20171041 Ver 1_Little Sebastian_100027_MY2_2022_20230127

ID#* 20171041 Version* 1
Select Reviewer:
Ryan Hamilton
Initial Review Completed Date 02/01/2023
Mitigation Project Submittal - 1/27/2023
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?* O Yes O No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
Stream Wetlands Buffer Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:* Email Address:*
Paul Wiesner [e-mail]
Project Information
........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
ID#:* 20171041 Version:* 1
Existing ID# Existing Version
Project Type: • DMS Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Little Sebastian Mitigation STREAM Site
County: Surry
Document Information
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: Little Sebastian_ 100027_MY2_2022.pdf 6.13MB
Please upload only one PDF of the complete file that needs to be submitted...
Signature
Print Name:* Paul Wiesner
Signature: *

Year 2 Monitoring Report
FINAL
LITTLE SEBASTIAN SITE
NCDMS Project #100027(Contract # 7187) | RFP 16-006993 (Issued 9/16/2016)
USACE Action ID: SAW-2017-01507|DWR Project #2017-1041
Surry County, North Carolina
Yadkin River Basin
HUC 03040101
Provided by:
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
For Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC
Provided for:
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
January 2023

3600 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 100
Raleigh, NC 27612
Corporate Headquarters
6575 W Loop S #300
Bellaire, TX 77401
Main: 713.520.5400
January 16, 2023
Paul Wiesner
NC DEQ Division of Mitigation Services
Asheville Regional Office
2090 U.S. 70 Highway
Swannanoa, NC 28778-8211
RE: Little Sebastian Mitigation Site: Year 2 Monitoring Report (NCDMS Project ID #100027)
Listed below are comments provided by DMS on December 1, 2022 regarding the Little Sebastian Mitigation
Site: Year 2 Monitoring Report Draft and RESÔ responses.

General: At the April 19, 2022, IRT Credit Release meeting, the IRT asked about the projectÔs rain gauge.
RES reported that it was an off-site rain gauge and noted that the crest gauge reporting is conducted every
24-hours. Due to the lack of bankfull events reported, has RES considered installing an on-site rain gauge?
Rain data for this site is obtained from The Raven Knob CRONOS station, approximately 6 miles north of
the site, and provides accurate daily rain data for the surrounding area. In the past, the use of on-site rain
gauges has shown to be less reliable than data from established weather stations, due to battery life, water
catchment issues, clogged gauges, and other general accuracy issues, and therefore, has not been
considered for this site. In the future, the USACEÔs Antecedent Precipitation Tool (APT) may be utilized in
conjunction with RESÔ current rain data retrieval method to better review climactic conditions.

General: The IRT also recommended more frequent (2-4 hour) crest gauge data recordation to confirm
project bankfull events. In the revised report, please indicate the crest gauge recording frequency in MY2
(2022).
The recording frequency for both crest and flow gauges on the site is once per hour, 24 hours per day. This
has been added to the report.

General: Please confirm that the entire project boundary was walked and assessed as part of the MY2 (2022)
monitoring effort, and all conservation easement encroachment has been reported accordingly.
The entire project boundary was walked during MY2 monitoring. Encroachment issues have been noted in
the report and will be addressed prior to MY3 monitoring efforts.

General: Please be sure to provide photo documentation of overbank events in MY3 (2023) and future
monitoring reports. Is any photo documentation of the overbank event reported in MY2 (2022) available?
If so, please include it in the revised monitoring report.
Flow cameras have not yet been installed on site but will be installed prior to the MY3 monitoring efforts
to capture photo documentation of overbank events.

res.us

Section 1.7 Monitoring Performance (MY2): Thank you for relocating the fencing in May 2022 as
discussed in the MY0 & MY1 (2021) reports. In the report text, please confirm that all project fencing is now
located outside of the conservation easement or on the conservation easement line as required.
This has been confirmed in Section 1.7.

Section 1.7 Monitoring Performance (MY2) - Vegetation: In the report text, please further describe the
total 0.83-acre encroachment areas observed on the site. Was the encroachment and project vegetation
damage associated with livestock encroachment or landowner mowing? Please discuss how the
encroachment was resolved with the landowner? The report notes that additional signage will be installed
along the project boundary/conservation easement to prevent further encroachment. Please ensure that
enough additional signage and horse tape are installed to clearly mark the conservation easement and
establish an understandable mowing boundary for the landowner/s.
Further description regarding the encroachment and associated vegetation damage has been added to
Section 1.7:
ÑTwo areas of mowing encroachment along the eastern boundary of the Project, adjacent to BS1, were
observed during Year 2 monitoring. The mowing has resulted in two areas of low stem density; one is
0.49 acres and the other is 0.34 acres. This roughly 0.83-acre area will be replanted with native
container trees, chosen in reference to the original planting list (Appendix C) and based on supply
availability, during this dormant season. Additional signage and horse tape (in areas where visibility
between markers may be limited) will be installed along this side of the easement to mark a clear
boundary to prevent further mowing.Ò
The encroachment will be resolved with the landowner by placing clear easement markers, signage, and
horse tape where necessary, in the impacted areas. If further encroachment is observed in the future, a
formal letter will be sent to the landowner.

Section 2.0 Methods: In this section, please provide the methodology for the flow gauges installed on the
site and the associated data interpretation. How is the DS Riffle Elevation utilized in the flow gauge data
interpretation?
Methodology regarding the project flow gauges has been added to Section 2.0. Flow detection is calculated
by subtracting the water depth measurement at the flow gauge by the water depth measurement of the
downstream riffle. Once this number is calculated, corrected HOBO readings can be used alongside the flow
detection to quantify flow events, i.e., any readings greater than the flow detection equal stream flow.

CCPV Maps Ï Figure 2: Please add a callout to the map to clearly define the MY2 (2022) encroachment
areas reported. The callout/s should also indicate that these areas will be replanted in the 2022/ 2023
dormant season as specified in the report.
These call outs have been added to the encroachment/low stem density areas in Figure 2.

CCPV Maps Ï Figure 2: A steep stream bank was observed on MC3-B/ MC3-C near the crossing during the
last DMS monitoring site visit (2021). Please confirm that the bank continues to remain stable.
This bank continues to remain stable.

Visual Stream Stability Assessment Tables: Visual stream stability assessment tables should include
Enhancement I reaches as well as Restoration reaches. Please update the monitoring report and digital
support files accordingly.
Table 5 has been updated accordingly.

2

Little Sebastian Crossing Photos - July 12th, 2022: Please review and update the crossing photos
provided. The photos for the crossing at JN2-D & JN3-B are the same photo sets. Additionally, the crossing
name for MC3-B/C should be updated.
These duplicate crossing photos are accurate for the crossing on JN3-B; unfortunately, the MY2 crossing
photo for JN2-D was lost during monitoring data download. Crossing photos from MY1 for JN2-D are
included for reference and will be updated and included in the MY3 report. Crossing MC3-B/C caption has
been revised.

Little Sebastian Crossing Photos - Please add upstream and downstream crossing photos for the crossing
at MC1-A/B; the crossing at MC1-B; and the crossing at BS1-E. The IRT has requested supplemental photos
of the all project culvert inlets and outlets to confirm crossing stability and sufficient organism passage.
The upstream and downstream crossing photos for BS1-E are included in the MY2 report. The crossing
photos for MC1-A/B were lost during monitoring data download but will be updated and included in the
MY3 report. MC1-B does not have a crossing, just an easement break, therefore, no photos were taken.

Appendix D Ï Cross Sections: Please review and QA/QC the cross-section data provided in Table 11 and
the corresponding project cross-section graphs. Cross sections 1; 2; 3 and 11 show notable changes for
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio between MY1 and MY2; however, these changes do not appear to be reflected
in the cross-section graphs provided. Once reviewed, please discuss the individual cross-section Bankfull
Bank Height Ratio changes in the revised report text.
Please see the reviewed cross section discussions below, and in the report.

Cross Section 1- because this is an Enhancement I section with steeper, uneven slopes, choosing the same
location to call top of bank, year to year, is difficult; therefore, minor changes are expected in bank height
ratios. Additionally, because the morphology tables are set to round numbers to one decimal place, the
change from MY1 to MY2 may look more drastic than it is. MY1, cross section 1 had a bank height ratio of
1.380952381; MY2 cross section 1 had a bank height ratio of 1.467336683 (only 6% change). This is less
than a 10% difference.

Cross Section 2- because this is an Enhancement I section with steeper, uneven slopes, choosing the same
location to call top of bank, year to year, is difficult; therefore, minor changes are expected in bank height
ratios. The left top of bank was called at 1211.91ft in the field, but upon desktop review, it is more likely
that the top of bank is at 1211.66ft, as the low top of bank. This changes the bank height ratio to
1.577205882. This is a 4% change from the MY1 bank height ratio of 1.516791045.

Cross Section 3- because this is an Enhancement II section with steeper slopes, choosing the same location
to call top of bank, year to year, is difficult; therefore, minor changes are expected in bank height ratios. The
right top of bank was called at 1170.983ft in the field, but upon desktop review, it is more likely that the top
of bank is at 1170.703ft, as the low top of bank. This changes the bank height ratio to 1.054081633. This is
a 6% change from the MY1 bank height ratio of 1.127348643.

