20171294 Ver 1_RES Yadkin 01 SAW2017.01467 Twiman MY3 Monitoring Report_20230922

ID#* 20171294 Version* 1
Select Reviewer:
Maria Polizzi
Initial Review Completed Date 09/26/2023
Mitigation Project Submittal - 9/22/2023
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?* Yes No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
Stream Wetlands Buffer Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name: * Email Address:
Daniel Dixon [e-mail]
Project Information
ID#: * 20171294 Version:* 1
Existing ID# Existing Version
Project Type: DMS Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Twiman Mitigation Bank
County: Yadkin
Document Information
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: RES Yadkin 01 SAW2017.01467 Twiman MY3
15.89MB
Monitoring Report.pdf
Please upload only one PDF of the complete file that needs to be submitted...
Signature
Print Name:* Daniel Dixon
Signature: *
eta e7Wz1;110Kt'G6Y

fires
September 22, 2023
Mr. Steve Kichefski
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Division
151 Patton Ave. Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801-5006
360o Glenwood Avenue. Suite ioo
Raleigh, NC 27612
Corporate Headquarters
6575 West Loop South, Suite 300
Bellaire, TX 774ot
Main: 713.520•5400
RE: Twiman Year 3 Monitoring Report (SAW-2017-01467 I RES Yadkin 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank)
Dear Mr. Kichefski,
Please find attached the Twiman Year 3 Monitoring Report. In Year 3, all 15 vegetation plots met the 320
stems per acre success criteria. Stem densities ranged from 364 to 971. Multiple events were recorded in
2023 on the stage recorder on TC1-A and one event was recorded on TC2-C. All three flow gauges
recorded flow for 225 consecutive flow days. Comments from the Monitoring Year Two Credit Release
Letter are located and italicized below with answers detailed in bold. NCDOT has designed a permanent
drainage easement on Abraham Road. The drainage easement will encroach onto the existing Twiman
conversation easement. RES is continuing coordination with the USACE Project Manager, long term
steward, and NCDOT to determine the appropriate steps to properly handle this situation.
RES is requesting a 10% stream credit release (581.207 SMUs) for the completion of the MY3 report.
Please see enclosed the credit release timeline and an updated credit ledger.
Thank you,
Daniel Dixon I Ecologist
[e-mail]
res.us

0
Erin Davis (NCDWR) comments:
1. DWR appreciates the update on the proposed NCDOT encroachment.
Thank you. RES will continue to update the appropriate parties as
this develops.
2. We support the addition of buttonbush to the approved site plant list. Is
it possible moving forward to add a note to Table 5 listing additional
supplemental plant species so all approved species can be found in a
single place? (This question/request is for all bank site monitoring
reports)
Table 5. has been updated with species and quantity planted from
supplemental plantings. RES is still in the process of updating this
across all monitoring reports
3. DWR is glad that low species diversity is on your radar because we are
concerned with the veg plots reporting only 2-3 species.
Thank you. The most recent supplemental planting of 2022 was
intended to help alleviate species composition concerns on site. RES
also anticipates that volunteer stems will start to populate the site
in greater numbers, further amplifying diversity.
Steve Kichefski (USACE) comments:
4. Concur with DWR comment regarding increasing species diversity.
Consider this with the proposed 2022 supplemental planting.
Table 5. now indicates the species planted in the 2022 supplemental
planting. Consideration was given to species composition on site
and the accepted planting plan.
5. Please continue to track the progress of repair areas and previous IRT
comments through future monitoring reports.
RES field staff indicate that all previous repairs are functioning
as designed and those localized areas remain stable. We will
continue to update the IRT on site integrity and further repairs
across the site as deemed beneficial based on -site conditions.

Project Name:
Sponsor Name:
USACE Action ID:
NCDWQ Action ID:
Wilmington District Mitigation Bank Credit Release Schedule
Twiman Stream Mitigation Project
EBX
SAW-2017-01467
20171294v1
County:
8-Digit HUC:
Year Project Instituted:
Date Prepared:
Total Potential Credits
Non -Forested
Stream Credits
Forested Wetland Credits
Wetland Credits
Credit Classification
Warm
Riparian
Riparian
Cool Water
Cold Water
Non -Riparian
Coastal
Water
Riverine
Non-Riverine
Potential Credits from Mitigation Plan
5,848.000
Potential Credits from As -Built Survey
5,812.067
Yadkin
3040101
2020
9/7/2023
Current and Future Credit Releases
Stream Credits
Forested Wetland Credits
Non -Forested Wetland
Credits
Projected
Actual Release
Credit Release Milestone
Scheduled
Releases
Warm
Water
BaseSMUs
WQSMUs
Scheduled
Releases
Riparian
Riverine
Riparian
Non-Riverine
Non -Riparian
Scheduled
Releases
Coastal
Release Date
Date
1(Bank/Site Establishment)1' Z
15%
877.200
12/31/2019
12/27/2019
2 (Year 0/As-Built)'
15%
866.420
12/31/2020
12/30/2020
3 (Year 1 Monitoring)
10%
581.207
12/15/2021
1/14/2022
4(Year 2 Monitoring)
10%
581.207
12/31/2022
12/22/2022
5 (Year 3 Monitoring)
10%
581.207
12/31/2023
6 (Year 4 Monitoring)
5%
290.603
7 (Year 5 Monitoring)
10%
581.207
8 (Year 6 Monitoring)
5%
290.603
9 (Year 7 Monitoring)
10%
581.207
Stream BankfullStandard'
10%
1
581.207
Varies°
Total Credits Release to Date
1
1 2906,033
Contingencies (if any): The site was built to design plans and guidelines barring a few deviations, including an easement change and stream structure changes. The easement change was a result of an easement
area decrease by the pond adjacent to TCS.
Signature of Wilmington District Official Approving Credit Release
1-The first credit release milestone is based on the potential credits stated in the approved mitigation plan.
2 -The first credit release shall occur upon establishment of the mitigation bank, which includes the following criteria:
1) Execution of the MBI or UMBI by the Sponsor and the USACE;
2) Approval of the final Mitigation Plan;
3) Mitigation bank site must be secured;
4) Delivery of the financial assurances described in the Mitigation Plan;
5) Recordation of the long-term protection mechanism and title opinion acceptable to the USACE;
6) 404 permit verification for construction of the site, if required.
3 -The second credit release is based on the credit totals from the as -built survey, and may differ slightly from the credit totals stated in the mitigation plan.
4 - A 10% reserve of credits to be held back until the bankfull event performance standard has been met.
Date

Transaction Credits Released Credits Debited
Number To Bank From Bank
TWIMAN STREAM CREDIT LEDGER (HUC 03040101)
Friday. January 6. 2023
Current Credits
Credit Balance Reserved Purchaser
Permit Number Date HUC
877.20 Credits Released: Task 1 12/27/19
866.42 Credits Released: Task 2 12/30/20
581.21 Credits Released: Task 3 1/14/22
581.207 Credits Released: Task 4 12/22/22
Total 2.906.03 0.00 1 2.906.03 1 0.0

TWIMAN
STREAM MITIGATION SITE
YADKIN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
RES YADKIN 01 UMBRELLA MITIGATION BANK
SAW-2017-01467
YEAR 3 MONITORING REPORT
- 4
t� T
h•'-' ''rf• � .4
i_
'flit J •.1 r
r
r •- If �r r T _ �Y_fl
Provided by:
fires
Bank Sponsor: Environmental Banc & Exchange, LLC
An entity of Resource Environmental Solutions
3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100
Raleigh, NC 27612
864-567-7761
September 2023

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 Success Criteria................................................................................................................... 2
Vegetation Success Criteria............................................................................................................. 3
1.4 Project Components.................................................................................................................. 3
1.5 Stream Design/Approach.......................................................................................................... 3
1.6 Construction and As -Built Conditions...................................................................................... 5
1.7 Year 3 Monitoring Performance(MY3).................................................................................... 5
Vegetation........................................................................................................................................ 5
StreamGeomorphology................................................................................................................... 5
StreamHydrology............................................................................................................................ 6
2.0 Methods.................................................................................................................................................. 6
3.0 References............................................................................................................................................... 7
Appendix A: Background Tables
Table 1: Project Mitigation Components
Table 2: Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3: Project Contacts Table
Table 4: Project Background Information Table
Figure 1: Site Location Map
Appendix B: Visual Assessment Data
Figure 2: Current Conditions Plan View
Vegetation Plot Photos
Monitoring Device Photos
Crossing Photos
Areas of Concern Photos
Appendix C: Vegetation Plot Data
Table 5: Planted Species Summary
Table 6: Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary
Table 7: Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot Species
Appendix D: Stream Measurement and Geomorphology Data
Cross -Section Plots
Table 8: Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table 9: Cross Section Morphology Data Table
Appendix E: Hydrology Data
Table 10: 2023 Rainfall Summary
Table 11: Documentation of Geomorphically Significant Flow Events
Stream Flow Hydrographs
Twiman Year 3 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site September 2023

