20231189 Ver 3_Final Prospectus_WLS_Speedman_All_20231219

WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank –
Speedman

Instrument Modification
Private Commercial Mitigation Bank for Stream Compensatory
Mitigation Credits
Wayne County, North Carolina
Neuse River Basin (HUC 03020201)
December 2023

Prepared for:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District

Prepared by:

WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank – Speedman

Table of Contents

1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Project Overview ........................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Bank Site Location ......................................................................................................................... 1
1.3 Mitigation Goals and Objectives ................................................................................................... 1
1.4 Watershed Need and Technical Feasibility ................................................................................... 2
2 Qualifications ........................................................................................................................................ 2
2.1 Bank Sponsor ................................................................................................................................ 2
2.2 Bank Sponsor Qualifications ......................................................................................................... 3
2.2.1 Representative Mitigation Projects ...................................................................................... 3
3 Bank Establishment and Operation ...................................................................................................... 5
3.1 Site Ownership .............................................................................................................................. 5
3.2 Proposed Service Area .................................................................................................................. 6
3.3 Credit Release Schedule ................................................................................................................ 6
3.3.1 Initial Allocation of Released Credits .................................................................................... 7
3.3.2 Subsequent Credit Releases .................................................................................................. 8
3.4 Financial Assurances ..................................................................................................................... 8
4 Ecological Suitability of the Site ............................................................................................................ 8
4.1 Existing Conditions – Speedman ................................................................................................... 8
4.1.1 Watershed Characterization ................................................................................................. 8
4.1.2 Physiography, Geology, and Soils ......................................................................................... 8
4.1.3 Existing Jurisdictional Waters of the US ................................................................................ 9
4.1.4 Existing Reach Descriptions .................................................................................................. 9
4.1.5 Existing Vegetation and Invasive Species Vegetation ......................................................... 11
4.2 Regulatory Considerations .......................................................................................................... 12
4.2.1 Existing Easements .............................................................................................................. 12
4.2.2 Mineral or Water Rights Assurance .................................................................................... 12
4.2.3 FEMA Floodplain Compliance and Hydrologic Trespass ..................................................... 12
4.2.4 Cultural Resources & Aviation ............................................................................................ 12
4.2.5 Threatened and Endangered Species ................................................................................. 12
4.2.6 Conditions Affecting Hydrology .......................................................................................... 13
4.2.7 Adjacent Land Use .............................................................................................................. 13
WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank – Speedman

5 Mitigation Work Plan .......................................................................................................................... 13
5.1 Site Design Approach .................................................................................................................. 13
5.2 Proposed Stream Conditions ...................................................................................................... 15
5.2.1 Proposed Stream Restoration ............................................................................................. 15
5.2.2 Proposed Nutrient Offset and Riparian Buffer Mitigation .................................................. 16
5.2.3 Proposed Revegetation Plan ............................................................................................... 17
5.3 Reference Ecosystems ................................................................................................................ 17
6 Potential Functional Uplift & Ecological Benefits ............................................................................... 17
6.1 Benefits Related to Hydrology .................................................................................................... 17
6.2 Benefits Related to Habitat ......................................................................................................... 18
6.3 Benefits Related to Water Quality .............................................................................................. 18
7 Credit Determination .......................................................................................................................... 19
7.1 Proposed Credit Types ................................................................................................................ 19
8 Monitoring .......................................................................................................................................... 19
8.1 As-Built Survey ............................................................................................................................ 20
8.2 Visual Monitoring ........................................................................................................................ 20
8.3 Channel Dimension ..................................................................................................................... 20
8.4 Flow Duration Monitoring .......................................................................................................... 20
8.5 Vegetation ................................................................................................................................... 20
9 Long-Term Management .................................................................................................................... 21
9.1 Maintenance ............................................................................................................................... 21
9.2 Long-Term Management ............................................................................................................ 21
9.3 Adaptive Management Plan ....................................................................................................... 21

Tables
Table 1. Parcel Ownership Information ........................................................................................................ 5
Table 2. Credit Release Schedule .................................................................................................................. 7
Table 3. Reach Watershed Drainage & Jurisdictional Status ........................................................................ 9
Table 4. Existing Reach Description ............................................................................................................ 10
Table 5. Existing Project Site Vegetation .................................................................................................... 11
Table 6. Proposed Stream Mitigation Credits (SMCs) ................................................................................. 19
Table 7. Routine Maintenance Components .............................................................................................. 21

WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank – Speedman

Figures
Figure 1 ......................................................................................................................... Project Location Map
Figure 2 ........................................................................................................... Geographic Service Area Map
Figure 3 ..................................................................................................................... USGS Topographic Map
Figure 4 .................................................................................................................................. NRCS Soils Map
Figure 5 ......................................................................................................................................... LiDAR Map
Figure 6 ....................................................................................................................... FEMA Floodplain Map
Figures 7a to 7c ....................................................................................................................... Historic Aerials
Figure 8 ........................................................................................................ Existing Aquatic Resources Map
Figure 9 ........................................................................................................... Proposed Mitigation Features

Appendices
Appendix A ............................................................................................................... Existing Conditions Data
Part 1 ............................................................................................................................................... Photo Log
Part 2 ........................................................................................................................................ Cross-Sections
Part 3 .............................................................................................................................. Longitudinal Profiles
Part 4 .................................................................................................... NCDWR Stream Identification Forms
Part 5 ........................................................................................................................................ NCSAM Forms
Appendix B ................................................................................................. Adjacent Landowner Information
Appendix C .................................................................................................... Landowner Authorization Form

WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank – Speedman
Page 1
1 Introduction
1.1 Project Overview
Water & Land Solutions, LLC (WLS) is pleased to submit this instrument modification for the WLS Neuse
01 Umbrella Mitigation Banking Instrument (“UMBI”, “Bank”). WLS proposes to develop this private
commercial mitigation bank in the Neuse River Basin, 8-digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03020201. The
Bank currently has one project named ‘Hollowell Mitigation Project’. This instrument modification is to
add a second project site named ‘Speedman Mitigation Bank’. The purpose of the Bank is to provide
stream mitigation credits to compensate for unavoidable impacts to Waters of the U.S. authorized under
section 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act, Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act, and all applicable
state statutes.
1.2 Bank Site Location
Speedman
The Project site is located in Mt. Olive, Wayne County (Figure 1). The site boundary is within the 8-digit
HUC 03020201 (Warm Water Thermal Regime) of the Neuse River Basin. The project reach includes
unnamed tributaries to Brooks Swamp. Brooks Swamp flows northwest into Thoroughfare Swamp,
which flows into Falling Creek, and finally into the Neuse River.
To access the site from Raleigh, NC, follow I-40 E to NC-50 S/NC-55 E in Sampson County. Take exit 341
toward US-13/Newton Grove. Continue onto NC-55 E. Turn left onto Thunder Swamp Road in Wayne
County. The site entrance is located on the right at 35.247207, -78.097459.
1.3 Mitigation Goals and Objectives
The project mitigation goals and objectives will be based on the current resource condition and functional
capacity of the project watershed to improve and protect diverse aquatic resources comparable to stable
stream systems within the Inner Coastal Plain Physiographic Province. The project will meet the general
restoration goals and opportunities outlined in the Neuse River Basin Restoration Priority Plan (RBRP,
2010). More specifically, watershed goals and management strategies will be met by:
• Reducing sediment, soil erosion, turbidity, and nutrient inputs such as nitrogen and
phosphorus to the Neuse River Watershed,
• Restoring, and protecting streams, riparian buffers, and aquatic habitat functions,
• Improving riparian corridor management and targeting restoration of impacted streams and
riparian buffer areas,
• Promoting agronomic farm management techniques and implementing agricultural BMPs and
water quality features such as nutrient management.
To accomplish these site-specific goals, the following objectives will be measured to document overall
project success:
WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank – Speedman
Page 2
• Provide a floodplain connection to incised streams by lowering BHRs greater than 1.5 and
increasing surface flow and duration, thereby promoting more natural or overbank flood
regime,
• Improve bedform diversity by increasing scour pool spacing and depth variability,
• Improve pre-restoration water quality parameters by reducing nutrient inputs, such that it is
higher functioning after the monitoring period,
• Increase native species riparian buffer and wetland vegetation density/composition along
streambank and floodplain areas that meet requirements of a minimum of 50-foot-wide and
210 stems/acre after the monitoring period,
• Improve aquatic habitat and fish migration through the addition of in-stream cover and native
woody debris,
• Site protection through a 53-acre conservation easement that will protect all streams, riparian
buffers, and aquatic resources in perpetuity.
1.4 Watershed Need and Technical Feasibility
As a result of implementing this Project, WLS will restore and protect approximately 3,740 linear feet of
stream to address components as defined in the RBRP (DMS, December 2010). In order to appropriately
offset unavoidable impacts to Waters of the United States associated with growth and development, the
proposed Bank is critical to improving water quality and protecting aquatic resource functions in this
region.
The technical feasibility of the Project is assured due to WLS’ extensive experience with stream mitigation
in North Carolina and throughout the Southeast. Examples of WLS’ success with stream and wetland
restoration include the WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank and the WLS Yadkin 01 Umbrella
Mitigation Bank. The absence of fatal flaws, such as hydrologic trespass and threatened and endangered
species, means the Project is unlikely to be impeded by resource issues or objections from adjacent
landowners.
2 Qualifications
2.1 Bank Sponsor
This prospectus is submitted on behalf of Water & Land Solutions, LLC (“Sponsor”), who will serve as the
Sponsor for the Speedman Mitigation Bank. The contact information for the Sponsor is listed below:
Water & Land Solutions, LLC
c/o Catherine Roland
7721 Six Forks Road, Suite 130
Raleigh, NC 27615
919-614-5111
[e-mail]

WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank – Speedman
Page 3
2.2 Bank Sponsor Qualifications
WLS is a mitigation provider that concentrates on the production and delivery of quality mitigation credits
and services to clients across multiple regions of the United States. WLS was founded with the purpose of
combining the key components of high quality and successful mitigation sites, including the technical
expertise for mitigation site development, the understanding of land management, and the expertise in
environmental economics and finance. Through its inception, WLS has identified, targeted, and employed
well-respected practitioners in the mitigation industry who have specifically focused their careers on all
the unique aspects of successful mitigation project implementation.
Beyond our focus to improve ecological function of impaired systems, WLS has a specific mission to
positively impact people in our industry and the general public through education, partnerships, and
building meaningful relationships. WLS has staff located in Raleigh and Weaverville, North Carolina;
Columbus, Ohio; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Charleston, South Carolina; Johnson City, Tennessee;
Morgantown, Pennsylvania and Crested Butte, Colorado. WLS staff have been recognized by industry
colleagues as leaders in the development, management, design, permitting, construction, and monitoring
of successful mitigation projects.
2.2.1 Representative Mitigation Projects
WLS staff have extensive experience with stream, wetland, and riparian buffer restoration. Our staff have
been involved with the entire suite of services for hundreds of mitigation projects over two decades. This
experience equates to the successful restoration of miles of stream and thousands of wetland acres.
Representative project examples are highlighted below.
Edwards Full Delivery Projects, DMS, Johnston County, NC
Lake Wendell Mitigation Project before (left) and one year after restoration (right)
WLS is providing turn-key mitigation services for an expansive series of DMS full-delivery projects within
adjacent Neuse River subwatersheds. These projects include Lake Wendell, Pen Dell, Edwards-Johnson,
Odell’s House, and Buffalo Creek Tributaries Sites (“Sites”) respectively. The Sites’ subwatersheds expand
across several hundred acres within one of the fastest urbanizing areas in the Triangle region. The five
WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank – Speedman
Page 4
projects total approximately 22,000 linear feet of stream, 20 acres of wetlands, and 64 acres of land
conversion to be restored, enhanced, and permanently protected with conservation easements.
Site streams, wetlands, and riparian buffer areas had been severely degraded primarily due to
development, agricultural practices, impoundments, and cattle grazing since the 1950s. Many of the
vegetated buffers along the stream reaches had been removed for agricultural practices. Wetlands were
historically present throughout the riparian corridor but had been significantly impacted due to cattle
trampling and channel incision (draining wetland hydrology). Many of the stream systems had been
channelized and incised leading to a significant loss of floodplain functions across the entire watershed.
The comprehensive restoration of these subwatersheds will provide significant species habitat and water
quality improvements to the wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers as well as the Buffalo Creek
watershed. Design and technical approaches include Rosgen Priority Level I stream restoration, associated
riparian wetland restoration, riparian buffer restoration, and the innovative design and installation of
agricultural and stormwater BMPs to reduce peak flows and restore appropriate watershed hydrology.
Hollowell Mitigation Project, Wayne County, NC
WLS developed a private commercial mitigation bank as
part of the WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
located in the Neuse River Basin, 8-digit HUC 03020201.
This basin is located within the rapidly growing Research
Triangle region of North Carolina. The Hollowell Bank
Site drains directly to the Neuse River, which is listed as
‘Class C’ and Nutrient Sensitive Waters per the North
Carolina Division of Water Resources. The Hollowell
project will restore, enhance, preserve, and protect
over 8,979 linear feet of critical headwater streams that
were in agricultural use. In addition, this project will
restore/enhance approximately 10 acres of riparian
wetlands.

WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank – Speedman
Page 5
Hornepipe Branch Tributaries Mitigation Project, Lenoir County, NC
WLS has developed a for the Division of
Mitigation Services (DMS) in response
to RFP 16-007401. The project
provided stream mitigation credits in
the Nese River Basin, 8-digit HUC
03020202. This site is located in Lenoir
County in the community of Deep Run.
The Hornpipe Branch Tributaries
Project drains into waters classified as
‘Class C’ and Nutrient Sensitive Waters
per the North Carolina Division of
Water Resources. The project
restored and protected over 5,151
linear feet of critical headwater
streams that were historically in
agricultural use.
3 Bank Establishment and Operation
The Bank will be developed as a private commercial mitigation bank under the WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella
Mitigation Banking Instrument (UMBI) in the Neuse River Basin, 8-digit HUC 03020201. The compensatory
mitigation credits developed under the UMBI will be available to public, private, and non-profit customers.
The proposed mitigation types, credit ratios, and performance monitoring will follow current USACE
guidance documents as approved by the USACE District Engineer (DE) and IRT.
3.1 Site Ownership
The Sponsor has obtained legal options to develop the mitigation project with a permanent conservation
easement for each of the property parcels that comprise the site. The Sponsor will record conservation
easements in the county Register of Deeds for the sites upon IRT bank approval. WLS will provide Agent
Authorization forms prior to any regulatory site visits. The current property owners for the proposed site
are listed in Table 1.
Table 1. Parcel Ownership Information
Owners of Record Parcel ID Number County Acres
Ford Michele Baker
Harris Holly Baker 2574077949 Wayne 47.97
Edith S Smith
2574392389
2574285334
2574272635
2574160967
Wayne
35.2
31.3
9.7
61.6
WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank – Speedman
Page 6
3.2 Proposed Service Area
The proposed Geographic Service Area (GSA) for the Bank is illustrated in Figure 2 and will provide
compensatory mitigation credits for unavoidable, permitted impacts to Waters of the United States in the
Neuse River Basin 8-Digit HUC 03020201. Use of approved mitigation credits from the Bank to compensate
for impacts outside the GSA may be considered by USACE on a case-by-case basis. The Site will provide
compensatory mitigation for warm water stream impacts.
3.3 Credit Release Schedule
All credit releases will be based on the total number of mitigation credits generated as reported in the
approved final mitigation plan and verified by the as-built survey. The initial credit release will be based
on the proposed stream lengths and mitigation types as approved in the final mitigation plan. The credit
ledger will be managed by WLS and approved by the USACE District Engineer (DE) and IRT. The estimated
stream mitigation credits (SMCs) will be released following current USACE guidance, as shown in Table 2.

WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank – Speedman
Page 7
Table 2. Credit Release Schedule
Credit Milestone Release Activity
Stream:
Interim
Release
Stream:
Total Released
1 Site Establishment
(as defined in Section 3.3.1) 15% 15%
2
Completion of all initial physical and
biological improvements made
pursuant to the Mitigation Plan
15% 30%
3
Year 1 Monitoring Report
demonstrates that channels are stable
and interim performance standards
have been met
10% 40%
4
Year 2 Monitoring Report
demonstrates that channels are stable
and interim performance standards
have been met
10% 50%
5
Year 3 Monitoring Report
demonstrates that channels are stable
and interim performance standards
have been met
10% 60%
6
Year 4 Monitoring Report
demonstrates that channels are stable
and interim performance standards
have been met
5% 65% (75%*)
7
Year 5 Monitoring Report
demonstrates that channels are stable
and interim performance standards
have been met
10% 75% (85%*)
8
Year 6 Monitoring Report
demonstrates that channels are stable
and interim performance standards
have been met
5% 80% (90%*)
9
Year 7 Monitoring Report
demonstrates that channels are stable
and interim performance standards
have been met
10% 90% (100%*)
Note: *10% reserve of credits to be held back until the bankfull event performance standard has been met.
3.3.1 Initial Allocation of Released Credits
The standard credit release schedule generated through stream projects will occur upon establishment of
the bank site(s), and upon initial satisfactory completion of the following activities:

1) Execution and Approval of the UMBI by the Sponsor and the USACE
2) Approval of the Final Mitigation Plan
3) Confirmation the mitigation bank site has been secured
4) Delivery of the financial assurances
5) Recordation of the long-term protection mechanism and title opinion acceptable to the USACE
6) Issuance of the 404-permit verification for construction of the site, if required.

WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank – Speedman
Page 8
If there are any preservation credits, 100% of the preservation credits will be released with the completion
of Task 1 above.
3.3.2 Subsequent Credit Releases
All subsequent credit releases must be approved by the DE, in consultation with the IRT, once
performance standards have been met or exceeded. Implementation of the approved Mitigation Plan
must be initiated no later than the first full growing season after the date of the first credit transaction
(credit sale). For streams, a reserve of 10% of the site total stream credits will be released after four
bankfull events have occurred, in separate years, provided the channel is stable and all other performance
standards are met. In the event that less than four bankfull events occur during the monitoring period,
release of these reserve credits is at the discretion of the IRT.
3.4 Financial Assurances
The Bank Sponsor will provide financial assurances in the form of a casualty insurance policy or a
performance bond. The financial assurance policy will be submitted for review and approval by the USACE
and Office of General Counsel (OGC) prior to completion of the final UMBI. Upon establishment, the
USACE will hold the original policy document to ensure bank compliance and successful project site
completion. Financial assurances shall be payable per the direction of the USACE to his designee or to a
standby trust. Financial assurances structured to provide funds to the USACE in the event of default by
the Bank Sponsor are not acceptable. A financial assurance must be in the form that ensures that the
USACE receives notification at least 120 days in advance of any termination or revocation.
4 Ecological Suitability of the Site
4.1 Existing Conditions – Speedman
4.1.1 Watershed Characterization
The project site is situated in the Brooks Swamp (12-digit HUC 030202011401) subwatershed in the
southwestern portion of Wayne County. The project includes unnamed tributaries to Brooks Swamp.
Brooks Swamp flows northwest into Thoroughfare Swamp, which flows into Falling Creek, and finally into
the Neuse River. Brooks Swamp is listed by the NCDEQ Division of Water Resources as ‘WS-IV; NSW’ water
(Water Supply IV; Nutrient Sensitive Waters) below the project area downstream to its confluence with
Thoroughfare Swamp.
The project area consists of mostly row crops with a section of disturbed forested area encompassing the
majority of S100-R2. The primary surrounding land use is agricultural, and large-scale development is not
common in the area, as most parcels are privately owned. The proposed project will extend the wildlife
corridor and protect aquatic and terrestrial habitat in the area through a permanent conservation
easement.
4.1.2 Physiography, Geology, and Soils
The Project is located in the Inner Coastal Plain physiographic region. This ecoregion is characterized by
flat, low-lying plains with meandering streams. The geologic unit underlying the site is the ‘Kb’ Black Creek
WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank – Speedman
Page 9
Formation, which is sedimentary rock composed of clay with thin beds of fine-grained micaceous sand
and thick lenses of cross-bedded sand. Glauconitic, fossiliferous clayey sand lenses can be found in the
upper part of the formation (USGS 1985).
As shown on the NRCS Soils Map (Figure 4), existing floodplain soils around the project reaches are mostly
within the mapping units GoA (Goldsboro loamy sand, 0 to 2% slopes, S. Coastal Plain), Ly (Lynchburg
sandy loam, 0 to 2% slopes), and Ra (Rains sandy loam, 0 to 2% slopes). Rains soils are poorly drained,
hydric soils located along flats, broad interstream divides, and Carolina bays on marine terraces. It is
anticipated that as a direct result of implementing stream and buffer restoration there will be a reduction
of non-point source discharge of contaminants entering the nutrient sensitive waters of Brooks Swamp.
4.1.3 Existing Jurisdictional Waters of the US
The streams at the Project were broken down into four reaches (S100-R1, S100-R2, S101, and S102)
totaling approximately 3,680 linear feet of existing streams. Project reaches were differentiated based on
drainage area breaks at confluences, changes in intermittent/perennial stream status, and/or property
boundaries. Preliminary (unverified) field evaluations determined that the project reach S100-R2 is a
perennial stream and reaches S100-R1, S101 and S102, were determined to be intermittent streams. The
presence of historic valleys for each of the project stream reaches can be seen from LiDAR imagery (Figure
5, LiDAR Map), and were verified through field observation. These evaluations were based on NCDWR’s
Methodology for Identification of Intermittent and Perennial Streams and Their Origins, (v4.11, Effective
Date: September 1, 2010) stream assessment protocols.
Table 3. Reach Watershed Drainage & Jurisdictional Status
Project Reach
Designation
Watershed
Drainage Area
(mi2)
Watershed
Drainage Area
(ac)
Stream Status Based on Field
Analyses
NCDWQ Stream
Classification
Form Score
S100-R1 0.092 59.0 Intermittent 22.0
S100-R2 0.232 148.2 Perennial 36.75
S101 0.037 23.4 Intermittent 19.75
S102 0.061 38.9 Intermittent 20.25
4.1.4 Existing Reach Descriptions
WLS conducted field investigations in summer and fall 2023 to evaluate and document the existing
conditions at the site, as well as for each of the project stream reaches. The results of the cross-section
surveys and the visual field evaluations were used to conduct geomorphic stream classification and assess
channel stability for each of the project stream reaches. Site reaches were also assessed using the NC
Stream Assessment Method (NCSAM) (Appendix A). The summary of the morphological parameters and
NCSAM are located in Table 4.

WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank – Speedman
Page 10
Table 4. Existing Reach Description
Project Reach
Designation
Existing
Length
(LF)
Entrenchment
Ratio (ER)
Width/Depth
Ratio (W/D)
Bank Height
Ratio (BHR)
Existing
Channel Type
(Rosgen
Classification)
NC SAM
Rating
S100-R1 1,066 1.6, 1.3 6.3, 9.7 2.1, 3.0 Ditched, G5c Low
S100-R2 1,188 1.9 6.0 1.9 Incised E5 Medium
S101 836 1.1 8.1 5.4 Ditched, G5c Low
S102 590 1.7 5.9 5.8 Ditched, G5c Low

The existing project streams have been impacted as a result of historic and current land use practices such
as silviculture and agriculture. Historically, the project reaches have been extensively ditched and
channelized to promote rapid drainage from the adjacent farm fields. This disturbance has resulted in
channel overwidening, extreme incision and the streams’ disconnection from their natural valleys and
relic floodplains. Currently, the project reaches are a source of excess sediment and nutrient
contamination to the Brooks Swamp watershed.
S100-R1: S100-R1 begins as a small first order tributary within an agricultural field that flows northeast
towards its confluence with S101 and eventually Brooks Swamp. The stream has been straightened and
deepened to allow for agricultural drainage from Ditch 1 (See Figure 8). The reach is oversized and exhibits
little to no riparian buffer and habitat function. The drainage area is approximately 59 acres, valley slope
of 0.0010 ft/ft, with an impervious coverage of less than one percent. The reach is actively subject to
water quality stressors, mainly in the form of nutrient inputs and minimal riparian buffer widths. Based
on NCSAM, this stream is classified as ‘Low’ and is considered to have a low functional quality. Based on
the existing channel conditions and anthropogenic disturbances, the reach is difficult to classify and most
closely resembles a Rosgen ‘G5c’ stream type.
S100-R2: S100-R2 transitions from S100-R1 into a forested area below S101 and continues to flow
northeast to the project boundary. The perennial tributary has a drainage area of approximately 148
acres, valley slope of 0.0074 ft/ft, with an impervious coverage of less than one percent. Cross Section 5
illustrates a moderate bank height ratio (BHR=1.9) and oversized channel condition as a result of historic
straightening and spoil along the existing property boundary and remnant fence fine. Based on the
existing channel conditions and anthropogenic disturbances, the reach does exhibit infrequent bedform
features and is classified as an incised Rosgen ‘E5’ stream type. Based on NCSAM, this stream is classified
as ‘Medium’.
S101: S101 originates within an agricultural field at the top of the catchment and flows across an existing
farm path. The reach has a drainage area of approximately 23 acres, valley slope of 0.0122 ft/ft, with an
impervious coverage of less than one percent. Due to historic land use activities, the stream was
straightened and heavily manipulated as it flows through the existing agricultural fields towards S100. The
channelized stream is severely incised (BHR=5.4) and limited bedform diversity was observed throughout
the entire reach length. The riparian buffer and habitat features have been degraded through the removal
of native vegetation and draining manipulation activities. Based on the existing channel conditions and
anthropogenic disturbances, the reach is difficult to classify and most closely resembles a Rosgen ‘G5c’
WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank – Speedman
Page 11
stream type. Based on NCSAM, this stream system is classified as ‘Low’ and exhibits poor aquatic resource
function. S101 is actively subject to water quality stressors, mainly in the form of nutrient inputs and
minimal riparian buffer widths.
S102: S102 originates below a wetland complex and existing farm path at the top of the catchment and
Ditch 2. The reach has a drainage area of 39 acres, valley slope of 0.0091 ft/ft, with an impervious coverage
of less than one percent. S102 is highly incised, channelized and actively maintained throughout its entire
length. The lack of natural stream features has also led to overwidening and poor bedform diversity.
Because of significant modifications to the valley (i.e. field crowns/ditching) and on-going agricultural
practices, it is difficult to discern the historic channel location. However, the observed base flow and LiDAR
signature illustrates a natural valley morphology and crenulations that would likely support a stream
channel. Based on the existing channel conditions and anthropogenic disturbances, the reach is difficult
to classify and most closely resembles a Rosgen ‘G5c’ stream type.
4.1.5 Existing Vegetation and Invasive Species Vegetation
The current land use within the project area is primarily conventional row crops. The majority of S100 has
disturbed buffer areas on the left and right banks consisting of mostly midstory and shrub species, with a
sparse canopy. Managed ditch banks are dominant in herbaceous and shrub vegetation including
elderberry, pokeberry, dogfennel, and blackberry. The wooded areas of S100 include trees such as black
walnut, sycamore, and sweetgum trees. A more extensive list of on-site vegetation is in Table 5 below.
Table 5. Existing Project Site Vegetation
Common Name Scientific Name
Canopy Vegetation
Red maple Acer rubrum
Sweetgum Liquidambar styraciflua
American sycamore Platanus occidentalis
Loblolly pine Pinus taeda
Tulip poplar Liriodendron tulipifera
Willow oak Quercus phellos
Black walnut Juglans nigra

