Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20200021 Ver 1_BullChute_100137_MY2_2023_20240201MY2 (2023) FINAL MONITORING REPORT    Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland   Mitigation Site   Randolph County, NC  Yadkin River Basin  Cataloging Unit 03040103     DMS Project ID No. 100137  Full Delivery Contract No. 7878‐01  RFP #16‐007878 (Issued: 5/6/2019)  USACE Action ID No. SAW‐2020‐00049  DWR Project No. 20200021    Data Collection: January ‐ November 2023  Submission:  January 2024                Prepared for:    NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY  DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES  1652 MAIL SERVICE CENTER  RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699‐1652         Clearwater Mitigation Solutions 604 Macon Place Raleigh, NC 27609 919-624-6901 clearwatermitigation@gmail.com January 17, 2024 Mr. Matthew Reid NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services Asheville Regional Office 2090 U.S. 70 Highway Swannanoa, NC 28778-8211 Re: Bull Chute – MY-2 Report (DMS Project No. 100137) Response to Comments Dear Mr. Reid, Please find below the response to comments on the Bull Chute MY-2 Report provided by DMS, dated January 4, 2024: 1) General: The MY2 monitoring summary included behind the cover page is a nice addition to the report. Thank you for providing this brief summary of the 2023 monitoring activities. Re: Noted, thank you. 2) 3.1 Stream Assessment: Please include additional information regarding bankfull events. Please list which monitored reaches recorded bankfull events and which ones did not. Please briefly discuss the malfunction/replacement of the UT4 gauge. Re: A summary of reaches that recorded bankfull events as well as a gauge malfunction summary were added to Section 3.1. 3) 3.1 Stream Assessment: Please include additional information regarding bankfull events. Please list which monitored reaches recorded bankfull events and which ones did not. Please briefly discuss the malfunction/replacement of the UT4 gauge. Re: A summary of reaches that recorded bankfull events as well as a gauge malfunction summary were added to Section 3.1. 4) 3.1 Stream Assessment: Please include additional information regarding the malfunction/ replacement of the UT3 and UT4a flow gauges. Re: A gauge malfunction summary was added to Section 3.1. 5) 3.2 Hydrology Assessment: Recommend revising discussion regarding Gauge 3 in this section. The hydrology data submitted with the draft report shows that Gauge 3 dropped below 12” for 14 days in April. The report indicates there were only 4 days below in April. I recognize that there was a 4 day period in April (4/3-4/6) below 12” CLEARWATER MITIGATION SOLUTIONS Bull Chute MY-2 Report Response to Comments P a g e | 2 Clearwater Mitigation Solutions 604 Macon Place Raleigh, NC 27609 919-624-6901 clearwatermitigation@gmail.com that prevented the success criteria from being met. Revising the discussion for clarity would be helpful. Re: The discussion of Gauge 3 has been revised to reflect the correct water levels in April. 6) 3.3 Vegetative Assessment: Section states that no vegetation areas of concern were identified in MY2. However, there is a low stem density area near VP19 that will receive supplemental planting and soil amendments this winter. Please revise this section and include a short discussion of this area and planned remediation work. Re: A brief discussion regarding the area of low stem density near VP19 has been added to Section 3.3. 7) 3.3 Vegetative Assessment: Include short discussion about invasive species treatment that occurred in October 2023. Please add Invasive Treatment to Table 14. Re: Invasive species treatment that took place in October 2023 included Chinese privet and multiflora rose along UT1, UT2, UT3, and UT4. This information has been added to Table 14. 8) During the 2022 Credit Release Meeting, the IRT requested that vegetation diversity be considered during species selection if supplemental planting occurs. Please consider this when the low stem density area is planted. Re: Vegetation diversity will be considered during species selection when supplemental planting occurs. A statement indicating this was added to the supplemental planting discussion in Section 3.3. 9) Please include an update in the MY3 report regarding the supplemental planting. Please include species, quantities, type (bare root, container, etc), and planting area size. Also, please make sure that species selected are from the approved Mitigation Plan. Re: Information regarding the proposed 2024 supplemental planting will be included in the MY3 monitoring report. Species will be selected from the approved Mitigation Plan with vegetation diversity taken into consideration. 10) Please include an update in the MY3 report regarding the action items identified during the boundary inspection that was conducted in November 2023. If the action items have been completed prior to submitting the MY2 final report, please update this report. Re: A summary of the November 2023 boundary inspection is located in Section 3.4 Monitoring Year 2 Summary. The action items are also listed and have not yet been completed. Completion information will be included in the MY3 report. CLEARWATER MITIGATION SOLUTIONS Bull Chute MY-2 Report Response to Comments P a g e | 3 Clearwater Mitigation Solutions 604 Macon Place Raleigh, NC 27609 919-624-6901 clearwatermitigation@gmail.com 11) CCPV – Recommend including the low stem density area near VP19 on the CCPV and updated Table 5 to reflect this area. Re: The CCPV has been updated to show the low stem density area near VP19 and Table 5 has been updated to reflect this area. 12) Crest Gauge graphs were not included in the hard copy draft. Please make sure final hard copies include all pages when submitted. Re: Crest gauge graphs are included in this submission. Apologies for the oversight. 13) Table 11: Recommend adding a column for “Monitoring Year” to Table 11 to make it easier to see when events occurred. Re: A column for “Monitoring Year” has been added to Table 11. 14) Bankfull Events: Recommend either only including bankfull photos from the current year or updating the photo label to show MY1, MY2, MY3, etc. Re: The bankfull event photo labels have been updated to show MY1 and MY2. 15) Bankfull Events: Photo 5 indicates a bankfull event on UT4, but the description of the event in Table 11 does not mention UT4. UT4 gauge data experienced a malfunction on the date of the photo (Feb. 12, 2023), but the photo can be used to document the event. Recommend revising table to clearly show which tributaries met the bankfull standard for each event. Re: A sentence has been added to the Feb. 12, 2023 bankfull event description in Table 11 that indicates bankfull events were documented via trail cameras on both UT3 and UT4 on this date. This information was also included in the bankfull summary in section 3.1. 16) Table 14: Please add two lines below MY1 and MY2 Monitoring Reports for Vegetation Survey and Stream Survey and include dates that data collection occurred for each entry. Table 14 in the MY1 Final Report included this, but the MY2 does not. Re: Lines have been added to Table 14 that show dates of data collection for Vegetation and Stream Surveys. CLEARWATER MITIGATION SOLUTIONS Bull Chute MY-2 Report Response to Comments P a g e | 4 Clearwater Mitigation Solutions 604 Macon Place Raleigh, NC 27609 919-624-6901 clearwatermitigation@gmail.com Digital Deliverable Review: 17) No comments. Please submit updated files based on comments above. Re: Noted. The digital files have been updated based on above comment responses. Please do not hesitate to contact me with questions at 919-624-6901. Sincerely, Kevin Yates   MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Executive Summary  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024  Bull Chute MY2, 2023 Monitoring Summary    General Notes   No encroachment was identified in Year 2 (2023).   No evidence of nuisance animal activity (i.e., heavy deer browsing, beaver activated, etc.) was  observed.     Streams    All streams within the Site are stable and functioning as designed. No stream areas of concern  were identified during MY2 (2023). Refer to Appendix A for the Visual Stream Morphology Stability  Assessment Table (Table 4A‐I) and Stream Photographs and Appendix C for Stream  Geomorphology Data.   Three bankfull events were documented during MY2 (2023) for a total of 6 bankfull events during  the 2 monitoring years (Table 11, Appendix D).    All Site tributaries showed evidence of channel formation during MY2 (2023), with each stream  flow gauge documenting greater than 30 consecutive days of flow (Tables 13A‐F and Flow Gauge  Graphs, Appendix D).    Wetlands   Seven of the 10 groundwater monitoring gauges met success criteria during MY2 (2023) (Appendix  D).    MY2 (2023) Groundwater Hydrology Data  Gauge  12% Hydroperiod Success Criteria Achieved ‐ Max Consecutive Days During Growing Season (Percentage)  Year 1  (2022)  Year 2   (2023)  Year 3  (2024)  Year 4  (2025)  Year 5  (2026)  Year 6  (2027)  Year 7  (2028)  1 No   1 day (0.4%)  No  2 days (0.8%)       2 Yes  62 days (25.4%)  Yes  48 days (20.5%)       3 No  19 days (7.8%)  No  11 days (4.7%)       4 No  7 days (2.9%)  No  5 days (2.1%)       5 Yes  124 days (50.8%)  Yes  136 days (58.1%)       6 Yes  63 days (25.8%)  Yes  131 days (56.0%)       7 Yes  64 days (26.2%)  Yes  49 days (20.9%)       8 Yes  63 days (25.8%)  Yes  54 days (23.1%)       9 Yes  45 days (18.4%)  Yes  221 days (94.4%)       10 Yes  33 days (13.5%)  Yes  221 days (94.4%)             MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Executive Summary  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024  Vegetation   Vegetation monitoring resulted in a sitewide stem density average of 609 planted stems per acre,  above the interim requirement of 320 stems per acre required at MY3. All 21 fixed vegetation plots  and 10 temporary plots met the interim success criteria (Appendix B).    There is an area of stunted vegetation within Plot 19 and directly adjacent to Plot 19 (~ 0.10‐acre),  likely due to previous construction activities at this location. Clearwater is planning to add soil  amendments and supplemental planting in this area in January/February 2024.    Site Monitoring Activity and Reporting History   Project Millstones  Stream  Monitoring  Complete  Vegetation  Monitoring  Complete  Wetland  Monitoring  Data Analysis  Complete  Completion  or Delivery  Construction Earthwork  ‐‐  ‐‐  ‐‐  ‐‐ March 8, 2022  Planting  ‐‐  ‐‐  ‐‐  ‐‐ March 18, 2022  As‐Built Documentation May 11, 2022 April 4, 2022  ‐‐ May 2022 June 2022  Year 1 Monitoring November 9, 2022 August 30, 2022 Jan. – Nov. 2022 November 2022 January 2023  Year 2 Monitoring June 16, 2023 August 24, 2023 Jan. – Nov. 2023 November 2023 January 2024      Site Maintenance Report (2023)  Invasive Species Work Maintenance work  Chinese privet and multiflora rose along UT1, UT2,  UT3, and UT4 were sprayed with herbicide using  backpack sprayers in October 2023.  Clearwater will be adding soil amendments and  supplemental planting in and around Plot 19  (~0.10‐acre) in Jan./Feb. 2024.      MY2 (2023) FINAL MONITORING REPORT    Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland   Mitigation Site   Randolph County, NC  Yadkin River Basin  Cataloging Unit 03040103     DMS Project ID No. 100137  Full Delivery Contract No. 7878‐01  RFP #16‐007878 (Issued: 5/6/2019)  USACE Action ID No. SAW‐2020‐00049  DWR Project No. 20200021    Data Collection: January ‐ November 2023  Submission:  January 2024    Prepared For:            And    Clearwater Mitigation Solutions Axiom Environmental, Inc.  604 Macon Place 218 Snow Avenue  Raleigh, North Carolina Raleigh, North Carolina 27603  Contact: Kevin Yates Contact: Grant Lewis  Phone: 919‐624‐6901 Phone: 919‐215‐1693    MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Table of Contents page i  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024  TABLE OF CONTENTS    1.0  PROJECT SUMMARY ................................................................................................................ 1  1.1  PROJECT BACKGROUND, COMPONENTS, AND STRUCTURE.................................................................. 1  TABLE 1. PROJECT MITIGATION QUANTITIES AND CREDITS ....................................................................... 2  TABLE 2.  SUMMARY: GOALS, PERFORMANCE, AND RESULTS .................................................................... 3  1.2  SUCCESS CRITERIA...................................................................................................................... 4  2.0  PROJECT MONITORING – METHODS ...................................................................................... 4  2.1  MONITORING ........................................................................................................................... 4  3.0  MONITORING YEAR 2 – DATA ASSESSMENT .......................................................................... 6  3.1  STREAM ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................................. 6  3.2  HYDROLOGY ASSESSMENT ........................................................................................................... 7  3.3  VEGETATIVE ASSESSMENT ........................................................................................................... 7  3.4  MONITORING YEAR 2 SUMMARY .................................................................................................. 7  TABLE 3.  PROJECT ATTRIBUTE TABLE ................................................................................................... 9  4.0  REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................... 10         MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Table of Contents page ii  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024  APPENDICES    Appendix A.  Visual Assessment Data  Figure 1.  Current Conditions Plan View  Table 4A‐I.  Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table  Table 5.  Vegetation Condition Assessment Table  Vegetation Plot Photographs  Site Photo Log    Appendix B.  Vegetation Plot Data  Table 6A.  Planted Bare‐Root Woody Vegetation  Table 6B.  Permanent Seed Mix  Table 7.  Vegetation Plot Counts and Densities  Table 8.  Vegetation Plot Data Table from Vegetation Data Entry Tool    Appendix C.  Stream Geomorphology Data  Cross‐Sections with Annual Overlays  Table 9A‐F.  Baseline Stream Data Summary Tables  Table 10A‐E.  Cross‐Section Morphology Monitoring Summary     Appendix D.  Hydrologic Data  Table 11. Verification of Bankfull Events  Table 12. Groundwater Hydrology Data  Groundwater Gauge Graphs  Tables 13A‐F. Channel Evidence  Surface Water Gauge Graphs  Figure D1. 30/70 Percentile Graph for Rainfall    Appendix E.  Project Timeline and Contact Info  Table 14.  Project Timeline  Table 15.  Project Contacts    Appendix F.  Boundary Inspection Report – MY2    MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) page 1  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024  1.0  PROJECT SUMMARY  Clearwater Mitigation Solutions has established the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services  (NCDMS) Bull Chute Stream & Wetland Mitigation Site (hereafter referred to as the “Site”). The  Site includes Unnamed Tributaries (UTs) to Caraway Creek in the Southern Outer Piedmont  ecoregion of North Carolina. The Site is located in the Yadkin River Basin, cataloguing unit  03040103 and Targeted Local Watershed and Local Watershed Plan Area (Caraway Creek)  03040103050040 and North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) subbasin number 03‐ 08‐38. Site watersheds range from approximately 0.008 of a square mile (5.4 acres) on UT2 to  0.19 of a square mile (120.9 acres) at the Site’s outfall.  