Cross Section 11 Ï this cross section is in a portion of the project that displays uneven slopes along both
banks, and in this case, a very steep left bank; therefore, calling the same top of bank, year to year, is difficult.
Minor changes are expected to occur, especially as the stream settles in the early stages of the project as
this is a Restoration reach. The left top of bank was called at 1136.665ft in the field, but upon desktop
review, it is more likely that the top of bank is at 1136.429ft, as the low top of bank. This changes the bank
height ratio to 0.915041783. This is a 14% change from MY1 bank height ratio of 1.07194244604311;
however, because this section has such uneven, sloped banks, the top of bank could have been miscalled
3

in MY1. MY2 more closely resembles as-built (MY0) conditions/numbers, which displayed a low bank height
ratio of 1; this is only an 8% change between MY0 and MY2. This cross section and reach will continue to
be monitored for changes that may impact the condition of the stream as a whole.

Appendix E Ï Hydrology Data - MY2 Little Sebastian GW1 graph: Please review and QA/QC to confirm
that the 32 days (15%) reported is accurate. The groundwater level appears to drop below the 12-inch mark
during the 32 days reported as ÑconsecutiveÒ.
The groundwater level does drop below the 12-inch mark during the 32-day stretch; however, the
groundwater gauge reads twice a day, and each of the instances where the level drops below 12 inches, it
is only for one reading that day, not both. RES determines a consecutive streak by beginning with at least
two days of readings above 12 inches, and then at least one reading a day above the 12-inch mark, until
there are two readings in a row under 12-inches, ending the consecutive day count, which, in this case
began on May 4, 2022, ending the 32-day stretch. Please reference the GW1 raw data in the digital files (5.
Hydrology Data) to see where the determinations come from.

Digital Support File Comments:
Please revise the visual vegetation condition assessment table to reflect the areas of low stem or bare areas
identified in the text and/or submitted with the digital data. All areas meet or exceed the minimum threshold
of .10 acres. Please update the digital support files and MY2 report as necessary.
The encroachment area has now been duplicated as a low stem density area as well. Since they are linked
issues, they share the same acreages. On Figure 2, the area is symbolized as red simple hatch since it is
encroachment (additional orange simple hatch denoting low stem density would clutter the shapes and
create symbology confusion). These were the only vegetation problem areas observed in MY2. The table
and digital files have been updated.
4

Table of Contents
1.0 Project Summary.................................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Project Location and Description.......................................................................................... 1
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives................................................................................................. 1
1.3 Project Success Criteria.......................................................................................................... 2
Stream Restoration Success Criteria........................................................................................... 2
Vegetation Success Criteria.......................................................................................................... 3
1.4 Project Components............................................................................................................... 4
1.5 Stream Mitigation Approach................................................................................................. 4
1.6 Construction and As-Built Conditions.................................................................................. 7
1.7 Monitoring Performance (MY2)............................................................................................ 7
Vegetation...................................................................................................................................... 7
Stream Geomorphology............................................................................................................... 8
Stream Hydrology......................................................................................................................... 9
Wetland Hydrology....................................................................................................................... 9
2.0 Methods..............................................................................................................................................10
3.0 References..........................................................................................................................................11
Appendix A: Background Tables
Table 1. Project Mitigation Components
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Table 4. Project Background Information Table
Figure 1. Site Location Map

Appendix B: Visual Assessment Data
Figure 2. Current Conditions Plan View
Table 5. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Table 6. Vegetation Condition Assessment
Vegetation Plot Photos
Monitoring Device and Crossing Photos

Appendix C: Vegetation Plot Data
Table 7. Planted Species Summary
Table 8. Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary
Table 9. Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot Species
Appendix D: Stream Measurement and Geomorphology Data
Table 10. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table 11. Cross Section Morphology Data Table
Cross Section Overlay Plots
Appendix E: Hydrology Data
Table 12. 2022 Rainfall Summary
Table 13. Documentation of Geomorphically Significant Flow Events
Table 14. 2022 Max Hydroperiod
Table 15. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results
Stream Flow Hydrographs
Groundwater Hydrographs

1.0 Project Summary
1.1Project Location and Description
The Little Sebastian Mitigation Site (“the Project”) is located in Surry County, approximately 10
miles north of Elkin. The Project presents 4,554.300 Cool Stream Mitigation Units (SMU) along Mill
Creek and three unnamed tributaries.
The Project’s total easement area is approximately 25.91 acres within the overall drainage area of
3,261 acres. The Project has two separate portions and in between those portions is the Gideon
Mitigation Site. The Gideon Mitigation Site has a total easement area that is approximately 11.23
ac and presents 4,782 linear feet of stream restoration, enhancement, and preservation. Therefore,
a total 37.14 ac and 12,887 LF of stream are protected in perpetuity. Grazing livestock historically
had access to all stream reaches within the Project. The lack of riparian buffer vegetation, deep-
rooted vegetation, and unstable channel characteristics contributed to the degradation of stream
banks throughout the Project area.

The Project will be monitored on a regular basis throughout the seven-year post-construction
monitoring period, or until performance standards are met. The Project will be transferred to the
NCDEQ Stewardship Program. This party shall serve as conservation easement holder and long-
term steward for the property and will conduct periodic inspection of the site to ensure that
restrictions required in the conservation easement are upheld.

1.2Project Goals and Objectives
Through the comprehensive analysis of the Project’s maximum functional uplift using the Stream
Functions Pyramid Framework, specific, attainable goals and objectives were realized by the
Project. These goals clearly address the degraded water quality and nutrient input from farming
that were identified as major watershed stressors in the 2009 Upper Yadkin Pee-Dee River RBRP.
The Project will address outlined RBRP Goals 2, 4, and 6 (Mitigation Plan).
The Project goals are:
Improve water transport from watershed to the channel in a non-erosive manner in a
stable channel;
Improve flood flow attenuation on site and downstream by allowing for overbanks flows
and connection to the active floodplain;
Improve instream habitat;
Restore and enhance native floodplain vegetation; and
Indirectly support the goals of the 2009 Upper Yadkin Pee-Dee RBRP to improve water
quality and to reduce sediment and nutrient loads.

The Project objectives to address the goals are:
Little Sebastian Site1 Year 2 Monitoring Report
Surry County, NCJanuary2023

Designed and reconstructed stream channels sized to convey bankfull flows that maintain
a stable dimension, profile, and planform based on modeling, watershed conditions, and
reference reach conditions;
Permanently excluded livestock from stream channels and their associated buffers;
Added in-stream structures and bank stabilization measures to protect restored and
enhanced streams;
Installed habitat features such as brush toes, constructed riffles, woody materials, and
pools of varying depths to restored and enhanced streams;
Reduced bank height ratios and increased entrenchment ratios to reference reach
conditions.
Increased forested riparian buffers to at least 30 feet on both sides of the channel along
the Project reaches with a hardwood riparian plant community;
Implemented one agricultural BMP in order to limit inputs of sediment, nutrients, and fecal
coliform to streams from surrounding farming operations;
Treated exotic invasive species; and
Established a permanent conservation easement on the Project.

1.3Project Success Criteria
The success criteria for the Project follows the 2016 USACE Wilmington District Stream and
Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update, the Little Sebastian Final Mitigation Plan, and
subsequent agency guidance. Cross section and vegetation plot monitoring takes place in Years
0, 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7. Stream hydrology, wetland hydrology, and visual monitoring takes place
annually. Specific success criteria components are presented below.

Stream Restoration Success Criteria
Four bankfull flow events must be documented within the seven-year monitoring period. The
bankfull events must occur in separate years. Otherwise, the stream monitoring will continue until
four bankfull events have been documented in separate years.
There should be little change in as-built cross sections. If changes do take place, they should be
evaluated to determine if they represent a movement toward a less stable condition (for example
down-cutting or erosion) or are minor changes that represent an increase in stability (for example
settling, vegetative changes, deposition along the banks, or decrease in width/depth ratio). Cross
sections shall be classified using the Rosgen stream classification method, and all monitored cross
sections should fall within the quantitative parameters defined for channels of the design stream
type. Bank height ratio shall not exceed 1.2, and the entrenchment ratio shall be above 1.4 within
restored riffle cross sections. Channel stability should be demonstrated through a minimum of
four bankfull events documented in the seven-year monitoring period.

Digital images are used to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or degradation, bank
erosion, success of riparian vegetation, and effectiveness of erosion control measures.
Longitudinal images should not indicate the absence of developing bars within the channel or an
Little Sebastian Site2 Year 2 Monitoring Report
Surry County, NCJanuary2023

excessive increase in channel depth. Lateral images should not indicate excessive erosion or
continuing degradation of the banks over time. A series of images over time should indicate
successional maturation of riparian vegetation.
Stream restoration reaches will be monitored to document intermittent or seasonal surface flow.
This will be accomplished through direct observation and the use of hydraulic pressure
transducers with data loggers. Reaches must demonstrate a minimum of 30 consecutive days of
flow. Flow gauges will be installed on JN2-A and BS1-A. The flow gauge on BS1-A will also be
capable of monitoring bankfull events.