Understory & Woody
Shrubs
Spicebush Lindera benzoin
Hackberry Celtis occidentalis
Mulberry Morus rubra
Elderberry Sambucus canadensis
White ash Fraxinus americana
Chinese privet Ligustrum sinense

Herbaceous & Vines
River cane Arundinaria tecta
Ebony spleenwort Asplenium platyneuron
False nettle Boehmeria cylindrica
Japanese stiltgrass Microstegium vimineum
Dogfennel Eupatorium capillifolium
Roundleaf greenbrier Smilax rotundifolia
Pokeberry Phytolacca americana
WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank – Speedman
Page 12
Blackberry Rubus argutus
Poison ivy Toxicodendron radicans
Invasives Chinese privet Ligustrum sinense
Oriental bittersweet Celastrus orbiculatus

4.2 Regulatory Considerations
4.2.1 Existing Easements
There are no existing easements on the site. There is a family grave site on the property located on the
right bank of Ditch 1. The grave site will be excluded from the conservation easement and will have
permanent access within the conservation easement.
4.2.2 Mineral or Water Rights Assurance
There are no known mineral or surface water rights issues within or adjacent to the site properties.
4.2.3 FEMA Floodplain Compliance and Hydrologic Trespass
None of the proposed project reaches are located within a FEMA regulated floodplain. While it is not
anticipated that there will be issues associated with FEMA permitting or documentation, WLS will
coordinate with the local floodplain administrator, as needed, and prepare the required documentation
to obtain approval for any FEMA regulated impacts. In addition, the project will be designed so that any
increase in flooding will be contained within the project boundary and will not impact adjacent
landowners, therefore hydrologic trespass will not be a concern.
4.2.4 Cultural Resources & Aviation
The project is not anticipated to have any adverse impacts on cultural or historic resources. There are no
sites currently listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) within the project area. On-site
investigations and discussions with the landowners have not disclosed any potential resources or
occurrences of this type on the property. The environmental screening phase of the Project will include
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) coordination to confirm these findings.
Based on a review using Google Earth, the nearest airport to the project site is the Mount Olive Municipal
Airport (privately owned), which is located approximately 3.6 miles southeast of the site. There are no
other airports in a five-mile radius. The project is not anticipated to affect aviation.
4.2.5 Threatened and Endangered Species
Based on a review of the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) database and IPAC, there are currently
three federally-listed threatened and endangered species: Red-cockaded Woodpecker (Picoides borealis),
Neuse River Waterdog (Necturus lewisi) and the Carolina Madtom (Noturus furiosus) that occur in Wayne
County. There is currently one proposed endangered species, the Tricolored Bat (Perimyotis subflavus)
and the Monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus) is a candidate species. The project site is not known to
support anadromous fish species. No potential protected species occurrences were observed during initial
WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank – Speedman
Page 13
site investigations. Project implementation is not anticipated to have a negative impact on these species.
WLS will coordinate with the appropriate agencies should a determination be required for permitting.
4.2.6 Conditions Affecting Hydrology
Within the project catchment there is an existing farm path located above Ditch 2 and Ditch 3. The farm
path location will remain and the design elevations may be modified to tie into these vertical control
points. There are multiple ditches throughout the site that are used to drain fields and create arable land.
Portions of these ditches will be partially filled during stream restoration activities to maintain positive
drainage and prevent backwater condition after project completion. The ditches flowing into S101 and
S102 have adequate slopes as shown on the surveyed longitudinal profiles in Appendix A. The ditch
bottoms will be raised gradually to match the stream design profile and eventually tie into S100-R1 and
S100-R2.
4.2.7 Adjacent Land Use
Site-adjacent land use is primarily agricultural and silvicultural. None of these land uses will have negative
impacts on the operation of the site.
5 Mitigation Work Plan
5.1 Site Design Approach
The project will involve the stream restoration of four reaches (S100-R1, S100-R2, S101 and S102) totaling
approximately 3,740 linear feet of streams. (Figure 9). The design will utilize a Rosgen Priority Level I/II
Restoration approach. The Project will appropriately address all of the jurisdictional streams at the project
site, including restoring riparian buffers along all of the project stream reaches currently in agriculture.
The project stream reaches are unstable, with documented active lateral migration, associated channel
straightening/widening, and downcutting. Many of the project riparian buffers have been disturbed and
completely or partially cleared. The proposed project will provide adequate floodplain access to all stream
reaches. A Priority Level II Restoration is proposed along lower S100-R2 to gradually lower the streambed
to the existing stream bed elevation near the downstream project boundary. The following elements will
be incorporated into the proposed Priority Level II design and construction:
• Floodplain bench excavation grading will extend a minimum of 1.5 bankfull widths beyond the
stream belt width such that meandering floodplains are not created.
• All proposed floodplains will be constructed such that they are over-excavated to accommodate
replacement of topsoil.
• Design and construction oversight measures will ensure the proper harvesting, segregating,
stockpiling, storage, handling, overall management and replacement of A and B soil horizon
materials onto the excavated floodplain.
• Constructed return slopes between the outer edge of the excavated floodplain and the terrace
will be a minimum of 5:1 or flatter.
Prior to disturbed conditions, the project reaches likely existed as low to medium gradient streams within
their natural valley, exhibiting moderately defined channels with increased meander lengths. The design
WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank – Speedman
Page 14
approach is supported by preliminary soils investigations, surface flow observations, topography, and
comparing reference site data, including ongoing monitoring data from multiple IRT approved mitigation
projects located within the Inner Coastal Plain (CP) ecoregion. These stream systems are commonly
observed across the inner CP and typically support small first order stream channels and wet tolerant
plant communities.
Stream restoration activities will include excavating a wider floodplain above the existing bed elevations
within the historic valley which will restore groundwater hydrology and connection of surface flows. The
construction activities will include field crown removal and crop row leveling, as well as improving the
channel’s dimension, pattern, and profile to create stable conditions. Appropriate use of in-stream
structures will consist of hardwood logs and woody materials to provide increased stability (both lateral
and vertical) and aquatic habitat.
The Project will provide increased floodplain connection for all reaches and will be monitored to
demonstrate successful floodplain function. The stream channel design will include analysis of the
hydrology, hydraulics, shear stress, sediment transport, and bankfull channel dimensions. WLS will
consider three methods (field indicators if present, published CP regional curve information, and hydraulic
modeling) for estimating a bankfull discharge. The hydrology and hydraulics analysis will evaluate a range
of lower flow discharges and flood frequency curves to help determine an appropriate design discharge.
The design discharge will be used to select an appropriate channel geometry and help monitor long-term
project performance. The design approach is supported by on-site soils investigations, surface flow
observations, topography, and historical observations by landowners. The combination of Rosgen Priority
Level I/II Restoration, filling ditches, and minor grading of spoil will restore the hydrologic conditions that
help form and maintain these stream systems.
Sediment Transport Considerations
The project reaches were observed to be predominantly sand bed, with small gravel materials in a few
downstream locations. Sediment transport calculations and stream power analyses will be performed for
both the existing channels and the proposed design channels. WLS will assess the stream’s transport
capacity to quantify the stream’s ability to transport its sediment load. WLS will perform quantitative
channel assessments that includes collecting sediment samples and predicting streambank erosion rates
and comparing model results using the BANCS Method (BEHI/NBS) to evaluate bed and bank material
characteristics and estimate sediment yields. If necessary, WLS will also perform an additional watershed
analysis to estimate how much sediment is being supplied to the project reaches by determining load
rates from upland sources. The substrate material will be sieved and a grain size distribution developed.
The results of the sediment transport analyses will be used to classify the streams, and complete critical
shear stress calculations required for designing slopes/depths and predicting channel stability.
Stream Channel and Floodplain Improvement Features
Stream channel improvement features such as in-stream structures and bioengineering techniques are
proposed for grade control, streambank protection, and improving bedform diversity and aquatic habitat.
All in-stream structures will be constructed from materials naturally found in the region such as hardwood
trees, trunks/logs, brush/branches, and gravel stone materials. In order to ensure sustainability of these
WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank – Speedman
Page 15
structures, WLS will use design and construction methods that have proven successful on numerous past
projects in the same geographic region and similar site conditions.
WLS will also incorporate bioengineering practices, when appropriate, that use biodegradable materials
and fabrics, uncompacted soils, live plant cuttings, and native species vegetation to stabilize streambanks.
Bioengineering will provide initial bank stability that allows for the quick establishment of deep-rooted
vegetation along the newly restored streambanks. Once established, these live, dormant plant cuttings
will provide long-term bank stability to the treated areas and prevent further bank erosion and
sedimentation.
Site Access and Constructability
WLS has field verified that the site has adequate construction access off Thunder Swamp Road (SR1117).
Where practicable, impacts to existing native riparian buffer vegetation will be minimized. Any potential
impacts to existing wetland areas will be avoided during construction, with only temporary, minimal
impacts expected only as necessary for maximized permanent stream, wetland, and riparian buffer
functional uplift.
5.2 Proposed Stream Conditions
5.2.1 Proposed Stream Restoration
S100-R1: The channelized stream will be gradually filled and graded to the natural valley topography prior
to the pre-disturbed condition. The channelization has disrupted the historic flow and overbank flooding
patterns of the site. The existing Ditch 1 will be tied into the restored stream system. The valley bottom
will be graded to restore the natural microtopographic variability. The reach will be restored as a Rosgen
‘C5’ stream type using appropriate riffle-pool morphology with a conservative meander planform
geometry that accommodates the valley slope and width. The stream channel will be constructed to
convey base flow and reconnect to its relic floodplain, restoring a more natural hydrology function. Any
exotic species vegetation will be removed and native riparian species vegetation will be planted within
the entire conservation easement. Riparian buffers in excess of 100 feet will be restored and protected
along the entire length.
S100-R2: S100-R2 continues as a first order tributary from its confluence with S101 to the bottom of the
project boundary. S100-R2 is mostly channelized and straightened, but generally flows through the low
point of the valley. The upper section is relatively steeper and more confined. Work will involve a Rosgen
Priority Level I Restoration by raising the bed elevation and reconnecting the stream with its geomorphic
floodplain, which will promote more frequent over bank flooding. A stable stream system will be achieved
by constructing a single-thread channel (Rosgen ‘C5’ stream type) across the geomorphic floodplain and
increasing the width/depth ratio. Proposed grading activities will improve overbank flows by removing
existing berms and other agricultural land manipulations.
The lower reach will eventually tie into the existing channel using a Rosgen Priority Level II approach. The
reach will be restored as a Rosgen ‘C5’ stream type using appropriate riffle-pool morphology with a
conservative meander planform geometry that accommodates the valley slope and width. Proposed in-
stream structures will include constructed wood riffles for grade control and habitat, brush toe, and cover
logs, and angled logs for encouraging step-pool formation, energy dissipation, bank stability, and bedform
WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank – Speedman
Page 16
diversity to provide natural scour features and improved aquatic habitat. Any disturbed riparian buffer
areas will be replanted with native woody species vegetation and the remaining riparian buffer will be
preserved to a minimum of 100 feet within the conservation easement.
S101: Work along S101 will involve a Rosgen Priority Level I Restoration approach. The current
channelized stream will be filled and graded to the natural valley topography prior to the pre-disturbed
condition. The existing Ditch 3 will be tied into the restored stream and the valley bottom will be graded
to restore the natural microtopographic variability. Riparian buffers in excess of 100 feet will be restored
and protected along the entire length. The proposed activities will restore a Rosgen ‘C5’ stream type by
removing berms and other agricultural land manipulations.
S102: Similar to S101, work along S102 will also involve a Rosgen Priority Level I restoration approach.
The current channelized stream will be filled gradually and graded to the natural valley topography prior
to the pre-disturbed condition. The existing Ditch 2 will be tied into the restored stream and valley bottom
will be graded to restore the natural microtopographic variability that is common within stream systems.
The proposed activities will restore a Rosgen ‘C5’ stream type by removing exiting berms and other
agricultural land manipulations. The proposed activities will maximize the stream restoration potential
and functional uplift. Riparian buffers in excess of 100 feet will be restored and protected along the entire
reach length.
5.2.2 Proposed Nutrient Offset and Riparian Buffer Mitigation
In addition to the stream restoration improvements associated with the proposed project, the Bank will
also utilize the NCDWR Nutrient Offset and Buffer Compensatory Mitigation Program to establish nutrient
offset and/or riparian buffer mitigation credits. The addition of extended buffers and nutrient removal
potential associated with the project will further enhance and improve downstream water quality
capabilities of the project, in addition to improving habitat for a diverse suite of species. Areas within the
project that will be utilized for nutrient offset and/or riparian buffer mitigation credits will not overlap
with the portions of the project where stream mitigation credits are being proposed. Nutrient offset and
riparian buffer mitigation credit generation is not discussed in this document as the NCDEQ DWR requires
a separate process associated with the generation of these proposed credit types. Figure 9 provides the
general overview of anticipated credit generation associated with the proposed project.
Water Quality Improvement Features
WLS will implement water quality improvement features as practices or measures as part of the
restoration approach during the mitigation plan stage. When implemented collectively along with stream,
riparian buffers, these water quality improvement features function as agricultural BMPs that reduce
pollutants from concentrated flows, particularly nutrient and sediment loadings, and therefore provide
additional ecological uplift to the project. The features will be installed along the project reaches at non-
jurisdictional or depressional areas where ephemeral drainages intersect with the project boundary. WLS
will finalize feature locations following the topographic survey and existing conditions assessment.
WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank – Speedman
Page 17
5.2.3 Proposed Revegetation Plan
Riparian buffers for the Bank will be established a minimum of 100 feet from the top of the streambanks
along each of the Project reaches, as well as permanently protecting those buffers with a conservation
easement. Many of the proposed riparian buffer widths within the conservation easement are greater
than 100 feet along one or both streambanks to meet NCDWR Nutrient Offset and Buffer Compensatory
Mitigation Program requirements and to provide additional functional uplift potential. Proposed plantings
will be conducted using native species trees and shrubs, in the form of live stakes and seedlings. Proposed
plantings will predominantly consist of bare root vegetation and will generally be planted at a total target
density of 680 stems per acre.
The proposed plant selection will help to establish a natural vegetation community that will include
appropriate strata based on an appropriate reference community. Schafale’s (2012) guidance on
vegetation communities for Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp, the USACE Wetland Research Program
(WRP) Technical Note VN-RS-4.1 (1997), as well as existing mature species identified throughout the
project area, will be referenced during the development of riparian buffer vegetation for the Project site.
5.3 Reference Ecosystems
Reference ecosystems will be identified that represent similar conditions to the proposed riparian stream
systems within the inner Coastal Plain Physiographic Province. Stream channel geometry, morphologic
relationships and native vegetation communities will be based on published regional curve relationships,
reference reach information, and extensive empirical data from monitoring successful mitigation projects.
6 Potential Functional Uplift & Ecological Benefits
6.1 Benefits Related to Hydrology
The potential functional uplift and ecological benefits to impairments are summarized below as part of
the overall project goals.