1.0 Proiect Summary
L I Project Location and Description
The Twiman Mitigation Site (the "Project") is located in Yadkin County approximately two miles southeast
of Boonville, North Carolina. Water quality stressors that affected the Project included livestock
production, agricultural production, impervious surfaces runoff, impoundments, and lack of riparian buffer.
The Project presents 8,970 linear feet (LF) of stream restoration and enhancement, generating 5,812.067
Warm Stream Mitigation Units (SMU) along seven unnamed tributaries that drain to North Deep Creek.
The Project is located in the Yadkin River Basin within Cataloging Unit 03040101, Target Local Watershed
(TLW) 03040101130010, and NC Division of Water Resources (DWR) subbasin 03-07-02. The Project
drains into North Deep Creek which is currently listed as State Classification Class C (NCDWQ 2011).
The Project's total easement area is approximately 30.5 acres within the overall drainage area of 810 acres
and consisted of agricultural fields, cattle pastures, and wooded areas. The wooded areas along the easement
corridor designated for restoration activities are classified as mixed hardwoods. Restored channels were
incised, both laterally and vertically unstable, lacked riparian buffers, and did not fully support aquatic life.
The stream design approach for the Project combined the analog method of natural channel design with
analytical methods to evaluate stream flows and hydraulic performance of the channel and floodplain. The
analog method involved the use of a reference reach, or "template" stream, adjacent to, nearby, or
previously in the same location as the design reach. The template parameters of the analog reach were
replicated to create the features of the design reach. The analog approach is useful when watershed and
boundary conditions are similar between the design and analog reaches (Skidmore et al., 2001). Hydraulic
geometry was developed using analytical methods to identify the design discharge.
The Project will continue to be monitored on a regular basis throughout the seven-year post -construction
monitoring period, or until performance standards are met. Upon approval for closeout by the Interagency
Review Team (IRT), the Project will be transferred to Unique Places to Save (UP2S). This parry 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.
Endowment funds required to uphold easement and deed restrictions will be finalized prior to Project
transfer to the responsible party.
1.2 Project 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 will be 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 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 ecological processes by reducing water temperature, improving terrestrial and aquatic
habitat, and restoring a native plant community;
Twiman 1 Year 3 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site September 2023

• 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 were:
• Designed and constructed stable stream channels with appropriate pattern, dimension, and profile
based on reference reach conditions;
• 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 50 feet on both sides of the channel along the project
reaches with a hardwood riparian plant community;
• Treated exotic invasive species;
• Removed impoundments to restore stream function and habitat;
• Established a permanent conservation easement on the Project that excludes livestock from stream
channels and their associated buffers.
Limitations to achieving these watershed goals arise by remaining constrained to the Project boundaries.
While restoring the habitat and streams to stable and effective conditions that achieve these goals within
the project parcels, it is not possible to control the effects of poor riparian buffers and livestock impact in
other areas within the watershed. However, through this Project's hydrologic connectivity with other project
in the watershed and responsible stewardship of current restoration projects, overall watershed functionality
and health will improve to support the goals of the 2009 Upper Yadkin Pee -Dee RBRP.
1.3 Project Success Criteria
The Project follows the USACE 2003 Stream Mitigation Guidelines and the "Wilmington District Stream
and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update" dated October 24, 2016. Cross section and vegetation plot
data will be collected in Years 0, 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7. Stream hydrology data and visual monitoring will be
reported annually.
Stream Success Criteria
Four bankfull flow events must be documented within the seven-year monitoring period. The bankfull
events must occur in separate years. Otherwise, the stream monitoring will continue until four bankfull
events have been documented in separate years.
There should be little change in as -built cross -sections. If changes do take place, they should be evaluated
to determine if they represent a movement toward a less stable condition (for example down -cutting or
erosion), or are minor changes that represent an increase in stability (for example settling, vegetative
changes, deposition along the banks, or decrease in width/depth ratio). Cross -sections shall be classified
using the Rosgen stream classification method, and all monitored cross -sections should fall within the
quantitative parameters defined for channels of the design stream type. Bank height ratio shall not exceed
1.2, and the entrenchment ratio shall be no less than 1.4 within restored reaches. The entrenchment ratio
shall be no less than 2.2 for all measured riffle cross -sections on a given reach. 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
Twiman 2 Year 3 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site September 2023

indicate the absence of developing bars within the channel or an excessive increase in channel depth. Lateral
images should not indicate excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the banks over time. A series of
images over time should indicate successional maturation of riparian vegetation.
Vegetation Success Criteria
Specific and measurable success criteria for plant density within the riparian buffers on the Project follow
IRT Guidance. Vegetation monitoring plots are a minimum of 0.02 acres in size and cover a minimum of
two percent of the planted area. The interim measures of vegetative success for the Project is the survival
of at least 320 planted per acre at the end of Year 3, at least 260 planted five-year old trees seven feet in
height at the end of Year 5, and the final vegetative success criteria is at least 210 trees per acre with an
average height of ten 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. 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 are shown in the monitoring table but were
not used to demonstrate success.
1.4 Project Components
The Project area is comprised of three easement locations along multiple drainage features that flow into
North Deep Creek. The northern easement area captures three unnamed tributaries and is divided from the
other easements by an agricultural property and Reese Road. The southern easement area is separated into
eastern and western portions by Abraham Road. The eastern portion is smaller and contains two additional
unnamed tributaries. The western portion is larger and contains the additional two tributaries, including the
confluence that joins all project tributaries. There were a few changes to the easement around TC5 which
resulted in 178 LF (35.933 SMUs) reduction. The easement changes are showed on the Redlines in in the
As -Built Report. The stream mitigation components are summarized below and are shown in more detail
in Appendix A.
Mitigation
Approach
Linear Feet
Ratio
Base SMUs
Restoration
4,074
1: 1
4,074.000
Enhancement I
1,295
1.5: 1
863.333
Enhancement II
342
2.5: 1
136.800
Enhancement 11
646
3: 1
215.333
Enhancement II
2,182
5: 1
436.400
Enhancement III
431
5: 1
86.200
8.970 5.812.067
1.5 Stream Design/Approach
Stream restoration and enhancement efforts along the tributaries of the Project were accomplished through
analyses of geomorphic conditions and watershed characteristics. The design approach applied a
combination of analytical and reference reach -based design methods that meet objectives commensurate
with both ecological and geomorphic improvements. Treatment activities ranged from minor bank grading
and planting to re-establishing a stable planform and hydraulic geometry. For full restoration reaches,
natural design concepts were applied and verified through rigorous engineering analyses and modeling. The
objective of this approach was to design a geomorphically stable channel that provides habitat
improvements and ties into the existing landscape. Specifically, treatments included Priority I and II
Restoration and Enhancement I, II, and III.
Twiman 3 Year 3 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site September 2023

Two restoration reaches were constructed in the old pond beds. These channels were designed below the
surveyed pond bed to promote the removal of any unsuitable material encountered in the pond bed. If
unsuitable material extends below the proposed channels, it will be removed and replaced with suitable
material generated from onsite excavation.
The Project has been broken into the following reaches:
Reach TC1-A — Reach TC1-A begins at the northern limits of project and flows south to easement
boundary and Reece Road. The reach totals 1,660 linear feet of offline Priority II Restoration. The design
approach included meandering the channel within the natural valley, backfilling the existing stream, and
excavating a new floodplain.
Reach TC2-AB/C/D — Reach TC2-A begins at the most northern limit of the northern easement portion
of the project and flows south. A 30-foot culvert crossing was constructed along this reach. The reach totals
1,164 linear feet of Enhancement I. Disturbed hardwood forest and pasture surrounded this reach. The
design approach was to address headcuts and bank erosion with a mix of bank grading and structure
installation. Reach TC2-B begins at the downstream end of TC2-A and flows southwest to the upstream
end of TC2-C. The reach totals 606 linear feet of Priority II Restoration. Enhancement activities on this
reach included channel grading on both banks for 400 linear feet, channel restoration for 103 linear feet,
and installation of a rock step pool and a diffuse flow structure. An existing impoundment was in the middle
of the reach and was breached prior to project construction. Pasture and disturbed riparian habitat
surrounded this reach. Reach TC2-C begins at the downstream end of TC2-13 and flows to the upstream
end of TC2-D. The reach totals 131 linear feet of Enhancement I. Disturbed hardwood forest and pasture
surrounded this reach. The design approach for this reach involved bank and floodplain grading. A 30ft
culvert crossing was constructed at the downstream end of this reach. Reach TC2-D begins at the culvert
crossing and flows southwest to a confluence with TC 1-A. The reach totals 171 linear feet of offline Priority
I Restoration and was surrounded by disturbed hardwood forest and pasture. Cattle were excluded from the
reach, and riparian plantings occurred to restore the buffer.
Reach TC3-AB — Reach TO -A begins in the northern easement portion and flows southwest through a
disturbed wooded valley. The reach totals 646 linear feet of Enhancement II. Woodlands and agricultural
practices surrounded this reach. The design approach for this reach was to stabilize active headcuts and
bank erosion with bank grading and structure installation. Reach TC3-B begins downstream of TO -A and
flows southwest to a confluence with Reach TC 1-A, downstream of the TC2-B and TC 1-A confluence. The
reach totals 757 linear feet of Priority I Restoration. An existing impoundment was in the middle of the
reach was breached prior to project construction. Row crops and pasture surrounded this reach.
Reach TC5-A/B — Reach TC5-A begins on the eastern limits of the southern easement portion immediately
downstream of a large impoundment and flows southwest to a culvert at Abraham Road. The reach totals
509 linear feet of Enhancement III. Hardwood forests, pasture and row crops surrounded this reach. Reach
TC5-13 begins downstream of TC5-A on the opposite side of Abraham Road and flows southwest at the
southern limits of the project. The reach flows through disturbed hardwood forest and pasture and totals
2,187 linear feet of Enhancement II. Within this reach, cattle were excluded from the buffer and riparian
vegetation was established where necessary. Major areas of channel instability at existing crossings were
stabilized as part of the project. A 467 linear feet segment in the middle of the reach has strong, desirable
bed geomorphology and received differing enhancement than most of the reach.
Reach TC6-A/B — Reach begins on the eastern side of the southern easement portion and flows northwest
to the top of TC6-13. The reach totals 880 linear feet of inline Priority I Restoration. Disturbed woodland
and row crops surrounded the reach. A significant number of clay plugs were installed along this reach to
Twiman 4 Year 3 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site September 2023