Vegetation Success Criteria
Specific and measurable success criteria for plant density within the riparian buffers on the Project
follow IRT Guidance. The interim measures of vegetative success for the Project is the survival of
at least 320 planted three-year old trees per acre at the end of Year 3, 260 trees per acre with an
average height of six feet at the end of Year 5, and the final vegetative success criteria is 210 trees
per acre with an average height of eight feet at the end of Year 7. Volunteer trees are counted,
identified to species, and included in the yearly monitoring reports, but are not counted towards
the success criteria of total planted stems until they are present in the plot for greater than two
seasons. Moreover, any single species can only account for up to 50 percent of the required
number of stems within any vegetation plot. Any stems in excess of 50 percent will be shown in
the monitoring table but will not be used to demonstrate success.

Little Sebastian Site3Year 2 Monitoring Report
Surry County, NCJanuary2023

1.4Project Components
The project streams were significantly impacted by livestock production, agricultural practices,
and a lack of riparian buffer. Improvements to the Project help meet the river basin needs
expressed in the 2009 Upper Yadkin Pee-Dee River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) as well as
ecological improvements to riparian corridor within the easement.
Through stream restoration, enhancement, and preservation, the Project presents 4,554.300 Cool
Stream Mitigation Units (SMU) (Table 1).

Mitigation ApproachLinear Feet Ratio Cool Base SMU
Restoration 2,758 12,721
Enhancement I 5971.5 398
Enhancement II 1,898 2.5 759.2
Enhancement II1,3725274.4
Enhancement II 8197.5 109.2
Enhancement II 24310 24.3
Preservation 41810 41.8

Total 8,068 4,327.9
Credit Loss in Required Buffer-278.7
Credit Gain for Additional Buffer505.1
Total Adjusted SMUs4,554.300
1.5Stream Mitigation Approach
The Project includes priority I stream restoration, enhancement I, enhancement II, and
preservation. Priority I stream restoration incorporates the design of a single thread meandering
channel, with parameters based on data taken from reference sites, published empirical
relationships, regional curves developed from existing project streams, and NC Regional Curves.
Analytical design techniques also were a crucial element of the project and were used to
determine the design discharge and to verify the design as a whole.

Reach JN2-A - Preservation activities included improving the existing livestock exclusion fencing
and buffers greater than 30 feet. The easement was extended to provide preservation beyond the
origin point of the stream as per the PJD.
Reach JN2-B - Enhancement activities included improving habitat through supplemental buffer
plantings and livestock exclusion fencing. Minimal bank grading and buffer re-establishment was
done along the downstream end. In-stream structures such as log sills and one log cross vane
were installed for stability and to improve habitat. The restoration of the riparian areas at the
downstream end filters runoff from adjacent pasture, reduce sediment loads, and provide wildlife
corridors throughout the Project area.
Reach JN2-C - Enhancement activities included improving habitat through supplemental buffer
plantings and livestock exclusion fencing. Minimal bank grading and buffer re-establishment were
Little Sebastian Site4 Year 2 Monitoring Report
Surry County, NCJanuary2023

done along the downstream end. The restoration of the riparian areas at the downstream end
filters runoff from adjacent pasture, reduce sediment loads, and provide wildlife corridors
throughout the Project area.
Reach JN2-D - Enhancement activities included some channel relocation, bed, and bank
stabilization, removing an existing ford crossing and access road, improving habitat through
supplemental buffer plantings, and livestock exclusion fencing. The restoration of the riparian
areas at the downstream end filters runoff from adjacent pasture, reduce sediment loads, and
provide wildlife corridors throughout the Project area.
Reach JN3-A –Enhancement II activities at a 7.5:1 ratio included improving habitat through
supplemental buffer plantings and livestock exclusion fencing. The widening and restoration of
the riparian areas along the right bank filters runoff from adjacent pasture and reduce sediment
loads.
Reach JN3-B - Restoration activities included constructing a new channel within the natural valley
to the north with appropriate dimensions and pattern and backfilling the abandoned channel. In-
stream structures such as log sills, brush toes, and log vanes were installed for stability and to
improve habitat. Habitat was further improved through buffer plantings and livestock exclusion.
Buffer activities improved riparian areas that filter runoff from adjacent pastures, thereby reducing
nutrient and sediment loads to the channel. Also, the reach was built through two small
jurisdictional wetlands that are currently on the right bank floodplain and degraded from cattle
access and pasture-use. While this project is not claiming any wetland credit, the raised channel
bed enhances the wetlands’ hydrology by reconnecting the floodplain wetlands to the stream.
Two groundwater wells were installed on the right floodplain to monitor the wetland hydrology
and will be reported in the yearly monitoring reports.
Reach MC1-A - Enhancement activities included improving habitat through supplemental buffer
plantings and livestock exclusion fencing. The widening and restoration of the riparian areas along
the right bank filters runoff from adjacent pasture and reduce sediment loads.
Reach MC1-B - Enhancement activities included improving habitat through supplemental buffer
plantings and livestock exclusion fencing. The widening and restoration of the riparian areas along
the left bank filters runoff from adjacent pasture, reduce sediment loads, and provide wildlife
corridors throughout the Project area.
Reach MC1-C - Restoration activities included using log structures to provide vertical stability,
assist in maintaining riffle, run and pool features and to provide habitat features. Cut and fill was
balanced in an effort to raise the channel bed to provide regular inundation of the adjacent
floodplain. Habitat was improved through supplemental buffer plantings and livestock exclusion
fencing. The Gideon Mitigation Bank was constructed with the Project.
Reach MC3-A - Enhancement activities included improving habitat through supplemental buffer
plantings and livestock exclusion fencing. The widening and restoration of the riparian areas along
the right bank filters runoff from adjacent pasture and reduce sediment loads.
Little Sebastian Site5 Year 2 Monitoring Report
Surry County, NCJanuary2023

Reach MC3-B - Enhancement activities included reshaping the left bank, install coir matting and
livestakes, and improving habitat through supplemental buffer plantings and livestock exclusion
fencing. The widening and restoration of the riparian areas along the left bank filters runoff from
adjacent pasture, reduce sediment loads, and provide wildlife corridors throughout the Project
area. A ford crossing was installed on this reach.
Reach MC3-C - Enhancement activities included reshaping the left bank, install coir matting and
livestakes, and improving habitat through supplemental buffer plantings and livestock exclusion
fencing. The widening and restoration of the riparian areas along the left bank filters runoff from
adjacent pasture, reduce sediment loads, and provide wildlife corridors throughout the project
area.
Reach MC3-D - Enhancement activities includes improving habitat through supplemental buffer
plantings and livestock exclusion fencing. The widening and restoration of the riparian areas along
the left bank filters runoff from adjacent pasture, reduce sediment loads, and provide wildlife
corridors throughout the Project area.
Reach BS1-A - Restoration activities included using log and rock structures to provide vertical
stability, assist in maintaining riffle, run and pool features and to provide habitat features. Cut and
fill were balanced in an effort to raise the channel bed to provide small floodplain benches where
topography allows. Habitat was further improved through supplemental buffer plantings and
livestock exclusion fencing. An engineered sediment pack was installed at the top of this reach.
Reach BS1-B - Enhancement activities included improving habitat through supplemental buffer
plantings and livestock exclusion fencing. The widening and restoration of the riparian areas along
the left bank filters runoff from adjacent pasture, reduce sediment loads, and provide wildlife
corridors throughout the project area.
Reach BS1-C - Restoration activities included using log and rock structures to provide vertical
stability, assist in maintaining riffle, run and pool features and to provide habitat features. Cut and
fill was balanced in an effort to raise the channel bed to provide small floodplain benches where
topography allows. Habitat was further improved through supplemental buffer plantings and
livestock exclusion fencing.
Reach BS1-D - Enhancement activities included improving habitat through supplemental buffer
plantings and livestock exclusion fencing. The widening and restoration of the riparian areas along
the left bank filters runoff from adjacent pasture, reduce sediment loads, and provide wildlife
corridors throughout the Project area.
Reach BS1-E - Restoration activities included using log structures to provide vertical stability,
assist in maintaining riffle, run and pool features and to provide habitat features. Cut and fill were
balanced in an effort to raise the channel bed to provide small floodplain benches where
topography allows. Habitat was further improved through supplemental buffer plantings and
livestock exclusion fencing.
Little Sebastian Site6 Year 2 Monitoring Report
Surry County, NCJanuary2023

1.6Construction and As-Built Conditions
Stream construction was completed in February 2021 and planting was completed in March 2021.
Additionally, five-strand high tensile electric fencing was installed for cattle exclusion. The Little
Sebastian Site was built to design plans and guidelines. Two minor changes were made during
construction: a log sill was added on JN2-B for extra grade control and log sills were removed
from BS1 due to bedrock. Additionally, JN7 was added between Final Mitigation Plan approval
and construction. This reach has a 30-acre drainage area and includes a pond located about 150
linear feet upstream of the easement area. Historically, this pond drained through a short ditch
into JN3-B but due to the relocation of JN3-B, a channel was constructed in order to connect the
pond back to JN3-B. The restored JN7 includes 37 linear feet within the easement. A photo of JN7
is in Appendix B. RES proposed the addition of JN7 for credit; however, this request was denied
by IRT. A flow gauge was installed along JN7 in February 2022. RES will monitor the stability and
hydrology of this reach and if back-up credits are needed at closeout there is the potential to use
the 19.660 SMUs from JN7.