• Floodplain Connectivity – A Rosgen Priority Level I/II Restoration approach will reconnect
channels with their geomorphic and/or relic floodplains and improve stream and wetland
hydrology to areas that have been degraded and/or been historically manipulated.
• Surface Storage and Retention – The restored streams will be raised and reconnected to their
active geomorphic or relic floodplains to restore wetland hydrology and to spread higher flow
energies onto the floodplain thereby increasing retention time, storage, and roughness. Wetland
restoration and incorporation of depressional areas and other floodplain features will provide
additional retention, storage and habitat diversity and uplift. Native species riparian vegetation
will be established throughout the riparian buffer corridor.
• Groundwater Recharge and Hyporheic Exchange – The restored riparian buffers and wetland
microtopography will increase infiltration and improve overall hydrogeologic function. Benefits
will be achieved through the establishment of vegetated buffers which increase groundwater
infiltration, surface water interaction and recharge rates.
WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank – Speedman
Page 18
• Proper channel form – Restoring an appropriate dimension, pattern, and profile will efficiently
transport and deposit sediment (point bars and floodplain sinks) relative to the stream power and
load that is supplied from banks, adjacent uplands, and watershed. Stream channels that are
appropriately sized to convey flows and sediment load will greatly improve channel stability by
reducing bed degradation and aggradation.
• In-stream structures – In-stream structures, such as log step-pools, log vanes, j-hook vanes, brush
toe and constructed riffles made from native woody materials, will help to control grade and
reduce bank erosion by diverting shear stress away from streambanks during storm events.
• Sediment Transport – Boundary conditions, land use, climate, and geologic controls influence
stream channel formation, migration, and how sediment is transported through its watershed.
Appropriate transport capacity, flow competency and bed material size will ensure fine sediment
is more evenly distributed, such that excessive degradation and aggradation do not occur.
Adequately transporting or entraining fine-grain sediment will prevent embeddedness and create
interstitial habitat and in-stream cover within riffle areas.
6.2 Benefits Related to Habitat
• Proper channel form – Restoring an appropriate bedform and geometry will efficiently transport
and deposit sediment (point bars and floodplain sinks) relative to the stream power and load that
is supplied from banks and uplands. Stream channels that are appropriately sized to convey
smaller storm flows will greatly improve channel stability by reducing active bank erosion (lateral
stability) and bed degradation (vertical stability, i.e., headcuts, downcutting, incision).
• Terrestrial and Aquatic Habitat – Benefits will be achieved through the incorporation of physical
structures, removal of invasive species and re-establishing and enhancing native vegetation to the
riparian buffer areas. Benefits to aquatic organisms will be achieved through the installation of
appropriate in-stream structures using native rock material and woody debris. Adequately
transporting and depositing fine-grain sediment onto the floodplain will prevent embeddedness
and create interstitial habitat, organic food resources and in-stream cover. In-stream habitat will
be improved by creating deeper pools and areas of re-aeration. These lotic systems can provide
sources of organic matter that ultimately improve the biodiversity of downstream river systems.
• Landscape Connectivity – Benefits to landscape connectivity will be achieved by restoring a
healthy stream corridor, promoting aquatic and terrestrial species migration and protecting their
shared resources in perpetuity.
6.3 Benefits Related to Water Quality
• Nutrient Reduction/Native Buffer Vegetation – Currently, excess nutrients and pollutants such
as nitrogen/phosphorus from agricultural practices are entering many of the project reaches
without adequate riparian buffers (fragmentation). High-functioning riparian buffer vegetation
will be established or enhanced and permanently protected to remove direct pollutant sources
and filter runoff prior to entering the project reaches.
• Sediment Reduction – Benefit will be achieved through stabilization of eroding banks; installation
of vegetated buffers; and by dissipating excess flow energy and shear stress with increased
overbank flows during storm events.
WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank – Speedman
Page 19
• DO, NO3-, DOC Concentration – Benefits will be achieved through the restoration of more natural
stream bedforms, including riffle and pool sequences, which will increase dissolved oxygen (DO)
concentrations. In addition, as planted riparian buffers mature, increased shade and wider
vegetation density/structure will reduce water temperatures and groundwater nitrates (NO3-) as
well as increase dissolved organic carbon (DOC).
• Bioengineering Treatments – Bioengineering practices such as live staking, brush layering, and
vegetated soil lifts will provide lateral bank stability, rapid tree growth and bank shading to reduce
water temperatures, bank erosion and increase dissolved oxygen levels.
• Agricultural BMPs – Agricultural BMPs will be implemented as water quality treatment features
to provide pollutant removal. When implemented collectively along with stream, riparian buffer,
and wetland restoration, these features can be effective at reducing nutrients and pollutants,
particularly sediment loadings, and therefore provide additional ecological uplift to a project. The
agricultural BMPs that are best suited for use at this Project include small basins and planting to
treat agricultural runoff and nutrient inputs.
7 Credit Determination
7.1 Proposed Credit Types
Expected credit types are Stream Mitigation Credits (SMCs). SMCs (Warm Thermal Regime) will be
generated through Stream Restoration (Table 6).
Table 6. Proposed Stream Mitigation Credits (SMCs)
Reach Designation Type of Mitigation
Proposed
Stream Length
(LF)
Ratio
Stream
Mitigation
Credits (SMCs)
S100-R1 Stream Restoration (PI) 1,077 1:1 1,077.000
S100-R2 Stream Restoration (PI/PII) 1,223 1:1 1,223.000
S101 Stream Restoration (PI) 844 1:1 844.000
S102 Stream Restoration (PI) 590 1:1 590.000
Total 3,740 3,740.000
Note 1: No mitigation credits are proposed outside the conservation easement boundaries.
8 Monitoring
Stream stability, hydrology, and vegetation survival will be monitored across the Project to determine the
success of the stream and buffer mitigation. Monitoring and performance standards will follow the
guidance provided in the 2016 USACE Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation
Update. Stream stability will be monitored with cross section surveys and visual assessment stream walks.
Vegetation survival rates will be monitored using vegetation plots over approximately two percent of the
planted area.
WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank – Speedman
Page 20
8.1 As-Built Survey
An as-built survey will be conducted following construction to document channel size, condition, and
location on constructed or modified channels. The survey will include a complete profile of thalweg, water
surface, bankfull, and top of bank to compare with future geomorphic data. Longitudinal profiles will not
be required in annual monitoring reports unless requested by the USACE.
8.2 Visual Monitoring
Visual monitoring of all mitigation areas will be conducted a minimum of twice per monitoring year by
qualified individuals. The visual assessments will include vegetation density, vigor, invasive species, and
easement encroachments. Visual assessments of stream stability will include a complete stream walk and
structure inspection. Photographs will be taken at fixed representative locations (cross-sections,
enhancement reaches, and crossings) to record each monitoring event, as well as any noted problem
areas or areas of concern. Results of visual monitoring will be presented in a plan view exhibit with a brief
description of problem areas and digital images.
Photographs will be used to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or degradation, bank erosion,
success of riparian vegetation, and effectiveness of erosion control measures. Longitudinal photos should
indicate the absence of developing bars within the channel or an excessive increase in channel depth.
Lateral photos should not indicate excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the banks over time. A
series of photos over time should indicate successional maturation of riparian vegetation.
8.3 Channel Dimension
Permanent cross-sections will be installed at a minimum of one per 20 bankfull widths, with half in pools
and half in riffles. Restored reaches will have two cross-sections for every 1,000 linear feet. All cross-
section measurements will include bank height ratio (BHR) and entrenchment ratio (ER). Cross-sections
will be monitored annually. There should be little change in as-built cross-sections.
8.4 Flow Duration Monitoring
Monitoring of stream flow will be conducted to demonstrate that the restored stream systems classified
as intermittent exhibit surface flow for a minimum of 30 consecutive days throughout some portion of the
year during years with normal rainfall conditions. The proposed monitoring of restored intermittent
reaches will include the installation of flow devices (continuous-read pressure transducers) within the
thalweg (bottom) of the channel towards the upper-third portion of the reach.
8.5 Vegetation
Vegetation monitoring plots will be a minimum of 0.02 acres in size and cover approximately two percent
of the restoration planted area. This does not include areas that are supplementally planted due to
existing vegetation. The following data will be recorded for all trees in the plots: species, height, planting
date (or volunteer), and grid location. Monitoring will occur each year during the monitoring period. The
interim measures of vegetative success for the sites will be the survival of at least 320 planted three-year
old trees per acre at the end of Year 3 and 260 five-year old trees per acre at the end of Year 5. The final
WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank – Speedman
Page 21
vegetative success criteria will be the survival of 210 trees per acre with an average height of 10 feet at
the end of Year 7 of the monitoring period.
9 Long-Term Management
9.1 Maintenance
The Project will be protected in perpetuity by a recorded conservation easement. The conservation
easement will allow for annual site inspections during the post-construction monitoring period. These site
inspections may identify components and features that require routine maintenance. The site will be
monitored on a regular basis and a physical inspection will take place at least once a year throughout the
post-construction monitoring period until performance standards are met. Routine post-construction
maintenance may include the following components as described in Table 7.
Table 7. Routine Maintenance Components
Feature Maintenance Activity Through Close-out
Stream Routine channel maintenance and repair activities may include modifying in-stream structures to
prevent piping, securing loose coir matting, and supplemental installation of live stakes and other
target vegetation along the Project reaches. Areas of concentrated stormwater and floodplain flows
that intercept the channel may also require maintenance.