promote proper hydrology in the proposed stream. Additionally, an engineered sediment pack was installed
above the top of this reach to attenuate peak sediment loading. Reach TC6-B begins at the downstream end
of TC6-A and flows to a confluence with TC5-A. The reach totals 95 linear feet of Enhancement III.
Reach TC7 — Reach begins immediately downstream of an existing impoundment and flows north to a
confluence with TC5-B. The reach totals 342 linear feet of Enhancement II. The design approach involved
stabilizing localized channel erosion with structure installation and pipe removal. Disturbed woodland and
row crops surround the reach.
1.6 Construction and As -Built Conditions
Stream construction and planting was completed in June 2020.Overall, the Project was built to design plans
and guidelines. There were a few minor structure substitutions. Additionally, there was a change to
easement between Mitigation Plan approval and construction that was described in Section 1.4. A redline
version of the as -built survey is included in the As -Built Report (submitted October 2020). Project credits
are based on design centerline, but as -built stream lengths are shown on Appendix A, Table 1. As requested
in the As -Built Credit Release Letter, the future NC DOT encroachment area has been added to Figure 2.
There were a few changes to the planting plan due to bareroot availability. Changes are detailed on
Appendix C, Table 5.
1.7 Year 3 Monitoring Performance (MY3)
Vegetation.
Monitoring of the 10 permanent vegetation plots and five random plots was completed on August 15, 2023.
Vegetation data is in Appendix C, associated photos are in Appendix B, and plot locations are in Figure
2;Appendix B. MY3 monitoring data indicates that all plots are exceeding the interim success criteria of
320 planted stems per acre. Planted stem densities ranged from 364 to 971 planted stems per acre with a
mean of 612 across all plots. A total of 13 species were documented within the plots. The average stem
height across all vegetation plots was 5.1 feet.
Visual assessment of vegetation outside of the monitoring plots indicates that the herbaceous vegetation is
becoming well established throughout the project. No evidence of easement encroachment was noted across
the site. Due to the high flows that occur on TC1-A, RES is planning to conduct a supplemental planting of
both live stakes and three -gallon container trees along this reach to slow flow and enhance vegetative
maturity. The species composition of the supplemental planting will be chosen from the approved
mitigation plan planting list, planting will occur in the upcoming dormant season. Locations of planned
supplemental plantings are shown in Figure 2.
Stream Geomorphology
Geomorphology data for MY3 was collected May 315i, 2023. Summary tables and cross section plots are
in Appendix D. Overall the baseline cross sections and profile on the restoration reach relatively match the
design. The cross section on the Enhancement I reach was included to monitor the changes in dimension
post cattle exclusion and riparian planting. Compared to as -built conditions, project streams indicate that
shear stress and velocities have been reduced across all restoration/enhancement reaches. All reaches were
designed as gravel bed channels and remain classified as gravel bed channels post -construction. Cross
section one shows signs of aggradation; RES field staff noted that immediately above the cross section was
a debris jam that is likely contributing to sediment loads settling in this cross section. RES will remove the
Twiman 5 Year 3 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site September 2023

debris jam and monitor the conditions of this cross section; RES will take adaptive measures if the sediment
load does not continue to move through the system. Cross section eight on TC2-A had some scouring and
degradation occur after several large flow events passed through the system. This area has been hand
repaired with rock on July 14, 2023; and now appears stable. RES will continue to monitor this location to
determine if further action is necessary. Cross section ten had some slight flood plain scour, this is evident
in the cross section plots. RES will monitor this area and take action towards improving it if no natural
remediation occurs. Photos of these areas of concern are located in Appendix B.
Visual assessment of the stream channel was performed to document signs of instability, such as eroding
banks, structural instability, or excessive sedimentation. The channel is mostly transporting sediment as
designed and will continue to be monitored for aggradation and degradation. In May 2023, RES field staff
noted several localized areas showing minor signs of erosion and shear stress along TC2. These areas will
be planted with live stakes from the approved mitigation plan planting list in the winter of 2023/2024 and
monitoring in case further action is deemed necessary. Reference Figure 2 for all above problem
areas/repair locations.
On July 15th 2023, RES field staff noted several structures on site that were deteriorating in function on
TC2. RES determined that a rock sill structure (—STA 14+20) and a log sill structure (—STA 14+70)
needed to be reset in order to improve channel flow and reduce the occurrence of piping. While working
in the area RES plans to add an additional log sill on TC2 (—STA 16+80) to reduce the drop at an existing
structure. Anticipated linear stream footage directly impacted totals approximately 40 linear feet with an
additional area of 0.2 acres of disturbance for stream access. Live stakes and coir matting will be installed
to stabilize the flood plain and channel where any work is conducted and where deemed beneficial across
site. Expected stream repair areas are noted in Figure 2; and photos are included in Appendix B. Work
will be conducted in the winter of 2023/2024 and monitored through subsequent monitoring years.
NCDOT has designed a permanent drainage easement on Abraham Road. The drainage easement will
encroach onto the existing Twiman conversation easement. RES is coordinating with the USACE Project
Manager, long term steward, and NCDOT to determine the appropriate steps to properly handle this
situation. RES is having a surveyor plot out and mark the NCDOT easement north of the road so the
maintenance limits are clear on site.
Stream Hydrology
In July 2020, stage recorders were installed on restoration reaches TC1-A and TC2-C to detect bankfull
events. Flow gauges were installed on reaches TC2-A, TC3-A, and TC6-A to track the frequency and
duration of stream flow events. In 2023, the stage recorder on TC1-A recorded four bankfull events and the
stage recorder on TC2-C recorded one bankfull event; both of the largest events for each stream occurred
on 4/28/2023. The stage recorder on TC1-A was displaced sometime between the months of May and July
during a high flow event. This gauge was reinstalled again on the same tributary although slightly
downstream from the original position. The flow gauges on TC2-A, TC3-A, and TC6 documented
consecutive flow from January 2023 through August 2023, all flow gauges showed 225 flow days. Stage
recorder and flow gauge locations can be found on Figure 2 and photos are in Appendix B. Stream flow
graphs and summary tables are found in Appendix E.
2.0 Methods
Stream geomorphology 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 22 cross -sections. Survey data were imported into
CAD, ArcGIS®, and Microsoft Excel® for data processing and analysis.
Twiman 6 Year 3 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site September 2023

Stream hydrology is monitored using stage recorders and flow gauges, which utilize automatic pressure
transducers, and were installed within the channels. The stage recorders record frequency, duration, and
stage of bankfull events and are programmed to record readings at an hourly interval. A surveyed elevation
was recorded at the bed and top of bank at the stage recorder elevation, allowing for accurate bankfull
events to be recorded. Flow gauges record frequency, duration, and stage of flow events and are
programmed to read at an hourly interval. The height of the adjacent downstream riffle (from the gauge) is
used to detect flow.
Vegetation success is being monitored at 10 permanent monitoring plots and five random plots for a total
of 15 plots. Locations of random plots vary from year to year and are shown in Figure 2, and species and
height will be recorded for all woody stems. 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 is 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 taken from the origin each monitoring year.
3.0 References
Harman, W., R. Starr, M. Carter, K. Tweedy, M. Clemmons, K. Suggs, C. Miller. 2012. A Function -
Based Framework for Stream Assessment and Restoration Projects. US Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC EPA 843-K-12-006.
Lee Michael T., Peet Robert K., Roberts Steven D., and Wentworth Thomas R. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol
for Recording Vegetation Level. Version 4.2
Peet, R.K., Wentworth, T.S., and White, P.S. (1998), A flexible, multipurpose method for recording
vegetation composition and structure. Castanea 63:262-274
Resource Environmental Solutions. 2019. Twiman Mitigation Site - Final Mitigation Plan.
Rosgen, D. 1996. Applied River Morphology, 2nd edition, Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, CO.
US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2003. April 2003 NC Stream Mitigation Guidelines. USAGE.
2016. Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update.
Twiman 7 Year 3 Monitoring Report
Stream Mitigation Site September 2023

Appendix A
Background Tables

Table 1. Twiman - Mitigation Assets and Components
Project Segment
Existing
Footage
or
Acreage
Mitigation
Plan
Footage or
Acreage
Mitigation
Category
Restoration
Level
Priority
Level
Mitigation
Ratio (XI)
Mitigation
Plan
Credits
As -Built
Footage or
Acreage
As -Built
Credits
Comments
TC1-A
1,662
1,660
Warm
R
1
1.0000
1660.000
1660
1660.000
Full Channel Restoration
TC2-A
1,163
1,164
Warm
El
NA
1.5000
776.000
1164
776.000
Bank Grading& Structure Installation
TC2-B
584
606
Warm
R
1
1.0000
606.000
606
606.000
Full Channel Restoration
TC2-C
131
131
Warm
El
NA
1.5000
87.333
131
87.333
Bank and Floodplain Grading
TC2-D
84
171
Warm
R
1
1.0000
171.000
171
171.000
Full Channel Restoration
TC3-A
646
646
Warm
Ell
NA
3.0000
215.333
646
215.333
Bank Grading & Structure Installation
TC3-B
599
757
Warm
R
1
1.0000
757.000
757
757.000
Full Channel Restoration
TC5-A
509
509
Warm
EIII
NA
5.0000
101.800
336
67.200
Planted Buffer, Exclusion of Livestock
TC5-B
2,187
2,187
Warm
Ell
NA
5.0000
437.400
2182
436.400
Planted Buffer, Exclusion of Livestock
TC6-A
964
880
Warm
R
1
1.0000
880.000
880
880.000
Full Channel Restoration
TC6-B
95
95
Warm
EIII
NA
5.0000
19.000
95
19.000
Planted Buffer, Exclusion of Livestock
TC7
342
342
Warm
Ell
NA
2.5000
136.800
342
136.800
Planted Buffer, Exclusion of Livestock
Project Credits
Restoration Level
Stream
Riparian Wetland
Non -Rip
Wetland
Coastal
Marsh
Warm
Cool
Cold
Riverine
Non-Riv
Restoration
4074.000
Re-establishment
Rehabilitation
Enhancement
Enhancement 1
863.333
Enhancement 11
1 788.533
Enhancement 111
86.200
Creation
Preservation
Total
5812.067

Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Twiman Mitigation Site
Elapsed Time Since grading complete: 3 year 3 months
Elapsed Time Since planting complete: 3 year 3 months
Number of reporting Years': 3
Activity or Deliverable
Data Collection
Complete
Completion or
Delivery
Mitigation Plan
NA
Jun-19
Final Design — Construction Plans
NA
Feb-20
Stream Construction
NA
Jun-20
Site Planting
NA
Jun-20
As -built (Year 0 Monitoring — baseline)
Jul-20
Oct-20
Supplemental Planting
NA
Jan-21
Invasive Species Treatment
NA
Dec-21
Stream Repairs (TC1, TC2, TC3)
NA
Apr-21
Year 1 Monitoring
XS: Jul-21
VP: Se -21
Sep-21
Supplemental Planting
NA
Mar-22
Invasive Species Treatment
NA
Aug-22
Year 2 Monitoring
XS: Jun-22
VP: Au -22
Sep-22
In -Stream Hand Repairs
NA
Jul-23
Year 3 Monitoring
XS: May-23
VP: Aug-23
Sep-23
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
Twiman Mitigation Site
Designer
WK Dickson 720 Corporate Center Drive Raleigh, NC 27607
Primary project design POC
David Perry
Construction Contractor
KBS Earthwork Inc. / 5616 Coble Church Rd., Julian, NC
27283
Construction contractor POC
Kory Strader
Survey Contractor
Ascension Land Surveying P.C. / 116 Williams Road,
Mocksville, NC 27028
Survey contractor POC
Chris Cole
Planting Contractor
H&J Forestry
Planting contractor POC
Matt Hitch
Monitoring Performers
RES / 401 Charles Avenue, Charlotte, North Carolina 28205.
Stream Monitoring POC
JDaniel Dixon [phone]
Vegetation Monitoring POC
JDaniel Dixon [phone]

Table 4. Project Background Information
Project Name
Twiman
County
Yadkin
Project Area (acres)
30.5
Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude)
(North Area) Latitude: 36.213241 N Longitude:-80.693855 W
(South Area) Latitude: 36.208615 N Longitude:-80.684732 W
Planted Acreage (Acres of Woody Stems Planted)
18.46
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province
Northern Inner Piedmont
River Basin
Yadkin
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit 3040101
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit 1 3040101130010
DWR Sub -basin
03-07-02
Project Drainage Area (Acres and Square Miles)
796 ac (1.24 mil)
Reach Summary Information
Parameters
TC1-A
TC2-A
TC2-B
TC2-C
TC2-D
TC3-A
TC3-B
TC5-A
TC5-13
TC6-A
TC6-13
TC7
Length of reach (linear feet) (designed)
1,660
1,164
606
131
171
646
757
509
2,187
880
95
342
Valley confinement (Confined, moderately confined, unconfined)
Drainage area (Acres)
2,291
80
93
22
28
904
1,010
19
29
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral
P
P
P
P
P
I
I
P
P
I
I
P
NCDWR Water Quality Classification
Stream Classification (existing)
G4c
34
A4
E4
34
35
E4
E4
E4b
A5
Stream Classification (proposed)
E4
B4
E4
E4
B4
E4
I E4
E4
E4b
A5
Evolutionary trend (Simon) (existing)
FEMA classification

Legend
Conservation Easement
® CCPV Index Sheet
Shugart Rd
o_
9
0:
E
E
U
96
a,
a
O
�l atiory �
apt\
L�
°c
o 01
E o
a
r tz
it a Dade N FecF
N Oak Ridge Church Rd `
N Date: 10/16/2020
Figure 1 - Site Location Map
w e Drawn by: GDS res
e
5 Twiman Mitigation Site
0 500 1,000 Checked By: MDE
Yadkin County, North Carolina 1 inch = 1,000 feet
a Feet

Appendix B
Visual Assessment Data

Target Community
Present Marginal Absent
ores
Absent fill
-Present IIIIIIA*K�Restoring a resilient earth for a modem —1d
TC5-A ,
fl V,
TC6-or O
..� /ice' .i ,,i' - _ f"*y{.. #d... ♦t'� /'� \\ -. - - 1 100 200
Feet
'' ! ` • `�
TC6-BTwiman
TC5-13Mitigation Project
•1. f /
r
Yadkin County,
North Carolina
Legend
Conservation Easement
>320 stems/acre
0 MY3 Random VP (>320 st(
ms/acre)
NCDOT Future Encroachm
nt
MY2 RVP Plot Locations
Stream Mitigation
e Restoration
.• Enhancement I
Enhancement 11
Enhancement 11 (3:1)
Enhancement 11 (5:1)
Enhancement III
Top of Bank
Structure
Cross Section
f/A
Monitoring Devices
Ambient
Flow Gauge
Stage Recorder

Twiman MY3 Fixed Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos (08/14/2023)
Vegetation Plot 1
Vegetation Plot 3
Vegetation Plot 2
Vegetation Plot 4
Vegetation Plot 5 Vegetation Plot 6

}' •�� 'x' .,SIT � f..�f � -
Xk _ *'•.-

Twiman MY3 Random Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos (08/14/2023)
Random Vegetation Plot 1
s
j
Random Vegetation Plot 3
Random Vegetation Plot 5
Random Vegetation Plot 2
Random Vegetation Plot 4

Twiman MY3 Monitoring Device Photos (08/14/2023)
dw
f A�
Stage Recorder (TC1-A)
Stage Recorder (TC2-B)

L r
1 I i
µ+ 1 f
+A� S
� f4
- ,' `',+.t ,ti+ +` a4• � ✓� - M1y �''1T--ems
L
ly
* Y
V•S i•

• � !� F.
5
t i f
�• •air• � 1 � 1 � 7Yft �.-.. - +�
+ i J
lr 'Y
i 1

Twiman MY3 Crossing Photos
TC2-C Upstream (05/09/2023)
ull
TC2-A Upstream (08/14/2023)
TC2-C Downstream (08/14/2023)
TC2-A Downstream (05/09/2023)

Tillman MY3 Areas of Concern Photos (05 0 %g2 )
Scour and degradation just upstream o XSy TC2- (05 0 % 0 3
.j,�
--
.:
-
v
~-
�
6' }
k;
}Ike
Bank destabilization j,4 upstream ofXS8- TC2- (5 n9 20 3

f
APA

Log Sills to be eaa —ST4 14+70( 715 2023)
Log sill to be added below to reduce drop —ST* 16 80(0715 20 3

Appendix C
Vegetation Plot Data

Appendix C. Vegetation Assessment Data
Table 5. Planted Species Summary
Common Name
Scientific Name
Mitigation Plan %
As -Built %
Total Stems Planted
Northern Red Oak
Quercus rubra
10
15
4,515
NVillow Oak
Quercus phellos
15
13
4,000
Water Oak
Quercus nigra
15
13
4,000
River Birch
Betula nigra
15
13
4,050
Sycamore
Platanns occidnetalis
15
13
3,800
Yellow Poplar
Driodendron tillipifera
10
9
2,600
Persimmon
Diospyros virginiana
5
5
1,500
Green Ash
Fraxinus pennst^lvanica
10
3
1,000
Red Mulberry
Morus rubra
0
3
1,000
Crab Apple
Malus angustifolia
0
3
800
Black Walnut
Juglans mgra
0
2
500
Silky Dogwood
Corpus atnouttsu
0
2
500
Elderberry
Sambucus canadensis
0
2
500
Eastern Redbud
Cercis canadensis
0
2
500
Sugarberry
Celtis laevigata
0
1
350
American Plum
Prunus ainericana
0
1
300
Blackgum
Nyssa sylvatica
5
0
0
Vrlrite Oak*
Quercus alba
0
0
40
Pin Oak*
Quercus polustris
0
0
15
Buttonbush*
Cephalanthus occidentalis
0
0
40
Total
30,010
Planted Area
18.46
As -built Planted Stems/Acre
1,626
Species not i .Ju&d in the original planting plan bin inc� in supplemental planting_
Table 6. Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary
Wetland/Stream Vegetation Totals
(per acre)
Plot #
Planted
Stems/Acre
Volunteer
Stems/Acre
Total
Stems/Acre
Success
Criteria
Met?
Avg Planted
Stem Height
(ft)
1
526
0
526
Yes
8.4
2
931
0
931
Yes
2.6
3
647
0
647
Yes
1.7
4
526
0
526
Yes
5.1
5
486
0
486
Yes
6.1
6
567
0
567
Yes
3.4
7
567
0
567
Yes
13.5
8
486
202
688
Yes
3.0
9
971
121
1093
Yes
4.4
10
971
0
971
Yes
5.2
R1
486
0
486
Yes
8.1
R2
526
0
526
Yes
2.8
R3
364
0
364
Yes
3.0
R4
364
0
364
Yes
2.9
R5
769
0
769
Yes
6.9
Project Avg
612
22
634
Yes
5.1