Planting plan changes included replacing blackgum (Nyssa sylvatica) and elderberry (Sambucus
canadensis) with sugarberry (Celtis laevigata) and buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis). These
changes were based on bare root availability. A planted species summary is included in Appendix
C. Minor monitoring device location changes were made during as-built installation due to site
conditions. The only monitoring devices not installed were the stage recorders proposed for MC1-
C and BS1-C due to the reach being less than 1,000 linear feet and there being two stage recorders
proposed for the same reach, respectively.
1.7Monitoring Performance (MY2)
The Little Sebastian Year 2 monitoring activities were performed in July and November 2022. All
Year 2 monitoring data is present below and in the appendices. The Project is on track to meeting
vegetation and stream interim success criteria.

Two areas of fencing inside the easement, adjacent to reach MC1, were relocated to the easement
boundaries in May 2022. An additional area of fencing was relocated at the downstream side of
fence at the crossing between MC1-A and MC1-B. Horse tape was strung along the upstream side
of the crossing to reinforce the easement boundaries and prevent any driving through the far
southwestern portion of the easement. All project fencing is now located outside of or on the
conservation easement line. Approximate fence and horse tape locations can be found in Figure
2, Appendix B.

Vegetation
Monitoring of six fixed vegetation plots and three random vegetation plots was completed on
November 2, 2022. Vegetation data can be found in Appendix C, associated photos are in
Appendix B, and plot locations are in Appendix B. MY2 data indicates that all plots are exceeding
the interim success criteria of 320 planted stems per acre. Planted stem densities ranged from 526
Little Sebastian Site7 Year 2 Monitoring Report
Surry County, NCJanuary2023

to 1,133 planted stems per acre with a mean of 823 planted stems per acre across all plots. A total
of 10 species were documented within the plots. Volunteer species were not noted in any of the
plots but are expected to establish in upcoming years. The average stem height in the plots was
3.0 feet.

Visual assessment of vegetation outside of the monitoring plots indicates that the herbaceous
vegetation is becoming well established throughout the project. A few small areas of Chinese
privet were treated in December 2021. No additional invasive species were observed during MY2.
Two areas of mowing encroachment along the eastern boundary of the Project, adjacent to BS1,
were observed during Year 2 monitoring. The mowing has resulted in two areas of low stem
density; one is 0.49 acres and the other is 0.34 acres. This roughly 0.83-acre area will be replanted
with native container trees, chosen in reference to the original planting list (Appendix C) and
based on supply availability, during this dormant season. Additional signage and horse tape (in
areas where visibility between markers may be limited) will be installed along this side of the
easement to mark a clear boundary to prevent further mowing. If further encroachment is
observed in the future, a formal letter will be sent to the landowner. All areas of proposed
supplemental planting (as a result of the encroachment) can be seen in Figure 2 as red simple
hatch and are referenced in Table 6, Appendix B. The entire project boundary was walked, and
no other problem areas were noted along the remainder of the easement boundary.

Stream Geomorphology
Cross section and geomorphology data collection for MY2 was collected on July 12, 2022.
Summary tables and cross section plots are in Appendix D. Overall the MY2 cross sections and
profile relatively match the proposed design. The current conditions show that shear stress and
velocities have been reduced for all restoration/enhancement reaches. The reaches were designed
as gravel/cobble bed channels and remain classified as gravel/cobble bed channels post-
construction.
Four cross sections displayed notable changes for Bankfull Bank Height Ratio between MY1 and
MY2 and are discussed below.
Cross Section 1- because this is an Enhancement I section with steeper, uneven slopes,
choosing the same location to call top of bank, year to year, is difficult; therefore, minor
changes are expected in bank height ratios. Additionally, because the morphology tables
are set to round numbers to one decimal place, the change from MY1 to MY2 may look
more drastic than it is. MY1, cross section 1 had a bank height ratio of 1.380952381; MY2
cross section 1 had a bank height ratio of 1.467336683 (only 6% change). This is less than
a 10% difference.
Cross Section 2- because this is an Enhancement I section with steeper, uneven slopes,
choosing the same location to call top of bank, year to year, is difficult; therefore, minor
changes are expected in bank height ratios. The left top of bank was called at 1211.91ft in
the field, but upon desktop review, it is more likely that the top of bank is at 1211.66ft, as
the low top of bank. This changes the bank height ratio to 1.577205882. This is a 4%
change from the MY1 bank height ratio of 1.516791045.
Little Sebastian Site8Year 2 Monitoring Report
Surry County, NCJanuary2023

Cross Section 3- because this is an Enhancement II section with steeper slopes, choosing
the same location to call top of bank, year to year, is difficult; therefore, minor changes are
expected in bank height ratios. The right top of bank was called at 1170.983ft in the field,
but upon desktop review, it is more likely that the top of bank is at 1170.703ft, as the low
top of bank. This changes the bank height ratio to 1.054081633. This is a 6% change from
the MY1 bank height ratio of 1.127348643.
Cross Section 11 – this cross section is in a portion of the project that displays uneven
slopes along both banks, and in this case, a very steep left bank; therefore, calling the same
top of bank, year to year, is difficult. Minor changes are expected to occur, especially as
the stream settles in the early stages of the project as this is a Restoration reach. The left
top of bank was called at 1136.665ft in the field, but upon desktop review, it is more likely
that the top of bank is at 1136.429ft, as the low top of bank. This changes the bank height
ratio to 0.915041783. This is a 14% change from MY1 bank height ratio of
1.07194244604311; however, because this section has such uneven, sloped banks, the top
of bank could have been miscalled in MY1. MY2 more closely resembles as-built (MY0)
conditions/numbers, which displayed a low bank height ratio of 1; this is only an 8%
change between MY0 and MY2. This cross section and reach will continue to be monitored
for changes that may impact the condition of the stream as a whole.

Visual assessment of the stream channel was performed to document signs of instability, such as
eroding banks, structural instability, or excessive sedimentation (Table 5, Appendix B). The
channel is transporting sediment as designed and will continue to be monitored for aggradation
and degradation.

Stream Hydrology
Two stage recorders and two flow gauges were installed in March 2021 and document bankfull
events and flow days, respectively. Both gauge types record readings at a frequency of once per
hour, 24 hours per day. The stage recorder on JN3-B documented one bankfull event on July 9,
2022, measuring 0.02 feet above the top of bank. The stage recorder along BS1-E has yet to record
any events; however, the highest recorded event was one inch away from receiving a bankfull
event in July 2022. RES expects to see in increase in bankfull events in future monitoring years.
Photo documentation of overbank events will be included in MY3 reports. The flow gauge on JN2-
B recorded five flow events, with the longest lasting 119 consecutive days. The gauge on BS1-A
recorded one flow event lasting 305 consecutive days. And the flow gauge on JN7, installed in
February 2022, recorded one flow event, lasting 273 consecutive days. All recorded streams are
on track to pass hydrology metrics. Stream hydrology data is included in Appendix E. Gauge
locations can be found on Figure 2 and photos are in Appendix B.

Wetland Hydrology
Two groundwater wells with automatic recording pressure transducers were installed in March
2021. The goal of the groundwater wells is to track the hydrology of the jurisdictional wetlands
Little Sebastian Site9 Year 2 Monitoring Report
Surry County, NCJanuary2023

on site post-stream construction. There is no hydroperiod success criteria for these groundwater
wells. In MY2, GW1 recorded a consecutive hydroperiod of 15 percent of the growing season and
GW2 recorded a consecutive hydroperiod of 100 percent of the growing season. Wetland
hydrology data is included in Appendix E. Groundwater well locations can be found on Figure 2.
2.0 Methods
Stream cross section monitoring was conducted using a Topcon GTS-312 Total Station. Three-
dimensional coordinates associated with cross-section data were collected in the field (NAD83
State Plane feet FIPS 3200). Morphological data were collected at 12 cross-sections. Survey data
were imported into CAD, ArcGIS®, and Microsoft Excel® for data processing and analysis. The
stage recorders include an automatic pressure transducer placed in PVC casing in a pool. The
elevation of the bed and top of bank at each stage recorder are used to detect bankfull events.
The flow gauges also include an automatic pressure transducer placed in a PVC casing in a pool.
The elevations of the bed, water surface, and immediate downstream riffle are used to determine
stream flow.

Vegetation success is being monitored at six fixed monitoring plots and three random monitoring
plots. Vegetation plot monitoring follows the CVS-EEP Level 2 Protocol for Recording Vegetation,
version 4.2 (Lee et al. 2008) and includes analysis of species composition and density of planted
species. Data are processed using the CVS data entry tool. In the field, the four corners of each
plot were permanently marked with PVC at the origin and metal conduit at the other corners.
Photos of each plot are to be taken from the origin each monitoring year. The random plot is to
be collected in locations where there are no permanent vegetation plots. Random plot will most
likely be collected in the form of 100 square meter belt transects with variable dimensions. Tree
species and height will be recorded for each planted stem and the transects will be mapped and
new locations will be monitored in subsequent years.

