20160404 Ver 2_Edwards-Johnson_97080_MY6_2023_20231229

Monitoring Report – Year 6
FINAL VERSION
Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project
Calendar Year of Data Collection: 2023
NCDEQ DMS Project Identification # 97080
NCDEQ DMS Contract # 6825
Neuse River Basin (Cataloging Unit 03020201)
USACE Action ID Number: SAW-2016-00883
NCDEQ DWR Project # 2016-0404 V2
Johnston County, NC
Contracted Under RFP # 16-006477
Data Collection Period: March and October
2023 Submission Date: December 29, 2023
Prepared for:
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
Prepared by:

December 29, 2023
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
Attn: Emily Dunnigan
217 West Jones Street, Suite 3000-A
Raleigh, NC 27603

RE: WLS Responses to NCDEQ DMS Review Comments for Task 12 Draft Monitoring Report Year 6 for the
Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project, NCDEQ DMS Full-Delivery Project ID #97080, Contract #006825, Neuse
River Basin, Cataloging Unit 03020201, Johnston County, NC
Dear Ms. Dunnigan:
Water & Land Solutions, LLC (WLS) is pleased to present the Final Monitoring Report Year 6 for the Edwards-Johnson
Mitigation Project to the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) Division of Mitigation
Services (DMS). The Final Monitoring Report Year 6 was developed by addressing NCDEQ DMS’s review comments.

Under this cover, we are providing the Final Monitoring Report Year 6, and the required digital data for each (the .pdf
copies of the entire updated reports and the updated digital data) via electronic delivery. We are providing our
written responses to NCDEQ DMS’s review comments on the Draft Monitoring Report Year 6 below. Each of the
DMS review comments is copied below in bold text, followed by the appropriate response from WLS in regular text:

Report:

1. Appendix B, Table 5e: Please update the table with the correct CCPV depiction for the encroachment
areas. WLS Response: The table has been updated with the correct CCPV depiction for the encroachment
areas.

2. Appendix D, Figure 4: Please update with rainfall through November if possible. WLS Response: Rainfall
through November 2023 has been updated in the Appendix D Rainfall Table.

3. Reminder to update the bond through MY6 prior to invoicing. WLS Response: WLS will update the bond
prior to invoicing.

Electronic Deliverables:

1. Please submit the undercut bank location identified in the visual stream assessment table in digital
format. WLS Response: The Stream Problem Area shapefile has been included in the E-data submission.

Please contact me if you have any questions or comments.

Sincerely,

Water & Land Solutions, LLC

Alyssa Davis
Water & Land Solutions, LLC
7721 Six Forks Road, Suite 130
Raleigh, NC 27615
Office Phone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

Table of Contents
1 Project Summary ................................................................................................................................... 1
2 Project Background ............................................................................................................................... 1
2.1 Project Location, Setting, and Existing Conditions............................................................................. 1
2.2 Mitigation Project Goals and Objectives ............................................................................................ 1
2.3 Project History, Contacts, and Timeframe ......................................................................................... 2
3 Project Mitigation Components ............................................................................................................ 2
3.1 Stream Mitigation Types and Approaches ......................................................................................... 2
3.1.1 R1 Preservation ..................................................................................................................... 3
3.1.2 R2 Restoration ....................................................................................................................... 3
3.1.3 R3 (Upper Reach) Restoration .............................................................................................. 3
3.1.4 R3 (Lower Reach) Preservation ............................................................................................. 3
3.1.5 R4 Restoration ....................................................................................................................... 4
4 Performance Standards ........................................................................................................................ 4
4.1 Streams .............................................................................................................................................. 5
4.1.1 Stream Hydrology ................................................................................................................. 5
4.1.2 Stream Profiles, Vertical Stability, and Floodplain Access .................................................... 5
4.1.3 Stream Horizontal Stability ................................................................................................... 5
4.1.4 Streambed Material Condition and Stability ........................................................................ 6
4.1.5 Jurisdictional Stream Flow .................................................................................................... 6
4.2 Vegetation .......................................................................................................................................... 6
5 Monitoring Year 6 Assessment and Results .......................................................................................... 6
5.1 Stream Hydrology .............................................................................................................................. 6
5.2 Stream Horizontal & Vertical Stability ............................................................................................... 7
5.3 Jurisdictional Stream Flow Documentation ....................................................................................... 7
5.4 Vegetation .......................................................................................................................................... 7
5.5 Wetlands ............................................................................................................................................ 8
6 References ............................................................................................................................................ 9
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A Background Tables and Figures
Table 1 Project Mitigation Components
Table 2 Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3 Project Contacts
Table 4 Project Information and Attributes

Appendix B Visual Assessment Data
Figure 1 Current Condition Plan View (CCPV)
Table 5a-d Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Table 5e Vegetation Condition Assessment
Photos Stream Station Photographs
Photos Stream Problem Area Photographs
Photos Vegetation Problem Area Photographs

Appendix C Stream Measurement and Geomorphology Data
Table 7a Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table 7b Cross-section Morphology Data
Table 7c Stream Reach Morphology Data

Appendix D Hydrologic Data
Table 8 Verification of Flow Events
Figure 3a Hydrograph Data
Figure 3b Groundwater Gauge Data
Figure 4 Monthly Rainfall Data

Appendix E Correspondence
DMS Boundary Inspection Report Letter – May 24, 2023
WLS Response Letter – June 15, 2023 with Attachment (Figure 1: Encroachment Map MY6)

Water & Land Solutions
Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project
FINAL Monitoring Report Year 6 Page 1
1 Project Summary
Water and Land Solutions, LLC (WLS) completed the construction and planting of the Edwards-Johnson
Mitigation Project (Project) full-delivery project for the North Carolina Department of Environmental
Quality (NCDEQ), Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) in March 2018. The Project is located in Johnston
County, North Carolina between the Community of Archer Lodge and the Town of Wendell at 35.7251°,
78.35636°. The Project site is located in the NCDEQ Sub-basin 03-04-06, in the Lower Buffalo Creek
Priority Sub-watershed 030202011504.
The Project involved the restoration, preservation, and permanent protection of four stream reaches (R1,
R2, R3, and R4) totaling 3,729 linear feet of streams and their riparian buffers. WLS staff visited the site
several times throughout Monitoring Year 6 (MY6) for monitoring activities. Data collection occurred in
March and October 2023. This report presents the data for MY6. The Project meets the MY6 success
criteria for stream hydrology, stream horizontal and vertical stability. Based on these results, the Project
is expected to meet the Monitoring Year 7 (MY7) success criteria in 2024.
2 Project Background
2.1 Project Location, Setting, and Existing Conditions
The Project site is located in the Lower Buffalo Creek Priority Sub-watershed 030202011504 study area of
the Neuse 01 Regional Watershed Plan, in the Wake-Johnston Collaborative Local Watershed Plan, and in
Targeted Local Watershed 03020201180050.
The catchment area is 223 acres and has an impervious cover less than one percent. The dominant
surrounding land uses are agriculture and mixed forest. Prior to construction, some of the riparian buffers
were less than 50 feet wide.
2.2 Mitigation Project Goals and Objectives
WLS established project mitigation goals and objectives based on the resource condition and functional
capacity of the watershed to improve and protect diverse aquatic resources comparable to stable
headwater stream systems within the Piedmont Physiographic Province. The proposed mitigation types
and design approaches described in the final approved mitigation plan considered the general restoration
and resource protection goals and strategies outlined in the 2010 Neuse River Basin Restoration Priority
Plan (RBRP). The functional goals and objectives were further defined in the 2013 Wake-Johnston
Collaborative Local Watershed Plan (LWP) and 2015 Neuse 01 Regional Watershed Plan (RWP) and
include:
Reducing sediment and nutrient inputs to the upper Buffalo Creek Watershed,
Restoring, preserving, and protecting wetlands, streams, riparian buffers, and aquatic habitat,
Implementing agricultural BMPs and stream restoration in rural catchments together as “project
clusters”.
The following site-specific goals were developed to address the primary concerns outlined in the LWP and
RWP and include:
Restore stream and floodplain interaction and geomorphically stable conditions by reconnecting
historic flow paths and promoting more natural flood processes,
Water & Land Solutions

Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project
FINAL Monitoring Report Year 6 Page 2

 Improve and protect water quality by reducing streambank erosion, nutrient and sediment inputs,
 Restore and protect riparian buffer functions and habitat connectivity in perpetuity by recording
a permanent conservation easement,
 Implement agricultural BMPs to reduce nonpoint source inputs to receiving waters.
To accomplish these site-specific goals, the following function-based objectives will be measured and
included with the performance standards to document overall project success as described in the table
below:
Functional Category
(Level) Functional Goal / Parameter Functional Design Objective
Hydrology (Level 1) Improve Base Flow Remove man-made pond dam and restore a
more natural flow regime and aquatic passage.
Hydraulics (Level 2) Reconnect Floodplain / Increase
Floodprone Area Widths
Lower BHRs from >2.0 to 1.0-1.2 and maintain
ERs at 2.2 or greater.
Geomorphology
(Level 3)
Improve Bedform Diversity Increase riffle/pool percentage to 70/30 and
pool-to-pool spacing ratio 4-7X bankfull width.
Increase Lateral Stability
Reduce BEHI/NBS streambank erosion rates
comparable to downstream reference
condition and stable cross-section values.
Enhance Riparian Buffer Vegetation
Plant or protect native species vegetation a
minimum 50’ wide from the top of the
streambanks with a composition/density
comparable to reference condition.
Physiochemical
(Level 4) Improve Water Quality
Install water quality treatment basins along
the riparian corridor and reduce sediment and
nutrient levels.
Biology
(Level 5)
Improve Macroinvertebrate
Community and Aquatic Species
Health
Incorporate native woody debris and bedform
diversity into channel and change DWR
bioclassification rating from ‘Poor’ to a
minimum ‘Fair’ by Monitoring Year 7.