Vegetation Vegetation will be maintained to ensure the health and vigor of the targeted plant community.
Routine vegetation maintenance and repair activities may include supplemental planting, pruning,
and fertilizing. Exotic invasive plant species will be treated by mechanical and/or chemical methods.
Any invasive plant species control requiring herbicide application will be performed in accordance
with North Carolina Department of Agriculture (NCDA) rules and regulations.

Project Site
Boundary
Project boundaries will be demarcated in the field to ensure clear distinction between the Project site
and adjacent properties. Boundaries may be identified by fence, marker, bollard, post, or other means
as allowed by Project conditions and/or conservation easement. Boundary markers disturbed,
damaged, or destroyed will be repaired and/or replaced on an as needed basis.

9.2 Long-Term Management
Upon final IRT approval and project closeout, the site will be transferred to a long-term land steward. The
responsible party for long-term management has not yet been chosen, but will be approved by the DE
and IRT prior to the bank establishment. The long-term management and land steward shall be
responsible for periodic/routine inspection of the site to ensure that the conservation easement and/or
the deed restrictions are being upheld. Any endowment funds for the conservation easement and deed
restrictions shall be negotiated prior to site transfer to the responsible party. The management activities
will be conducted in accordance with the terms and conditions of the approved UMBI as agreed to by
WLS, USACE, and the IRT.
9.3 Adaptive Management Plan
In the event the mitigation site or a specific component of the mitigation site fails to achieve the necessary
performance standards as specified in the approved mitigation plan, the Sponsor shall notify the USACE
and coordinate with IRT members to develop a remedial action plan. The Sponsor will also coordinate
WLS Neuse 01 Umbrella Mitigation Bank – Speedman
Page 22
with the USACE to obtain authorization and approval to conduct the remedial action. The remedial action
plan should describe the source or reason for the failure, a concise description of the corrective measures
that are proposed, and a time period for the implementation of the corrective measures. Additional
monitoring, as prescribed by IRT guidance, may also be required to satisfy the performance standards.

Figures

Figure 1 – Project Location Map
Figure 2 – Geographic Service Area Map
Figure 3 – USGS Topographic Map
Figure 4 – NRCS Soils Map
Figure 5 – LiDAR Map
Figure 6 – Floodplain Map
Figure 7a – 1993 Aerial Photograph
Figure 7b – 2006 Aerial Photograph
Figure 7c – 2016 Aerial Photograph
Figure 8 – Existing Aquatic Resources Map
Figure 9 – Proposed Mitigation Map

±0 1,600 3,200Feet
Figure1
Map Projection: NAD_1983_StatePlane_NC_FIPS_3200_Feet
Project LocationMap
!(
!(
o
o
Proposed Conservatio nEasementParcel Boundary
Existing Stream (NHD)
!(Project Location
HUC-8
HUC-12
NC Counties
o Airport
Airport Buffer (5mi)
Wayne County
0 4 8Miles050100Miles
Project is located in: HUC8 - 03020201HUC12 - 030202011401
Date: 12/18/2023
Legend
Service Layer Credits: S ources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMEN T P, NRCa n, Esri Jap an, ME TI, Esri China (Hon g K ong), Esri Korea, Esri (T hailand ), NGCC , (c)OpenStreetMap co ntributors, and the GIS User Co mmu nity
35.247207, -78.097459
Speedman Mitigation BankHUC8 Neuse 01 - 03020201Wayne County, North Carolina
Site Access
!(
Site Location
Figure2Speedman Mitigation BankHUC8 Neuse 01 - 03020201Wayne County, North Carolina
Map Projection: NAD_1983_StatePlane_North_Carolina_FIPS_3200_Feet
Geographic ServiceArea M ap
Date: 9/22/2023
!(Site Location
Service AreaNeuse 01 (03020201)
Service Layer Credits: S ources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMEN T P, NRCa n, Esri Jap an, ME TI, Esri China (Hon g K ong), EsriKorea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) Open StreetMap contribu to rs, and the GIS User Co mmunity
´0 10 205Miles
1 inch = 10 miles
S101DrainageAreaS102Drainage Area
S100-R1Drainage Area
S100-R2Drainage Area
Figure3USGS TopoSW Goldsboro, Mt Olive
Date: 12/19/2023
Proposed Conservation EasementDrainage AreasS101 Drainage Area (23.4 ac)S102 Drainage Area (38.9 ac)S100-R1 Drainage Area (59.0 ac)S100-R2 Drainage Area (148.2 ac)
´0 2,000 4,0001,000 Feet
1 inch = 2,000 feet
Imagery data source: EDR
Map Projection: NAD_1983_StatePlane_North_Carolina_FIPS_3200_Feet
Speedman Mitigation BankHUC8 Neuse 01 - 03020201Wayne County, North Carolina
D i t c h 1
S100-R1 S101
S 102
S100-R2
D itc h 2
Ditch 3 Ke
Ly
Ke
Ra
WaB
Ra
Ly
GoA
Ke
Ke
Ra
GoA
Bb
Bb
We
Dr
Js
WaB
We
Lv
WaC
NoA
JsGoA
WaB
WaD
NoB
NoB
NoBLy
Bb
Ly
Co
Ke
Figure4NRCSSoils Map
Date: 12/19/2023
Bb: Bibb sandy loamCo: Coxville loamDr: Dragston loamy sandGoA: Goldsboro loamy sand, 0 to 2% slopes, S. Coastal PlainJs: Johnston loamKe: Kenansville loamy sandLv: Lumbee sandy loamLy: Lynchburg sandy loam, 0 to 2% slopes
NoA: Norfolk loamy sand, 0 to 2% slopesNoB: Norfolk loamy sand, 2 to 6%t slopesPo: Pantego loamRa: Rains sandy loam, 0 to 2% slopesWaB: Wagram loamy sand, 0 to 6% slopesWaC: Wagram loamy sand, 6 to 10% slopesWaD: Wagram loamy sand, 10 to 15% slopesWe: Weston loamy sand (Woodington)
´0 500 1,000250Feet
1 inch = 500 feet
Imagery data source: EDR
Map Projection: NAD_1983_StatePlane_North_Carolina_FIPS_3200_Feet
Speedman Mitigation BankHUC8 Neuse 01 - 03020201Wayne County, North Carolina
Proposed Conservation Easem entExisting StreamExisting Ditch
Thunder Swamp Rd
D i t c h 1
S100-R1 S101
S 102
S100-R2
D itc h 2 Ditch 3
Figure5LiDARMap
Date: 12/19/2023
Proposed Conservatio n Easemen tExisting StreamExisting DitchLiDAR Eleva tion (ft)
High : 156.3 7 Low : 105.01
´0 400 800200Feet
1 inch = 400 feet
Imagery data source: EDR
Map Projection: NAD_1983_StatePlane_North_Carolina_FIPS_3200_Feet
Speedman Mitigation BankHUC8 Neuse 01 - 03020201Wayne County, North Carolina
Thunder Swamp Rd
Figure6FEMAFloodplain Map
Date: 12/19/2023
´0 500 1,000250Feet
1 inch = 500 feet
Imagery data source: EDR
Map Projection: NAD_1983_StatePlane_North_Carolina_FIPS_3200_Feet
Speedman Mitigation BankHUC8 Neuse 01 - 03020201Wayne County, North Carolina
Proposed Conservation Easem entFEMA Floodplain100-yr (Zone AE)100-yr Floodway (Zone AE)500-yr (Zone X)
FEMA InformationFIRM Panel: 3720257400KEffective Date: 06/20/2018
Thunder Swamp Rd
O berry R d
Figure7a1993Aerial
Date: 12/19/2023
Proposed Conservation Easem ent
´0 500 1,000250Feet
1 inch = 500 feet
Imagery data source: EDR
Map Projection: NAD_1983_StatePlane_North_Carolina_FIPS_3200_Feet
Speedman Mitigation BankHUC8 Neuse 01 - 03020201Wayne County, North Carolina
Thunder Swamp Rd
O berry R d
Figure7b2006Aerial
Date: 12/19/2023
Proposed Conservation Easem ent
´0 500 1,000250Feet
1 inch = 500 feet
Imagery data source: EDR
Map Projection: NAD_1983_StatePlane_North_Carolina_FIPS_3200_Feet
Speedman Mitigation BankHUC8 Neuse 01 - 03020201Wayne County, North Carolina
Thunder Swamp Rd
O berry R d
Figure7c2016Aerial
Date: 12/19/2023
Proposed Conservation Easem ent
´0 500 1,000250Feet
1 inch = 500 feet
Imagery data source: EDR
Map Projection: NAD_1983_StatePlane_North_Carolina_FIPS_3200_Feet
Speedman Mitigation BankHUC8 Neuse 01 - 03020201Wayne County, North Carolina
XW
XW
XW
XW
XW
Thunder Swamp Rd
O berry R d
D i t c h 1
S100-R1
S101
S 102
S100-R2
D itc h 2 Ditch 3
XS1
XS2
XS3
XS4
XS5
Figure8Existing AquaticResources Map
Date: 12/19/2023
Proposed Conservation Easem entExisting StreamExisting DitchStream Form Locations
XW Existing Condition XS
´0 400 800200Feet
1 inch = 400 feet
Imagery data source: EDR
Map Projection: NAD_1983_StatePlane_North_Carolina_FIPS_3200_Feet
Speedman Mitigation BankHUC8 Neuse 01 - 03020201Wayne County, North Carolina
Thunder Swamp Rd
O berry R d
D i t c h 1
S100-R1 S101
S 102
S100-R2
D itc h 2 Ditch 3
Figure9ProposedMitigation Map
Date: 12/19/2023
Proposed Conservatio n Easemen tCemetery AccessExisting DitchStream Mitiga tionRestorationNutrient and B uffe r Mitiga tionNutrient100-ft Riparian Buffer R estora tionRiparian Buffer Prese rvatio n
´0 400 800200Feet
1 inch = 400 feet
Imagery data source: EDR
Map Projection: NAD_1983_StatePlane_North_Carolina_FIPS_3200_Feet
Speedman Mitigation BankHUC8 Neuse 01 - 03020201Wayne County, North Carolina