Wetland hydrology is monitored to track the hydrology of the jurisdictional wetlands on site post-
stream construction. This is accomplished with two automatic pressure transducer gauges (located
in groundwater wells) that record daily groundwater levels. One automatic pressure transducer is
installed above ground for use as a barometric reference. Gauges are downloaded quarterly and
wetland hydroperiods are calculated during the growing season. Gauge installation followed
current regulatory guidance. Visual observations of primary and secondary wetland hydrology
indicators are also recorded during quarterly site visits.

Fixed digital image locations are established at each cross section, vegetation plot, stage recorder,
flow gauge, and the upstream and downstream side of each crossing.

Little Sebastian Site10Year 2 Monitoring Report
Surry County, NCJanuary2023

3.0 References
Griffith, G.E., J.M.Omernik, J.A. Comstock, M.P. Schafale, W.H.McNab, D.R.Lenat, T.F.MacPherson,
J.B. Glover, and V.B. Shelburne. (2002). Ecoregions of North Carolina and South Carolina,
(color Poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and photographs): Reston,
Virginia, U.S. Geological Survey (map scale 1:1,500,000).
Lee Michael T., Peet Robert K., Roberts Steven D., and Wentworth Thomas R., 2008. CVS-EEP
Protocol
for Recording Vegetation Level. Version 4.2

Peet, R.K., Wentworth, T.S., and White, P.S. (1998), A flexible, multipurpose method for recording
vegetation composition and structure. Castanea 63:262-274

Resource Environmental Solutions (2018). Little Sebastian Final Mitigation Plan.

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.

USACE. (2016). Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update. NC:
Interagency Review Team (IRT).
Little Sebastian Site11Year 2 Monitoring Report
Surry County, NCJanuary2023

Comments
Livestock exclusionBuffer planting and livestock exclusionBuffer planting and livestock exclusion; 31-foot crossingBuffer planting and livestock exclusionChannel relocation, bed and
bank stabilization, crossing relocation, buffer plantings, and livestock exclusion; 62-foot crossingChannel relocation, bed and bank stabilization, crossing relocation, buffer plantings,
and livestock exclusionBuffer planting and livestock exclusionChannel relocation in the natural valley, improved stream structures, buffer planting, and livestock exclusion; 43-foot
crossingChannel relocation, bed and bank stabilization, crossing relocation, buffer plantings, and livestock exclusionChannel construction, bed and bank stabilization, buffer plantings,
and livestock exclusion; No CreditBuffer planting and livestock exclusionBuffer planting and livestock exclusion; 41-foot utility line crossingBuffer planting and livestock exclusionChannel
bed raised, improved stream structures, buffer planting, and livestock exclusionBuffer planting and livestock exclusionBuffer planting and livestock exclusion; 41-foot crossingBank
stabilization, improved stream structures, buffer planting, and livestock exclusionBuffer planting and livestock exclusionChannel bed raised, improved stream structures, buffer planting,
and livestock exclusionBuffer planting and livestock exclusionChannel bed raised, improved stream structures, buffer planting, and livestock exclusionBuffer planting and livestock exclusionChannel
bed raised, improved stream structures, buffer planting, and livestock exclusion; 45-foot crossingChannel bed raised, improved stream structures, buffer planting, and livestock exclusion

433794
418187307837153350781262469717260555243402214395214175541177274
As-Built
Acreage
Footage or
0.000
41.80028.66746.66762.53352.00024.30079.00070.00070.80094.000
124.667122.800334.800102.000781.000262.000143.400555.000160.800142.667214.000541.000274.000
Mitigation
Plan Credits
Marsh
1.500002.500002.500001.500001.500007.500001.000001.000001.000007.500005.000005.000001.000002.500001.500005.000001.000002.500001.000002.500001.000001.00000Coastal
10.0000010.00000
Mitigation
Ratio (X:1)
IIIIIIII
NANANANANANANANANANANANANANANANA
Non-rip
Wetland
Priority Level
PRRRRRRRR
EIEIEIEI
EIIEIIEIIEIIEIIEIIEIIEIIEIIEIIEII
Level
Wetland
Riparian
Restoration
CoolCoolCoolCoolCoolCoolCoolCoolCoolCoolCoolCoolCoolCoolCoolCoolCoolCoolCoolCoolCoolCoolCoolCoolCold
Category
Migitation
0
4394
418187307837153350781262469717260555243402214395214175541177274
StreamCool
Plan
41.800
226.400
398.000
Acreage
2721.0001167.100
Mitigation
Footage or
4,554.300
Table 1. Little Sebastian (ID-100027) - Mitigation Assets and Components
0
3994
418187307837150350900224469717260545243402214395205190580185278
Warm
Existing
Acreage
Footage or
TOTALS
JN7*
JN2-AJN2-BJN3-AJN3-BJN3-B
JN2-CJN2-CJN2-DJN2-DBS1-ABS1-BBS1-EBS1-E
BS1-CBS1-D
MC1-AMC1-BMC1-BMC3-AMC3-B
MC1-CMC3-CMC3-D
Project Segment
Restoration Level
Project Credits
*Added between Final Mitigation Plan and Construction; no credit but potential to add credits if reach meets success criteria and back-up credits are neededNote: all crossings and utility
easements have been removed from credit calculations. RestorationRe-establishmentRehabilitationEnhancementEnhancement IEnhancement IICreationPreservationNSBW

Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Little Sebastian
Elapsed Time Since grading complete:1 yr, 9 mo
Elapsed Time Since planting complete:1 yr, 8 mo
1
Number of reporting Years:
2
Data Collection Completion or
Activity or DeliverableCompleteDelivery
Mitigation PlanNANov-18
Final Design – Construction PlansNASep-20
Stream ConstructionNAFeb-21
Site PlantingNAMar-21
As-built (Year 0 Monitoring – VP, XS, Hydro, Visual)Mar-21Oct-21
Stream: Nov-21
Year 1 MonitoringDec-21
Vegetation: Nov-21
NA
Invasive TreatmentDec-21
NA
Fence RelocationMay-22
Stream: July-22
Year 2 MonitoringNov-22
Vegetation: Nov-22
Year 3 Monitoring
Year 4 Monitoring
Year 5 Monitoring
Year 6 Monitoring
Year 7 Monitoring
1 = The number of reports or data points produced excluding the baseline

Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Little Sebastian
RES / 3600 Glenwood Ave., Suite 100, Raleigh, NC 27612
Designer
Primary project design POCFrasier Mullen, PE
KBS Earthwork Inc. / 5616 Coble Church Rd., Julian, NC
Construction Contractor
27283
Construction contractor POCKory Strader
Acension Land Surveying, PC / 116 Williams Road, Mocksville,
Survey Contractor
NC 27028
Survey contractor POCChris Cole, PLS
Shenandoah Habitats
Planting Contractor
Planting contractor POCDavid Coleman
RES / 3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100, Raleigh, NC 27612
Monitoring Performers
Project Manager POCRyan Medric [phone]
Monitoring POCEmily Ulman [phone]

Table 4. Project Background Information
Project Name
Little Sebastian
County
Surry
Project Area (acres)
25.91
Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude)
36.40, -80.86
Planted Acreage (Acres of Woody Stems Planted)
10.7
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province
45e - Northern Inner Piedmont
River Basin
Yadkin
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit
03040101080020
03040101
DWR Sub-basin
03-04-01
Project Drainage Area (Acres and Square Miles)
3,261 acres (5.1 sq mi)
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area
<1%
Reach Summary Information
Parameters
JN2-AJN2-BJN2-CJN2-DJN3-A
Length of reach (linear feet)
4181871114189350
Valley confinement (Confined, moderately confined, unconfined)
UCMC
MCMCUC
Drainage area (Acres)
1017
3738956
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral
IPPPP
Parameters
JN3-BMC1-AMC1-BMC1-CMC3-A/B/C
Length of reach (linear feet)
1043469977555859
Valley confinement (Confined, moderately confined, unconfined)
CUC
UCUCUC
Drainage area (Acres)
9991862
191529213225
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral
PPPPP
Parameters
MC3-DBS1-A/C/EBS1-B/DJN7
Length of reach (linear feet)
395102935237
Valley confinement (Confined, moderately confined, unconfined)
UCC
CUC
Drainage area (Acres)
326212-29
14-2830
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral
PI/PPI

Little Sebastian
Little Sebastian
Mitigation Site
Mitigation Site
Gideon Mitigation Site
Little Sebastian
Mitigation Site
Legend
Easement
Proposed Gideon Site
Service Area - 03040101
TLW - 03040101080020
Date: 10/30/2018
Figure 1 - Map
Drawn by: MDE
©
Little Sebastian Mitigation Site
Checked by: ATP

05001,000
Surry County, North Carolina
Feet

Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Jowbtjwf!Tqfdjft
Document Path: R:\\Resgis\\entgis\\Projects\\100908_Little_Sebastian\\MXD\\6_MonitoringMaintenance\\MY2\\Little Sebastian CCPV MY2 2022.mxd