2.3 Project History, Contacts, and Timeframe
The chronology of the project history and activity is presented in Table 2. Relevant project contact
information is presented in Table 3. Relevant project background information is presented in Table 4.
3 Project Mitigation Components
Refer to Figure 1 and Table 1 for the project components/asset information. A recorded conservation
easement consisting of 10.96 acres protects and preserves all stream reaches, existing wetland areas, and
riparian buffers in perpetuity.
3.1 Stream Mitigation Types and Approaches
Stream restoration practices involved raising the existing streambed and reconnecting the stream to the
relic floodplain. Some portions of the existing degraded channels that were abandoned within the
restoration areas were filled to decrease surface and subsurface drainage and raise the local water table.
The project also included restoring, enhancing, and protecting riparian buffers and riparian wetlands
within the conservation easement. The vegetative components of this project included stream bank,
Water & Land Solutions

Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project
FINAL Monitoring Report Year 6 Page 3

floodplain, and transitional upland zone planting. The Site was planted with native species riparian buffer
vegetation and is now protected through a permanent conservation easement. Table 1 (Appendix A) and
Figure 1 (Appendix B) provide a summary of the project components.
3.1.1 R1 Preservation
Preservation was implemented along this reach since the existing stream and wetland system is mostly
stable with a mature riparian buffer due to minimal historic impacts. The preservation area is being
protected in perpetuity through a permanent conservation easement. This approach will extend the
wildlife corridor from the Buffalo Creek floodplain boundary throughout a majority of the riparian valley,
while providing a hydrologic connection and critical habitat linkage within the catchment area.
3.1.2 R2 Restoration
Work along R2 involved a Priority Level I Restoration approach by raising the bed elevation and
reconnecting the stream with its abandoned floodplain. This approach will promote more frequent over
bank flooding in areas with hydric soils, thereby creating favorable conditions for wetland re-
establishment. The reach was restored using appropriate riffle-pool morphology with a conservative
meander planform geometry that accommodates the valley slope and width. This approach allowed
restoration of a stable channel form with appropriate bedform diversity, as well as improved biological
functions through increased aquatic and terrestrial habitats. Proposed in-stream structures included
constructed wood riffles for grade control and habitat, log j-hook vanes, and log weirs/jams for
encouraging step-pool formation, energy dissipation, bank stability, and bedform diversity. Riparian
buffers greater than 50 feet were enhanced and will be protected along the entire length of R2. Mature
trees and significant native vegetation were protected and incorporated into the design.
Bioengineering techniques such as vegetated geolifts and live stakes were also used to protect
streambanks and promote woody vegetation growth along the streambanks. The existing unstable
channel was filled to an elevation sufficient to connect the new bankfull channel to its active floodplain
using suitable fill material excavated from the newly restored channels and remnant spoil piles.
Additionally, water quality treatment basins were installed to reduce direct sediment and nutrient inputs.
3.1.3 R3 (Upper Reach) Restoration
A Priority Level I Restoration approach was implemented for the upstream portion to improve stream
functions and water quality. Prior to restoration activities, the reach exhibited both lateral and vertical
instability, as shown by active headcuts and moderate bank erosion. A new single-thread meandering
channel was constructed offline in this area before reconnecting with multiple relic channel features and
the existing channel alignment farther downstream. In-stream structures, including log riffles, log weirs
and log vanes were used to dissipate flow energy, protect streambanks, and eliminate potential for future
incision. Shallow floodplain depressions and vernal pools were created or preserved in the floodplain to
provide habitat diversity, nutrient cycling, and improved treatment of overland flows. Restored
streambanks were graded to stable side slopes, and the floodplain was reconnected to further promote
stability and hydrological function.
3.1.4 R3 (Lower Reach) Preservation
Preservation was implemented along this reach since the existing stream and wetland system is mostly
stable with a mature riparian buffer due to minimal historic impacts. The preservation is being protected
in perpetuity through a permanent conservation easement. This approach will extend the wildlife corridor
Water & Land Solutions

Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project
FINAL Monitoring Report Year 6 Page 4

from the Buffalo Creek floodplain boundary throughout a majority of the riparian valley, while providing
a hydrologic connection and critical habitat linkage within the catchment area.
3.1.5 R4 Restoration
The restoration of R4 involved raising the existing bed elevation gradually to reconnect the stream with
its active floodplain. Prior to restoration activities, the existing channel began experiencing backwater
conditions and sediment aggradation from a man-made pond. The failing dam and remnant spoil piles
were removed, and the pond was drained to reconnect the new stream channel with its geomorphic
floodplain. Channel and floodplain excavation in this reach segment included the removal of shallow
legacy sediments (approx. 12” depth) to accommodate a new bankfull channel and in-stream structures,
as well as a more natural step-pool morphology using grade control structures in the steeper transitional
areas. Shallow floodplain depressions were created to provide habitat diversity, nutrient cycling, and
improved treatment of overland flows. Riparian buffers greater than 50 feet were restored and protected
along all R4.
4 Performance Standards
The applied success criteria for the Project will follow necessary performance standards and monitoring
protocols presented in the final approved mitigation plan. Annual monitoring and semi-annual site visits
will be conducted to assess the condition of the project throughout the monitoring period. Monitoring
activities will be conducted for a period of seven years, with the final duration dependent upon
performance trends toward achieving project goals and objectives.
The following Proposed Monitoring Plan Summary from the approved final mitigation plan summarizes
the measurement methods and performance standards. Specific success criteria components and
evaluation methods follow.
Functional
Category
(Level)
Project Goal /
Parameter
Measurement
Method Performance Standard Potential Functional
Uplift
Hydrology
(Level 1)
Improve Base Flow
Duration and
Overbank Flows (i.e.
channel forming
discharge)
Remove man-made
pond, pressure
transducer, regional
curve, regression
equations, catchment
assessment
Maintain seasonal flow for a
minimum of 30 consecutive
days during normal annual
rainfall.
Create a more natural
and higher functioning
headwater flow regime
and provide aquatic
passage.
Hydraulics
(Level 2)
Reconnect
Floodplain / Increase
Floodprone Area
Widths
Bank Height Ratio,
Entrenchment Ratio,
crest gauge
Maintain average BHRs at 1.2
and increase ERs at 2.2 or
greater and document
bankfull/geomorphically
significant flow events.
Provide temporary
water storage and
reduce erosive forces
(shear stress) in
channel during larger
flow events.

Geomorphology
(Level 3)

Improve Bedform
Diversity
Pool to Pool spacing,
riffle-pool sequence,
pool max depth ratio,
Longitudinal Profile
Increase riffle/pool
percentage and pool-to-pool
spacing ratios compared to
reference reach conditions.
Provide a more natural
stream morphology,
energy dissipation and
aquatic habitat/refugia.
Increase Vertical and
Lateral Stability
BEHI / NBS, Cross-
sections and
Longitudinal Profile
Surveys, visual
assessment
Decrease streambank erosion
rates comparable to
reference condition cross-
section, pattern, and vertical
profile values.
Reduce sedimentation,
excessive aggradation,
and embeddedness to
allow for interstitial
flow habitat.
Water & Land Solutions

Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project
FINAL Monitoring Report Year 6 Page 5

Functional
Category
(Level)
Project Goal /
Parameter
Measurement
Method Performance Standard Potential Functional
Uplift

