note 1: Composite reference reach values and ratios were compared using the stable streams described above.
Note 2: Reference reach data was collected at UT to Fisher, and UT to Paul's Creek respectively.
6.5 Water Quality Treatment Features
There are six areas for S100 and six areas on S200 of active erosion due to overland flow and highway
ditches on 1-40. To stabilize these eroding areas, water quality treatment features are proposed in the
form of floodplain inceptors, berms and matted grass swales to dissipate energy and gradually step-down
to the stable design streams.
6.6 Vegetation Plan
Riparian buffers will be established or preserved a minimum of 50 feet from the top of the streambanks
along each of the Project reaches, as well as permanently protecting those buffers with a conservation
easement. Many of the proposed riparian buffer widths within the conservation easement are greater
than 50 feet along one or both streambanks to provide additional functional uplift potential.
Proposed plantings will be conducted using native tree species seedlings. Proposed plantings will consist
of bare root vegetation and will be planted at a total target density of 680 stems per acre. This planting
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project
Page 37

density has proven successful with the reforestation of past mitigation projects, based on current USACE
regulatory guidelines requiring 210 trees at Year 7.
The proposed plant selection will help to establish an appropriate natural vegetation community based
on reference conditions and water quality goals. Schafale's (2012) Natural Communities of North Carolina,
as well as existing mature species identified throughout the Project area, were referenced during the
development of riparian buffer planting plan for the Project site. The closest approximation natural
communities are Piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest on the narrow stream floodplains and Mixed-
Mesic Hardwood Forest (Piedmont Subtype) on adjacent side slopes. Species proposed for revegetation
planting are presented in Table 17. Riparian wetlands are generally too small to necessitate a separate
community designation.
Table 17. Proposed Riparian Buffer Bare Root Plantings
Betula nigra
River birch
FACW
10%
Fraxinus
Green ash
FACW
4%
4%
pennsylvanica
Platanus
American
occidentalis
sycamore
FACW
15%
15%
Ulmus
American elm
FACW
5%
americana
Quercus
Swamp
michauxii
chestnut oak
FACW
16%
10%
Quercus alba
White oak
FACU
20%
6%
Quercus phellos
Willow oak
FAC
15%
Quercus nigra
Water oak
FAC
15%
Shagbark
Carya ovata
Hickory
FACU
15%
Diospyros Persimmon FAC 10% 5%
virginiana
Liriodendron Tulip poplar FACU 10% 10%
tulipifera
Alnus serrulata Tag alder OBL 10%
Asimina triloba Pawpaw FAC 5%
Note: Final species selection may change due to refinement or availability at the time of
planting. Species substitutions will be coordinated between WLS and planting contractor prior
to the procurement of seeding stock. A red -line table will be provided in the As -Built report
document.
6.6.1 Planting Materials and Methods
Planting will be conducted during the dormant season, with all trees installed between November 15th
and March 30t". The final planting zone limits may be modified based on these observations and
comparisons, and the final selection of the location of the planted species will be matched according to
the species wetness tolerance and the anticipated wetness of the planting area.
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project
Page 38

Live Staking and Live Branch Cuttings: Where black willow (Salix nigra) and silky willow (Salix sericea) live
staking is proposed on streambanks, live stakes will typically be installed at a minimum of 40 stakes per
1,000 square feet and the stakes will be spaced approximately two to three feet apart in meander bends
and six to eight feet apart in the riffle sections, using a triangular spacing pattern along the streambanks,
between the toe of the streambank and bankfull elevation. When bioengineering is proposed, live branch
cutting bundles will be installed at five linear feet per bundle approximately two to three branches thick.
Permanent Seeding: Permanent seed mixtures of native species herbaceous vegetation and temporary
herbaceous vegetation seed mixtures will be applied to all disturbed areas of the Project site. Temporary
and permanent seeding will be conducted simultaneously at all disturbed areas of the Project site during
construction and will conducted with mechanical broadcast spreaders. Table 18 lists the proposed species,
mixtures, and application rates for permanent seeding. The vegetation species proposed for temporary
seeding germinate quickly to swiftly establish vegetative ground cover and thus, short term stability. The
permanent seed mixture proposed is suitable for streambank, floodplain, and adjacent riparian wetland
areas, and the upland transitional areas in the riparian buffer. Beyond the riparian buffer areas, temporary
and permanent seeding will also be conducted at all other disturbed areas of the Project site that are
susceptible to erosion. If temporary seeding is applied from November through April, rye grain will be
used and applied at a rate of 130 pounds per acre. If applied from May through October, temporary
seeding will consist of browntop millet, applied at a rate of 40 pounds per acre.
Table 18. Proposed Riparian Buffer Permanent Seeding
Scirpus cyperinus
Woolgrass
FACW
10%
2.0
Dichanthelium
FAC
clandestinum
Deer tongue
15%
3.0
Elymus virginicus
Virginia wildrye
FACW
15%
3.0
Panicum virgatum
Switchgrass
FAC
15%
3.0
Schizachyrium
FACU
Little blue stem
15%
3.0
scopanum
Black-eyed
FACU
Rudbeckia hirta
10%
2.0
susan
Echinacea purpurea
Coneflower
NI
10%
2.0
Juncus effusus Soft rush FAWC 10% 2.0
Note: Final species selection may change due to refinement or availability at the time of planting. Species
substitutions will be coordinated between WLS and planting contractor prior to the procurement of seeding
stock.
Invasive Species: Invasive exotic species vegetation, such as Chinese privet, Kudzu and multiflora rose will
be treated to control their presence, inhibit their spread, and allow planted natural communities to
mature. There are some areas with Japanese stilt grass and fescue present, these areas will be monitored
to make sure the vegetation does not interfere with native plant growth and establishment of the desired
natural community, but are not proposed for treatment throughout the easement. Black walnut species
will be removed during construction as much as possible and will be treated post -construction only where
threating the success of planted vegetation.
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project
Page 39

6.7 Site Construction Methods
6.7.1 Site Grading and Construction Elements
Much of the grading across the Project site will be conducted within the existing riparian corridor. The
restored streams will be excavated within the existing valleys. Suitable fill material will be generated from
new channel excavation and adjacent upland areas and hauled to ditch fill/plugs or stockpile locations as
necessary. Portions of the existing, unstable channels will be partially to completely filled in along their
length using compactable material excavated from construction of the restored channels.
Floodplain grading activities will focus on restoring pre -disturbance valley topography by removing field
crowns, overburden/spoil, and surface drains that were imposed during conversion of the land for
agriculture. In general, floodplain grading activities will be minor, with the primary goal of soil
scarification, creating depressional areas, water quality and habitat features, and microtopographic
crenulations by filling the drainage features at the Project site back to natural ground elevations (Scherrer,
1999). Any excess material not used for ditch plugging or suitable as a soil base for vegetation will be
spread across upland areas outside of the easement boundary and jurisdictional WOTUS. Locations with
depressional areas greater than 14 inches deep will be called out on as -built drawings.
6.7.2 Stream, Wetland and Floodplain Improvement Features
Stream improvement features such as in -stream structures and bioengineering techniques are proposed
for grade control, streambank protection, and improving bedform diversity and habitat. All in -stream
structures will be constructed from materials naturally found in the region such as hardwood trees,
trunks/logs, brush/branches, and gravel stone materials. Whenever possible, existing substrate material
in the abandoned stream channels will be harvested and utilized for the new channel locations.
WLS will also incorporate bioengineering practices, when appropriate, that use biodegradable materials
and fabrics, uncompacted soils, live plant cuttings, and native species vegetation to stabilize streambanks.
Bioengineering treatments will provide initial bank stability that allows for the quick establishment of
deep-rooted vegetation along the newly restored streambanks. Additionally, floodplain improvement
features such as coarse woody debris (CWD) will be installed. This will mimic features like tree throws,
snags, stumps, etc. that are commonly found in natural riparian systems. These floodplain improvement
features will be added to provide habitat and serve as water storage and sediment sinks throughout the
corridor to improve riparian functions (Dooley, 2003).
6.7.3 Construction Feasibility
WLS has field verified that the Project site has adequate, viable construction access, staging, and stockpile
areas. Physical constraints or barriers, such as stream crossings, account for only a small percentage of
the proposed total stream reach length within the Project boundary. Existing Project site access points
and features will be used for future access after the completion of construction.
6.7.4 Future Project Risks and Uncertainties
Listed below are identified project risks and uncertainties that have been evaluated in the development
of design plans for the site, along with methods that have been/will be used to address these concerns.
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 40

Land Use Development: There is potential for increased land development around the site in the future
that could lead to additional runoff and changes to watershed hydrology.
o Methods to Address: The project area has seen little development in recent years, though
development could occur near the site in the foreseeable future. Restoration of the site to
reconnect streams to their floodplains will reduce the likelihood of future degradation from
watershed changes, as increased flows will spread over a wider floodplain. Grade control (in the
form of constructed instream structures and natural bedrock outcrops) present across the
restored site decrease the chances of future channel incision. In anticipation of development
around the conservation easement, breaks in the easement have been placed in areas in
anticipation of future roads and utilities.
Easement Encroachment: There is potential for landowner encroachment into the permanent
conservation easement.
o Methods to Address: WLS has had considerable discussions with the landowner regarding the
project requirements and limitations of easement access and is confident that the landowners
fully understand and will maintain the easement protections. The landowner has also completed
previous DMS restoration projects on other property they own. The easement boundaries will be
clearly marked per requirements. Any encroachments that do occur will be remedied by WLS or
the long-term steward to remedy any damage and provide any other corrections required by the
IRT. The easement will not allow for it to be subdivided if or when the surrounding area is
developed.
Drought and Floods: There is potential for extreme climatic conditions during the monitoring period of
the project.
o Methods to Address: WLS will apply adaptive management techniques as necessary to meet the
site performance criteria. Such adaptive management may include replanting, channel damage
repair, irrigation, or other methods. If adaptive management activities are significant, additional
monitoring may be required by the IRT.
Beavers: While there was no evidence of beaver activity during recent assessments, there is potential for
beavers to affect the site during the monitoring period of the project.
o Methods to Address: WLS will take steps to trap and remove beaver if they threaten Project
success during the monitoring period.
1-40 Widening: There is some potential for the widening of I-40 along the corridor by the Project which
could affect the conservation easement. At the present time there are no plans to widen I-40; however,
it could potentially happen sometime in the next 15-30 years.
o Methods to Address: WLS set the easement boundaries 25 feet off the current right of way to
account for potential widening of the corridor. NCDOT has been notified of the Project and did
not provide any guidance for easement set -backs or future encroachment. NCDOT will evaluate
potential encroachments if the need arises.
7 Maintenance Plan
The Project will be monitored on a regular basis and a physical inspection of the Project will take place at
least twice a year throughout the post -construction monitoring period until performance standards are
met. These inspections may identify Project components and features that require routine maintenance.
Routine maintenance is anticipated in the years following Project construction and may include the
following components as described in Table 19.
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 41

Table 19. Routine Maintenance Components
Stream Routine channel maintenance and repair activities may include modifying in -stream structures
to prevent piping, securing loose coir matting, and supplemental installation of live stakes and
other target vegetation along the Project reaches. Areas of concentrated stormwater and
floodplain flows that intercept the channel may also require maintenance.
Vegetation Vegetation will be maintained to ensure the health and vigor of the targeted plant community.
Routine vegetation maintenance and repair activities may include supplemental planting,
pruning, and fertilizing. Exotic/nuisance invasive plant species will be treated by mechanical
and/or chemical methods. Any invasive plant species control requiring herbicide application
will be performed in accordance with NCDA rules and regulations.
Project Site Project boundaries will be demarcated in the field to ensure clear distinction between the
Boundary Project site and adjacent properties. Boundaries may be identified by fence, marker, bollard,
post, or other means as allowed by Project conditions and/or conservation easement.
Boundary markers disturbed, damaged, or destroyed will be repaired and/or replaced on an as
needed basis.
Stream Crossing The stream crossing(s) within the Project may be maintained only as allowed by the recorded
Conservation Easement, deed restrictions, rights of way, or corridor agreements.
Beaver Routine maintenance and repair activities caused by beaver activity may include supplemental
Management planting, pruning, and dewatering/dam removal. Beaver management will be implemented
using accepted trapping and removal methods only within the recorded Conservation
Easement.
Livestock Exclusion Livestock exclusion fencing will be installed outside the Conservation Easement boundary to
Fencing ensure no cattle are allowed within the Project boundary. Routine maintenance of fencing will
the responsibility of the landowner.
8 Performance Standards
The success criteria for the Project will follow the approved performance standards and monitoring
protocols presented in this mitigation plan which have been developed in compliance with the USACE
October 2016 Guidance, USACE Stream Mitigation Guidelines (April 2003 and October 2005), and 2008
Compensatory Mitigation Final Rule. Monitoring activities will be conducted for a period of seven years
with the final duration dependent upon performance trends toward achieving the Project goals and
objectives. Specific success criteria components and evaluation methods are described below.
8.1 Streams
Stream Hydrology: 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.
Stream Profiles, Vertical Stability, and FloodplainAccess: Stream profiles, as a measure of vertical stability
and floodplain access will be evaluated by looking at Bank Height Ratios (BHR). In addition, observed
bedforms should be consistent with those observed for channels of the design stream type(s). The BHR
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 42

shall not exceed 1.2 along the restored Project stream reaches. This standard only applies to restored
reaches of the channel where BHRs were corrected through design and construction.
Stream Horizontal Stability: Cross -sections will be used to evaluate horizontal stream stability. There
should be little change expected in as -built restoration cross -sections. If measurable changes do occur, they
should be evaluated to determine if the changes represent a movement toward a more unstable condition
(e.g., downcutting, erosion) or a movement towards increased stability (e.g., settling, vegetation
establishment, deposition along the streambanks, 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. The bank height ratio and
entrenchment ratio will not change more than 10% from baseline conditions at any riffle cross-section
during the monitoring period.
Streambed Material Condition and Stability: After construction, there should be minimal change in the
particle size distribution of the streambed materials, over time, given the current watershed conditions
and anticipated upstream sediment supply. Since the stream substrate and supply is predominantly fine
particles (sand), significant changes in particle size distribution and excess channel aggradation are not
expected.
Jurisdictional Stream Flow: The restored stream systems must be classified as at least intermittent, and
intermittent streams must exhibit minimum 30 days of continuous flow for some portion of the year during
a year with normal rainfall conditions. Stream flow will be monitored and assessed annually during the
monitoring period.
Photo Documentation: Photographs should illustrate the Project's vegetation and morphological stability
on an annual basis. Cross-section photos should demonstrate no excessive erosion or degradation of the
banks. Stream crossing photos should show the crossings stability. Longitudinal photos should indicate
the absence of persistent mid -channel bars or vertical incision. Grade control structures should remain
stable. Deposition of sediment on the bank side of vane arms is preferable. Maintenance of scour pools
on the channel side of vane arms is expected.
8.2 Vegetation
Vegetative restoration success for the Project during the intermediate monitoring years will be based on
the survival of at least 320 stems per acre at the end of Year 3 of the monitoring period; and at least 260
stems per acre that must average seven feet in height at the end of Year 5 of the monitoring period. The
final vegetative restoration success criteria will be achieving a density of no less than 210, stems per acre
that must average 10 feet in height in Year 7 of monitoring. To be counted towards success criteria the
stems must be 2 year old trees, this includes replanted and volunteer trees also on the planting list. In
addition, planted trees in each vegetation plot must average 7 feet in height after MY5 and 10 ft in height
at MY7 before close out.
8.3 Invasive Species
WLS will treat invasive species vegetation within the project area and provide remedial action on a case
by -case basis. Common invasive species vegetation, such as Chinese privet, kudzu, and multiflora rose will
be removed to allow native plants to become established within the conservation easement. Invasive
species vegetation will be treated by approved mechanical and/or chemical methods. Any control
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 43

methods requiring herbicide application will be performed in accordance with NC Department of
Agriculture (NCDA) rules and regulations. If necessary, these removal treatments (i.e., cutting and/or
spraying) will continue until the corrective actions demonstrate that the site is trending towards or
meeting the standard monitoring requirement.
9 Monitoring Plan
In accordance with the approved mitigation plan, the baseline monitoring document and as -built report
documenting the mitigation activities will be developed within 60 days of the completion of planting and
monitoring device installation at the restored Project. In addition, a period of at least six months will
separate the as -built baseline measurements and the first -year monitoring measurements. The baseline
monitoring document and as -built monitoring report will include all information required by the USACE
Stream Mitigation Guidelines, issued in April 2003 and USACE Guidance for Compensatory Stream and
Wetland Mitigation Conducted for Wilmington District dated October 2016.
WLS will conduct mitigation performance monitoring based on these methods and will submit annual
monitoring reports to IRT by December 315Y of each monitoring year during which required monitoring is
conducted. Project success criteria must be met by the final monitoring year prior to project closeout, or
monitoring will continue until unmet criteria are successfully met. The following subsections summarize
the monitoring methods and linkage between the goals, parameters, and expected functional lift
outcomes. Figure 10 illustrates the post -construction monitoring feature types and location.
9.1 Stream Monitoring
Hydrologic monitoring will be conducted for all of the Project stream reaches. For reaches that involve a
combination of traditional Restoration (Rosgen Priority Level I and II) approaches, geomorphic monitoring
methods will be employed to evaluate the effectiveness of the restoration practices. Visual monitoring
will be conducted along these reaches as described herein. The monitoring of these Project reaches will
utilize the methods described under visual monitoring.
9.1.1 Hydrologic Monitoring
The occurrence of four required bankfull events within the monitoring period, along with floodplain access
by flood flows, will be documented using pressure transducers and/or photography. The pressure
transducers will be installed on the floodplain of the restored channels for monitoring. The pressure
transducers will record the flood stage between monitoring site visits and used to determine if a bankfull
or significant flow event occurred since the previous site visit. Corresponding photographs will be used to
document the occurrence of debris lines and sediment deposition on the floodplain during monitoring
site visits. This hydrologic monitoring will help establish that the restoration objectives of restoring
floodplain functions and promoting more natural flood processes are being met.
9.1.2 Geomorphic Monitoring
Pattern: A planimetric survey will be conducted for the entire length of restored channel immediately after
construction to document as -built baseline conditions (Monitoring Year 0). The survey will be tied to a
permanent benchmark and measurements will include thalweg, bankfull, and top of banks. The plan view
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 44

measurements such as sinuosity, radius of curvature, meander width ratio will be taken on newly
constructed meanders during baseline documentation (Monitoring Year 0) only. These measurements will
demonstrate that the restored stream channel pattern provides more stable planform and associated
features than the old channel, which provide improved aquatic habitat and geomorphic function, as per
the restoration objectives.
Dimension: Permanent cross -sections will be installed and surveyed at an approximate rate of one cross-
section per 20 bankfull widths or an average distance interval (not to exceed 500 LF) of restored stream,
with approximately 50 percent cross -sections located at riffles, and 50 percent located at pools. Each cross-
section will be monumented on both streambanks to establish the exact transect used and to facilitate
repetition each year and easy comparison of year-to-year data. The cross-section surveys will occur in years
0 (as -built), 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7, and will include measurements of bankfull cross -sectional area (Abkf) at low
bank height, Bank Height Ratio (BHR) and Entrenchment Ratio (ER). The monitoring survey will include
points measured at all breaks in slope, including top of streambanks, bankfull, inner berm, edge of water,
and thalweg, if the features are present.
There should be minimal change in as -built cross -sections. Stable cross -sections will establish that the
restoration goal of creating geomorphically stable stream conditions has been met. If changes do take
place, they will be documented in the survey data and evaluated to determine if they represent a
movement toward a more unstable condition (e.g., down -cutting or erosion) or a movement toward
increased stability (e.g., settling, vegetative changes, deposition along the streambanks, or decrease in
width -to -depth ratio). Using the Rosgen Stream Classification System, all monitored cross -sections should
fall within the quantitative parameters defined for channels of the design stream type. Given the smaller
channel sizes and meander geometry of the proposed steams, bank pin arrays will not be installed unless
monitoring results indicate active lateral erosion at cross -sections occurring in meander bends or an
increase of greater than 15 percent in cross -sectional area, or when visual monitoring indicates potential
bank instability.
Reference photo transects will be taken at each permanent cross-section. Lateral photos should not
indicate excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the streambanks. Photographs will betaken of both
streambanks at each cross-section. A survey tape stretched between the permanent cross-section
monuments/pins will be centered in each of the streambank photographs. The water elevation will be
shown in the lower edge of the frame, and as much of the streambank as possible will be included in each
photo. Photographers should attempt to consistently maintain the same area in each photo over time.
Profile: A longitudinal profile will be surveyed for the entire length of restored channel immediately after
construction (Monitoring Year 0) to document as -built baseline conditions. The survey will be tied to a
permanent benchmark and measurements will include thalweg, water surface, bankfull, and top of low
bank. Each of these measurements will be taken at the head of each feature (e.g., riffle, pool) and at the
maximum pool depth. The longitudinal profile should show that the bedform features installed are
consistent with intended design stream type. The longitudinal profiles will not be taken during subsequent
monitoring years unless vertical channel instability has been documented or remedial actions/repairs are
deemed necessary. Bank height ratios will be measured along the restored reaches using the results of the
longitudinal profile.
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project
Page 45

9.1.3 Flow Duration Monitoring
Jurisdictional Stream Flow Documentation: Monitoring of stream flow will be conducted to demonstrate
that the restored stream systems classified as intermittent exhibit surface flow for a minimum of 30
consecutive days throughout some portion of the year during a year with normal rainfall conditions. To
determine if rainfall amounts are normal for the given year, precipitation amounts using tallied data
obtained from an on -site rain gauge will be used, location on Figure 10. In the event that there is an error
in the data the Oxford weather station near Claremont, NC, approximately 3.7 miles North of the Project
site, will be used. Data from the station can be obtained from USGS. If a normal year of precipitation does
not occur during the first seven years of monitoring, monitoring of flow conditions at the Project site will
continue until it documents that the intermittent streams have been flowing during the appropriate times
of the year.
The proposed monitoring of restored intermittent reaches will include the installation of flow devices
(continuous -read pressure transducers) within the thalweg (bottom) of the channel towards the upper one-
third portion of the reach. In addition, photographic documentation using a continuous series of remote
photos over time may be used to subjectively evaluate and document channel flow conditions throughout
the year. More specifically, the longitudinal photos should indicate the presence of flow within the channel
to illustrate water levels within the pools and riffles. The photographs will be taken from a height of
approximately five feet to ensure that the same locations (and view directions) at the Project site are
documented in each monitoring period and will be shown on a plan view map. The devices will be inspected
on a quarterly basis to document surface hydrology and provide a basis for evaluating flow response to
rainfall events and surface runoff throughout the monitoring period.
9.2 Vegetation Monitoring
Vegetation -monitoring quadrants or plots will be installed and monitored for stem density and height
(vigor) across the Project. The vegetation monitoring plots shall comprise approximately 2% of the planted
portion (approximately 27.7 acres planted) of the Project site with approximately 24 plots established
randomly within the planted riparian buffer areas. The sampling may employ quasi -random plot locations
which may vary upon approval from IRT. Any random plots should comprise no more than 50% of the total
required plots, and the location (GPS coordinates and orientation) will be identified in the monitoring
reports. The size and location of individual quadrants will be 100 square meters (i.e., 10m X 10m or 5m X
20M) for woody tree species and may be adjusted based on site conditions after construction activities
have been completed. No monitoring quadrants will be established within undisturbed wooded
preservation areas, however visual observations will be documented in the annual monitoring reports to
describe any changes to the existing vegetation community.
Vegetation monitoring will occur in the fall each required monitoring year, prior to the loss of leaves.
Mortality will be determined from the difference between the previous year's living, planted seedlings
and the current year's living, planted seedlings. Data will be collected at each individual quadrant and will
include specific data for monitored stems on diameter, height, species, date planted, and grid location, as
well as a collective determination of the survival density within that quadrant. Individual planted seedlings
will be marked at planting or monitoring baseline setup so that those stems can be found and identified
consistently each successive monitoring year. Volunteer species will be noted and if they are on the
approved planting list and meet success criteria standards, they will be counted towards success criteria
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 46

after being present for two years. Other species not included on the list may be considered by the IRT on
a case -by -case basis. The presence of invasive species vegetation within the monitoring quadrants will
also be noted, as will any wildlife effects. At the end of the first full growing season (from baseline/year
0) or after 180 days, species composition, stem density and survival will be evaluated. For each
subsequent year, vegetation plots shall be monitored for seven years in years 1, 2, 3, 5 and 7, and visual
monitoring in years 4 and 6, or until the final success criteria are achieved.
9.3 Visual Assessment Monitoring
WLS will conduct visual assessments in support of mitigation performance monitoring. Visual assessments
of all stream reaches will be conducted at least twice per monitoring year with a minimum of five months
in between each site visit throughout the monitoring period. Photographs will be used to visually document
system performance and any areas of concern related to streambank and bed stability, condition of in -
stream structures, channel migration, active headcuts, live stake mortality, impacts from invasive plant
species or animal browsing, easement boundary encroachments, cattle exclusion fence damage, and the
general condition of pools and riffles. The monitoring activities will document and quantify the visual
assessment throughout the monitoring period.
A series of photographs over time will be compared to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation (bar
formations) or degradation, streambank erosion, successful maturation of riparian vegetation, and
effectiveness of sedimentation and erosion control measures. More specifically, the longitudinal profile
photos should indicate the absence of developing bars within the channel or excessive increase in channel
depth, while lateral photos should not indicate excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the banks.
The photographs will be taken from a height of approximately five feet to ensure that the same locations
(and view directions) at the Project site are documented in each monitoring period and will be shown on a
plan view map. The results of the visual monitoring assessments will be used to support the development
of the annual monitoring document that provides the visual assessment metrics.
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 47

Table 20. Proposed Monitoring Plan Summary
Improve Base Flow
Duration and
Overbank Flows (Le
channel forming
discharge)
Reconnect
Floodplain / Increase
Floodprone Area
Widths
Improve Bedform
Diversity
Increase Vertical and
Lateral Stability
Establish Riparian
Buffer Vegetation
Pressure transducer
stage recorder,
regional curve,
regression equations,
catchment
assessment
Bank Height Ratio,
Entrenchment Ratio,
Crest gauge
Pool to pool spacing,
riffle -pool sequence,
pool max depth ratio,
longitudinal profile
Cross -sections and
longitudinal profile
surveys, visual
assessment
Tree Veg Plots, visual
assessment (vigor,
density
10 Long -Term Management Plan
Maintain seasonal flow on
intermittent streams for a
minimum of 30 consecutive
days during normal annual
rainfall.
Maintain average BHRs <_1.2
and ERs >_2.2 and document
out of bank and/or significant
flow events using pressure
transducers or photographs &
crest gauges.
Increase riffle/pool
percentage and pool -to -pool
spacing ratios compared to
reference reach conditions.
Decrease streambank erosion
rates comparable to
reference condition cross-
section, pattern and vertical
profile values.
Within planted portions of
the Project site, a minimum
of 320 stems per acre must
be present at year three; a
minimum of 260 stems per
acre must be present at year
five; and a minimum of 210
stems per acre must be
present at year seven.
Create a more natural
and higher functioning
headwater flow regime
and provide aquatic
passage.
Provide temporary
water storage and
reduce erosive forces
(shear stress) in
channel during larger
flow events.
Provide a more natural
stream morphology,
energy dissipation and
aquatic habitat/refugia.
Reduce sedimentation,
excessive aggradation,
and embeddedness to
allow for interstitial
flow habitat.
Increase woody and
herbaceous vegetation
will provide channel
stability and reduce
streambank erosion,
runoff rates and exotic
species vegetation.
The Project will be protected in perpetuity by a recorded conservation easement. The conservation
easement will allow for annual monitoring and maintenance of the Project during the monitoring phase.
Upon final site approval and project closeout, the Project stewardship will be transferred to an approved
long-term stewardship program. WLS has partnered with Unique Places To Save (UP2Save) as the long-
term steward for the Project site (See Appendix D for conservation easement and engagement letter).
Unique Places To Save
Attn: Michael Sisco
PO Box 1183
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
803-553-1644
info(@uniqueplacestosave.org
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project
Page 48

This party shall serve as conservation easement holder and long-term steward for the property and will
conduct periodic inspection of the Project to ensure that restrictions required in the conservation
easement are upheld. Any endowment funds for the conservation easement and deed restrictions shall
be negotiated prior to transfer to the responsible party. Funding will be supplied by the responsible party
on a yearly basis until such time and endowments are established. The use of funds from the Endowment
Account is governed by NC General Statue GS 113A-232(d) (3). Payments and interest gained by the
endowment fund may be used only for stewardship, monitoring, stewardship administration, and land
transaction costs, if applicable. The management activities will be conducted in accordance with the terms
and conditions of the approved UMBI as agreed to by WLS, USACE, and the IRT.
11 Adaptive Management Plan
The Sponsor will conduct post -construction monitoring activities and routine maintenance as needed for
the duration of the monitoring period. The Sponsorwill notifythe USACE immediately if monitoring results
or visual observations demonstrate that performance standards cannot be achieved. In the event the
Project site or a specific component of the Project site fails to achieve the performance standards as
specified in the mitigation plan, the sponsor shall notify the IRT and develop a corrective action plan and
facilitate remedial actions. The Sponsor is responsible for providing any necessary permits to implement
the corrective action plan that describes the extent and nature of the work to be performed. If the USACE
determines that the Bank is not meeting performance standards, or the Sponsor is not complying with the
terms of the instrument, the USACE may take appropriate actions, including but not limited to: holding
credit sales, utilizing financial assurances, and/or terminating the instrument.
The site will be monitored on a regular basis and a physical inspection of the site will take place at least
twice a year throughout the post -construction monitoring period until performance standards are met.
These site inspections may identify site components and features that require routine maintenance.
Routine maintenance should be expected most often in the first two years following site construction.
12 Financial Assurances
CONFIDENTIAL
The Sponsor will provide financial assurances in the form of casualty insurance or a performance bond
that is acceptable to the USACE and sufficient to assure successful completion of all mitigation bank
activities, reporting and monitoring, and any remedial work required pursuant to the approved Mitigation
Plan and/or UMBI. The insurance policy or performance bond will be submitted for review and approval
by the USACE. The financial assurance will cover the cost estimates for providing the mitigation bank
activities such as site mobilization and construction, annual monitoring, and reporting as outlined in Table
21 and broken out by annual cost below. There will be a financial assurance for the construction phase in
the amount of $1,300,000 and that financial assurance will be retired following completion of construction
and planting. Then a monitoring financial assurance in the amount of $304,000 will be provided to assure
completion of seven years of monitoring and reporting, and any remedial work required during the
monitoring period.
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 49

Table 21. Financial Assurances
Site Earthwork, Amenities, & Planting $1,300,000
Monitoring Activities and $160,000
Annual Reports through 7 years
Land Management and Routine Maintenance $40,000
Contingency / Remedial Action $104,000
The annual monitoring costs for Table 21 are itemized below and each item includes direct costs.
Annual Monitoring Costs Price Per Task
Gauge downloads/maintenance
$3,500.00
Vegetation Plot Measurements (22 plots & 3 transects)
$5,357.00
On -site Physical Measurements (22 XS)
$7,000.00
Data Processing and Analysis
$3,000.00
Report Preparation
$4,000.00
TOTAL ANNUAL MONITORING COSTS
$22,857.00
Annual Maintenance Costs Price Per Task
Invasive Species Vegetation and Annual Maintenance $5,714
The monitoring financial assurance will be reduced following approval of each annual monitoring report
as provided in the financial assurance policy; however monitoring years 1 through 3 will keep the full
contingency amount of $104,000 and the contingency will be reduced starting in monitoring year 4. The
monitoring financial assurance will be retired in total following official notice of site close-out from the
IRT. Financial assurances shall be payable to a standby trust or other designee at the direction of the
obligee. Financial assurances structured to provide funds to the USACE in the event of default by the Bank
Sponsor are not acceptable. The USACE shall receive notification at least 120 days in advance of any
termination or revocation. In the event of Sponsor default, UP2S has agreed to receive the endowment
funds and will ensure the mitigation work is successfully completed.
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project
Page 50

13 References
Dooley and Maschhoff, 2003. Functional requirements and design parameters for restocking coarse
woody features in restored and enhanced wetlands.
Doll, B.A., D.E. Wise -Frederick, C.M. Buckner, S.D. Wilkerson, W.A. Harman, R.E. Smith, and J. Spooner.
2002. Hydraulic geometry relationships for urban streams throughout the Piedmont of North
Carolina. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 38(3): 641-651.
Dunne, T. & Leopold, L.B. (1978): Water in Environmental Planning W.HG. Freeman Co., San Francisco,
818 pp.
Ecological Flows Science Advisory Board (EFSAB). 2013. Recommendations for Estimating Flows to
Maintain Ecological Integrity in Streams and Rivers in North Carolina.
https://www.fws.gov/asheville/pdfs/Recommendations_for_Maintaining_Flows_FINAL/202013
-10-30. pdf
Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group (FISRWG). 1998. Stream corridor restoration:
Principles, processes and practices. National Technical Information Service. Springfield, VA.
Griffith, G.E., et al. 2002. Ecoregions of North Carolina. Reston, VA. United States Geological Survey.
Harman, W.A., G.D. Jennings, J.M. Patterson, D.R. Clinton, L.O. Slate, A.G. Jessup, J.R. Everhart, and R.E.
Smith. 1999. Bankfull hydraulic geometry relationships for North Carolina streams. Wildland
Hydrology. AWRA Symposium Proceedings. D.S. Olsen and J.P. Potyondy, eds. American Water
Resources Association. June 30-July 2, 1999. Bozeman, MT.
Harman, W.A. and C.J. Jones. 2016. Functional Lift Quantification Tool for Stream Restoration Projects in
North Carolina: Spreadsheet User Manual. Environmental Defense Fund, Raleigh, NC.
Harman, W., R. Starr, M. Carter, K. Tweedy, M. Clemmons, K. Suggs, C. Miller. 2012. A function based
framework for developing stream assessments, restoration goals, performance standards and
standard operating procedures. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wetlands,
Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, D.C.
Harman, W., R. Starr. 2011. Natural Channel Design Review Checklist. US Fish and Wildlife Service,
Chesapeake Bay Field Office, Annapolis, MD and US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Wetlands Division. Washington D.C. EPS 843-B-12-005.
Leopold, Luna B., 1994. A View of the River. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, Mass.
NC Stream Functional Assessment Team, 2015. "NC Stream Assessment Method (NC SAM) User Manual".
Version 2.1, August 2015.
NC Wetland Functional Assessment Team, 2010. "NC Wetland Assessment Method (NC WAM) User
Manual". Version 4.1, October 2010.
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, 2019. "DWR Surface Water Classifications."
Accessed via: https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/planning/classification-
standards/classifications#DWRPrimaryClassification
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 51