Jowbtjwf!Tqfdjft
Document Path: R:\\Resgis\\entgis\\Projects\\100908_Little_Sebastian\\MXD\\6_MonitoringMaintenance\\MY2\\Little Sebastian CCPV MY2 2022.mxd

100%
Intended
% Stable,
Performing as
00100%0100%
Footage
Unstable
Amount of
in As-built
Total Number
1010100%1818100%
Stable,
Number
Intended
Performing as
Totals
include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are
JN310432086Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOTproviding habitat.Fluvial
and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse0100%Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill.Bank erosion within the structures extent
of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring guidance document)
Surface Scour/Bare BankToe ErosionBank FailureBank Protection
Major Channel CategoryMetric
Visual Stream Stability AssessmentAssessment Date: 11/2/2022 ReachAssessed Stream Length Assessed Bank LengthBankStructureGrade Control

100%
Intended
% Stable,
Performing as
00100%0100%
Footage
Unstable
Amount of
in As-built
Total Number
22100%77100%
Stable,
Number
Intended
Performing as
Totals
include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are
MC1-C5551110Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOTproviding habitat.Fluvial
and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse0100%Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill.Bank erosion within the structures extent
of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring guidance document)
Surface Scour/Bare BankToe ErosionBank FailureBank Protection
Major Channel CategoryMetric
Visual Stream Stability AssessmentAssessment Date: 11/2/2022 ReachAssessed Stream Length Assessed Bank LengthBankStructureGrade Control

100%
Intended
% Stable,
Performing as
00100%0100%
Footage
Unstable
Amount of
in As-built
Total Number
88100%33100%
Stable,
Number
Intended
Performing as
Totals
include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are
BS111232246Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOTproviding habitat.Fluvial
and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse0100%Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill.Bank erosion within the structures extent
of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring guidance document)
Surface Scour/Bare BankToe ErosionBank FailureBank Protection
Major Channel CategoryMetric
Visual Stream Stability AssessmentAssessment Date: 11/2/2022 ReachAssessed Stream Length Assessed Bank LengthBankStructureGrade Control

100%
Intended
% Stable,
Performing as
00100%0100%
Footage
Unstable
Amount of
in As-built
Total Number
99100%22100%
Stable,
Number
Intended
Performing as
Totals
include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are
JN2383766Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOTproviding habitat.Fluvial
and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse0100%Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill.Bank erosion within the structures extent
of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring guidance document)
Surface Scour/Bare BankToe ErosionBank FailureBank Protection
Major Channel CategoryMetric
Visual Stream Stability AssessmentAssessment Date: 11/2/2022 ReachAssessed Stream Length Assessed Bank LengthBankStructureGrade Control

100%
Intended
% Stable,
Performing as
00100%0100%
Footage
Unstable
Amount of
in As-built
Total Number
00NA00NA
Stable,
Number
Intended
Performing as
Totals
include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are
MC3214428Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or surface scour Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely. Does NOTproviding habitat.Fluvial
and geotechnical - rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse0100%Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill.Bank erosion within the structures extent
of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring guidance document)
Surface Scour/Bare BankToe ErosionBank FailureBank Protection
Major Channel CategoryMetric
Visual Stream Stability AssessmentAssessment Date: 11/2/2022 ReachAssessed Stream Length Assessed Bank LengthBankStructureGrade Control

% of 1/1&4/3&
AcreageAcreage
Easement
% of Planted
1/111/94
1/948/9&1/948/9&
AcreageAcreage
CombinedCombined
3
11/111/1&31/948/9&11/111/1&1
Polygons
Polygons
Number of Number of
Total
bsfpgqbsujdvmbsjoufsftuhjwfouifjsfyusfnfsjtl0uisfbumfwfm
Ibudi
Ibudi
Zfmmpx
CCPVCCPV
PsbohfPsbohf
Dspttibudi
DepictionDepiction
Sfe!Tjnqmf!
Sfe!Tjnqmf!
Tjnqmf!IbudiTjnqmf!Ibudi
reditalics
Cumulative Total
opof
2111!TG
MappingMapping
ThresholdThreshold
vckfduuptvqqmfnfoubmqmboujohpguifvoefstupsz-uifdiboofmbdsfbhf-dspttjohtps
ifobssbujwftfdujpopguiffyfdvujwftvnnbsz/
sfrvfodz/Uiptfjo
ojuztusvduvsfgpsfyjtujoh-npsfftubcmjtifeusff0tisvctuboetpwfsujnfgsbnftuibubsftmjhiumz
mbzfstxjuijouifujnfgsbnftejtdvttfeboeuifqpufoujbmjnqbdutpgusfbujohfyufotjwfbnpvoutpg
Vegetation Condition Assessment
10.7 Wfsz!mjnjufe!dpwfs!pg!cpui!xppez!boe!ifscbdfpvt!nbufsjbm/1/2!bdsftXppez!tufn!efotjujft!dmfbsmz!cfmpx!ubshfu!mfwfmt!cbtfe!po!NZ4-!5-!ps!6!tufn!dpvou!dsjufsjb/1/2!bdsftBsfbt!xjui!xppez!tufnt!pg!b!
tj{f!dmbtt!uibu!bsf!pcwjpvtmz!tnbmm!hjwfo!uif!npojupsjoh!zfbs/1/36!bdsft 25.91 Bsfbt!ps!qpjout!)jg!upp!tnbmm!up!sfoefs!bt!qpmzhpot!bu!nbq!tdbmf*/Bsfbt!ps!qpjout!)jg!upp!tnbmm!up!sfoefs!bt!qpmzhpot!bu
!nbq!tdbmf*/
3
mmjfejouifsfmfwboujufn)j/f/-jufn2-3ps4*btxfmmbtbqbsbmmfmubmmzjojufn6/
4
2
1
>Uifbdsfbhfxjuijouiffbtfnfoucpvoebsjft/
>Foufsuifqmboufebdsfbhfxjuijouiffbtfnfou/Uijtovncfsjtdbmdvmbufebtuiffbtfnfoubdsfbhfnjovtbozfyjtujohnbuvsfusfftuboetuibuxfsfoput>Fodspbdinfounbzpddvsxjuijopspvutjefpgqmboufebsfbtboexjmmuifsfgpsfcfdbmd
vmbufebhbjotuuifpwfsbmmfbtfnfoubdsfbhf/Jouiffwfoubqpmzhpojtdbubmphfejoupjufnt2-3ps4jouifubcmfboejtuifsftvmupgfodspbdinfou-uif
>Jowbtjwftnbzpddvsjopspvupgqmboufebsfbt-cvutujmmxjuijouiffbtfnfouboexjmmuifsfgpsfcfdbmdvmbufebhbjotuuifpwfsbmmfbtfnfoubdsfbhf/Jowbtjwftpgdpodfso0joufsftubsfmjtufecfmpx/Uifmjtupgijhidpodfsotqdjftbsfui
ptfxjui
2bozpuifsfmfnfoutopuejsfdumzqmboufebtqbsupguifqspkfdufggpsu/34bttpdjbufebdsfbhftipvmecfub5uifqpufoujbmupejsfdumzpvudpnqfufobujwf-zpvoh-xppeztufntjouiftipsu.ufsn)f/h/npojupsjohqfsjpepstipsumzuifsfbguf
s*psbggfduuifdpnnvmpohfs)f/h/2.3efdbeft*/Uifmpx0npefsbufdpodfsohspvqbsfuiptftqfdjftuibuhfofsbmmzepopuibwfuijtdbqbdjuzpwfsuifujnfgsbnftejtdvttfeboeuifsfgpsfbsfopufyqfdufeupcfnbqqfexjuisfhvmbsjuz-cvudb
ocfnbqqfe-jgjouifkvehfnfoupguifpctfswfsuifjsdpwfsbhf-efotjuzpsejtusjcvujpojttvqqsfttjohuifwjbcjmjuz-efotjuz-pshspxuipgqmboufexppeztufnt/Efdjtjpotbtupxifuifssfnfejbujpoxjmmcfoffefebsfcbtfepouifjoufhsb
ujpopgsjtlgbdupstczFFQtvdibttqfdjftqsftfou-uifjsdpwfsbhf-ejtusjcvujposfmbujwfupobujwfcjpnbtt-boeuifqsbdujdbmjuzpgusfbunfou/Gpsfybnqmf-fwfonpeftubnpvoutpgLve{vpsKbqboftfLopuxffefbsmzjouifqspkfdutijtup
szxjmmxbssboudpouspm-cvuqpufoujbmmzmbshfdpwfsbhftpgNjdsptufhjvnjouififscmbzfsxjmmopumjlmfzusjhhfsdpouspmcfdbvtfpguifmjnjufedbqbdjujftupjnqbduusff0tisvchspvoedpwfs/Uiptftqfdjftxjuiuif#xbudimjtu#eftjho
bupsjohsbztibefbsfpgjoufsftubtxfmm-cvuibwfzfuupcfpctfswfebdspttuiftubufxjuibozggpsnbqqjohbtqpjoutxifsfjtpmbufetqfdjnfotbsfgpvoe-qbsujdvmbsmzfbmszjobqspkfdutnpojupsjohijtupsz/Ipxfwfs-bsfbtpgejtdsffu-e
fotfqbudiftxjmmpgdpvstfcfnbqqfebtqpmzhpot/Uiftzncpmphztdifnfcfmpxxbtpofuibuxbtgpvoeupcfifmqgvmgpstzncpm{johjowbtjwftqpmzhpot-qbsujdvmbmszgpstjuvbujpotxifsfuifdpoejupogpsbobsfbjttpnfxifsfcfuxffojtpmbu
fetqfdjnfotboeefotf-ejtdsffuqbudift/Jobozdbtf-uifqpjoupsqpmzhpo0bsfbgfbuvsfdbocftzncpmj{feupeftdsjcfuijohtmjlfijhipsmpxdpodfsoboetqfdjftdbocfmjtufebtbnbqjotfu-jomfhfoejufntjguifovncfspgtqfdjftbsfmjnj
ufepsjou
Table 6
Assessment Date: 11/2/2022
Planted Acreage Vegetation CategoryDefinitions1. Bare Areas2. Low Stem Density Areas3. Areas of Poor Growth Rates or Vigor Easement Acreage Vegetation CategoryDefinitions 4. Invasive
Areas of Concern
5. Easement Encroachment Areas