Geomorphology
(Level 3) Establish Riparian
Buffer Vegetation
CVS Level I & II
Protocol Tree Veg
Plots (Strata
Composition and
Density), visual
assessment
Within planted portions of
the site, a minimum of 320
stems per acre must be
present at year three; a
minimum of 260 stems per
acre must be present at year
five; and a minimum of 210
stems per acre must be
present at year seven.
Increase woody and
herbaceous vegetation
that will provide
channel stability and
reduce streambank
erosion, runoff rates,
and exotic species
vegetation.
Physiochemical
(Level 4)
Improve Water
Quality N/A N/A
Reduction of excess
nutrients and organic
pollutants will increase
the hyporheic exchange
and dissolved oxygen
(DO) levels.
Biology
(Level 5)
Improve Benthic
Macroinvertebrate
Communities and
Aquatic Health
DWR Small Stream/
Qual v4 sampling, IBI
(MY7)
N/A
Increase leaf litter and
organic matter critical
to provide in-stream
cover/shade, wood
recruitment, and
carbon sourcing.
Note: Level 4 and 5 project parameters and monitoring activities will not be tied to performance standards nor
required to demonstrate success for credit release.
4.1 Streams
4.1.1 Stream Hydrology
Two separate bankfull events must be documented within the seven-year monitoring period. These two
bankfull events must occur in separate years. Otherwise, the stream monitoring will continue until two
bankfull events have been documented in separate years. In addition to the two bankfull flow events, two
geomorphically significant flow events (Qgs=0.66Q2) must also be documented during the monitoring
period. There are no temporal requirements regarding the distribution of the geomorphically significant
flows.
4.1.2 Stream Profiles, Vertical Stability, and Floodplain Access
Stream profiles, as a measure of vertical stability will be evaluated by looking at Bank Height Ratios (BHR).
The BHR shall not exceed 1.2 within riffles along the restored project reaches. This standard only applies
to the restored project reaches where BHRs were corrected through design and construction. In addition,
observed bedforms should be consistent with those observed for channels of the design stream type(s).
4.1.3 Stream Horizontal Stability
Cross-sections will be used to evaluate horizontal stream stability. There should be little change expected
in as-built restoration cross-sections. If measurable changes do occur, they should be evaluated to
determine if the changes represent a movement toward a more unstable condition (e.g., downcutting,
erosion) or a movement towards increased stability (e.g., settling, vegetation establishment, deposition
along the streambanks, decrease in width/depth ratio). Cross-sections shall be classified using the Rosgen
Stream Classification method, and all monitored cross-sections should fall within the quantitative
parameters defined for channels of the design stream type.
Water & Land Solutions
Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project
FINAL Monitoring Report Year 6 Page 6
4.1.4 Streambed Material Condition and Stability
Pebble counts or streambed material samples will not be collected per the DMS Pebble Count Data
Requirements memo sent on October 19, 2021. The IRT reserves the right to request pebble count
data/particle distributions if deemed necessary during the monitoring period.
4.1.5 Jurisdictional Stream Flow
The restored stream systems must be classified as at least intermittent, and therefore must exhibit base
flow with at least 30 days of continuous flow during years with normal rainfall conditions as described in
the approved mitigation plan.
4.2 Vegetation
Vegetative restoration success for the project during the intermediate monitoring years will be based on
the survival of at least 320, three-year-old planted trees per acre at the end of Year 3 of the monitoring
period and at least 260, five-year-old planted trees per acre at the end of Year 5 of the monitoring period.
The final vegetative restoration success criteria will be achieving a density of no less than 210, seven-year-
old planted stems per acre in Year 7 of monitoring. Planted vegetation (for projects in coastal plain and
piedmont counties) must average seven feet in height at Year 5 of monitoring and 10 feet in height at
Year 7 of monitoring. Volunteer stems will only be counted toward success if they are surviving for at
least 2 years, are at least 12 inches tall, and are species from the approved planting list. For all of the
monitoring years (Year 1 through Year 7), the number of Red maple (Acer rubrum) stems cannot exceed
20 percent of the total stems in any of the vegetation monitoring plots.
5 Monitoring Year 6 Assessment and Results
Annual monitoring was conducted during MY6 in accordance with the monitoring plan as described in the
approved mitigation plan to document the site conditions. All monitoring device locations are depicted
on the CCPV (Figure 1). MY6 results are provided in the appendices. The Project meets the MY6 success
criteria for stream hydrology, stream horizontal and vertical stability.
5.1 Stream Hydrology
Monitoring to document the occurrence of the two required bankfull events (overbank flows) and the two
required geomorphically significant flow events (Qgs=0.66Q2) within the monitoring period, along with
floodplain access by flood flows, is being conducted using a crest gauge. The gauge was installed on
December 12th, 2018 on the floodplain of and across the dimension of the restored channel at the left top
of Reach R2’s bank, immediately upstream of the confluence of Reach R2 and R4 (Figure 1). The gauge
will record the watermark associated with the highest flood stage between monitoring site visits.
Photographs are also being used to document the occurrence of debris lines and sediment deposition on
the floodplain during monitoring site visits. One bankfull event occurred during MY6 (see table below).
This event was documented using the described photography (Table 8). The documented occurrence of
two flow events in MY3 and the three flow events during MY2 satisfies the requirement of the occurrence
of four bankfull events (overbank flows) in at least two separate years.
Water & Land Solutions

Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project
FINAL Monitoring Report Year 6 Page 7

Bankfull Events Table
Monitoring Year Documented Bankfull Events Requirement Met
2 3 No
3 2 Yes
4 2 Yes
5 1 Yes
6 1 Yes

5.2 Stream Horizontal & Vertical Stability
Visual assessment and monitoring of eight permanent cross sections were utilized for assessment of MY6
horizontal and vertical stream stability. The visual assessments for each stream reach concluded that the
MY6 stream channel pattern, longitudinal profiles, and instream structure locations still closely match the
profile design parameters and MY0/baseline conditions. The MY6 plan form geometry or pattern still fall
within acceptable ranges of the design parameters for all restored reaches. Cross-section surveys were
not required for MY6 per the mitigation plan; they will be completed in MY7.
An area on the right bank of R2 located at the transition of R1 to R2 at station 16+13 has approximately
10 linear feet of undercut bank and was noted during a MY3 visual assessment (SPA1). This area is where
the transition from preservation to restoration occurs. This area was planted with live stakes in MY4 and
has stabilized throughout MY4/MY5/MY6 and will continue to be monitored in MY7. Photographs of the
area can be found in Appendix B.
5.3 Jurisdictional Stream Flow Documentation
Jurisdictional stream flow documentation and monitoring of restored intermittent reaches is achieved
using a flow gauge (continuous-read pressure transducer) within the thalweg of the channel towards the
middle portion of Reach R4 (Figure 1). Additionally, to determine if rainfall amounts are normal for the
given year, precipitation data was obtained from CLAY Central Crops Research Station in Johnston County,
approximately nine miles southwest of the site. The flow gauge documented that the stream exhibited
surface flow for 162 consecutive days from January 1st through June 11th, 2023, during a year with normal
rainfall conditions (Figure 3).
5.4 Vegetation
Vegetation plot surveys were not required during MY6 per the mitigation plan; surveys will continue in
MY7. The MY6 vegetation monitoring was conducted utilizing visual assessment throughout the
easement. An area of pine establishment (~0.82 acres) was noted during the IRT site visit in October 2022.
Pine in this area were thinned on November 22nd, 2022, using hand tools to allow desirable planted and
volunteer species to establish. Future management in this area will be documented in annual reports as
needed. The results of the visual assessment did not indicate any additional significant negative changes
to the existing vegetation community.
Water & Land Solutions

Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project
FINAL Monitoring Report Year 6 Page 8

Three small encroachment areas were noted along the hay field on the left side of R2 and right side of R4
totaling 0.05 acres. WLS added additional posts and horse tape along the area. The encroachments were
small and did not require any replanting of native stems.
During the MY5 DMS site walk in May 2023, DMS noted that the conservation easement corners were in
the incorrect locations in the portion of the easement below the crossing. Chris Cole, of Ascension Land
Surveying, LLC was hired to reset the easement corners in accordance with the recorded plat and deed.
The entirety of the easement below the crossing consisting of 9 corners was reset. The existing marked
easement ranged from a few feet minimum to approximately 50 feet maximum off the recorded plat. This
work was completed in September 2023, and all incorrectly placed signage was moved to the proper
easement line.
5.5 Wetlands
Wetland mitigation credits are not contracted or proposed for this project. One groundwater monitoring
well was installed during baseline monitoring along Reach R3. Two additional groundwater monitoring
wells are installed along Reach R3 near station 33 + 75 and 37 + 00 (Figure 3). These wells were installed
to document groundwater levels within the restoration area for reference and comparison to the
preservation areas, at the request of the NCIRT (DWR). No performance standards for wetland hydrology
success were proposed in the Mitigation Plan, and therefore, wetland mitigation monitoring is not
included for this project. The well data is presented in the appendices. Groundwater gauge 1 exhibited a
max consecutive hydroperiod of 118 days during the growing season or 51.98 percent. Groundwater
gauge 2 exhibited a max consecutive hydroperiod of 15 days during the growing season or 6.61 percent.
Groundwater gauge 3 exhibited a max consecutive hydroperiod of 72 days during the growing season or
31.28 percent.