North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, 2010. "Catawba River Basin wide Water Quality
Plan."
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Water Resources, Water Sciences
Section, Biological Assessment Branch. 2016. Standard Operating Procedures for the Collection
and Analysis of Benthic Macroinvertebrates, v. 5.0.
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). N.C. Ecosystem
Enhancement Program (EEP) 2007 amended 2013. "Catawba River Basin Restoration Priorities."
Rosgen, D.L. 1994. A Classification of Natural Rivers. Catena 22:169-199.
Schafale, M.P. 2012. Guide to the Natural Communities of North Carolina, Fourth Approximation. North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, NCDENR, Raleigh, NC.
Simon, A. 1989. A model of channel response in disturbed alluvial channels. Earth Surface Processes and
Landforms.
United States Army Corps of Engineers. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
Technical Report Y-87-1. Environmental Laboratory. US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment
Station. Vicksburg, MS.
United States Army Corps of Engineers. 1997. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Research Program. Technical
Note VN-RS-4.1. Environmental Laboratory. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station.
Vicksburg, MS.
United States Army Corps of Engineers. 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines, April 2003, U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers. Wilmington District.
United States Army Corps of Engineers. 2016. Notification of Issuance of Guidance for Compensatory
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Conducted for Wilmington District, October 2016, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers. Wilmington District.
United States Army Corps of Engineers. 2009. Compensatory Mitigation for Losses of Aquatic Resources;
Final Rule dated April 10, 2009 of the Federal Register Vol. 73, No. 70.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey Division. A.
Walker, Personal communication, 2015. NC BEHI/NBS rating curve.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey Division.
1975. Soil Survey of Catawba County, North Carolina.
United States Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Threatened and Endangered
Species in North Carolina (County Listing). Catawba County. 2019.
Wolman, M. G., and Leopold, L. B., 1957, River flood plains; some observations on their formation: U.S.
Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 282-C, pg 22.
Final Mitigation Plan
Starker Mitigation Project Page 52

Figures
WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Starker Mitigation Project
Figure 1—
Project Location Map
Figure 1a
— Reference Reach Map
Figure 2 —Service
Area Map
Figure 3 —
USGS Topographic Quad Map
Figure 4—
NRCS Soils Map
Figure 5 —
LiDAR Map
Figure 6—
FEMA Floodplain Map
Figure 7a
—1951 Aerial Photograph
Figure 7b
—1964 Aerial Photograph
Figure 7c
—1993 Aerial Photograph
Figure 7d
— 2012 Aerial Photograph
Figure 8—
Existing Conditions Map
Figure 9—
Proposed Mitigation Map
Figure 10
— Proposed Monitoring Map
Figure 11—
Planting Plan Map

Legend
Proposed • Project Location
Q Conservation HUC-8
Easement
0 Parcel Boundary NC Counties
Existing Stream Catawba County
o NC Cities
in
Alexander,'County
27
Biookford
Catawba County
0 50 100 ° Lin5-oln County
OMiles Miles
Project is located in:
HUC8 - 03050101 a E �e
HUC12 - 030501011102
F ^s
c
cook Ln
St Johns Church Rtl N@ o Duck Pond ❑r NF
N
a tl —' ... — z z
0 8 m 2,000 3rtlstNE 4,000
Feet z
Iredell
Q`
k ooa
D Q�nOi
o� � y� �r ❑r
a^In 9
6 � /\ - - N _r9otanica, Dr
iv.
E Cal
bne Z
rti d
9
O
N
Claremont
N
a
e
0
v'
n`
U
N
Starker Mitigation Project
Figure
WATER & LA N DM
Catawba - 03050101
Catawba County, NC
Project Location
Map
1
SOLUTIONS
Map Projection: NAD 83 2011 State Plane North Carolina RIPS 3200 FT US
Date: 3/17/2021
Service Lever Credits Saunas Esn, HERE. Germ,,, USGS, I-r—p, INCREMENT P, NRCe,, Esri hp- METI, Esri Chine (Hang Kang), Es, Kr-, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c)
Ope,Str-Map can trib-rs, end the CIS User Community

lade Spring �hilhowie
® Site Location
� Catawba - 03050101 ibinqdon
'Hill -:Ole
® State Boundary A k, air.
Reference Reaches Galax
'S2
UT to Little Fisher
LO UT to Paul's Creek rj O
Ffet Fork
1Wourltalrl L I [y
OTo --t �4ri Dr1t Airy--i
leff_r-nrt _ _- �.
i21
'Eiiznbetlltnrr 71'1uf•rT10 `�'
or
•. r� 1
Il city [
0 h
HayPleasatltHiN• '']bnmi{Ile
iJnicai Mulberry
�' ..-
'BoD11- y Elkin `Boonville—
rn 1r Millers Creek' • North Wilkesboro �.
Wilkesba�o Yadkinville
fl -
f.. � Lewisville'
��` i �g i r I' CIef711T10715s
Pirri er�oir �� lorsville
^4�Mocksville
o40
�r9a ton
:sue 1 ...:�:_- -�`- f 1
- ory
B_ M@rrOr! -_.`,Ct. Sal1SblJry
i� OL7hterlrr- j r:-� Ilk.noa-
--4 Mai
P�
. i
Moore Landis �ChinaGroVE
, ,
er £ *kEr `~ 4`��_ nton ji tb alias ekannapolis
ehurst n .:pindale the+ lie unte�svr�fe- ;
Concord
tanl�r
Rutherfordtarl Z,1 } .. _
•
= Foresttity
Alb
atFfatFr=k _ 74 •Shelhy MountH,-.ly -_- r•
.Locust
Kini-1 .i'.1nLrrlto. _ Be ry ••
Charlotte Mint Hill •Midland
• �lT'L'el Ir1dian Ti ail
Gaffney • f'ine:�ill e
I .
York
Greer- L:r�l-Yn '.partanburg Monroe
!29r + - Marsh
Rork Hill waxhaw
■
0 7.5 15 30
Miles �\1
1 inch = 15 miles N
Starker Mitigation Project
Figure
WATER & LAND"
Catawba - 03050101
Reference
Reach Map
SOLUTIONS
Catawba County, NC
la
Map Projection:NAD_1983_State Plan e_N C_F I PS_3200_Feet
Date: 8/20/2021
Service Leger Credits National G-graphic, Esri, Germin, HERE, UNEP-WCMC, USGS, NASA, ESA, METI, NRCAN, GEBCO, NOAA,
increment P Carp.

Eli zab, thton.
Ir
Ik EL
P,
Site Location
Johnson City
t
Catawba - 03050101
r.1�_
if IT qII 159
IR
®State Boundary
!321
Hays
Mulberry Elkin
'Uni(o)
Boom?
Jonesville*
37
Millers Creek.
Irwin
Cricket North Wilkesboro
rn
Wilkesboro.
19
B1, r4
v, Irp, '4211. Ya&
��077 V Pa
'TiN"A 'NS
A 1
819M
X\ 21
Burnsville Spruce
Pine. 1.? 1?
Lenoir'
nylorsville
BO
I III ILLf.
226
2037m
Morganton.
HiCKDRY
RCNE
AIRPORLI,
70
Mariar;
Newton-
Duntain'
wannan0a
S
e�i
1AV
Maide Norma ooreSVilIQ
1344m
27 Lincointorl U rnelikJ5
me
Ruth ertiordt.m
UnterSville
Spindale
Cherrywille
tanley
nviire
•Forest City
�74
Shelby.
Mau ally
Tryon
Ki os Mau in elmon li'7 7Charlotte
Landrurn-
ARL DOU
AJRP
Mi11
Clover
Gaffney.
Inevil In
14
1 4
York
-Lyman Spartanburg.
Taylu'� Greer C)t)ncdn
ascrya
ks�ePLArarpur{,covq-Pacojet
Rock Hilf
"ttY JULE
0 6 12 24
Miles
1 inch = 12 miles N
Starker Mitigation Project
Figure
WATER & LAND"
Catawba - 03050101
Catawba County, NC
ServMaprea
2
SOLUTIONS
Map Projection: NAD_1983_StatePlane_NC_FIPS_3200_Feet
Date: 3/15/2021
S­­ Lyer Credits: Net­l G.grzphic, Esri, G—in, HERE, UNEP WCMC, USGS, NASA, ESA, METI, NRCAN, GEBCO, NGAA,
increment P Carp

QProposed Conservation Easement
S-100 Watershed (249 ac)
S-200 Watershed (169 ac)
Q Parcel Boundary
Starker Mitigation Project
USGS
Figure
WATER & LA N DM
Catawba - 03050101
Topographic Quad
SOLUTIONS
Catawba County, NC
Newton
3
Map Projection: NAD_1983_StatePlane_NC_FIPS_3200_Feet
Date: 3/17/2021
Service Layer Credits USGS Th e National Mep_ National Boundaries Deteset, 3DEP Elevation Pragr—, G-graph is Names I nfanne —
System, NeMnel Hydragrephy Deteset, Neti a n el Lend Cover Dete base, Neti an el Stru cW re Deteset, end Neti an el Trensparteti an Detese5

1777f76
ervation Easementyne sandy loam, 0 to 6
percent slopes, rarely flooded
CfC: Clifford sandy loam, 6 to 10
percent slopes
CfD: Clifford sandy loam, 10 to 15
percent slopes
CsA: Codorus loam, 0 to 2 percent
slopes, frequently flooded
FaE3: Fairview clay loam, 10 to 25
percent slopes, severely eroded
TmB: Tomlin loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
TmC: Tomlin loam, 6 to 10 percent
slopes
TmD: Tomlin loam, 10 to 15 percent
slopes
b
TmE: Tomlin loam, 15 to 25 percent
slopes
ToB2: Tomlin clay loam, 2 to 6 percent
\ slopes, moderately eroded ti
ToC2: Tomlin clay loam, 6 to 10 percent
slopes, moderately eroded
WwF: Woolwine-Fairview-Westfield
complex, 25 to 45 percent slopes, stony
i< k
el �
• 0 400 800 .00
TmD� - �To m6 �.' TmC � Feet
"` TmCf`T m �" feet
-v. .. gym.. TmB
Starker Mitigation Project
Figure
WATER & LAND"
Catawba - 03050101
Catawba County, NC
NRCS Soils
Map
/�
L.�
s��uTia�s
Map Projection: NAD_1983_StatePlane_NC_FIPS_3200_Feet
Date: 3/17/2021
Data sources - Soils data source: USDA. Imagery data source: NCOneMap

Elevation
925T1 ft
�o
0 Proposed Conservation Easement
Existing Stream
k0 Parcel Boundary
03 LiDAR Elevation
i102 = •
High : 995.4 ft Low: 841.5 ft
;r
S100
S101
r
.%0�4-00'
5A
T 0 400 800 1,600
Feet\1
1 inch = 800 feet N
Starker Mitigation Project
Figure
WATER & LA N DM
Catawba - 03050101
LiD p
Map
SOLUTIONS
Catawba County, NC
5
Map Projection: NAD_1983_StatePlane_NC_FIPS_3200_Feet
Date: 3/17/2021
Data sources - Elevation data source: NCFMP

Starker Mitigation Project
Figure
WATER & LAND
Catawba - 03050101
FEMA Floodplain
Map
SOLUTIONS
Catawba County, NC
6
Map Projection: NAD_1983_StatePlane_NC_FIPS_3200_Feet
Date: 3/17/2021
Data sources - Stream and wetland data collected during preliminary assessment. Imagery data source: NCOneMap

Starker Mitigation Project
Figure
WATER & LAN DM
Catawba - 03050101
Catawba County, NC
1951 Aerial
Source: EDR
7 a
SOLUTIONS
Map Projection: NAD_1983_StatePlane_NC_FIPS_3200_Feet
Date: 3/17/2021
S-- Ayer Cremts_

Starker Mitigation Project
Figure
WATER & LAN DM
Catawba - 03050101
Catawba County, NC
1964 Aerial
Source: EDR
7 b
SOLUTIONS
Map Projection: NAD_1983_StatePlane_NC_FIPS_3200_Feet
Date: 3/17/2021
S-- Ayer Cremts_

0 Proposed Conservation Easement
Wes-
-�
..�:
_ -•
a
1
0 400 800 1,600
Feet\1
1 inch = 800 feet N
Starker Mitigation Project
Figure
WATER & LAND"
Catawba - 03050101
Catawba County, NC
1993 Aerial
Source- EDR
7 C
SOLUTIONS
Map Projection: NAD_1983_StatePlane_NC_FIPS_3200_Feet
Date: 3/17/2021
S-- Ayer credits_

46
5
0 Proposed Conservation Easement
Ph
r
+ �c cfr fo
- �, ' .A�ik'!-fir..' t
� 4
4W i
,t4f,W, W,' �w
ry
•1Y--
a ,h
Vow C.isf'�lt's•S
0 400 800
1 inch = 800 feet
1,600
� Feet �\1
N
Starker Mitigation Project
Figure
WATER & LAN DM
Catawba - 03050101
Catawba County, NC
2012 Aerial
Source- EDR
7 d
SOLUTIONS
Map Projection: NAD_1983_StatePlane_NC_FIPS_3200_Feet
Date: 3/17/2021
S-- Ayer credits_

QJr,Q Proposed Conservation Easement
S-200 Watershed (169 ac)
"�' * �• w;yt"e`?}`'� S-100 Watershed (249 ac)
"a —Existing Stream
►` '� y �far, 0 Existing Stream Gauge
Existing Condition Cross -Section
'w � ."+� �1 .� G Existing Culvert
WA _1 ,r
S103 Existing Wetland
Contour (2ft)
p A.� : — Contour (20ft)
SG1 Parcel Boundary
r..
,� Fn S 102 z
X
0 400 800 1,600
Feet\1
t 1 inch = 800 feet N
Starker Mitigation Project
Figure
WATER & LAND"
Upper Catawba - 03050101
Existing
Conditions Map
SOLUTIONS8
Catawba County, NC
Map Projection:NAD_1983_State Plan e_N C_F I PS_3200_Feet
Date: 8/18/2021
Data sources - Stream and wetland data collected during preliminary assessment. Imagery data source: NCOneMap

I, .' t; w''- �' Q Proposed Conservation Easement
■ Stream Mitigation
,,� P1/P2
P1
P2
S10.3.
Existing Wetland No Credit)
,..� R,,,• ¢ - Water Quality Features
S1O2 Parcel Boundary
e'
= +�• 'fit ;, • .t G �"i`. r.
Improved Crossing .
Future Crossing
Remove,Crossing
100
Improved Crossing S101
Reach
Mitigation
Existing Stream
Length (LF)
proposed
Creditable
Len th (LF)
Stream
Mitigation
Credits
51O0
P1/P2
5446
5175.22
5175.22
51O1
P2
96
79.57
79.57
51O2
51O3
52O0
P2
P2
P2
110
81
785
98.96
56.44
704.851
98.96
56.44
704.85
52O0
P1
550
491.161
491.16
52O0
P1/P2
2,897
3,050.531
3,050.53
Totals 1 9,9651 9,656.731 9,656.73
r+ 0 400 800
i
st 1 inch = 800 feet
1,600
� Feet �\1
N
Starker Mitigation Project
Figure
WATER & LAND"
Upper Catawba - 03050101
Proposed
Mitigation Map
SOLUTIONS9
Catawba County, NC
Map Projection:NAD_1983_State Plan e_N C_F I PS_3200_Feet
Date: 8/20/2021
Data sources - Stream and wetland data collected during preliminary assessment. Imagery data source: NCOneMap

F .•
Wr f ^
❑
S102 S-100
CP.t-Q'��� S100 �t0
-i • ,
vn ❑
S,1 OU
;1dEEEEP_r_*___ .
a S100 /
S101
Proposed Conservation
Easement
Water Quality Feature
'Y
—Stream Restoration
x Proposed Fencing
Q Parcel Boundary
- Rain Gauge
Flow Gauge
Crest Gauge
❑ Vegetation Plot
p;
❑ Photo Point
Cross -Section'','
0 400 800 1,600
— - -Riffle Folt
e: Cross Sections double Feet\1
s photo point locations.
1 inch = 800 feet N
Starker Mitigation Project
Figure
WATER & LAND M
Catawba - 03050101
Proposed
Monitoring Map
SOLUTIONS
Catawba County, NC
10
Map Projection:NAD_1983_State Plan e_N C_F I PS_3200_Feet
Date: 8/18/2021
Data sources - Stream and wetland data collected during preliminary assessment. Imagery data source: NCOneMap

s
a.�
Proposed Conservation
Easement
..'
Planting Zones
w t.' •' Alluvial Forest
Preservation
S103 ¢. -,' Mixed Mesic
�. •., — Proposed Stream
S102 Q Parcel Boundary
S100
7l"
\IV
f,r... 0 400 800 1,600
Feet �1
1 inch = 800 feet N
Starker Mitigation Project
Figure
WATER & LAND"
Catawba - 03050101
Planting
Plan Map
soLuTioNs
Catawba County, NC
11
Map Projection:NAD_1983_State Plan e_N C_F I PS_3200_Feet
Date: 8/18/2021
Data sources - Stream and wetland data collected during preliminary assessment. Imagery data source: NCOneMap

L

Appendix A- Design Plan Sheets
WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Starker Mitigation Site

}/
°®
=a
2§
_
/§§
/§LO
10
}e\
u
\
�)
u
:
\\
w
j20
(U
�
0
.
a
0
g
co 7 z
W
/
/
6
\
q
/
z
ON
a
z
\
a
\
\
/
k ZLo
\
):
/
_
»
/
/
.
\ / /
\\
q
/
_
-
2 ::
_
\
/
\
\ /\
/
ƒ
/
m
$
u
\ -
-,
\ L /
Ld
/ /
z \ a
m
ZM
S
�
�
_
}
-„
Ld
/
_
_
Ld g I I F,
1 0
7
-
_0
: u 0,
_
\
1 3 3 F O�J d
N O U VEA -LI
�3N&VIS:103FO�d)l
J

z.
Z z
O_
w (� zzr~
O W a �O�
w �
t O O �oz
m m
u , z w ��¢
i U );2
0
a p O
xoa
a o
w° x= xO awm oo°o°m0 mwo> uoz'zu
z� uZ oz wao`ung�]wtNnu'� aimaw°sod
Z u o ¢ Z O> F ?- O° u u Q °a O u Z F Z m L w Z
W ZLL °° as u$z zo°'°v,uaz ❑ww ¢�nU� ¢°oaa
U 0Z a� ❑w r-o '� a�n=-zw aao x❑;�3 ❑,ALL°= 0 4J O w
Z u 0 ° tt 0 O LL O O U m m❑ a Z W Z ¢ m¢ 2 U F Z Q N
W �u Zw z� �u �u°��=H o 2m F o z fx ,n m
Z' OR Zw, Z ° z ° x0I. ° ¢Zia ,� gw > p am
Zx gSma 3o o'�-LL 0 01Exox- �x uZm 'o30u °03 o U1 a�-
O W u > 0 2. u" u u z 0 0) w m LL F u In F F O Z u U ° F O Q 2 Z W
�z 0u °cu zz zLL=°v��m°z w Z w�aa 0d0m z U J W a m
W Qo° ouz o� oum wo 3°w¢°¢� m0 u mu aUn ° W W W' Qau
z Z¢ Z J U w w w Z w O u w Fx Z .i wj 0 ¢ °' m w° Z O Z J]
T. 0 y u u 3 j z � ta7 Fx- 2 w O 0(0, u m aW F w Z O a a F ni
a F u • O
Z ozu z�u ug �W o °a°0oo�zm Zoo o== oouwu a
O xk wzm m o m awm z 'Q <u OZ wm 5°°u'a u °° 0ua�u ../
F- o wo j �za F zz wu'x' o w3o°v, °'w° omo0 m om Z z°o
m Q o ¢z zu z wZ ° o Imr-LL=�m z 1- u o3°x
° z LL 2 ~ ~ 2 w Z = w o n Z W u a 0 u 0°° 3 i� u F ° o w aa' w w Z 0
iy Q o❑ w Z ° W ° o} z m m Z o Z F Z w 0 In U°§ - Q w Q F Q° LL
LL u u=a o m zo9 uo ° cZ'�� r- Inu8x-wua a�oo z�=z �m°F
F- z �w o w i z u �w- �o o w
X. u u u u wku'i w om awm o 33u Za m> 2a� ww ° 00t0
Z z u Z Z u j O w 0 U~ o U z p¢ n u 0 0 a Z o ° 0 z a O° O D 0= F o
O ° z o0, U o 0 F N a w J F° 0 m Z z V u F O F J a N Q O° u Y, u Q W u LLO LL W n iL
0 ?xm ° ° wF 0 wF LL000 w 'a6 wzx��uwo xoa� ��x 3 'z00�m0 �U
w ¢¢
J ❑ m Z0 Z Z Z 0 0 U7 z u ° m F W 61 O S F S w 2 F U a ~LL, m F I.
a 0 F R }z}
- cV u (� V In .i ❑ t0 r .i CO _ ¢ 0 Z ¢ 4 ¢ 0 LL O O ¢ 0 ❑ Q, F
Z Z
O 5
U
U U
F- m
K d
w4
�U
a
m
G
m z F�-
w a w w O co G
g U Q to
z z Q z u W g
w a O Ld
Z a' w Z o
w U o O o Z z 0 3 G' O a g
OU Z Z - w ° Q J >
LL Z, m F Z F z ¢' z F G z w
m F w Nz w w
F ? w
zw w ou
X z O O L, O z
aFJ x w w am w Q w W w af x a m H mm¢
uUF 0 u° t3 w zlu
Xpp ZQ0� CzOn
Lu
zu�!
,
LU
a 00 In a H O w
FF-J F Q N<
UW 2'FI z ` n
F—
Z 0 Q �W rW� Q� V/
W IT
fail JwI N ma
2 2 LL4. Q � F. 0 Lo
W Zw Q J an
O O O �w ~ iz�� JN ZOo a ?W F n c
Z Z Ili O W -j O C� Q Z �' 17 Z p
U > O n. ° j[� Fm ��Q� ? a 0 0
Y Y K W L/ ink ZJ20 W >W O
O O W � > !n ZW W-�W� mm 2LL�
:0,: 0:: 0 O U OQ W Q W QF ZW1~f)Z 0OWF GwY
W W w u O
W �in�O O O w Qg�N� uO WS �wa
z uO � °n°
U) to F W❑FinZ
Z Z Ul In F m F- O
co G O 0 0_ 0_ U U W Z LJ=U0SQtlo7
Z
U U Z zwWFw w -jG j a°Z
wU u F O > Q,I.U,O w 1A
w wz wzg
O O o'=u~i wwzw z� oz z
x L UO UO CD 0 u u Z co a In ¢ O z O'CoI ZQw aFF
U C7 K o: O O O O O O G o' m U U O_ U y Oy & a a
Q' U U J lU F- W fr O Q [i z~ W F N�
ID Z
I Quo �o WO Imo->m c,o
Q U4.J Yw°x ul Y h m
WAS �0' z UQ
F SSG C'2WW 00>
G FQm �F-Ind U 0=Q O N
u�a yi-H�d li3.�vdu�.rve�d�aa.2�aiis iiw 3v,viq s�nn an iorioa s�zo�z isdiia

L
Ow F-Urzo
UZ� a O�
=Wz ::) Z N
F �cyO W ❑��
W z W v n K
�
O F w O
O U W
a O
Y a m u 2 0 L, Ix 11 UOz
a w Fw o W F
3 Z 0 0 0 a z= Z
w a O
a ❑
O W 2 z 0 O 0 �.
❑' a~ z Q J a w
aw z ° g = zum
F mp(Du z m owaac� z o
Zwu �azQ ° xw awixz i 0'S Q a
r-0 =0wz w zmr.Uiw 'o La C7 P w
za z0 uJa
T.ga zoum W ° a 0�
2 F w a O > o ❑ 0 �Z a n�al
=Z Wmo w a 0w❑Qu L O aNd
m 0 w Z W❑m Z m z a O w = O Q �U14
za (9z ,o o ?smwa z U J W zjm
a Q 20 and 'dm a W IL X Qaw
zm 3 az ❑ xz zw0wo, a w
'❑ uw02 �z.Ji
uQ za F o° s m°T.
gym •
0Z ❑ Oo jg ou¢❑a a
o w z a z w¢ ¢ tJ7 Z �j Q o
z�aa❑Z 0U ow oa°iw
° z- pJ00m
zow'uw u❑�oz
Z Z F a a m 0❑ F Z W F 0
°w°z xu Qo oguuu
as Zawz ao zQ zzgu
z wuno w aw ¢owW
u w 0 o a J w F
u3 Q�ow uz o8 aazo0
�L.J z Noa gig ° inu°uww ~
U - U
zWWo❑WaW� ❑F�o ❑ ❑w 0J zw air x zz> w
Z 2 ¢ a W F Z a Z° o o \_ F a w o Q U
�J..J Ju000�aw �a u0 oaOW ❑ z w k z
>LLaa_3o❑ =Q0 >o au oQ�3.W,� z uaQ a.
'] ZOaa❑°ao za za w moLLw`Qa0 a w3 m °3.n
=maa a ozw oo °°a F�- u.V.-z w k� u$u O
V ua a z aw LL''o u'w zam r-m° �Z 10 F-0
LLJaF°amm�o >z qua w� 3 W❑°=a ° U
LL J�O� 000 W 0u zZ z❑'Q03 ¢ Oa maF- F' m
z wmax3�0w uw Dm-u oUz aazxzz u ua w oo�
�n2omza o°m oo�n zw zz=zaam w o� uuo w d
Q mOJauz w❑m JWu uz °=UaO�a z om 0zz Y4
~ mmoEz��mu °`zoo z0° ou m°awam, o Q° z uwm ¢U
] a0o�z0
�w �oz m u g w gzxox w ou = u�zm u
T.
r-W3umZ `fix wuiam J 2 °'nowJm
a°zzg3Z z��u zw 0E x mazzo=a❑ au z z¢ux
Z Z O g O~° F u a U U a (a7 O Q O~ F Z g 0 O m O W Q o° OU a= 2 z
z F�0oouQQ >moz a°o Qoo � wmLLmQo° J as o oOWZ
Q z zW Oz3 ww °ww-a wo u wFw w Jzwa °z a ❑= zm
U o o aoOJao. uLLa� u❑a awLL mzmuuw�. o z0 �Wzz
w m ooQoozg mmow m Q J�z ° 0 Q°wwz>w° ° ozu a m?wm 0
u wwz,u�azmw 5wzx Jwa r2-a = JazFFLL❑u 0 z❑ o==u Z
° aooz0 zY0 w 3 uwa a z w azaowz u❑ zo u =LLo° Q z o
a m F m 0 z a� 0 � 0 F 0 w Z 3° F tt tt tt° z w 2 w a w¢= a ~ O
a Juoo a z aJo 0 o ou zoJo a o-
° z°aFFoz03 oo o ohm zou z aamazm w 0 xQ �z Oopo w �
w w�uaawuau w❑w �wz J oaoaoo w u° oo �aoo ❑ mo
❑. m a 0 a a w w O Z z ° w F m F o �'" °�M000,0om W Q D I a F KZ
N�u0o x'm `Q �i¢�a �r❑o �n zu � hma0a ro oi�o -0 °dm a LU o�
LLz a= wQ awz oo°o .J,u° °mo ma'04 uoz'zw a H O xW
Za oZ oZ Wmow ,anw 'z'oJ°o aj-❑'a a Q N<
I z0 Jg uW3u w. mx <z o oo ¢�o m m x z
am°�a
wZ as aZ¢ 2¢>¢F Faaou¢U¢u �zz Oa(n2 UzaaF' Y
z LL Q O Q a 0 2 z 0 d' F w z F F Q F a a° a
°o o¢`Q zz "o zzuu'zou ¢a❑ z°mow o0W❑2
uu ar-w am aJ❑ 0 0Ba000 wwo amwz aaQQ❑
aw zW m° IOW YF°mUwmm S Z°_ �JZm
F m Z U a 2 J m 0 m F O a
'z .0 zmd go aoa o ounWo=,Wa Yzw you o0 3z
0az 3 r p ouE U mzwcov�mw oN °0 _um =
UWg 30 =< mz° o zwo Wwaw umuz m�w wuaa F➢N
z m0I 00 HhomzWo zLL a n
wao zzo zw� zOw wLLu=�az Q mz'o JWOm zuom
a 0 z 0 Z a z0z .Ji U w m w m° 0 o 2 W= z J O° _ w u z w w z jai. >
Wi=O z 0 3a Im 00 nu uIE'Z I Q g J ° W a 0° °a
Y 2 j j z o 0 = F- 0 ~ O O m W F w Z ❑ m R a F N° F a z a W Y
z UJm z a ug wam ozO°"mzw N oo zzWa mezzo a
°0`Q m 0 w m - xa ° awz°OWc�m P,oz Iw Oo
m 0 CW.Ji ❑ W Ww Z ❑3U zmwx SFu¢ o za w a-pU
o az< �za w zz azww o ��a'oPw=o -0uoQ w aw Izu� wW
mjLL z zo z wz wWao 0 Ja0 ax m z umw0 zzm❑W m W
° zLL$ u °_ w z= o>zz m uamuo°w a;�ur2- oozwwaZo o zz
m F°z z O w ° 00 zmWZ o o FOQWoao wu°� oaw awa° wzL
u m_a z m 0m❑ uz oWzz_ F m=uoFF>z r-Wmz zw0 >�o�n 0ozz
z �m F 0 ZO�n m ° Wi z. u I Jew- �0� 0.r 0
m o-o m u wua a m zW=� z 0T 3 wz]m owzs w000 °Y��w
JZa a j0� Q w0 u o U EQ `� FZ z z o m =t7 m J Z Z�' OLL U Z a u1F F
o-z z w m 0W > z o.wwooaWQ °oz> ow0J� aouz� asz
o Quo 0 0 aw W uQ =oam u ¢gam x= o ko❑m u umz Q>
o °u u LL - 0 1zam z jad-. u°'omaz-,j���il� aj(7zz zw'a-z XUX°0wd `n°m
Z F F F F O m U F o U W o W W j ° o°> u w Q -° m U W
am m m maz o mQ oo a_ wz=WWUao zoaw O z Z Z Z Z U lA Z U ] O w Q W 61 0 'J F a m m 2 F J U U w F m Q a ❑ 2
- N0 (� d' In OO t0 1�0 COZQ� m z Q Q0a Q mQ� 0 LLOO Qo0 OZ N
N» a I-H�d li3nuvi�� .rve�d�aa.2�3iis ii W 3Nlie?5 SIN 9a I ofioa GiZo�Z i6d4 i8

O
wN Jz
0
w
z J
O
�
� ti
o0
w� `
�w ti
u)a
ti
w m
.
M
d
O
OKO
�'OO
a o
$
o
to z
W - z
U U
z I
MM
z
W I In I
°�—ZQ
I I
o3N
�nm
a _
p
U S
t7
O
�
(J] ¢�-
w �
r zw
W a'
�wax Z��
m Q J
a W
a
u I � I F
3rvvvMM
I� I�
M
3N
I�
O
°
a�
i
3
m
u
i`
Z `C
o �
C z
lZ
n
N
O
G
Z Z
z
a0
I-
o
F mm
� \
�
w d
a
o.
�u
U F
E �
Ln
m
} F
a
N
T
r
V
I
66
Q 7
z
J I I
I I
3
�z
Z uwi U
a w�
Z N I w
= Ox
m
0
w w J o2
I co
w ILL W I�
a
S
�N
m a J
o I a
a U
I a
m
-
m
w II
y
m
m
en
c
F
a -
a„
c�
a w
I
""
ww
a
a
r
s I
z z
z
z
a
z w
U) U)
U)
U
w
w
0 0
0
0
z
O
z
z
00
��a��
o 00
z
wzg
F
t
EOD
m w
OD
O m
w
rY
Ozz
0
0
�'¢mrnam
aaa
F
O O
O
O
F
zz
rn
U)
°O
F
n
m
F
Un Un
in
in
via _o Hid �3.wd���.�d,d�aa,��a��s ��w 3N„e.�s s�M 9�lonoa �izo'z�sdiFa
M
N
�
N
V
03�
a
M
3�
N
O
v
a
m
n
o
a
Q
N
Z
Z
s
Z
N
�
�
O
O
K
V
0
0
F
F LL
w � N
3�
a
T
a
Q
N Y
m
0 3
N
�
O
a
i
m
N Y
'O Q
O
M
m
m m�
O
N
c
Oo
m
L
V O
T
N
(7
ZZZZ
Z
�Z
rn
O
O O
O�
U
o
w
U
E
w
0 0
0
m m
m w
0 0
0>
W o
0 0
0 0
�'
¢ ¢
¢ m
rn z
z m
m Un
Un Un
Un Un
Oo a
o
O O
O O
O
zzzz
Orn
0 0
0 0
O
o

w
J
w
w
rr
W
F-
U
F-
Z
0
U
a w a w
El
IFW
� m
w � z
L ke F
r
a w
J
r
_l
pk� a
Jew
Q
JF
z ° 1
�
J
s�
zQ�
Na
Z
j �UiQ�wul
N .wwzw LL=
a�
-
a
U
� m
�
ww
o w <»
w _
lE
y-gWNk
U� -
vW
Kw
10
tta
mZ
a
m
a
m
°
p
LL
`k III
i O
m
u
w
a
�
IN
Ld
°a
¢ Q
a p
U
Ld
O F
u
F ` a W
Mo�� z
atq
O o b a
U o
a
°o
z
F
z
O
0 F
U
w J
w
Ld pruz
_
G
a
a
°=o�w w�
U
°yz�_F
❑
Wmaa�FmLL
V�vs
-
fE -
ur
r�J
_
U
>LL
g
aIr
Ll°gwLL
lob Oa
w F w
Z a n�
YY O a
L
W CL X Q�w
W
rn
o
u
U
w
dU
dz
a.
Z Z
0
a
U
F- m
K d
W 4
� U
Ln
7