Wfhfubujpo!Qmpu!3!)220303133*Wfhfubujpo!Qmpu!5!)220303133*!
3!Wfhfubujpo!Npojupsjoh!Qmpu!Qipupt!
Wfhfubujpo!Qmpu!2!)220303133*!Wfhfubujpo!Qmpu!4!)220303133*!
NZ
Mjuumf!Tfcbtujbo

3*
0313
Wfhfubujpo!Qmpu!7!)2202803132*!
!Sboepn!Wfhfubujpo!Qmpu!3!)2203
3*!
0313
Wfhfubujpo!Qmpu!6!)220303133*!
Sboepn!Wfhfubujpo!Qmpu!2!)2203

)npxjoh0fodspbdinfou*!
Cbsf!bsfb!bmpoh!fbtufso!tjef!pg!CT2!
3*!
0313
Sboepn!Wfhfubujpo!Qmpu!4!)2203

Hspvoexbufs!Xfmm!2
C
.
Hspvoexbufs!Xfmm!3
Tubhf!Sfdpsefs!KO4

Opw!3132
—
D!)epxotusfbn*
.
KO3
E!)epxotusfbn*
.
KO3
Opw!3132
.
!.!Kvmz!23ui-!3133!
D!)vqtusfbn*
.
KO3
E!)vqtusfbn*
.
KO3
Mjuumf!Tfcbtujbo!Dspttjoh!Qipupt

tusfbn*
o
)epx
ND4.C0D!
C
.
4
KO
tusfbn*
)vqtusfbn*
epxo
C
.
4
KO
ND2.D!)

F!)epxotusfbn*
.
CT2
F!)vqtusfbn*
.
CT2

!Bqqfoejy!D/!Wfhfubujpo!QmpuEbub

Ubcmf!8/!Qmboufe!Tqfdjft!Tvnnbsz
Dpnnpo!ObnfTdjfoujgjd!ObnfNju!Qmbo!&Bt.Cvjmu!&Upubm!Tufnt!Qmboufe
Xjmmpx!Pbl Quercus phellos 26262-711
Sjwfs!Cjsdi Betula nigra 26262-711
Tzdbnpsf Platanus occidentalis 21262-711
Xbufs!Pbl Quercus nigra 26252-711
Opsuifso!Sfe!Pbl Quercus rubra 21222-311
Zfmmpx!Qpqmbs Liriodendron tulipifera 21212-211
Hsffo!Bti Fraxinus pennsylvanica 216711
Qfstjnnpo Diospyros virginiana 66711
Cvuupocvti Cephalanthus occidentalis 16711
Tvhbscfssz Celtis laevigata 16711
Fmefscfssz Sambucus canadensis 611
Ozttb!tzmwbujdb Blackgum 611
Upubm 22-211
Qmboufe!Bsfb21/8
Bt.cvjmu!Qmboufe!Tufnt0Bdsf2-148
Ubcmf!9/!Wfhfubujpo!Qmpu!Njujhbujpo!Tvddftt!Tvnnbsz
Averaged
Success
Planted Volunteer Total Planted
Plot #Criteria
Stems/AcreStems/AcreStems/AcreStem
Met?
Height (ft)
1 7690769Yes2.7
2 101201012Yes2.9
3 109301093Yes3.9
4 113301133Yes1.9
5 7690769Yes3.8
6 6070607Yes2.2
R1 6470647Yes2.5
R2 8500850Yes4.3
R3 5260526Yes1.9
Project Avg8230823Yes3.0

Cross Section 5 (Riffle)
Cross Section 10 (Riffle)
3.23.13.01.01.01.06.37.17.71.11.01.14.03.44.23.83.33.01.00.91.0
21.321.021.349.848.247.223.823.523.3
>3.0>3.1>3.1
>64.9>65.1>65
1150.61150.61150.71187.61187.51187.6
1150.61150.71150.81187.61187.61187.6
Cross Section 9 (Pool)
Cross Section 4 (Riffle)
---------------
9.08.88.50.90.80.83.52.62.41.00.90.91.00.91.13.63.03.7
>4.9>4.9>5.2
>43.9>43.2>43.9
1165.01164.91165.01165.01164.81164.91188.31188.41188.4
#100027
Cross Section 8 (Pool)
Cross Section 3 (Riffle)
---------------
5.35.85.61.01.11.03.54.33.81.01.11.13.64.24.3
34.834.032.5
>6.6>5.9>5.9
>34.8>34.1>33.5
1170.71170.71170.71170.71170.81170.71157.21157.21157.3
Project Name/Number: Little Sebastian
Cross Section 12 (Pool)
Cross Section 2 (Riffle)Cross Section 7 (Riffle)
---------------
5.45.65.78.78.89.40.50.80.92.34.14.31.61.61.71.01.51.62.22.42.51.01.01.01.20.91.04.64.13.5
15.015.014.922.824.423.5
>4.3>4.3>4.3
>64.4>64.7>64.3
1211.21211.31211.41211.21211.61211.71157.41157.31157.41157.41157.41157.41136.11136.21136.3
Appendix D. Table 11 - Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary (Dimensional Parameters – Cross Sections)
Cross Section 6 (Pool)
Cross Section 1 (Riffle)
Cross Section 11 (Riffle)
------------
5.45.15.50.71.01.22.44.14.92.42.22.11.01.41.54.14.14.05.76.56.50.70.70.72.63.02.32.01.71.81.01.10.9
13.111.211.556.756.454.211.311.311.9
BaseMY1MY2MY3MY5MY7MY+BaseMY1MY2MY3MY5MY7MY+BaseMY1MY2MY3MY5MY7MY+BaseMY1MY2MY3MY5MY7MY+BaseMY1MY2MY3MY5MY7MY+BaseMY1MY2MY3MY5MY7MY+BaseMY1MY2MY3MY5MY7MY+BaseMY1MY2MY3MY5MY7MY+BaseMY1MY2MY3MY5MY7MY+B
aseMY1MY2MY3MY5MY7MY+BaseMY1MY2MY3MY5MY7MY+BaseMY1MY2MY3MY5MY7MY+
1214.71214.81214.81150.51150.61150.71136.41136.41136.5
111221111122111112211
)))
222
Bankfull Width (ft)Bankfull Width (ft)Bankfull Width (ft)
Floodprone Width (ft)Floodprone Width (ft)Floodprone Width (ft)
Low Bank Elevation (ft)1214.741215.01215.2Low Bank Elevation (ft)---Low Bank Elevation (ft)1136.41136.51136.4
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)Bankfull Max Depth (ft)Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
Bankfull Bank Height RatioBankfull Bank Height RatioBankfull Bank Height Ratio
Bankfull Entrenchment RatioBankfull Entrenchment RatioBankfull Entrenchment Ratio
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ftBankfull Cross Sectional Area (ftBankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSABankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSABankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSA
1 - Uses the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each
subsequent years bankfull elevation

4Y!Wfsujdbm!Fybhhfsbujpo
NZ3!3133Mpx!Cbol!Fmfwbujpo
Riffle -Enhancement I
Ejtubodf!)gu*
-Cross Section 1 -
NZ2!3132Gmppeqspof!Bsfb
Reach JN2-B
Little Sebastian -
NZ1!3132Bqqspy/!Cbolgvmm
147:2326293235384144474:535659
232:232923282327232623252324
Fmfwbujpo!)gu*

4Y!Wfsujdbm!Fybhhfsbujpo
Mpx!Cbol!Ifjhiu
Gmppeqspof!Bsfb
Riffle -Enhancement I
Bqqspy/!Cbolgvmm
Ejtubodf!)gu*
-Cross Section 2 -
NZ3!3133
Reach JN2-B
NZ2!3132
Little Sebastian -
NZ1!3132
147:2326293235384144474:535659
2327232623252324232323222321
Fmfwbujpo!)gu*