Water & Land Solutions
Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project
FINAL Monitoring Report Year 6 Page 9
6 References
Doll, B.A., Grabow, G.L., Hall, K.A., Halley, J., Harman, W.A., Jennings, G.D., and Wise, D.E. 2003. Stream
Restoration A Natural Channel Design Handbook.
Harrelson, Cheryl C; Rawlins, C.L.; Potyondy, John P. 1994. Stream Channel Reference Sites: An Illustrated
Guide to Field Technique. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-245. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 61 p.
KCI Associates of NC, DMS. 2010. Using Pressure Transducers for Stream Restoration Design and
Monitoring.
Lee, M., Peet R., Roberts, S., Wentworth, T. CVS-NCEEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation, Version 4.1,
2007.
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Mitigation Services, Wildlands
Engineering, Inc. 2015. Neuse 01 Regional Watershed Plan Phase II. Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Mitigation Services, 2017. Annual
Monitoring Report Format, Data and Content Requirement. Raleigh, NC.
Rosgen, D. L., 1994. A Classification of Natural Rivers. Catena 22: 169-199.
Rosgen, D.L., 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology Books, Pagosa Springs, CO.
Schafale, M. P., and A. S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the natural communities of North Carolina,
third approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. NCDENR Division of Parks and
Recreation. Raleigh, NC.
United States Army Corps of Engineers. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
Technical Report Y-87-1. Environmental Laboratory. US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment
Station. Vicksburg, MS.
___. 1997. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Research Program. Technical Note VN-RS-4.1. Environmental
Laboratory. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station. Vicksburg, MS.
___. 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines, April 2003, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Wilmington District.
Water and Land Solutions, LLC (2017). Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project Final Mitigation Plan.
NCDMS, Raleigh, NC.
Appendix A:
Background Tables and Figures
Table 1: Project Mitigation Components
Table 2: Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3: Project Contacts
Table 4: Project Information and Attributes
Table 1. Mitigation Assets and Components
Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project (NCDEQ DMS Project ID# 97080)
Existing Mitigation As-Built
Project Wetland Footage Plan Footage or Approach
Component Position and or Footage or Acreage Restoration Priority Mitigation Mitigation
(reach ID, etc.)1 HydroType2 Acreage Stationing Acreage Level Level Ratio (X:1) Credits* Notes/Comments
R1 611 10+00 -16+11 611 611 P -10 61 Invasive Control, Permanent Conservation Easement.
R2 1007 16+11 - 27+94 1183 1180 R PI 1 1183 Full Channel Restoration, Invasive Control, Permanent Conservation Easement.
R3 (upper 629 27+94 - 36+09 815 853 R PI 1 815 Full Channel Restoration, Invasive Control, Permanent Conservation Easement.
R3 (lower)240 36+09 - 37+39 130 149 P -10 13 Invasive Control, Permanent Conservation Easement.
R4 815 10+00 - 19+36 951 936 R PI/PII 1 951
Full Channel Restoration, Pond Removal, Invasive Control, Permanent
Conservation Easement.
Stream
Non-riparian
Wetland Overall
(linear feet)(acres)Credits*
Riverine Non-Riverine
Restoration 2949 3,023.100
Enhancement
Enhancement I
Enhancement II
Creation * Mitigation Credits are from the final approved mitigation plan, as verified by the as-built survey.
Preservation 741
High Quality Pres
Length and Area Summations by Mitigation Category Overall Assets Summary
RP Wetland
NR Wetland
Stream
Restoration Level
Riparian Wetland
(acres)Asset Category
Elapsed Time Since grading complete:5 yrs 7 months
Elapsed Time Since planting complete:5 yrs 7 months
Number of reporting Years0:6
Data Collection Completion or
Activity or Deliverable Complete Delivery
Project Contract Execution N/A 3/18/2016
Final Mitigation Plan Submittal N/A 9/29/2017
Section 404 General (Regional and Nationwide) Permit Verfication N/A 1/12/2017
Begin Construction N/A 3/23/2018
Mitigation Site Earthwork Completed N/A 5/5/2018
Mitigation Site Planting Completed N/A 5/5/2018
Installation of Monitoring Devices Completed N/A 5/14/2018
Installation of Survey Monumentation and Boundary Marking N/A 8/13/2018
As-built/Baseline (Year 0) Monitoring Report Submittal 6/23/2018 12/3/2018
Year 1 Monitoring Report Submittal 11/24/2018 12/4/2018
Replant Encroachment (~0.04 acres)N/A 3/2019
Year 2 Monitoring Report Submittal 10/18/2019 12/31/2019
Replant Low Stem Density Areas (~0.43 acres)N/A 2/2020
Year 3 Monitoring Report Submittal 10/14/2019 11/3/2020
Replant Low Stem Density Area (~0.35 acres)N/A 2/2021
Year 4 Monitoring Report Submittal 9/15/2021 10/20/2021
Year 5 Monitoring Report Submittal 9/13/2022 11/30/2022
Reset Easement Corners and Signage N/A 9/1/2023
Year 6 Monitoring Report Submittal 10/10/2023 12/29/2023
Year 7 Monitoring Report Submittal N/A N/A
Bolded items are examples of those items that are not standard, but may come up and should be included
Non-bolded items represent events that are standard components over the course of a typical project, but the one listed may not be all inclusive.
The above are obviously not the extent of potential relevant project activities, but are just provided as example as part of this exhibit.
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project (NCDEQ DMS Project ID# 97080)
Mitigation Provider Water & Land Solutions, LLC
7721 Six Forks Road, Suite 130, Raleigh, NC 27615
Primary Project POC Catherine Manner Phone: [phone]
Construction Contractor RiverWorks Construction
114 W. Main Street, Suite 106, Clayton, NC 27520
Primary Project POC Bill Wright Phone: [phone]
Survey Contractor (Existing
Condition Surveys)
WithersRavenel
115 MacKenan Drive, Cary, NC 27511
Primary Project POC Marshall Wight, PLS Phone: [phone]
Survey Contractor (Conservation
Easement, Construction and As-
Builts Surveys)
True Line Surveying, PC
205 West Main Street, Clayton, NC 27520
Primary Project POC Curk T. Lane, PLS 919-359-0427
Planting Contractor RiverWorks Construction
114 W. Main Street, Suite 106, Clayton, NC 27520
Primary Project POC Bill Wright Phone: [phone]
Seeding Contractor RiverWorks Construction
114 W. Main Street, Suite 106, Clayton, NC 27520
Primary Project POC Bill Wright Phone: [phone]
Seed Mix Sources Green Resource
5204 Highgreen Ct., Colfax, NC 27235
Rodney Montgomery Phone: [phone]
Nursery Stock Suppliers Foggy Mountain Nursery (Live Stakes)
797 Helton Creek Rd, Lansing, NC 28643
Glenn Sullivan Phone: [phone]
Dykes & Son Nursery (Bare Root Stock)
825 Maude Etter Rd, Mcminnville, Tn 37110
Jeff Dykes Phone: [phone]
Monitoring Performers Water & Land Solutions, LLC
7721 Six Forks Road, Suite 130, Raleigh, NC 27615
Stream Monitoring POC Leah Farr Phone: (919) 971 - 4575
Vegetation Monitoring POC Leah Farr Phone: (919) 971 - 4575

Table 3. Project Contacts
Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project (NCDEQ DMS Project ID# 97080)
Reach 3 (upper) Reach 3 (lower) Reach 4
770 130 1176
unconfined unconfined unconfined
211 acres, 0.33 sq
mi
223 acres, 0.35 sq
mi 55 acres, 0.09 sq mi
Perennial Perennial Intermittent
C;NSW C; NSW C; NSW
E5(incised) E5(incised) G5c/Pond
C5 C5, D5 C5
IV V III/IV
N/A Zone AE N/A
Wetland 3
N/A
Supporting Docs?
Categorical
Exclusion
Categorical
Exclusion
Categorical
Exclusion
Categorical
Exclusion
N/A
Categorical
Exclusion
Categorical
ExclusionEssential Fisheries Habitat No N/A
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA or CAMA)No N/A
FEMA Floodplain Compliance Yes
Water of the United States - Section 401 Yes Yes
Yes
Endangered Species Act No Yes
Historic Preservation Act No N/A
Restoration or enhancement method (hydrologic, vegetative etc.)
Regulatory Considerations
Parameters Applicable? Resolved?
Water of the United States - Section 404 Yes Yes
Drainage class
Soil Hydric Status
Source of Hydrology
Size of Wetland (acres)N/A N/A
Wetland Type (non-riparian, riparian riverine or riparian non-riverine)
Mapped Soil Series
Evolutionary trend (Simon)I III/IV
FEMA classification N/A N/A
Wetland Summary Information
Parameters Wetland 1 Wetland 2
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
NCDWR Water Quality Classification C; NSW C; NSW
Stream Classification (proposed)C5 C5
Stream Classification (existing)C5 G5c
Table 4. Project Information and Attributes
Project Name Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project
County Johnston
Project Area (acres) 11.0
Reach 2
Length of reach (linear feet)611 1173
Project Drainage Area (Acres and Square Miles)223 acres, 0.35 sq mi
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area 2.30%
CGIA Land Use Classification 2.01.03, 2.99.05, 413, 4.98 (33% crops/hay, 16% pasture, 51%
mixed forest)
Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude)35.7245361 N, -78.3570806 W
Planted Acreage (Acres of Woody Stems Planted)3.69
Project Watershed Summary Information
Valley confinement (Confined, moderately confined, unconfined) unconfined unconfined
Drainage area (Acres and Square Miles)
Piedmont
Reach Summary Information
Parameters Reach 1
River Basin Neuse
DWR Sub-basin 30406
Physiographic Province
03020201USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit
96 acres, 0.15 sq mi 120 acres, 0.19 sq
mi
Appendix B:
Visual Assessment Data
Figure 1: Current Condition Plan View (CCPV)
Table 5a-d: Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Table 5e: Vegetation Condition Assessment
Stream Station Photographs
Stream Problem Area Photographs
Vegetation Problem Area Photographs
#0
XY
XY
XY
XY XY
XY
XYXY XY
XY
XY
XY
XY
!>
We
n
d
e
l
l

R
d
Lake W
e
n
d
e
l
l

R
d
35
+
0
0
X
S
-
8
X
S
-
7
X
S
-
6
PS-1
PS-2
PS-3
PS-4
PS-5
PS-6
PS-7
PS-8
PS-9
PS-11
PS-12
PS-13
PS-10
Encroachment 1
Encroachment 2
Encroachment 3
4
1
3
2
323/283
445/324
526/405
769/526
Legend
Conservation Easement
Top of Streambank
#0 Crest Gauge
!>Flow Gauge
Wetland Gauge
XY Photo Points
Pine Management Area (0.82 acres)
Water Quality Features
Pre-Construction Wetlands (2.4 acres)Stream Mitigation Type
Preservation
Restoration
Restoration (Field Adjustment)CVS Plots (MY5 Data)
Success Criteria Met
Encroachments 2023 (0.05 acres)
0 200 400
Feet ±
Access point:
35.72617°
78.35283°
Aerial: Google Earth March 2021
36
+
0
0
37
+
0
0
FIGURE1NAD 1983 2011 State Plane
North Carolina FIPS 3200 FT US
Edwards-Johnson Mitigation ProjectJohnston County, North Carolina
NCDMS Contract No. 6825
NCDMS Project No. 97080
October 2023
MY6
Current Conditions
Plan View
Monitoring Year 6
Wetla
n
d