1.1  Project Background, Components, and Structure  Located in Randolph County, less than one‐mile northwest of New Market and 4.5 miles  northwest of Randleman, the Site encompasses 31.7 acres. Restoration activities within the Site  included the construction of meandering, E/C‐type stream channel resulting in 6974 linear feet  of Priority I stream restoration, 617 linear feet of stream enhancement (Level I), 833 linear feet  of stream enhancement (Level II), 450 linear feet of stream enhancement (Level II with an  adjusted ratio), 3.13 acres of riparian wetland re‐establishment, 0.114 acres of riparian wetland  rehabilitation, and 1.462 acre of riparian wetland enhancement. The site is expected to provide  7742.933 warm water stream credits and 3.937 riparian wetland credits by closeout (Table 1,  page 2). A conservation easement was granted to the State of North Carolina and recorded at  the Randolph County Register of Deeds on April 9, 2021.    Prior to construction, the Site was characterized by disturbed forest and livestock pasture. Site  design was completed in May 2021. Construction started on September 6, 2021 and ended within  a final walkthrough on March 8, 2022. The Site was planted on March 18, 2022. Completed  project activities, reporting history, completion dates, and project contacts are summarized in  Tables 14‐15 (Appendix E).       Original Mitigation Original Original Original Plan As‐Built Mitigation Restoration Mitigation Project Segment Ft/Ac Ft/Ac Category Level Ratio (X:1) Credits Comments Stream UT 1 Reach A 173 187 Warm EII 2.50000 69.200 UT 1 Reach B 468 456 Warm EI 1.50000 312.000 UT 1 Reach C 68 68 Warm EII 2.50000 27.200 UT 1 Reach D 149 149 Warm EI 1.50000 99.333 UT 1 Reach E 2164 2168 Warm R 1.00000 2,164.000 UT 2 592 592 Warm EII 2.50000 236.800 UT 3 Reach A 418 423 Warm R 1.00000 418.000 UT 3 Reach B 306 303 Warm EII* 7.50000 40.800 UT 3 Reach C 1137 1119 Warm R 1.00000 1,137.000 UT 4A 410 402 Warm R 1.00000 410.000 UT 4B 295 290 Warm R 1.00000 295.000 UT 4C 180 175 Warm No Credit 0.00000 0.000 UT 4 2482 2492 Warm R 1.00000 2,482.000 Approx. 30 lf (approx. sta. 10+11 to 10+41) was realigned during  construction to avoid damaging mature trees. This resulted in an increase  of stream restoration footage along this reach at MY0. However, no  change to crediting is proposed for MY0. UT 5A 37 36 Warm No Credit 0.00000 0.000 UT 5B 38 38 Warm R 1.00000 38.000 UT 6 121 130 Warm No Credit 0.00000 0.000 UT 7 68 77 Warm EII* 5.00000 13.600 Total: 7,742.933 Wetland Wetland Reestablish ‐‐3.13 R REE 1.00000 3.130 Wetland Rehabilitation 0.114 0.114 R RH 1.50000 0.076 Wetland Enhancement 1.462 1.462 R E 2.00000 0.731 Total: 3.937 Project Credits Riparian Non‐Rip Coastal Warm Cool Cold Wetland Wetland Marsh Restoration 6,944.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Re‐establishment 3.130 0.000 0.000 Rehabilitation 0.076 0.000 0.000 Enhancement 0.731 0.000 0.000 Enhancement I 411.333 0.000 0.000 Enhancement II 333.200 0.000 0.000 Enhancement II* 54.400 0.000 0.000 *Enhancement Level II with an adjusted ratio (based on IRT comment and review). Creation 0.000 0.000 0.000 Preservation 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Totals 7,742.933 3.937 Total Stream Credit 7,742.933 Total Wetland Credit 3.937 Wetland Mitigation Category Restoration Level CM Coastal Marsh HQP High Quality Preservation R Riparian P Preservation NR Non-Riparian E Wetland Enhancement - Veg and Hydro EII Stream Enhancement II EI Stream Enhancement I C Wetland Creation RH Wetland Rehabilitation - Veg and Hydro REE Wetland Re-establishment Veg and Hydro R Restoration Table 1. Bull Chute Mitigation Site (ID‐100137) Project Mitigation Quantities and Credits Restoration Level Stream   MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) page 3  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024  Table 2.  Summary: Goals, Performance, and Results  Goals Objectives Success Criteria  (1) HYDROLOGY   Minimize downstream flooding to  the maximum extent possible.   Construct new channel at historic floodplain elevation to restore  overbank flows   Plant woody riparian buffer   Deep rip floodplain soils to reduce compaction and increase soil  surface roughness   Protect riparian buffers with a perpetual conservation easement   Construct channels with proper pattern, dimension, and  longitudinal profile   BHR not to exceed 1.2   Document four overbank events in separate monitoring years   Continuous intermittent surface flow for at least 30 days   Livestock excluded from the easement   Attain Wetland Hydrology Success Criteria   Attain Vegetation Success Criteria   Conservation Easement recorded   Increase stream stability within the  Site so that channels are neither  aggrading nor degrading.   Construct channels with proper pattern, dimension, and  longitudinal profile    Remove livestock from the property   Construct stable channels with appropriate substrate    Upgrade existing piped channel crossings and install piped  crossings at existing forded crossings   Stabilize stream banks   Plant woody riparian buffer   Cross‐section measurements indicate a stable channel with  appropriate substrate   Visual documentation of stable channels and structures   BHR not to exceed 1.2   < 10% change in BHR in any given year   Livestock excluded from the easement   Attain Vegetation Success Criteria  (1) WATER QUALITY   Remove direct nutrient and  pollutant inputs from the Site and  reduce contributions to  downstream waters.   Remove agricultural livestock and reduce agricultural land/inputs   Install marsh treatment areas   Plant woody riparian buffer    Restore/enhance jurisdictional wetlands adjacent to Site streams   Provide surface roughness and reduce compaction through deep  ripping/plowing   Restore overbank flooding by constructing channels at historic  floodplain elevation   Livestock excluded from the easement   Attain Wetland Hydrology Success Criteria   Attain Vegetation Success Criteria  (1) HABITAT   Improve instream and stream‐ side habitat.   Construct stable channels with appropriate substrate    Plant woody riparian buffer to provide organic matter and shade   Construct new channel at historic floodplain elevation to restore  overbank flows   Protect riparian buffers with a perpetual conservation easement   Restore/enhance jurisdictional wetlands adjacent to Site streams   Stabilize stream banks   Install in‐stream structures   Cross‐section measurement indicate a stable channel with  appropriate substrate    Visual documentation of stable channels and in‐stream  structures.   Attain Wetland Hydrology Success Criteria   Attain Vegetation Success Criteria   Conservation Easement recorded      MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) page 4  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024  1.2  Success Criteria  Monitoring and success criteria for stream restoration should relate to project goals and objectives  identified from on‐site NC SAM and NC WAM data collection. From a mitigation perspective, several  of the goals and objectives are assumed to be functionally elevated by restoration activities without  direct measurement. Other goals and objectives will be considered successful upon achieving  success criteria. The following summarizes Site annual success criteria.    Success Criteria  Streams   All streams must maintain an Ordinary High‐Water Mark (OHWM), per RGL 05‐05.   Continuous surface flow in intermittent streams must be documented each year for a minimum of 30  consecutive days.   Bank height ratio (BHR) cannot exceed 1.2 at any measured cross‐section.   BHR at any measure riffle cross‐section should not change by more than 10% from baseline condition during  any given monitoring period.   The stream project shall remain stable and all other performance standards shall be met through four  separate bankfull events, occurring in separate years, during the monitoring years 1‐7.  Wetland Hydrology   Saturation or inundation, measured annually, within the upper 12 inches of the soil surface for, at a minimum,  12 percent of the growing season*, during average climatic conditions.  Vegetation   Within planted portions of the site, a minimum of 320 stems per acre must be present at year 3; a minimum  of 260 stems per acre must be present at year 5; and a minimum of 210 stems per acre must be present at  year 7.   Trees must average 7 feet in height at year 5, and 10 feet in height at year 7 in each plot.    Planted and volunteer stems are counted, provided they are included in the approved planting list for the  site; natural recruits not on the planting list may be considered by the IRT on a case‐by‐case basis.   Any volunteer species on the approved planting list must be established for at least 2 years to count towards  success and will be subject to the average height standard.  *In accordance with IRT request after submittal of the MY0 report, the growing season for this site will be based on the latest 30‐ year WETS data (Station Asheboro 2 W, NC) and is defined as March 18 to November 16.  2.0  PROJECT MONITORING – METHODS  Monitoring will be conducted in accordance with 2016 NCIRT Guidelines. Monitoring will be  conducted by Axiom Environmental, Inc based on the schedule below. A summary of monitoring is  outlined in Section 3.1. Annual monitoring reports will be submitted to the NCDMS by Restoration  Systems no later than December 1 of each monitoring year data is collected.     Monitoring Schedule  Resource Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7  Streams         Wetlands         Vegetation         Visual Assessment         Report Submittal         2.1  Monitoring  The monitoring parameters are summarized in the following table.      MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) page 5  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina    January 2024  Monitoring Summary  Stream Parameters  Parameter Method Schedule/Frequency Number/Extent Data Collected/Reported  Stream Profile Full longitudinal survey As‐built (unless otherwise  required) All restored stream channels Graphic and tabular data.  Stream Dimension Cross‐sections Years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7 Total of 26 cross‐sections on  restored channels Graphic and tabular data.  Channel Stability  Visual Assessments Yearly All restored stream channels  Areas of concern will be depicted on a  plan view figure with a written  assessment and photograph of the area  included in the report.  Additional Cross‐sections Yearly Only if instability is documented  during monitoring Graphic and tabular data.  Stream Hydrology Continuous monitoring surface water  gauges and/or trail camera  Continuous recording through  monitoring period  6 surface water gauges on UT 1, UT  2, UT 3, UT 4A, UT 4B, and UT 7  Surface water data for each monitoring  period  Bankfull Events  Continuous monitoring surface water  gauges and/or trail camera  Continuous recording through  monitoring period  3 crest gauges on UT 1, UT 3, and  UT 4  Surface water data for each monitoring  period  Visual/Physical Evidence Continuous through  monitoring period  Periodic Site visits throughout the  year.  Visual evidence, photo documentation,  and/or rain data.  Wetland Parameters  Parameter Method Schedule/Frequency Number/Extent Data Collected/Reported  Wetland  Restoration Groundwater gauges  Years 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7  throughout the year with the  growing season defined as  March 18‐November 16*  10 gauges spread throughout  restored wetlands  Groundwater and rain data for each  monitoring period  Vegetation Parameters  Parameter Method Schedule/Frequency Number/Extent Data Collected/Reported  Vegetation  establishment and  vigor  Permanent vegetation plots 0.0247  acre (100 square meters) in size; CVS‐ EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation,  Version 4.2 (Lee et al. 2008)  As‐built, Years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7 21 plots spread across the Site Species, height, planted vs. volunteer,  stems/acre  Annual random vegetation plots,  0.0247 acre (100 square meters) in size As‐built, Years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7 10 plots randomly selected each  year Species and height  *In accordance with IRT request after submittal of the MY0 report, the growing season for this site will be based on the latest 30‐year WETS data (Station Asheboro 2 W, NC, 1992‐ 2022) and is defined as March 18 to November 16 (244 days). Soil temperature and bud burst documentation will not be required to verify growing season start dates.    Note: Photo points will be taken at all cross sections and at vegetation plot origin points. In addition, photo points will be located at  all culverts and crossings.    MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) page 6  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024  3.0  MONITORING YEAR 2 – DATA ASSESSMENT  Annual monitoring and site visits were conducted between January and November 2023 to assess  the condition of the project. Stream, wetland, and vegetation criteria for the Site follow the  approved success criteria presented in the Mitigation Plan and summarized in Section 1.2;  monitoring methods are detailed in Section 2.0.   3.1  Stream Assessment   Morphological surveys for MY2 were conducted on June 16, 2023. All streams within the Site are  stable and functioning as designed. Refer to Appendix A for the Visual Stream Morphology  Stability Assessment Table (Table 4A‐I) and Stream Photographs. Refer to Appendix C for Stream  Geomorphology Data. No stream areas of concern were identified during MY2 (2023).    Three bankfull events were documented during MY2 (2023) for a total of 6 bankfull events during  the 2 monitoring years (Table 11, Appendix D).     Bankfull Events by Tributary – MY2 (2023)   UT1 – 3 total bankfull events were recorded; February 12, April 8, and July 8, 2023 (all via  crest gauge).   UT3 – 2 total bankfull events were recorded; February 12 (via time‐lapse trail camera) and  July 8, 2023 (via crest gauge).    UT4 – 1 bankfull event was recorded; February 12, 2023 (via time‐lapse trail camera). See  below for description of the UT4 crest gauge malfunction.     Additionally, all Site tributaries showed evidence of channel formation during MY2 (2023), with  each stream flow gauge documenting greater than 30 consecutive days of flow (Tables 13A‐F and  Flow Gauge Graphs, Appendix D).    Gauge Malfunction Summary – MY2 (2023)  UT4 crest gauge data was initially collected for MY2 on April 17, 2023, however a shuttle failure  occurred, resulting in the loss of data up to this date. The gauge remained in working order  thereafter, but over the course of year 2 (2023) monitoring, the crest gauge showed a continued  upward trend in water level. This looks significantly different than the overall trend of other crest  gauges and seems indicative of a pressure sensor malfunction. The gauge will be replaced early  in the MY3 monitoring year to ensure accurate documentation of MY3 bankfull events on this  reach.     The flow gauge on UT3 malfunctioned starting on April 18, 2023, resulting in a loss of data. The  gauge was replaced when this was discovered on May 26, 2023, and the gauge continued working  the rest of the year. The flow gauge on UT4A also malfunctioned starting on January 27, 2023, in  which water levels were reading sporadically and incorrectly. The gauge was relaunched when  the issue was discovered on April 17, 2023, and read properly the rest of the year.        MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) page 7  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024  3.2  Hydrology Assessment  Seven of the 10 groundwater monitoring gauges met success criteria during MY2 (2023). The area  surrounding gauge 1 is characterized by hydrophytic vegetation and surface hydrology, but gauge  data are not indicative of this. Clearwater proposes to reinstall a new gauge prior to MY3 (2024)  monitoring.     Gauge 3 read above 12” for 9 days, followed by 4 days below 12” in April, then another 11 days  above 12”. This gauge would have met success criteria had it not been for the 4 days below 12”  in April. With normal to high rainfall, this gauge is expected to exceed the 10% hydroperiod.  Gauge 4 was installed in a non‐credit‐generating area to monitor the possible formation of  wetlands after the removal of drain tile upstream of the UT‐1 origin. It has not yet met success  criteria but will continue to be monitored during subsequent years. See groundwater gauge data  in Appendix D.  3.3  Vegetative Assessment  The MY2 (2023) vegetative survey was completed on August 24, 2023. Vegetation monitoring  resulted in a sitewide stem density average of 609 planted stems per acre, above the interim  requirement of 320 stems per acre required at MY3. All 21 fixed vegetation plots and 10  temporary plots met the interim success criteria. Please refer to Appendix A for Vegetation Plot  Photographs and the Vegetation Condition Assessment Table, and Appendix B for MY2  Vegetation Plot Data.     There is an area of stunted vegetation within and directly adjacent to Plot 19 (~ 0.20‐acre), likely  due to poor soil from previous construction activities at this location. Clearwater is planning to  add soil amendments and perform a supplemental planting in this area in January/February 2024.  Vegetation diversity will be considered at the request of the IRT, and species will be chosen from  the list on the approved mitigation plan. The area of low stem density is depicted on Figure 1  (Appendix A). A summary of the replanting effort, including species, quantities, type (bare root,  containerized, etc.), and planting area size will be included in the MY3 (2024) monitoring report.     Additionally, Chinese privet and multiflora rose along UT1, UT2, UT3, and UT4 were sprayed with  herbicide using backpack sprayers in October 2023. These areas will continue to be monitored  during subsequent monitoring years and may be retreated if necessary.  3.4  Monitoring Year 2 Summary  Overall, the Site looks good, is performing as intended, and is on track to meet success criteria.  All vegetation plots are on track to exceed the MY3 interim requirement of 320 planted stems  per acre, wetlands are trending toward success, and all streams within the Site are stable and are  meeting project goals.     A boundary inspection of the Site was conducted by NCDMS Property Specialist, Mr. Kelly Phillips  on November 16, 2023. The NCDMS boundary inspection report is in Appendix F. During the site  inspection there were no easement encroachments identified nor observed during MY2. The    MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) page 8  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024  cattle exclusion fencing is still intact along the entire perimeter of the conservation easement  boundary. There is a portion of a fallen tree across the fence on UT3, that will be removed. All  easement corners are marked with appropriately stamped aluminum caps atop #5 rebar. The  corners were generally well marked with appropriate conservation easement signs. Several  corners were missing a sign, and there were some areas of more than 200‐ft without a sign, as  identified in a .kmz provided by Mr. Phillips. Action items to properly identify the boundary and  bring it back into compliance will be conducted in January/February 2024, and are as follows:      Install witness signs/posts at each unmarked corner.   Install in‐line marking at a frequency of 200’ spacing or less. Shorter segments should have  the signs installed equidistant from the corners, but signs must be installed at a spacing  no greater than 200’.   Remove fallen tree from the exclusion fencing in the north central section of the site  (UT3).  UT 1UT 2UT 3UT 4UT 4A/B UT 4C UT 5UT 6UT 7 3022 592 1861 2482 705 180 75 121 68 3149 592 1907 2558 693 175 75 130 77 A, CA, CA, CA, CA, CA, CA, CA, CA, C 97.6 48.1 48.1 120.9 10.2/8.9 8.3 12.5 5.4 16 Int/Per Int Int/Per Per Int Int Int Int Int G5 ‐‐‐G5 Fg/G5 Eg/Cf5 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐---‐‐‐ Ce 3/4 ‐‐‐Ce 3/4 Ce 3/4 Ce 3/4 Ce 3/4 Ce 3/4 ‐‐‐Ce 3/4 IV IV IV IV IV III III III III 3040103050040 03‐07‐09 218.5 <2% Managed Herbaceous Cover & Hardwood Swamps 3.206 restored & 0.731 enhanced Riparian riverine Mecklenburg, Wynott‐Enon Complex, and field identified Wehadkee Variant Non‐hydric, Non‐hydric, and Hydric Reach Summary Information C Wetland Summary Information Wetlands Dominant Stream Classification (proposed) Dominant Evolutionary class (Simon) if applicable Valley confinement (Confined, moderately confined,  Drainage area (acres) Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral NCDWR Water Quality Classification Table 3. Project Attribute Table Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site  Randolph County, North Carolina 31.7 35.8325, ‐79.8879 Project Name County Project Area (acres)  Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude decimal degrees) Essential Fisheries Habitat No N/A Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA or CAMA) No N/A Water of the United States ‐ Section 404 Yes Yes Water of the United States ‐ Section 401 Yes Yes Endangered Species Act Yes Yes Historic Preservation Act Yes Yes N/A Mapped Soil Series Post‐project (acres) Wetland Type (non‐riparian, riparian) Parameters Section 404 Permit Section 401 CE Document CE Document N/A Parameters Applicable? Resolved? Soil Hydric Status Regulatory Considerations Supporting Docs? Project Watershed Summary Information Southern Outer Piedmont Yadkin Pre‐project (acres) Dominant Stream Classification (existing) River Basin DWR Sub‐basin Post‐project (feet) Pre‐project length (feet) Physiographic Province Parameters Project Drainage Area (acres) Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area   Land Use Classification  3.130 acre drained & 1.576 acre degraded USGS Hydrologic Unit 8‐digit   MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) page 10  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024  4.0  REFERENCES    Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth.  2008.  CVS‐EEP Protocol for Recording  Vegetation.  Version 4.2.  North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural  Resources, Ecosystem Enhancement Program.  Raleigh, North Carolina.    North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS).  2014.  Stream and Wetland Mitigation  Monitoring Guidelines. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Raleigh, North  Carolina.    North Carolina Stream Functional Assessment Team.  (NC SFAT 2015).  N.C. Stream Assessment  Method (NC SAM) User Manual. Version 2.1.    North Carolina Wetland Functional Assessment Team.  (NC WFAT 2010).  N.C. Wetland  Assessment Method (NC WAM) User Manual. Version 4.1.    Rosgen, D.  1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology (Publisher).  Pagosa Springs,  Colorado.    Simon A, Hupp CR. 1986. Geomorphic and Vegetative Recovery Processes Along Modified  Tennessee Streams: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Disturbed Fluvial Systems. Forest  Hydrology and Watershed Management. IAHS‐AISH Publ.      MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024                          APPENDIX A  Visual Assessment Data    Figure 1.  Current Conditions Plan View  Tables 4A‐I.  Stream Visual Stability Assessment  Table 5.  Visual Vegetation Assessment  Vegetation Plot Photographs  Site Photo Log     ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ #* ") #* !( !( #* #*!( #* !( #* #*#* !( !( !( !( !( !(#* ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_ ^_^_ ^_^_ 5 8 2 4 1 7 6 9 3 10 1A1B 2B 2A 3A 3B 4B 4A 9 8 2 6 5 7 10 1 3 4 1 5 9 3 8 6 2 4 7 11 12 19 17 14 10 18 20 16 21 15 13 NC Ce nt er f or G eo gr aphic I nf orm a tion & An aylsis FIGU R E Dra wn b y: Da te: Sca le : Pro jec t N o.: KRJ JA N 2024 1:3500 20-006 Tit le: Pro jec t: Pre pa red fo r: Randolph County, N C BULL C HU TEMITIGATION SITE CUR RE NTCONDITIONSPLAN VIEW 1 ³ 0 50 0 1,0 0 0250Fe e t Lege nd Bul l C hu te Sit e E ase me nt = 3 1.7 a c Asb u ilt Str uctu res Stre am Re stor ati on Stre am E nh an ce men t (Le ve l I) Stre am E nh an ce men t (Le ve l II) Stre am E nh an ce men t (Le ve l II, 5:1 ) Stre am E nh an ce men t (Le ve l II, 7.5 :1 ) Stre am Ge ne ra tin g No Cred it Wet la nd Re esta bl ishme nt Wet la nd Re ha bi lit at ion Wet la nd En ha nce me nt ^_Pho to Po in ts (Bri dg e Cro ssin gs) ^_Veg e tat io n P lo t Ori gi ns !(Grou n dwa te r Ga u ge s Me eti n g MY 2 Su cce ss Crit er ia !(Grou n dwa te r Ga u ge s No t Me e tin g MY2 Su ccess Cri te ri a ")Rai n Gau g e/So il Pro b e #*Stre a m Cre st Ga ug e #*Stre a m Fl ow Ga ug e Cross Se ct io ns Perma ne nt Ve ge ta ti on Pl ots Me et ing MY3 St em De n si ty Re qu ire men t 2x50 m Ra nd om Te mp or ary Pl ot s Me e tin g MY 3 S te m Den si ty Re qu ire men t MY 2 S tun te d Growt h Are a (Q1 2 02 4 Su pp le me nt al Pl an tin g ) U T-1 UT-1 U T - 2 UT-3 U T - 4 UT-4 UT-4A U T - 4 B UT-4C U T -7 UT-5 UT-6 X S - 1 XS-2 X S - 3 XS-4 X S - 5 X S- 6 XS-7 XS-8 XS-9 XS-10 X S -11 X S -1 2 X S - 1 3 XS-14 XS-15 XS-16 X S -1 7XS-18 X S -1 9XS-2 0 XS-21 XS-22 X S -2 3XS-2 4 XS-25 XS-26 N ote : B a se ma p i s d ron e i ma ge ry fro m A pri l 2 02 2 o ntop o f 20 18 ae ri al orth oi ma ge ry fro m N C On eMa p At re que st o f IRT, plot 2 0 wasmoved int o a nea rby we tlan dreestablishment ar ea pr ior t oMY1 m o nito ring. Table 4A.  Visual Stream Stability Assessment Reach UT 1 Assessed Stream Length 3149 Assessed Bank Length 6298 Bank Surface Scour/Bare  Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth  and/or surface scour 0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely.   Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable  and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical ‐ rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse 0 100% 0 100% Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the  sill. 46 46 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not  exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring  guidance document)  46 46 100% Survey Date: November 9, 2023 Major Channel Category Metric Number  Stable,  Performing as  Intended Total Number  in As‐built Amount of  Unstable  Footage % Stable,  Performing as  Intended Totals   Table 4B.  Visual Stream Stability Assessment Reach UT 2 Assessed Stream Length 592 Assessed Bank Length 1184 Bank Surface Scour/Bare  Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth  and/or surface scour 0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely.   Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable  and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical ‐ rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse 0 100% 0 100% Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the  sill. 0 0 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not  exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring  guidance document)  0 0 100% % Stable,  Performing as  Intended Totals   Survey Date: November 9, 2023 Major Channel Category Metric Number  Stable,  Performing as  Intended Total Number  in As‐built Amount of  Unstable  Footage Table 4C.  Visual Stream Stability Assessment Reach UT 3 Assessed Stream Length 1907 Assessed Bank Length 3814 Bank Surface Scour/Bare  Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth  and/or surface scour 0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely.   Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable  and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical ‐ rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse 0 100% 0 100% Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the  sill. 30 30 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not  exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring  guidance document)  30 30 100% % Stable,  Performing as  Intended Totals   Survey Date: November 9, 2023 Major Channel Category Metric Number  Stable,  Performing as  Intended Total Number  in As‐built Amount of  Unstable  Footage Table 4D.  Visual Stream Stability Assessment Reach UT 4 Assessed Stream Length 2558 Assessed Bank Length 5116 Bank Surface Scour/Bare  Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth  and/or surface scour 0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely.   Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable  and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical ‐ rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse 0 100% 0 100% Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the  sill. 27 27 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not  exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring  guidance document)  27 27 100% % Stable,  Performing as  Intended Totals   Survey Date: November 9, 2023 Major Channel Category Metric Number  Stable,  Performing as  Intended Total Number  in As‐built Amount of  Unstable  Footage Table 4E.  Visual Stream Stability Assessment Reach UT 4A Assessed Stream Length 401 Assessed Bank Length 802 Bank Surface Scour/Bare  Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth  and/or surface scour 0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely.   Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable  and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical ‐ rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse 0 100% 0 100% Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the  sill. 17 17 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not  exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring  guidance document)  17 17 100% % Stable,  Performing as  Intended Totals   Survey Date: November 9, 2023 Major Channel Category Metric Number  Stable,  Performing as  Intended Total Number  in As‐built Amount of  Unstable  Footage Table 4F.  Visual Stream Stability Assessment Reach UT 4B Assessed Stream Length 290 Assessed Bank Length 580 Bank Surface Scour/Bare  Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth  and/or surface scour 0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely.   Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable  and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical ‐ rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse 0 100% 0 100% Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the  sill. 10 10 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not  exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring  guidance document)  10 10 100% % Stable,  Performing as  Intended Totals   Survey Date: November 9, 2023 Major Channel Category Metric Number  Stable,  Performing as  Intended Total Number  in As‐built Amount of  Unstable  Footage Table 4G.  Visual Stream Stability Assessment Reach UT 4C Assessed Stream Length 175 Assessed Bank Length 350 Bank Surface Scour/Bare  Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth  and/or surface scour 0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely.   Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable  and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical ‐ rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse 0 100% 0 100% Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the  sill. 4 4 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not  exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring  guidance document)  4 4 100% % Stable,  Performing as  Intended Totals   Survey Date: November 9, 2023 Major Channel Category Metric Number  Stable,  Performing as  Intended Total Number  in As‐built Amount of  Unstable  Footage Table 4H.  Visual Stream Stability Assessment Reach UT 5 Assessed Stream Length 75 Assessed Bank Length 150 Bank Surface Scour/Bare  Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth  and/or surface scour 0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely.   Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable  and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical ‐ rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse 0 100% 0 100% Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the  sill. 0 0 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not  exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring  guidance document)  0 0 100% % Stable,  Performing as  Intended Totals   Survey Date: November 9, 2023 Major Channel Category Metric Number  Stable,  Performing as  Intended Total Number  in As‐built Amount of  Unstable  Footage Table 4I.  Visual Stream Stability Assessment Reach UT 7 Assessed Stream Length 77 Assessed Bank Length 154 Bank Surface Scour/Bare  Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth  and/or surface scour 0 100% Toe Erosion Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure appears likely.   Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable  and are providing habitat. 0 100% Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical ‐ rotational, slumping, calving, or collapse 0 100% 0 100% Structure Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the  sill. 1 1 100% Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not  exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in DMS monitoring  guidance document)  1 1 100% % Stable,  Performing as  Intended Totals   Survey Date: November 9, 2023 Major Channel Category Metric Number  Stable,  Performing as  Intended Total Number  in As‐built Amount of  Unstable  Footage Table 5. Visual Vegetation Assessment Planted acreage 28.5 Bare Areas Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material. 0.10 acres 0.00 0.0% Low Stem Density Areas Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on current MY stem count criteria. 0.10acres 0.00 0.0% 0.00 0.0% Areas of Poor Growth Rates Planted areas where average height is not meeting current MY Performance Standard. 0.10 acres 0.20 0.7% 0.20 0.7% Easement Acreage 31.7 Invasive Areas of Concern Invasives may occur outside of planted areas and within the easement and will therefore be calculated against the total easement acreage. Include species with the potential to directly outcompete native, young, woody stems in the short­term or community structure for existing communities. Species included in summation above should be identified in report summary. 0.10 acres 0.00 0.0% Easement Encroachment Areas Encroachment may be point, line, or polygon. Encroachment to be mapped consists of any violation of restrictions specified in the conservation easement. Common encroachments are mowing, cattle access, vehicular access. Encroachment has no threshold value as will need to be addressed regardless of impact area. none % of Planted Acreage Total Cumulative Total Vegetation Category Definitions Mapping Threshold Combined Acreage 0 Encroachments noted Combined Acreage % of Easement AcreageVegetation Category Definitions Mapping Threshold Bull Chute Mitigation Site MY2 (2023) Vegetation Monitoring Photographs (Taken August 24, 2023) MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions Randolph County, North Carolina December 2023 Plot 7 Plot 1 Plot 2 Plot 3 Plot 4 Plot 5 Plot 6 Plot 8 Plot 15 Plot 9 Plot 10 Plot 11 Plot 12 Plot 13 Plot 14 Plot 16 MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions Randolph County, North Carolina December 2023 Bull Chute Mitigation Site MY2 (2023) Vegetation Monitoring Photographs (Taken August 24, 2023) Plot 17 Plot 18 Plot 19 Plot 20 Plot 21 MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions Randolph County, North Carolina December 2023 Bull Chute Mitigation Site MY2 (2023) Vegetation Monitoring Photographs (Taken August 24, 2023) Bull Chute Mitigation Site MY2 (2023) Site Photo Log Photo Point 1A: UT-1 Upper Crossing, Upstream End Facing Downstream Photo Point 1B: UT-1 Upper Crossing, Downstream End Facing Upstream MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions Randolph County, North Carolina December 2023 Photo Point 2A: UT-1 Lower Crossing, Upstream End Facing Downstream Photo Point 2B: UT-1 Lower Crossing, Downstream End Facing Upstream Bull Chute Mitigation Site MY2 (2023) Site Photo Log MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions Randolph County, North Carolina December 2023 Photo Point 3A: UT-3 Crossing, Upstream End Facing Downstream Photo Point 3B: UT-3 Crossing, Downstream End Facing Upstream Bull Chute Mitigation Site MY2 (2023) Site Photo Log MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions Randolph County, North Carolina December 2023 MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions Randolph County, North Carolina December 2023 Photo Point 4A: UT-4 Crossing, Upstream End Facing Downstream Photo Point 4B: UT-4 Crossing, Downstream End Facing Upstream Bull Chute Mitigation Site MY2 (2023) Site Photo Log   MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024                        Appendix B  Vegetation Data    Table 6A.  Planted Bare‐Root Woody Vegetation  Table 6B.  Permanent Seed Mix  Table 7.  Vegetation Plot Counts and Densities  Table 8.  Vegetation Plot Data Table from Vegetation Data Entry Tool        MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024  Table 6A.  Planted Bare Root Woody Vegetation  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site    Species Wetland Indicator Total  Acres  28.5  Tag Alder (Alnus serrulata) OBL 2,500  River Birch (Betula nigra) FACW 4,000  Redbud (Cercis canadensis) FACU 600  Mockernut Hickory (Carya tomentosa) FACU 200  Silky dogwood (Cornus amomum) FACW 5,000  Common Persimmon (Diospyros virginiana) FAC 420  Tuliptree (Liriodendron tulipifera) FACU 1,700  Black Gum (Nyssa sylvatica) FAC 600  Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis) FACW 5,500  Water Oak (Quercus nigra) FAC 5,500  Willow Oak (Quercus phellos) FAC 4,000  Black Willow (Salix nigra) OBL 1,600  TOTALS  31,620  Average Stems/Acre  1,110       MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024  Table 6B.  Permanent Seed Mix  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site    Species Wetland Indicator Percent of Total Mix  Redtop (Agrostis gigantea) FACW 10%  VA Wild Rye (Elymus virginicus) FACW 15%  Switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) FAC 15%  Eastern Gammagrass (Tripsacum dactyloides) FAC 5%  PA Smartweed (Polygonum pensylvanicum) FACW 5%  Little Bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium) FACU 5%  Soft Rush (Juncus effusus) FACW 5%  Bur Marigold (Bidens cernua) OBL 10%  Lance‐leaved Tickseed (Coreopsis lanceolata) FACU 10%  Deertongue (Dichanthelium clandestinum) FAC 10%  Big Bluestem (Andropogon gerardii) FAC 5%  Indiangrass (Sorghastrum nutans) FACU 5%  TOTAL  100%         MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024  Table 7.  Planted Vegetation Totals  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site  Plot # Planted Stems/Acre Success Criteria Met?  1 1133 Yes  2 729 Yes  3 567 Yes  4 526 Yes  5 850 Yes  6 769 Yes  7 769 Yes  8 1336 Yes  9 486 Yes  10 405 Yes  11 405 Yes  12 1376 Yes  13 769 Yes  14 486 Yes  15 972 Yes  16 688 Yes  17 567 Yes  18 445 Yes  19 405 Yes  20* 891 Yes  21 405 Yes  Transect 1 (2x50 m) 526 Yes  Transect 2 (2x50 m) 607 Yes  Transect 3 (2x50 m) 445 Yes  Transect 4 (2x50 m) 769 Yes  Transect 5 (2x50 m) 486 Yes  Transect 6 (2x50 m) 769 Yes  Transect 7 (2x50 m) 364 Yes  Transect 8 (2x50 m) 769 Yes  Transect 9 (4x25 m) 486 Yes  Transect 10 (4x25 m) 850 Yes  Average Planted Stems/Acre 679 Yes  *At request of IRT, plot 20 was moved into a nearby wetland reestablishment area prior to MY1 monitoring.     Table 8.  Vegetation Plot Data Table from Vegetation Data Entry Tool 28.5 2022‐03‐18 NA  2023‐08‐24  2023‐08‐24 0.0247 Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Alnus serrulata hazel alder Tree OBL 11 11 1 1 Betula nigra river birch Tree FACW 2 2 2 2 21 21 Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam Tree FAC Cercis canadensis eastern redbud Tree FACU 1111 Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub FACW 20 20 111166 Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree FAC 22 Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree FACW 1 1 Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree FACU 227711 Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree FAC Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 8833 3366 Quercus lyrata overcup oak Tree OBL Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree FACW 11 Quercus nigra water oak Tree FAC 336644111133 Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak Tree FACW Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC 11551111 22 Quercus sp.996611 Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW 22 Sum Performance Standard 32 32 18 18 17 17 13 13 21 21 19 19 27 27 32 18 17 13 21 19 27 1133 729 567 526 850 769 769 4646565 62 33 65 46 43 32 78 2122222 0000000 32 18 17 13 21 19 27 1133 729 567 526 850 769 769 4646565 62 33 65 46 43 32 78 2122222 0000000 1). Bolded species are proposed for the current monitoring year, italicized species are not approved, and a regular font indicates that the species has been approved. 2). The "Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan" section contains only those species that were included in the original approved mitigation plan. The "Post Mitigation Plan Species" section includes species that are being proposed through a mitigation plan addendum for the current monitoring year (bolded) , species  that have been approved in prior monitoring years through a mitigation plan addendum (regular font), and species that are not approved (italicized). 3). The "Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" section is derived only from stems included in the original mitigation plan, whereas the "Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" includes data from mitigation plan approved, post mitigation plan approved, and proposed stems. Post Mitigation  Plan  Performance  Standard Current Year Stem Count Current Year Stem Count Stems/Acre Stems/Acre Species Count Species Count Dominant Species Composition (%) Dominant Species Composition (%) Average Plot Height (ft.) Average Plot Height (ft.) % Invasives % Invasives Species  Included in  Approved  Mitigation Plan Mitigation Plan  Performance  Standard Veg Plot 5 F Veg Plot 6 F Veg Plot 7 FIndicator  Status Veg Plot 1 F Veg Plot 2 F Veg Plot 3 F Veg Plot 4 F Date of Current Survey Plot size (ACRES) Scientific Name Common Name Tree/Shrub Planted Acreage Date of Initial Plant Date(s) of Supplemental Plant(s) Date(s) Mowing Table 8.  Vegetation Plot Data Table from Vegetation Data Entry Tool (continued) 28.5 2022‐03‐18 NA  2023‐08‐24  2023‐08‐24 0.0247 Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Alnus serrulata hazel alder Tree OBL 1144 Betula nigra river birch Tree FACW 8822 331166 Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam Tree FAC Cercis canadensis eastern redbud Tree FACU Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub FACW 5 5 12 12 14 14 5555 Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree FAC 3 3 11 Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree FACW Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree FACU 3322 22 11 Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree FAC Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 774411 4466 Quercus lyrata overcup oak Tree OBL Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree FACW Quercus nigra water oak Tree FAC 1111224455 Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak Tree FACW 1 1 Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC 551133 2211 Quercus sp.6622 11 Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW Sum Performance Standard 33 33 12 12 10 10 15 15 34 34 19 19 12 12 33 12 10 15 34 19 12 1336 486 405 405 1376 769 486 7643863 24 33 50 80 41 32 50 22222222 0000000 33 12 10 15 34 19 12 1336 486 405 405 1376 769 486 7643863 24 33 50 80 41 32 50 22222222 0000000 1). Bolded species are proposed for the current monitoring year, italicized species are not approved, and a regular font indicates that the species has been approved. 2). The "Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan" section contains only those species that were included in the original approved mitigation plan. The "Post Mitigation Plan Species" section includes species that are being proposed through a mitigation plan addendum for the current monitoring year (bolded) , species  that have been approved in prior monitoring years through a mitigation plan addendum (regular font), and species that are not approved (italicized). 3). The "Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" section is derived only from stems included in the original mitigation plan, whereas the "Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" includes data from mitigation plan approved, post mitigation plan approved, and proposed stems. Post Mitigation  Plan  Performance  Standard Current Year Stem Count Stems/Acre Species Count Dominant Species Composition (%) Average Plot Height (ft.) % Invasives Planted Acreage Date of Initial Plant Date(s) of Supplemental Plant(s) Date(s) Mowing Date of Current Survey Plot size (ACRES) Scientific Name Common Name Tree/Shrub Indicator  Status Species  Included in  Approved  Mitigation Plan Mitigation Plan  Performance  Standard Current Year Stem Count Stems/Acre Species Count Dominant Species Composition (%) Average Plot Height (ft.) % Invasives Veg Plot 10 F Veg Plot 11 F Veg Plot 12 F Veg Plot 13 F Veg Plot 14 FVeg Plot 8 F Veg Plot 9 F Table 8.  Vegetation Plot Data Table from Vegetation Data Entry Tool (continued) 28.5 2022‐03‐18 NA  2023‐08‐24  2023‐08‐24 0.0247 Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Alnus serrulata hazel alder Tree OBL 1122 Betula nigra river birch Tree FACW 1122 Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam Tree FAC Cercis canadensis eastern redbud Tree FACU Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub FACW 11 11 4 4 3333 Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree FAC 2 2 Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree FACW Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree FACU 1111 77 Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree FAC 22 Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 11776644 101055 Quercus lyrata overcup oak Tree OBL Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree FACW Quercus nigra water oak Tree FAC 5 5 2 2 Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak Tree FACW Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC 4444334433 Quercus sp.1111 2233 22 Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW 11 Sum Performance Standard 24 24 17 17 14 14 11 11 10 10 22 22 10 10 24 17 14 11 10 22 10 972 688 567 445 405 891 405 6554444 46 41 43 36 30 45 50 2222143 0000000 24 17 14 11 10 22 10 972 688 567 445 405 891 405 6554444 46 41 43 36 30 45 50 2222143 0000000 1). Bolded species are proposed for the current monitoring year, italicized species are not approved, and a regular font indicates that the species has been approved. 