Appendix A - Existing Conditions Data

Photo Log
Cross-Sections
Longitudinal Profiles
DWR Stream Forms
NCSAM Forms

S100 looking downstream within forested buffer
preservation area
S100 within riparian buffer restoration area showing lack of
native riparian buffer vegetation
View of S101 showing lack of native riparian buffer
vegetation
S101 looking downstream demonstrating flow and current
conditions
S102 looking upstream showing lack of native riparian buffer
vegetation
S102 looking downstream demonstrating flow and current
conditions
Representative photo of ditch conditions (Ditch 3 looking
downstream pictured)
Cross Section XS-1
Bankfull Dimensions Flood Dimensions Materials
1.7 x-section area (ft.sq.)5.5 W flood prone area (ft)0.63 D50 Riffle (mm)
3.1 width (ft)1.7 entrenchment ratio 1.4 D84 Riffle (mm)
0.5 mean depth (ft)4.9 low bank height (ft)14 threshold grain size (mm):
0.8 max depth (ft)5.8 low bank height ratio
3.7 wetted parimeter (ft)
0.5 hyd radi (ft)
5.8 width-depth ratio
Bankfull Flow Flow Resistance Forces & Power
3.6 velocity (ft/s)0.025 Manning's roughness 1 channel slope (%)
6.1 discharge rate (cfs)0.09 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric.0.29 shear stress (lb/sq.ft.)
0.92 Froude number 14.9 resistance factor u/u*0.39 shear velocity (ft/s)
118.7 relative roughness 1.21 unit strm power (lb/ft/s)
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Width
Speedman, S102, Riffle
Cross Section XS-2
Bankfull Dimensions Flood Dimensions Materials
1.2 x-section area (ft.sq.)3.4 W flood prone area (ft)0.63 D50 Riffle (mm)
3.2 width (ft)1.1 entrenchment ratio 1.4 D84 Riffle (mm)
0.4 mean depth (ft)2.7 low bank height (ft)13 threshold grain size (mm):
0.5 max depth (ft)5.4 low bank height ratio
3.5 wetted parimeter (ft)
0.3 hyd radi (ft)
8.1 width-depth ratio
Bankfull Flow Flow Resistance Forces & Power
3.2 velocity (ft/s)0.025 Manning's roughness 1.2 channel slope (%)
4.0 discharge rate (cfs)0.10 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric.0.26 shear stress (lb/sq.ft.)
0.97 Froude number 14.0 resistance factor u/u*0.37 shear velocity (ft/s)
84.5 relative roughness 0.94 unit strm power (lb/ft/s)
86.00
87.00
88.00
89.00
90.00
91.00
92.00
93.00
94.00
95.00
96.00
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Width
Speedman, S101, Riffle
Cross Section XS-3
Bankfull Dimensions Flood Dimensions Materials
1.3 x-section area (ft.sq.)4.8 W flood prone area (ft)0.63 D50 Riffle (mm)
2.9 width (ft)1.6 entrenchment ratio 1.4 D84 Riffle (mm)
0.5 mean depth (ft)1.6 low bank height (ft)11 threshold grain size (mm):
0.8 max depth (ft)2.1 low bank height ratio
3.3 wetted parimeter (ft)
0.4 hyd radi (ft)
6.3 width-depth ratio
Bankfull Flow Flow Resistance Forces & Power
3.1 velocity (ft/s)0.025 Manning's roughness 0.9 channel slope (%)
4.1 discharge rate (cfs)0.10 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric.0.23 shear stress (lb/sq.ft.)
0.86 Froude number 14.5 resistance factor u/u*0.34 shear velocity (ft/s)
100.4 relative roughness 0.8 unit strm power (lb/ft/s)
86.00
87.00
88.00
89.00
90.00
91.00
92.00
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Width
Speedman, S100-R1, Riffle
Cross Section XS-4
Bankfull Dimensions Flood Dimensions Materials
3.9 x-section area (ft.sq.)8.6 W flood prone area (ft)0.63 D50 Riffle (mm)
5.4 width (ft)1.6 entrenchment ratio 1.4 D84 Riffle (mm)
0.7 mean depth (ft)2.2 low bank height (ft)17 threshold grain size (mm):
0.8 max depth (ft)2.7 low bank height ratio
5.7 wetted parimeter (ft)
0.7 hyd radi (ft)
7.3 width-depth ratio
Bankfull Flow Flow Resistance Forces & Power
4.2 velocity (ft/s)0.025 Manning's roughness 0.8 channel slope (%)
16.4 discharge rate (cfs)0.08 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric.0.35 shear stress (lb/sq.ft.)
0.88 Froude number 15.6 resistance factor u/u*0.42 shear velocity (ft/s)
159.8 relative roughness 1.53 unit strm power (lb/ft/s)
86.00
87.00
88.00
89.00
90.00
91.00
92.00
93.00
94.00
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Width
Speedman, S100-R1, Riffle
Cross Section XS-5
Bankfull Dimensions Flood Dimensions Materials
5.4 x-section area (ft.sq.)10.6 W flood prone area (ft)0.63 D50 Riffle (mm)
5.7 width (ft)1.9 entrenchment ratio 1.4 D84 Riffle (mm)
0.9 mean depth (ft)3.0 low bank height (ft)17 threshold grain size (mm):
1.6 max depth (ft)1.9 low bank height ratio
6.6 wetted parimeter (ft)
0.8 hyd radi (ft)
6.0 width-depth ratio
Bankfull Flow Flow Resistance Forces & Power
4.4 velocity (ft/s)0.025 Manning's roughness 0.7 channel slope (%)
23.4 discharge rate (cfs)0.08 D'Arcy-Weisbach fric.0.36 shear stress (lb/sq.ft.)
0.85 Froude number 16.3 resistance factor u/u*0.43 shear velocity (ft/s)
206.4 relative roughness 1.8 unit strm power (lb/ft/s)
90.50
91.00
91.50
92.00
92.50
93.00
93.50
94.00
94.50
95.00
95.50
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
Width
Speedman, S100-R2, Riffle
Sinuosity (k)1.00
Valley Slope (ft/ft)0.0143
Thalweg Length (ft)370
Valley Length (ft)370
Descriptor = TWG Descriptor = LTB Descriptor = RTB Descriptor = WSF
Station Elevation Station Elevation Station Elevation Station Elevation
1000 127.50 991.5 131.72
1301.56 122.16 1309.56 126.19
1369.96 122.20 1361.46 122.8
5.30 8.92
120
122
124
126
128
130
132
134
990 1090 1190 1290 1390 1490
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
t
)
Station (ft)
Speedman Mitigation Project
Existing Longitudinal Profile: Ditch 1 - S100-R1
Thalweg Low Top of Bank
Sinuosity (k)1.01
Valley Slope (ft/ft)0.0091
Thalweg Length (ft)1,662
Valley Length (ft)1,653
Descriptor = TWG Descriptor = LTB Descriptor = RTB Descriptor = WSF
Station Elevation Station Elevation Station Elevation Station Elevation
1000 138.98 1003 142.52
1425.26 136.23 1427.37 141.55
2084.02 130.41 2091.7 135.29
2430.61 126.88 2435.76 129.74
2661.64 123.96 2669.41 127.84
15.02
120
125
130
135
140
1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
t
)
Station (ft)
Speedman Mitigation Project
Existing Longitudinal Profile: Ditch 2 - S102
Thalweg
Low Top of Bank
Sinuosity 1.02
Valley Slope (ft/ft)0.0122
Thalweg Length (ft)1,268
Valley Length (ft)1,237
Descriptor = TWG Descriptor = LTB Descriptor = RTB Descriptor = WSF
Station Elevation Station Elevation Station Elevation Station Elevation
1000 132.11 986 135.82
1318.21 128.91 1319.84 135.03
1628.46 124.79 1626.77 131.27
2267.86 117.06 2276.4 120.77
15.05 15.05
116
121
126
131
136
141
986 1186 1386 1586 1786 1986 2186 2386
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
t
)
Station (ft)
Speedman Mitigation Project
Existing Longitudinal Profile: Ditch 3 - S101
Thalweg Low Top of Bank
NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the “Notes/Sketch” section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION: 1. Project name (if any): Speedman 2. Date of evaluation:9/7/2023 3.Applicant/owner name:Water and Land Solutions 4. Assessor name/organization:DPI, KVS, CMR/WLS 5.County:Wayne 6.Nearest named water bodyon USGS 7.5-minute quad: Brooks Swamp 7.River basin:Neuse 8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach):35.24716, -78.09730
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)9.Site number (show on attached map):S100-R1 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet):1,000 11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet):1.6 Unable to assess channel depth. 12.Channel width at top of bank (feet):5.1 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam?Yes No 14.Feature type: Perennial flow Intermittent flow Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:15.NC SAM Zone: Mountains (M) Piedmont (P) Inner Coastal Plain (I) Outer Coastal Plain (O)
16.Estimated geomorphic19 valley shape (skip for Tidal Marsh Stream):
A B
(more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17.Watershed size: (skip Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi2) Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi2) Size 4 (≥ 5 mi2)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: 18.Were regulatory considerations evaluated?Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area. Section 10 water Classified Trout Waters Water Supply Watershed (I II III IV V) Essential Fish Habitat Primary Nursery Area High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters Publicly owned property NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect Nutrient Sensitive Waters Anadromous fish 303(d) List CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area. List species: Designated Critical Habitat (list species) 19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in “Notes/Sketch” section or attached?Yes No
1.Channel Water – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)A Water throughout assessment reach. B No flow, water in pools only. C No water in assessment reach.
2.Evidence of Flow Restriction – assessment reach metricA At least 10% of assessment reach in-stream habitat or riffle-pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams, beaver dams). B Not A
3.Feature Pattern – assessment reach metricA A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert). B Not A
4.Feature Longitudinal Profile – assessment reach metricA Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down-cutting, existing damming, over widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these disturbances). B Not A
5.Signs of Active Instability – assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability includeactive bank failure, active channel down-cutting (head-cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip-rap).A < 10% of channel unstable B 10 to 25% of channel unstable C > 25% of channel unstable
6.Streamside Area Interaction – streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).LB RB A A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction B B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down-cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching]) C C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an interstream divide
7.Water Quality Stressors – assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam) B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone) C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors) E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in “Notes/Sketch” section. F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc) I Other: AG/Nutrient (explain in “Notes/Sketch” section) J Little to no stressors
8.Recent Weather – watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours C No drought conditions
9.Large or Dangerous Stream – assessment reach metricYes No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10.Natural In-stream Habitat Types – assessment reach metric10a. Yes No Degraded in-stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive sedimentation, mining, excavation, in-stream hardening [for example, rip-rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams) A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent vegetation C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter E Little or no habitat
F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms G Submerged aquatic vegetation H Low-tide refugia (pools) I Sand bottom J 5% vertical bank along the marsh K Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11.Bedform and Substrate – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11a. Yes No Is assessment reach in a natural sand-bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).A Riffle-run section (evaluate 11c) B Pool-glide section (evaluate 11d) C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach – whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare (R)= present but < 10%, Common (C) = > 10-40%, Abundant (A) = > 40-70%, Predominant (P) = > 70%. Cumulative percentagesshould not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.NP R C A P Bedrock/saprolite Boulder (256 – 4096 mm) Cobble (64 – 256 mm) Gravel (2 – 64 mm) Sand (.062 – 2 mm) Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm) Detritus Artificial (rip-rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. Yes No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Ch
e
c
k

f
o
r

T
id
a
l

Ma
r
s
h

S
t
r
e
a
m
s

On
l
y

12.Aquatic Life – assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)12a. Yes No Was an in-stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual? If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. No Water Other:
12b. Yes No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to “individuals” for Size 1 and 2 streams and “taxa” for Size 3 and 4 streams. Adult frogs Aquatic reptiles Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) Beetles Caddisfly larvae (T) Asian clam (Corbicula) Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp) Damselfly and dragonfly larvae Dipterans Mayfly larvae (E) Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae) Midges/mosquito larvae Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea) Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula) Other fish Salamanders/tadpoles Snails Stonefly larvae (P) Tipulid larvae Worms/leeches
13.Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.LB RB A A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area B B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area C C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction, livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14.Streamside Area Water Storage – streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.LB RB A A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water ≥ 6 inches deep B B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep C C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15.Wetland Presence – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normalwetted perimeter of assessment reach.LB RB Y Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area? N N
16.Baseflow Contributors – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges) B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins) C Obstruction passing flow during low-flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom-release dam, weir) D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage) E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present) F None of the above
17.Baseflow Detractors – assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation) B Obstruction not passing flow during low-flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit) C Urban stream (≥ 24% impervious surface for watershed)D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge F None of the above
18.Shading – assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)Consider aspect. Consider “leaf-on” condition.A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes) B Degraded (example: scattered trees) C Stream shading is gone or largely absent
19.Buffer Width – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider “vegetated buffer” and “wooded buffer” separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.Vegetated Wooded LB RB LB RB A A A A ≥ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed B B B B From 50 to < 100 feet wide C C C C From 30 to < 50 feet wide D D D D From 10 to < 30 feet wide E E E E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20.Buffer Structure – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 (“Vegetated” Buffer Width).LB RB A A Mature forest B B Non-mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure C C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide D D Maintained shrubs E E Little or no vegetation
21.Buffer Stressors – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but iswithin 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22:Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet LB RB LB RB LB RB A A A A A A Row crops B B B B B B Maintained turf C C C C C C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture D D D D D D Pasture (active livestock use)
22.Stem Density – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 (“Wooded” Buffer Width).LB RB A A Medium to high stem density B B Low stem density C C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23.Continuity of Vegetated Buffer – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.LB RB A A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent. B B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent. C C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24.Vegetative Composition – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes toassessment reach habitat.LB RB A A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse. B B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear-cutting or clearing or communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees. C C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted stands of non-characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25.Conductivity – assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)25a. Yes No Was conductivity measurement recorded?If No, select one of the following reasons. No Water Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).A < 46 B 46 to < 67 C 67 to < 79 D 79 to < 230 E ≥ 230
Notes/Sketch:
Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Speedman Date of Assessment 9/7/2023 Stream Category lb1 Assessor Name/Organization DPI,KVS,CMR.WLS
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) No NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Intermittent
Function Class Rating Summary USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent (1) Hydrology LOW LOW (2)Baseflow HIGH HIGH (2) Flood Flow LOW LOW (3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW LOW (4) Floodplain Access LOW LOW (4) Wooded Riparian Buffer LOW LOW (4) Microtopography NA NA (3) Stream Stability LOW LOW (4) Channel Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM (4) Sediment Transport LOW LOW (4) Stream Geomorphology LOW LOW (2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA NA (3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA NA (1) Water Quality LOW LOW (2) Baseflow HIGH HIGH (2) Streamside Area Vegetation LOW LOW (3) Upland Pollutant Filtration LOW LOW (3)Thermoregulation LOW LOW (2) Indicators of Stressors YES YES (2) Aquatic Life Tolerance OMITTED NA (2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA NA (1) Habitat(2) In-stream Habitat(3) Baseflow HIGH HIGH (3) Substrate LOW LOW (3) Stream Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM (3)In-stream Habitat(2) Stream-side Habitat LOW LOW (3) Stream-side Habitat LOW LOW (3) Thermoregulation LOW LOW (2) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat NA NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA NA (4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA NA (3)Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat NA NA (2) Intertidal Zone NA NA Overall LOW LOW
NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the “Notes/Sketch” section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION: 1. Project name (if any): Speedman 2. Date of evaluation:9/7/2023 3. Applicant/owner name:Water and Land Solutions 4. Assessor name/organization:DPI, KVS, CMR/WLS 5. County:Wayne 6. Nearest named water bodyon USGS 7.5-minute quad: Brooks Swamp 7. River basin:Neuse 8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach):35.24716, -78.09730
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)9. Site number (show on attached map):S100-R2 10.Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet):700 11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet):2.6 Unable to assess channel depth. 12. Channel width at top of bank (feet):8.8 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam?Yes No 14. Feature type: Perennial flow Intermittent flow Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:15. NC SAM Zone: Mountains (M) Piedmont (P) Inner Coastal Plain (I) Outer Coastal Plain (O)
16. Estimated geomorphic19 valley shape (skip for Tidal Marsh Stream):
A B
(more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi2) Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi2) Size 4 (≥ 5 mi2)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: 18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated?Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area. Section 10 water Classified Trout Waters Water Supply Watershed (I II III IV V) Essential Fish Habitat Primary Nursery Area High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters Publicly owned property NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect Nutrient Sensitive Waters Anadromous fish 303(d) List CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area. List species: Designated Critical Habitat (list species) 19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in “Notes/Sketch” section or attached?Yes No
1.Channel Water – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)A Water throughout assessment reach. B No flow, water in pools only. C No water in assessment reach.
2.Evidence of Flow Restriction – assessment reach metricA At least 10% of assessment reach in-stream habitat or riffle-pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams, beaver dams). B Not A
3.Feature Pattern – assessment reach metricA A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert). B Not A
4.Feature Longitudinal Profile – assessment reach metricA Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down-cutting, existing damming, over widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these disturbances). B Not A
5.Signs of Active Instability – assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability includeactive bank failure, active channel down-cutting (head-cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip-rap).A < 10% of channel unstable B 10 to 25% of channel unstable C > 25% of channel unstable
6. Streamside Area Interaction – streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). LB RB A A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction B B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down-cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching]) C C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors – assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply. A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam) B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone) C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors) E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in “Notes/Sketch” section. F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc) I Other: (explain in “Notes/Sketch” section) J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather – watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams) For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought. A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream – assessment reach metric Yes No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In-stream Habitat Types – assessment reach metric 10a. Yes No Degraded in-stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive sedimentation, mining, excavation, in-stream hardening [for example, rip-rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams) A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent vegetation C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter E Little or no habitat
F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms G Submerged aquatic vegetation H Low-tide refugia (pools) I Sand bottom J 5% vertical bank along the marsh K Little or no habitat