R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e

G
a
u
g
e

2
Wetla
n
d

G
a
u
g
e

1
Wetla
n
d

G
a
u
g
e

3
R1
R2
R3 (upper)
R3 (lower)
R4
Table 5a Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Project Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project (NCDEQ DMS Project ID# 97080)
Reach ID R1
Assessed Length 611
1. Bank 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth
and/or scour and erosion 0 0 100% 0 0 100%
*2. Undercut
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting
appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest,
appear sustainable and are providing habitat.
0 0 100% 0 0 100%
3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100% 0 0 100%
0 0 100% 0 0 100%
2. Engineered
Structures 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 0 0 N/A
2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the
sill. 00 N/A
2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 0 0 N/A
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not
exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring
guidance document)
00 N/A
4. Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean
Bankfull Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at
base-flow.
00 N/A
Totals
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Number with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Footage with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Adjusted % for
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Major Channel
Category
Channel
Sub-Category Metric
Number
Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Total Number
in As-built
Number of
Unstable
Segments
Table 5b Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Project Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project (NCDEQ DMS Project ID# 97080)
Reach ID R2
Assessed Length 1,180
1. Bank 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth
and/or scour and erosion 0 0 100% 0 0 100%
*2. Undercut
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting
appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest,
appear sustainable and are providing habitat.
1 10 100% 0 0 100%
3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100% 0 0 100%
1 10 100% 0 0 100%
2. Engineered
Structures 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 29 29 100%
2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the
sill. 5 5 100%
2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 8 8 100%
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not
exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring
guidance document)
8 8 100%
4. Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean
Bankfull Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at
base-flow.
8 8 100%
Totals
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Number with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Footage with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Adjusted % for
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Major Channel
Category
Channel
Sub-Category Metric
Number
Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Total Number
in As-built
Number of
Unstable
Segments
Table 5c Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Project Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project (NCDEQ DMS Project ID# 97080)
Reach ID R3
Assessed Length 1,002
1. Bank 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth
and/or scour and erosion 0 0 100% 0 0 100%
*2. Undercut
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting
appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest,
appear sustainable and are providing habitat.
0 0 100% 0 0 100%
3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100% 0 0 100%
0 0 100% 0 0 100%
2. Engineered
Structures 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs.6 6 100%
2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the
sill. 00 N/A
2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms.1 1 100%
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not
exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring
guidance document)
4 4 100%
4. Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean
Bankfull Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at
base-flow.
4 4 100%
Number of
Unstable
Segments
Adjusted % for
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
Totals
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Number with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Footage with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Major Channel
Category
Channel
Sub-Category Metric
Number
Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Total Number
in As-built
Table 5d Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Project Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project (NCDEQ DMS Project ID# 97080)
Reach ID R4
Assessed Length 936
1. Bank 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth
and/or scour and erosion 0 0 100% 0 0 100%
*2. Undercut
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting
appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest,
appear sustainable and are providing habitat.
1 10 99% 0 0 99%
3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100% 0 0 100%
1 10 99% 0 0 99%
2. Engineered
Structures 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 22 22 100%
2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the
sill. 4 4 100%
2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 6 6 100%
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not
exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring
guidance document)
9 9 100%
4. Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining ~ Max Pool Depth : Mean
Bankfull Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at
base-flow.
9 9 100%
Totals
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Number with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Footage with
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Adjusted % for
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Major Channel
Category
Channel
Sub-Category Metric
Number
Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Total Number
in As-built
Number of
Unstable
Segments
Table 5e Vegetation Condition Assessment
Project Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project (NCDEQ DMS Project ID# 97080)
Planted Acreage1 3.6
1. Bare Areas Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material. 0.01 acres
Pattern and
Color 0 0.00 0.0%
2. Low Stem Density Areas Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on MY3, 4, or 5 stem count criteria. 0.1 acres solid light blue 0 0.00 0.0%
0 0.00 0.0%
3. Areas of Poor Growth Rates or Vigor Areas with woody stems of a size class that are obviously small given the monitoring year. 0.25 acres
Pattern and
Color 0 0.00 0.0%
0 0.00 0.0%
Easement Acreage2 10.97
4. Invasive Areas of Concern4 Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale).1000 SF Pattern and
Color 0 0.00 0.0%
5. Easement Encroachment Areas3 Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale).none Yellow Hatch 3 0.05 1.4%
CCPV
Depiction
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
% of Easement
AcreageVegetation Category Definitions
Mapping
Threshold
% of Planted
Acreage
Total
Cumulative Total
Vegetation Category Definitions
Number of
Polygons
Mapping
Threshold
CCPV
Depiction
Combined
Acreage
PS-1, Reach R1, facing upstream, April 12, 2018 (MY-00)
PS-2, Reach R1, facing downstream, Dec 6, 2018 (MY-01)
PS-1, Reach R1, facing upstream, March 2, 2023 (MY-06)
PS-2, Reach R1, facing downstream, March 2, 2023 (MY-06)
PS-3, Reach R2, facing upstream, Sta 17+00, April 23, 2018 (MY-00)PS-3, Reach R2, facing upstream, Sta 17+00, March 2, 2023 (MY-06)
PS-4, Reach R2, facing downstream, Sta 18+00, April 23, 2018 (MY-00)PS-4, Reach R2, facing downstream, Sta 18+00, March 2, 2023 (MY-06)
PS-5, Reach R2, facing downstream, Sta 19+50, Sept 17, 2018 (MY-00)PS-5, Reach R2, facing downstream, Sta 19+50 , March 2, 2023 (MY-06)
PS-6, Reach R2, facing upstream, Sta 20+75, April 23, 2018 (MY-00)PS-6, Reach R2, facing upstream, Sta 20+75, March 2, 2023 (MY-06)
PS-8, Reach R2, facing downstream, Sta 24+50, March 2, 2023 (MY-06)
PS-7, Reach R2, facing downstream, Sta 21+00, March 2, 2023 (MY-06)PS-7, Reach R2, facing downstream, Sta 21+00, April 23, 2018 (MY-00)
PS-8, Reach R2, facing downstream, Sta 24+50, April 23, 2018 (MY-00)
PS-9, Reach R2, facing upstream, Sta 25+75, April 23, 2018 (MY-00)PS-9, Reach R2, facing upstream, Sta 25+75, March 2, 2023 (MY-06)
PS-10, Reach R3, facing downstream, Sta 32+00, October 14, 2019 (MY-02)PS-10, Reach R3, facing downstream, Sta 32+00, March 2, 2023 (MY-06)
PS-11, Reach R4, facing upstream, Sta 13+00, June 11, 2018 (MY-00)PS-11, Reach R4, facing upstream, Sta 13+00, March 2, 2023 (MY-06)
PS-11, Reach R4, facing downstream, Sta 13+00, June 11, 2018 (MY-00)PS-11, Reach R4, facing downstream, Sta 13+00, March 2, 2023 (MY-06)
PS-13, Reach R4, facing upstream, Sta 17+00, June 11, 2018 (MY-00)
PS-12, Reach R4, facing upstream, Sta 14+00, June 11, 2018 (MY-00)
PS-13, Reach R4, facing upstream, Sta 17+00, March 2, 2023 (MY-06)
PS-12, Reach R4, facing upstream, Sta 14+00, March 2, 2023 (MY-06)
SPA1, Erosion on R2, March 17, 2020 (MY-03)SPA1, Erosion on R2, September 15, 2021 (MY-04)
SPA1, Erosion on R2, September 15, 2021 (MY-04)SPA1, Erosion on R2, September 13, 2022 (MY-05)
SPA1, Erosion on R2, March 2, 2023 (MY-06)SPA1, Erosion on R2, October 25, 2023 (MY-06)
VPA1, Encroachment Area , March 2, 2023 (MY-06)VPA1, Encroachment Area, October 25, 2023 (MY-06)
Pine management area along R4, November 22, 2022 (MY-05)Pine management area along R4, November 22, 2022 (MY-05)

Appendix C:
Stream Measurement and
Geomorphology Data
Table 7a: Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table 7b: Cross-section Morphology Data
Table 7c: Stream Reach Morphology Data