2). The "Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan" section contains only those species that were included in the original approved mitigation plan. The "Post Mitigation Plan Species" section includes species that are being proposed through a mitigation plan addendum for the current monitoring year (bolded) , species  that have been approved in prior monitoring years through a mitigation plan addendum (regular font), and species that are not approved (italicized). 3). The "Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" section is derived only from stems included in the original mitigation plan, whereas the "Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" includes data from mitigation plan approved, post mitigation plan approved, and proposed stems. Average Plot Height (ft.) % Invasives Post Mitigation  Plan  Performance  Standard Current Year Stem Count Stems/Acre Species Count Dominant Species Composition (%) Average Plot Height (ft.) % Invasives Plot size (ACRES) Scientific Name Common Name Tree/Shrub Planted Acreage Date of Initial Plant Date(s) of Supplemental Plant(s) Date(s) Mowing Date of Current Survey Veg Plot 20 F Veg Plot 21 FIndicator  Status Species  Included in  Approved  Mitigation Plan Mitigation Plan  Performance  Standard Current Year Stem Count Stems/Acre Species Count Dominant Species Composition (%) Veg Plot 15 F Veg Plot 16 F Veg Plot 17 F Veg Plot 18 F Veg Plot 19 F Table 8.  Vegetation Plot Data Table from Vegetation Data Entry Tool (continued) 28.5 2022‐03‐18 NA  2023‐08‐24  2023‐08‐24 0.0247 Veg Plot 1 R Veg Plot 2 R Veg Plot 3 R Veg Plot 4 R Veg Plot 5 R Veg Plot 6 R Veg Plot 7 R Veg Plot 8 R Veg Plot 9 R Veg Plot 10 R Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Alnus serrulata hazel alder Tree OBL 4 2 2 Betula nigra river birch Tree FACW 3 2 5 2 Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam Tree FAC 1 1 Cercis canadensis eastern redbud Tree FACU Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub FACW 1 1214 Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree FAC 1 Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree FACW 2 1 Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree FACU 4 1 2 6 1 2 1 Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree FAC Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 36751 1655 Quercus lyrata overcup oak Tree OBL 1 Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree FACW Quercus nigra water oak Tree FAC 2 2 313212 Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak Tree FACW 4 Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC 24524 513 Quercus sp. Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW 3 1 1 8 Sum Performance Standard 13 15 12 19 12 19 9 19 12 21 13 15 12 19 12 19 9 19 12 21 526 607 445 769 486 769 364 769 486 850 6636775555 31 40 58 26 25 32 44 32 42 38 22222221222 0000000000 13 15 12 19 12 19 9 19 12 21 526 607 445 769 486 769 364 769 486 850 6636775555 31 40 58 26 25 32 44 32 42 38 22222221222 0000000000 1). Bolded species are proposed for the current monitoring year, italicized species are not approved, and a regular font indicates that the species has been approved. 2). The "Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan" section contains only those species that were included in the original approved mitigation plan. The "Post Mitigation Plan Species" section includes species that are being proposed through a mitigation plan addendum for the current monitoring year (bolded) , species  that have been approved in prior monitoring years through a mitigation plan addendum (regular font), and species that are not approved (italicized). 3). The "Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" section is derived only from stems included in the original mitigation plan, whereas the "Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" includes data from mitigation plan approved, post mitigation plan approved, and proposed stems. Post Mitigation  Plan  Performance  Standard Current Year Stem Count Stems/Acre Species Count Dominant Species Composition (%) Average Plot Height (ft.) % Invasives Indicator  Status Species  Included in  Approved  Mitigation Plan Mitigation Plan  Performance  Standard Current Year Stem Count Stems/Acre Species Count Dominant Species Composition (%) Average Plot Height (ft.) % Invasives Plot size (ACRES) Scientific Name Common Name Tree/Shrub Planted Acreage Date of Initial Plant Date(s) of Supplemental Plant(s) Date(s) Mowing Date of Current Survey   MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024                        Appendix C  Stream Geomorphology Data    Cross‐Sections with Annual Overlays  Table 9A‐F.  Baseline Stream Data Summary Tables  Table 10A‐E.  Cross‐Section Morphology Monitoring Summary      Station Elevation -0.5 714.0 713.57 2.2 713.9 0.99 5.5 713.7 712.78 8.1 713.6 713.57 9.3 713.2 0.79 10.1 712.9 5.7 11.1 712.9 12.0 712.9 13.0 712.8 14.0 712.8 15.0 712.8 16.0 712.9 16.8 713.1 E/C 4 17.6 713.4 19.2 713.6 21.6 713.4 25.2 713.5 Stream Type LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: Bank Height Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: Feature Riffle Date:6/16/2023 Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance Site Bull Chute Site Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103 XS ID UT1, XS -1 712 713 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Bull Chute, UT 1, XS - 1, Riffle Bankfull MY-00 5/11/22 MY-01 11/29/22 MY-02 6/16/2023 Station Elevation 0.0 714.9 714.82 3.0 714.7 0.97 7.1 714.8 712.59 8.7 714.3 714.76 9.4 713.7 2.17 10.5 713.1 11.2 11.4 712.8 12.8 712.6 13.3 712.8 13.9 713.1 14.4 713.3 14.8 713.6 15.0 713.9 E/C 4 15.6 714.3 16.4 714.8 17.7 714.9 19.8 715.0 22.8 714.8 Site Bull Chute Site Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103 XS ID UT1, XS -2 Feature Pool Date:6/16/2023 Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Height Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 712 713 715 716 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Bull Chute, UT 1, XS - 2, Pool Bankfull MY-00 5/11/22 MY-01 11/29/22 MY-02 6/16/2023 Station Elevation 0.2 727.6 727.61 3.5 727.7 0.92 6.0 727.7 726.74 7.4 727.5 727.54 7.9 727.2 0.80 8.2 726.9 5.0 8.9 726.8 9.7 726.9 10.2 726.8 10.9 726.8 11.2 726.8 11.7 726.9 12.4 726.7 E/C 4 13.2 726.7 13.8 726.9 14.2 727.0 15.0 727.3 15.8 727.5 17.5 727.7 19.2 727.4 22.3 727.72 Site Bull Chute Site Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103 XS ID UT1, XS -3 Feature Riffle Date:6/16/2023 Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Height Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 726 727 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Bull Chute, UT 1, XS - 3, Riffle Bankfull MY-00 5/11/22 MY-01 11/29/22 MY-02 6/16/2023 Station Elevation 0.1 727.8 727.95 3.1 728.0 0.92 6.0 727.9 726.30 7.6 727.8 727.82 8.2 727.5 1.52 8.7 727.1 7.9 9.3 726.8 10.1 726.7 10.6 726.6 11.6 726.3 12.2 726.3 12.6 726.4 13.1 726.5 E/C 4 13.5 726.7 13.8 726.8 14.4 727.2 15.2 727.5 16.3 727.8 18.0 727.7 19.3 727.9 21.9 727.98 Site Bull Chute Site Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103 XS ID UT1, XS -4 Feature Pool Date:6/16/2023 Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Height Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 726 727 728 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Bull Chute, UT 1, XS - 4, Pool Bankfull MY-00 5/11/22 MY-01 11/29/22 MY-02 6/16/2023 Station Elevation -0.3 739.7 739.85 3.5 739.7 0.79 6.3 739.8 738.83 7.5 739.4 739.64 8.2 739.2 0.81 8.8 738.9 6.1 9.6 738.9 10.2 738.9 11.2 738.9 11.9 738.9 12.9 738.8 13.4 738.8 13.8 738.8 E/C 4 14.7 738.9 15.5 738.9 15.9 739.3 16.3 739.6 17.4 739.7 19.6 739.7 22.6 739.6 Site Bull Chute Site Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103 XS ID UT1, XS -5 Feature Riffle Date:6/16/2023 Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Height Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 738 739 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Bull Chute, UT 1, XS - 5, Riffle Bankfull MY-00 5/11/22 MY-01 11/29/22 MY-02 6/16/2023 Station Elevation 0.0 740.1 740.05 2.2 740.0 0.97 4.3 740.0 738.42 6.4 739.6 740.00 8.0 739.2 1.58 8.6 739.0 11.2 9.2 738.8 10.1 738.6 11.1 738.5 11.7 738.5 12.3 738.6 13.6 738.8 14.2 739.0 E/C 4 14.8 739.2 15.4 739.4 15.9 739.9 17.2 740.3 17.4 740.3 20.0 740.3 23.5 740.1 Site Bull Chute Site Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103 XS ID UT1, XS -6 Feature Pool Date:6/16/2023 Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Height Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 738 739 741 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Bull Chute, UT 1, XS - 6, Pool Bankfull MY-00 5/11/22 MY-01 11/29/22 MY-02 6/16/2023 Station Elevation 0.0 747.7 747.79 2.6 747.6 0.90 5.1 747.8 746.79 7.3 747.7 747.68 8.0 747.2 0.90 9.0 746.8 5.9 9.9 746.8 10.5 746.8 11.1 746.8 12.0 746.8 12.8 747.0 13.9 746.9 14.8 747.0 E/C 4 15.3 747.4 16.6 747.7 18.3 747.8 23.8 747.3 Site Bull Chute Site Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103 XS ID UT1, XS -7 Feature Riffle Date:6/16/2023 Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Height Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 746 747 748 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Bull Chute, UT 1, XS - 7, Riffle Bankfull MY-00 5/11/22 MY-01 11/29/22 MY-02 6/16/2023 Station Elevation 0.0 747.8 747.99 4.8 748.0 0.98 7.7 747.7 746.39 8.6 747.2 747.96 10.0 747.1 1.58 10.7 746.9 10.0 11.5 746.7 11.9 746.5 12.4 746.4 13.0 746.4 14.2 746.5 14.7 746.7 15.4 746.9 E/C 4 15.8 747.3 16.8 747.8 17.9 748.1 19.4 748.0 22.9 748.0 Site Bull Chute Site Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103 XS ID UT1, XS -8 Feature Pool Date:6/16/2023 Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Height Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 746 747 748 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Bull Chute, UT 1, XS - 8, Pool Bankfull MY-00 5/11/22 MY-01 11/29/22 MY-02 6/16/2023 Station Elevation 0.1 764.5 763.65 1.9 764.6 0.90 3.5 764.2 763.26 4.1 763.8 763.61 5.1 763.6 0.35 5.8 763.5 1.1 6.4 763.3 7.1 763.3 7.4 763.3 8.2 763.3 8.9 763.4 9.4 763.4 10.1 763.6 E/C 4 11.2 763.8 12.1 763.7 13.6 763.6 15.5 763.6 17.9 763.8 Site Bull Chute Site Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103 XS ID UT1, XS -9 Feature Riffle Date:6/16/2023 Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Height Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 763 764 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Bull Chute, UT 1, XS - 9, Riffle Bankfull MY-00 5/11/22 MY-01 11/29/22 MY-02 6/16/2023 Station Elevation 0.1 765.6 764.50 0.9 765.6 0.90 1.8 765.0 763.55 3.4 764.5 764.41 4.3 764.0 0.86 5.2 763.6 5.5 6.2 763.6 7.1 763.5 8.1 763.6 9.3 763.6 10.1 763.8 11.2 764.1 12.6 764.4 E/C 4 14.8 764.4 16.6 764.5 Site Bull Chute Site Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103 XS ID UT1, XS -10 Feature Pool Date:6/16/2023 Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Height Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 763 764 765 767 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Bull Chute, UT 1, XS - 10, Pool Bankfull MY-00 5/11/22 MY-01 11/29/22 MY-02 6/16/2023 Station Elevation 0.1 722.5 722.69 3.4 722.5 0.88 6.3 722.7 721.70 7.2 722.2 722.58 8.0 722.0 0.88 8.7 721.7 5.3 9.5 721.8 10.4 721.9 11.0 721.7 11.6 721.7 12.2 721.8 13.0 722.0 13.9 722.0 E/C 4 15.3 722.6 17.7 722.7 21.7 722.5 Site Bull Chute Site Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103 XS ID UT3, XS -13 Feature Riffle Date:6/16/2023 Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Height Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 721 722 724 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Bull Chute, UT 3, XS - 13, Riffle Bankfull MY-00 5/11/22 MY-01 11/29/22 MY-02 6/16/2023 Station Elevation 0.1 723.3 722.99 2.6 723.2 0.98 5.0 723.0 721.13 5.8 722.5 722.96 6.9 721.8 1.83 7.5 721.6 10.0 8.3 721.4 9.1 721.1 10.0 721.4 10.9 721.5 11.7 721.8 12.3 722.4 13.7 722.5 E/C 4 16.5 723.0 19.0 723.0 Site Bull Chute Site Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103 XS ID UT3, XS -14 Feature Pool Date:6/16/2023 Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Height Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 720 721 722 724 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Bull Chute, UT 3, XS - 14, Pool Bankfull MY-00 5/11/22 MY-01 11/29/22 MY-02 6/16/2023 Station Elevation -0.2 734.3 734.23 2.5 734.0 0.80 4.1 734.0 732.97 4.8 733.8 733.98 5.2 733.5 1.01 5.6 733.2 4.6 6.2 733.0 6.6 733.0 7.4 733.0 8.0 733.1 8.6 733.2 9.2 733.4 10.2 733.5 E/C 4 11.3 733.7 12.1 734.1 12.9 734.3 15.3 734.2 17.6 734.2 Site Bull Chute Site Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103 XS ID UT3, XS -15 Feature Pool Date:6/16/2023 Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Height Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 733 734 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Bull Chute, UT 3, XS - 15, Pool Bankfull MY-00 5/11/22 MY-01 11/29/22 MY-02 6/16/2023 Station Elevation 0.0 734.9 734.91 3.7 734.9 1.04 5.5 734.9 734.02 6.5 734.5 734.95 7.1 734.2 0.93 7.6 734.0 5.1 8.1 734.0 8.8 734.1 9.5 734.1 9.9 734.1 10.9 734.3 11.6 734.3 12.3 734.5 E/C 4 13.5 734.7 14.3 735.1 17.6 734.9 20.2 735.0 Site Bull Chute Site Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103 XS ID UT3, XS -16 Feature Riffle Date:6/16/2023 Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Height Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 734 735 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Bull Chute, UT 3, XS - 16, Riffle Bankfull MY-00 5/11/22 MY-01 11/29/22 MY-02 6/16/2023 Station Elevation -0.2 763.7 763.60 1.8 763.6 1.03 3.2 763.4 762.55 4.0 762.9 763.63 5.0 762.8 1.08 5.6 762.5 5.4 6.5 762.8 7.5 763.0 8.3 762.8 8.8 762.9 9.5 763.0 10.2 763.5 11.1 763.7 E/C 4 12.2 763.7 14.7 763.6 Site Bull Chute Site Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103 XS ID UT3, XS -17 Feature Riffle Date:6/16/2023 Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Height Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 762 763 764 0 10 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Bull Chute, UT 3, XS - 17, Riffle Bankfull MY-00 5/11/22 MY-01 11/29/22 MY-02 6/16/2023 Station Elevation 0.1 764.0 763.79 2.9 763.7 0.87 4.2 763.3 762.55 4.9 763.0 763.63 5.5 762.6 1.08 5.9 762.6 5.0 6.6 762.5 7.1 762.6 7.8 762.8 8.2 762.7 9.2 763.1 10.4 763.5 12.6 763.6 E/C 4 15.1 763.5 Site Bull Chute Site Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103 XS ID UT3, XS -18 Feature Pool Date:6/16/2023 Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Height Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 762 763 764 0 10 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Bull Chute, UT 3, XS - 18, Pool Bankfull MY-00 5/11/22 MY-01 11/29/22 MY-02 6/16/2023 Station Elevation 0.2 715.3 714.81 2.8 715.2 1.05 5.4 714.9 713.29 6.7 714.5 714.88 7.1 714.1 1.59 7.7 713.5 8.6 8.7 713.4 9.6 713.5 11.1 713.3 11.5 713.5 12.1 713.9 12.6 714.0 13.1 714.4 E/C 4 13.9 714.6 14.5 714.8 15.5 714.9 16.7 