O
x
w N Ln
z
w Q
-
U p Ld
j J
O
_
U�
J
i! a
O�
F�
wz
J
W
W
Z
U)
O
x
U
Y
U
a
rr
�M
I �u_
Ott
J W
°Fp
i4
LO
J
z
a
F
w
G
_ J
a
z
O
J
LL
<
=J
<�
W
w
a
rc av=LLQ�
Q JO
F F w02>�=zoiJ NJY
Q
ww zz
wF
zzGc o
z
�5,
�3
Fy
°NaF��z - -
-
U
> oL�ppJa<aw_w wrc2
-_ wz izzZyw
IJ-NF
a
nzz���i�3Q�,a
6
QF
LL
UN LL
O LL aO 6v!F
m
O
4
z
z
_Li
g
z
o
w
Q O
Z
1, " IID
w
0..
a J I m
O Z
w
F- O
��
z -
� 0
4�F
6
Wd
Q
],
U7
ra LL
_
vN
j
z
v
4
J�
J
z
m �
w2
w3
Q
OS
- a
J za.
W W J
2
w0
'KW
w
I
I
V1
z
I�
it
V
I I
w
zZ
W�F
J wQSJ
>a w J
uz°z,a�
5<s a,F
m
e
JJ
Y
>
2
dwY
w�
rc ej
cJ
WF-ao nJ
Q
"'
OZawZ g>O
W
W w
a]
Lzk>u
O
z z
QUJQ
1y
>
> Z
�5
n
aO �Ww W,J u)
B U
FUU
z z
ZZ
t
�FaJy w,aa
dU(D
a
w
�==NS�z JaZ
¢
(TIFF
a a
�,�Tca jwF
C� O
w
a¢cw�6
F
I� a
B
J
w� - z��i w z �
O
-

O
Z z
wN � zJo
_ � z
�OU
H
r- Ld �oz w ❑0O
C F N
w U W�O
a QUO
z
a.
� LL
cc
G O O
Q _
,G1 z Z o
- F- a
vv�AII�vnA � -- F 0 � z � aNd
O Q ��y azw
aQu
WJJ
U �' a
0 J H
\14\1\\\I\ cLo
U /
I��v4
F-
c U
LLJ
1 Oo Oo° a Z
(D o Z
Z
o � O
W F O
Z o Q U
0 z p wa
¢aw FW-
U) m U~7
0
TANGENT LINE � i � O
lz
TO fOP O.-B4NK - � J i i z
j�
j -
w
ma. N a LU OS
n
I�
F L
a �
> G
a
aWr
a
a
a
a m m
Z
W w w
a
> z a a
Z Z
N L5
�
goo
�
- aaa U U l7
w==
❑s>
0 0
nm
O - �
via ��o Hie lia.vdu�.�d�e�aa.��aJis Jiw aNneJs sTnn 9�lonoa �iz'o�zisdiia
J�
�j
z�
x
wU
m
Z
zz
w cam
rc
~
IJ
JJ
z m
�F¢°z_J
rcwJrcF
d
W
Z
z LL
-
¢W
or az
Q
w J=w
a a
�
2
J � Q
j
uJ0 aS
O
Ox
o �
wz
g
°4N
J k
U
W
J�J
a
¢
w
i��

O
Z
w Ln
k
Z_Jo
2
U r
Z
0.
K
H
#
F W 1�1.''
_ J
❑O�
U
W �
m — ❑
_
W U%�K
W;o
�O ZO
z
_
N
z
lob Qa
m
o W C7 F m
F Q F
T
O Z
O
w
a
U J W aZ�
u
z
z
a W CL X Z w
am
mF
a
a WUJ
d
Wrc
-
Zp
a
w
a
J>
U
Q
nz
a w
1m
a
3
a
a
_
W
Z
_
_
F
1
U
-
O
O
az
®
O
O
w
Z
r
�d
m
w�
co-
LL
0
y
a`ow' wo
°
K d
u Fo
LL
W
y d
U
ul
Q
U7
IL
a
J
-
O
cl
SZ
U
a KZ
O
LU J S
O
m
NQ
a � X61
F L
a \
C] o
J
0
W
J
2
d w
a
Y
z
a
a
m
m
z �
W w
m
�
w
�
w
U

G
z
/
\
/
/
IN
\
0
/
0
u
z:©
Q\\
\
02=
LL >
\
<:12
, .
\\
a.
2oz
3 < 0 J
Lao § :
1 «
/
: m —
0 ( ) / \}
:04�:„
},
; U u m
:uILxz,
/
-
}
j
/
-
§\\}
LL
lo
\
})
\\\}

�
p�m�w�a�az�Z
=Fog`--r'a.mF aj
Ow
yo
�
O�
O
z
of
w
U
W7
ouzFw
-a�a>w�°rw
u,�wz�
O
z p z
w N UJ z_ o
_ Z
t z �Nz
0
r Ld w ❑ o
� F N o
d
w Ww
O �wI
° p o
boa
a o
z
2 pa
o W C7 P W
Ul Z o n m
S O
U J W azw
WILxZ.z
a
2 �JJ
Q W
W Q
2
a
w"
Wrz
U) Nrazz \/�\ U
(D -pzk z
°LLJ
O \ C z
z o?oLLL� a.
O,��� - vv� z z
0
z
O /
V a ay s\ Wd
�sxY
❑ ll
U) V a}: v DV m
❑
w /� �w
M�NNb'l a'✓13 Ja LL=��D Z QJ / W
J i
d O
0 �LL.FLL > �a /\ OF d a
O LLZJLL /%' w o
a ti
p /� ❑ mp
Cz
Li x
- °_ z /� � LJJ J w0
x-
O
/
/
�>x W
dZ W
b41b1 yry'uJr / J U j Z W
JN3'
� - 5 5
°�zaN W z z z
Como a O z z
F O O
MOb ¢
U U l7
(ll F F
W - -
❑ 2 z
0 0
h m
O - °
Z
vim°°moo Hid lia,�°bu�.rve�d�aa. °�aiis iiw 3vliviq s�nn an iorioa s�zo�z isdiia

\
Z` �
\\\
R
§
)
\
\
\ `
\ ��
�\
``
LL—
\
}:(
«
/
o
a. ,
/
<
_
.. 3 < § J
<
: L o § :
_Ln:
x z Q «:
° m z w =(<
`
`
}
( / j ]fL :JI
IL
}
\
\� /�\
,§�
,§Z.
!:\
} }\
§ :;
}
}\
\/
%
_
z,
(\
/
e
/)
\ /
<
cn
j
>
/
} \
\} \
\
©: 2
\:
}
o
9
\
x
/
\
{\\�
\
_
}
.
\
\
j k /
( /
051 \\
\
}}
\. \
\}(
)
/
\
\\
( ?~�__
\\
\\
\\\\
\
�
\ \\>\\
w

z
Z
z
zz0
�O.
r
LLl
❑2O u
w �
�
w
N F O
LLJ
a
Q O
�Oo
�LLm
2 pa
o La P
Z
=
UFl a n m
I N
° >-Zpa_
Z h mNa
os o
zU�wzz
°
m W IL W
° w
Q�z
J
a
W O
a
T Lil—
wxz
w
g
J
01
¢ �
wLLJ
o
T T
o
C
a.
S
z
ZZ
Z
U
J
¢
C� W
b o�
a
o
J)
w
o
O
F
U
_
�
F
z
wa
Y
U
d
W
J
w
'a
W
u
F
ww HIas
O 0
w
U~7
�
>-
-
U
J
�o
�C), oLi
o
Li
>
�Do
wIw
°
w
Z
/ Or
It
/�\ W
iJ
OZ
O � YU
\/\In
O
ttV
WW 1Z0
,
W LU J O
d XW
//\
za gz
-
o °c
w"xxsu
°a='
r n
aWr
3O=-wz-YO�s=
w�p ���zzwp
a
�mm
bN�vFONu�
IE
Z��
W
W
¢Q�?rcOW4
IL
W
z
O
Z
z
"a"jarca'�z
z w
w QN,j Taw
w
a
z °z
00
z
a
U
Ul'7
l7
y �'w`"rLLia
-
mFF
-
¢¢aN ¢fp
wQ�z¢ZQ�J
w -
❑si
00
-w -a�Ott
wFw
z
�zi�����w
z_.umaw�r .n
��a H�o Hid �3.�vdu�.�d�d�°a.
��aiis
iiw 3Nliv�s s�nn
a�.iorioa Gizo�zisdiia
w
�n
W
U

\ \ 22j
/ ) }\\
0 v
\ ( Q� }
LL
>
U�F`
\
}e«
: y =
z �
` \ ..2ob0
) ' a ) (o § :
0()/%}
0 :0
[/} ;Uums,
u :u=±/:§
U
( -
lz
/
\�
\( :\
\
LLJ
u ` y/
j _ _} }%
§
\ +^ `_ \/
( ®x { :g` \ \
( �® `^�� ` }\
\ ® ° /
0 'x
j ~'x
/ ~'x
/
�d
II y ( \ 2 {
\ U u } / G
O §
} /
Nj z{ / -
-- : 0 `
} \ ` I -
}j}}\\\} ` \\\\\
\_}�}}\}\ \\\\
}}{\\\{ a«
\j\

\
Z` �
/
) }\\
2
2 c/j
c
U�F`
r /23
LL >
0\
}`2
.. 3 < § J
-
: L o § :
§
: x z Q «:
/ §
-
u
; U m
a \
(
\\
\
<
0
^ ,
\ \
/
:
a
u
LLJ
)/
CZ
2j
:
/LLJ
,2
}/
>/
/
\
}/
Ld
-
�
/
/ \
-co
\ 2 (
_
( / O /
\
\
oo
/ }
-
[(\}
/
/
\
_
\\\\\
: j
\\M
~
�\\
}
--

z
Z r z
w cJv Ln ° ZJo
_ z
�OU
H
Ld =i a w ❑2O
W U
C w _ F N O
ao _ J Ww
O �W�
t d Oho
t oo
z a o
_ o
o w
p�, 0 cn
° pa
o F O F w
>' �YY am-
w O L aNd-
�, w o z U J W zzm
- ao ❑ W IL X �z
Qa
- ¢ BUJ
1 _
4
4 -
q - ¢1
Q ° O
W W N
- >
0 S - p
NLn
x c c J o =,j w
r - � LL
c b
IL
O HZN39 wo 'mow` w 0 F U
x W W
IU
1 ° > O z
a.
F LL N O z
F - g U z a�
O
d2 � ❑ z`^ � m
W Dr W d
O �U
D
O w cn
as
Ja a w w ]
UI m v u
p
Ln
W
� 4
nno]e z
❑ � � m�
-Z
w w a�
_ m a IJJJ
c
I�
s J
m ¢ -
usoU ❑„
Wj Z a o
'
Ld
rI �Q a w Y
a
yQ r] a
o Faw
]mFo a m m
x z��
z = w w
? EL z
a o zz
Lo
Ij
�5
°cc J W z a a
wa a o z z
F � �
Lu
wi°�w a F F
w ¢ a a
mJ U U
-oai w F F
w wwtw ❑ i
o�LLa n m
Zzw
a
4
W C F= tt
°w
�
.i_
Fu
❑i.0pw � �a
U
_ aww Q2
c� wmwa wa
'�
a
�- m Ja_Fumz3z=Fw
10,

/
z`0
_ $5G
\ \)\
/
r 6\ /3
>
}`2
.. 3 < 0 J
, Lao § :
» \ 2 )
o (
) / \}
: 0 :„
4
; U u m
IL
X2�u
(Ld
co
%
\/
T/
/
UD0
I
�/
/
\
ƒ
2
}
G
U
D
3
R
3
�
: / \
C.TN ;.It ;.Tt
\ 2 (
.
( / O /
k
3 ;
�
)
/
/n
\\\
M.
`
\
i�
//�,:
„
=;2=;=;2l=;;e;;;;
/�«m%Pm4wgm;n:mm
i�
)\
„
:-
\�m«EmmmmGmRRrm&m
i�
)\
"
: „
:I_,_;,_;;

Z<
/:J
/
_ $0.
/
36
r />
LL
\
}`2
2
: :Rama=r
: ;::m :
:moo §:
) \(
) @!4G§G\
) !(!$ ) ((
)
-
§\ 2 )
-
-
- -
: x z Q «:
/ § )
-
; U u m
{ )\j}}
:u IL ±/:§
TITM
_
7 ,
7 ,
-- 7 ,
§
\ j)�,:
\ j)
))\\\\\\\\\\\\\\_
„ :�
) 1.9
)
(\((((\(
) \\4 )\\((
) 222ggq
- -
- -
%
\/
T/
\,_
vt
§/
\\\z/
\
\\ ))
:
))\)/)
\\
®
/))
/I
U #
s
3
R
Im
\eco
\
p
/ \
:
/ k Q >
\ (
co
_2
( O /
k
3 ;
�
�kaaaaaa\\
..�..�
]. ]. ]. ].
].�].�
T.�
[.�].�
].�].�
].�].�
].�].�
T.�
].�].�
].�].�
].�].�
].�T.�
].�
].�].�
].�].�
].�].�
T.�
].�].�
)
/
/\
\\\\
.�
.�
.�
.�
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
9 9
\�m%mmm&m77wlRmn;mmGmRmmmm««R::mvmR«ppmRmPP!
«(::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
<kwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww
))�,:
„e2l,a;e;;;m&;me:R:3Gm:mm;;g

z
Z
z
Or
w m
L
zz
N
W
O.
t
z �Nz
r
a
❑�O
u
a
w
ol -
r N o
W�
a
608
mmNaaa
wF6�08
WmmNaaa
v v
v
w0
wm`maaaa
6�
o�
cw0

Z`�
/
_ $0.
m
\ \)\
/
r />
36
Et>,
Ia. ` 2
.. 3 < § J
, L § :
o
; U u m
X\�\
(�
%
:(
\\
%
<
\}
�
®
/
I
>
/
Ln
U
s
3
R
2
�
: / \
/ k Q >
\ 2 (
( / /
k
3 ;
z o 6rmr-pr (ci 6 qi (cirr :mm 6 C6 C6 m�m 4 4 6rp Corp cq-: 6 cq m
z
/
/\
�\}}
�
\
»
,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
)j}\\))\
�\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
\
:
\
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

)
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww
/
y\§§§§§§2\\\\\§%%2\\\±±\%%
\
:
,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
B;;@m»germ;el+eey;r;Gle;>;:;
\%%\\\$$§kk§§%%§§§$$%§§$$$%%

Z`�
/
_ $0.
/
36
r />
Et>,
Ia. ` 2
z
co
.. 3 < § J
, L o § :
15,
: x z Q «:
/ § ) % :\{
-
; U u m
\„
:u=±/:§
/ „ m m m
<
o
LLJ
T/
/
\\
\/
/
}/
®
I
>/
2C) „
/
/
)
U
s
3
R
-
7::2z=
$
\
2
( /
k
0 m.
3 ;
,
\;!!!:
\
\\\
: \\\\\\\ \
\
u \\\\\ m
�I
)\\
\
:
,\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
\
:
~]jj/)))jjj\\\\jj)}j\)}j}\jj
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
�\\\\\/\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
\
m:
,\\\\\\\\\\
\\\\\\\\\\

a
y\\\\\\\\\\
\\\\\\\\\\
£K\\\\\\\((\((4
(
:
y\§)\\\\((\\\\\\
71-1,71,TT"
/)�,:
„:�=,

/
Z`�
_ $0.
/
36
r />
Et>,
Ia. ` 2
.. 3 < 0 J
, L o § :
( )
: 0 / \}
4 U)
; U u m
(Ld\�\
Hill
%
}\
:(
\\
%
�
<
\}
�
®
I
>/
/
U
s
3
R
2
: / \
co
\ 2 (
( / /
k
3 ;
/
\
\
�
(
)
.
. .
. .
. .
.
.
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
.
\
\
�R �R
�R �R
�R �R
�R �'R
�,RfRff
�R �R
�R �R
\
r
�}}
�0zz
)\
":
„
,=
�\§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§
)\
"
: „
:-=,=;2=;=;2

/
0.�`�
_ $
\ \)\
/
36
r />
\
Ia.`2
.. 3 < § J
: L o § :
» \ 2
o «:
; U u m
«
:u=±/:§
�2.6
\ /�
%
\/
T/
/
\\\
\\
~
<
�
\\\
\�
®
I
>/
\^`
/
Ln
U
°
,{ww
g
3
R
2
ase
e
` \
-
0 r
\ 2 {
)
is

/:J
/
_ $0.
/
36
r />
Et>,
Ia. ` 2
.. 3 < 0 J
: L o § :
( )
/ \}
: 0 :„
4
; U u m
ILxz\'
/u
17
Ej
Ej
\
� \
%
2)\
2\\\\
2)
LLJ
}\
:(
\\
%
\\
\\
\/
® \}
\}\\\\
\}CD
I
/
/
:
3
R
------------------
¥\::
¥\::::
¥\:
�_®
: / \
a
a
a
/
w r{::
r{aaaa
r{:
( /
�
\
�
f
9
9
§
/f/
co/)�,:,
/ /)�
0j\\

Z`�
/
_ $0.
m
\ \)\
/
r />
36
LL
\
}`2
.. 3 < § J
, LLJ o § :
» \ 2
( )
/ \}
; U u m
IL
X,\
(Ld
%
2
/
O
/%
%
^
%
�)
2
2
®
}}
>/
Z
O
/
z
%
/WE
2
G
2
6
:
>o
2
K
_m
` \
EE
\ 2 (
_
_
\
( /
k 3 ;
o
/
o
z
0
0 z
z
2
)
2
f
\
!
{
{
\
\
�
�
�
;�_

N
NAP
IMMEMEMEN
0
v
z
0
(D z
zza
Qw� r
Paz
❑�O
UJJ¢
0
Lyww
2>�
Co�
�a
W o
u
U
W
d�
oz
Z Z
0
ao
U U
F d
m
LLJ
K d
� U
a
co

(D z
zza
Qw�
r
Paz
❑a0
�u
U7J¢
O
Ld w
2�7�
Cho
xQO
o
�za�N
O Lf) �U#
LAl 4 z W
Wf].QCz�z
Q W
W
O

a
Z
w� �W
Z T aM
# 0 P� nGi LLB.
a. J
� O Q
d O u
U)
O
O
�3HS �N77H�ybw
L�
z
U)
In
0
u
0
W
m
0
L�
0
z
0
0
a
O
aD
O
M
0
O
M
0
0
0
0
0
N
0
0
N
(D z
zza
Qw�
r
❑�oaz
O
UJJ¢
O
Ld w
ooll
ll
c
CL o
u
u
w
d0
oz
Z Z
0
a0
uu
FQ
m
�a
LLJu
a
co
�o
od
W J
�0

MATCH LINE SHEET., 7
Ed I I IEd I I IE0
0
ro
v
0
O
V
0
0
v
(D z
zza
Qw�
r
Paz
❑�O
UJJ¢
0
Ld w
2>�
cao
a. o
�+c9Fw
�Z<
Z �Na
O U7 \
V LLr Z.
Qa
W
O
'r
w
d�
oz
n�
Zz
0
ao
UU
�d
m
LLj
�d
a
co

a
Z
w° �L
d
#� J0 g
NI-
Ili,
w a w
oa d
o U
o
0
1 Z 133HS 3NJ-IHO-LVN
/
J l l
/ f
g0o
CE
Z
oo /
69
/ I %
61 .133HS 3Nl�,yJ
OOiI I �I I W
0
0
0
O
N
0
0
N
0
O
N
0
w
K
(3 z
zza
�oz
Qw�
Paz
❑�O
U)
0
Ld
2>�
C�
xao
. o
u
u
w
dU
U z
0 Y
Z FZ
0
U
UU
�d
m
�d
wd
�U
a
GO

z�
r gaa
� 11� A�l11�11��1JI i � ��)1110
1»1�1���\1��1 /
I � / �1IIl1i 111 mllh�����
� ��o111s1(
71
� � I I I��Il�yl�l� �I�11�111111��II1
� � � I� �111SI� I��Iallllll�Ill
� I � ��e{�(� 101 I111111 111
e Jf1
o �
Ill
l
o I 11���i111�1)/ J1I11>>I1(
l I I II II � i6a I��r 11 I
)Ill �1J�I1�r
c�
z
0
1
U
0
J
W
Cl
0
a
0
In
0
0
m
rol I ml I m
O
V
0
O
V
a
w
K
cD z
zza
Qw� r
Paz
❑�O
U7J¢
O
Ld w
2�7�
c
CL o
�O
od
W J
�0

J
o b 9
_
X�l
w
�
o
F
l LL\ O
!e
x o \
CD
\ O +
O
�o
CD
r �
H
y
i
o
0
+
u
U
w
dU
oz
n
zz
0
ao
UU
m
LLJ
K d
� U
Q
co

W N
Ld
r
ZJC)
J
c'J
V-
w
Q
�
z
Paz
U
I
I
U
w
cnp¢
d
O
a
Xw-
QUO
mpz
� a
a
o�c�Fw
m m
z
N Z D aNd
F OJ�
�NLly.J
//QZN
W W ]�z
LL
C] aaW
W � Q
a
F
U
w
�U
O�z
a
zz
OD
O
UU
�m
0
0
0
LQ
Y `C
U
F
0
0
0
0
0
0
t
ZLO
Q � o
a�y Ood
�Z
a LU p=
a xw
�J
a
m
a
�a
a
a w
a
a
Y
a
a m
z �
w w
m
�
Z
O
Z
a
a
Z
w
tt
z
J z
F O
z
O
aFF
O
O
O
U F
O
W
a0
a0
a0
a0
O
O
0
r
0
�
O
O
m
O
rF
Z

6Z 133HS 3NI1HD1b'W
0
N
il)ui}yOI(\vv�}���AyVVA���AA vVA��vA V�i� 3 vA ( Av 1 y
�\\�y\\\\\t��
����6\�VAS\11V111�)ly)}il
JA"\\
Ilil44i)ll?1 /N4"�
�)J i!�l?>��
1)rr%�I)�I�llv�»�I11 11�s1w��yw������������' (fir I 1 sl}S�
11J11(!1/(1{)I(?h1\����O
\1 VA VAA�V J
111��
) >11
(( �lill�lyl1111\JIJ11ll�I<<V 1l((l\y?�� � �/A
Jl, � /�lillllll/S((I �l � y111111 i �lz�lVA�n f L
L z
o °
Q
ul
:2as0o
LLI0Fw
k—za�N
r z �
O z O
U Lt! azw
W0.fYZOw
r> .1 Qa
w
m
o

w N )�Lti �/
\o
Ld
U�Fwl
o U a
U)
��' � � `-r•'J �// lr�-iJ r/%/, i ��-�� it
\ as k
� '�•-,.,� I% � ; %Gj(� �������� �'��� �iJ �`'F,�J�i j/%/��JJ% �j% r/r�,`J ! o
v
\Z
�0\
VA1\,\VA\t/irl'�
1 OJ �\tA�\\
Rt�/�
AWx
\4 i
��hllll�j�llf�ll
l�dlllq}s�11 �� Ld
{l 1 <(C �i/�1d z.
C {tJ
\\� A\1 V` l �✓ ����� tip\ �1��111�11�I�IIl�J�11
�� 1�\,l 1 \I � �t���\`\V\V� jl1 ° y
(LV Q�t \�lJ ? ��
�1\L � 1i 1 �A\\V1 LewvU A�����w
��� .�\l�� w o
v� v \ J ���J �a� . w w
�l)Si» >��S a
\I�1�1��`�� 1llll I�11111�1�!(��l `�
\�IIAVCZ l 1
y M v l' 1 Sri 1) Ash
11 11O�IIII II 1111jlllllf (t!r
VA I hilts�11 V
�
III lillll� 11i1 ��AwA���II��1�1��A�A } III1}I�
}ll II illl �ll11111111��1iV/\�A \.~llll(I�'�� \ \�A A �V
\v�A�A
�l III II Ifl �l lilhil�l\//� VJ loll II(r� ;A\i
/rF
qt�1Vll�t«�� 1s s
A1
�ill�VAVVA\\V�V�VA\}\�I \\lli'Jw �lli��c�2� oJ��111�JJ.
\VAV/�/� �1111}Aill\II�AV of/J//����
6��tC��iii/��1 z
)�I11\I,111111\I,�\Z\���, 1 11\�11'`II1�111f11�1/% jlr'��� Tl\",r`��
8Z 133HS 3NI1HD1f1W
�Jz
0
Zz�
�pz
O
(nay
O
LLJ w w
a>�
pro
�oz
a o
2aso�
LL,(7Fw
Q
Z p
OZO��
U LLr az.
w a a ?Ow
r> .1 Qa
w
o
u
U
w
dU
U z
Z Z
0
ao
UU
�Q
m
LLj
K d
�u
a
m

Z
w O
N ~ z
r LLI 11 I E 1HHHS HNI"1H31tlN ��� ° ❑�o
o " ❑J—�� �( i 1 �� J/vim '1 �� �I�ti�'22 1 ���� 1 w o
y - �1� 1 hi t �f \�^� "� � V\�� iV\111 l� \ ¢ w w�
vA �r/ lz�� r'�� \111� 1Q�1111{\1A w�
�11�tz oa°
��l�l(J)�I=
N1111 �IJllll
/ 7 , o
!/lA) o � F
�
p a m
w �,� A�J1\JI1)1 i1r 1113i ll�llJ�llf�Ilf�I111J)�I1�1114��1\ �)b))�7i1�)((l�� 11l��f111� I(i1�Jp�llII(I�?II(V�1(I�1I(��r �i ��tirl
O�
(NMOUNT,
rill llll. 1flIr�111IN l �1 —` Q w
1
11,1111111I III( �l�iNlll)Illp,lllll/j/��.I W
llllillij;llll
�� � 1 � l/�fl/�l ��Jll1Jt�(`ll� li 51' ((1 I II � h��pll(Il�•�yt ---
1
I(sly �fl ql(1f�J1111111��l ' rl�'JJll�lflf���till 1111>� / i�
`o_
( r/�l/I/./jl//1�/r�ii�ii��i� 'r�r/AJ�/IJIIt)111�11>!1l(�l l 1'�11'))>j1)A}\1111J111111�IIllllti � ���_
� r r r/l I llI%11 r///rii�i`iii, __�� i�r��ir� f 111 JJ' �)ifl II11�Iflrrjrrjlllllli'lll'`I�I IIIN 1 \� ((
ryz
E s��/
��glfll�i/l�l
r 11 lyilJl
l �I( JVYJ K\N A
as
u
�v(g
WIT' ��yArIr!4
/'jJl I wY aQ 86
�yI Ill r/Js z
LO
��fv1C�l,Jv���tII!\tv f F `� /1J11111II(IIIIj���/ Q Z
;�vv��,y��vvv1�Ill�fr I � ���°��
�vvv��v�tyllJ�lf+lllll;r/( C,,-
�1v�vv'
1�`i111�11 ( Q oC D
1111i11I 111 111l 1 �l t(< °' uj ox
�)lfl�l��Jl�II��
1111-h11t
.`l
v`JJ`'llS�1't1111111V1\\.
`• (S 11 � ti� ��\ �� i O1(�I I I �f (f(�li//r. j) rr��f
\�1\t1 J'I��%IJII(\��11�'1 \�lll��l)�Illillilllh ii�JJlJl(/f�li' °� a

Z z. z
w O o zz�
r ❑Vo
w ° U)"
o W a w w�°
H i o U a>�
a ��r
o a 0.0
o adoo o� a
Z
�as0�
o�c�Qw
z m
r z -
o U) I- ^
U) aNd
r O �LLr Iz.
Ta/ _
//j i`� ✓�� a W J
�= a
# .
p�// //���/j/
a z
LU
OE 133HS 3NI1HUIVN w o
a;
'moo
W
O U U ¢
IL u7 a
a � uj www
co o z
> z a a
o z z
'oo
a � F
¢ ¢ a
UU t7
m r r
Q � �
a
0 0
I� m
oul^ N
Z
H�a la Hid li3.udi��.rvd�d\dO.'J\3tiSLW 3Nev15 SlN 9c IOfIOd SI ZOZ/6� 4/8

O
Z Z
w" O
N Z
w � I££ 133HS 3NI1H3lb'W
#� Oz� \ \
w LdO tZ'z �lvtl\yv�Av/� ✓/// } 1V/�\\�yi1C�}1f� }J� )' )i�
I/J\,
Ally ll)lSll��lz,��� vim'
� (,1111f11(
l
v L l
x L
SV1
1/1N
1/�y�1111(I�ll���rItlj)('�1`,j�I�`�` 1\
2 df z
—JX
oO Z 0 g-
wLOz�-0Na
= o U) °�
x
r� IL �Qz
Ruml l
/�f 11�J}\illl�l( r1f11�111I(Ong � z
I>r�jil)1(\J JAAv\\ z
l/�IIS (�� A��AVv O r
hail "l(Il�yl��vf 1�, 1ly Ay 1 z
�,11 �IIIIA((INl 1 }vv�Jv���J 01
m k1 i
11 �j(I
Ji�Ilf
6
Z
aZ
0O
W J
�O

O ((!�/ 14 `/ice/` �' •�'f s,/ Z U
o
Oz
_�// 0
Ldu
Ad -
AT dAN
_ = p o `z'
�-- �- �— � �f�J,�s��,�i .!✓_r��/ors s�� _._> i a. o
F
o Ul � a
� Nd
z
•. � �l/�/I/ Jlj l� / J� � �'� � J ���s� � „r �� ,-� � ��� � �� --"`� � d U) N z z w
1\� /
�� � -�� i� � / ✓mil 1� Sri �'" �� � a v�.
Ct] 0.. 0.' >�
==u
-.ram
11
v '�1l/ I � Itc S�' �- � �� �� �11
t
i / �% i x�- � \/
��1I�J�1�1�1�£111�jj��//���
�\41A(�A(�I�
1Y�V0-0
1V�Is����4����lll//�/�rl%�i
IS
7111A 11),7z 1� �,C
101'lisp �r z
TV..� �'������il
La
La
77
INK/2M
`
\\1OVY �Aau
1r
11�4I,II�IIdf/�i�r �� �iE��` yj��'1` _
14,�11 I� l III �
7 I
y
�x 4
'AP:z�I?1���\��'
III �A� \r-I 11141
Ill,l,il�,—
�A�����Av\�-i
�V������������/i�llll/r�'��V������Ij�111�111��,111� �lV�,• ��;� t����t����� >>�>>`>>>��//�����%»���1'`'� "` �� v
w
II1���11141K11t11�
Z£ 133HS 3NFIH71VW
kb
Z�
Q Z
0 O
W J
O
ILI

LO
Z z
w� O
Z
w 2
a o z CL
G° �p !
5£ 133HS 3NI1HO1V W
40110�,
l5//��t1(�)L\
��r�r ���1�1j�/�%/�'I!!/U(�llSf(11(j'�i�l�1���`�l�l)� °�° •• %(��
`�;1Cil
/ %% i/�� I ��SI� �I��1111/)11 lj�y//.
r�//ll�l 1 Il/1/1� I't�<L<<��rflff�lly�ti /r/
91�1r'!t�/����1(1//!(�11�lllllj�//!)11��' �. �• C(r
O Z
O zJP
Zi
w QwN
O� o
\ oi w w Logo
w �ww
{. o U
U) Owl
},lill,ll�A' 1,
Illd,�r/lljf J), 2 cb 0
LL
1�� �
r A L.r z U j w z?�
l(�.,
/
j( V, p5 \t w
l/� � ��-
�/r''
I�III,�1111������1�VIQIII�'�II�(yS��\1 //�.�
I�N � j I� ,...�
�, / t�h �tl
) /
II�
m
z
00
/y"LLJ
#`/ice/���
LO
F(
6
Z
aZ
060
W J
�O

�za�N
Lt! az�
W0.QCz�z
Q W
W
O
b£ 133HS 3NIIHDIHW

Appendix B- Existing Conditions Data
WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Starker Mitigation Site
BEHI
Existing Cross -Section
Sediment Samples
Hydric Soils Report
NC DWQ Stream Identification