Parameter Parameter
Reach ID: R1 (Preservation)Reach ID: R2
Dimension (Riffle)Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Dimension (Riffle)Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max
Bankfull Width (ft)5.5 7.2 4.5 8.3 - - - -
Bankfull Width (ft)4.4 7.2 4.5 8.3 7.7 - 8.9 -
Floodprone Width (ft)30.0 80.0 10.0 20.0 - - - -
Floodprone Width (ft)30.0 70.0 10.0 20.0 20.0 50.0 32.0 -
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.4 0.8 0.8 1.6 - - - -
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.4 0.8 0.8 1.6 0.6 - 0.6 -
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.5 0.9 0.9 1.3 - - - -
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)1.3 1.5 0.9 1.3 0.9 - 1.2 -
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)4.1 5.0 3.0 5.0 - - - -Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)3.3 5.1 3.0 5.0 5.0 - 5.0 -
Width/Depth Ratio 8.2 15.2 6.2 14.2 - - - -
Width/Depth Ratio 8.2 15.2 6.2 14.2 12.0 - 16.0 -
Entrenchment Ratio 4.2 12.0 7.1 8.4 - - - -
Entrenchment Ratio 4.3 10.0 7.1 8.4 2.2 - 3.6 -
Bank Height Ratio 1.1 1.1 0.9 1.1 - - - -
Bank Height Ratio 1.1 1.6 0.9 1.1 1.0 - 1.0 -
Profile Profile
Riffle Length (ft)7.5 38.2 9.5 22.7 - - - -
Riffle Length (ft)17.0 44.0 9.5 22.7 10.0 30.0 12.0 34.0
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)0.011 0.014 0.009 0.015 - - - -
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)0.011 0.013 0.009 0.015 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Pool Length (ft)4.1 7.9 6.1 8.7 - - - -
Pool Length (ft)3.9 6.0 6.1 8.7 6.0 9.0 6.2 9.9
Pool Max Depth (ft)1.2 1.4 1.8 2.4 - - - -
Pool Max Depth (ft)1.2 1.3 1.8 2.4 1.1 1.5 1.1 1.6
Pool Spacing (ft)22.0 50.0 14.4 22.3 - - - -
Pool Spacing (ft)22.0 39.0 14.4 22.3 30.0 55.0 11.8 36.1
Pattern Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)22.0 28.0 23.4 29.0 - - - -
Channel Beltwidth (ft)28.0 23.4 29.0 28.0 51.0 27.0 46.0
Radius of Curvature (ft)11.3 19.1 11.2 17.5 - - - -
Radius of Curvature (ft)11.3 19.1 11.2 17.5 15.0 25.0 13.0 29.0
Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft)1.6 2.9 1.6 2.5 - - - -
Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft)1.6 2.9 1.6 2.5 2.0 3.0 2.1 3.5
Meander Wavelength (ft)27.0 60.0 43.4 65.1 - - - -
Meander Wavelength (ft)31.0 45.0 43.4 65.1 55.0 100.0 35.0 88.0
Meander Width Ratio 2.2 6.4 3.9 4.5 - - - -
Meander Width Ratio 2.3 6.4 3.9 4.5 3.0 8.0 4.4 7.6
Transport Parameters Transport Parameters
Boundary Shear Stress (lb/ft2)Boundary Shear Stress (lb/ft2)
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
Stream Power (W/m 2)Stream Power (W/m2)
Additional Reach Parameters Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Velocity (fps)Bankfull Velocity (fps)
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
Sinuosity Sinuosity
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
-
As-Built/ Baseline
Pre-
Restoration
Condition
Reference
Reach Data Design
----
0.012 0.015 -
Table 7a. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project (NCDEQ DMS Project ID# 97080)
-
-
0.010 0.015 -
-- -
---
C5 E5/C5 E5/C5
1.21 1.1 - 1.3 -
-
4.1 4.5 - -
20.0 --- -
E5/C5
-
- - - 2.00 -
Pre-Restoration
Condition
Reference
Reach Data Design
As-Built/
Baseline
0.012 0.015 0.012 0.013
26.0 -26.0 26.0
1.16 1.1 - 1.3
--0.49 -
4.7 4.7
--31.00 -
0.011 0.015 0.011 0.012
G5 E5/C5 C5 C5
4.1 4.5
1.17 1.17
Parameter Parameter
Reach ID: R3 (upper)Reach ID: R3 (lower) Preservation
Dimension (Riffle)Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Dimension (Riffle)Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max
Bankfull Width (ft)4.4 7.2 4.5 8.3 8.2 - 8.8 18.4 Bankfull Width (ft)4.4 7.2 4.5 8.3 - - - -
Floodprone Width (ft)30.0 70.0 10.0 35.0 30.0 80.0 27.0 38.0 Floodprone Width (ft)30.0 70.0 10.0 35.0 - - - -
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)1.0 1.8 0.8 1.6 0.7 - 0.3 0.6 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.4 0.8 0.8 1.6 - - - -
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)1.5 2.3 0.9 1.3 1.0 - 0.4 1.0 Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.5 0.9 0.9 1.3 - - - -
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)3.3 3.0 5.0 5.6 - 4.7 5.5 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)3.3 5.3 3.0 5.0 - - - -
Width/Depth Ratio 8.2 15.2 6.2 14.2 12.0 - 14.3 71.8 Width/Depth Ratio 8.0 20.0 6.2 14.2 - - - -
Entrenchment Ratio 4.3 10.0 7.1 8.4 3.7 8.0 1.5 4.3 Entrenchment Ratio 3.0 8.0 7.1 8.4 - - - -
Bank Height Ratio 1.1 1.7 0.9 1.1 1.0 - 1.0 1.1 Bank Height Ratio 1.0 - 0.9 1.1 - - - -
Profile Profile
Riffle Length (ft)33.0 55.0 9.5 22.7 12.0 33.0 10.0 30.0 Riffle Length (ft)11.0 22.0 9.5 22.7 - - - -
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)0.007 0.009 0.009 0.015 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Riffle Slope (ft/ft)0.008 0.009 0.009 0.015 - - - -
Pool Length (ft)8.0 13.0 6.1 8.7 8.0 11.0 7.0 10.0 Pool Length (ft)5.0 8.0 6.1 8.7 - - - -
Pool Max Depth (ft)1.4 2.0 1.8 2.4 1.4 2.0 1.1 1.6 Pool Max Depth (ft)1.3 1.7 1.8 2.4 - - - -
Pool Spacing (ft)22.0 39.0 14.4 22.3 25.0 51.0 11.8 35.5 Pool Spacing (ft)22.0 39.0 14.4 22.3 - - - -
Pattern Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)28.0 23.4 29.0 25.0 45.0 30.0 45.0 Channel Beltwidth (ft)28.0 40.0 23.4 29.0 - - - -
Radius of Curvature (ft)10.0 11.2 17.5 12.0 22.0 15.0 25.0 Radius of Curvature (ft)11.0 19.0 11.2 17.5 - - - -
Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft)1.6 1.6 2.5 2.0 3.0 2.5 4.2 Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft)1.6 2.9 1.6 2.5 - - - -
Meander Wavelength (ft)27.0 43.4 65.1 30.0 42.0 30.0 44.8 Meander Wavelength (ft)27.0 50.0 43.4 65.1 - - - -
Meander Width Ratio 6.4 3.9 4.5 3.3 5.1 5.1 7.6 Meander Width Ratio 6.4 8.5 3.9 4.5 - - - -
Transport Parameters Transport Parameters
Boundary Shear Stress (lb/ft2)Boundary Shear Stress (lb/ft2)
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
Stream Power (W/m2)Stream Power (W/m2)
Additional Reach Parameters Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Velocity (fps)Bankfull Velocity (fps)
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
Sinuosity Sinuosity
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
Pre-Restoration
Condition
Reference Reach
Data Design
As-Built/
Baseline
--0.51 -
0.007 0.015 0.009 0.009
0.009 0.015 0.011 0.011
--28.90 -
E5 incised E5/C5 C5 C5
4.1 4.5 5.7 4.5
34.0 -34.0 34.0
1.20 1.1 - 1.3 1.20 1.16
--2.00 -
29.00 -
Pre-Restoration
Condition
Reference Reach
Data Design
As-Built/
Baseline
0.009 0.015 --
37.0 ---
0.008 0.015 --
E5 E5/C5 --
4.1 4.0
1.21 1.1 - 1.3 --
--
--
2.00 -
--0.49 -
--
Parameter
Reach ID: R4
Dimension (Riffle)Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max
Bankfull Width (ft) 6.9 - 4.5 8.3 6.6 - 8.8 -
Floodprone Width (ft) 6.1 - 10.0 35.0 25.0 70.0 38.0 -
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 2.4 - 0.8 1.6 0.5 - 0.6 -
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 3.1 - 0.9 1.3 0.7 - 1.0 -
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft 2)15.8 - 3.0 5.0 3.6 - 5.5 -
Width/Depth Ratio 5.6 - 10.3 14.2 12.0 - 14.3 -
Entrenchment Ratio 1.0 - 2.0 5.0 3.8 10.0 4.3 -
Bank Height Ratio 1.7 - 0.9 1.1 1.0 - 1.0 -
Profile
Riffle Length (ft) 17.0 44.0 5.1 13.9 13.0 31.0 12.0 27.0
Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.019 0.027 0.017 0.026 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Pool Length (ft) 4.0 6.6 4.5 7.0 6.8 9.4 6.0 8.7
Pool Max Depth (ft) 1.9 2.2 1.1 1.7 1.1 1.6 1.1 1.6
Pool Spacing (ft) 38.0 87.0 10.0 30.0 22.0 50.0 19.0 41.0
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft) - - 23.4 29.0 22.0 35.0 19.0 31.0
Radius of Curvature (ft) - - 11.2 17.5 12.0 20.0 10.0 19.0
Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft) - - 1.6 2.5 1.8 3.0 2.1 3.4
Meander Wavelength (ft) - - 43.4 65.1 40.0 60.0 34.0 77.0
Meander Width Ratio - - 3.9 4.5 3.3 5.3 3.0 6.0
Transport Parameters
Boundary Shear Stress (lb/ft2)
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
Stream Power (W/m2)
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
Sinuosity
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
Design
As-Built/
Baseline
Pre-Restoration
Condition
Reference
Reach Data
--0.48 -
--2.00 -
7.0 4.0 4.5 4.5
16.0 -16.0 16.0
--24.50 -
G5c C5 C5 C5
1.06 1.1 - 1.2 1.15 1.14
0.019 0.015 0.017 0.017
0.018 0.015 0.017 0.017
Parameters Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankfull Width (ft) 8.9 7.7 8.6 7.8 N/A 8.2 N/A 8.4 13.3 5.8 6.1 N/A 5.0 N/A 9.2 9.3 8.7 7.8 N/A 7.6 N/A
Floodprone Width (ft) 32.0 32.0 34.0 34.0 N/A 35.5 N/A 31.0 30.7 31.0 31.0 N/A 30.6 N/A 40.0 40.4 40.0 40.0 N/A 38.1 N/A
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.6 0.7 0.6 0.6 N/A 0.6 N/A 0.8 0.5 1.1 1.1 N/A 1.3 N/A 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 N/A 1.5 N/A
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.3 N/A 1.4 N/A 1.7 1.6 1.8 1.9 N/A 1.9 N/A 2.0 2.1 2.3 2.3 N/A 2.3 N/A
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)5.2 4.9 4.9 4.9 N/A 4.9 N/A 6.7 6.5 6.5 6.5 N/A 6.5 N/A 10.4 11.0 11.0 11.0 N/A 11.0 N/A
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 15.9 11.4 15.0 12.4 N/A 13.6 N/A 10.6 27.8 5.1 5.8 N/A 3.8 N/A 8.2 7.9 6.8 5.5 N/A 5.2 N/A
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 3.6 4.2 4.0 4.4 N/A 4.3 N/A 3.7 2.3 5.4 5.1 N/A 6.2 N/A 4.3 4.3 4.6 5.1 N/A 5.0 N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 N/A 0.90 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
d50 (mm) N/A 0.8 1.8 1.7 0.6 N/A N/A N/A 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.6 N/A N/A N/A 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.6 N/A N/A
Parameters Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankfull Width (ft) 8.8 8.2 8.2 9.6 N/A 9.6 N/A 8.8 8.0 6.8 6.8 N/A 6.9 N/A 10.4 14.3 25.7 5.8 N/A 6.8 N/A
Floodprone Width (ft) 38.0 38.2 38.0 38.0 N/A 38.7 N/A 38.0 44.8 44.0 44.0 N/A 44.8 N/A 44.0 44.5 44.0 44.0 N/A 44.7 N/A
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 N/A 0.5 N/A 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 N/A 0.7 N/A 0.7 0.4 0.2 1.0 N/A 0.8 N/A
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 N/A 1.0 N/A 1.0 1.3 1.4 1.4 N/A 1.5 N/A 1.4 1.1 1.0 1.4 N/A 1.5 N/A
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)5.4 5.2 5.2 5.2 N/A 5.2 N/A 5.5 4.7 4.7 4.7 N/A 4.7 N/A 7.7 5.6 5.6 5.6 N/A 5.6 N/A
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 14.3 13.0 13.0 17.8 N/A 17.8 N/A 14.3 12.1 9.9 9.9 N/A 10.1 N/A 14.1 37.1 117.0 6.0 N/A 8.1 N/A
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 4.3 4.7 4.6 4.0 N/A 4.0 N/A 4.3 5.6 6.4 6.5 N/A 6.5 N/A 4.2 3.1 1.7 7.6 N/A 6.6 N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.0 N/A 0.97 N/A 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 N/A 1.02 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
d50 (mm) N/A 0.8 1.8 1.7 0.6 N/A N/A N/A 0.8 1.8 1.7 0.6 N/A N/A N/A 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.6 N/A N/A
Parameters Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankfull Width (ft) 18.4 18.1 27.2 28.5 N/A 20.3 N/A N/A N/A 24.8 24.7 N/A 14.0 N/A
Floodprone Width (ft) 27.0 31.7 64.0 59.1 N/A 64.7 N/A N/A N/A 135.8 131.0 N/A 136.5 N/A
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.2 N/A 0.2 N/A N/A N/A 0.2 0.2 N/A 0.3 N/A
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.4 N/A 0.6 N/A N/A N/A 0.8 0.7 N/A 1.0 N/A
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7 N/A 4.7 N/A N/A N/A 4.7 4.7 N/A 4.7 N/A
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 71.8 69.7 158.9 174.2 N/A 87.9 N/A N/A N/A 130.6 131.4 N/A 41.3 N/A
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 1.5 1.7 2.4 2.1 N/A 3.2 N/A N/A N/A 5.5 5.3 N/A 9.8 N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.0 1.1 0.9 N/A 0.82 N/A N/A N/A 1.0 1.0 N/A 1.00 N/A
d50 (mm) N/A 0.8 1.8 1.7 0.6 N/A N/A N/A 0.8 1.8 1.7 0.6 N/A N/A
Table 7b. Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary (Dimensional Parameters – Cross Sections)
Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project (NCDEQ DMS Project ID# 97080)
Cross Section 6 (Pool)
Cross Section 7 (Riffle) Cross Section 8 (Riffle)
Cross Section 1 (Riffle) Cross Section 2 (Pool) Cross Section 3 (Pool)
Cross Section 4 (Riffle) Cross Section 5 (Riffle)
Parameter Parameter
Reach ID: R1 (Preservation)Reach ID: R2
Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max
Profile Profile
Riffle Length (ft)--Riffle Length (ft)12 34
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)--Riffle Slope (ft/ft)0.017 0.029
Pool Length (ft)--Pool Length (ft)6.2 9.9
Pool Max depth (ft)--Pool Max depth (ft)1.1 1.6
Pool Spacing (ft)--Pool Spacing (ft)11.8 36.1
Pattern Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)--Channel Beltwidth (ft)27 46
Radius of Curvature (ft)--Radius of Curvature (ft)13 29
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)--Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)2.1 3.5
Meander Wavelength (ft)--Meander Wavelength (ft)35 88
Meander Width Ratio --Meander Width Ratio 4.4 7.6
Additional Reach Parameters Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification Rosgen Classification
Sinuosity (ft)Sinuosity (ft)
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
BF slope (ft/ft)BF slope (ft/ft)
3Ri% / Ru% / P% / G% / S%3Ri% / Ru% / P% / G% / S%
3SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% / Be%3SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% / Be%
3d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 /3d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 /
2% of Reach with Eroding Banks 2% of Reach with Eroding Banks
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other Biological or Other
0.013
MY5
1.17
C5
MY2
Table 7c. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Summary
Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project (NCDEQ DMS Project ID# 97080)
MY4
1.21
MY2 MY3Baseline MY1
C5
MY5
0.01
0.012
0.012
Baseline MY1 MY3 MY4
Pattern data will not typically be
collected unless visual data,
dimensional data or profile data
Pattern data will not typically be collected unless visual
data, dimensional data or profile data indicate
significant shifts from baseline
Pattern and Profile data will not typically be
collected unless visual data, dimensional data or
profile data indicate significant deviations from
baseline conditions
Pattern and Profile data will not typically be
collected unless visual data, dimensional data or
profile data indicate significant deviations from
baseline conditions
Parameter Parameter
Reach ID: R3 (upper)Reach ID: R4
Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max
Profile Profile
Riffle Length (ft)10 30 Riffle Length (ft)12 27
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)0.02 0.035 Riffle Slope (ft/ft)0.015 0.027
Pool Length (ft)710 Pool Length (ft)6 8.7
Pool Max depth (ft)1.1 1.6 Pool Max depth (ft)1.1 1.6
Pool Spacing (ft)11.8 35.5 Pool Spacing (ft)19 41
Pattern Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)30 45 Channel Beltwidth (ft)19 31
Radius of Curvature (ft)15 25
Radius of Curvature (ft)10 19
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)2.5 4.2 Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)2.1 3.4
Meander Wavelength (ft)30 44.8 Meander Wavelength (ft)34 77
Meander Width Ratio 5.1 7.6 Meander Width Ratio 36
Additional Reach Parameters Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification Rosgen Classification
Sinuosity (ft)Sinuosity (ft)
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
BF slope (ft/ft)BF slope (ft/ft)
3Ri% / Ru% / P% / G% / S%3Ri% / Ru% / P% / G% / S%
3SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% / Be%3SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% / Be%
3d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 /3d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 /
2% of Reach with Eroding Banks 2% of Reach with Eroding Banks
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other Biological or Other
Baseline
0.009
0.011
MY4 MY5
C5 C5
MY3BaselineMY1
1.16 1.14
0.017
MY1 MY5 MY2MY2MY3MY4
0.017Pattern data will not typically be collected unless visual
data, dimensional data or profile data indicate
significant shifts from baseline
Pattern data will not typically be collected unless visual
data, dimensional data or profile data indicate
significant shifts from baseline
Pattern and Profile data will not typically be
collected unless visual data, dimensional data or
profile data indicate significant deviations from
baseline conditions
Pattern and Profile data will not typically be
collected unless visual data, dimensional data or
profile data indicate significant deviations from
baseline conditions