Appendix C. Vegetation Assessment Data
Table 7 Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot Species
Current Plot Data (MY3 2023)
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
07172020-01-0001
07172020-01-0002
07172020-01-0003
07172020-01-0004
07172020-01-0005
07172020-01-0006
07172020-01-0007
07172020-01-0008
07172020-01-0009
07172020-01-0010
PnoLS
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
3
3
3
1
1
1
2
2
2
Cephalanthus occidentalis
common buttonbush
Shrub
5
5
5
1
1
1
Cercis canadensis
red bud
tree
Cornus amomum
silky dogwood
Shrub
9
9
9
Diospyros virginiana
common persimmon
Tree
2
2
2
1
1
1
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
Juglans nigra
black walnut
Tree
1
1
1
3
3
3
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
1
1
1
2
1
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
11
11
11
7
7
7
3
3
3
2
2
2
6
6
6
7
7
10
2
2
4
1
1
1
Prunus serotina
black cherry
Tree
3
3
3
Quercus alba
white oak
Tree
8
8
8
1
1
1
Quercus lyrata
overcup oak
Tree
Quercus nigra
water oak
Tree
1
1
1
Quercus phellos
lwillow oak
iTree
1
1
1
15
15
15
3
3
3
3
3
3
1
1
1
4
4
4
2
2
2
18
18
18
11
11
11
Quercus rubra
inorthern red oak
ITree
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
41
4
3
3
3
2
2
2
3
3
3
9
9
9
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
13
13
13
23
23
23
16
16
16
13
13
13
121
121
12
14
14
14
14
141
14
12
12
17
24
241
27
24
24
24
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
31
31
3
31
31
3
5
51
5
31
31
3
51
51
5
4
4
4
4
41
41
4
4
5
4
4
5
5
5
5
5261
5261
5261
9311
931
931
647
6471
6471
5261
5261
526
4861
4861
486
5671
567
5671
567
5671
5671
486
4861
688
971
971
1093
971
971
971
Current Plot Data (MY3 2023)
Annual Means
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
R1
R2
R3
R4
R5
MY3 (2023)
MY2 (2022)
MY1 (2021)
MYO (2020)
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
4
4
4
10
10
10
21
21
22
14
14
14
14
14
14
Cephalanthus occidentalis
common buttonbush
Shrub
5
5
5
3
3
3
14
14
14
16
16
16
12
12
12
12
12
12
Cercis canadensis
red bud
tree
3
3
3
1
1
1
Cornus amomum
silky dogwood
Shrub
9
9
9
11
11
11
10
10
10
15
15
15
Diospyros virginiana
common persimmon
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
7
7
7
14
14
14
3
3
3
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
Juglans nigra
black walnut
Tree
1
1
1
5
5
5
3
3
3
5
5
5
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
3
3
3
7
7
7
11
11
14
2
2
5
16
16
19
3
3
3
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
2
2
2
2
2
2
5
5
5
1
1
1
49
49
54
65
65
93
50
50
157
54
54
54
Prunus serotina
black cherry
Tree
5
5
5
8
8
8
5
5
5
3
3
3
3
3
3
Quercus alba
white oak
Tree
9
9
9
9
9
9
10
10
10
10
10
10
Quercus lyrata
overcup oak
Tree
3
3
3
Quercus nigra
water oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
12
12
12
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
5
5
5
5
5
5
6
6
6
74
74
74
76
76
76
90
901
164
120
120
120
Quercus rubra
northern red oak
Tree
11
11
1
21
21
2
29
29
29
35
35
35
35
35
35
94
94
94
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
12
12
12
13
13
13
9
9
9
9
9
9
19
19
19
227
227
235
258
2581
290
252
252
436
3431
3431
343
1
1
1
1
1
15
15
15
15
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.37
0.37
0.37
0.37
51
5
5
4
41
4
3
3
3
3
3
5
5
5
13
13
13
12
12
12
13
13
13
12
12
12
486
486
486
526
526
526
364
364
];aL36413641
3641
7691
7691
769
6121
6121
634
6961
6961
7821
6801
6801
1176
9251
9251
925

Appendix D
Stream Measurement and
Geomorphology Data

L
Y
r
-r
5.
" as
�.NN
"
irk
895
894
893
c
p 892
CO
m
w
891
890
889
Upstream
Downstream
Twiman - Reach TC1-A - Cross Section 1 - - Restoration
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft) 3X Vertical Exaggeration
MYO 2020 MY1 2021 MY2 2022 — MY3 2023 — — — Approx. Bankfull • • • • • • • Low Bank Height
ir Cross Section 1 (Pool)
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on ABASA
893.3
893.1
893.2
893.5
Bankfull Width (ft)'
16.6
19.4
18.7
23.6
Flood rove Width (ft)'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
2.6
2.9
2.9
2.5
Low Bank Elevation (ft)
893.30
892.8
892.9
893.3
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (fe)2
21.4
16.5
16.9
16.0
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio'
N/A
I N/A
I N/A
N/A
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Upstream
Downstream
Twiman- Reach TC1-A - Cross Section 2 - Riffle - Restoration
896
895
894
893
.....
......
.....................
.. ................
...
.@
W
u'
892
891
890
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
3X Vertical
MYO 2020 MY1 2021 MY2 2022
Exaggeration
MY3 2023 - - - Approx. Bankfull------- Low Bank Height
Cross Section 2 (Riffle)
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on ABASA'
893.3
893.3
893.4
893.6
Bankfull Width ft'
15.7
19.9
16.8
18.9
Floodprone Width (ft)'
49.9
>50.0
>50.2
50.1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
1.9
2.0
2.1
2.2
Low Bank Elevation ft
893.3
893.2
893.3
893.4
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area fez
20.9
19.2
19.8
18.8
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio'
3.2
>2.5
>3
2.7
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio'
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.9
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Upstream
Downstream
Twiman- Reach TC1-A - Cross Section 3 - Pool - Restoration
894
893
892
° 891
Ar
w
890
889
888
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
3X Vertical Exaggeration
MYO 2020 MY1 2021 MY2 2022 MY3 2023 — — - Approx. Bankfull • • • • • • • Low Bank Height
Cross Section 3 (Pool)
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on ABAXSA1
890.9
891.0
891.1
891.2
Bankfull Width ft 1
17.1
25.0
16.9
23.1
Floodprone Width (ft) 1
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
2.2
2.3
2.3
2.4
Low Bank Elevation 8
890.9
891.0
891.0
891.2
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area f12 z
23.1
22.0
22.0
21.7
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

893
892
891
c
° 890
m
w
889
888
887
0
Upstream
Downstream
Twiman- Reach M-A - Cross Section 4 - Riffle - Restoration
3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO 2020 - MY1 2021 MY2 2022 MY3 2023 3x vertical
- - - Approx. Bankfull • • • • • • • Low Bank Height Floodprone Area exaggeration
Cross Section 4 (Riffle)
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on ABASA'
890.9
890.7
890.8
890.9
Bankfull Width 11i
19.5
16.9
16.9
15.3
Flood rove Width ft'
49.9
>50.0
>49.7
50.0
Bankfull Max Depth ft 2
3.0
3.5
3.4
3.7
Low Bank Elevation ft
890.9
890.9
890.9
890.8
Bankftdl Cross Sectional Area ft2 -
25.5
28.4
27.3
23.7
BankfulI Entrenchment Ratio'
2.6
>3.0
>2.9
3.2
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio'
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Upstream
Downstream
Twiman - Reach TC1-A - Cross Section 5 - Pool - Restoration
888
887
886
- -
- -
- -
-
- -
- - - -
- -
- -
c
° 885
w 884
883
882
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft) 3X Vertical Exaggeration
MYO 2020 MY1 2021 — MY2 2022 — MY3 2023 — — — Approx. Bankfull • • • • • • • Low Bank Height
Cross Section 5 (Pool)
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on ABASA'
886.4
886.1
886.3
886.4
Bankfull Width ft'
17.1
23.4
20.7
29.9
Flood tune Width ft'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Max Depth ft 2
3.2
2.7
2.8
3.0
Low Bank Elevation ft
886.4
885.8
886.1
886.0
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ft 2
29.7
23.9
26.0
21.5
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Banldull Bank Height Ratio'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Upstream
Downstream
Twiman - - Cross Section 6 - - Restoration
888
887
886
—
—
—
—
—
— — —
—
c
°
885
w
884
883
882
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft) 3X Vertical Exaggeration
MYO 2020 MY1 2021 MY2 2022 - MY3-2023 — — — Approx. Bankfull • • • • • • • Low Bank Height
Cross Section 6 (Pool)
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on ABASA'
886.0
886.1
886.2
886.1
Bankfull Width 11'
18.9
17.4
18.1
26.6
Flood rove Width fl'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
2.1
2.1
2.2
2.2
Low Bank Elevation $
886.0
886.0
886.0
886.1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (if)'
24.8
22.4
22.3
22.6
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Upstream
Downstream
Twiman- Reach TC2-A - Cross Section 7 - Riffle - Enhancement 1
934
933
932
° 931
°
w
930
.00
929
928
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
3X Vertical
MYO 2020 - MY1 2021 MY2 2022
Exaggeration
MY3 2023 Floodprone - - - A rox. Bankfull
Cross Section 7 (Riffle)
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on ABASA'
929.7
929.9
929.9
929.8
Bankfull Width 8'
7.1
11.9
8.2
9.0
Floodprone Width 8'
32.2
31.8
30.8
29.5
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)'
1.3
1.0
1.0
0.9
Low Bank Elevation ft
929.7
929.6
929.8
929.8
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area t 2 z
4.8
2.6
4.3
3.5
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio'
4.5
2.7
3.8
3.3
Bankfull Bank Height Ratioll
1.0
1 1.0
1 0.9
1 1.0
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Upstream
Downstream
Twiman- Reach TC2-A - Cross Section 8 - - Enhancement 1
933
932
931
c
°
930
m
w
929
.....
- -
......................
- -
- -
- -
- -
.....
- -
.....
- -
.........
- -
.
-
.......
....
- -
.....
- -
................
- -
- -
- -
...
-
928
927
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO 2020 MY1 2021 MY2 2022
MY3 2023 - - - Approx. Bankfull • • • • • • Low Bank Height
3x vertical
Exaggeration
Cross Section 8 (Riffle)
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on ABASA'
929.1
929.2
929.2
928.4
Bankfull Width ft'
7.6
9.5
7.8
6.3
Flood rove Width 11'
24
24.7
25.3
17.9
Bankfull Max Depth ft z
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.7
Low Bank Elevation 11
929.1
929.3
929.1
928.7
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ft2 2
5.6
6.4
4.7
8.1
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio'
3.2
2.6
3.3
2.8
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio'
1.0
1.1
0.9
1.3
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Upstream
J�aW�;tl�� Ira
:•9 4F I ) �1 � �i
'l0 K1 f4� uk
�++t
Downstream
Twiman- Reach TC2-13 - Cross Section 9 - Pool - Restoration
907
906
905
0
°
904
rz
a)
....
. .
— —
. .
....
— —
....
. .
— —
. .
— —
. .
— —
. .
— —
. .
— —
.
— —
—
. .
—
. .
— —
...
— —
— —
— —
— —
. .
— —
. . .
—
w
903
902
901
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance ft 3X Vertical
Exaggeration
MYO 2020 MY1 2021 MY2 2022 — MY3 2023 — — — Approx. Bankfull • • • • • • • Low Bank Height
Cross Section 9 (Pool)
Base
MYI
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on ABASAI
903.5
903.5
903.6
903.4
Bankfull Width ft'
7.0
7.8
7.7
7.8
Floodprone Width (ft)'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)'
2.0
1.9
1.8
1.6
Low Bank Elevation ft
903.5
903.5
903.6
903.7
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ft2 2
7.9
7.9
7.9
6.8
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio'
N/A
I N/A
I N/A
I N/A
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