715.0 18.3 715.0 20.9 714.9 Site Bull Chute Site Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103 XS ID UT 4 Downstream, XS -11 Feature Pool Date:6/16/2023 Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Height Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 712 713 715 716 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Bull Chute, UT 4 Downstream, XS - 11, Pool Bankfull MY-00 5/11/22 MY-01 11/29/22 MY-02 6/16/2023 Station Elevation 0.0 715.5 715.44 3.6 715.5 0.99 6.2 715.4 714.39 7.6 714.9 715.43 8.5 714.7 1.05 9.5 714.7 8.4 11.0 714.5 12.6 714.5 13.1 714.5 13.8 714.5 14.5 714.4 15.1 714.5 15.9 714.5 E/C 4 16.5 714.7 17.1 715.2 17.7 715.5 18.5 715.5 20.2 715.5 22.9 715.4 26.9 715.5 Site Bull Chute Site Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103 XS ID UT4, XS -12 Feature Riffle Date:6/16/2023 Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Height Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 713 715 716 717 0 10 20 30 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Bull Chute, UT 4 Downstream, XS - 12, Riffle Bankfull MY-00 5/11/22 MY-01 11/29/22 MY-01 6/16/2023 Station Elevation -0.4 732.9 732.36 1.1 733.0 0.97 3.0 732.7 731.10 4.4 732.5 732.33 5.5 732.3 1.23 5.9 731.8 6.4 6.6 731.5 7.4 731.5 8.2 731.3 8.8 731.2 9.5 731.1 10.4 731.1 11.0 731.4 E/C 4 11.7 731.5 12.4 732.0 13.0 732.2 14.1 732.4 15.7 732.5 17.0 732.4 19.2 732.6 Site Bull Chute Site Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103 XS ID UT4 Upstream, XS -19 Feature Pool Date:6/16/2023 Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Height Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 730 731 733 734 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Bull Chute, UT 4 Upstream, XS - 19, Pool Bankfull MY-00 5/11/22 MY-01 11/29/22 MY-02 6/16/2023 Station Elevation 0.1 733.7 733.77 1.6 733.8 0.91 3.9 733.7 732.89 5.6 733.7 733.69 6.7 733.5 0.81 7.6 733.2 4.5 8.1 733.2 9.0 733.1 9.7 733.1 10.5 733.0 11.1 733.0 11.9 733.1 12.7 732.9 E/C 4 13.4 733.0 14.1 733.5 15.0 733.7 16.3 733.7 17.6 733.7 18.9 733.6 19.9 733.8 Site Bull Chute Site Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103 XS ID UT4 Upstream, XS -20 Feature Riffle Date:6/16/2023 Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Height Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 733 734 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Bull Chute, UT 4 Upstream, XS - 20, Riffle Bankfull MY-00 5/11/22 MY-01 11/29/22 MY-02 6/16/2023 Station Elevation 0.2 750.3 749.98 4.3 750.0 0.96 5.8 749.5 749.11 6.4 749.3 749.95 7.2 749.1 0.84 8.2 749.1 5.4 8.3 749.1 8.8 749.2 9.4 749.3 10.1 749.1 10.8 749.3 11.6 749.2 12.2 749.4 E/C 4 13.3 749.8 15.0 749.9 18.3 750.1 Site Bull Chute Site Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103 XS ID UT4 Upstream, XS -21 Feature Riffle Date:6/16/2023 Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Height Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 748 750 751 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Bull Chute, UT 4 Upstream, XS - 21, Riffle Bankfull MY-00 5/11/22 MY-01 11/29/22 MY-02 6/16/2023 Station Elevation 0.0 750.3 750.19 2.5 750.4 0.93 3.6 750.0 748.52 5.1 749.5 750.08 6.0 749.2 1.56 6.8 748.8 7.3 7.4 748.7 8.2 748.5 8.9 748.6 9.4 748.8 10.2 749.4 11.6 749.9 12.4 750.1 E/C 4 15.6 750.3 Site Bull Chute Site Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103 XS ID UT4 Upstream, XS -22 Feature Pool Date:6/16/2023 Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Height Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 747 748 750 751 0 10 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Bull Chute, UT 4 Upstream, XS - 22, Pool Bankfull MY-00 5/11/22 MY-01 11/29/22 MY-02 6/16/2023 Station Elevation 0.0 758.2 757.86 3.7 757.8 0.90 5.2 757.4 756.89 6.0 757.2 757.76 6.4 757.0 0.88 6.9 756.9 2.7 7.2 757.0 7.7 757.3 8.5 757.5 9.8 757.5 12.3 757.8 14.9 758.0 E/C 4 Site Bull Chute Site Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103 XS ID UT4B, XS -23 Feature Pool Date:6/16/2023 Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Height Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 756 758 759 0 10 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Bull Chute, UT 4B, XS - 23, Pool Bankfull MY-00 5/11/22 MY-01 11/29/22 MY-02 6/16/2023 Station Elevation 0.1 758.0 758.04 2.8 758.0 0.87 3.9 757.8 757.60 4.8 757.8 757.98 5.6 757.7 0.38 6.1 757.6 1.2 6.8 757.7 7.4 757.7 8.0 757.8 9.3 758.0 12.4 757.9 E/C 4 Site Bull Chute Site Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103 XS ID UT4B, XS -24 Feature Riffle Date:6/16/2023 Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Height Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 757 758 759 0 10 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Bull Chute, UT 4B, XS - 24, Riffle Bankfull MY-00 5/11/22 MY-01 11/29/22 MY-02 6/16/2023 Station Elevation 0.5 758.4 758.13 3.7 758.4 0.92 4.9 758.3 757.44 5.7 758.1 758.07 6.2 758.0 0.63 6.4 757.6 1.2 6.6 757.5 7.0 757.4 7.5 757.5 7.8 757.5 8.1 757.6 8.4 757.9 8.9 758.0 E/C 4 9.8 758.1 10.7 758.1 12.2 758.3 14.4 758.2 Site Bull Chute Site Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103 XS ID UT4A, XS -25 Feature Pool Date:6/16/2023 Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Height Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 757 758 759 0 10 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Bull Chute, UT 4A, XS - 25, Pool Bankfull MY-00 5/11/22 MY-01 11/29/22 MY-02 6/16/2023 Station Elevation 0.1 758.7 758.60 3.5 758.6 0.77 5.4 758.6 757.97 6.8 758.3 758.45 7.5 758.3 0.48 8.3 758.2 0.9 8.8 758.0 9.0 758.0 9.6 758.2 10.1 758.4 11.0 758.5 12.3 758.4 16.0 758.2 E/C 4 Site Bull Chute Site Watershed:Yadkin River Basin, 03040103 XS ID UT4A, XS -26 Feature Riffle Date:6/16/2023 Field Crew:Perkinson, Smith, Flemming, Lance Bankfull Elevation: Bank Height Ratio: Thalweg Elevation: LTOB Elevation: LTOB Max Depth: LTOB Cross Sectional Area: Stream Type SUMMARY DATA 758 759 0 10 20 El e v a t i o n ( f e e t ) Station (feet) Bull Chute, UT 4A, XS - 26, Riffle Bankfull MY-00 5/11/22 MY-01 11/29/22 MY-02 6/16/2023 Parameter Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft)5.6 8.5 16 8.5 9.8 5.5 10.2 5 Floodprone Width (ft)10 14 100 50 150 25 100 5 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.4 0.7 1.1 0.6 0.7 0.2 0.8 5 Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.6 1.1 1.4 0.8 1.1 0.4 1.1 5 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)6 6 6 6 6 1.3 8.1 5 Width/Depth Ratio 5.1 12.1 40 12 16 12.8 22.9 5 Entrenchment Ratio 1.1 1.4 15.9 5.9 15.3 4.6 11.4 5 Bank Height Ratio 1.3 2.8 5 1 1.3 1 1 5 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) Sinuosity (ft) Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft) Other Parameter Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft)3.3 5.1 7.1 6.7 7.7 8.0 10.0 2 Floodprone Width (ft)7 9 50 50 100 75 75 2 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.5 0.7 1.1 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.6 2 Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.8 1 1.7 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.0 2 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 4.8 6.4 2 Width/Depth Ratio 3 7.3 13.5 12 16 12.4 15.6 2 Entrenchment Ratio 1.1 1.5 13.5 7.5 13 7.5 9.4 2 Bank Height Ratio 1.5 2.5 4 1 1.3 1 1 2 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) Sinuosity (ft) Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft) Other 0.0254 0.0225 0.0199 13.7 13.7 13.7 1.02 1.15 1.15 G 5 Ce 3/4 Ce 4 Table 9B. Baseline Stream Data Summary Bull Chute - UT 3 Pre-Existing Condition (applicaple)Design Monitoring Baseline (MY0) Pre-Existing Condition (applicaple) Monitoring Baseline (MY0)Design Table 9A. Baseline Stream Data Summary Bull Chute - UT 1 1.15 0.0211 0.0189 0.0197 1.03 1.15 22.922.9 22.9 Ce 4G 5 Ce 3/4 Parameter Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft)5 8.3 10.4 7.2 8.3 8.5 8.9 2 Floodprone Width (ft)6 11 24 50 100 75.0 75.0 2 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.4 0.6 0.9 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.6 2 Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.5 1.1 1.2 0.7 0.9 0.8 1.0 2 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 5.1 5.8 2 Width/Depth Ratio 5.6 15.4 26 12 16 13.7 14.1 2 Entrenchment Ratio 1.1 1.3 2.6 7 12.1 8.4 8.8 2 Bank Height Ratio 2.5 3.1 5.4 1 1.3 1.0 1.0 2 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) Sinuosity (ft) Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft) Other Parameter Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft)7.8 9.2 10 9.1 10.5 11.0 11.0 1 Floodprone Width (ft)9 11 14 50 150 100.0 100.0 1 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.7 0.8 0.9 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.8 1 Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.9 1 1.1 0.8 1.1 1.2 1.2 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)6.9 6.9 6.9 6.9 6.9 8.5 8.5 1 Width/Depth Ratio 6.8 9.7 12.6 12 16 14.0 14.0 1 Entrenchment Ratio 1.1 1.2 1.4 5.5 14.3 9.1 9.1 1 Bank Height Ratio 4.7 5.3 5.9 1 1.3 1.0 1.0 1 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) Sinuosity (ft) Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft) Other 0.0165 0.0146 0.01484 26.7 26.7 26.7 1.02 1.15 1.15 G 5 Ce 3/4 Ce 4 Table 9D. Baseline Stream Data Summary Bull Chute - UT 4 Downstream Pre-Existing Condition (applicaple)Design Monitoring Baseline (MY0) 0.212 0.0196 0.0182 16.1 16.1 16.1 1.06 1.15 1.15 Fg 5 Ce 3/4 Ce 4 Table 9C. Baseline Stream Data Summary Bull Chute - UT 4 Upstream Pre-Existing Condition (applicaple)Design Monitoring Baseline (MY0) Parameter Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft)2.3 3.3 4.5 3.9 4.6 4.7 4.7 1 Floodprone Width (ft)6 8 12 20 50 35 35 1 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.3 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 1 Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.6 0.6 0.9 0.4 0.5 0.7 0.7 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.4 1 Width/Depth Ratio 4.6 8.3 15 12 16 15.5 15.5 1 Entrenchment Ratio 1.3 3.5 3.6 5.1 11 7.5 7.5 1 Bank Height Ratio 1.7 3 3.9 1 1.3 1 1 1 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) Sinuosity (ft) Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft) Other Parameter Riffle Only Min Mean Med Max n Min Max Min Max n Bankfull Width (ft)3.1 5 6.9 3.9 4.6 5.3 5.3 1 Floodprone Width (ft)9 14 18 20 50 35 35 1 Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)0.2 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 1 Bankfull Max Depth (ft)0.3 0.6 0.8 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.6 1 Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)1.2 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.6 1.6 1 Width/Depth Ratio 7.8 21.1 34.5 12 16 17.5 17.5 1 Entrenchment Ratio 1.3 3.6 5.8 5.1 11 6.6 6.6 1 Bank Height Ratio 1.3 4.3 7.3 1 1.3 1 1 1 Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull Rosgen Classification Bankfull Discharge (cfs) Sinuosity (ft) Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft) Other 0.0359 0.0336 0.034 4.3 4.3 4.3 1.03 1.1 1.1 Cf 5 Ce 3/4 Ce 4 Table 9F. Baseline Stream Data Summary Bull Chute - UT 4B Pre-Existing Condition (applicaple)Design Monitoring Baseline (MY0) 0.0444 0.0336 0.0356 4.3 4.3 4.3 1.02 1.1 1.1 Eg 5 Ce 3/4 Ce 4 Table 9E. Baseline Stream Data Summary Bull Chute - UT 4A Pre-Existing Condition (applicaple)Design Monitoring Baseline (MY0) MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area 713.54 713.53 713.57 714.80 714.91 714.82 727.56 727.61 727.61 727.84 727.98 727.95 739.80 739.86 739.85 Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.00 0.97 0.99 1.00 1.01 0.97 1.00 0.97 0.92 1.00 0.99 0.92 1.00 0.95 0.79 Thalweg Elevation 712.66 712.78 712.78 712.56 712.69 712.59 726.64 726.79 726.74 726.21 726.32 726.30 738.69 738.88 738.83 LTOB2 Elevation 713.54 713.50 713.57 714.80 714.92 714.76 `727.56 727.59 727.54 727.84 727.96 727.82 739.80 739.81 739.64 LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)0.88 0.73 0.79 2.24 2.24 2.17 0.91 0.80 0.80 1.64 1.63 1.52 1.11 0.93 0.81 LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)5.7 5.48 5.66 11.7 11.83 11.17 5.5 5.27 4.96 9.4 9.07 7.92 8.1 7.29 6.12 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area 739.99 740.05 740.05 747.73 747.79 747.79 747.94 748.03 747.99 763.66 763.64 763.65 764.42 764.51 764.50 Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.90 0.90 1.00 0.94 0.98 1.00 0.95 0.90 1.00 0.96 0.90 Thalweg Elevation 738.45 738.54 738.42 746.66 746.80 746.79 746.29 746.37 746.39 763.30 763.31 763.26 763.33 763.64 763.55 LTOB2 Elevation 739.99 740.06 740.00 747.73 747.70 747.68 747.94 747.94 747.96 763.66 763.63 763.61 764.42 764.47 764.41 LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)1.54 1.52 1.58 1.07 0.90 0.90 1.65 1.56 1.58 0.36 0.32 0.35 1.09 0.83 0.86 LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)12.0 12.05 11.22 6.9 5.95 5.91 10.3 9.34 9.96 1.3 1.23 1.12 6.3 5.78 5.49 0.00 1.80 Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area Thalweg Elevation LTOB2 Elevation LTOB2 Max Depth (ft) LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2) Note: The smaller the channel the closer the survey measurements are to their limit of reliable detection, therefore inter-annual variation in morphological measurement (as a percentage) is by default magnified as channel size decereases. Some of the variability above is the result of this factor and some is due to the large amount of depositional sediments observed. UT 1 - Cross Section 6 (Pool)UT 1 - Cross Section 7 (Riffle)UT 1 - Cross Section 8 (Pool)UT 1 - Cross Section 9 (Riffle)UT 1 - Cross Section 10 (Pool) Table 10A. Monitoring Data - Cross Section Morphology Monitoring Summary (Bull Chute/ DMS:100137) UT 1 UT 1 - Cross Section 1 (Riffle)UT 1 - Cross Section 2 (Pool)UT 1 - Cross Section 3 (Riffle)UT 1 - Cross Section 4 (Pool)UT 1 - Cross Section 5 (Riffle) The above morphology parameters reflect the 2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS, the IRT and industry mitigation providers/practitioners. The outcome resulted in the focus on three primary morphological parameters of interest for the purposes of tracking channel change moving forward. They are the bank height ratio using a constant As-built bankfull area and the cross sectional area and max depth based on each years low top of bank. These are calculated as follows: 1 - Bank Height Ratio (BHR) takes the As-built bankful area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation. For example if the As-built bankfull area was 10 ft2, then the MY1 bankfull elevation would be adjusted until the calculated bankfull area within the MY1 cross section survey = 10 ft2. The BHR would then be calculated with the difference between the low top of bank (LTOB) elevation for MY1 and the thalweg elevation for MY1 in the numerator with the difference between the MY1 bankfull elevation and the MY1 thalweg elevation in the denominator. This same process is then carried out in each successive year. 2 - LTOB Area and Max depth - These are based on the LTOB elevation for each years survey (The same elevation used for the LTOB in the BHR calculation). Area below the LTOB elevation will be used and tracked for each year as above. The difference between the LTOB elevation and the thalweg elevation (same as in the BHR calculation) will be recroded and tracked above as LTOB max depth. The above morphology parameters reflect the 2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS, the IRT and industry mitigation providers/practitioners. The outcome resulted in the