Appendix D: Hydrologic Data
Table 8: Verification of Flow Events
Figure 3a: Hydrograph Data
Figure 3b: Groundwater Gauge Data
Figure 4: Monthly Rainfall Data

Date of Data Collection Date of Occurrence Method
Greater than Bankfull (Bkf) or
Qgs (Q2*0.66 = 50.66 CFS)
Stage? Photo/ Notes Measurement
9/17/2018 9/16-9/17/2018
Observed indicators of bankfull stage (wrack
lines) after storm event Bkf Photo N/A
7/26/2019 7/24/2019 Crest Gauge Bkf Photo .25 ft
8/20/2019 unknown Crest Gauge Bkf Photo .28 ft
9/6/2019 9/5/2019 Crest Gauge Bkf Photo .25 ft
9/6/2019 9/5/2019
Observed indicators of bankfull stage (wrack
lines) after storm event Bkf Photo NA
2/7/2020 2/6/2020 Crest Gauge Bkf & Qgs Photo
.85 ft
8/4/2020 8/4/2020 Crest Gauge Bkf & Qgs Photo
0.5 ft
1/13/2021 unknown Crest Gauge Bkf Photo 0.95 ft
7/13/2021 unknown Crest Gauge Bkf Photo 0.7 ft
4/1/2022 unknown
Observed indicators of bankfull stage (wrack
lines) after storm event Bkf Photo N/A
10/25/2023 unknown
Observed indicators of bankfull stage (wrack
lines) after storm event Bkf Photo N/A
10/25/2023
Table 8
Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project (NCDEQ DMS Project ID# 97080)
Figure 3a:

Longest consecutive days of flow: 162 days, January 1, 2023 - June 11, 2023.