Banks Assessment for Non -point source
Consequences of Sediment (BANCS)
Starker: Existing
Conditons
Bank Erosion Hazard
Stream
Index
Near Bank Shear
Erosion Rate
Sub -Reach Length (ft)*
(BEHI) Category
Stress
(Tons/yr)
S100 (North of 1-40, above crossing)
Left Bank 1025
Low
Very Low
0.10
47
Extreme
Very Low
5.88
Right Bank 825
Low
Very Low
0.08
145
Moderate
Very Low
0.29
111
Extreme
Very Low
13.90
subtotal
20
S100 (North of 1-40, below crossing)
Left Bank 94
Low
Very Low
0.04
1212
Moderate
Very Low
0.75
723
High
Very Low
3.66
370
Extreme
Very Low
46.98
Right Bank 111
Low
Very Low
0.02
1209
Moderate
Very Low
5.34
621
High
Very Low
13.36
422
Extreme
Very Low
116.43
subtotal
187
S100 (South of 1-40)
Left Bank 1362
Moderate
Low
10.64
410
High
Low
10.89
250
Extreme
Low
126.98
Right Bank 1379
Moderate
Low
10.22
307
High
Low
7.73
347
Extreme
Low
167.13
subtotal
334
Reach S100 Total
540
S200 (North of 1-40)
Left Bank 85
Low
Very Low
0.02
246
High
Very Low
4.31
324
Very High
Very Low
30.53
159
Extreme
Very Low
35.67
Right Bank 115
Low
Very Low
0.02
264
High
Very Low
4.74
329
Very High
Very Low
31.80
104
Extreme
Very Low
23.94
subtotal
131
S200 (South of 1-40, above crossing)
Left Bank 424
Moderate
Low
2.37
160
High
Low
3.04
Right Bank 421
Low
Low
0.05
106
Moderate
Low
0.12
53
High
Low
0.20
subtotal
6
S200 (South of 1-40, below crossing)
Left Bank 1609
Moderate
Moderate
12.09
930
High
Moderate
18.63
258
Extreme
Moderate
80.74
Right Bank 1495
Moderate
Moderate
20.21
926
High
Moderate
33.39
412
Extreme
Moderate
232.09
subtotal
397
Reach S200 Total
534
Proiect Total
1074

Banks Assessment for Non -point source
Consequences of Sediment (BANCS)
Starker: Design
Bank Erosion Hazard
Stream Index Near Bank Shear Erosion Rate
Sub -Reach Length (ft)* (BEHI) Category Stress (To ns/yr)
S100 (North of 1-40, above crossing)
Left Bank 1076 Low Very Low 0.11
Right Bank 1076 Low Very Low 0.11
subtotal 0
5100 (North of 1-40, below crossing)
Left Bank 2355 Low Very Low 0.94
Right Bank 2355 Low Very Low 0.52
subtotal 1
5100 *South of 1-40)
Left Bank 2054 Low Low 1.61
Right Bank 2054 Low Low 1.52
subtotal 3
Reach S100 Total 5
S200 (North of 1-40)
Left Bank 815 Low Very Low 0.15
Right Bank 815 Low Very Low 0.15
subtotal 0
5200 (South of 1-40, above crossing)
Left Bank 583 Low Low 0.33
Right Bank 583 Low Low 0.06
subtotal 0
S200 (South of 1-40, below crossing)
Left Bank 2812 Low Moderate 3.52
Right Bank 2812 Low Moderate 6.34
subtotal
10
Reach S200 Total
11
Project Totol
15

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: Starker
Reach Name: 5100
Cross Section Name: S100 N OF I-40, ABOVE CROSSING
Survey Date: 07/14/2020
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 1 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 100 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1
5.07
95.93
4
5.23
95.77
8
5.64
95.36
LTOB
8.5
6.67
94.33
9.1
6.82
94.18
9.7
8.12
92.88
FIELD BKF
9.8
8.73
92.27
10.5
8.75
92.25
11.5
8.7
92.3
11.8
8.65
92.35
REw
13
8.43
92.57
15.7
8.02
92.98
BKF
19
7.59
93.41
22.2
6.8
94.2
23
6.65
94.35
27
3.5
97.5
29
3.2
97.8
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
93.71
93.71
93.71
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
92.98
92.98
92.98
Floodprone width (ft)
10.9
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
6.05
2.72
3.33
Entrenchment Ratio
1.8
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.43
0.65
0.25
Maximum Depth (ft)
0.73
0.73
0.53
width/Depth Ratio
14.07
4.16
13.32
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
2.63
1.78
0.85
wetted Perimeter (ft)
6.68
3.84
3.9
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.39
0.46
0.22
Begin BKF Station
9.65
9.65
12.37
End BKF Station
15.7
12.37
15.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

V
Z
/
V
/^/
V
O
ry
U
LULU
/ in ° m
m a
Q
m
i
LL
0
Z
0
0
0
a
a
0
0
0
(4) UOI}eA213

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: Starker
Reach Name: 5100
Cross Section Name: S100 N OF I-40, BELOW CROSSING
Survey Date: 07/14/2020
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 1 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 100 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
6.15
94.85
LPin
4
6.38
94.62
LTOB
5
6.78
94.22
6.3
7.83
93.17
7.3
8.16
92.84
8
8.5
92.5
BKF
8.9
8.85
92.15
9.5
9.11
91.89
10.2
9.37
91.63
LEW
11
9.54
91.46
12.2
9.58
91.42
13
9.61
91.39
TWG
14.2
9.4
91.6
REW
15.4
9.16
91.84
16.3
9.25
91.75
Back of bench
16.4
8.61
92.39
18
8.13
92.87
FIELD BKF
19.4
7.54
93.46
20.7
7.07
93.93
21.5
6.68
94.32
22
6.07
94.93
RPin
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
93.61
93.61
93.61
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
92.5
92.5
92.5
Floodprone width (ft)
14.06
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
8.77
4.6
4.17
Entrenchment Ratio
1.6
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.77
0.75
0.79
Maximum Depth (ft)
1.11
1.09
1.11
width/Depth Ratio
11.39
6.16
5.28
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
6.72
3.43
3.28
wetted Perimeter (ft)
9.56
5.88
5.87
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.7
0.58
0.56
Begin BKF Station
8
8
12.6
End BKF Station
16.77
12.6
16.77
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side

Slope
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

V
Z
/
V
/^/
V
O
ry
U
Oin
0
J
LU a
m=
'IT co
i
LL
O
Z
O
O
0
a
a
0
0
0
(4) UOI}eA213

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: Starker
Reach Name: S100
Cross Section Name: S100 S OF I-40-xS1 US
Survey Date: 07/14/2020
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 1 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 100 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
12.71
88.29
LPin
2
13.07
87.93
4
13.35
87.65
5.5
13.65
87.35
7
14.09
86.91
8.3
14.35
86.65
8.6
14.56
86.44
8.8
15.04
85.96
9.3
15.45
85.55
9.6
16.01
84.99
10.1
16.2
84.8
LEW
11
16.23
84.77
12
16.26
84.74
13.4
16.4
84.6
TW
14.2
16.41
84.59
REW
14.9
15.32
85.68
15.3
14.98
86.02
BKFL
16.1
14.33
86.67
17
13.87
87.13
19
13.35
87.65
20
13.08
87.92
RPin
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
87.45
87.45
87.45
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
86.02
86.02
86.02
Floodprone width (ft)
13.23
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
6.53
3.25
3.27
Entrenchment Ratio
2.03
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
1.08
1.02
1.13
Maximum Depth (ft)
1.43
1.28
1.43
width/Depth Ratio
6.05
3.17
2.89
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
7.01
3.34
3.68
wetted Perimeter (ft)
7.81
5.1
5.28
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.9
0.65
0.7
Begin BKF Station
8.78
8.78
12.03
End BKF Station
15.3
12.03
15.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side

Slope
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

V
D
OIm
0
0
0
a
a
0
0
0
(4) UOI}eA213

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: Starker
Reach Name: S100
Cross Section Name: S100 S OF I-40-xS2 DS
Survey Date: 07/14/2020
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 1 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 100 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
3.58
97.42
LPin
0.5
3.71
97.29
2.1
5.06
95.94
3.6
6.56
94.44
4.5
6.99
94.01
5.5
8
93
5.8
8.82
92.18
6.3
9.13
91.87
BKFL
6.7
9.38
91.62
6.9
10.36
90.64
LEw
9
10.49
90.51
11.2
10.53
90.47
12.2
10.64
90.36
Tw
12.8
10.36
90.64
REw
13
9.53
91.47
13.3
9.36
91.64
13.5
9.14
91.86
BKFL
15.3
8.82
92.18
16.7
8.56
92.44
17.6
8.21
92.79
18.4
7.87
93.13
21.6
7.15
93.85
25
7.45
93.55
RPin
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
93.38
93.38
93.38
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
91.87
91.87
91.87
Floodprone width (ft)
14.39
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
7.26
3.63
3.63
Entrenchment Ratio
1.98
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
1.17
1.15
1.19
Maximum Depth (ft)
1.51
1.38
1.51
width/Depth Ratio
6.21
3.14
3.05
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
8.51
4.19
4.32
wetted Perimeter (ft)
9
5.88
5.87
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.95
0.71
0.74
Begin BKF Station
6.3
6.3
9.93
End BKF Station
13.56
9.93
13.56
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve

channel Left side Right side
slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

LL �
0 m
O
O
0
a
a
0
0
0
(4) UOI}eA213

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: Starker
Reach Name: 5100
Cross Section Name: S102
Survey Date: 07/14/2020
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 1 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 100 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
5.55
95.45
LPin
4
5.37
95.63
7.1
5.79
95.21
LTOB
8.6
6.39
94.61
9.1
7.17
93.83
9.8
8.15
92.85
BKF
10.6
8.4
92.6
LEw
11
8.54
92.46
11.3
8.54
92.46
11.4
8.49
92.51
REw
11.8
7.62
93.38
13.3
7.09
93.91
14.4
6.5
94.5
15.6
6.24
94.76
20
5.39
95.61
RTOB/RPin
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
93.24
93.24
93.24
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
92.85
92.85
92.85
Floodprone width (ft)
2.21
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
1.76
0.88
0.88
Entrenchment Ratio
1.26
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.23
0.14
0.33
Maximum Depth (ft)
0.39
0.28
0.39
width/Depth Ratio
7.65
6.39
2.67
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
0.41
0.12
0.29
wetted Perimeter (ft)
2.05
1.2
1.4
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.2
0.1
0.2
Begin BKF Station
9.8
9.8
10.68
End BKF Station
11.56
10.68
11.56
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

0
a
a
0
0
0
(4) UOI}eA213

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: Starker
Reach Name: 5100
Cross Section Name: S101
Survey Date: 07/14/2020
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 1 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 100 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
4.53
96.47
Lein
2
5.04
95.96
4
5.53
95.47
6.1
6.22
94.78
7.4
7.14
93.86
8.8
8.53
92.47
10.3
9.26
91.74
FIELD BKFL
11.2
9.79
91.21
BKF
11.6
10.15
90.85
LEw
12.6
10.23
90.77
Tw
13.2
10.15
90.85
REw
14
9.84
91.16
BKF
14.3
9.23
91.77
FIELD BKFL
15.1
8.78
92.22
16.6
8.29
92.71
17.9
7.54
93.46
19
6.79
94.21
22.7
5.32
95.68
27
4.79
96.21
RPin
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
91.61
91.61
91.61
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
91.19
91.19
91.19
Floodprone width (ft)
3.7
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
2.79
1.06
1.73
Entrenchment Ratio
1.33
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.29
0.3
0.29
Maximum Depth (ft)
0.42
0.39
0.42
width/Depth Ratio
9.62
3.57
5.97
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
0.82
0.31
0.51
wetted Perimeter (ft)
3.01
1.58
2.21
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.27
0.2
0.23
Begin BKF Station
11.22
11.22
12.28
End BKF Station
14.01
12.28
14.01
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)

Movable Particle (mm)

0
a
a
0
0
0
(4) U0I}eAG13

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: Starker
Reach Name: S200
Cross Section Name: S200 N OF I-40
Survey Date: 07/15/2020
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 1 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 100 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
4.53
96.47
2
5.82
95.18
3.1
6.1
94.9
4.4
6.47
94.53
5
6.74
94.26 BKF
6.5
7.42
93.58
7.7
7.57
93.43 LEw
8.1
7.67
93.33
9.1
7.64
93.36
10
7.64
93.36
10.5
7.58
93.42 REw
13.2
6.36
94.64
14.8
6.26
94.74
15.7
6.17
94.83
17.3
5.6
95.4
19.2
4.63
96.37
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
95.19
95.19
95.19
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
94.26
94.26
94.26
Floodprone width (ft)
14.73
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
7.36
3.68
3.68
Entrenchment Ratio
2
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.64
0.63
0.65
Maximum Depth (ft)
0.93
0.93
0.91
width/Depth Ratio
11.5
5.88
5.66
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
4.71
2.3
2.41
wetted Perimeter (ft)
7.71
4.76
4.78
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.61
0.48
0.5
Begin BKF Station
5
5
8.68
End BKF Station
12.36
8.68
12.36
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

0
I N
11� O
LL U
O�
Z
0 m
0 C
N
0
a
a
0
0
0
(4) UOI}eA213

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: Starker
Reach Name: S200
Cross Section Name: S200 S OF I-40, ABOVE CROSSING -xS4
Survey Date: 07/14/2020
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 1 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 100 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
5.01
95.99
LPin
1.5
6.24
94.76
3
7.3
93.7
3.7
8.1
92.9
4.5
8.59
92.41
6
8.9
92.1
9
9.09
91.91
13
9.06
91.94
15.7
8.9
92.1
16
8.92
92.08
16.5
9.16
91.84
16.8
9.61
91.39
BKFL
17.2
9.91
91.09
17.7
10.5
90.5
LEw
18.5
10.6
90.4
Tw
19.2
10.57
90.43
20.3
10.56
90.44
20.9
10.52
90.48
REw
21.2
9.94
91.06
21.5
9.62
91.38
BKFL
21.8
9.46
91.54
22.2
9.12
91.88
23.7
8.74
92.26
25.9
7.5
93.5
28
5.03
95.97
30
3.27
97.73
RPin
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
92.36
92.36
92.36
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
91.38
91.38
91.38
Floodprone width (ft)
19.14
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
4.69
2.35
2.34
Entrenchment Ratio
4.08
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.77
0.74
0.8
Maximum Depth (ft)
0.98
0.98
0.95
width/Depth Ratio
6.09
3.19
2.92
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
3.59
1.73
1.86
wetted Perimeter (ft)
5.56
3.68
3.78
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.65
0.47
0.49
Begin BKF Station
16.81
16.81
19.16
End BKF Station
21.5
19.16
21.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations

Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified shields curve
channel Left side Right side
slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

/�
V
X
V
Z
/
V
/^/
V
0
ry
U
LU
U
0',
m
0 0
LL
0
0
0
N
0
a
a
0
0
0
(4) UOI}eA213

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: Starker
Reach Name: S200
Cross Section Name: S200 S OF I-40, ABOVE CROSSING - xS5
Survey Date: 07/14/2020
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 1 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 100 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
2.35
98.65
LPin
2
3.21
97.79
5
5.19
95.81
9
5.29
95.71
11
5.31
95.69
12.6
5.15
95.85
14.5
5.42
95.58
BKFL
15.1
5.9
95.1
15.8
6.2
94.8
16.2
6.44
94.56
LEW
17
6.6
94.4
17.8
6.58
94.42
18.4
6.68
94.32
TW
18.7
6.48
94.52
REW
18.9
5.78
95.22
19.6
5.45
95.55
BKFL
20.7
4.86
96.14
21.4
4.43
96.57
22.3
3.6
97.4
23.5
2.51
98.49
RPin
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
96.82
96.82
96.82
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
95.57
95.57
95.57
Floodprone width (ft)
18.2
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
5.12
2.56
2.57
Entrenchment Ratio
3.55
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.79
0.74
0.85
Maximum Depth (ft)
1.25
1.17
1.25
width/Depth Ratio
6.48
3.48
3.02
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
4.06
1.88
2.18
wetted Perimeter (ft)
6.11
4.03
4.41
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.67
0.47
0.49
Begin BKF Station
14.51
14.51
17.07
End BKF Station
19.64
17.07
19.64
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0

shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

/LO
V
X
V
Z
/
V
/^/
V
0
ry
U
LU
U
0',
m
0 0
LL
0
0
0
N
0
a
a
0
0
0
(4) UOI}eA213

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
River Name: Starker
Reach Name: S200
Cross Section Name: S200 S OF I-40, BELOW CROSSING
Survey Date: 07/14/2020
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 1 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 100 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
5.16
95.84
LPin
2.8
5.17
95.83
4.8
5.54
95.46
7
5.5
95.5
8
5.67
95.33
9
6.15
94.85
10.3
6.91
94.09
11.2
7.82
93.18
FIELD BKFL
11.6
7.91
93.09
BKF
11.8
8.92
92.08
LEW
13
9.01
91.99
14.7
8.86
92.14
15.9
8.95
92.05
17.1
8.73
92.27
REW
17.4
8.67
92.33
17.7
8.04
92.96
18.8
7.89
93.11
BKFL
19.8
7.37
93.63
20.8
7.03
93.97
22.2
6.5
94.5
23.7
5.55
95.45
26
5.14
95.86
30
5.08
95.92
RPin
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
94.21
94.21
94.21
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
93.1
93.1
93.1
Floodprone width (ft)
11.34
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
7.17
3.55
3.62
Entrenchment Ratio
1.58
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.83
1
0.66
Maximum Depth (ft)
1.11
1.11
1.05
width/Depth Ratio
8.64
3.56
5.48
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
5.92
3.54
2.38
wetted Perimeter (ft)
8.45
5.39
5.04
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.7
0.66
0.47
Begin BKF Station
11.56
11.56
15.11
End BKF Station
18.73
15.11
18.73
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve

channel Left side Right side
slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

V
Z
/
V
/^/
V
O
ry
U
Din
0
J
LU a
m=
O
'IT co
i 0
LL
0
0
0
N
0
a
a
0
0
0
(4) UOI}eA213

E
E
aauid auaoaad

E
E
Jauid auaaad

Jauid au@OJad

aaul� auaoaad

HYDRIC SOIL & SITE INVESTIGATION
Hunsucker Tract
Catawba County, North Carolina
Prepared for:
Ecosystem Planning & Restoration
559 Jones Franklin Road, Suite 150
Raleigh, NC 27606
Prepared by:
324 Blackwell Street, Suite 1200
Durham, NC 27701
[phone]
Michael G. Wood
January 3, 2019

INTRODUCTION
Ecosystem Planning & Restoration (EPR) is investigating the feasibility of stream and riparian
wetland mitigation within the Catawba River Basin. The project site was accessed from Rock
Barn Road, Catawba County, NC. Three Oaks Engineering (Three Oaks) has been retained to
perform a Hydric Soil & Site Investigation that describes and classifies the soil within the study
area to make a determination as to its present and/or past hydric status.
The Study Area is a 1.18-acre wetland delineated by EPR that is a lightly wooded pasture
adjacent to a UT to Mull Creek. The UT is mostly incised.
METHODOLOGY
Prior to performing the evaluation, NRCS soil maps and USGS topographic maps were reviewed.
The field investigation was performed on October 12, 2018, by Michael G. Wood, LSS. Soils were
evaluated via hand -turned soil auger borings. Each boring was classified based on soil
characteristics indicating the hydric soil status. Boring locations were located with a GPS Unit
with sub -meter accuracy and are shown on the attached figure. Hydric soil status is based upon
the NRCS Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States -A Guide for Identifying and
Delineating Hydric Soils (Version 8.1, 2017).
RESULTS
Two (2) soil borings were advanced within the Study Area (Figure 1), both of which had colluvium
material from the surrounding uplands that washed in from anthropogenic activities. The
amount of colluvium varied from 8-13 inches. The colluvium material in both borings was
determined to be hydric. The original soil below the colluvium also was determined to have
been hydric. In all cases, hydric soil indicator F3 Depleted Matrix was the best match.
F3 Depleted Matrix. A layer that has a depleted matrix with 60 percent or more chroma
2 or less that has a minimum thickness of either:
a. 5 cm (2 inches) if the 5 cm starts at a depth of <10 cm (4 inches) from the soil
surface, or
b. 15 cm (6 inches), starting at a depth of <25 cm (10 inches) from the soil
surface.
CONCLUSION
Borings 1 and 2 are prime candidates for wetland rehabilitation. It is anticipated that through
removal of the cattle, raising the stream level, limited soil alterations, and re -vegetation, the
hydrology will be restored and allow the wetland to regain its normal functions.
Hunsucker Tract Hydric Soil & Site Investigation January 3, 2019
Three Oaks Job 18-795 1

The findings presented herein represent Three Oaks' professional opinion based on our Hydric
Soil & Site Investigation and knowledge of the current regulations regarding wetland mitigation
in North Carolina and national criteria for determining hydric soil.
Hunsucker Tract Hydric Soil & Site Investigation January 3, 2019
Three Oaks Job 18-795 2

Ow Soil Borings
Existing Wetlands
IMP"
Hydric Soil Investigation
Hunsucker Farm
Catawba County, North Carolina
- ' I \ 1. f . '. �i
_l
w -
1.18 Acres
1
f�
4�
NC Ce fo Ge gryp Information si
Date: January 2019
Scale: 0 25 50 Feet
1 It�I
Job No-: 18-795
DraW11 By:-'hecked Be:
ETM M3
Figure

NC DWO Stream identification Form Version 4.11
Date: � lL� y
ProjectlSite: �a"- 1, [X/,5/0 U
Latitude: 2�S -2-1QQ aI�
Evaluator: .Sa►yiCs �P
County: cc? 7 0b.�
Longitude: - S1.14543j
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent 3
Stream Determination (ci
Ephemeral Intermitten Perennia
Other
e.g. Quad Name: rCtct� ni 1
if ? 19 or perennial if ? 30`
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 1'3')
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1 a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
(3 J
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
; 2,
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool se uence
0
1
2
5J
4, Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
% 3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
13
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
["2)
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
01
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
R Hvrirnlnnv (Rijhtntal = 6 1
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
`1.5)
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.
1
1,5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3 '
('. Rininnv fSiihtntal = <i' _1'7 l
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
(3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
e12
3
21, Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0 `
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0 `
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0 '
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL =1.5,
Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
�-
Notes: I' I J . ,
�,
Sketch:

S101
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: f Project/Site: Latitude: r -7 q6l.fir'
Evaluator: �_ r�' County: N� W vc�_. Longitude: - ( (S-7 -13 L
Total Points: Stream Deter n {4ircle one) Other
Stream is at least intermittent Ephemeral Intermittent erennial e.g. Quad Name:
if? 19 or perennial if? 30`
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1 a, Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
0
1
3
rip le -pool sequence
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
5- Activeirelict floodplain
0
1
tt
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
�0
1
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
,0.;
2
3
9. Grade control
0
,0.5.
1
1.5
10, Natural valley
0
�0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel No =0�' Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
�-
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
14- Leaf litter
15. Sediment on plants or debris
1.5
0
BE]
0.5
1
0
1-5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
;. 0-5'
1
1.5
17- Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Wes = 3
r` 0,n1nC"Infr4nl = /
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20- Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
CO)1
2
3
22- Fish
0
0.5
q" 1 ,
1.5
23. Crayfish
0.5
1
1-5
24- Amphibians
CO)
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
of
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1-5 Other = 0.
"perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch: i Ofo r 1�
`�c��-• �ti+�R V�(�•Q�Qn�. �����`"" �-
:, -.-�a •-�ar� i � ,� j �� ���-'�-� �
�`t=bi`�S l 5-�-st� ,`� G��ilr.t�s-q.�
��[�,a i~r�>,�Jo�� : ti-�-� �_c.�G�. S��
cell-�N`t).
Sa l�

0911%
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: ( Project/Site: �/j, t_u
Evaluator: IlM County:
Total Poems: Stream e7ete atttsnGi
Stream is at least intermittent g 5 Ephemeral ntermitteti
if ? 19 or perennial if >_ 30"
Latitude: '; �5 -7 Z 6 ��
Longitude: -g ( r 1_15Z�
role one) other
Perennial e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Stror
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle pool, step -pool,
0
1
2
3
ri le- ooi sequence
1
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
5. Active/rolict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
$. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
9- Grade control
0
0-5
1 1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
( No
= 0
Yes
= 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
A,
U. l 1 Vi VIV +v
0
1
_
21
-
3
12. Presence of Baseflow
�'
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
011,
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
.5
1
0.5
0
15_ Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5'
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0.5
17- Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
es = 3
,--
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
-
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0,5
i
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.0 Othe_rr,�
"perennial streams may also be identified using other methods_ See p- 35 of manual_
Notes:
Sketch: j► ��7 i S rd�� r��n Cu+COt^A y CUnc_41 �W ri t7� 7 0 I^
""f- GLCCX5 iaalrN�� �P�

NC DW9 Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: I 4 Project/Site: Stoek. r S/O j Latitude: �jC� -32 :w
Evaluator:A-. SDme 14 EP PCounty: C��.� (3c Longitude:
Total Points: Stream Determin ircle one) Other
Stream is at least intermittent ZZ EphemerM Intermittent erennial e.g. Quad Name: �� e-4*40 h
if z 19 or perennial if a 30'
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1'Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
r3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
0
2
3
ripple -pool sequence
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
3
5. Activeirelict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0.)
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0. ,
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3 '
9. Grade control
b '
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
D.5 '
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0 ;
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
f�2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
0 0.5
-No = 0 .
1 1.5
Yes = 3

NC.' DWO Stream identification Form Version 4.11
Date:
Project/site. ��2 J
Latitude: 3 +7_2�}?j
Evaluator: A
County: �.b�
Longitude: -
Total Points:
Stream is at feast intermittent
Stream Determination (cir
Ephemeral Intermittent, Perennial
Other I 1
e.g. Quad Name: N �W�aj1
it 2! 19 or perenni2i if? 30''
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = L L. �R]
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Activeirelict floodplain
0
1
2
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
S. Headcuts
i 0
1
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
, N�=O
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated: see discussions in manual
R Hvrlrnlnnv (Richtntnl = Q (� 1
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
es = 3
C; Rinloav (Subtotal = -4- 1
18 Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21 Aquatic Mollusks
1
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.
1
1.5
24, Amphibians
0
0-5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1,5 Other =
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual -
Notes: ,ADrr r r r n� WG
4-a 6yr,r
it r 4L. d
G
r pjt,�-
i [.
Sketch:

Appendix C- Site Analysis Data
WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Starker Mitigation Site
Bankfull Area Regional Curve Data
Sediment Transport Calculations
Sediment Analysis

BANKFULL AREA REGIONAL CURVE DATA
STARKER MITIGATION PROJECT
Drainage Area
(Sq.Mi.)
X-Sectional Area
(SF)
Reference
0.2
10.4
Harman, W.H. et al. 1999. Bankfull Hydraulic Geometry
Relationships for North Carolina Streams. AWRA
Wildland Hydrology Symposium Proceedings. Edited by:
D.S. Olsen and J.P. Potyondy. . AWRA Summer
Symposium. Bozeman, MT.
1.05
15.8
3.44
45.6
4.7
46.7
6.5
62.5
7.18
98.8
9.6
89.6
15.5
194
29.9
162
31.8
195
42.8
469
78.8
377
128
578
4
37.7
Harman, W.H. 2012. Revised Curve for Piedmont Rural
Streams using Surry County Projects.
5
47.3
17
127.2
17.5
117.4
0.02
2.9
Reference Reach - UT to Little Fisher River - Riffle 1
0.02
1.7
Reference Reach - UT to Little Fisher River - Riffle 2
0.14
5.8
Reference Reach - UT to Pauls Creek - Riffle 1
0.09
2.6
Starker Mitigation Project Existing Conditions
0.30
6.7
0.39
7
0.01
0.4
0.02
0.8
0.13
4.7
0.18
3.6
0.26
5.9
0.09
3.0
Starker Mitigation Project Proposed Conditions
0.30
7.0
0.39
8.0
0.01
0.4
0.02
0.8
0.13
4.0
0.18
4.0
0.26
6.0

0
0
0100
V
Z
O
O
a
L
O
W N
Q �cc
m
V
Q
J
�
�
N
L
LL
� U
Z �
Q �
m �
c�
00
0
m
U
�
o
O
0
0 0
o
(11 'bs) said IInyqus8
o
x

Worksheet 3-14. Sediment competence calculation form to assess bed stability.
Stream: SMS -S100 N OF 1-40, ABOVE CROSSING Stream Type:
Location: Valley Type:
Observers: RM and AD Date: 7/14/2020
Enter Required Information for Existing Condition
30.0
D50
Median particle size of riffle bed material (mm)
17.5
D 50
Median particle size of bar or sub -pavement sample (mm)
0.115
D max
Largest particle from bar sample (ft)
35
(mm)
304.8
mm/ft
0.01200
S
Existing bankfull water surface slope (ft/ft)
0.43
d
Existing bankfull mean depth (ft)
1.65
Immersed specific gravity of sediment
Select the Appropriate Equation and Calculate Critical Dimensionless Shear Stress
1.71
D501D50 A I
Range: 3 — 7 Use EQUATION 1: ti" = 0.0834 ( D50/D50) —0 872
1.17
D max/D 50
Range: 1.3 — 4.0 Use EQUATION 2: ti" = 0.0384 (D max/D 50) —0.887
0.033
Bankfull Dimensionless Shear Stress
EQUATION USED:
Calculate Bankfull Mean Depth Required for Entrainment of Largest Particle in Bar Sample
0.53
F d
TRequired bankfull mean depth (ft) d _ (use D max in ft)
Calculate Bankfull Water Surface Slope Required for Entrainment of Largest Particle in Bar Sample
0.01474
S
Required bankfull water surface slope (ft/ft) S = Z * (Ys (use D max in ft)
d
Check: Stable r Aggrading Degrading
Sediment Competence Using Dimensional Shear Stress
0.322
Bankfull shear stress C = ydS (Ibs/ft2) (substitute hydraulic radius, R, with mean depth, d) Y =
62.4, d = existing depth, S = existing slope
Shields
23.94
co
66.06
Predicted largest moveable particle size (mm) at bankfull shear stress ti (Figure 3-11)
Shields
0.464
co
0.136
Predicted shear stress required to initiate movement of measured Dmax (mm) (Figure 3-11)
Shields
0.62
co
1 0.18
Predicted mean depth required to initiate movement of measured D max (mm) d - i 'L =
predicted shear stress = 62.4 S = existing sloe YS
Shields
0.0173
co
0. 0051
Predicted slope required to initiate movement of measured Dmax (mm) S _ predicted
shear stress = 62.4 d = existin depth Yd
Check: Stable Aggrading Degrading
Copyright © 2008 Wildland Hydrology River Stability Field Guide page 3-101

Worksheet 3-14. Sediment competence calculation form to assess bed stability.
Stream: SMS - S100 S OF 1-40 Stream Type:
Location: Valley Type:
Observers: RM and AD Date: 7/14/2020
Enter Required Information for Existing Condition
21.9
Dso
Median particle size of riffle bed material (mm)
3.0
D 50
Median particle size of bar or sub -pavement sample (mm)
0.102
D max
Largest particle from bar sample (ft)
31
(mm)
304.8
mm/ft
mm/ft
0.00600
S
Existing bankfull water surface slope (ft/ft)
1.17
d
Existing bankfull mean depth (ft)
1.65
YS-y/y
Immersed specific gravity of sediment
Select the Appropriate Equation and Calculate Critical Dimensionless Shear Stress
7.22
Dso/Dso
Range: 3 - 7 Use EQUATION 1: ti* = 0.0834 ( D50/D5os72
0)
1.42
D max/D so
Range: 1.3 - 4.0 Use EQUATION 2: T* = 0.0384 (D max/Dso) -o.ss7
0.028
�'
Bankfull Dimensionless Shear Stress
EQUATION USED:
2
Calculate Bankfull Mean Depth Required for Entrainment of Largest Particle in Bar Sample
0.79
d
Required bankfull mean depth (ft) d = Z * (YS ' 1)DmaX (use D max in ft)
Calculate Bankfull Water Surface Slope Required for Entrainment of Largest Particle in Bar Sample
0.00404
S
1 Dmac
Required bankfull water surface slope (ft/ft) $ = x (` 5 ) (use D n ,X in ft)
d
Check: Stable Aggrading Degrading
Sediment Competence Using Dimensional Shear Stress
0.438
Bankfull shear stress T = ydS (Ibs/ft2) (substitute hydraulic radius, R, with mean depth, d )
d = existing depth, S = existing slope
Shields
32.99
co
82.84
Predicted largest moveable particle size (mm) at bankfull shear stress ti (Figure 3-11)
Shields
0.413
co
0.115
Predicted shear stress required to initiate movement of measured Dm'X (mm) (Figure 3-11)
Shields
1.10
co
0.31
Predicted mean depth required to initiate movement of measured D, 'X (mm) d - T
ti = predicted shear stress, Y = 62.4, S = existing slope YS
Shields
0.0057
co
0.0016
Predicted slope required to initiate movement of measured D, 'X (mm) T
S
'C =predicted shear stress, Y = 62.4, d =existing depth yd
Check: Stable Aggrading Degrading
Copyright © 2008 Wildland Hydrology River Stability Field Guide page 3-101