*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11a. Yes No Is assessment reach in a natural sand-bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es). A Riffle-run section (evaluate 11c) B Pool-glide section (evaluate 11d) C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach – whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare (R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) = > 10-40%, Abundant (A) = > 40-70%, Predominant (P) = > 70%. Cumulative percentages should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach. NP R C A P Bedrock/saprolite Boulder (256 – 4096 mm) Cobble (64 – 256 mm) Gravel (2 – 64 mm) Sand (.062 – 2 mm) Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm) Detritus Artificial (rip-rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. Yes No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Ch
e
c
k

f
o
r

T
id
a
l

Ma
r
s
h

S
t
r
e
a
m
s

On
l
y

12. Aquatic Life – assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams) 12a. Yes No Was an in-stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual? If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. No Water Other:
12b. Yes No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to “individuals” for Size 1 and 2 streams and “taxa” for Size 3 and 4 streams. Adult frogs Aquatic reptiles Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) Beetles Caddisfly larvae (T) Asian clam (Corbicula) Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp) Damselfly and dragonfly larvae Dipterans Mayfly larvae (E) Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae) Midges/mosquito larvae Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea) Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula) Other fish Salamanders/tadpoles Snails Stonefly larvae (P) Tipulid larvae Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff. LB RB A A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area B B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area C C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction, livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage – streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area. LB RB A A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water ≥ 6 inches deep B B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep C C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal wetted perimeter of assessment reach. LB RB Y Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area? N N
16. Baseflow Contributors – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach. A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges) B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins) C Obstruction passing flow during low-flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom-release dam, weir) D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage) E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present) F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors – assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply. A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation) B Obstruction not passing flow during low-flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit) C Urban stream (≥ 24% impervious surface for watershed) D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge F None of the above
18. Shading – assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams) Consider aspect. Consider “leaf-on” condition. A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes) B Degraded (example: scattered trees) C Stream shading is gone or largely absent
19.Buffer Width – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider “vegetated buffer” and “wooded buffer” separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.Vegetated Wooded LB RB LB RB A A A A ≥ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed B B B B From 50 to < 100 feet wide C C C C From 30 to < 50 feet wide D D D D From 10 to < 30 feet wide E E E E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20.Buffer Structure – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 (“Vegetated” Buffer Width).LB RB A A Mature forest B B Non-mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure C C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide D D Maintained shrubs E E Little or no vegetation
21.Buffer Stressors – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but iswithin 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22:Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet LB RB LB RB LB RB A A A A A A Row crops B B B B B B Maintained turf C C C C C C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture D D D D D D Pasture (active livestock use)
22.Stem Density – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 (“Wooded” Buffer Width).LB RB A A Medium to high stem density B B Low stem density C C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23.Continuity of Vegetated Buffer – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.LB RB A A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent. B B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent. C C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24.Vegetative Composition – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes toassessment reach habitat.LB RB A A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse. B B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear-cutting or clearing or communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees. C C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted stands of non-characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25.Conductivity – assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)25a. Yes No Was conductivity measurement recorded?If No, select one of the following reasons. No Water Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).A < 46 B 46 to < 67 C 67 to < 79 D 79 to < 230 E ≥ 230
Notes/Sketch:
Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Speedman Date of Assessment 9/7/2023 Assessor Name/Organization DPI,KVS,CMR/WLS
NO
Stream Category la2
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Perennial
Function Class Rating Summary USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent (1) Hydrology HIGH (2)Baseflow HIGH (2) Flood Flow HIGH (3) Streamside Area Attenuation HIGH (4) Floodplain Access HIGH (4) Wooded Riparian Buffer MEDIUM (4) Microtopography LOW(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM (4) Channel Stability MEDIUM (4) Sediment Transport LOW (4) Stream Geomorphology HIGH (2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2)Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2)Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA (3)Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3)Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA (1) Water Quality LOW (2) Baseflow HIGH (2) Streamside Area Vegetation MEDIUM (3) Upland Pollutant Filtration MEDIUM (3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM (2) Indicators of Stressors NO (2) Aquatic Life Tolerance LOW (2)Intertidal Zone Filtration NA (1) Habitat(2) In-stream Habitat(3) Baseflow HIGH (3) Substrate(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM (3)In-stream Habitat LOW (2) Stream-side Habitat MEDIUM (3) Stream-side Habitat MEDIUM (3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM (2)Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat NA
(3)Flow Restriction NA
(3)Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA (4)Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4)Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA (3)Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat NA (2)Intertidal Zone NA Overall MEDIUM
NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the “Notes/Sketch” section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION: 1. Project name (if any): Speedman 2. Date of evaluation:9/7/2023 3.Applicant/owner name:Water and Land Solutions 4. Assessor name/organization:DPI, KVS, CMR/WLS 5.County:Wayne 6.Nearest named water bodyon USGS 7.5-minute quad: Brooks Swamp 7.River basin:Neuse 8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach):35.24716, -78.09730
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)9.Site number (show on attached map):S102 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet):800 11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet):2.7 Unable to assess channel depth. 12.Channel width at top of bank (feet):21.8 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam?Yes No 14.Feature type: Perennial flow Intermittent flow Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:15.NC SAM Zone: Mountains (M) Piedmont (P) Inner Coastal Plain (I) Outer Coastal Plain (O)
16.Estimated geomorphic19 valley shape (skip for Tidal Marsh Stream):
A B
(more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17.Watershed size: (skip Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi2) Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi2) Size 4 (≥ 5 mi2)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: 18.Were regulatory considerations evaluated?Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area. Section 10 water Classified Trout Waters Water Supply Watershed (I II III IV V) Essential Fish Habitat Primary Nursery Area High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters Publicly owned property NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect Nutrient Sensitive Waters Anadromous fish 303(d) List CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area. List species: Designated Critical Habitat (list species) 19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in “Notes/Sketch” section or attached?Yes No
1.Channel Water – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)A Water throughout assessment reach. B No flow, water in pools only. C No water in assessment reach.
2.Evidence of Flow Restriction – assessment reach metricA At least 10% of assessment reach in-stream habitat or riffle-pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams, beaver dams). B Not A
3.Feature Pattern – assessment reach metricA A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert). B Not A
4.Feature Longitudinal Profile – assessment reach metricA Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down-cutting, existing damming, over widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these disturbances). B Not A
5.Signs of Active Instability – assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability includeactive bank failure, active channel down-cutting (head-cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip-rap).A < 10% of channel unstable B 10 to 25% of channel unstable C > 25% of channel unstable
6.Streamside Area Interaction – streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).LB RB A A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction B B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down-cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching]) C C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an interstream divide
7.Water Quality Stressors – assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam) B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone) C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors) E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in “Notes/Sketch” section. F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc) I Other: No Buffer (explain in “Notes/Sketch” section) J Little to no stressors
8.Recent Weather – watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours C No drought conditions
9.Large or Dangerous Stream – assessment reach metricYes No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10.Natural In-stream Habitat Types – assessment reach metric10a. Yes No Degraded in-stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive sedimentation, mining, excavation, in-stream hardening [for example, rip-rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams) A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent vegetation C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter E Little or no habitat
F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms G Submerged aquatic vegetation H Low-tide refugia (pools) I Sand bottom J 5% vertical bank along the marsh K Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11.Bedform and Substrate – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11a. Yes No Is assessment reach in a natural sand-bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).A Riffle-run section (evaluate 11c) B Pool-glide section (evaluate 11d) C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach – whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare (R)= present but < 10%, Common (C) = > 10-40%, Abundant (A) = > 40-70%, Predominant (P) = > 70%. Cumulative percentagesshould not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.NP R C A P Bedrock/saprolite Boulder (256 – 4096 mm) Cobble (64 – 256 mm) Gravel (2 – 64 mm) Sand (.062 – 2 mm) Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm) Detritus Artificial (rip-rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. Yes No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Ch
e
c
k