Max Consecutive Hydroperiod: 118 days, April 6, 2023 - August 1, 2023, 51.98 % of Growing Season

Max Consecutive Hydroperiod: 15 days, April 6, 2023 - April 20, 2023, 6.61 % of Growing Season

Max Consecutive Hydroperiod: 72 days, April 6, 2023 - June 15, 2023, 31.28 % of Growing Season

Figure 3b - Groundwater Gauge Data
Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project (NCDEQ DMS Project ID# 97080)
MY6 2023
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Mean
Edwards-Johnson Wetland Gauge 1 M 6.17% 6.61% 64.76% 31.28% 51.98%32.16%
Edwards-Johnson Reference Wetland Gauge 2 M 39.21% 84.14% 5.29% 3.96% 6.61%27.84%
Edwards-Johnson Reference Wetland Gauge 3 N/A N/A 37.00% 6.61% 26.00% 31.28%25.22%
Annual Precip Total NA
WETS 30th Percentile 42.7
WETS 70th Percentile 51.8
Normal Y
Monitoring Gauge Name
Max Consecutive Hydroperiod: Saturation within 12 Inches of Soil
Surface (Percent of Growing Season)
WETS Station: 317994 - Smithfield Growing Season: 4/6-11/4 (227 days)
*30th and 70th percentile rainfall data collected from weather station CLAY - Central Crops Research Station in Clayton, NC.
**Incomplete Month
Month 30% 70% Observed
Oct-22 2.08 4.08 2.28
Nov-22 2.05 4.23 3.53
Dec-22 2.57 5.54 3.08
Jan-23 2.72 4.62 3.04
Feb-23 2.26 4.09 3.15
Mar-23 3.30 5.03 2.78
Apr-23 2.16 4.20 9.56
May-23 2.65 4.58 3.05
Jun-23 2.41 5.00 2.8
Jul-23 3.88 6.36 4.47
Aug-23 3.17 6.03 5.05
Sep-23 2.93 6.12 4.34
Oct-23 2.08 4.08 1.74
Nov-23 2.05 4.23 2.64
Dec-23 2.57 5.54 **
Figure 4: Monthly Rainfall Data
Edwards-Johnson Mitigation Project (NCDEQ DMS Project ID# 97080)
MY6 2023
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
Oct-22 Nov-22 Dec-22 Jan-23 Feb-23 Mar-23 Apr-23 May-23 Jun-23 Jul-23 Aug-23 Sep-23 Oct-23 Nov-23 Dec-23
Pr
e
c
i
p
i
t
a
t
i
o
n

(
i
n
)
Date
30-70 Percentile Rainfall Graph
Clayton, NC (CLAY - Central Crops Research Station)
Observed Rainfall 30th Percentile 70th Percentile

Appendix E:
Correspondence
DMS Boundary Inspection Report Letter – May 24, 2023
WLS Response Letter – June 15, 2023 with Attachment (Figure 1: Encroachment Map MY6)

1

May 24, 2023

Emily Dunnigan
Project Manager – Eastern Region
Division of Mitigation Services
Green Square
217 West Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27603

Subject: Boundary Inspection Report – MY6 Site
Edwards-Johnson, Johnston County, NC; DMS ID No. 97080

Emily,

The MY0 boundary inspection was conducted by DMS on May 24, 2023. The inspection was conducted in
accordance with the DMS Property Checklist which included an office review and a site visit to document site
conditions. The entire easement boundary was inspected during the site visit to validate easement integrity and
identify any potential issues on the site. This report summarizes those inspection results. Site photos and locations
are shown on the attached kmz map.

Office Review:
• The external crossing shown on the plat in the west-central section of the site was not used and no culvert was
installed.
• The MY1 report indicates an encroachment on the right floodplain of R1/R2 had been resolved with supplemental
marking and planting.

Field Inspection:
• The easement corners were adequately monumented with stamped aluminum caps.
• There was a misalignment between the mapped easement shape and the GPS measurements collected during
the site visit. The GPS corner points were shifted in all directions by variable distances.
• The corners were marked but visually obstructed by vine overgrowth in a few locations.
• In-line marker spacing was adequate except for the area along the field at R4 where the spacing exceeded the
200’ maximum.
• Multiple farming encroachments were observed along the field edges with widths ranging from 1-5 feet.
• A hunting tree stand was found within the easement of R4 (not permanent so no issue).

Action Items
• Inform the provider of the mapping discrepancy and validate survey/GIS mapping for the site. Resolve all property
issues prior to closeout.
• Recommend adding supplemental posts/horse tape markings at the field encroachment areas. Communication
should be initiated between the provider and the farmer to minimize the potential for future/ongoing encroachment.
• Monitor the deer stand area for any damage to vegetation or installation of a permanent stand.
• Clear obstructing vegetation from the easement signs.

2
Let me know if you have any questions or need additional information.

Sincerely,
Kelly Phillips
Property Specialist
NCDEQ-DMS
610 East Center Avenue, Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115
Cell: [phone]

cc: R:\EEP PROJECT LIBRARY FILES\PROJECT DELIVERABLES(REPORTS)\FD PROJECTS\Edwards-Johnson
006825 (#97080)\4_T2_Cons_Ease\DMS Easement Inspections

June 15th, 2023

NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
Attn: Emily Dunnigan
217 West Jones Street, Suite 3000-A
Raleigh, NC 27603

RE: WLS Responses to NCDEQ DMS Review Comments for action items for Boundary Inspection Report Year 6
for the Edwards Johnson Mitigation Project, NCDEQ DMS Full-Delivery Project ID #97080, Contract #006825,
Neuse River Basin, Cataloging Unit 03020201, Johnston County, NC

Dear Ms. Dunnigan:
Water & Land Solutions, LLC (WLS) is pleased to respond to the Boundary Inspection Report Year 6 for the
Edwards Johnson Mitigation Project to the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ)
Division of Mitigation Services (DMS). The Boundary Inspection Report Year 6 was developed by
addressing NCDEQ DMS’s review comments.

Under this cover, we are providing our written responses to NCDEQ DMS’s review comments on the
Boundary Inspection Report Year 6 below. Each of the DMS review comments is copied below in bold text,
followed by the appropriate response from WLS in regular text:

1. Inform the provider of the mapping discrepancy and validate survey/GIS mapping for the site.
Resolve all property issues prior to closeout. WLS response: Map discrepancies will be
evaluated and addressed prior to submittal of the MY6 Draft Monitoring Report this fall.
2. Recommend adding supplemental posts/horse tape markings at the field encroachment areas.
Communication should be initiated between the provider and the farmer to minimize the
potential for future/ongoing encroachment. WLS response: Posts and horse tape were added
along field edge in encroachment areas. The total encroachment areas added up to
approximately 0.05 acres. WLS will continue to monitor these areas during site visits to ensure
no encroachments continue and will contact the landowner as a precaution.
3. Monitor the deer stand area for any damage to vegetation or installation of a permanent
stand. WLS response: Monitoring will continue to take place to ensure vegetation isn’t damaged
and a permanent stand isn’t built.
4. Clear obstructing vegetation from the easement signs. WLS response: Vegetation cleared and
will continue to monitor and treat as needed.

Please contact me if you have any questions or comments.

Sincerely,

Water & Land Solutions, LLC

Leah Farr

Water & Land Solutions, LLC
7721 Six Forks Road, Suite 130
Raleigh, NC 27615
Office Phone: [phone]
Mobile Phone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
FIGURE1NAD 1983 2011 State Plane
North Carolina FIPS 3200 FT US
Edwards-Johnson Mitigation ProjectJohnston County, North Carolina
NCDMS Contract No. 6825
NCDMS Project No. 97080
November 2022
MY5
We
n
d
e
l
l

R
d
X
S
-
6
Encroachment 1
Encroachment 2
Encroachment 3
323/283
445/324
526/405
769/526
Legend
Conservation Easement
Top of Streambank
Water Quality Features
Pre-Construction Wetlands (2.4 acres)Stream Mitigation Type
Preservation
Restoration
Restoration (Field Adjustment)
Encroachments 2023 (0.05 acres)
0 90 180
Feet ±
Access point:
35.72617°
78.35283°
Aerial: Google Earth March 2021
37
+
0
0
36
+
0
0
Encroachment Map
MY6
6/14/2023