Worksheet 3-14. Sediment competence calculation form to assess bed stability.
Stream: SMS - S200 S OF 1-40, BELOW CROSSING Stream Type:
Location: Valley Type:
Observers: RM and AD Date: 7/14/2020
Enter Required Information for Existing Condition
15.9
D50
Median particle size of riffle bed material (mm)
3.8
D 50
Median particle size of bar or sub -pavement sample (mm)
0.171
D max
Largest particle from bar sample (ft)
52
(mm)
304.8
mm/ft
mm/ft
0.00400
$
Existing bankfull water surface slope (ft/ft)
0.83
d
Existing bankfull mean depth (ft)
1.65
YS-y!y
Immersed specific gravity of sediment
Select the Appropriate Equation and Calculate Critical Dimensionless Shear Stress
4.23
Aso/Dso
Range: 3 — 7 Use EQUATION 1: ti* = 0.0834 ( D50I�50) -o a72
3.28
D max/D 50
Range: 1.3 — 4.0 Use EQUATION 2: T* = 0.0384 (D max/D 50) —0.887
0.024
'*
Bankfull Dimensionless Shear Stress
EQUATION USED:
1
Calculate Bankfull Mean Depth Required for Entrainment of Largest Particle in Bar Sample
1.67
d
Required bankfull mean depth (ft) d = Z * (Ys (use D max in ft)
Calculate Bankfull Water Surface Slope Required for Entrainment of Largest Particle in Bar Sample
0.00805
S
Required bankfull water surface slope (ft/ft) $ _ Z * (! 5-1)Diiiax (use D max in ft)
d
Check: Stable Aggrading Degrading
Sediment Competence Using Dimensional Shear Stress
0.207
Bankfull shear stress 1 = ydS (lbs/ft2) (substitute hydraulic radius, R, with mean depth, d )
= existing depth, S = existing slope
Shields
15.12
co
47.76
Predicted largest moveable particle size (mm) at bankfull shear stress ti (Figure 3-11)
Shields
0.678
co
0.233
Predicted shear stress required to initiate movement of measured D max (mm) (Figure 3-11)
Shields
2.72
co
0.93
Predicted mean depth required to initiate movement of measured D max (mm) tr
d
'r = predicted shear stress, Y = 62.4, S = existing slope yS
Shields
0.0131
co
0.0045
Predicted slope required to initiate movement of measured D max (mm) S _ Z T =
predicted shear stress y = 62.4 d = existing depth yd
Check: Stable Aggrading Degrading
Copyright © 2008 Wildland Hydrology River Stability Field Guide page 3-101

Worksheet 3-14. Sediment competence calculation form to assess bed stability.
Stream: SMS -S100 N OF 1-40, ABOVE CROSSING Stream Type:
Location: Valley Type:
Observers: RM and AD Date: 7/14/2020
Enter Required Information for Existing Condition
30.0
D50
Median particle size of riffle bed material (mm)
17.5
D 50
Median particle size of bar or sub -pavement sample (mm)
0.115
D max
Largest particle from bar sample (ft)
35
(mm)
304.8
mm/ft
0.01500
S
Proposed bankfull water surface slope (ft/ft)
0.46
d
Proposed bankfull mean depth (ft)
1.65
Immersed specific gravity of sediment
Select the Appropriate Equation and Calculate Critical Dimensionless Shear Stress
1.71
D501D50 A I
Range: 3 — 7 Use EQUATION 1: ti" = 0.0834 ( D50/D50) —0 872
1.17
D max/D 50
Range: 1.3 — 4.0 Use EQUATION 2: ti" = 0.0384 (D max/D 50) —0.887
0.033
Bankfull Dimensionless Shear Stress
EQUATION USED:
Calculate Bankfull Mean Depth Required for Entrainment of Largest Particle in Bar Sample
0.42
F d
TRequired bankfull mean depth (ft) d _ (use D max in ft)
Calculate Bankfull Water Surface Slope Required for Entrainment of Largest Particle in Bar Sample
0.01378
S
Required bankfull water surface slope (ft/ft) S = Z * (Ys (use D max in ft)
d
Check: Stable r Aggrading Degrading
Sediment Competence Using Dimensional Shear Stress
0.431
Bankfull shear stress C = ydS (Ibs/ft2) (substitute hydraulic radius, R, with mean depth, d) Y =
62.4, d = existing depth, S = existing slope
Shields
32.4
co
81.8
Predicted largest moveable particle size (mm) at bankfull shear stress ti (Figure 3-11)
Shields
0.464
co
0.136
Predicted shear stress required to initiate movement of measured Dmax (mm) (Figure 3-11)
Shields
0.50
co
1 0.15
Predicted mean depth required to initiate movement of measured D max (mm) d - i 'L =
predicted shear stress = 62.4 S = existing sloe YS
Shields
0.0162
co
0. 0047
Predicted slope required to initiate movement of measured Dmax (mm) S _ predicted
shear stress = 62.4 d = existin depth Yd
Check: Stable Aggrading Degrading
Copyright © 2008 Wildland Hydrology River Stability Field Guide page 3-101

Worksheet 3-14. Sediment competence calculation form to assess bed stability.
Stream: SMS - S100 S OF 1-40 Stream Type:
Location: Valley Type:
Observers: RM and AD Date: 7/14/2020
Enter Required Information for Existing Condition
21.9
D 50
Median particle size of riffle bed material (mm)
3.0
D 50
Median particle size of bar or sub -pavement sample (mm)
0.102
D max
Largest particle from bar sample (ft)
31
(mm)
304.8
mm/ft
mm/ft
0.00900
S
Proposed bankfull water surface slope (ft/ft)
0.76
d
Proposed bankfull mean depth (ft)
1.65
YS-y/y
Immersed specific gravity of sediment
Select the Appropriate Equation and Calculate Critical Dimensionless Shear Stress
7.22
Dso/Dso
Range: 3 — 7 Use EQUATION 1: ti* = 0.0834 ( D50/D50.872
0)
1.42
D max/D so
Range: 1.3 — 4.0 Use EQUATION 2: T* = 0.0384 (D max/D r)0) -0.887
0.028
�'
Bankfull Dimensionless Shear Stress
EQUATION USED:
2
Calculate Bankfull Mean Depth Required for Entrainment of Largest Particle in Bar Sample
0.53
d
Required bankfull mean depth (ft) d = Z * (YS ' 1)DmaX (use D max in ft)
Calculate Bankfull Water Surface Slope Required for Entrainment of Largest Particle in Bar Sample
0.00622
S
1 Dmac
Required bankfull water surface slope (ft/ft) $ = x (` 5 ) (use D n ,X in ft)
d
Check: Stable Aggrading Degrading
Sediment Competence Using Dimensional Shear Stress
0.427
Bankfull shear stress T = ydS (Ibs/ft2) (substitute hydraulic radius, R, with mean depth, d )
d = existing depth, S = existing slope
Shields
32.11
co
81.27
Predicted largest moveable particle size (mm) at bankfull shear stress ti (Figure 3-11)
Shields
0.413
co
0.115
Predicted shear stress required to initiate movement of measured Dm'X (mm) (Figure 3-11)
Shields
0.73
co
0.20
Predicted mean depth required to initiate movement of measured D, 'X (mm) d — T
ti = predicted shear stress, Y = 62.4, S = existing slope YS
Shields
0.0087
co
0.0024
Predicted slope required to initiate movement of measured D, 'X (mm) T
S
'C =predicted shear stress, Y = 62.4, d =existing depth yd
Check: Stable Aggrading Degrading
Copyright © 2008 Wildland Hydrology River Stability Field Guide page 3-101

Worksheet 3-14. Sediment competence calculation form to assess bed stability.
Stream: SMS - S200 S OF 1-40, BELOW CROSSING Stream Type:
Location: Valley Type:
Observers: RM and AD Date: 7/14/2020
Enter Required Information for Existing Condition
15.9
D50
Median particle size of riffle bed material (mm)
3.8
D 50
Median particle size of bar or sub -pavement sample (mm)
0.171
D max
Largest particle from bar sample (ft)
52
(mm)
304.8
mm/ft
mm/ft
0.00800
$
Proposed bankfull water surface slope (ft/ft)
0.65
d
Proposed bankfull mean depth (ft)
1.65
YS-y!y
Immersed specific gravity of sediment
Select the Appropriate Equation and Calculate Critical Dimensionless Shear Stress
4.23
Aso/Dso
Range: 3 — 7 Use EQUATION 1: ti* = 0.0834 ( D50I�50) -o a72
3.28
D max/D 50
Range: 1.3 — 4.0 Use EQUATION 2: T* = 0.0384 (D max/D 50) —0.887
0.024
'*
Bankfull Dimensionless Shear Stress
EQUATION USED:
1
Calculate Bankfull Mean Depth Required for Entrainment of Largest Particle in Bar Sample
0.83
d
Required bankfull mean depth (ft) d = Z"(r s(use D max in ft)
Calculate Bankfull Water Surface Slope Required for Entrainment of Largest Particle in Bar Sample
0.01028
S
Required bankfull water surface slope (ft/ft) $ _ Z (! s -1)Diiiax (use D max in ft)
d
Check: Stable Aggrading Degrading
Sediment Competence Using Dimensional Shear Stress
0.324
Bankfull shear stress 1 = ydS (lbs/ft2) (substitute hydraulic radius, R, with mean depth, d )
= existing depth, S = existing slope
Shields
24.13
co
66.43
Predicted largest moveable particle size (mm) at bankfull shear stress ti (Figure 3-11)
Shields
0.678
co
0.233
Predicted shear stress required to initiate movement of measured D max (mm) (Figure 3-11)
Shields
1.36
co
0.47
Predicted mean depth required to initiate movement of measured D max (mm) tr
d
'r = predicted shear stress, Y = 62.4, S = existing slope yS
Shields
0.0167
co
0.0057
Predicted slope required to initiate movement of measured D max (mm) S _ Z T =
predicted shear stress y = 62.4 d = existing depth yd
Check: Stable Aggrading Degrading
Copyright © 2008 Wildland Hydrology River Stability Field Guide page 3-101

RIVERMORPH PARTICLE SUMMARY
River Name:
Reach Name:
Sample Name:
Survey Date:
Size (mm)
Starker
S100
S100 N OF I-40, ABOVE CROSSING ACTIVE RIFFLE
07/14/2020
TOT # ITEM % CUM
0 - 0.062
0
0.00
0.00
0.062 - 0.125
0
0.00
0.00
0.125 - 0.25
3
2.94
2.94
0.25 - 0.50
1
0.98
3.92
0.50 - 1.0
2
1.96
5.88
1.0 - 2.0
1
0.98
6.86
2.0 - 4.0
0
0.00
6.86
4.0 - 5.7
0
0.00
6.86
5.7 - 8.0
0
0.00
6.86
8.0 - 11.3
0
0.00
6.86
11.3 - 16.0
10
9.80
16.67
16.0 - 22.6
16
15.69
32.35
22.6 - 32.0
23
22.55
54.90
32 - 45
28
27.45
82.35
45 - 64
14
13.73
96.08
64 - 90
3
2.94
99.02
90 - 128
1
0.98
100.00
128 - 180
0
0.00
100.00
180 - 256
0
0.00
100.00
256 - 362
0
0.00
100.00
362 - 512
0
0.00
100.00
512 - 1024
0
0.00
100.00
1024 - 2048
0
0.00
100.00
Bedrock
0
0.00
100.00
D16 (mm)
15.68
D35 (mm)
23.7
D50 (mm)
29.96
D84 (mm)
47.28
D95 (mm)
62.51
D100 (mm)
128
Silt/Clay (%)
0
Sand (%)
6.86
Gravel (%)
89.22
Cobble (%)
3.92
Boulder (%)
0
Bedrock (%)
0
Total Particles = 102.

S100 N OF 1-40, ABOVE CROSSING ACTIVE RIFFLE
100 1000 10000
Particle Size (mm)

S100 N OF 1-40, ABOVE CROSSING SIEVE ANALYSIS
Particle Size (mm)

RIVERMORPH PARTICLE SUMMARY
River Name:
Reach Name:
Sample Name:
Survey Date:
Size (mm)
Starker
S100
S100 S OF I-40-XS1 US ACTIVE RIFFLE
07/14/2020
TOT # ITEM % CUM
0 - 0.062
0
0.00
0.00
0.062 - 0.125
0
0.00
0.00
0.125 - 0.25
1
0.88
0.88
0.25 - 0.50
4
3.54
4.42
0.50 - 1.0
4
3.54
7.96
1.0 - 2.0
0
0.00
7.96
2.0 - 4.0
0
0.00
7.96
4.0 - 5.7
0
0.00
7.96
5.7 - 8.0
1
0.88
8.85
8.0 - 11.3
8
7.08
15.93
11.3 - 16.0
18
15.93
31.86
16.0 - 22.6
23
20.35
52.21
22.6 - 32.0
26
23.01
75.22
32 - 45
11
9.73
84.96
45 - 64
5
4.42
89.38
64 - 90
6
5.31
94.69
90 - 128
6
5.31
100.00
128 - 180
0
0.00
100.00
180 - 256
0
0.00
100.00
256 - 362
0
0.00
100.00
362 - 512
0
0.00
100.00
512 - 1024
0
0.00
100.00
1024 - 2048
0
0.00
100.00
Bedrock
0
0.00
100.00
D16 (mm)
11.32
D35 (mm)
17.02
D50 (mm)
21.88
D84 (mm)
43.72
D95 (mm)
92.22
D100 (mm)
128
Silt/Clay (%)
0
Sand (%)
7.96
Gravel (%)
81.42
Cobble (%)
10.62
Boulder (%)
0
Bedrock (%)
0
Total Particles = 113.

S100 S OF 1-40-XS1 US ACTIVE RIFFLE
100 1000 10000
Particle Size (mm)

S100 S OF 1-40 SIEVE ANALYSIS
Particle Size (mm)

RIVERMORPH PARTICLE SUMMARY
River Name:
Reach Name:
Sample Name:
Survey Date:
Size (mm)
Starker
S200
S200 S OF I-40, ABOVE CROSSING XS5 ACTIVE RIFFLE
07/14/2020
TOT # ITEM % CUM
0 - 0.062
0
0.00
0.00
0.062 - 0.125
0
0.00
0.00
0.125 - 0.25
0
0.00
0.00
0.25 - 0.50
12
12.00
12.00
0.50 - 1.0
7
7.00
19.00
1.0 - 2.0
0
0.00
19.00
2.0 - 4.0
1
1.00
20.00
4.0 - 5.7
4
4.00
24.00
5.7 - 8.0
14
14.00
38.00
8.0 - 11.3
10
10.00
48.00
11.3 - 16.0
18
18.00
66.00
16.0 - 22.6
14
14.00
80.00
22.6 - 32.0
12
12.00
92.00
32 - 45
7
7.00
99.00
45 - 64
0
0.00
99.00
64 - 90
1
1.00
100.00
90 - 128
0
0.00
100.00
128 - 180
0
0.00
100.00
180 - 256
0
0.00
100.00
256 - 362
0
0.00
100.00
362 - 512
0
0.00
100.00
512 - 1024
0
0.00
100.00
1024 - 2048
0
0.00
100.00
Bedrock
0
0.00
100.00
D16 (mm)
0.79
D35 (mm)
7.51
D50 (mm)
11.82
D84 (mm)
25.73
D95 (mm)
37.57
D100 (mm)
90
Silt/Clay (%)
0
Sand (%)
19
Gravel (%)
80
Cobble (%)
1
Boulder (%)
0
Bedrock (%)
0
Total Particles = 100.

S200 S OF 1-40, ABOVE CROSSING XS5 ACTIVE RIFFLE
100 1000 10000
Particle Size (mm)

RIVERMORPH PARTICLE SUMMARY
River Name:
Reach Name:
Sample Name:
Survey Date:
Size (mm)
Starker
S200
S200 S OF I-40, BELOW CROSSING-XS3 ACTIVE RIFFLE
07/14/2020
TOT # ITEM % CUM
0 - 0.062
0
0.00
0.00
0.062 - 0.125
0
0.00
0.00
0.125 - 0.25
8
7.92
7.92
0.25 - 0.50
4
3.96
11.88
0.50 - 1.0
10
9.90
21.78
1.0 - 2.0
0
0.00
21.78
2.0 - 4.0
0
0.00
21.78
4.0 - 5.7
2
1.98
23.76
5.7 - 8.0
4
3.96
27.72
8.0 - 11.3
7
6.93
34.65
11.3 - 16.0
16
15.84
50.50
16.0 - 22.6
13
12.87
63.37
22.6 - 32.0
13
12.87
76.24
32 - 45
11
10.89
87.13
45 - 64
7
6.93
94.06
64 - 90
4
3.96
98.02
90 - 128
1
0.99
99.01
128 - 180
1
0.99
100.00
180 - 256
0
0.00
100.00
256 - 362
0
0.00
100.00
362 - 512
0
0.00
100.00
512 - 1024
0
0.00
100.00
1024 - 2048
0
0.00
100.00
Bedrock
0
0.00
100.00
D16 (mm)
0.71
D35 (mm)
11.4
D50 (mm)
15.85
D84 (mm)
41.26
D95 (mm)
70.17
D100 (mm)
179.99
Silt/Clay (%)
0
Sand (%)
21.78
Gravel (%)
72.28
Cobble (%)
5.94
Boulder (%)
0
Bedrock (%)
0
Total Particles = 101.

S200 S OF 1-40, BELOW CROSSING-XS3 ACTIVE RIFFLE
100 1000 10000
Particle Size (mm)

S200 S OF 1-40, BELOW CROSSING SIEVE ANALYSIS
Particle Size (mm)

Appendix D- Site Protection Instrument
WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Starker Mitigation Site
Agent Authorization Forms
Long-term Steward Engagement Letter
Conservation Easement Template

WATER & LAND SOLUTION
7721 SIX FORKS ROAD, SUITE 130, RALEIGH, NC 2761.'
(919) 614 - 5111 1 waterlandsolutions.com
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
DEED BOOK 2785 PAGE NO. 1153 PARCEL ID: 375210364087
STREET ADDRESS: 3223 John Daniel Road, Conover NC
DEED BOOK 2785 PAGE NO. 1148 PARCEL ID: - 375219523168
STREET ADDRESS: 3 tracts off E 140, Conover NC
DEED BOOK 3269 PAGE NO. 1875 PARCEL ID: .375215732614
STREET ADDRESS: 31.70 acres off E 140, Claremount NC
DEED BOOK 3269 PAGE NO. 1875 PARCEL ID: — 375216831456
STREET ADDRESS: 3069 Peach Tree Street Ext, Claremount NC
DEED BOOK 3068 PAGE NO. 571 PARCEL ID: 375215534132
STREET ADDRESS:.3 tracts off E 140, Conover NC
DEED BOOK 2785 PAGE NO. .1163 PARCEL ID: 375211558910
STREET ADDRESS: 3728 Rock Barn Road NE. Conover NC

WATER & LAND SOLUTION!
7721 SIX FORKS ROAD, SUITE 130, RALEIGH, NC 27615
i919i 614 - 5111 1 waterlandsolutions.com
Please Print:
Property Owner: Hunsucker Legacy Farms, LLC/dba Hunsucker Farms, LLC
Manager: Dan A. Hunsucker
The undersigned, registered property owners of the above noted property, do hereby
authorize
(Contractor / Agent)
(Name of consulting firm)
to review my property and to act on my behalf to take all actions necessary for the
processing, issuance and acceptance of necessary permits and/or certifications and any and
all standard and special conditions attached. This authorization allows the individual to
represent on my behalf to the necessary Government agency personnel for the proposed
property.
Property Owner's Address (if different than property above):
3223 John Daniel Drive NE, Conover, NC 28613
Telephone: [phone]
We hereby certify the above information submitted in this application is true and accurate
to the best of our knowledge.
Dan hunsuc r (Aug 21, 202016:18 EDT)
Authorized Signature
Date: Aug 21) 2020
Authorized Signature
Date:
Page 2

Starker-Lan(Ic ner Authorizatic
Final Audit Report 2020-08-21
Created: 2020-08-21
By: Catherine Manner ([e-mail])
Status: Signed
Transaction ID: CBJCHBCAABAAsOqjxhvb8Rf2ebn6QfOX 7uOiUFQdZzm
"Starker -Landowner Authorization" History
Document created by Catherine Manner ([e-mail])
2020-08-21 - 8:12:33 PM GMT- IP address: 174.108.239.26
L""+ Document emailed to Dan hunsucker ([e-mail]) for signature
2020-08-21 - 8:13:24 PM GMT
Email viewed by Dan hunsucker ([e-mail])
2020-08-21 - 8:15:33 PM GMT- IP address: 71.81.244.211
�@- Document e-signed by Dan hunsucker ([e-mail])
Signature Date: 2020-08-21 - 8:18:14 PM GMT - Time Source: server- IP address: 71.81.244.211
Signed document emailed to Dan hunsucker ([e-mail]) and Catherine Manner
([e-mail])
2020-08-21 - 8:18:14 PM GMT
a Adobe Sign

RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S
USE
PERMANENT CONSERVATION
EASEMENT
THIS CONSERVATION EASEMENT ("Conservation Easement") made
this day of
("Grantor") and _
., 202 by _ and between
("Grantee") .
The designation Grantor and Grantee as used herein shall include said
parties, their heirs, successors and assigns, and shall include singular, plural,
masculine, feminine or neuter as required by context.
RECITALS
WHEREAS, Grantor owns in fee simple certain real property situated,
lying and being in County, North Carolina, more particularly
described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein (the "Property");
WHEREAS, Grantee is a charitable, not -for -profit or educational
corporation, association, or trust qualified under § 501 (c)(3) and § 170 (h) of
the Internal Revenue Code, and N.C. Gen. Stat. § 121-34 et seq., the purposes
or powers of which include one or more of the purposes (a) — (d) listed below;
(a) retaining or protecting natural, scenic, or open -space aspects of

real property;
(b) ensuring the availability of real property for recreational,
educational, or open -space use;
(c) protecting natural resources;
(d) maintaining or enhancing air or water quality.
WHEREAS, Grantor and Grantee recognize the conservation, scenic,
natural, or aesthetic value of the property in its natural state, which includes the
following natural communities: [add or delete as appropriate: coastal wetlands,
non -riparian wetlands, riparian wetlands, perennial and intermittent streams
and riparian buffers]. The purpose of this Conservation Easement is to maintain
streams, wetlands and riparian resources and other natural values of
approximately acres, more or less, and being more
particularly described in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated fully herein
by reference (the "Conservation Easement Area"), and prevent the use or
development of the Conservation Easement Area for any purpose or in any
manner that would conflict with the maintenance of its natural condition.
WHEREAS, the restoration, enhancement and preservation of the
Conservation Easement Area is a condition of the approval of the Mitigation
Banking Instrument (MBI) and Mitigation Plan for the
Mitigation Bank, Department of the Army (DA) Action ID Number SAW-
, entitled "Agreement to Establish the
Mitigation Bank in the River Basin within the State of North
Carolina", entered into by and between [enter Sponsor name], acting as the
Bank Sponsor, and the Wilmington District Corps of Engineers (Corps), in
consultation with the North Carolina Interagency Review Team (IRT). The
Mitigation Site has been approved by the Corps for use as
a mitigation bank to compensate for unavoidable stream and wetland impacts
authorized by DA permits.
WHEREAS, the restoration, enhancement and preservation of the
Conservation Easement Area is also a condition of the approval of the
Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset Mitigation Banking
Instrument (MBI) and Bank Parcel Development Package (BPDP) or
Mitigation Plan forthe Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset
Mitigation Bank, North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR)
Project ID# , which was approved by the NCDWR, and will
be made and entered into by and between [enter Sponsor name], acting as
the Bank Sponsor, and the NCDWR. The Riparian Buffer
and Nutrient Offset Site is intended to be used to compensate for riparian
buffer and nutrient impacts to surface waters.
WHEREAS, Grantor and Grantee agree that third -party rights of
enforcement shall be held by the North Carolina Division of Water Resources
(NCDWR) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District ("Third -
Parties," to include any successor agencies), and may be exercised through the
appropriate enforcement agencies of the United States and the State of North
Carolina, and that these rights are in addition to, and do not limit, the rights of
enforcement under the NCDWR Project ID# and the
Department of the Army instrument number SAW-

("Mitigation Banking Instrument"), or any permit or certification issued by the
Third -Parties.
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the covenants and
representations contained herein and for other good and valuable
consideration, the receipt and legal sufficiency of which is hereby
acknowledged, Grantor hereby unconditionally and irrevocably grants and
conveys unto Grantee, its heirs, successors and assigns, forever and in
perpetuity a Conservation Easement of the nature and character and to the
extent hereinafter set forth, over the Conservation Easement Area described on
Exhibit B, together with the right to preserve and protect the conservation
values thereof, as follows:
ARTICLE I.
DURATION OF EASEMENT
This Conservation Easement shall be perpetual. This Conservation
Easement is an easement in gross, runs with the land and is enforceable by
Grantee against Grantor, Grantor's personal representatives, heirs, successors
and assigns, lessees, agents and licensees.
ARTICLE II.
PROHIBITED AND RESTRICTED ACTIVITIES
Any activity on, or use of, the Conservation Easement Area inconsistent
with the purpose of this Conservation Easement is prohibited. The
Conservation Easement Area shall be preserved in its natural condition and
restricted from any development that would impair or interfere with the
conservation values of the Conservation Easement Area.
Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the following activities
and uses are expressly prohibited, restricted or reserved as indicated
hereunder:
A. Disturbance of Natural Features. Any change disturbance,
alteration or impairment of the natural features of the Conservation Easement
Area or any introduction of non-native plants and/or animal species is
prohibited.
B. Construction. There shall be no constructing or placing of any
building, mobile home, asphalt or concrete pavement, billboard or other
advertising display, antenna, utility pole, tower, conduit, line, pier, landing, dock
or any other temporary or permanent structure or facility on or above the
Conservation Easement Area.
C. Industrial, Commercial and Residential Use. Industrial, residential
and/or commercial activities, including any rights of passage for such purposes
are prohibited.
D. Agricultural, Grazing and Horticultural Use. Agricultural, grazing,
animal husbandry, and horticultural use of the Conservation Easement Area

are prohibited.
E. Vegetation., There shall be no removal, burning, destruction,
harming, cutting or mowing of trees, shrubs, or other vegetation in the
Conservation Easement Area except as provided in the Mitigation Plan and
BPDP/Mitigation Plan. Mowing of invasive and herbaceous vegetation for
purposes of enhancing planted or volunteer trees and shrubs approved in the
Mitigation Plan and BPDP/Mitigation Plan is allowable once a year for no more
than five consecutive years from the date on page 1 of this Conservation
Easement, except where mowing will negatively impact vegetation or disturb
soils. Mowing activities shall only be performed by [enter Sponsor name] and
shall not violate any part of Item L of Article 11.
F. Roads and Trails. There shall be no construction of roads, trails or
walkways on the Conservation Easement Area; nor enlargement or
modification to existing roads, trails or walkways.
G. Signage. No signs shall be permitted on or over the Conservation
Easement Area, except the posting of no trespassing signs, signs identifying
the conservation values of the Conservation Easement Area, signs giving
directions or proscribing rules and regulations for the use of the Conservation
Easement Area and/or signs identifying the Grantor as owner of the
Conservation Easement Area.
H. Dumping or Storage. Dumping or storage of soil, trash, ashes,
garbage, waste, abandoned vehicles, appliances, machinery or hazardous
substances, or toxic or hazardous waste, or any placement of underground or
aboveground storage tanks or other materials on the Conservation Easement
Area is prohibited.
I. Excavation, Dredging or Mineral Use. There shall be no grading,
filling, excavation, dredging, mining or drilling; no removal of topsoil, sand,
gravel, rock, peat, minerals or other materials, and no change in the topography
of the land in any manner on the Conservation Easement Area, except to
restore natural topography or drainage patterns. For purposes of restoring and
enhancing streams and wetlands within the Conservation Easement Area,
[enter Sponsor name] is allowed to perform grading, filling, and excavation
associated with stream and wetland restoration and enhancement activities as
described in the Mitigation Plan and authorized by Department of the Army
Nationwide Permit 27.
J. Water Quality and Drainage Pattern. There shall be no diking,
draining, dredging, channeling, filling, leveling, pumping, impounding or related
activities, or altering or tampering with water control structures or devices, or
disruption or alteration of the restored, enhanced, or created drainage patterns.
In addition, diverting or causing or permitting the diversion of surface or
underground water into, within or out of the easement area by any means,
removal of wetlands, polluting or discharging into waters, springs, seeps, or
wetlands, or use of pesticide or biocides is prohibited.
K. Development Rights. No development rights that have been

encumbered or extinguished by this Conservation Easement shall be
transferred pursuant to a transferable development rights scheme or cluster
development arrangement or otherwise.
[Not required, but may be added if Grantor and Grantee agree:]
L. Subdivision. The Grantor and Grantee agree that the Conservation
Easement Area currently consists of within
separate parcels. The Grantor may not further subdivide the
Conservation Easement Area, except with the prior written consent of the
Grantee. If Grantor elects to further subdivide any portion of the Conservation
Easement Area, Grantor must provide the Grantee the name, address, and
telephone number of new owner(s) of all property within the Conservation
Easement Area, if different from Grantor. No subdivision of the Conservation
Easement Area shall limit the right of ingress and egress over and across the
Property for the purposes set forth herein. Further, in the event of any
subdivision of the Property (whether inside or outside of the Conservation
Easement Area) provision shall be made to preserve not only Grantee's
perpetual rights of access to the Conservation Easement Area, as defined
herein, but also Grantee's right of perpetual access to any conservation
easements on properties adjacent to the Property which form a part of or are
included in the Mitigation Plan or BPDP/Mitigation Plan. Creation of a
condominium or any de facto division of the Conservation Easement Area is
prohibited. Lot line adjustments or lot consolidation without the prior written
consent of the Grantee is prohibited. The Grantor may convey undivided
interests in the real property underlying the Conservation Easement Area. The
Grantor shall notify the Grantee immediately of the name, address, and
telephone number of any grantee of an undivided interest in any property within
the Conservation Easement Area.
M. Vehicles. The operation of mechanized vehicles, including, but not
limited to, motorcycles, dirt bikes, all -terrain vehicles, cars and trucks is
prohibited other than for temporary or occasional access by the [enter Sponsor
name], the Grantee, its employees and agents, successors, assigns, NCDWR,
and the Corps for purposes of constructing, maintaining and monitoring the
restoration, enhancement and preservation of streams, wetlands and riparian
areas within the Conservation Easement Area. The use of mechanized
vehicles for monitoring purposes is limited to only existing roads and trails as
shown in the approved in the Mitigation Plan and BPDP/Mitigation Plan.
N. Other Prohibitions. Any other use of, or activity on, the
Conservation Easement Area which is or may become inconsistent with the
purposes of this grant, the preservation of the Conservation Easement Area
substantially in its natural condition, or the protection of its environmental
systems, is prohibited.
ARTICLE III.
GRANTOR'S RESEVERED RIGHTS
The Grantor expressly reserves for himself, his personal representatives,
heirs, successors or assigns, the right to continue the use of the Conservation
Easement Area for all purposes not inconsistent with this Conservation