focus on three primary morphological parameters of interest for the purposes of tracking channel change moving forward. They are the bank height ratio using a constant As-built bankfull area and the cross sectional area and max depth based on each years low top of bank. These are calculated as follows: 1 - Bank Height Ratio (BHR) takes the As-built bankful area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation. For example if the As-built bankfull area was 10 ft2, then the MY1 bankfull elevation would be adjusted until the calculated bankfull area within the MY1 cross section survey = 10 ft2. The BHR would then be calculated with the difference between the low top of bank (LTOB) elevation for MY1 and the thalweg elevation for MY1 in the numerator with the difference between the MY1 bankfull elevation and the MY1 thalweg elevation in the denominator. This same process is then carried out in each successive year. 2 - LTOB Area and Max depth - These are based on the LTOB elevation for each years survey (The same elevation used for the LTOB in the BHR calculation). Area below the LTOB elevation will be used and tracked for each year as above. The difference between the LTOB elevation and the thalweg elevation (same as in the BHR calculation) will be recroded and tracked above as LTOB max depth. MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area 722.63 722.64 722.69 722.98 723.01 722.99 734.17 734.23 734.23 734.92 734.91 734.91 763.55 763.58 763.60 Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.00 1.00 0.88 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.01 0.80 1.00 1.01 1.04 0.98 1.00 1.03 Thalweg Elevation 721.62 721.65 721.70 720.98 721.08 721.13 732.78 732.99 732.97 733.97 734.06 734.02 762.51 762.53 762.55 LTOB2 Elevation 722.63 722.64 722.58 722.98 723.00 722.96 `734.17 734.25 733.98 734.92 734.92 734.95 763.52 763.58 763.63 LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)1.02 0.99 0.88 2.00 1.92 1.83 1.39 1.26 1.01 0.95 0.86 0.93 1.01 1.05 1.08 LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)6.3 6.36 5.32 10.4 10.26 10.04 7.0 7.10 4.60 4.74 4.80 5.07 4.94 5.09 5.37 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area 763.85 763.86 763.79 Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.00 0.98 0.87 Thalweg Elevation 762.31 762.57 762.55 LTOB2 Elevation 763.85 763.84 763.63 LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)1.55 1.27 1.08 LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)6.58 6.40 5.03 0.00 1.80 Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area Thalweg Elevation LTOB2 Elevation LTOB2 Max Depth (ft) LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2) Note: The smaller the channel the closer the survey measurements are to their limit of reliable detection, therefore inter-annual variation in morphological measurement (as a percentage) is by default magnified as channel size decereases. Some of the variability above is the result of this factor and some is due to the large amount of depositional sediments observed. UT 3 - Cross Section 18 (Pool) Table 10B. Monitoring Data - Cross Section Morphology Monitoring Summary (Bull Chute/ DMS:100137) UT 3 UT 3 - Cross Section 13 (Riffle)UT 3 - Cross Section 14 (Pool)UT 3 - Cross Section 15 (Pool)UT 3 - Cross Section 16 (Riffle)UT 3 - Cross Section 17 (Riffle) The above morphology parameters reflect the 2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS, the IRT and industry mitigation providers/practitioners. The outcome resulted in the focus on three primary morphological parameters of interest for the purposes of tracking channel change moving forward. They are the bank height ratio using a constant As-built bankfull area and the cross sectional area and max depth based on each years low top of bank. These are calculated as follows: 1 - Bank Height Ratio (BHR) takes the As-built bankful area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation. For example if the As-built bankfull area was 10 ft2, then the MY1 bankfull elevation would be adjusted until the calculated bankfull area within the MY1 cross section survey = 10 ft2. The BHR would then be calculated with the difference between the low top of bank (LTOB) elevation for MY1 and the thalweg elevation for MY1 in the numerator with the difference between the MY1 bankfull elevation and the MY1 thalweg elevation in the denominator. This same process is then carried out in each successive year. 2 - LTOB Area and Max depth - These are based on the LTOB elevation for each years survey (The same elevation used for the LTOB in the BHR calculation). Area below the LTOB elevation will be used and tracked for each year as above. The difference between the LTOB elevation and the thalweg elevation (same as in the BHR calculation) will be recroded and tracked above as LTOB max depth. MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area 714.76 714.92 714.81 715.38 715.44 715.44 732.43 732.39 732.36 733.76 733.76 733.77 750.00 749.98 749.98 Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.07 0.99 1.00 1.01 0.97 1.00 0.94 0.91 1.00 1.02 0.96 Thalweg Elevation 713.25 713.40 713.29 714.22 714.45 714.39 731.14 730.93 731.10 732.93 732.99 732.89 748.99 749.06 749.11 LTOB2 Elevation 714.76 715.00 714.88 715.38 715.52 715.43 `732.43 732.41 732.33 733.76 733.72 733.69 `750.00 750.00 749.95 ` LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)1.51 1.60 1.59 1.16 1.06 1.05 1.29 1.48 1.23 0.84 0.73 0.81 1.00 0.94 0.84 LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)7.9 8.71 8.63 8.5 9.59 8.44 6.7 6.88 6.42 5.2 4.68 4.47 5.7 5.88 5.37 MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area 750.27 750.20 750.19 Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.00 1.03 0.93 Thalweg Elevation 748.69 748.58 748.52 LTOB2 Elevation 750.27 750.26 750.08 ` LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)1.58 1.68 1.56 LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)8.3 8.90 7.28 0.00 1.80 Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area Thalweg Elevation LTOB2 Elevation LTOB2 Max Depth (ft) LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2) Note: The smaller the channel the closer the survey measurements are to their limit of reliable detection, therefore inter-annual variation in morphological measurement (as a percentage) is by default magnified as channel size decereases. Some of the variability above is the result of this factor and some is due to the large amount of depositional sediments observed. UT 4 - Cross Section 22 (Pool) Table 10C. Monitoring Data - Cross Section Morphology Monitoring Summary (Bull Chute/ DMS:100137) UT 4 UT 4 - Cross Section 11 (Pool)UT 4 - Cross Section 12 (Riffle)UT 4 - Cross Section 19 (Pool)UT 4 - Cross Section 20 (Riffle)UT 4 - Cross Section 21 (Riffle) The above morphology parameters reflect the 2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS, the IRT and industry mitigation providers/practitioners. The outcome resulted in the focus on three primary morphological parameters of interest for the purposes of tracking channel change moving forward. They are the bank height ratio using a constant As-built bankfull area and the cross sectional area and max depth based on each years low top of bank. These are calculated as follows: 1 - Bank Height Ratio (BHR) takes the As-built bankful area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation. For example if the As-built bankfull area was 10 ft2, then the MY1 bankfull elevation would be adjusted until the calculated bankfull area within the MY1 cross section survey = 10 ft2. The BHR would then be calculated with the difference between the low top of bank (LTOB) elevation for MY1 and the thalweg elevation for MY1 in the numerator with the difference between the MY1 bankfull elevation and the MY1 thalweg elevation in the denominator. This same process is then carried out in each successive year. 2 - LTOB Area and Max depth - These are based on the LTOB elevation for each years survey (The same elevation used for the LTOB in the BHR calculation). Area below the LTOB elevation will be used and tracked for each year as above. The difference between the LTOB elevation and the thalweg elevation (same as in the BHR calculation) will be recroded and tracked above as LTOB max depth. MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area 758.11 758.02 758.13 758.57 758.62 758.60 Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.00 1.03 0.92 1.00 0.89 0.77 Thalweg Elevation 757.29 757.36 757.44 757.79 758.00 757.97 LTOB2 Elevation 758.11 758.04 758.07 758.57 758.55 758.45 ` LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)0.82 0.68 0.63 0.78 0.56 0.48 LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)1.5 1.52 1.24 1.6 1.19 0.93 Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area Thalweg Elevation LTOB2 Elevation LTOB2 Max Depth (ft) LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2) 0.00 1.80 Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area Thalweg Elevation LTOB2 Elevation LTOB2 Max Depth (ft) LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2) Note: The smaller the channel the closer the survey measurements are to their limit of reliable detection, therefore inter-annual variation in morphological measurement (as a percentage) is by default magnified as channel size decereases. Some of the variability above is the result of this factor and some is due to the large amount of depositional sediments observed. Table 10D. Monitoring Data - Cross Section Morphology Monitoring Summary (Bull Chute/ DMS:100137) UT 4A UT 4A - Cross Section 25 (Pool)UT 4A - Cross Section 26 (Riffle) The above morphology parameters reflect the 2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS, the IRT and industry mitigation providers/practitioners. The outcome resulted in the focus on three primary morphological parameters of interest for the purposes of tracking channel change moving forward. They are the bank height ratio using a constant As-built bankfull area and the cross sectional area and max depth based on each years low top of bank. These are calculated as follows: 1 - Bank Height Ratio (BHR) takes the As-built bankful area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation. For example if the As-built bankfull area was 10 ft2, then the MY1 bankfull elevation would be adjusted until the calculated bankfull area within the MY1 cross section survey = 10 ft2. The BHR would then be calculated with the difference between the low top of bank (LTOB) elevation for MY1 and the thalweg elevation for MY1 in the numerator with the difference between the MY1 bankfull elevation and the MY1 thalweg elevation in the denominator. This same process is then carried out in each successive year. 2 - LTOB Area and Max depth - These are based on the LTOB elevation for each years survey (The same elevation used for the LTOB in the BHR calculation). Area below the LTOB elevation will be used and tracked for each year as above. The difference between the LTOB elevation and the thalweg elevation (same as in the BHR calculation) will be recroded and tracked above as LTOB max depth. MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 MY+ Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area 757.88 757.89 757.86 758.07 758.04 758.04 Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.00 1.05 0.90 0.52 1.00 0.87 Thalweg Elevation 756.83 756.93 756.89 757.50 757.63 757.60 LTOB2 Elevation 757.88 757.94 757.76 758.07 758.04 757.98 ` LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)1.05 1.01 0.88 0.57 0.41 0.38 LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)3.4 3.80 2.66 1.6 1.56 1.22 Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area Thalweg Elevation LTOB2 Elevation LTOB2 Max Depth (ft) LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2) 0.00 1.80 Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area Bank Height Ratio_Based on AB Bankfull1 Area Thalweg Elevation LTOB2 Elevation LTOB2 Max Depth (ft) LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2) Note: The smaller the channel the closer the survey measurements are to their limit of reliable detection, therefore inter-annual variation in morphological measurement (as a percentage) is by default magnified as channel size decereases. Some of the variability above is the result of this factor and some is due to the large amount of depositional sediments observed. Table 10E. Monitoring Data - Cross Section Morphology Monitoring Summary (Bull Chute/ DMS:100137) UT 4B UT 4B - Cross Section 23 (Pool)UT 4B - Cross Section 24 (Riffle) The above morphology parameters reflect the 2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS, the IRT and industry mitigation providers/practitioners. The outcome resulted in the focus on three primary morphological parameters of interest for the purposes of tracking channel change moving forward. They are the bank height ratio using a constant As-built bankfull area and the cross sectional area and max depth based on each years low top of bank. These are calculated as follows: 1 - Bank Height Ratio (BHR) takes the As-built bankful area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation. For example if the As-built bankfull area was 10 ft2, then the MY1 bankfull elevation would be adjusted until the calculated bankfull area within the MY1 cross section survey = 10 ft2. The BHR would then be calculated with the difference between the low top of bank (LTOB) elevation for MY1 and the thalweg elevation for MY1 in the numerator with the difference between the MY1 bankfull elevation and the MY1 thalweg elevation in the denominator. This same process is then carried out in each successive year. 2 - LTOB Area and Max depth - These are based on the LTOB elevation for each years survey (The same elevation used for the LTOB in the BHR calculation). Area below the LTOB elevation will be used and tracked for each year as above. The difference between the LTOB elevation and the thalweg elevation (same as in the BHR calculation) will be recroded and tracked above as LTOB max depth.   MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024                        Appendix D  Hydrologic Data    Table 11. Verification of Bankfull Events  Table 12. Groundwater Hydrology Data  Groundwater Gauge Graphs  Tables 13A‐F. Channel Evidence  Surface Water Gauge Graphs  Figure D1. 30/70 Percentile Graph for Rainfall       MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024  Table 11. Verification of Bankfull Events        Date of Data  Collection  Date of  Occurrence  Monitoring  Year Method Photo  (if available)  May 23, 2022 May 23, 2022 MY1  Crest gauges on UT‐1, UT‐3, and UT‐4 documented a bankfull  event, with crests of 17 inches, 12 inches, and 14.5 inches  respectively after 1.88 inches of rain were captured at an  onsite rain gauge.  ‐‐  September 30,  2022  September 30,  2022 MY1  Crest gauges on UT‐1, UT‐3, and UT‐4 documented a bankfull  event, with crests of 16 inches, 13 inches, and 10 inches  respectively after 2.48 inches of rain were captured at an  onsite rain gauge as a result of tropical storm Ian.   ‐‐  November 29,  2022  November 27,  2022 MY1  Wrack and laid‐back vegetation were observed along the top of  bank and floodplain of all Site reaches after 1.49 inches of rain  were captured at an onsite rain gauge.  1, 2, 3  February 12,  2023  February 12,  2023 MY2  Crest gauge on UT‐1 documented a bankfull event, with a crest  of 13 inches after 1.78 inches of rain were captured at an  onsite rain gauge. The event was also documented on UT‐3 and  UT‐4 by time‐lapse trail cameras.   