f
o
r

T
id
a
l

Ma
r
s
h

S
t
r
e
a
m
s

On
l
y

12.Aquatic Life – assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)12a. Yes No Was an in-stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual? If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. No Water Other:
12b. Yes No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to “individuals” for Size 1 and 2 streams and “taxa” for Size 3 and 4 streams. Adult frogs Aquatic reptiles Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) Beetles Caddisfly larvae (T) Asian clam (Corbicula) Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp) Damselfly and dragonfly larvae Dipterans Mayfly larvae (E) Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae) Midges/mosquito larvae Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea) Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula) Other fish Salamanders/tadpoles Snails Stonefly larvae (P) Tipulid larvae Worms/leeches
13.Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.LB RB A A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area B B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area C C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction, livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14.Streamside Area Water Storage – streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.LB RB A A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water ≥ 6 inches deep B B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep C C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15.Wetland Presence – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normalwetted perimeter of assessment reach.LB RB Y Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area? N N
16.Baseflow Contributors – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges) B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins) C Obstruction passing flow during low-flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom-release dam, weir) D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage) E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present) F None of the above
17.Baseflow Detractors – assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation) B Obstruction not passing flow during low-flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit) C Urban stream (≥ 24% impervious surface for watershed)D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge F None of the above
18.Shading – assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)Consider aspect. Consider “leaf-on” condition.A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes) B Degraded (example: scattered trees) C Stream shading is gone or largely absent
19.Buffer Width – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider “vegetated buffer” and “wooded buffer” separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.Vegetated Wooded LB RB LB RB A A A A ≥ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed B B B B From 50 to < 100 feet wide C C C C From 30 to < 50 feet wide D D D D From 10 to < 30 feet wide E E E E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20.Buffer Structure – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 (“Vegetated” Buffer Width).LB RB A A Mature forest B B Non-mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure C C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide D D Maintained shrubs E E Little or no vegetation
21.Buffer Stressors – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but iswithin 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22:Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet LB RB LB RB LB RB A A A A A A Row crops B B B B B B Maintained turf C C C C C C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture D D D D D D Pasture (active livestock use)
22.Stem Density – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 (“Wooded” Buffer Width).LB RB A A Medium to high stem density B B Low stem density C C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23.Continuity of Vegetated Buffer – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.LB RB A A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent. B B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent. C C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24.Vegetative Composition – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes toassessment reach habitat.LB RB A A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse. B B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear-cutting or clearing or communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees. C C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted stands of non-characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25.Conductivity – assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)25a. Yes No Was conductivity measurement recorded?If No, select one of the following reasons. No Water Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).A < 46 B 46 to < 67 C 67 to < 79 D 79 to < 230 E ≥ 230
Notes/Sketch:
Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Speedman Stream Category lb1 Date of Assessment 9/7/2023 Assessor Name/Organization DPI,KVS,CMR/WLS
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) YES Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Intermittent
Function Class Rating Summary USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent (1) Hydrology LOW LOW (2) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM (2) Flood Flow LOW LOW (3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW LOW (4) Floodplain Access LOW LOW (4) Wooded Riparian Buffer LOW LOW (4) Microtopography NA NA (3) Stream Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM (4) Channel Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM (4) Sediment Transport HIGH HIGH (4) Stream Geomorphology LOW LOW (2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA NA (3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA NA (1) Water Quality(2) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM (2) Streamside Area Vegetation LOW LOW (3) Upland Pollutant Filtration LOW LOW (3)Thermoregulation LOW LOW (2) Indicators of Stressors YES YES (2) Aquatic Life Tolerance NA (2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA NA (1) Habitat(2) In-stream Habitat(3) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM (3) Substrate(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM (3)In-stream Habitat(2) Stream-side Habitat LOW LOW (3) Stream-side Habitat LOW LOW (3) Thermoregulation LOW LOW (2) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat NA NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA NA (4)Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA NA (3) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat NA NA (2) Intertidal Zone NA NA Overall LOW LOW
NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the “Notes/Sketch” section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION: 1. Project name (if any): Speedman 2. Date of evaluation:9/7/2023 3. Applicant/owner name:Water and Land Solutions 4. Assessor name/organization:DPI, KVS, CMR/WLS 5. County:Wayne 6. Nearest named water bodyon USGS 7.5-minute quad: Brooks Swamp 7. River basin:Neuse 8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach):35.24716, -78.09730
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)9. Site number (show on attached map):S102 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet):600 11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet):3.5 Unable to assess channel depth. 12. Channel width at top of bank (feet):20.0 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam?Yes No 14. Feature type: Perennial flow Intermittent flow Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:15. NC SAM Zone: Mountains (M) Piedmont (P) Inner Coastal Plain (I) Outer Coastal Plain (O)
16. Estimated geomorphic19 valley shape (skip for Tidal Marsh Stream):
A B
(more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi2) Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi2) Size 4 (≥ 5 mi2)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: 18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated?Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area. Section 10 water Classified Trout Waters Water Supply Watershed (I II III IV V) Essential Fish Habitat Primary Nursery Area High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters Publicly owned property NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect Nutrient Sensitive Waters Anadromous fish 303(d) List CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area. List species: Designated Critical Habitat (list species) 19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in “Notes/Sketch” section or attached?Yes No
1.Channel Water – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)A Water throughout assessment reach. B No flow, water in pools only. C No water in assessment reach.
2.Evidence of Flow Restriction – assessment reach metricA At least 10% of assessment reach in-stream habitat or riffle-pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams, beaver dams). B Not A
3.Feature Pattern – assessment reach metricA A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert). B Not A
4.Feature Longitudinal Profile – assessment reach metricA Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down-cutting, existing damming, over widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these disturbances). B Not A
5.Signs of Active Instability – assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability includeactive bank failure, active channel down-cutting (head-cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip-rap).A < 10% of channel unstable B 10 to 25% of channel unstable C > 25% of channel unstable
6.Streamside Area Interaction – streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).LB RB A A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction B B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down-cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching]) C C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an interstream divide
7.Water Quality Stressors – assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.A B C D E
F G H I J
Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam) Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone) Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem Odor (not including natural sulfide odors) Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in “Notes/Sketch” section. Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc) Other: No buffer (explain in “Notes/Sketch” section) Little to no stressors
8.Recent Weather – watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours C No drought conditions
9.Large or Dangerous Stream – assessment reach metricYes No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10.Natural In-stream Habitat Types – assessment reach metric10a. Yes No Degraded in-stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive sedimentation, mining, excavation, in-stream hardening [for example, rip-rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams) A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent vegetation C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter E Little or no habitat
F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms G Submerged aquatic vegetation H Low-tide refugia (pools) I Sand bottom J 5% vertical bank along the marsh K Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11.Bedform and Substrate – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11a. Yes No Is assessment reach in a natural sand-bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).A Riffle-run section (evaluate 11c) B Pool-glide section (evaluate 11d) C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach – whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare (R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) = > 10-40%, Abundant (A) = > 40-70%, Predominant (P) = > 70%. Cumulative percentagesshould not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.NP R C A P Bedrock/saprolite Boulder (256 – 4096 mm) Cobble (64 – 256 mm) Gravel (2 – 64 mm) Sand (.062 – 2 mm) Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm) Detritus Artificial (rip-rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. Yes No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Ch
e
c
k

f
o
r

T
id
a
l

Ma
r
s
h

S
t
r
e
a
m
s

On
l
y

12.Aquatic Life – assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)12a. Yes No Was an in-stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual? If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. No Water Other:
12b. Yes No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to “individuals” for Size 1 and 2 streams and “taxa” for Size 3 and 4 streams. Adult frogs Aquatic reptiles Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) Beetles Caddisfly larvae (T) Asian clam (Corbicula) Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp) Damselfly and dragonfly larvae Dipterans Mayfly larvae (E) Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae) Midges/mosquito larvae Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea) Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula) Other fish Salamanders/tadpoles Snails Stonefly larvae (P) Tipulid larvae Worms/leeches
13.Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.LB RB A A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area B B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area C C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction, livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14.Streamside Area Water Storage – streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.LB RB A A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water ≥ 6 inches deep B B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep C C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15.Wetland Presence – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normalwetted perimeter of assessment reach.LB RB Y Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area? N N
16.Baseflow Contributors – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges) B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins) C Obstruction passing flow during low-flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom-release dam, weir) D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage) E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present) F None of the above
17.Baseflow Detractors – assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation) B Obstruction not passing flow during low-flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit) C Urban stream (≥ 24% impervious surface for watershed)D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge F None of the above
18.Shading – assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)Consider aspect. Consider “leaf-on” condition.A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes) B Degraded (example: scattered trees) C Stream shading is gone or largely absent
19.Buffer Width – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider “vegetated buffer” and “wooded buffer” separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.Vegetated Wooded LB RB LB RB A A A A ≥ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed B B B B From 50 to < 100 feet wide C C C C From 30 to < 50 feet wide D D D D From 10 to < 30 feet wide E E E E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20.Buffer Structure – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 (“Vegetated” Buffer Width).LB RB A A Mature forest B B Non-mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure C C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide D D Maintained shrubs E E Little or no vegetation
21.Buffer Stressors – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but iswithin 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22:Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet LB RB LB RB LB RB A A A A A A Row crops B B B B B B Maintained turf C C C C C C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture D D D D D D Pasture (active livestock use)
22.Stem Density – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 (“Wooded” Buffer Width).LB RB A A Medium to high stem density B B Low stem density C C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23.Continuity of Vegetated Buffer – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.LB RB A A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent. B B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent. C C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24.Vegetative Composition – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes toassessment reach habitat.LB RB A A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse. B B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear-cutting or clearing or communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees. C C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted stands of non-characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25.Conductivity – assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)25a. Yes No Was conductivity measurement recorded?If No, select one of the following reasons. No Water Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).A < 46 B 46 to < 67 C 67 to < 79 D 79 to < 230 E ≥ 230
Notes/Sketch:
Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Speedman Stream Category lb1 Date of Assessment 9/7/2023 Assessor Name/Organization DPI,KVS,CMR/WLS
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) YES Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Intermittent
Function Class Rating Summary USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent (1) Hydrology LOW LOW (2) Baseflow HIGH HIGH (2) Flood Flow LOW LOW (3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW LOW (4) Floodplain Access LOW LOW (4) Wooded Riparian Buffer LOW LOW (4) Microtopography NA NA (3) Stream Stability LOW LOW (4) Channel Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM (4) Sediment Transport LOW LOW (4) Stream Geomorphology LOW LOW (2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA NA
(2)Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA NA
(2)Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA NA (3)Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA NA
(3)Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA NA (1) Water Quality LOW LOW (2) Baseflow HIGH HIGH (2) Streamside Area Vegetation LOW LOW (3) Upland Pollutant Filtration LOW LOW (3)Thermoregulation LOW LOW (2) Indicators of Stressors NO NO (2) Aquatic Life Tolerance OMITTED NA (2)Intertidal Zone Filtration NA NA (1) Habitat(2) In-stream Habitat(3) Baseflow HIGH HIGH (3) Substrate(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM (3)In-stream Habitat LOW LOW (2) Stream-side Habitat LOW LOW (3) Stream-side Habitat LOW LOW (3) Thermoregulation LOW LOW (2)Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat NA NA
(3)Flow Restriction NA NA
(3)Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA NA (4)Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA NA
(4)Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA NA (3)Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat NA NA (2)Intertidal Zone NA NA Overall LOW LOW

Appendix B - Adjacent Landowner
Information

Appendix B - Adjacent Landowner Information
Table 1. Speedman- Project Landowner Information
Parcel ID Number Owners of Record County Acres
2574160967; 2574272635 Edith S. Smith Wayne 66.8
2574077949 Michelle Baker Ford & Holly Baker
Harris Wayne 46.65

Table 2. Speedman- Adjacent Landowner Information
Owner of Record Mailing Address PARCEL #
Harvey Tyndall 1391 OBERRY RD MOUNT OLIVE, NC 28365-7037 2574096170
Michele Baker Ford & Thomas
Howard Ford Jr.
2114 LITTLE BROOK LN CLEARWATER, FL 33763-2415 2574083330
Holly Baker Harris 213 THUNDER SWAMP RD MOUNT OLIVE, NC 28365-7155 2564979608
Gore Ezzie 104 DEBBIE DR GOLDSBORO, NC 27530-7566 2564966744
Denise M. Simmons & Terry
Fitzgerald Simmons
309 THUNDER SWAMP RD MOUNT OLIVE, NC 28365-7157 2564966527
William McGowan 319 THUNDER SWAMP RD MOUNT OLIVE, NC 28365-7157 2564965497
Alberta Durham 349 THUNDER SWAMP RD MOUNT OLIVE, NC 28365-7157 2564965061
Arnold L. Flowers & Gloria D.
Flowers
3601 ARRINGTON BRIDGE RD SEVEN SPRINGS, NC 28578-8583 2574150766
Wade Heirs Durham
(Jeannette D. Bowden)
411 THUNDER SWAMP RD MOUNT OLIVE, NC 28365-7159 2574154966
Edith S. Smith PO BOX 54 MOUNT OLIVE, NC 28365-0054
2574166271; 2574266951; 2574285334
Wade Heirs Durham
(Shirley Bennett)
2623 HUNTINGTON AVE ALEXANDRIA, VA 22303-1405 2574260446
Christopher Scott Smith & Kimberly
Jernigan Smith
737 THUNDER SWAMP RD MOUNT OLIVE, NC 28365-7165 2575105085
Larry Andrew Beaman 1443 OBERRY RD MOUNT OLIVE, NC 28365-7039 2565919930
Pamela G. Beaman 188 THUNDER SWAMP RD MOUNT OLIVE, NC 28365-7152 2564985140
Marvin Joseph Beaman Jr. 1240 O'BERRY RD MOUNT OLIVE, NC 28365-7040 2564973568
Brian Kevin Jordan & Donna L.
Jordan
250 THUNDER SWAMP RD MOUNT OLIVE, NC 28365-7154 2564973306
Wanda Rose Williford 260 THUNDER SWAMP RD MOUNT OLIVE, NC 28365-7154 2564974202
Edna Edwards Et Al 126 E MAIN ST MOUNT OLIVE, NC 28365-2111 2564973180
Franklin Strickland Et Al 280 THUNDER SWAMP ROAD MOUNT OLIVE, NC 28365-7154 2564963949
William Strickland C & W 288 THUNDER SWAMP RD MOUNT OLIVE, NC 28365-7154 2564963889
Johnnie Mitchell Oliver 322 THUNDER SWAMP RD MOUNT OLIVE, NC 28365-7156 2564963316
Lillian Oliver Ashford 322 THUNDER SWAMP RD MOUNT OLIVE, NC 28365-7156 2564962280
Note: Listed in the table above are the names and mailing addresses for all the landowners adjacent to the
Speedman Mitigation Site.

Appendix C – Landowner Authorization
Forms