Easement, including, but not limited to, the right to quiet enjoyment of the
Conservation Easement Area, the rights of ingress and egress, the right to
hunt, fish, and hike on the Conservation Easement Area, the right to sell,
transfer, gift or otherwise convey the Conservation Easement Area, in whole or
in part, provided such sale, transfer or gift conveyance is subject to the terms
of, and shall specifically reference, this Conservation Easement.
Notwithstanding the foregoing Restrictions, Grantor reserves for Grantor,
its successors and assigns, including [enter Sponsor name] acting as the Bank
Sponsor, the right to construct and perform activities related to the restoration,
enhancement, and preservation of streams, wetlands and riparian areas within
the Conservation Easement Area in accordance with the approved
Mitigation Plan, the approved
BPDP/Mitigation Plan, and the two Mitigation Banking
the Recitals of this Conservation Easement.
Instruments described in
Notwithstanding the foregoing Restrictions, Grantor reserves for Grantor,
its successors and assigns, the following rights in the areas labeled as "Internal
Crossing" on the plat [insert plat name and recorded plat book page number] in
the Conservation Easement Area: vehicular access, livestock access, irrigation
piping and piping of livestock waste. All Internal Crossings that allow livestock
access will be bounded by fencing and will be over a culvert.
ARTICLE IV.
GRANTEE'S RIGHTS
The Grantee or its authorized representatives, successors and assigns,
the Corps and NCDWR, shall have the right to enter the Property and
Conservation Easement Area at all reasonable times for the purpose of
inspecting the Conservation Easement Area to determine if the Grantor, or his
personal representatives, heirs, successors, or assigns, is complying with the
terms, conditions, restrictions, and purposes of this Conservation Easement.
The Grantee, [enter Sponsor name], and its authorized representatives,
successors and assigns, the Corps and NCDWR shall also have the right to
enter and go upon the Conservation Easement Area for purposes of making
scientific or educational observations and studies, and taking samples. The
easement rights granted herein do not include public access rights.
ARTICLE V.
ENFORCEMENT AND REMEDIES
A. To accomplish the purposes of this Easement, Grantee, the Corps,
and NCDWR are allowed to prevent any activity on or use of the Conservation
Easement Area that is inconsistent with the purposes of this Easement and to
require the restoration of such areas or features of the Conservation Easement
Area that may be damaged by such activity or use. Upon any breach of the
terms of this Conservation Easement by Grantor that comes to the attention of
the Grantee, the Grantee shall notify the Grantor in writing of such breach. The
Grantor shall have 30 days after receipt of such notice to correct the conditions
constituting such breach. If the breach remains uncured after 30 days, the
Grantee may enforce this Conservation Easement by appropriate legal

proceedings including damages, injunctive and other relief. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, the Grantee reserves the immediate right, without notice, to obtain a
temporary restraining order, injunctive or other appropriate relief if the breach of
the terms of this Conservation Easement is or would irreversibly or otherwise
materially impair the benefits to be derived from this Conservation Easement.
The Grantor and Grantee acknowledge that under such circumstances damage
to the Grantee would be irreparable and remedies at law will be inadequate.
The rights and remedies of the Grantee provided hereunder shall be in addition
to, and not in lieu of, all other rights and remedies available to Grantee in
connection with this Conservation Easement. The costs of a breach, correction
or restoration, including the Grantee's expenses, court costs, and attorneys'
fees, shall be paid by Grantor, provided Grantor is determined to be
responsible for the breach. The Corps and the NCDWR shall have the same
rights and privileges as the said Grantee to enforce the terms and conditions of
this Conservation Easement.
B. No failure on the part of the Grantee to enforce any covenant or
provision hereof shall discharge or invalidate such covenant or any other
covenant, condition, or provision hereof or affect the right to Grantee to enforce
the same in the event of a subsequent breach or default.
C. Nothing contained in this Conservation Easement shall be
construed to entitle Grantee to bring any action against Grantor for any injury or
change in the Conservation Easement Area resulting from causes beyond the
Grantor's control, including, without limitation, fire, flood, storm, war, acts of
God or third parties, except Grantor's lessees or invitees; or from any prudent
action taken in good faith by Grantor under emergency conditions to prevent,
abate, or mitigate significant injury to life, damage to property or harm to the
Conservation Easement Area resulting from such causes.
ARTICLE VI.
MISCELLANEOUS
A. Warranty. Grantor warrants, covenants and represents that it owns
the Property in fee simple, and that Grantor either owns all interests in the
Property which may be impaired by the granting of this Conservation Easement
or that there are no outstanding mortgages, tax liens, encumbrances, or other
interests in the Property which have not been expressly subordinated to this
Conservation Easement. Grantor further warrants that Grantee shall have the
use of and enjoy all the benefits derived from and arising out of this
Conservation Easement, and that Grantor will warrant and defend title to the
Property against the claims of all persons. -
B. Subsequent Transfers. The Grantor agrees to incorporate the terms
of this Conservation Easement in any deed or other legal instrument that
transfers any interest in all or a portion of the Conservation Easement Area.
The Grantor agrees to provide written notice of such transfer at least sixty (60)
days prior to the date of the transfer. The Grantor and Grantee agree that the
terms of this Conservation Easement shall survive any merger of the fee and
easement interests in the Conservation Easement Area or any portion thereof
and shall not be amended, modified or terminated without the prior written

consent and approval of the Corps.
C. Assignment. The parties recognize and agree that the benefits of
this Conservation Easement are in gross and assignable provided, however
that the Grantee hereby covenants and agrees, that in the event it transfers or
assigns this Conservation Easement, the organization receiving the interest will
be a qualified holder pursuant to 33 CFR 332.7 (a)(1), N.C. Gen. Stat. § 121-34
et seq. and § 501 (c)(3) and § 170 (h) of the Internal Revenue Code, and the
Grantee further covenants and agrees that the terms of the transfer or
assignment will be such that the transferee or assignee will be required to
continue in perpetuity the conservation purposes described in this document.
D. Entire Agreement and Severability. The combined Mitigation
Banking Instruments: MBI with corresponding Mitigation Plan, and MBI with
corresponding BPDP/Mitigation Plan, and this Conservation Easement sets
forth the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the Conservation
Easement and supersedes all prior discussions, negotiations, understandings
or agreements relating to the Conservation Easement. If any provision is found
to be void or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder
shall continue in full force and effect.
E. Obligations of Ownership. Grantor is responsible for any real estate
taxes, assessments, fees, or charges levied upon the Property. Grantor shall
keep the Property free of any liens or other encumbrances for obligations
incurred by Grantor, except those incurred after the date hereof, which are
expressly subject and subordinate to the Conservation Easement. Grantee shall
not be responsible for any costs or liability of any kind related to the ownership,
operation, insurance, upkeep, or maintenance of the Property, except as
expressly provided herein. Nothing herein shall relieve the Grantor of the
obligation to comply with federal, state or local laws, regulations and permits
that may apply to the exercise of the Reserved Rights.
F. Long -Term Management. Grantor is responsible for all long-term
management activities associated with fencing. These activities include the
maintenance and/or replacement of fence structures to ensure the aquatic
resource functions within the boundaries of the Protected Property are
sustained.
G. Extinguishment. In the event that changed conditions render
impossible the continued use of the Conservation Easement Area for the
conservation purposes, this Conservation Easement may only be extinguished,
in whole or in part, by judicial proceeding.
H. Eminent Domain. Whenever all or part of the Conservation
Easement Area is taken in the exercise of eminent domain so as to
substantially abrogate the Restrictions imposed by this Conservation
Easement, Grantor and Grantee shall join in appropriate actions at the time of
such taking to recover the full value of the taking, and all incidental and direct
damages due to the taking.
Proceeds. This Conservation Easement constitutes a real property

interest immediately vested in Grantee. In the event that all or a portion of the
Conservation Easement Area is sold, exchanged, or involuntarily converted
following an extinguishment or the exercise of eminent domain, Grantee shall
be entitled to the fair market value of this Conservation Easement as
determined at the time of the extinguishment or condemnation.
J. Notification. Any notice, request for approval, or other
communication required under this Conservation Easement shall be sent by
registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, to the following addresses (or such
address as may be hereafter specified by notice pursuant to this paragraph):
To Grantor:
[Name, address and fax number]
To Grantee:
[Name, address and fax number]
To the Corp-!L.
US Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District, Regulatory Division
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403
To NCDEQ -DWR:
NCDEQ - Division of Water Resources 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1601
K. Failure of Grantee. If at any time Grantee is unable or fails to
enforce this Conservation Easement, or if Grantee ceases to be a qualified
grantee, and if within a reasonable period of time after the occurrence of one of
these events Grantee fails to make an assignment pursuant to this
Conservation Easement, then the Grantee's interest shall become vested in
another qualified grantee in accordance with an appropriate proceeding in a
court of competent jurisdiction.
L. Amendment. This Conservation Easement may be amended, but
only in a writing signed by all parties hereto, and provided such amendment
does not affect the qualification of this Conservation Easement or the status of
the Grantee under any applicable laws, and is consistent with the conservation
purposes of this grant.
M. Present Condition of the Conservation Easement Area. The
wetlands, scenic, resource, environmental, and other natural characteristics of
the Conservation Easement Area, and its current use and state of
improvement, are described in Section of the Mitigation Plan, prepared
by Grantor and acknowledged by the Grantor and Grantee to be complete and
accurate as of the date hereof. Both Grantor and Grantee have copies of this
report. It will be used by the parties to assure that any future changes in the use
of the Conservation Easement Area will be consistent with the terms of this
Conservation Easement. However, this report is not intended to preclude the

use of other evidence to establish the present condition of the Conservation
Easement Area if there is a controversy over its use.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said rights and easements perpetually
unto Grantee for the aforesaid purposes.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereunto set his hand and
seal, the day and year first above written.
[Signatures of the Grantor and Grantee in appropriate form]

DocuSign Envelope ID:90F59615-5954-46CF-ACCA-68E945154lC9
Unique Places
To Save
December 10, 2020
Catherine Manner
Water & Land Solutions
7721 Six Forks Road, Suite 130
Raleigh, NC 27615
Dear Ms. Manner,
This letter confirms that Unique Places to Save ("UP2S"), a 501(c)3 not -for -profit organization located in the
State of North Carolina, has preliminarily agreed to act as the conservation easement grantee and long-term
steward for the Starker Mitigation site ("Site") located in Catawba County, North Carolina. The Site consists of
an approximate 30-acre conservation easement area. As the conservation easement grantee and long-term
steward, UP2S shall be responsible for periodic inspection of the Site to ensure that the terms and restrictions
required in the conservation easement are enforced and maintained into perpetuity. Specific responsibilities
include:
• Conservation easement compliance monitoring of the Site is conducted on an annual basis.
• Visits to Site are coordinated with the landowner when possible.
• Annual conservation easement compliance monitoring reports are sent to the landowner when
possible.
• Signage (if applicable) for the conservation easement boundary is maintained.
• • Violations and potential violations of the conservation easement deed are addressed following
protocols contained in the UP2S Conservation Easement Violations Policy and per the terms of the
conservation easement deed.
Water & Land Solutions shall act as Bank Sponsor of the Site. UP2S shall receive a stewardship endowment in
the amount of $61,297.00 to ensure annual Site inspections occur and that the terms of the conservation
easement are legally defended into perpetuity.
DOCUSigned by:
83$56C8737A48E...
Je Fisher, Board Chair
Unique Places to Save
V e-
..,.
Representative Signature
Water & Land Solutions
Printed Name
1
014 4^0 A
Date
IZ-rc9-0Z
PO Box 1183 . Chapel Hill, NC 27514 • 585-472-9498 • [e-mail]

�'
0
0
0
U
0�
0
0
0
C.
't
NN
�
-,o�
,
,
iL
Q
i
� O
C f6 f6 �' f6 f6 f6 f6
Q Q 4J Q Q Q Q
LL 4J
U
C
O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
000"'0d�0
U �
F,",
o Q Q Q Q Q
= z z z z z
I
u a a o O a
o z z CONo N z
IzS �-
ao
0
O
2
C
El
0
0
0
0
a
�
•.
4.1
�
o
o
+�
O
U n
U
4--
c
J c
(n
cn
0
0
0
0
0
0
O�
c
L
N
-b4
-b4
-b4
-b4
V�
C
E
E
0
E
a--�
Q
Q
Q
Q
N
\
z
\
z
\
z
\
z
iy
C
ca
bA
O
U
p
Z.
O
LL
m
0
0
Q
11.04
0
z�z�z
o
o a a a
co z z z
a a a a
z z z z
4
.5
a
E
a)
Lu
a
L
O
+1
0
O
7
U
tLi
o
S
�
U
Q
cn
�
O
cn

Appendix E- USACE Assessment Forms
WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Starker Mitigation Site
INIVENTAIMOTH IT
NC WAM Forms

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Starker Mitigation Bank
3. Applicant/owner name: WLS/Hunsucker Farms LLC
5. County: Catawba
7. River basin: Catawba
Date of evaluation: 7/14/2020
Assessor name/organization:
Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad:
Amy James/EPR
Mull Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.717069,-81.165934
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): S100 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 5,418
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 3-7 ft. ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 15-20 ft. 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ®Perennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ❑A� J ®B
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) ®Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mil) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mil) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ®Water Supply Watershed (❑l ❑II ❑III ®IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ❑No
1. Channel Water — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction — assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not
3. Feature Pattern — assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile — assessment reach metric
®A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
❑B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability — assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
®C > 25% of channel unstable

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

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

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

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Starker Mitigation Bank Date of Assessment
7/14/2020
Stream Category Pb2 Assessor Name/Organization
Amy James/EPR
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
YES
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
LOW
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
LOW
(4) Floodplain Access
LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
MEDIUM
(4) Microtopography
NA
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
LOW
(4) Sediment Transport
MEDIUM
(4) Stream Geomorphology
MEDIUM
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(1) Water Quality
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
HIGH
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
(3) Substrate
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
(3) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall
LOW

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Starker Mitigation Bank
3. Applicant/owner name: WLS/Hunsucker Farms LLC
5. County: Catawba
7. River basin: Catawba
Date of evaluation: 7/14/2020
Assessor name/organization:
Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad:
Amy James/EPR
Mull Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.713045,-81.172890
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): S200 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 4,220
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 4-10 ft. ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 12-18 ft. 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ®Perennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ❑A� J ®B
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) ®Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mil) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mil) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑l ❑II ❑III ®IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ❑No
1. Channel Water — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction — assessment reach metric
®A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
❑B Not
3. Feature Pattern — assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile — assessment reach metric
®A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
❑B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability — assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
®C > 25% of channel unstable

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

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

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

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Starker Mitigation Bank Date of Assessment
7/14/2020
Stream Category Pb2 Assessor Name/Organization
Amy James/EPR
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
LOW
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
LOW
(4) Floodplain Access
LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
LOW
(4) Microtopography
NA
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
(4) Channel Stability
LOW
(4) Sediment Transport
HIGH
(4) Stream Geomorphology
MEDIUM
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(1) Water Quality
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
HIGH
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
(3) Substrate
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
(3) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall
LOW

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user Manual version b.0
USACE AID #
NCDWR#
Project Name
Starker Mitigation Bank
Date of Evaluation
7/14/2020
Applicant/Owner Name
WLS/Hunsucker Farms LLC
Wetland Site Name
Wetland A
Wetland Type
Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Amy James/EPR
Level III Ecoregion
Piedmont
Nearest Named Water Body
Mull Creek
River Basin
Catawba
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
03050101
County
Catawba
NCDWR Region
Mooresville
I-1 Yes F No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Lonaitude (deci-dearees)
35.726300.-81.175047
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in
recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic
tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ❑ Yes ® No
Regulatory Considerations -Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑ Anadromous fish
❑ Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
❑ NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
❑ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
❑ Publicly owned property
❑ N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
❑ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
❑ Designated NCNHP reference community
❑ Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
❑ Blackwater
® Brownwater
❑ Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ❑ Lunar ❑ Wind ❑ Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? ❑ Yes ® No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? ❑ Yes ® No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the
assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment
area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
❑A ❑A Not severely altered
®B ®B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub).
Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot
deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ❑B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
❑C ❑C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change)
(examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
Water Storage/Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
3a. ❑A ❑A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
❑B ❑B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
®C ®C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
❑D ❑D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. ❑A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
❑B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
®C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture/Structure — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature.
Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional
indicators.
4a. ❑A Sandy soil
®B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
❑C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
❑D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
❑E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. ❑A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
®B Soil ribbon >_ 1 inch
4c. ®A No peat or muck presence
❑B A peat or muck presence
Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub). Examples
of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
❑B ❑B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
El El Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6. Land Use — opportunity metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources draining
to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (5M),
and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M).
WS
5M
2M
❑A
❑A
❑A
> 10% impervious surfaces
❑B
❑B
❑B
Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants
®C
®C
®C
>_ 20% coverage of pasture
®D
®D
®D
>_ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
❑E
❑E
❑E
>_ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
❑F
❑F
❑F
>_ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
❑G
❑G
❑G
Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent drainage and/or overbank flow from affecting the
assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer —assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the .water body. Make
bufferjudgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
❑A >_ 50 feet
®B From 30 to < 50 feet
❑C From 15 to < 30 feet
❑D From 5 to < 15 feet
❑E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
®<_ 15-feet wide ❑> 15-feet wide ❑ Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
®Yes ❑No
7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed?
®Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
❑Exposed — adjacent open water with width >_ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes and
Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp Forest
only)
Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and
the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
❑A ❑A >_ 100 feet
❑B ®B From 80 to < 100 feet
❑C ❑C From 50 to < 80 feet
❑D ❑D From 40 to < 50 feet
❑E ❑E From 30 to < 40 feet
❑F ❑F From 15 to < 30 feet
❑G ❑G From 5 to < 15 feet
❑H ❑H < 5 feet

9. Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
®A Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
❑B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
❑C Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
®A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
❑B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
El Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
❑A ❑A ❑A >_ 500 acres
❑B ❑B ❑B From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C ❑C ❑C From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D ❑D ❑D From 25 to < 50 acres
❑E ❑E ❑E From 10 to < 25 acres
❑F ❑F ❑F From 5 to < 10 acres
®G ®G ❑G From 1 to < 5 acres
❑H ❑H ®H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
❑I ❑I ❑I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
❑J ❑J ❑J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
❑K ❑K ❑K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
❑A Pocosin is the full extent (>_ 90%) of its natural landscape size.
❑B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility line
corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300
feet wide.
Well Loosely
❑A
❑A
>_ 500 acres
❑B
❑B
From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C
❑C
From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D
®D
From 10 to < 50 acres
❑E
❑E
< 10 acres
❑F
❑F
Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
❑Yes ❑No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect —wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non -forested areas >_ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors, and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directions? If the assessment area is clear cut,
select option "C."
❑A 0
❑B 1 to 4
®C 5to8
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
❑A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
❑B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or clearing.
It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
®C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in at
least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
❑A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics).
®B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
❑C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure —assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
❑A >_ 25% coverage of vegetation
❑B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider
structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA WT
o ❑A ❑A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
m ®B ®B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U ❑C ❑C Canopy sparse or absent
❑A
❑A
Dense mid-story/sapling layer
❑B
❑B
Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
®C
®C
Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
❑A
❑A
Dense shrub layer
®B
®B
Moderate density shrub layer
U) ❑C
❑C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
-a ❑A
❑A
Dense herb layer
_ ®B
®B
Moderate density herb layer
❑C
❑C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
19. Diameter Class Distribution —wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
❑B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
®C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris —wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
❑A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion — wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
❑A ❑B ❑C ❑D
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion,
man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
❑A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
®B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
N otes

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Wetland A Date of Assessment 7/14/2020
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization Amy James/EPR
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO
Sub -function Ratina Summar
Function
Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Sub -surface Storage and
Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Veaetation Composition
Condition
LOW
Function Ratina Summar
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user Manual version b.0
USACE AID #
NCDWR#
Project Name
Starker Mitigation Bank
Date of Evaluation
7/14/2020
Applicant/Owner Name
WLS/Hunsucker Farms LLC
Wetland Site Name
Wetland B
Wetland Type
Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Amy James/EPR
Level III Ecoregion
Piedmont
Nearest Named Water Body
Mull Creek
River Basin
Catawba
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
03050101
County
Catawba
NCDWR Region
Mooresville
I-1 Yes F No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Lonaitude (deci-dearees)
35.724651.-81.173859
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in
recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic
tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ❑ Yes ® No
Regulatory Considerations -Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑ Anadromous fish
❑ Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
❑ NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
❑ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
❑ Publicly owned property
❑ N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
❑ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
❑ Designated NCNHP reference community
❑ Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
❑ Blackwater
® Brownwater
❑ Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ❑ Lunar ❑ Wind ❑ Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? ❑ Yes ® No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? ❑ Yes ® No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the
assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment
area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
®A ®A Not severely altered
❑B ❑B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub).
Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot
deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ❑B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
❑C ❑C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change)
(examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
Water Storage/Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
3a. ❑A ❑A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
❑B ❑B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
❑C ❑C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®D ®D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. ❑A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
®B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
❑C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture/Structure — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature.
Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional
indicators.
4a. ❑A Sandy soil
®B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
❑C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
❑D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
❑E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. ❑A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
®B Soil ribbon >_ 1 inch
4c. ®A No peat or muck presence
❑B A peat or muck presence
Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub). Examples
of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
❑B ❑B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
El El Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6. Land Use — opportunity metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources draining
to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (5M),
and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M).
WS
5M
2M
❑A
❑A
❑A
> 10% impervious surfaces
❑B
❑B
❑B
Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants
®C
®C
®C
>_ 20% coverage of pasture
❑D
❑D
El
>_ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
❑E
❑E
❑E
>_ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
❑F
❑F
❑F
>_ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
❑G
❑G
❑G
Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent drainage and/or overbank flow from affecting the
assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer —assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the .water body. Make
bufferjudgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
❑A >_ 50 feet
❑B From 30 to < 50 feet
❑C From 15 to < 30 feet
®D From 5 to < 15 feet
❑E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
®<_ 15-feet wide ❑> 15-feet wide ❑ Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
❑Yes ®No
7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed?
®Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
❑Exposed — adjacent open water with width >_ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes and
Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp Forest
only)
Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and
the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
❑A ❑A >_ 100 feet
❑B ❑B From 80 to < 100 feet
❑C ❑C From 50 to < 80 feet
❑D ❑D From 40 to < 50 feet
❑E ❑E From 30 to < 40 feet
❑F ❑F From 15 to < 30 feet
❑G ®G From 5 to < 15 feet
❑H ❑H < 5 feet

9. Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
❑A Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
❑B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
®C Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
®A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
❑B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
El Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
❑A ❑A ❑A >_ 500 acres
❑B ❑B ❑B From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C ❑C ❑C From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D ❑D ❑D From 25 to < 50 acres
❑E ❑E ❑E From 10 to < 25 acres
❑F ❑F ❑F From 5 to < 10 acres
❑G ❑G ❑G From 1 to < 5 acres
❑H ❑H ❑H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
❑I ❑I ❑I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
®J ®J ®J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
❑K ❑K ❑K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
❑A Pocosin is the full extent (>_ 90%) of its natural landscape size.
❑B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility line
corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300
feet wide.
Well Loosely
❑A
❑A
>_ 500 acres
❑B
❑B
From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C
❑C
From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D
®D
From 10 to < 50 acres
❑E
❑E
< 10 acres
❑F
❑F
Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
❑Yes ❑No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect —wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non -forested areas >_ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors, and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directions? If the assessment area is clear cut,
select option "C."
❑A 0
®B 1 to 4
❑C 5to8
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
❑A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
❑B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or clearing.
It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
®C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in at
least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
❑A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics).
®B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
❑C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure —assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
❑A >_ 25% coverage of vegetation
❑B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider
structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA WT
o ❑A ❑A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
m ®B ®B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U ❑C ❑C Canopy sparse or absent
❑A
❑A
Dense mid-story/sapling layer
❑B
❑B
Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
®C
®C
Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
❑A
❑A
Dense shrub layer
❑B
❑B
Moderate density shrub layer
U) ®C
®C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
-a ❑A
❑A
Dense herb layer
_ ®B
®B
Moderate density herb layer
❑C
❑C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
19. Diameter Class Distribution —wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
❑B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
®C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris —wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
❑A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion — wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
❑A ❑B ❑C ❑D
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion,
man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
®A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
❑B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
N otes
Oxbox wetland that holds standing water for longer periods; outlets to stream on either end.

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Wetland B Date of Assessment 7/14/2020
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization Amy James/EPR
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO
Sub -function Ratina Summar
Function
Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Sub -surface Storage and
Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Particulate Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Physical Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Veaetation Composition
Condition
LOW
Function Ratina Summar
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user Manual version b.0
USACE AID #
NCDWR#
Project Name
Starker Mitigation Bank
Date of Evaluation
7/14/2020
Applicant/Owner Name
WLS/Hunsucker Farms LLC
Wetland Site Name
Wetland C
Wetland Type
Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Amy James/EPR
Level III Ecoregion
Piedmont
Nearest Named Water Body
Mull Creek
River Basin
Catawba
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
03050101
County
Catawba
NCDWR Region
Mooresville
I-1 Yes F No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Lonaitude (deci-dearees)
35.724229.-81.173741
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in
recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic
tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ❑ Yes ® No
Regulatory Considerations -Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑ Anadromous fish
❑ Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
❑ NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
❑ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
❑ Publicly owned property
❑ N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
❑ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
❑ Designated NCNHP reference community
❑ Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
❑ Blackwater
® Brownwater
❑ Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ❑ Lunar ❑ Wind ❑ Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? ❑ Yes ® No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? ❑ Yes ® No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the
assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment
area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
❑A ❑A Not severely altered
®B ®B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub).
Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot
deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ❑B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
❑C ❑C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change)
(examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
Water Storage/Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
3a. ❑A ❑A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
❑B ❑B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
❑C ❑C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®D ®D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. ❑A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
❑B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
®C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture/Structure — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature.
Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional
indicators.
4a. ❑A Sandy soil
®B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
❑C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
❑D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
❑E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. ❑A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
®B Soil ribbon >_ 1 inch
4c. ®A No peat or muck presence
❑B A peat or muck presence
Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub). Examples
of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
❑B ❑B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
El El Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6. Land Use — opportunity metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources draining
to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (5M),
and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M).
WS
5M
2M
❑A
❑A
❑A
> 10% impervious surfaces
❑B
❑B
❑B
Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants
®C
®C
®C
>_ 20% coverage of pasture
❑D
❑D
El
>_ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
❑E
❑E
❑E
>_ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
❑F
❑F
❑F
>_ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
❑G
❑G
❑G
Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent drainage and/or overbank flow from affecting the
assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer —assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the .water body. Make
bufferjudgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
❑A >_ 50 feet
❑B From 30 to < 50 feet
®C From 15 to < 30 feet
❑D From 5 to < 15 feet
❑E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
®<_ 15-feet wide ❑> 15-feet wide ❑ Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
❑Yes ®No
7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed?
®Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
❑Exposed — adjacent open water with width >_ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes and
Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp Forest
only)
Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and
the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
❑A ❑A >_ 100 feet
❑B ❑B From 80 to < 100 feet
❑C ❑C From 50 to < 80 feet
❑D ❑D From 40 to < 50 feet
❑E ❑E From 30 to < 40 feet
❑F ®F From 15 to < 30 feet
❑G ❑G From 5 to < 15 feet
❑H ❑H < 5 feet

9. Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
®A Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
❑B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
❑C Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
®A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
❑B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
El Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
❑A ❑A ❑A >_ 500 acres
❑B ❑B ❑B From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C ❑C ❑C From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D ❑D ❑D From 25 to < 50 acres
❑E ❑E ❑E From 10 to < 25 acres
❑F ❑F ❑F From 5 to < 10 acres
❑G ❑G ❑G From 1 to < 5 acres
❑H ❑H ❑H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
❑I ❑I ❑I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
®J ®J ®J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
❑K ❑K ❑K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
❑A Pocosin is the full extent (>_ 90%) of its natural landscape size.
❑B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility line
corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300
feet wide.
Well Loosely
❑A
❑A
>_ 500 acres
❑B
❑B
From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C
❑C
From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D
®D
From 10 to < 50 acres
❑E
❑E
< 10 acres
❑F
❑F
Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
❑Yes ❑No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect —wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non -forested areas >_ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors, and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directions? If the assessment area is clear cut,
select option "C."
❑A 0
®B 1 to 4
❑C 5to8
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
❑A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
❑B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or clearing.
It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
®C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in at
least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
❑A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics).
®B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
❑C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure —assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
❑A >_ 25% coverage of vegetation
❑B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider
structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA WT
o ❑A ❑A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
m ®B ®B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U ❑C ❑C Canopy sparse or absent
❑A
❑A
Dense mid-story/sapling layer
❑B
❑B
Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
®C
®C
Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
❑A
❑A
Dense shrub layer
❑B
❑B
Moderate density shrub layer
U) ®C
®C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
-a ❑A
❑A
Dense herb layer
_ ❑B
❑B
Moderate density herb layer
®C
®C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
19. Diameter Class Distribution —wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
®B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
❑C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris —wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
❑A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion — wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
❑A ❑B ❑C ❑D
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion,
man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
®A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
❑B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
N otes

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Wetland C Date of Assessment 7/14/2020
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization Amy James/EPR
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO
Sub -function Ratina Summar
Function
Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Sub -surface Storage and
Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Particulate Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Physical Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Veaetation Composition
Condition
LOW
Function Ratina Summar
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user Manual version b.0
USACE AID #
NCDWR#
Project Name
Starker Mitigation Bank
Date of Evaluation
7/14/2020
Applicant/Owner Name
WLS/Hunsucker Farms LLC
Wetland Site Name
Wetland D
Wetland Type
Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Amy James/EPR
Level III Ecoregion
Piedmont
Nearest Named Water Body
Mull Creek
River Basin
Catawba
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
03050101
County
Catawba
NCDWR Region
Mooresville
I-1 Yes F No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Lonaitude (deci-dearees)
35.724193.-81.173371
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in
recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic
tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ❑ Yes ® No
Regulatory Considerations -Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑ Anadromous fish
❑ Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
❑ NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
❑ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
❑ Publicly owned property
❑ N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
❑ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
❑ Designated NCNHP reference community
❑ Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
❑ Blackwater
® Brownwater
❑ Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ❑ Lunar ❑ Wind ❑ Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? ❑ Yes ® No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? ❑ Yes ® No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the
assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment
area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
❑A ❑A Not severely altered
®B ®B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub).
Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot
deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ❑B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
❑C ❑C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change)
(examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
Water Storage/Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
3a. ❑A ❑A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
❑B ❑B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
❑C ❑C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®D ®D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. ❑A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
❑B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
®C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture/Structure — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature.
Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional
indicators.
4a. ❑A Sandy soil
®B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
❑C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
❑D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
❑E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. ❑A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
®B Soil ribbon >_ 1 inch
4c. ®A No peat or muck presence
❑B A peat or muck presence
Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub). Examples
of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
❑B ❑B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
El El Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6. Land Use — opportunity metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources draining
to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (5M),
and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M).
WS
5M
2M
❑A
❑A
❑A
> 10% impervious surfaces
❑B
❑B
❑B
Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants
®C
®C
®C
>_ 20% coverage of pasture
❑D
❑D
El
>_ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
❑E
❑E
❑E
>_ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
❑F
❑F
❑F
>_ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
❑G
❑G
❑G
Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent drainage and/or overbank flow from affecting the
assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer —assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the .water body. Make
bufferjudgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
❑A >_ 50 feet
®B From 30 to < 50 feet
❑C From 15 to < 30 feet
❑D From 5 to < 15 feet
❑E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
®<_ 15-feet wide ❑> 15-feet wide ❑ Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
❑Yes ®No
7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed?
®Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
❑Exposed — adjacent open water with width >_ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes and
Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp Forest
only)
Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and
the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
❑A ❑A >_ 100 feet
❑B ❑B From 80 to < 100 feet
❑C ❑C From 50 to < 80 feet
❑D ❑D From 40 to < 50 feet
❑E ®E From 30 to < 40 feet
❑F ❑F From 15 to < 30 feet
❑G ❑G From 5 to < 15 feet
❑H ❑H < 5 feet

9. Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
®A Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
❑B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
❑C Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
®A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
❑B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
El Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
❑A ❑A ❑A >_ 500 acres
❑B ❑B ❑B From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C ❑C ❑C From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D ❑D ❑D From 25 to < 50 acres
❑E ❑E ❑E From 10 to < 25 acres
❑F ❑F ❑F From 5 to < 10 acres
❑G ❑G ❑G From 1 to < 5 acres
❑H ❑H ❑H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
❑I ❑I ❑I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
®J ®J ❑J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
❑K ❑K ®K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
❑A Pocosin is the full extent (>_ 90%) of its natural landscape size.
❑B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility line
corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300
feet wide.
Well Loosely
❑A
❑A
>_ 500 acres
❑B
❑B
From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C
❑C
From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D
®D
From 10 to < 50 acres
❑E
❑E
< 10 acres
❑F
❑F
Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
❑Yes ❑No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect —wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non -forested areas >_ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors, and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directions? If the assessment area is clear cut,
select option "C."
❑A 0
®B 1 to 4
❑C 5to8
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
❑A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
❑B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or clearing.
It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
®C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in at
least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
❑A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics).
®B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
❑C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure —assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
❑A >_ 25% coverage of vegetation
❑B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider
structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA WT
o ❑A ❑A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
m ❑B ❑B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
CU ®C ®C Canopy sparse or absent
❑A
❑A
Dense mid-story/sapling layer
❑B
❑B
Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
®C
®C
Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
❑A
❑A
Dense shrub layer
❑B
❑B
Moderate density shrub layer
U) ®C
®C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
-a ❑A
❑A
Dense herb layer
_ ®B
®B
Moderate density herb layer
❑C
❑C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
19. Diameter Class Distribution —wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
®B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
❑C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris —wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
❑A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion — wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
❑A ❑B ❑C ❑D
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion,
man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
®A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
❑B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
N otes

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Wetland D Date of Assessment 7/14/2020
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization Amy James/EPR
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO
Sub -function Ratina Summar
Function
Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -surface Storage and
Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Particulate Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Physical Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Veaetation Composition
Condition
LOW
Function Ratina Summar
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
LOW
Water Quality
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user Manual version b.0
USACE AID #
NCDWR#
Project Name
Starker Mitigation Bank
Date of Evaluation
7/14/2020
Applicant/Owner Name
WLS/Hunsucker Farms LLC
Wetland Site Name
Wetland E
Wetland Type
Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Amy James/EPR
Level III Ecoregion
Piedmont
Nearest Named Water Body
Mull Creek
River Basin
Catawba
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
03050101
County
Catawba
NCDWR Region
Mooresville
I-1 Yes F No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Lonaitude (deci-dearees)
35.722391.-81.178292
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in
recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic
tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ❑ Yes ® No
Regulatory Considerations -Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑ Anadromous fish
❑ Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
❑ NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
❑ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
❑ Publicly owned property
❑ N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
❑ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
❑ Designated NCNHP reference community
❑ Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
❑ Blackwater
® Brownwater
❑ Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ❑ Lunar ❑ Wind ❑ Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? ❑ Yes ® No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? ❑ Yes ® No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the
assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment
area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
®A ®A Not severely altered
❑B ❑B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub).
Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot
deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ❑B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
❑C ❑C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change)
(examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
Water Storage/Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
3a. ❑A ❑A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
❑B ❑B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
❑C ❑C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®D ®D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. ❑A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
❑B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
®C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture/Structure — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature.
Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional
indicators.
4a. ❑A Sandy soil
®B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
❑C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
❑D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
❑E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. ❑A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
®B Soil ribbon >_ 1 inch
4c. ®A No peat or muck presence
❑B A peat or muck presence
Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub). Examples
of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
❑B ❑B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
El El Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6. Land Use — opportunity metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources draining
to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (5M),
and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M).
WS
5M
2M
❑A
❑A
❑A
> 10% impervious surfaces
❑B
❑B
❑B
Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants
®C
®C
®C
>_ 20% coverage of pasture
®D
®D
®D
>_ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
❑E
❑E
❑E
>_ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
❑F
❑F
❑F
>_ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
❑G
❑G
❑G
Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent drainage and/or overbank flow from affecting the
assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer —assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the .water body. Make
bufferjudgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
❑A >_ 50 feet
®B From 30 to < 50 feet
❑C From 15 to < 30 feet
❑D From 5 to < 15 feet
❑E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
®<_ 15-feet wide ❑> 15-feet wide ❑ Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
❑Yes ®No
7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed?
®Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
❑Exposed — adjacent open water with width >_ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes and
Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp Forest
only)
Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and
the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
❑A ❑A >_ 100 feet
❑B ❑B From 80 to < 100 feet
❑C ❑C From 50 to < 80 feet
❑D ❑D From 40 to < 50 feet
❑E ®E From 30 to < 40 feet
❑F ❑F From 15 to < 30 feet
❑G ❑G From 5 to < 15 feet
❑H ❑H < 5 feet

9. Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
❑A Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
®B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
❑C Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
®A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
❑B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
El Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
❑A ❑A ❑A >_ 500 acres
❑B ❑B ❑B From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C ❑C ❑C From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D ❑D ❑D From 25 to < 50 acres
❑E ❑E ❑E From 10 to < 25 acres
❑F ❑F ❑F From 5 to < 10 acres
❑G ❑G ❑G From 1 to < 5 acres
❑H ❑H ❑H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
❑I ❑I ❑I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
®J ®J ®J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
❑K ❑K ❑K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
❑A Pocosin is the full extent (>_ 90%) of its natural landscape size.
❑B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility line
corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300
feet wide.
Well Loosely
❑A
❑A
>_ 500 acres
❑B
❑B
From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C
❑C
From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D
❑D
From 10 to < 50 acres
❑E
®E
< 10 acres
❑F
❑F
Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
❑Yes ❑No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect —wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non -forested areas >_ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors, and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directions? If the assessment area is clear cut,
select option "C."
❑A 0
❑B 1 to 4
®C 5to8
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
❑A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
®B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or clearing.
It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
El Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in at
least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
❑A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics).
®B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
❑C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure —assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
❑A >_ 25% coverage of vegetation
❑B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider
structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA WT
o ❑A ❑A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
m ®B ®B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U ❑C ❑C Canopy sparse or absent
❑A
❑A
Dense mid-story/sapling layer
®B
®B
Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
❑C
❑C
Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
❑A
1E
❑A
Dense shrub layer
❑B
❑B
Moderate density shrub layer
U) ®C
®C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
-a ®A
®A
Dense herb layer
_ ❑B
❑B
Moderate density herb layer
❑C
❑C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
19. Diameter Class Distribution —wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
❑B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
®C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris —wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
❑A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion — wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
❑A ❑B ❑C ❑D
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion,
man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
®A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
❑B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
N otes

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Wetland E Date of Assessment 7/14/2020
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization Amy James/EPR
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO
Sub -function Ratina Summar
Function
Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Sub -surface Storage and
Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Particulate Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Physical Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Veaetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Ratina Summar
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM

Appendix F- WOTUS Information
WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Starker Mitigation Site

SAW-2020-01540
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW-2020-01540 County: Catawba U.S.G.S. Quad: NC- Newton
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERNIINATION
Requestor: Water & Land Solutions, LLC
Catherine Manner
Address: 7721 Six Forks Road, Suite 130
Raleigh, NC 27615
Telephone Number: 919-614-5111
E-mail: catherinena,waterlandsolutions.com
Size (acres) 30.3 Nearest Town Conover
Nearest Waterway Mull Creek River Basin Santee
USGS HUC 03050101 Coordinates Latitude: 35.72226
Longitude:-81.17203
Location description: The project area for the Starker Mitigation Site is located east if Banner Road, between Conover and
Claremont in Catawba County, North Carolina. The site is bisected by Interstate 40 between mile markers 133 and 135.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
® There appear to be waters, including wetlands on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The
waters, including wetlands have been delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently accurate
and reliable. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated 8/20/2020, submitted
via email September 15, 2022. Therefore this preliminary jurisdiction determination may be used in the permit evaluation
process, including determining compensatory mitigation. For purposes of computation of impacts, compensatory mitigation
requirements, and other resource protection measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat all waters
and wetlands that would be affected in any way by the permitted activity on the site as if they are jurisdictional waters of the U.S.
This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process
(Reference 33 CFR Part 331). However, you may request an approved JD, which is an appealable action, by contacting the Corps
district for further instruction.
❑ There appear to be waters, including wetlands on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403).
However, since the waters, including wetlands have not been properly delineated, this preliminary jurisdiction determination
may not be used in the permit evaluation process. Without a verified wetland delineation, this preliminary determination is
merely an effective presumption of CWA/RHA jurisdiction over all of the waters, including wetlands at the project area, which
is not sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable permit decision. We recommend that you have the waters,
including wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland
delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by the Corps.
B. Approved Determination
❑ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area/property subject to the permit
requirements of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for
a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ There are waters, including wetlandson the above described project area/property subject to the permit requirements of Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ We recommend you have the waters, including wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be
able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that
can be verified by the Corps.
❑ The waters, including wetlands on your project area/property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by
the Corps. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated DATE. We strongly

SAW-2020-01540
suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by the Corps. Once
verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your property which, provided
there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years.
❑ The waters, including wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the
Corps Regulatory Official identified below onDATE. Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area/property which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA).
You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City, NC, at [phone] to determine their
requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US, including wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material, construction or
placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). If you have any questions
regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Steve Kichefski at 828-271-7980 ext. 4234 or
stev en.l.kichefskinu sace. army.mil.
C. Basis For Determination: See the preliminary jurisdictional determination form dated 03/12/2021.
D. Remarks: None.
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site
identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security
Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request
a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in B.
above)
This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to this
determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed you will find a
Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this determination you
must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Phillip Shannin, Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 1OM15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal
under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP. Should you
decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by Not applicable.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this correspondence. **
Steve Kichefski Digitally signed by Steve Kichefski
Corps Regulatory Official: Date: 2021.03.12 18:46:49-05'00'
Date of JD: 03/12/2021 Expiration Date of JD: Not applicable
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at
http://corpsmapu.usace.anny.mil/cm_apex/Vp=136:4:0

� a• •- -_ r�yure ca � -
w '�4P. i ►� t
Ai
Fco
igure 2C
Figure
S100
Yh' "j
q,.4t.- Figure 2D
S200
LEGEND -� f
J CONSERVATION EASEMENT
PROJECT STREAMS
® EXISTING WETLANDS
0 500 1,000 STARKER MITIGATION BANK PREPARED BY:
ECOSYPOTENTIAL JURISDICTIONAL FEATURES MAP Ar
PLANNING
EM
Feet OVERVIEW F�LANiVING �
RESTORATION{
FIGURE 2 CATAWBA COUNTY, NC AUGUST 2020
41

Wetland A-1
Av,
``. .. ;.
7. Y - - .ICE j
Mx . ~
-
z► r `'
- --Ifn t Cam '
S �
�l
Wetland A S102 _
t -
,t r
LEGEND
Q CONSERVATION EASEMENT
PROJECT STREAMS
(� EXISTING WETLANDS•;
STARKER MITIGATION BANK PREPARED BY:
0 100 200 ECOSYSTEM
Feet POTENTIAL JURISDICTIONAL PLANNING a
FEATURES MAP Ar RESTORATION
FIGURE 2B CATAWBA COUNTY, NC AUGUST 2020

' f
:A
j ' ti• � `rye. ��
'7L; •M ' a
Wetland C
•i It tit `� :,�l "�ii^r . ,��I
f
Wetland B
i
Wetland D
S100
r
LEGEND`r
YES. r
J CONSERVATION EASEMENT
PROJECT STREAMS �� A
® EXISTING WETLANDS j
STARKER MITIGATION BANK PREPARED BY:
0 100 200 ECOSYSTEM
Feet POTENTIAL JURISDICTIONAL PLANNING a
FEATURES MAP Ar RESTORATION
FIGURE 2C CATAWBA COUNTY, NC AUGUST 2020

I
I1- 1
L
S100
= S101
f— ;k
AL
Y - v r • f. id�4. irr -/� r v
LEGEND f<x
Q CONSERVATION EASEMENT.00
PROJECT STREAMS M..- 4" .AR
(� EXISTING WETLANDS ,rt"ALL
- wsa
o 100 200 STARKER MITIGATION BANK PREPARED BY:
ECOSYSTEM
POTENTIAL JURISDICTIONAL
PLANNING
Feet LANiVIG a
FEATURES MAP Ar RESTORATION
FIGURE 2D CATAWBA COUNTY, NC AUGUST 2020

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: Water &Land Solutions. LLC, Catherine
File Number: SAW-2020-01540
Date: 03/12/2021
Manner
Attached is:
See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
A
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
B
PERMIT DENIAL
C
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
D
©
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
E
SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision.
Additional information may be found at or http://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/Res4ulatoiyPros4ramandPenuits.aspx
or the Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request
that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district
engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will
forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your
objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your
objections, or (c) not modify the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After
evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in
Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein,
you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of
this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days
of the date of this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by
completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division
engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new
information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the
date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers
Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the district engineer. This form
must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.

E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the
preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed),
by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further consideration by the
Corps to reevaluate the JD.
SECTION II - REQUEST FOR APPEA BJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial
proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or
objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the
record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to
clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record.
However, you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative
record.
OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
appeal process you may contact:
also contact:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division
Mr. Phillip Shannin, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
Attn: Steve Kichefski
CESAD-PDO
Asheville Regulatory Office
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
U.S Army Corps of Engineers
60 Forsyth Street, Room 1 OM15
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
Phone: [phone]
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15-day
notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportuni to participate in all site investi ations.
Date:
Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or agent.
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn: Steve Kichefski, 69 Darlington Avenue, Wilmington, North Carolina
28403
For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and Approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:
Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Phillip Shannin, Administrative
Appeal Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 1OM15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]

PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: 03/12/2021
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: Water & Land Solutions, LLC,
Catherine Manner, 7721 Six Forks Road, Suite 130, Raleigh, NC 27615
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Wilmington District, WLS Catawba 01
UMB — Starker Mitigation Site, SAW-2020-01540
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The project area for the
Starker Mitigation Site is located east if Banner Road, between Conover and Claremont in Catawba
County, North Carolina. The site is bisected by Interstate 40 between mile markers 133 and 135.
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC
RESOURCES AND/OR AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County: Catawba City: Conover
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Latitude: 35.72226 Longitude:-81.17203
Universal Transverse
Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Mull Creek
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
N Office (Desk) Determination. Date: March 12, 2021
N Field Determination. Date(s): September 30, 2020

TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES INREVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO
REGULATORY JURISDICTION.
Site
Latitude
Longitude
Estimated amount
Type of aquatic
Geographic authority
Number
(decimal degrees)
(decimal degrees)
of aquatic
resources (i.e.,
to which the aquatic
resources in review
wetland vs. non-
resource "may be"
area (acreage and
wetland waters)
subject (i.e., Section 404
linear feet, if
or Section 10/404)
applicable
5100
35.726936
-81.175431
5,418 linear ft.
Non -wetland waters;
Section 404
perennial stream
S200
35.722431
-81.178252
4,220 linear ft.
Non -wetland waters;
Section 404
perennial stream
5101
35.718675
-81.167732
80 linear ft.
Non -wetland waters;
Section 404
intermittent stream
S102
35.726800
-81.175242
92 linear ft.
Non -wetland waters;
Section 404
intermittent stream
S103
35.727514
-81.175651
81 linear ft.
Non -wetland waters;
Section 404
intermittent stream
Wetland A
35.726300
-81.175047
1.2 acres
Wetland
Section 404
(WA)
Wetland B
35.724651
-81.173859
0.03 acre
Wetland
Section 404
(WB)
Wetland C
35.724229
-81.173741
0.03 acre
Wetland
Section 404
(WC)
Wetland D
35.724193
-81.173371
0.03 acre
Wetland
Section 404
(WD)
Wetland E
35.722391
-81.178292
0.04 acre
Wetland
Section 404
(WE)

1) The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in the
review area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option to request
and obtain an approved JD (AJD) for that review area based on an informed decision after
having discussed the various types of JDs and their characteristics and circumstances when
they may be appropriate.
2) In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a Nationwide
General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring "pre- construction
notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non -reporting NWP or other general permit,
and the permit applicant has not requested an AJD for the activity, the permit applicant is
hereby made aware that: (1) the permit applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization
based on a PJD, which does not make an official determination of jurisdictional aquatic
resources; (2) the applicant has the option to request an AJD before accepting the terms and
conditions of the permit authorization, and that basing a permit authorization on an AJD could
possibly result in less compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions;
(3) the applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting the terms
and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4) the applicant can accept
a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply with all the terms and conditions of that
permit, including whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary;
(5) undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without
requesting an AJD constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the PJD; (6) accepting a
permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered individual permit) or undertaking any activity in
reliance on any form of Corps permit authorization based on a PJD constitutes agreement that
all aquatic resources in the review area affected in any way by that activity will be treated as
jurisdictional, and waives any challenge to such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial
compliance or enforcement action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court;
and (7) whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD or a PJD, the JD will be processed
as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered individual permit (and all terms and
conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be administratively appealed
pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it becomes appropriate to
make an official determination whether geographic jurisdiction exists over aquatic resources
in the review area, or to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources in
the review area, the Corps will provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is
practicable. This PJD finds that there "may be" waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be"
navigable waters of the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in
the review area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following
information:

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources below where
indicated for all checked items:
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map:
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale:
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Newton: 1:24,000
® Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Web Soil Survey
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
❑ Photographs: ❑Aerial (Name & Date):
or ❑Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Other information (please specify):
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarilv been
verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional
determinations.
Steve Digitally signed by
Steve Kichefski
Kichefski Date:2021.03.12
18:47:36-05'00' �
Signature and date of Regulatory
staff member completing PJD
Signature and date of person
requesting PJD (REQUIRED,
unless obtaining the signature
is impracticable)'
' Districts may establish timeframes for requester to return signed PJD forms. If the requester does not respond within the
established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is necessary prior to finalizing
an action.

Appendix G- Agency Correspondence
WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Starker Mitigation Site
Initial Evaluation Letter
Meeting Minutes- NCIRT Draft Prospectus Site Meeting
United State Department of Interior- Species List and Review Comments
NCHPO Map
NC Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
NC Wildlife Resource Commission- Review Comments

Appendix G - Agency Correspondence
Page 2 4

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
151 PATTON AVENUE
ROOM 208
ASHEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 28801-5006
March 12, 2021
Regulatory Division
SUBJECT: Initial Evaluation of the proposed WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank:
Starker Mitigation Site (SAW-2020-01540)
Water & Land Solutions, LLC
Attention: Mr. Adam V. McIntyre
[e-mail]
Dear Mr. McIntyre:
This letter is in regard to your prospectus document dated October 2020, for the proposed WLS
Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank including the Starker Mitigation Site. The proposal
consists of the establishment and operation of a commercial umbrella mitigation bank in the
Upper Catawba Watershed, Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03050101 of the Santee River Basin.
The Starker mitigation site is a 30.3-acre stream and wetland mitigation site located east of
Banner Road, between Conover and Claremont in Catawba County, North Carolina (35.7198, -
81.1742).
The Corps determined the prospectus was complete and issued a public notice (P/N # SAW-
2020-01540) on November 9, 2020. The purpose of this notice was to solicit the views of
interested State and Federal agencies and other parties either interested in or affected by the
proposed work. Attached are the comments received in response to the public notice from the
Cherokee Nation.
The Corps has considered the information provided in the prospectus document, comments
received in response to the public notice and information that was discussed during on -site
reviews conducted on September 30, 2020. The meeting minutes for field review are attached
and no additional revisions to the meeting minutes were provided by IRT members. We have
determined that the proposed umbrella mitigation bank appears to have the potential to restore
and enhance aquatic resources within the Upper Catawba Watershed, HUC 03050101 of the
Santee River Basin. Therefore, the bank sponsor may proceed with preparation of a draft
Umbrella Mitigation Banking Instrument (UMBI).
Please address all comments included in the attached memo with your draft UMBI submittal. If
you have questions concerning the path forward for the proposed mitigation bank, please do not
hesitate to contact me at 828-271-7980 x4234.

Sincerely,
Steve
Digitally signed by Steve
Kichefski
Kichefski
Date: 2021.03.1219:11:58
05'00'
Steve Kichefski
Regulatory Project Manager
Digital Copies Furnished:
Todd Tugwell, USACE
Casey Haywood, USACE
Kim Browning, USACE
Erin Davis, NCDWR
Olivia Munzer, NCWRC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Todd Bowers, USEPA
Holland Youngman, USFWS
Renee Gledhill -Early, NCSHPO

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
151 PATTON AVENUE
ROOM 208
ASHEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 28801-5006
CESAW-RG/Kichefski
MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD
March 12, 2021
SUBJECT: Proposed WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank (SAW-2020-01540) -
Comments Received in Response to the Public Notice and during the September 30, 2020 site
visit reflected in the October 1, 2020 Meeting Minutes
Project Name: WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank, Catawba County, NC
Elizabeth Toombs, Cherokee Nation, December 9, 2020:
SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS
Olivia Munzer, NCWRC:
SEE ATTACHED MEETING MINUTES
Erin Davis, NCDWR:
SEE ATTACHED MEETING MINUTES
Steve Kichefski & Todd Tugwell, USACE, March 8, 2020
SEE ATTACHED MEETING MINUTES
Steve Kichefski
Regulatory Project Manager

0117re of the Chief
CWXQ D3P Chuck Hoskin Jr.
n��+
Principal Chief
C nHu ERoKEE N A T ION J Bryan Warner
Pj Btix 94X • TshlequAi, OK 74465-04-1 . Deprro? Principal Chief'
918-413-50011 • www,� hcra6rc.� r�
December 9, 2020
Steven Kichefski
United States Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801
Re: SAW-2020-01540, WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Mr. Steven Kichefski:
The Cherokee Nation (Nation) is in receipt of your correspondence about SAW-2020-01540, and
appreciates the opportunity to provide comment upon this project. Please allow this letter to serve
as the Nation's interest in acting as a consulting party to this proposed project.
The Nation maintains databases and records of cultural, historic, and pre -historic resources in this
area. Our Historic Preservation Office reviewed this project, cross referenced the project's legal
description against our information, and found no instances where this project intersects or adjoins
such resources. Thus, the Nation does not foresee this project imparting impacts to Cherokee
cultural resources at this time.
However, the Nation requests that the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) halt all
project activities immediately and re -contact our Offices for further consultation if items of cultural
significance are discovered during the course of this project.
Additionally, the Nation requests that USACE conduct appropriate inquiries with other pertinent
Tribal and Historic Preservation Offices regarding historic and prehistoric resources not included
in the Nation's databases or records.
If you require additional information or have any questions, please contact me at your convenience.
Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.
W ado,
Elizabeth Toombs, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer
Cherokee Nation Tribal Historic Preservation Office
[e-mail]
918.453.5389

WATER & LAND
SOLUTIONS
Meeting Minutes
Starker Mitigation Project
Subject: NCIRT Draft Prospectus Site Meeting
Date Prepared: October 1, 2020
Meeting Date and Time: September 30, 2020 @ 11:00 am
Meeting Location: On Site (Catawba County, NC)
Attendees: USACE: Todd Tugwell, Steve Kichefski (NCIRT)
NCDEQ DWR: Erin Davis (NCIRT)
NCWRC: Olivia Munzer (NCIRT)
EPR: Erin Bennett, Jake Byers, Amy James
WLS: Daniel Ingram, Catherine Manner
Recorded By: Catherine Manner
These meeting minutes document notes and discussion points from the North Carolina Interagency
Review Team (NCIRT) Draft Prospectus Site Meeting for the Starker Mitigation Project (Catawba Basin, CU
03050101). The project site is located in Catawba County, near Claremont, North Carolina. The meeting
began at 11:OOam with a general summary of the overall project concepts. After the site overview,
attendees toured the project site to review existing conditions and proposed mitigation types, restoration
approaches, and design concepts. In general, the project site review notes are presented below in the
order they were visited.
Grouo started on the south side of Interstate 40
5100 (End of Reach)
• Meeting started at the bottom end of 5100 at the crossing.
• Discussed how the culvert would be an agricultural culvert. Steve noted that at the permitting
stage to make it clear that is an agriculture crossing.
• IRT noted a lot of Black Walnut species and to avoid planting that species, and remove existing
black walnut as needed (do not avoid).
• WLS stated that we were unsure of continuing the project past the crossing, Todd was concerned
that if we didn't it might cause stability issues upstream.
waterlandsolutions.com 1 7721 Six Forks Rd, Ste 1130, Raleigh, NC 27615 1 919-614-5111

91
WATER & LAND
SOLUTIONS
• Restoration design approach was thought to be the correct approach for the reach.
5101
• Group walked up to 5101.
• Steve/Daniel walked up to the origin point. Origin point was located at the end of the conservation
easement for that section.
• Discussion on how the elevation of the channel needs to be brought up correctly to connect into
5100 and intermittent stream flow might be affected
• Group agreed on the restoration approach.
5100 (Below Interstate-40)
• Group drove to the culvert output below Interstate-40 and hiked down the hill to the stream.
• Discussed restoration approach and raising the bed to match culvert elevation. Talked about how
even with raising the streambed elevation not much aquatic passage would result because of how
long the culvert is under the interstate.
S200 (above crossing)
• Group drove across field to S200 and walked from the crossing up to the culvert under Interstate
40.
• Daniel explained that enhancement II was proposed in the section between the culvert and the
crossing below.
• Group discussion on the amount of sediment that appeared to be moving through the channel as
well as the lack of vegetation on the banks which might lead to stability issues.
• Discussed that restoration could be proposed in this area if justified in the mitigation plan.
• Group walked down the stream below the culvert. Discussion on if restoration approach was used
above the crossing then the elevation could be set for the crossing culvert and the entire reach in
the design.
• Group continued to walk S200 below the crossing. Todd stated that there were some areas that
looked okay and others that were not, Erin Davis stated that the vegetation was not ideal.
• Group agreed that restoration was the best approach to the section below the crossing.
S200 (North of Interstate-40
Group drove to the north side of the project and started on 5200.
Walking downstream on S200 group discussed restoration approach and what elevation this
section would be brought up too. Todd suggested placing a bmp in areas where run off is coming
into the easement if possible.
5100 (North of Interstate-40)
• Group drove over to 5100 and started at the wetland area. Erin Davis stated that rehabilitation
would be a good approach up until the wood line and then inside the wood line enhancement
would be a better approach.
• IRT suggested adding a wetland gage now in order to document existing conditions and
demonstrate functional lift.
• Erin Davis inquired about the target hydroperiod and WLS responded we would follow the current
2016 IRT guidance.
waterlandsolutions.com 1 7721 Six Forks Rd, Ste 1130, Raleigh, NC 27615 1 919-614-5111

91
WATER & LAND
SOLUTIONS
S102
• Walked upstream to 5102. Group looked at origin point.
• IRT stated that if the restoration approached was used that WLS would have to show that it was
still jurisdictional.
S103
• Group had similar concerns about 5103 as they did with 5102. WLS would have to show that it
was still a jurisdictional feature after the bed elevation is brought up.
Overall Notes
• Steve suggested starting the easement about 15-20ft off the ROW of the interstate in case of
future expansion. WLS/EPR will coordinate with NCDOT during design phase regarding culvert
capacity and extra ROW width.
• After seeing above and below the interstate the IRT thought that a restoration approach for the
section of S200 south of the interstate would be appropriate if clearly justified in the mitigation
plan.
• Erin Davis noted that WLS should clearly state what the target community is in the mitigation plan.
• Overall the IRT members agreed the project is suitable to provide compensatory mitigation,
provided it is properly justified in the mitigation plan.
• WLS will provide a "Final Prospectus" and table of adjacent owners for public notice.
The above minutes represents Water & Land Solutions' interpretation and understanding of the meeting
discussion and actions. If recipients of these minutes should find any information contained in these
minutes to be in error, incomplete, please notify the author with appropriate corrections and/or additions
within five (5) business days to allow adequate time for correction and redistribution.
waterlandsolutions.com 1 7721 Six Forks Rd, Ste 1130, Raleigh, NC 27615 1 919-614-5111

WATER & LAND
SOLUTIONS
Meeting Minutes
Starker Mitigation Project
Subject: NCIRT Draft Prospectus Site Meeting
Date Prepared: October 1, 2020
Meeting Date and Time: September 30, 2020 @ 11:00 am
Meeting Location: On Site (Catawba County, NC)
Attendees: USACE: Todd Tugwell, Steve Kichefski (NCIRT)
NCDEQ DWR: Erin Davis (NCIRT)
NCWRC: Olivia Munzer (NCIRT)
EPR: Erin Bennett, Jake Byers, Amy James
WLS: Daniel Ingram, Catherine Manner
Recorded By: Catherine Manner
These meeting minutes document notes and discussion points from the North Carolina Interagency
Review Team (NCIRT) Draft Prospectus Site Meeting for the Starker Mitigation Project (Catawba Basin, CU
03050101). The project site is located in Catawba County, near Claremont, North Carolina. The meeting
began at 11:OOam with a general summary of the overall project concepts. After the site overview,
attendees toured the project site to review existing conditions and proposed mitigation types, restoration
approaches, and design concepts. In general, the project site review notes are presented below in the
order they were visited.
Group started on the south side of Interstate 40
5100 (End of Reach)
• Meeting started at the bottom end of 5100 at the crossing.
• Discussed how the culvert would be an agricultural culvert. Steve noted that at the permitting
stage to make it clear that is an agriculture crossing.
• IRT noted a lot of Black Walnut species and to avoid planting that species, and remove existing
black walnut as needed (do not avoid).
• WLS stated that we were unsure of continuing the project past the crossing, Todd was concerned
that if we didn't it might cause stability issues upstream.
waterlandsolutions.com 1 7721 Six Forks Rd, Ste 1130, Raleigh, NC 27615 1 919-614-5111

91
1AT E R & LAND
SOLUTIONS
• Restoration design approach was thought to be the correct approach for the reach.
5101
• Group walked up to 5101.
• Steve/Daniel walked up to the origin point. Origin point was located at the end of the conservation
easement for that section.
• Discussion on how the elevation of the channel needs to be brought up correctly to connect into
5100 and intermittent stream flow might be affected
• Group agreed on the restoration approach.
5100 (Below Interstate-40)
• Group drove to the culvert output below Interstate-40 and hiked down the hill to the stream.
• Discussed restoration approach and raising the bed to match culvert elevation. Talked about how
even with raising the streambed elevation not much aquatic passage would result because of how
long the culvert is under the interstate.
S200 (above crossing)
• Group drove across field to S200 and walked from the crossing up to the culvert under Interstate
40.
• Daniel explained that enhancement II was proposed in the section between the culvert and the
crossing below.
• Group discussion on the amount of sediment that appeared to be moving through the channel as
well as the lack of vegetation on the banks which might lead to stability issues.
• Discussed that restoration could be proposed in this area if justified in the mitigation plan.
• Group walked down the stream below the culvert. Discussion on if restoration approach was used
above the crossing then the elevation could be set for the crossing culvert and the entire reach in
the design.
• Group continued to walk S200 below the crossing. Todd stated that there were some areas that
looked okay and others that were not, Erin Davis stated that the vegetation was not ideal.
• Group agreed that restoration was the best approach to the section below the crossing.
S200 (North of Interstate-40)
• Group drove to the north side of the project and started on 5200.
• Walking downstream on S200 group discussed restoration approach and what elevation this
section would be brought up too. Todd suggested placing a bmp in areas where run off is coming
into the easement if possible.
5100 (North of Interstate-40)
• Group drove over to 5100 and started at the wetland area. Erin Davis stated that rehabilitation
would be a good approach up until the wood line and then inside the wood line enhancement
would be a better approach.
• IRT suggested adding a wetland gage now in order to document existing conditions and
demonstrate functional lift.
• Erin Davis inquired about the target hydroperiod and WLS responded we would follow the current
2016 IRT guidance.
waterlandsolutions.com 1 7721 Six Forks Rd, Ste 1130, Raleigh, NC 27615 1 919-614-5111

91
1AT E R & LAND
SOLUTIONS
S102
• Walked upstream to 5102. Group looked at origin point.
• IRT stated that if the restoration approached was used that WLS would have to show that it was
still jurisdictional.
S103
• Group had similar concerns about 5103 as they did with 5102. WLS would have to show that it
was still a jurisdictional feature after the bed elevation is brought up.
Overall Notes
• Steve suggested starting the easement about 15-20ft off the ROW of the interstate in case of
future expansion. WLS/EPR will coordinate with NCDOT during design phase regarding culvert
capacity and extra ROW width.
• After seeing above and below the interstate the IRT thought that a restoration approach for the
section of S200 south of the interstate would be appropriate if clearly justified in the mitigation
plan.
• Erin Davis noted that WLS should clearly state what the target community is in the mitigation plan.
• Overall the IRT members agreed the project is suitable to provide compensatory mitigation,
provided it is properly justified in the mitigation plan.
• WLS will provide a "Final Prospectus" and table of adjacent owners for public notice.
The above minutes represents Water & Land Solutions' interpretation and understanding of the meeting
discussion and actions. If recipients of these minutes should find any information contained in these
minutes to be in error, incomplete, please notify the author with appropriate corrections and/or additions
within five (5) business days to allow adequate time for correction and redistribution.
waterlandsolutions.com 1 7721 Six Forks Rd, Ste 1130, Raleigh, NC 27615 1 919-614-5111

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Ecological Services Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801-1082
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
http://www.fws.gov/nc-es/es/couMfr.html
In Reply Refer To:
Consultation Code: 04EN1000-2020-SLI-0814
Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-01917
Project Name: Starker Mitigation Site
jF
August 07, 2020
Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project
location, and/or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The attached species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as
well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your
proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. Although not required by
section 7, many agencies request species lists to start the informal consultation process and begin
their fulfillment of the requirements under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
This list, along with other helpful resources, is also available on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service) Asheville Field Office's (AFO) website: https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/
cntylist/nc counties.html. The AFO website list includes "species of concern" species that could
potentially be placed on the federal list of threatened and endangered species in the future. Also
available are:
Design and Construction Recommendations
https://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmis/project review/Recommendations.html
Optimal Survey Times for Federally Listed Plants
https://www.fws.gov/nc-es/plant/plant survey.html
Northern long-eared bat Guidance
https://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmis/project review/NLEB in WNC.html
Predictive Habitat Model for Aquatic Species
https://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmls/Maxent/Maxent.html

08/07/2020 Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-01917
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of
species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could require modifications of these lists.
Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the Act,
the accuracy of the species lists should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be
completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be
completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website or the AFO website (the AFO website dates each
county list with the day of the most recent update/change) at regular intervals during project
planning and implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be
requested through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the
enclosed list or by going to the AFO website.
The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the
ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the
Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to
utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered
species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or
designated critical habitat.
A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having
similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the
human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)
(c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a Biological
Evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether the project may
affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended
contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12 and on our office's website
at https://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmis/project review/assessment guidance.html.
If a Federal agency (or their non-federal representative) determines, based on the Biological
Assessment or Biological Evaluation, that listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be
affected by the proposed project, the agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to
50 CFR 402. In addition, the Service recommends that candidate species, proposed species, and
proposed critical habitat be addressed within the consultation. More information on the
regulations and procedures for section 7 consultation, including the role of permit or license
applicants, can be found in the "Endangered Species Consultation Handbook" at: http://
www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/TOC-GLOS.PDF.
Though the bald eagle is no longer protected under the Endangered Species Act, please be aware
that bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16
U.S.C. 668 et seq.), and projects affecting these species may require additional consultation (see
https://www.fws.gov/southeast/our-services/permits/eagles/). Wind energy projects should follow
the wind energy guidelines (http://www.fws.gov/windenerge /) for minimizing impacts to
migratory birds (including bald and golden eagles) and bats.
Guidance for minimizing impacts to migratory birds for projects including communications
towers (e.g., cellular, digital television, radio, and emergency broadcast) can be found at: http:
www.fws. gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdlssues/Hazards/towers/towers.htm;

08/07/2020 Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-01917
3
http://www.towerkill.com; and http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdlssues/Hazards/
towers/comtow.html.
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages
Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project
planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number in
the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project
that you submit to our office.
Attachment(s):
• Official Species List
• Migratory Birds
• Wetlands

08/07/2020 Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-01917
Official Species List
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Asheville Ecological Services Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801-1082
[phone]

08/07/2020 Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-01917 2
Project Summary
Consultation Code: 04EN1000-2020-SLI-0814
Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-01917
Project Name: Starker Mitigation Site
Project Type: ** OTHER **
Project Description: The Starker Mitigation Site includes two unnamed tributaries to Mull
Creek (UT1 and UT2) and associated riparian wetland opportunities. The
site is expected to include stream credits and several acres of wetland
mitigation potential. The mitigation approaches for the site are expected
to include stream restoration and enhancement, and wetland restoration,
enhancement, and creation.
Project Location:
Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:
www.google.com/maps/place/35.718861146l6011N81.16785545802983W
V FG
3'i' .
Counties: Catawba, NC

08/07/2020 Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-01917 3
Endangered Species Act Species
There is a total of 4 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheriesi, as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
Mammals
NAM L
STATUS
Northern Long-eared Bat Myotis septentrionalis
Threatened
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9045
Reptiles
NAME
STATUS
Bog Turtle Clemmys muhlenbergii
Similarity of
Population: U.S.A. (GA, NC, SC, TN, VA)
Appearance
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
(Threatened)
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6962

08/07/2020 Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-01917 4
Flowering Plants
NAM L_ STATUS
Dwarf -flowered Heartleaf Hexastylis nani flora Threatened
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2458
Schweinitz's Sunflower Helianthus schweinitzii Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3849
Critical habitats
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECTAREA UNDER THIS OFF ICE'S
JURISDICTION.

08/07/2020
Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-01917
Migratory Birds
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act! and the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Actz.
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to
migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider
implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described below.
1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
3. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)
The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the USFWS
Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your project location.
To learn more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this list is generated, see
the FAQ below. This is not a list of every bird you may find in this location, nor a guarantee that
every bird on this list will be found in your project area. To see exact locations of where birders
and the general public have sighted birds in and around your project area, visit the E-bird data
mapping tool (Tip: enter your location, desired date range and a species on your list). For
projects that occur off the Atlantic Coast, additional maps and models detailing the relative
occurrence and abundance of bird species on your list are available. Links to additional
information about Atlantic Coast birds, and other important information about your migratory
bird list, including how to properly interpret and use your migratory bird report, can be found
below.
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures
to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, click on the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE
SUMMARY at the top of your list to see when these birds are most likely to be present and
breeding in your project area.
NAME BREEDING SEASON
Blue -winged Warbler Uermivora pinus Breeds May 1 to Jun
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation 30
Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus Breeds May 10 to Sep
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the 10
continental USA and Alaska.