1:
1 $
4 S�
tlY
Upstream Downstream
Twiman- Reach TC2-13 - Cross Section 10 - Riffle - Restoration
906
905
904
c
n3
903 ...... .. ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ... ...... ...... ....
w
902
901
900
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO 2020 MY1 2021 MY2 2022 MY3 2023 3x vertical
L - - - Approx. Bankfull • • • • • • • Low Bank Height Floodprone Area I
Exaggeration
Cross Section 10 (Riffle)
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on ABASA'
902.7
902.7
902.7
902.6
Bankfull Width(ft)'
6.2
7.7
8.9
5.7
Floodprone Width 8'
48
>49.1
48.6
47.5
Bankfull Max Depth $ 2
1.0
1.2
1.1
1.8
Low Bank Elevation $
902.70
902.7
902.6
902.9
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft)'
4.4
4.3
3.9
6.4
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio'
7.7
>6.4
>5.4
8.4
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio'
1.0
1.0
0.9
1.2
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Upstream
Downstream
Twiman- Reach TC3-B - Cross Section 11 - Pc - Restoration
915
914
913
0
°
912
>
a)
w
911
910
909
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
3X Vertical
Distance (ft) Exaggeration
MYO 2020 MY1 2021 MY2 2022 - — MY3 2023 — — — Approx. Bankfull • • • • • • • Low Bank Height
Cross Section 11 (Pool)
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSA'
911.7
911.8
912.0
911.9
Bankfull Width (ft)'
5.5
5.5
5.6
5.6
Floodprone Width (ft)'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
1.0
1 1.2
0.6
1.1
Low Bank Elevation ft
911.70
911.8
912.0
911.9
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)2
3.3
3.8
3.6
3.2
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Bank Hei ht Ratio'
N/A
N/A
I N/A
I N/A
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

915
914
913
c
° 912
6
w
911
910
909
Upstream
Downstream
Twiman- Reach TC3-13 - Cross Section 12 - Riffle - Restoration
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO 2020 MY1 2021 MY2 2022 3X Vertical
MY3-2023 - - - Approx. Bankfull • Low Bank Height Exaggeration
Cross Section 12 (Riffle)
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on ABASA'
911.3
911.5
911.7
911.6
Bankfull Width (ft)'
11.6
8.7
9.0
19.9
Floodprone Width ft '
50.0
>49.8
>50.0
49.7
Bankfull Max Depth ft2
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.4
Low Bank Elevation ft
911.3
911.5
911.5
911.4
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ftC)2
6.6
6.3
5.4
5.4
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio'
4.3
>5.7
>5.6
2.5
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio'
1.0
1.0
0.9
1.0
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

911
910
909
c
° 908
w
907
906
905
Upstream
Downstream
Twiman- Reach TC6-A - Cross Section 13 - Riffle - Restoration
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
3X Vertical
Exaggeration
Cross Section 13 (Riffle)
Base
W1
W2
MY3
W5
W7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on ABASA'
907.7
907.7
907.6
907.7
Bankfull Width (ft)'
11.7
13.8
8.6
13.1
Floodprone Width ft t
48.1
>45.6
>47.1
47.1
Bankfull Max Depth ft 2
1.0
0.9
0.9
1.0
Low Bank Elevation ft
907.67
907.6
907.6
907.6
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (fC)2
3.2
2.8
3.2
3.2
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratios
4.1
>3.3
>5.5
3.6
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio'
1.0
0.9
1.0
1.0
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

�A
4 h
.W
Upstream Downstream
Twiman- - Cross Section 14 - - Restoration
910
909
908
c
° 907 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
>
a)
w
906
905
904
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
3X Vertical
Distance (ft) Exaggeration
MYO 2020 MY1 2021 MY2 2022 - MY3-2023 — — — Approx. Bankfull • • • • • • • Low Bank Height
Cross Section 14 (Pool)
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on ABASA'
907.1
907.1
907.1
907.1
Bankfull Width (ft)'
4.1
5.7
5.5
7.3
Floodprone Width (ft)'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Max Depth ft2
1.4
1.6
1.5
1.5
Low Bank Elevation ft
907.1
907.1
907.0
907.0
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (fC)2
3.7
3.9
3.5
2.9
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratiot
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratiot
N/A
N/A
I N/A
I N/A
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Twiman Mitigation Site - Reach TC1-A
Parameter
Gauge
Regional Curve
Pre -Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle Only
LL
UL
Eq.
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Min
Med
Max
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Bankfull Width (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
16.7
---
---
1
4.4
8.9
7.1
15.3
---
3
14.9
---
17.0
15.7
17.6
---
19.5
2.7
2
Floodprone Width (ft)
---
---
20.0
---
---
1
>10
---
>16
>30
---
3
80.0
---
115.0
49.9
49.9
---
49.9
0.0
2
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
1.5
---
---
1
0.6
1.1
1.0
1.6
---
3
1.7
---
1.8
---
---
---
---
---
---
'Bankfull Max Depth ft
---
---
2.0
---
---
1
0.9
1.4
1.2
2.0
---
3
2.2
---
2.3
1.9
2.5
---
3.0
0.8
2
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft)
---
---
25.3
1
2.8
11.1
6.7
1 23.9
1 ---
1 3
1 24.6
1 ---
30.5
20.9
23.2
1 ---
1 25.5
1 3.3
2
Width/Depth Ratio
11.0
1
6.9
1 8.0
7.4
9.8
---
3
9.0
---
9.5
---
---
---
---
---
Entrenchment Ratio
---
---
1.2
---
1
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
---
3
>2.2
---
>2.2
2.6
2.9
---
3.2
0.4
2
'Bank Height Ratiol
1
3.9
1
1.0
1.2
---
1.3
3
1.0
---
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.0
2
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
2
---
---
35
---
---
12
---
41
9.5
19.0
18.8
36.1
6.3
20
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
0.4
2.6
2.7
5.3
1.5
20
Pool Length (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
2
---
---
18
---
---
3
---
21
19.3
60.4
57.6
107.5
26.0
19
Pool Max depth (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
--
---
Pool Spacing (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
8
---
---
62
---
---
29
---
72
32.9
79.2
74.5
125.3
28.5
19
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
18
---
---
114
---
---
29
---
83
29
---
---
83
---
---
Radius of Curvature ft
---
---
---
---
---
---
6
---
---
73
---
---
34
---
75
34
---
---
75
---
---
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
1
---
---
5
---
---
2
---
5
2
---
---
5
---
---
Meander Wavelength (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
28
---
---
345
---
---
75
---
235
75
---
---
235
---
---
Meander Width Ratio
---
---
---
---
---
---
2
8
--
---
2
5
2
---
5
Transport parameters
Reach Shear Stress (competency) Ible
---
---
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
--
Stream Power (transport capacity) W/mZ
---
---
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
G4c
E4
E4
E4
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
---
---
--
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
---
---
--
Valley length (ft)
1478
1238
802
---
Channel Thalweg length (ft)
1668
1500
900
---
Sinuosity (ft)
1.13
1.21
1.12
---
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
0.007
---
0.007
---
Channel slope (ft/ft)
0.006
0.01
0.006
---
3 Bankfull Flood lain Area acres
---
---
---
---
4% of Reach with Eroding Banks
---
---
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
---
---
Biological or Other
---
---
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1 = The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile. 2= For projects with a proximal USGS gauge in -line with the project reach (added bankfull verification - rare).
3. Utilizing XS measurement data produce an estimate of the bankfull fioodplain area in acres, which should be the area from the top of bank to the toe of the terrace riser/slope.
4 = Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey for comparison to monitoring data; 5. Ofvalue/needed only ifthe n exceeds 3

Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary (continued)
Twiman Mitigation Site - Reach TC2-B
Parameter
Gauge
Regional Curve
Pre -Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle Only
LL
UL
Eq.
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Min
Med
Max
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD5
n
Bankfull Width (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
8.0
---
---
1
4.4
8.9
7.1
15.3
---
3
5.4
---
8.0
---
---
6.2
---
---
---
Floodprone Width (ft)
---
---
10.0
---
---
1
>10
---
>16
>30
---
3
>12
---
>18
---
---
47.5
---
---
---
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
0.8
---
---
1
0.6
1.1
1.0
1.6
---
3
0.7
---
0.8
---
---
---
---
---
---
'Bankfull Max Depth ft
---
---
1.0
---
---
1
0.9
1.4
1.2
2.0
---
3
0.8
---
1.0
---
---
1.0
---
---
---
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftZ
6.4
1
2.8
11.1
1 6.7
1 23.9
1 --
3
1 3.7
1 ---
6.0
---
---
4.4
---
I ---
I ---
Width/Depth Ratio
9.8
1
6.9
8.0
7.4
9.8
---
3
7.9
---
10.7
---
---
---
---
Entrenchment Ratio
---
---
1.3
---
---
1
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
---
3
>2.2
---
>2.2
---
---
7.7
---
---
---
'Bank Height Ratiol
1
3.1
1
1.0
1.2
1.3
3
1.0
---
1.0
---
---
1.0
---
---
---
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
2
35
---
---
5
---
19
0.6
9.1
6.8
27.6
6.2
19
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
0.4
13.4
4.0
171.9
38.6
19
Pool Length (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
2
18
---
---
2
---
10
5.7
22.0
19.8
47.5
11.9
19
Pool Max depth (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
--
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
Pool Spacing (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
8
62
---
---
6
---
34
15.8
31.1
32.6
57.5
13.3
19
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
18
---
---
114
---
---
13
---
26
13
---
---
26
---
---
Radius of Curvature (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
6
---
---
73
---
---
9
---
35
9
---
35
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
1
---
---
5
---
---
2
---
4
2
---
---
4
Meander Wavelength (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
28
---
---
345
---
---
25
---
85
25
---
---
85
Meander Width Ratio
---
---
---
---
---
--
2
---
---
8
---
---
2
---
5
2
---
---
5
---
---
Transport parameters
Reach Shear Stress (competency) Ible
---
---
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
--
Stream Power (transport capacity) W/mZ
---
---
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
A4
E4/E4B
E4
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
---
---
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
---
---
Valley length (ft)
435
---
498
---
Channel Thalweg length (ft)
551
---
607
Sinuosity (ft)
1.27
---
1.22
---
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
0.057
---
0.057
---
Channel slope (ft/ft)
0.047
---
0.025
---
3 Bankfull Flood lain Area acres
---
---
---
---
4% of Reach with Eroding Banks
---
---
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
---
I ---
Biological or Other
---
I ---
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1 = The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile. 2= For projects with a proximal USGS gauge in -line with the project reach (added bankfull verification - rare).
3. Utilizing XS measurement data produce an estimate of the bankfull fioodplain area in acres, which should be the area from the top ofbank to the toe of the terrace riser/slope.
4 = Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey for comparison to monitoring data; 5. Ofvalue/needed only if the n exceeds 3

Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary (continued)
Twiman Mitigation Site - Reach TC3-B
Parameter
Gauge
Regional Curve
Pre -Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle Only
LL
UL
Eq.
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD'
n
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Min
Med
Max
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD5
n
Bankfull Width (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
4.5
---
---
1
4.4
8.9
7.1
15.3
---
3
---
4.8
---
---
---
11.6
---
---
---
Floodprone Width (ft)
---
---
7.0
---
---
1
>10
---
>16
>30
---
3
---
>11
---
---
---
50.0
---
---
---
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
0.5
---
---
1
0.6
1.1
1.0
1.6
---
3
---
0.5
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
'Bankfull Max Depth ft
---
---
0.8
---
---
1
0.9
1.4
1.2
2.0
---
3
---
0.7
---
---
---
1.6
---
---
---
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftZ
2.4
1
2.8
11.1
1 6.7
1 23.9
1
3
2.5
---
---
---
6.6
---
I ---
Width/Depth Ratio
8.7
1
6.9
8.0
7.4
9.8
3
---
9.1
---
---
---
---
---
---
Entrenchment Ratio
---
---
1.6
---
1
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
3
>2.2
---
---
---
4.3
---
---
'Bank Height Ratiol
1
3.2
1
1.0
1.2
1.3
3
1.0
---
---
---
1.0
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
2
35
---
---
3
---
17
1.3
7.6
6.0
17.8
4.3
27
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
0.3
9.1
5.1
61.4
13.6
27
Pool Length (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
2
18
---
---
3
---
9
2.5
22.0
18.2
80.0
16.6
26
Pool Max depth (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
--
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
Pool Spacing (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
8
62
---
---
11
---
32
3.7
29.3
23.5
85.8
16.9
26
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
18
---
---
114
---
---
10
---
22
10
---
---
22
---
Radius of Curvature (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
6
---
---
73
---
---
10
---
23
10
---
23
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
1
---
---
5
---
---
2
---
5
2
---
---
5
Meander Wavelength (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
28
---
---
345
---
---
32
---
82
32
---
---
82
Meander Width Ratio
---
---
---
---
---
2
---
---
8
2
---
5
2
---
5
---
---
Transport parameters
Reach Shear Stress (competency) Ible
---
---
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
--
Stream Power (transport capacity) W/mZ
---
---
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
B5
E4/E4b
E4
E4
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
---
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
---
---
Valley length (ft)
535
---
715
---
Channel Thalweg length (ft)
748
---
790
---
Sinuosity (ft)
1.4
---
1.1
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
0.067
---
0.067
---
Channel slope (ft/ft)
0.043
---
0.028
---
3 Bankfull Flood lain Area acres
---
---
---
---
4% of Reach with Eroding Banks
---
---
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
---
I ---
Biological or Other
---
I ---
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1 = The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile. 2= For projects with a proximal USGS gauge in -line with the project reach (added bankfull verification - rare).
3. Utilizing XS measurement data produce an estimate of the bankfull fioodplain area in acres, which should be the area from the top ofbank to the toe of the terrace riser/slope.
4 = Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey for comparison to monitoring data; 5. Ofvalue/needed only if the n exceeds 3

Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary (continued)
Twiman Mitigation Site - Reach TC6-A
Parameter
Gauge
Regional Curve
Pre -Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle Only
LL
UL
Eq.
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Min
Med
Max
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD'
n
Bankfull Width (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
5.2
---
---
1
4.4
8.9
7.1
15.3
---
3
---
4.0
---
---
---
11.7
---
---
---
Floodprone Width (ft)
---
---
16.0
---
---
1
>10
---
>16
>30
---
3
---
27.0
---
---
---
48.1
---
---
---
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
0.6
---
---
1
0.6
1.1
1.0
1.6
---
3
---
0.4
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
'Bankfull Max Depth ft
---
---
0.9
---
---
1
0.9
1.4
1.2
2.0
---
3
---
0.6
---
---
---
1.0
---
---
---
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftZ
---
--
--
2.9
1 ---
I ---
1
2.8
11.1
1 6.7
1 23.9
1
3
---
1.8
---
---
---
3.2
---
I ---
I ---
Width/Depth Ratio
---
---
9.1
---
---
1
6.9
8.0
7.4
9.8
3
8.9
---
---
---
---
---
Ratio
EntrenEHh
---
BankRatio
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
2
---
---
35
---
---
3
---
14
3.2
11.6
9.6
21.8
5.7
24
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
0.2
3.6
3.2
8.3
2.2
24
Pool Length (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
2
---
---
18
---
---
2
---
7
5.5
24.3
21.9
99.1
19.2
23
Pool Max depth (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
--
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
Pool Spacing (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
8
---
---
62
---
---
9
---
27
15.6
35.5
30.0
111.8
19.7
23
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
18
---
---
114
---
---
12
---
19
12
---
---
19
---
---
Radius of Curvature (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
6
---
---
73
---
---
8
---
19
8
---
19
---
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
1
---
---
5
---
---
2
---
5
2
---
5
Meander Wavelength (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
28
---
---
345
---
---
22
---
57
22
---
57
Meander Width Ratio
---
---
---
---
---
---
2
---
---
8
---
---
3
---
5
3
---
---
5
Transport parameters
Reach Shear Stress (competency) Ible
---
---
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
--
Stream Power (transport capacity) W/mZ
---
---
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
---
E4/E4b
E4
E4
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
---
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
---
---
Valley length (ft)
---
---
843
---
Channel Thalweg length (ft)
---
---
924
Sinuosity (ft)
---
---
1.1
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
---
---
0.036
---
Channel slope (ft/ft)
---
---
0.028
---
3 Bankfull Flood lain Area acres
---
---
---
---
4% of Reach with Eroding Banks
---
---
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
---
---
Biological or Other
---
---
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1 = The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile. 2= For projects with a proximal USGS gauge in -line with the project reach (added bankfull verification - rare).
3. Utilizing XS measurement data produce an estimate of the bankfull fioodplain area in acres, which should be the area from the top ofbank to the toe of the terrace riser/slope.
4 = Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey for comparison to monitoring data; 5. Ofvalue/needed only if the n exceeds 3