4Y!Wfsujdbm!Fybhhfsbujpo
Mpx!Cbol!Fmfwbujpo
Gmppeqspof!Bsfb
Riffle -Enhancement II
Bqqspy/!Cbolgvmm
Ejtubodf!)gu*
-Cross Section 3 -
NZ3!3133
Reach JN2-C
NZ2!3132
Little Sebastian -
NZ1!3132
147:2326293235384144474:535659
228622852284228322822281227:
Fmfwbujpo!)gu*

Mpx!Cbol!Ifjhiu
4Y!Wfsujdbm!Fybhhfsbujpo
Gmppeqspof!Bsfb
Riffle -Enhancement I
Bqqspy/!Cbolgvmm
Ejtubodf!)gu*
-Cross Section 4 -
NZ3!3133
Reach JN2-D
NZ2!3132
Little Sebastian -
NZ1!3132
147:2326293235384144474:535659
227:227922782277227622752274
Fmfwbujpo!)gu*

4Y!Wfsujdbm!Fybhhfsbujpo
NZ3!3133Mpx!Cbol!Fmfwbujpo
Riffle -Restoration
-Cross Section 5 -
Ejtubodf!)gu*
NZ2!3132Gmppeqspof!Bsfb
Reach MC1-C
Little Sebastian-
NZ1!3132Bqqspy/!Cbolgvmm
147:2326293235384144474:5356596265687174
226622652264226322622261225:225922582257
Fmfwbujpo!)gu*

4Y!Wfsujdbm!Fybhhfsbujpo
Mpx!Cbol!Fmfwbujpo
Pool -Restoration
Bqqspy/!Cbolgvmm
-Cross Section 6 -
Ejtubodf!)gu*
NZ3!3133
Reach MC1-C
NZ2!3132
Little Sebastian -
NZ1!3132
147:2326293235384144474:5356596265687174
2264226322622261225:22592258225722562255
Fmfwbujpo!)gu*

4Y!Wfsujdbm!Fybhhfsbujpo
NZ3!3133Mpx!Cbol!Fmfwbujpo
Riffle -Restoration
-Cross Section 7 -
Ejtubodf!)gu*
NZ2!3132Gmppeqspof!Bsfb
Reach JN3-B
Little Sebastian -
NZ1!3132Bqqspy/!Cbolgvmm
147:2326293235384144474:5356596265687174
227322722271226:226922682267226622652264
Fmfwbujpo!)gu*

4Y!Wfsujdbm!Fybhhfsbujpo
Mpx!Cbol!Fmfwbujpo
Pool -Restoration
Bqqspy/!Cbolgvmm
-Cross Section 8 -
Ejtubodf!)gu*
NZ3!3133
Reach JN3-B
NZ2!3132
Little Sebastian -
NZ1!3132
147:2326293235384144474:5356596265687174
2271226:22692268226722662265226422632262
Fmfwbujpo!)gu*

4Y!Wfsujdbm!Fybhhfsbujpo
Mpx!Cbol!Fmfwbujpo
Pool -Restoration
Bqqspy/!Cbolgvmm
-Cross Section 9 -
Ejtubodf!)gu*
NZ3!3133
Reach BS1-A
NZ2!3132
Little Sebastian -
NZ1!3132
147:2326293235384144474:535659
22:422:322:222:1229:22992298
Fmfwbujpo!)gu*

4Y!Wfsujdbm!Fybhhfsbujpo
NZ3!3133Mpx!Cbol!Fmfwbujpo
Riffle -Restoration
-Cross Section 10 -
Ejtubodf!)gu*
NZ2!3132Gmppeqspof!Bsfb
Reach BS1-A
Little Sebastian -
NZ1!3132Bqqspy/!Cbolgvmm
147:2326293235384144474:535659
22:322:222:1229:229922982297
Fmfwbujpo!)gu*

4Y!Wfsujdbm!Fybhhfsbujpo
NZ3!3133Mpx!Cbol!Fmfwbujpo
Riffle -Restoration
-Cross Section 11 -
Ejtubodf!)gu*
NZ2!3132Gmppeqspof!Bsfb
Reach BS1-E
Little Sebastian -
NZ1!3132Bqqspy/!Cbolgvmm
147:2326293235384144474:535659
22522251224:2249224822472246
Fmfwbujpo!)gu*

4Y!Wfsujdbm!Fybhhfsbujpo
Mpx!Cbol!Fmfwbujpo
Pool -Restoration
Bqqspy/!Cbolgvmm
-Cross Section 12 -
Ejtubodf!)gu*
NZ3!3133
Reach BS1-E
NZ2!3132
Little Sebastian -
NZ1!3132
147:2326293235384144474:535659
2251224:22492248224722462245
Fmfwbujpo!)gu*

Ubcmf!23/!Sbjogbmm!Tvnnbsz!NZ33133
Opsnbm!Mjnjut
Sbwfo!Lopc!Tubujpo!
NpouiBwfsbhf
Qsfdjqjubujpo
41!Qfsdfou81!Qfsdfou
Kbovbsz4/:93/885/853/78
Gfcsvbsz4/413/314/:66/15
Nbsdi5/183/:35/914/93
Bqsjm5/2:3/946/123/42
Nbz!5/6:4/176/616/:2
Kvof5/874/356/7:2/87
Kvmz!6/434/897/4122/31
Bvhvtu5/:84/626/:15/3:
Tfqufncfs5/414/226/194/64
Pdupcfs4/683/435/3:3/65
Opwfncfs4/472/::5/194/29
Efdfncfs5/143/915/8:...
Upubm61/5545/6471/2457/36
Bcpwf!Opsnbm!MjnjutCfmpx!Opsnbm!MjnjutXjuijo!Opsnbm!Mjnjut
Opuf;!Sbwfo!Lopc!DSPOPT!Tubujpo!jt!bqqspyjnbufmz!7!njmft!opsui!pg!uif!tjuf

Ubcmf!24/!Epdvnfoubujpo!pg!Hfpnpsqijdbmmz!Tjhojgjdbou!Gmpx!Fwfout
Ovncfs!pg!Cbolgvmm!Nbyjnvn!Cbolgvmm!
ZfbsEbuf!pg!Nbyjnvn!Cbolgvmm!Fwfou
FwfoutIfjhiu!)gu*
Tubhf!Sfdpsefs!KO4.C
NZ2!31321O0BO0B
NZ3!313321/1380:03133
Tubhf!Sfdpsefs!CT2.F
NZ2!31321O0BO0B
NZ3!31331O0BO0B
Nbyjnvn!Dpotfdvujwf!Nbyjnvn!Dvnnmbujwf!Nbyjnvn!Dpotfdvujwf!
ZfbsOvncfs!pg!Gmpx!Fwfout
Gmpx!EbztGmpx!EbztGmpx!Ebuf!Sbohf
Gmpx!Hbvhf!KO3.C
NZ2!31322354354402:03132!.!2202803132
NZ3!3133622:26480703133!.!220303133
Gmpx!Hbvhf!CT2.B
NZ2!31322354354402:03132!.!2202803132
NZ3!3133241641620203133!.!220303133
Gmpx!Hbvhf!KO8+
NZ3!3133238438430203133!.!220303133
+Gmpx!Hbvhf!po!KO8!xbt!jotubmmfe!po!Gfcsvbsz!2-!3133
Ubcmf!25/!3133!Nby!Izespqfsjpe
3133!Nby!Izespqfsjpe!)Hspxjoh!Tfbtpo!4.Bqs!uispvhi!41.Pdu-!321!ebzt*!
DpotfdvujwfDvnvmbujwf
Xfmm!JEPddvssfodft
Izespqfsjpe!Izespqfsjpe!
EbztEbzt
)&*)&*
HX2 43262788::
HX3 3212113212112
Ubcmf!26/Tvnnbsz!pg!Hspvoexbufs!Npojupsjoh!Sftvmut
Tvnnbsz!pg!Hspvoexbufs!Npojupsjoh!Sftvmut
Mjuumf!Tfcbtujbo
Izespqfsjpe!)&*
Xfmm!JE
Zfbs!2!Zfbs!3!Zfbs!4!Zfbs!5!Zfbs!6!Zfbs!7!Zfbs!8!
)3132*!)3133*)3134*)3135*)3136*)3137*)3138*
HX2 5226
HX3 211211

Sbjogbmm!)jo*
Xbufs!Efqui!)gu*

Sbjogbmm!)jo*
Xbufs!Efqui!)gu*

Sbjogbmm!)jo*
Xbufs!Efqui!)gu*

Sbjogbmm!)jo*
Xbufs!Efqui!)gu*

Sbjogbmm!)jo*
Xbufs!Efqui!)gu*

Qsfdjqjubujpo!)jodift*
19-Oct-22
19-Sep-22
19-Aug-22
19-Jul-22
19-Jun-22
19-May-22
19-Apr-22
19-Mar-22
19-Feb-22
19-Jan-22
19-Dec-21
19-Nov-21
Hspvoexbufs!Fmfwbujpo!)jodift*

Qsfdjqjubujpo!)jodift*
19-Oct-22
19-Sep-22
19-Aug-22
19-Jul-22
19-Jun-22
19-May-22
19-Apr-22
19-Mar-22
19-Feb-22
19-Jan-22
19-Dec-21
19-Nov-21
Hspvoexbufs!Fmfwbujpo!)jodift*