08/07/2020 Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-01917
Probability Of Presence Summary
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be
present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project
activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read and understand the
FAQ "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report' before using or attempting
to interpret this report.
Probability of Presence ( 1)
Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your
project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4-week
months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey effort (see
below) can be used to establish a level of confidence in the presence score. One can have higher
confidence in the presence score if the corresponding survey effort is also high.
How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:
The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in
the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for
that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee
was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is
0.25.
2. To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of
presence is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum
probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence
in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12
(0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of presence on
week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2.
3. The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical
conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the
probability of presence score.
Breeding Season( )
Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time -frame inside which the bird breeds across
its entire range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project
area.
Survey Effort (1)
Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys
performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The number of
surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.
No Data (—)
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
Survey Timeframe

08/07/2020 Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-01917
3
Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant
information. The exception to this is areas off the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are based on
all years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse.
■ probability of presence breeding season I survey effort — no data
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Blue -winged Jill
Jill ---- ---- —� - — - -- - — ---
Warbler --- --�— —
BCC -BCR
Red-headed III"""""' �j— — ---
Woodpecker -4- +—+— ---- ---- — -- - - - - —
BCC Rangewide (CON)
Additional information can be found using the following links:
• Birds of Conservation Concern http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/
birds -of -conservation -concern. php
• Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds http://www.fws.gov/birds/
management/project-assessment-tools-and-guidance
conservation-measures.php
• Nationwide conservation measures for birds http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/
management/nationwidestandardconservationmeasures.pdf
Migratory Birds FAQ
Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts
to migratory birds.
Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize
impacts to all birds at any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly
important when birds are most likely to occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in
the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is a very
helpful impact minimization measure. To see when birds are most likely to occur and be breeding
in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures and/or
permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of
infrastructure or bird species present on your project site.
What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified
location?
The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern
(BCQ and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location.

08/07/2020 Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-01917 4
The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian
Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding,
and citizen science datasets and is queried and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as
occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identified as
warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle Act
requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to offshore activities or
development.
Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your
project area. It is not representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list
of all birds potentially present in your project area, please visit the AKN Phenology Tool.
What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds
potentially occurring in my specified location?
The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data
provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing
collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets .
Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information
becomes available. To learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and
how to interpret them, go the Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me
about these graphs" link.
How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering, migrating or present year-round in my
project area?
To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding,
wintering, migrating or year-round), you may refer to the following resources: The Cornell Lab
of Ornithology All About Birds Bird Guide, or (if you are unsuccessful in locating the bird of
interest there), the Cornell Lab of Ornithology Neotropical Birds guide. If a bird on your
migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated with it, if that bird does occur in your
project area, there may be nests present at some point within the timeframe specified. If "Breeds
elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your project area.
What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?
Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:
1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern
throughout their range anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacific Islands,
Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands);
2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation
Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA; and
3. "Non -BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on
your list either because of the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non -eagles)
potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities
(e.g. offshore energy development or longline fishing).

08/07/2020 Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-01917 5
Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, efforts should be made,
in particular, to avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC
species of rangewide concern. For more information on conservation measures you can
implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird impacts and requirements for eagles,
please see the FAQs for these topics.
Details about birds that are potentially affected by offshore projects
For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species
and groups of bird species within your project area off the Atlantic Coast, please visit the
Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal also offers data and information about other taxa besides
birds that may be helpful to you in your project review. Alternately, you may download the bird
model results files underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS Integrative Statistical
Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic
Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.
Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use
throughout the year, including migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this
information. For additional information on marine bird tracking data, see the Diving Bird Study
and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel or Pam Lorin.
What if I have eagles on my list?
If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid
violating the Eagle Act should such impacts occur.
Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report
The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of
birds of priority concern. To learn more about how your list is generated, and see options for
identifying what other birds may be in your project area, please see the FAQ "What does IPaC
use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location". Please be
aware this report provides the "probability of presence" of birds within the 10 km grid cell(s) that
overlap your project; not your exact project footprint. On the graphs provided, please also look
carefully at the survey effort (indicated by the black vertical bar) and for the existence of the "no
data" indicator (a red horizontal bar). A high survey effort is the key component. If the survey
effort is high, then the probability of presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In
contrast, a low survey effort bar or no data bar means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of
certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a starting point for
identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might
be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list helps you
know what to look for to confirm presence, and helps guide you in knowing when to implement
conservation measures to avoid or minimize potential impacts from your project activities,
should presence be confirmed. To learn more about conservation measures, visit the FAQ "Tell
me about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory
birds" at the bottom of your migratory bird trust resources page.

08/07/2020 Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-01917
Wetlands
Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.
For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers District.
Please note that the NWI data being shown may be out of date. We are currently working to
update our NWI data set. We recommend you verify these results with a site visit to determine
the actual extent of wetlands on site.
FRESHWATER FORESTED/SHRUB WETLAND
• PF01A
RIVERINE
• R4SBC

NCHPO HPOWEB
u •CTO`30 House O
�G46 House
a
y�r4
i
�4
CT0795 Jotum Theobold Rr
• Humhsucker HOLSe
T0417 Rork Barn Farm v
�i
� 1990 rc
c ��
u
I a
Roc F. Qirdie `
n,
1i
! 5a rr
oNF ti
Sao
CT0796 Sair�it John's
Cr07M__'r Frederick Smith •• Church Cemetery
Gt
r* HousestJohns Church RdHt-
a
OT0797 L Si.gmcn Hausa
r�
199B
.
10'
P71574 HeHnerFaim
C e1"Onral
Blvd
ti ATAW B
2_
GT1005 HOLISe
CT1007 Gal Sigmon Housey
V0790 E. Holler HousB
CT1003 Claremont Sdv]olCT1001 House
z
y 9789 Muse Herman
Cler•mo^' •µam5t
CT1011 HOUS0
.. d
4 an • House
CTC-998 Knox Sigmon
CT1013
ap`� HoLse ,CT0999 Carl Pope House
ES. Litt
N
m
y 1p12 HoLse �CT0996 Jonas Sigmon
House u House
D
`
CT0786 Lloyd Hamtt c
y
HouseA �CT0995 LeeSmyreFi3n5eu T0496• House
riever
Leh
F r -110 N
CT0598 W. H. Smith
',I CT0787 Smith HoLre
O
? 4
House
• Sa'a
P0513 House •
a
• CT1017 Factory Smoke
_
a
Stack
Conover Blvd E ?a;.
dL
V0345 House
`
,CT
Kelly Blvd
1077 Yeu nt Cotton
--!
n:;
CN785 Little Fann
Mill 2010
—
Site
A'
CT0784 E. C. Hewitt
IQ ASS Kelsrer Dairy Rd
• House
r °4
O
day°
'Qa
c,c
• CT0711 Zeb Balls House
•
�disfer
de
pa;rY CT07711.eggs. House
^', F1hr
$
E 'ISO
CT07�2 HUghehe House
u
GTG594 Sherrill House
•CT0558 House
e
C4
2/12/2021, 10:46:47 AM
- Starker Survey Area - Starker _SurveyArea_rev
* Surveyed Area in NHRD
..: Local districts & boundaries
DOE districts & boundaries
Local individual resources & centerpoi nts
Determined Eligible Boundary
Local Landmark
Both DOE and Study List Boundary
Local Landmark, Gone
DOE individual resources & centerpoints
ht Local HD Center Point
• Determined Eligible
Surveyed Only individual resources &centerpoints
• DOE, Gone
Surveyed Only
• SL and DOE
Surveyed in NRHD
• SL and DOE, Gone
Surveyed Only, Gone
* DOEHD Center Point
Surveyed in NRHD, Gone
't SLDOEHD Center Point
+ Blockface- Multiple properties
SL districts & boundaries
Study List Boundary
+ Blockface in NRHD
Both SL and Determined Eligible Boundary
* Surveyed Area, No designation
1:36,112
SL individual resources & centerpoints 0 0.33 0.65 1.3 mi
SL Individual Entry
0 0.5 1 2 km
• SL and DOE entry
• Study List Entry, Gone
• SL and DOE, Gone
* SLHD Center Point
't SLDOEHD Center Point
NR districts & boundaries
= National Register Boundary
State of North Carolina DOT, Esri, HERE, Garmin, INCREMENT P,
NGA,USGS
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office
State of North Carolina DOT, Esri, HERE, Garmin, INCREMENT P, NGA, USGS i Participating NC Counties, NCCGIA, NC OneMap, US EPA i Esri, HERE i

New Roy Cooper, Governor
•� mm NC DEPARTMENT OF Susi Hamilton, Secretary
■�,-t m NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
a ■ox Walter Clark, Director, Land and Water Stewardship
NCNHDE-12647
August 10, 2020
Amy James
Ecosystem Planning and Restoration
1150 SE Maynard Rd. Suite 140
Cary, NC 27511
RE: Starker Mitigation Bank Site
Dear Amy James:
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide
information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
Based on the project area mapped with your request, a query of the NCNHP database indicates that
there are no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, and/or
conservation/managed areas within the proposed project boundary. Please note that although there
may be no documentation of natural heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not
imply or confirm their absence; the area may not have been surveyed. The results of this query
should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists. In the event that rare
species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may update our
records.
The attached `Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that
have been documented within a one -mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these
records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area
if suitable habitat exists. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one -mile
radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report.
If a Federally -listed species is found within the project area or is indicated within a one -mile radius of
the project area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for
guidance. Contact information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is found here:
httr)s://www.fws.aov/offices/Directory/ListOffices.cfm?statecode=37.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria
for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published
without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information
source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission.
The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a
Dedicated Nature Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Clean Water Management Trust Fund
easement, or Federally -listed species are documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance,
please contact Rodney A. Butler at rod ney.butlerCo�ncdcr.aov or 919-707-8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
121 W JON S STREET, RALEIGI I_ NC 27603 - 16Sl MAOL SERVICE CENTER. PALEIGW. rkc 276�0
OFC 919.707,9120 • FAK 919.707.9121

/
3
\
±
\
}
$
\
/
w
=
j
\
e
6
3
/
0
\:
\�
CO
2
<\
2
Gƒ
E
\/
}
®®
g
\
±/
CO
0)2
72
\
42
cs
»±
\ �
\
§-
\ CO
\
CO
CO \ \
= e g
/
/
\
e .2
/ 5
(
x \
s s® o
u
e
CO
CO)
z
2\
=y/2
0
/
CO2//
\
z
4
\\
Z
CO
\\<
\
u
0
4/
0
\ ®
§
° (
=
5
e
y
e o
0 g
-
-
CO
CO
\
\ y
\ \
®
\
E
/
3 /
\ \
/
5
\ / o s
:
±
}
CO
99(
d
�0
§
g
m
O Z c
/ Z
u
CO
5
0
a)
�\
\
/
/
\ \
s\
E
`
6
\ \
LE
\
\
\
\ ~
s
§
.\ \
\
\
}
\
COCO/
Z
\
/
E \
/{
/
±
/ ° E
co
\ \
\
\
/ /
\ \
/
*
\ CO \
` \
t
\
°
/
s s =
\ \
E
e e e w
e
CO
ss7u
/~
3
Z
co //©»
�\
co C
/
-
\
/
/
/ 6
/
§
\
c

99a2�
M
0
M
N
a

9 North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 9
Gordon Myers, Executive Director
01 September 2020
Ms. Erin Bennett
Ecosystem Planning & Restoration
1150 S.E. Maynard Road, Suite 140
Cary, North Carolina 27511
Subject: Request for Project Review and Comments
Starker Stream Mitigation Site
Catawba County, North Carolina.
Dear Ms. Bennett,
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission (NCWRC) received your request to
review and comment on any possible concerns regarding Starker Stream Mitigation Site. Biologists with
NCWRC have reviewed the provided documents. Comments are provided in accordance with provisions
of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667e) and North
Carolina General Statutes (G.S. 113-131 et seq.).
The Starker Stream Mitigation Site is located north of Interstate 40 (I-40) and south of Rock Barn Road,
and south of I-40 and east of Banner Road NE near Claremont, Catawba County, North Carolina. The
site occurs within an existing agricultural and wooded areas.
We have no known records for rare, threatened, or endangered species at the site. Ecosystem Planning &
Restoration (EPR) surveyed the site for federal and state endangered Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus
schweinitzii) in mid -July and found no individuals. The optimal survey period for Schweinitz's sunflower
is late August through October. EPR states potential suitable habitat occurs for the federal and state
threatened dwarf -flowered heartleaf (Hexastylis naniflora) and surveys will be conducted in spring 2021.
We offer the following preliminary recommendations to minimize impacts to aquatic and terrestrial
wildlife resources:
1. We recommend surveys for Schweinitz's sunflower are conducted during the optimal survey
window of mid -August through October. We suggest EPR contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) at [phone].
2. We recommend that riparian buffers are as wide as possible, given site constraints and landowner
needs. NCWRC generally recommends a woody buffer of 100 feet on perennial streams to
maximize the benefits of buffers, including bank stability, stream shading, treatment of overland
runoff, and wildlife habitat.
Mailing Address: Habitat Conservation • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]

Page 2
01 September 2020
Starker Stream Mitigation Site
Catawba County
3. Due to the decline in bat populations, we recommend leaving snags and mature trees, or if
necessary, remove tees outside the maternity roosting season for bats (May 15 — August 15).
4. We recommend the planting list is diverse and consists of species typically found in that natural
vegetation community, as described by M.P. Schafale in The Guide to The Natural Communities
of North Carolina, Fourth Approximation (https://www.ncnhp.org/references/nhp-
publications/fourth-approximation-descri tp ions).
5. We recommend reducing the number of right-of-way easements that fragment the mitigation
project. If feasible, we suggest extending the mitigation project along Mull Creek to further
increase hydrologic function, restore ecological function in the watershed, and provide a corridor
for wildlife.
6. Ensure the culverts provide aquatic life passage during low flows.
Stringent sediment and erosion control measures should be implemented. The use of
biodegradable and wildlife -friendly sediment and erosion control devices is strongly
recommended. Silt fencing, fiber rolls and/or other products should have loose -weave netting
that is made of natural fiber materials with movable joints between the vertical and horizontal
twines. Silt fencing that has been reinforced with plastic or metal mesh should be avoided as it
impedes the movement of terrestrial wildlife species. Excessive silt and sediment loads can have
detrimental effects on aquatic resources including destruction of spawning habitat, suffocation of
eggs, and clogging of gills.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments. We will provide additional comments during the
site visit. If I can be of assistance, please call [phone] or email olivia.munzerkncwildlife.org.
Sincerely,
Olivia Munzer
Western Piedmont Habitat Conservation Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
Ec: Steve Kichefski, US Army Corps of Engineers
Erin Davis, NC Division of Water Resources
Byron Hamstead, USFWS

ua
United States Department of the Interior F`
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
September 9, 2020
Erin Bennett
System Planning and Restoration, LLC
1150 S.E. Maynard Road, Suite 140
Cary NC 27511
Dear Erin Bennett:
Subject: Proposed Starker Mitigation Bank; Catawba County, North Carolina
Log No. 4-2-20-421
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the information provided in your
correspondence received on August 18, 2020, dated August 14, 2020, for the project referenced
above wherein you solicit comments regarding potential impacts to federally protected species to
satisfy Nationwide permit application requirements. We submit the following comments in
accordance with the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 661-667e); the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. §4321 et seq.); and
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543) (Act).
Project Description
According to the information provided, the proposed project involves restoration and
enhancement of two unnamed tributaries which connect with Mull Creek River in Claremont,
North Carolina. Design plans and descriptions of proposed impact minimization measures were
not provided in your correspondence. Onsite habitats (instream and riparian) are highly
disturbed due to a legacy of agricultural land use. Surrounding land cover is dominated by
forest, agricultural and residential developments.
Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Species
Suitable summer roosting habitat may be present in the project area for the northern long-eared
bat (Myotis septentriona/is). However, the final 4(d) rule (effective as of February 16, 2016),
exempts incidental take of northern long-eared bat associated with activities that occur greater
than 0.25 miles from a known hibernation site, and greater than 150 feet from a known, occupied
maternity roost during the pup season (June 1 — July 31). Based on the information provided, the
project (which may or may not require tree clearing) would occur at a location where any
incidental take that may result from associated activities is exempt under the 4(d) rule.
Although not required, we encourage you to avoid any associated tree clearing activities
during this animal's maternity roosting season from May 15 — August 15.

Service records indicate several known occurrences of the federally threatened dwarf -flowered
heartleaf (Hexasty/is nanif/ora) in the project vicinity. Moreover, your correspondence indicates
that suitable habitat is present onsite for dwarf -flowered heartleaf and the federally endangered
Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii). Your correspondence states that "the area was
searched for specimens in mid -July 2020", but it is unclear if targeted surveys were completed at
that time.
To ensure that these species are not inadvertently lost, targeted surveys should be conducted by
qualified biologists during optimal survey windows where project -mediated impacts overlap
their suitable habitats. Surveys are not required where suitable habitats are not present within the
proposed impact area.
Members of the genus Hexastylis may be identified by characteristic evergreen leaves present
throughout the year, but flowers are required to diagnose H. naniflora. The flowering window
for this species is typically March — May in North Carolina. The optimal survey window for
Schweinitz's sunflower is late -August — October.
To complete our evaluation, we request that the Applicant provide this office with survey results
and/or provide information indicating that suitable habitats are not present within the proposed
impact area for federally protected species.
In accordance with the Act, it is the responsibility of the appropriate federal agency or its
designated representative to review its activities or programs and to identify any such activities
or programs that may affect endangered or threatened species or their habitats. If it is
determined that the proposed activity may adversely affect any species federally listed as
endangered or threatened, formal consultation with this office must be initiated.
We offer the following comments in the interest of protecting this species and other natural
resources:
Erosion and Sediment Control
Measures to control sediment and erosion should be installed before any ground -disturbing
activities occur. Grading and backfilling should be minimized, and existing native vegetation
should be retained (if possible) to maintain riparian cover for fish and wildlife. Disturbed areas
should be revegetated with native grass and tree species as soon as the project is completed.
Ground disturbance should be limited to what will be stabilized quickly, preferably by the end of
the workday. Natural fiber matting (coir) should be used for erosion control as synthetic
netting can trap animals and persist in the environment beyond its intended purpose.
Stream Channel and Bank Restoration
A natural, stable stream system is one that is able to transport a wide range of flows and
associated sediment bed load while maintaining channel features and neither degrading nor
aggrading. Alterations to the dimension, pattern, or profile of the stream channel as well as
changes to streambank vegetation, floodplains, hydrology, or sediment input can significantly
alter this equilibrium.

We offer the following recommendations for the Applicant's consideration:
Streambanks with deep-rooted woody vegetation are the most stable, and stream
restoration efforts should incorporate the use of native vegetation adapted to the site
conditions. Live dormant stakes may be used to reestablish root structure in riparian
areas. In areas where banks are severely undercut, high, and steep, whole -tree revetment
or rock may be used as a stabilization treatment (small rock, gravel, sand, and dirt are not
recommended due to their erosive nature), and it should not extend above the bank -full
elevation (the elevation of the channel where the natural floodplain begins).
Deep -rooting woody vegetation should be established along banks where any channel
work is accomplished. Tree and shrub plantings should be spaced at intervals no greater
than 10 feet along banks. Vegetated riparian zone widths should be as wide as practical
but should extend at least 30 feet from the stream channel.
2. Only the absolute minimum amount of work should be done within stream channels to
accomplish necessary reconstruction. Restoration plans should account for the
constraints of the site and the opportunities to improve stream pattern, dimension, and
profile with minimal disturbance.
Reconstruction work should follow natural channel design methodologies that are based
on the bank -full, or channel -forming, stage of the stream. Bank -full stage maintains the
natural channel dimensions and transports the bulk of sediment over time. Natural
channel conditions should be identified using a reference reach (nearby stream reaches
that exemplify restoration goals). Restoration design should match the pattern,
dimension, and profile of the reference reach to ensure the project's success.
4. All work in or adjacent to stream waters should be conducted in a dry work area to the
extent possible. Sandbags, cofferdams, bladder dams, or other diversion structures
should be used to prevent excavation in flowing water. These diversion structures should
be removed as soon as the work area is stable.
Equipment should not be operated in the stream unless absolutely necessary. Machinery
should be operated from the banks in a fashion that minimizes disturbance to woody
vegetation. Equipment should be: (a) washed to remove any contaminant residue prior
to project construction, (b) in good working order, and (c) checked to ensure there are no
leaks of potential contaminants (such as oil or other lubricants) prior to and during
construction.
6. Adequate measures to control sediment and erosion must be implemented prior to any
ground -disturbing activities in order to minimize effects on downstream aquatic
resources. In North Carolina, non -cohesive and erosion -prone soils are most common in
the felsic-crystalline terrains of the mountain and upper piedmont regions. Therefore,
reconstruction work should be staged such that disturbed areas would be stabilized with
seeding, mulch, and/or biodegradable (coir) erosion -control matting prior to the end of
each workday. Matting should be secured in place with staples; stakes; or, wherever
possible, live stakes of native trees. If rain is expected prior to temporary seed

establishment, additional measures should be implemented to protect water quality along
slopes and overburden stockpiles (for example, stockpiles may be covered with plastic or
other geotextile material and surrounded with silt fencing).
The Service appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments. Please contact Mr. Byron
Hamstead of our staff at [e-mail], if you have any questions. In any future
correspondence concerning this project, please reference our Log Number 4-2-20-421.
Sincerely,
Digitally signed by JANEf
J A N ET M I ZZ I Date:12020.09.0913:36:00
-04'00'
Janet Mizzi
Field Supervisor
4

L.S
United States Department of the Interior FISESERVIC I.IFF.
& W 1 LD
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICEu�J'lj
Asheville Field Office §'�
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
April 23, 2021
Erin Bennett
System Planning and Restoration, LLC
1150 S.E. Maynard Road, Suite 140
Cary, North Carolina 27511
[e-mail]
Dear Erin Bennett:
Subject: Proposed Starker Mitigation Bank; Catawba County, North Carolina
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the information provided in your
correspondence received on April 19, 2021, for the project referenced above wherein you solicit
comments regarding potential impacts to federally protected species to satisfy nationwide permit
application requirements. We submit the following comments in accordance with the provisions
of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 661-667e); the National
Environmental Policy Act (42 U. S.C. §4321 et seq.); and section 7 of the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543) (Act).
Project Description
According to the information provided, the proposed project involves restoration and
enhancement of two unnamed tributaries which connect with Mull Creek River in Claremont,
North Carolina. Design plans and descriptions of proposed impact minimization measures were
not provided in your correspondence. Onsite habitats (instream and riparian) are highly
disturbed due to a legacy of agricultural land use. Surrounding land cover is dominated by
forested areas, agricultural and residential developments.
Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Species
Suitable summer roosting habitat may be present in the project area for the federally threatened
northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis), and Service records indicate multiple mist -net
captures of this animal in the project vicinity. However, the final 4(d) rule (effective as of
February 16, 2016), exempts incidental take of northern long-eared bat associated with activities
that occur greater than 0.25 miles from a known hibernation site, and greater than 150 feet from
a known, occupied maternity roost during the pup season (June 1 — July 31). Based on the
information provided, the project would occur at a location where any incidental take that may
result from associated activities is exempt under the 4(d) rule. Although not required, we
encourage you to conduct tree removal activities outside of the northern long-eared bat
pup season (June 1 to July 31) and/or the active season (April 1 to October 15). This will
minimize impacts to pups at roosts not yet identified.

Service records indicate several known occurrences of the federally threatened dwarf -flowered
heartleaf (Hexastylis naniora) in the project vicinity. Moreover, your correspondence indicates
that suitable habitat is present onsite for dwarf -flowered heartleaf and the federally endangered
Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii). However, botanical surveys conducted during
September 30, 2020 and April 15, 2021 detected no evidence for these species at that time. Due
to the presence of suitable habitat, but lack of onsite evidence for these species, we believe the
probability for project -mediated loss is insignificant and discountable. Therefore, we would
concur with a "may affect, not likely to adversely affect" determination for these species from
the applicable federal action agency.
Please be aware that obligations under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act must be
reconsidered if: (1) new information reveals impacts of this identified action that may affect
listed species or critical habitat in a manner not previously considered, (2) this action is
subsequently modified in a manner that was not considered in this review, or (3) a new species is
listed or critical habitat is determined that may be affected by the identified action.
We offer the following general recommendations on behalf of natural resources:
Erosion and Sediment Control
Construction activities near aquatic resources, streams, and wetlands have the potential to cause
bank destabilization, water pollution, and water quality degradation if measures to control site
runoff are not properly installed and maintained. In order to effectively reduce erosion and
sedimentation impacts, best management practices specific to the extent and type of construction
should be designed and installed prior to land disturbing activities and should be maintained
throughout construction. Natural fiber matting (coir) should be used for erosion control as
synthetic netting can trap animals and persists in the environment beyond its intended purpose.
Land disturbance should be limited to what can be stabilized quickly, preferably by the end of
the workday. Once construction is complete, disturbed areas should be revegetated with native
riparian grass and tree species as soon as possible. For maximum benefits to water quality and
bank stabilization, riparian areas should be forested; however, if the areas are maintained in
grass, they should not be mowed. The Service can provide information on potential sources of
plant material upon request.
A complete design manual that is consistent with the requirements of the North Carolina
Sedimentation and Pollution Control Act and Administrative Rules, can be found at the
following website: https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/energy-mineral-land-resources.
Stream Channel and Bank Restoration
A natural, stable stream system is one that is able to transport a wide range of flows and
associated sediment bed load while maintaining channel features and neither degrading nor
aggrading. Alterations to the dimension, pattern, or profile of the stream channel as well as
changes to streambank vegetation, floodplains, hydrology, or sediment input can significantly
alter this equilibrium.
We offer the following recommendations for the Applicant's consideration:
2

Streambanks with deep-rooted woody vegetation are the most stable, and stream
restoration efforts should incorporate the use of native vegetation adapted to the site
conditions. Live dormant stakes may be used to reestablish root structure in riparian
areas. In areas where banks are severely undercut, high, and steep, whole -tree revetment
or rock may be used as a stabilization treatment (small rock, gravel, sand, and dirt are not
recommended due to their erosive nature), and it should not extend above the bank -full
elevation (the elevation of the channel where the natural floodplain begins).
Deep -rooting woody vegetation should be established along banks where any channel
work is accomplished. Tree and shrub plantings should be spaced at intervals no greater
than 10 feet along banks. Vegetated riparian zone widths should be as wide as practical
but should extend at least 30 feet from the stream channel.
2. Only the absolute minimum amount of work should be done within stream channels to
accomplish necessary reconstruction. Restoration plans should account for the
constraints of the site and the opportunities to improve stream pattern, dimension, and
profile with minimal disturbance.
Reconstruction work should follow natural channel design methodologies that are based
on the bank -full, or channel -forming, stage of the stream. Bank -full stage maintains the
natural channel dimensions and transports the bulk of sediment over time. Natural
channel conditions should be identified using a reference reach (nearby stream reaches
that exemplify restoration goals). Restoration design should match the pattern,
dimension, and profile of the reference reach to ensure the project's success.
4. All work in or adjacent to stream waters should be conducted in a dry work area to the
extent possible. Sandbags, cofferdams, bladder dams, or other diversion structures
should be used to prevent excavation in flowing water. These diversion structures should
be removed as soon as the work area is stable.
Equipment should not be operated in the stream unless absolutely necessary. Machinery
should be operated from the banks in a fashion that minimizes disturbance to woody
vegetation. Equipment should be: (a) washed to remove any contaminant residue prior
to project construction, (b) in good working order, and (c) checked to ensure there are no
leaks of potential contaminants (such as oil or other lubricants) prior to and during
construction.
6. Adequate measures to control sediment and erosion must be implemented prior to any
ground -disturbing activities in order to minimize effects on downstream aquatic
resources. In North Carolina, non -cohesive and erosion -prone soils are most common in
the felsic-crystalline terrains of the mountain and upper piedmont regions. Therefore,
reconstruction work should be staged such that disturbed areas would be stabilized with
seeding, mulch, and/or biodegradable (coir) erosion -control matting prior to the end of
each workday. Matting should be secured in place with staples; stakes; or, wherever
possible, live stakes of native trees. If rain is expected prior to temporary seed
establishment, additional measures should be implemented to protect water quality along
3

slopes and overburden stockpiles (for example, stockpiles may be covered with plastic or
other geotextile material and surrounded with silt fencing).
The Service appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments. Please contact Mr. Byron
Hamstead of our staff at [e-mail], if you have any questions. In any future
correspondence concerning this project, please reference our Log Number 4-2-20-421.
Sincerely,
- - original signed - -
Janet Mizzi
Field Supervisor
4

Appendix H- Site Photographs
WLS Catawba 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Starker Mitigation Site

STARKER STREAM RESTORATION SITE
AUGUST 2019
CATAWBA COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
REACH S 100 (NORTH OF 1-40, ABOVE CROSSING)
S 100 - FACING UPSTREAM - DEBRIS PILED IN
S 100 - FACING UPSTREAM - CATTLE ALONG
GULLEY, CATTLE HAVE ACCESS TO STREAM ERODING STREAMBANKS
S 100 - FACING DOWNSTREAM - STEEP,
S 100 - FACING DOWNSTREAM - INCREASED
VERTICAL STREAM BAN KS AND OVERWIDE BANK EROSION DUE TO CATTLE IMPACTS
CHANNEL
APPENDIX H

STARKER STREAM RESTORATION SITE
AUGUST 2019
CATAWBA COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
S 1 00- FACING UPSTREAM - ERODING
STREAMBANKS AND FINE SEDIMENT IN CHANNEL
REACH 9102
S 102 - FACING UPSTREAM - CONFLUENCE WITH
S 100 - FACING UPSTREAM - CROSSING NORTH OF
1-40, RIPARIAN WETLAND USED AS A WALLOW AREA
FOR CATTLE
S 102 - FACING UPSTREAM - INCISED
CHANNEL
APPENDIX H 2

STARKER STREAM RESTORATION SITE
AUGUST 2019
CATAWBA COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
S 102 - FACING UPSTREAM - CATTLE CROSSING,
S 1 02- FACING UPSTREAM - ERODING
FINE SEDIMENT ENTERING CHANNEL STREAMBANKS, LOGS AND DEBRIS IN CHANNEL
NEAR SPRING HEAD
REACH S 100 (NORTH OF 1-40, BELOW CROSS
S 1 00- FACING UPSTREAM - PERCHED
CULVERT AT CROSSING
S 100 - FACING UPSTREAM - ERODING
STREAMBANKS
APPENDIX H 3

Olt
• - r_.�' �"S .ice ZS` _ '�> _4 _ .�
' TPaw
r
-
L

i y a
�IMP
If
�1 1
v
W
z
._ ,. .... «cif', _.�: - �- - •t,.. - '•i .

� g",
x x r 1< y icy
! � J n �� S£ 1 i � T" - ; ..,"a�# � -• dT � ': � f fay. F -'�
'"'yl � ✓ � "' S � _d �:- i. Szri'- x R �g-
�,-
'
iJ
r

STARKER STREAM RESTORATION SITE
AUGUST 2019
CATAWBA COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
S 1 00- FACING UPSTREAM - TREES FALLING
INTO CHANNEL, FINE SEDIMENT DEPOSITS
S 100 - FACING UPSTREAM - DEBRIS IN
CHANNEL, ERODING STREAMBANK
S 100 - FACING DOWNSTREAM - LARGE
ERODING CUT BANK
S 100 - FACING DOWNSTREAM - UNDERCUT
STREAMBANK
APPENDIX H 7

STARKER STREAM RESTORATION SITE
AUGUST 2019
CATAWBA COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
S 100 - FACING UPSTREAM - FENCE DEBRIS IN
CHANNEL
S 100 - FACING DOWNSTREAM - ERODING
STREAM BANKS DOWNSTREAM OF CROSSING
S 100 - FACING DOWNSTREAM - ERODING
STREAMBANK, JUST UPSTREAM OF CROSSING
NEAR XS
S 100 - FACING DOWNSTREAM - ERODING
STREAMBANK DOWNSTREAM OF CROSSING
APPENDIX H 8

STARKER STREAM RESTORATION SITE
AUGUST 2019
CATAWBA COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
REACH S 1 O 1
S 10 1 - FACING UPSTREAM - CONFLUENCE WITH
5100
S 10 1 - FACING UPSTREAM - INCISED
CHANNEL, ERODING STREAMBANK
S 10 1 - FACING UPSTREAM - ERODING
STREAMBANKS, FINES SEDIMENT IN CHANNEL
APPENDIX H 9

STARKER STREAM RESTORATION SITE
AUGUST 2019
CATAWBA COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
REACH S200 (NORTH OF 1-40)
S200 - FACING DOWNSTREAM - WATER
PONDED UPSTREAM OF BLOCKED CULVERT
S200 - FACING DOWNSTREAM - INCISED
CHANNEL, ERODING BANKS
S200- FACING DOWNSTREAM - TREES
COLLAPSED INTO CHANNEL
S200 - ERODING GULLEY THAT DRAINS TO
PROJECT STREAM
APPENDIX H 10

STARKER STREAM RESTORATION SITE
AUGUST 2019
CATAWBA COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
S200 - FACING UPSTREAM
REACH S200 (SOUTH OF 1-40, BELOW CROSSING)
S200 - FACING UPSTREAM - ARMORED
CULVERT AT CROSSING
S200- FACING UPSTREAM
S200 - FACING DOWNSTREAM - STEEP
STREAMBANKS, CATTLE IMPACTS
APPENDIX H 12

STARKER STREAM RESTORATION SITE
AUGUST 2019
CATAWBA COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
S200 - FACING DOWNSTREAM - DEBRIS AND
FINE SEDIMENT IN STREAM
S200 - FACING DOWNSTREAM - FENCE LINE,
CATTLE HAVE ACCESS TO UPSTREAM SECTION OF
REACH
S200- FACING DOWNSTREAM - STEEP
STREAMBANKS, CATTLE IMPACTS
S200- FACING DOWNSTREAM - ERODING
STREAMBANKS, DOMINANT INVASIVE SPECIES
APPENDIX H 13

€c �
tA
xt`
/1
`