Appendix D. Table 9 - Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross Sections)
Project Name: Twiman
Cross Section 1 (Pool)
Cross Section 2 (Riffle)
Cross Section 3 (Pool)
Cross Section 4 (Riffle)
Cross Section 5 (Pool)
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSA
893.3
893.1
893.2
893.5
893.3
893.3
893.4
893.6
890.9
891.0
891.1
891.2
890.9
890.7
890.8
890.9
886.4
886.1
886.3
886.4
Bankfull Width (ft)'
16.6
19.4
18.7
23.6
1 15.7
19.9
16.8
18.9
17.1
25.0
16.9
23.1
19.5
16.9
16.9
15.3
1 17.1
23.4
20.7
29.9
Floodprone Width ft'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
49.9
>50.0
>50.2
50.1
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
49.9
>50.0
>49.7
50.0
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
2.6
2.9
2.9
2.5
1.9
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.2
2.3
2.3
2.4
3.0
3.5
3.4
3.7
3.2
2.7
2.8
3.0
Low Bank Elevation (ft)
893.30
892.8
892.9
893.3
893.3
893.2
893.3
893.4
890.9
891.0
891.0
891.2
890.9
890.9
890.9
890.8
886.4
885.8
886.1
886.0
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (f 2)2
21.4
16.5
16.9
16.0
20.9
19.2
19.8
18.8
23.1
22.0
22.0
21.7
25.5
28.4
27.3
23.7
1
29.7
23.9
26.0
21.5
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
3.2
>2.5
>3
2.7
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2.6
>3.0
>2.9
3.2
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1.0
1 1.0
1.0
1 0.9
1
1
1
N/A
N/A
I N/A
I N/A
1.0
1 1.0
1 1.0
1.0
N/A
N/A
I N/A
N/A
Cross Section 6 (Pool)
Cross Section 7 (Riffle)
Cross Section 8 (Riffle)
Cross Section 9 (Pool)
Cross Section 10 (Riffle)
FBasTMYI
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSA
886.0
886.1
886.2
886.1
929.7
929.9
929.9
929.8
1 929.1
929.2
929.2
928.4
903.5
903.5
903.6
903.4
902.7
902.7
902.7
902.6
Bankfull Width (ft)'
18.9
17.4
18.1
26.6
7.1
11.9
8.2
9.0
7.6
9.5
7.8
6.3
7.0
7.8
7.7
7.8
6.2
7.7
8.9
5.7
Floodprone Width ft
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
32.2
31.8
30.8
29.5
24
24.7
25.3
17.9
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
48
>49.1
48.6
47.5
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
2.1
2.1
2.2
2.2
1.3
1.0
1.0
0.9
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.7
2.0
1.9
1.8
1.6
1.0
1.2
1.1
1.8
Low Bank Elevation (ft)
886.0
886.0
886.0
886.1
929.7
929.6
929.8
929.8
929.1
929.3
929.1
928.7
903.5
903.5
903.6
903.7
902.70
902.7
902.6
902.9
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)2
24.8
22.4
22.3
22.6
4.8
2.6
4.3
3.5
5.6
6.4
4.7
8.1
7.9
7.9
7.9
6.8
4.4
4.3
3.9
6.4
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
4.5
2.7
3.8
3.3
3.2
2.6
3.3
2.8
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
7.7
>6.4
>5.4
8.4
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1.0
1 1.0
0.9
1.0
1.0
1.1
0.9
1.3
N/A
N/A
N/A
I N/A
1.0
1.0
0.9
1.2
Cross
Section
11
(Pool)
Cross
Section
12
(Riffle)
Cross Section
13
(Riffle)
Cross Section
14
(Pool)
Base
I MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSA
911.7
911.8
912.0
911.9
911.3
911.5
911.7
911.6
907.7
907.7
907.6
907.7
907.1
907.1
907.1
907.1
Bankfull Width (ft)'
5.5
5.5
5.6
5.6
11.6
8.7
9.0
19.9
11.7
13.8
8.6
13.1
4.1
5.7
5.5
7.3
Floodprone Width (ft)'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
50.0
>49.8
>50.0
49.7
48.1
>45.6
>47.1
47.1
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
1.0
1.2
0.6
1.1
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.4
1.0
0.9
0.9
1.0
1.4
1.6
1.5
1.5
Low Bank Elevation (ft)
911.70
1 911.8
912.0
911.9
911.3
911.5
911.5
911.4
907.67
907.6
907.6
907.6
907.1
907.1
907.0
907.0
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftz z
3.3
3.8
3.6P32
6.6
6.3
5.4
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio'
N/A
N/A
N/A4.3Bankfull
Bank Hei ht Ratio'
N/A
N/AN/A
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Appendix E
Hydrology Data

Table 10. 2023 Rainfall Summary
Month
Average
Normal
Limits
Project Location
Precipitation
30 Percent
70 Percent
September
3.39
2.18
4.08
3.86
October
2.37
1.30
2.89
2.52
November
2.73
1.70
3.29
3.95
2022
December
3.26
2.23
3.89
4.63
January
3.27
2.38
3.85
4.73
February
2.95
2.21
3.46
3.29
March
3.73
2.86
4.33
2.39
April
3.60
2.71
4.20
5.37
May
3.92
3.00
4.55
2.84
2023
June
4.19
3.26
4.84
6.82
July
4.29
3.22
5.01
4.05
August
1 3.72
1 2.40
1 4.47
1 3.28
Total Annual
41.42
29.45 48.86 47.73
Above Normal
Limits
Below Normal
Limits
WETS Station: Yadkinville 6E. Approximatley 6 miles from site.
*Project Location Precipitation is a location -weighted average of surrounding gauged data retrieved by the
USACE Antecedent Precipitation Tool. Gauges used include Elkin, King, and Yadkinville 6 E
Table 11. Documentation of Geomorphically Significant Flow Events
Year
Number of Bankfull Events
Maximum Bankfull Height (ft)
Date of Maximum Bankfull Event
Stage Recorder TCl-A
MYO/1 2020
8
2.07
11/12/2020
MYl 2021
3
0.69
2/15/2021
MY2 2022
3
1.57
7/7/2022
MY3 2023
4
2.70
4/28/2023
Stage Recorder TC2-C
MYO/1 2020
2
0.79
11/12/2020
MYl 2021
2
0.21
7/2/2021
MY2 2022
7
5.19
1 /22/2022
MY3 2023
1
0.30
4/28/2023
Year
Number of Flow Events
Maximum Consecutive Flow Days
Maximum Cummlative
Flow Days
Maximum Consecutive Flow Date Range
Flow Gauge T12-1
MYO/1 2020
1 1
1 161
1 161
7/24/2020 - 12/31/2020
MYl 2021
1 1
1 264
1 264
1/1/2021 - 9/23/2021
MY2 2022
1 1
1 229
1 229
1/1/2022 - 8/17/2022
MY3 2023
1 l
1 225
1 225
1/1/2023 - 8/14/2023
Flow Gauge TC3-A
MYO/1 2020
11
1 161
1 161
7/24/2020 - 12/31/2020
MYl 2021
1 1
1 265
1 265
1/1/2021 - 9/23/2021
MY2 2022
1 l
1 150
1 192
1/1/2022 - 5/30/2022
MY3 2023
1 1
1 225
1 225
1/1/2023 - 8/14/2023
Flow Gauge TC6-A
MYO/1 2020
1 1
1 161
1 161
7/24/2020 - 12/31/2020
MYl 2021
1 l
1 265
1 265
1/1/2021 - 9/23/2021
MY2 2022
1 7
1 51
1 103
1/1/2022 - 2/21/2022
MY3 2023
1 1
1 225
1 225
1/1/2023 - 8/14/2023

U)
3
r.
1
1
2023 Twiman TC2-A Flow Gauge
Date
Total Precipitation FG TC2-A —Downstream Riffle Elevation
M.
5
4
3
C
2
1
0
Ares

2
1
0
U)
2023 Twiman TC3-A Flow Gauge
o`tiry
o`tiry
o`Iry
ti o�ti o�ry h�ti °�ti ^�ryry
Date
Total Precipitation TC3-A Downstream Riffle Elevation
M.
5
4
3
c
2
1
M
Ares

3
FA
1
U)
2023 Twiman TC6-A Flow Gauge
o`tiry
o`tiry
o`ti�
o`��
ti o�ti o�ry h�ti °�ti ^�ryry
Date
Total Precipitation FG-TC6-A Downstream Riffle Elevation
M.
5
4
3
c
2
1
M
Ares

2023 Twiman M -A Stage Recorder Graph
Max,-7
Event - 2.7 ft. above TOB
4 28 2023
i
Gage Malfunction
05/09/2023-07/0
2023
I
.111
I. I
1 1
dill
I�.■ ...
I
�1
I.1.
I
h?ryry
co\�Ory�L
co\�O��L
^��Ory�
V
Date
Total Precipitation SR TC1-A
O��Ory� K\,IV
�ti 4ti
Top of Bank
4�
4
3
2
1
1

4
3
2
0
2023 Twiman TC2-C Stage Recorder Graph
Max,-7
Event - 0.3 ft. above TOB
4/28/2023
I II ��� . I
. I
I .III
1 1
���
I .
I
I�.■ ...
I
�1
I.1.
I In.
lei,
I
-2
h ��Oryry
411
V
Date
Total Precipitation SR TC2-C
O��Ory� K\,IV
�ti 4ti
Top of Bank
4�
4
3
c
O
1