4, 5  April 8, 2023 April 8, 2023 MY2  Crest gauge on UT‐1 documented a bankfull event with a crest  of 13 inches after 3.10 inches of rain were recorded by an  onsite rain gauge the days leading up to the event.  ‐‐  July 8, 2023 July 8, 2023 MY2  Crest gauges on UT‐1 and UT‐3 documented a bankfull event  with crests of 17 inches and 12 inches respectively after 2.91  inches of rain were recorded by an onsite rain gauge the days  leading up to the event.  ‐‐    MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024                     Photo 1: Bankfull event documented on UT‐2 (MY1)  Photo 2: Bankfull Event Documented on UT‐3 (MY1)    MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024     Photo 3: Bankfull Event Documented on UT‐4 (MY1)  Photo 4: Bankfull Event Documented on UT‐3 (MY2)    MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024                                             Photo 5: Bankfull Event Documented on UT‐4 (MY2)  0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 ‐10 ‐6 ‐2 2 6 10 14 18 22 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l   Am o u n t s  (i n ) Su r f a c e  Wa t e r  Le v e l  (i n ) Bull Chute UT1 Crest Gauge Year  2 (2023 Data) Bankfull  Event Bankfull  Event Bankfull  Event 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 ‐10 ‐6 ‐2 2 6 10 14 18 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l   Am o u n t s  (i n ) Su r f a c e  Wa t e r  Le v e l  (i n ) Bull Chute UT3 Crest Gauge Year  2 (2023 Data) Bankfull  Event 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 ‐10 ‐6 ‐2 2 6 10 14 18 22 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l   Am o u n t s  (i n ) Su r f a c e  Wa t e r  Le v e l  (i n ) Bull Chute UT4 Crest Gauge Year  2 (2023 Data) Upward trend indicates some  sort of malfunction. This gauge  will be replaced prior to the  MY3 growing season. Gauge malfunctioned  resulting in data loss. It was  reinstalled on 4/17/2023   MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024  Table 12. Groundwater Hydrology Data  Summary of Monitoring Period/Hydrology Success Criteria by Year  Gauge  12% Hydroperiod Success Criteria Achieved ‐ Max Consecutive Days During Growing Season (Percentage)  Year 1  (2022)  Year 2   (2023)  Year 3  (2024)  Year 4  (2025)  Year 5  (2026)  Year 6  (2027)  Year 7  (2028)  1 No   1 day (0.4%)  No  2 days (0.8%)       2 Yes  62 days (25.4%)  Yes  48 days (20.5%)       3 No  19 days (7.8%)  No  11 days (4.7%)       4 No  7 days (2.9%)  No  5 days (2.1%)       5 Yes  124 days (50.8%)  Yes  136 days (58.1%)       6 Yes  63 days (25.8%)  Yes  131 days (56.0%)       7 Yes  64 days (26.2%)  Yes  49 days (20.9%)       8 Yes  63 days (25.8%)  Yes  54 days (23.1%)       9 Yes  45 days (18.4%)  Yes  221 days (94.4%)       10 Yes  33 days (13.5%)  Yes  221 days (94.4%)          0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 ‐40 ‐38 ‐36 ‐34 ‐32 ‐30 ‐28 ‐26 ‐24 ‐22 ‐20 ‐18 ‐16 ‐14 ‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l   Am o u n t s  (i n ) Gr o u n d w a t e r   Le v e l  (i n ) Bull Chute Groundwater Gauge 1 Year  2 (2023 Data) End Growing Season November  16 Start Growing Season March 18 2Days 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 ‐40 ‐38 ‐36 ‐34 ‐32 ‐30 ‐28 ‐26 ‐24 ‐22 ‐20 ‐18 ‐16 ‐14 ‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l  Am o u n t s   (i n ) Gr o u n d w a t e r   Le v e l  (i n ) Bull Chute Groundwater Gauge 2 Year  2 (2023 Data) End Growing Season November  16 Start Growing Season March 18 48 Days  0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 ‐40 ‐38 ‐36 ‐34 ‐32 ‐30 ‐28 ‐26 ‐24 ‐22 ‐20 ‐18 ‐16 ‐14 ‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l  Am o u n t s   (i n ) Gr o u n d w a t e r   Le v e l  (i n ) Bull Chute Groundwater Gauge 3 Year  2 (2023 Data)End Growing Season November  16Start Growing Season March 18 11 Days 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 ‐40 ‐38 ‐36 ‐34 ‐32 ‐30 ‐28 ‐26 ‐24 ‐22 ‐20 ‐18 ‐16 ‐14 ‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l   Am o u n t s  (i n ) Gr o u n d w a t e r   Le v e l  (i n ) Bull Chute Groundwater Gauge 4 Year  2 (2023 Data) End Growing Season November  16 Start Growing Season March 18 5 Days 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 ‐40 ‐38 ‐36 ‐34 ‐32 ‐30 ‐28 ‐26 ‐24 ‐22 ‐20 ‐18 ‐16 ‐14 ‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l  Am o u n t s   (i n ) Gr o u n d w a t e r   Le v e l  (i n ) Bull Chute Groundwater Gauge 5 Year  2 (2023 Data) End Growing Season November  16 Start Growing Season March 18 136 Days 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 ‐40 ‐38 ‐36 ‐34 ‐32 ‐30 ‐28 ‐26 ‐24 ‐22 ‐20 ‐18 ‐16 ‐14 ‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l  Am o u n t s   (i n ) Gr o u n d w a t e r   Le v e l  (i n ) Bull Chute Groundwater Gauge 6 Year  2 (2023 Data) End Growing Season November  16 Start Growing Season March 18 131 Days  0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 ‐40 ‐38 ‐36 ‐34 ‐32 ‐30 ‐28 ‐26 ‐24 ‐22 ‐20 ‐18 ‐16 ‐14 ‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l  Am o u n t s   (i n ) Gr o u n d w a t e r   Le v e l  (i n ) Bull Chute Groundwater Gauge 7 Year  2 (2023 Data) End Growing Season November  16 Start Growing Season March 18 49 Days 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 ‐40 ‐38 ‐36 ‐34 ‐32 ‐30 ‐28 ‐26 ‐24 ‐22 ‐20 ‐18 ‐16 ‐14 ‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l   Am o u n t s  (i n ) Gr o u n d w a t e r   Le v e l  (i n ) Bull Chute Groundwater Gauge 8 Year  2 (2023 Data) End Growing Season November  16 Start Growing Season March 18 54 Days  0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 ‐40 ‐38 ‐36 ‐34 ‐32 ‐30 ‐28 ‐26 ‐24 ‐22 ‐20 ‐18 ‐16 ‐14 ‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l   Am o u n t s  (i n ) Gr o u n d w a t e r   Le v e l  (i n ) Bull Chute Groundwater Gauge 9 Year  2 (2023 Data) End Growing Season November  16 Start Growing Season March 18 221 Days 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 ‐40 ‐38 ‐36 ‐34 ‐32 ‐30 ‐28 ‐26 ‐24 ‐22 ‐20 ‐18 ‐16 ‐14 ‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l  Am o u n t s   (i n ) Gr o u n d w a t e r   Le v e l  (i n ) Bull Chute Groundwater Gauge 10 Year  2 (2023 Data) End Growing Season November  16 Start Growing Season March 18 221 Days   MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024  Table 13A.  UT‐1 Channel Evidence  UT‐1 Upstream Channel Evidence  Year 1  (2022)  Year 2  (2023)  Max consecutive days channel flow 105 125   Presence of litter and debris (wracking)  Yes Yes  Leaf litter disturbed or washed away Yes Yes  Matted, bent, or absence of vegetation (herbaceous or otherwise) Yes Yes  Sediment deposition and/or scour indicating sediment transport  Yes Yes  Water staining due to continual presence of water Yes Yes  Formation of channel bed and banks Yes Yes  Sediment sorting within the primary path of flow Yes Yes  Sediment shelving or a natural line impressed on the banks Yes Yes  Change in plant community (absence or destruction of terrestrial vegetation and/or  transition to species adapted for flow or inundation for a long duration, including  hydrophytes)  Yes Yes  Development of channel pattern (meander bends and/or channel braiding) at natural  topographic breaks, woody debris piles, or plant root systems Yes Yes  Exposure of woody plant roots within the primary path of flow No No  Other:         Table 13B.  UT‐2 Channel Evidence  UT‐2 Channel Evidence  Year 1  (2022)  Year 2  (2023)  Max consecutive days channel flow 124 204  Presence of litter and debris (wracking)  Yes Yes  Leaf litter disturbed or washed away Yes Yes  Matted, bent, or absence of vegetation (herbaceous or otherwise) Yes Yes  Sediment deposition and/or scour indicating sediment transport  Yes Yes  Water staining due to continual presence of water Yes Yes  Formation of channel bed and banks Yes Yes  Sediment sorting within the primary path of flow Yes Yes  Sediment shelving or a natural line impressed on the banks Yes Yes  Change in plant community (absence or destruction of terrestrial vegetation and/or  transition to species adapted for flow or inundation for a long duration, including  hydrophytes)  Yes Yes  Development of channel pattern (meander bends and/or channel braiding) at natural  topographic breaks, woody debris piles, or plant root systems Yes Yes  Exposure of woody plant roots within the primary path of flow No No  Other:         MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024    Table 13C.  UT‐3 Channel Evidence  UT‐1 Upstream Channel Evidence  Year 1  (2022)  Year 2  (2023)  Max consecutive days channel flow 239 107  Presence of litter and debris (wracking)  Yes Yes  Leaf litter disturbed or washed away Yes Yes  Matted, bent, or absence of vegetation (herbaceous or otherwise) Yes Yes  Sediment deposition and/or scour indicating sediment transport  Yes Yes  Water staining due to continual presence of water Yes Yes  Formation of channel bed and banks Yes Yes  Sediment sorting within the primary path of flow Yes Yes  Sediment shelving or a natural line impressed on the banks Yes Yes  Change in plant community (absence or destruction of terrestrial vegetation and/or  transition to species adapted for flow or inundation for a long duration, including  hydrophytes)  Yes Yes  Development of channel pattern (meander bends and/or channel braiding) at natural  topographic breaks, woody debris piles, or plant root systems Yes Yes  Exposure of woody plant roots within the primary path of flow No No  Other:         Table 13D.  UT‐7 Channel Evidence  UT‐2 Channel Evidence  Year 1  (2022)  Year 2  (2023)  Max consecutive days channel flow 124 293  Presence of litter and debris (wracking)  Yes Yes  Leaf litter disturbed or washed away Yes Yes  Matted, bent, or absence of vegetation (herbaceous or otherwise) Yes Yes  Sediment deposition and/or scour indicating sediment transport  Yes Yes  Water staining due to continual presence of water Yes Yes  Formation of channel bed and banks Yes Yes  Sediment sorting within the primary path of flow Yes Yes  Sediment shelving or a natural line impressed on the banks Yes Yes  Change in plant community (absence or destruction of terrestrial vegetation and/or  transition to species adapted for flow or inundation for a long duration, including  hydrophytes)  Yes Yes  Development of channel pattern (meander bends and/or channel braiding) at natural  topographic breaks, woody debris piles, or plant root systems Yes Yes  Exposure of woody plant roots within the primary path of flow No No  Other:       MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024  Table 13E.  UT‐4A Channel Evidence  UT‐1 Upstream Channel Evidence  Year 1  (2022)  Year 2  (2023)  Max consecutive days channel flow 239 163  Presence of litter and debris (wracking)  Yes Yes  Leaf litter disturbed or washed away Yes Yes  Matted, bent, or absence of vegetation (herbaceous or otherwise) Yes Yes  Sediment deposition and/or scour indicating sediment transport  Yes Yes  Water staining due to continual presence of water Yes Yes  Formation of channel bed and banks Yes Yes  Sediment sorting within the primary path of flow Yes Yes  Sediment shelving or a natural line impressed on the banks Yes Yes  Change in plant community (absence or destruction of terrestrial vegetation and/or  transition to species adapted for flow or inundation for a long duration, including  hydrophytes)  Yes Yes  Development of channel pattern (meander bends and/or channel braiding) at natural  topographic breaks, woody debris piles, or plant root systems Yes Yes  Exposure of woody plant roots within the primary path of flow No No  Other:         Table 13F.  UT‐4B Channel Evidence  UT‐2 Channel Evidence  Year 1  (2022)  Year 2  (2023)  Max consecutive days channel flow 239 293  Presence of litter and debris (wracking)  Yes Yes  Leaf litter disturbed or washed away Yes Yes  Matted, bent, or absence of vegetation (herbaceous or otherwise) Yes Yes  Sediment deposition and/or scour indicating sediment transport  Yes Yes  Water staining due to continual presence of water Yes Yes  Formation of channel bed and banks Yes Yes  Sediment sorting within the primary path of flow Yes Yes  Sediment shelving or a natural line impressed on the banks Yes Yes  Change in plant community (absence or destruction of terrestrial vegetation and/or  transition to species adapted for flow or inundation for a long duration, including  hydrophytes)  Yes Yes  Development of channel pattern (meander bends and/or channel braiding) at natural  topographic breaks, woody debris piles, or plant root systems Yes Yes  Exposure of woody plant roots within the primary path of flow No No  Other:     0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 ‐10 ‐6 ‐2 2 6 10 14 18 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l  Am o u n t s   (i n ) Su r f a c e  Wa t e r  Le v e l  (i n ) Bull Chute UT1 Flow Gauge Year  2 (2023 Data) 125 Days 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 ‐10 ‐6 ‐2 2 6 10 14 18 22 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l  Am o u n t s   (i n ) Su r f a c e  Wa t e r  Le v e l  (i n ) Bull Chute UT2 Flow Gauge Year  2 (2023 Data) 204 Days 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 ‐10 ‐6 ‐2 2 6 10 14 18 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l   Am o u n t s  (i n ) Su r f a c e  Wa t e r  Le v e l  (i n ) Bull Chute UT3 Flow Gauge Year  2 (2023 Data) 107 Days Guage Malfunction.  Re‐installed 5/26/23 68 Days 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 ‐10 ‐6 ‐2 2 6 10 14 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l   Am o u n t s  (i n ) Su r f a c e  Wa t e r  Le v e l  (i n ) Bull Chute UT7 Flow Gauge Year  2 (2023 Data) 293 Days 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 ‐10 ‐6 ‐2 2 6 10 14 18 22 26 30 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l  Am o u n t s   (i n ) Su r f a c e  Wa t e r  Le v e l  (i n ) Bull Chute UT4A Flow Gauge Year  2 (2023 Data) 163 Days Malfunction: errant  readings. Gauge re‐ launched 4/17/23 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 ‐10 ‐6 ‐2 2 6 10 14 18 1/ 1 / 2 3 1/ 1 1 / 2 3 1/ 2 1 / 2 3 1/ 3 1 / 2 3 2/ 1 0 / 2 3 2/ 2 0 / 2 3 3/ 2 / 2 3 3/ 1 2 / 2 3 3/ 2 2 / 2 3 4/ 1 / 2 3 4/ 1 1 / 2 3 4/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 / 2 3 5/ 1 1 / 2 3 5/ 2 1 / 2 3 5/ 3 1 / 2 3 6/ 1 0 / 2 3 6/ 2 0 / 2 3 6/ 3 0 / 2 3 7/ 1 0 / 2 3 7/ 2 0 / 2 3 7/ 3 0 / 2 3 8/ 9 / 2 3 8/ 1 9 / 2 3 8/ 2 9 / 2 3 9/ 8 / 2 3 9/ 1 8 / 2 3 9/ 2 8 / 2 3 10 / 8 / 2 3 10 / 1 8 / 2 3 10 / 2 8 / 2 3 11 / 7 / 2 3 11 / 1 7 / 2 3 11 / 2 7 / 2 3 12 / 7 / 2 3 12 / 1 7 / 2 3 12 / 2 7 / 2 3 Ra i n f a l l   Am o u n t s  (i n ) Su r f a c e  Wa t e r  Le v e l  (i n ) Bull Chute UT4B Flow Gauge Year  2 (2023 Data) 293 Days 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Ra i n f a l l  Am o u n t  in  In c h e s Figure D1: Bull Chute 30‐70 Percentile Graph for Rainfall  Current year data from onsite rain gauge 30‐70th percentile data from WETS Station: Randleman, NC (1992‐2022) 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 30th Percentile 70th Percentile   MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024                        Appendix E  Project Timeline and Contact Info    Table 14.  Project Timeline  Table 15.  Project Contacts  Table 14. Project Timeline Data Collection Task Completion or Activity or Deliverable Complete Deliverable Submission Project Instituted NA Nov‐19 Mitigation Plan Approved NA 13‐May‐21 Construction (Grading) Completed NA 8‐Mar‐22 Planting Completed NA 18‐Mar‐22 As‐built Survey Completed Jun‐22 Jun‐22 MY‐0 Baseline Report May‐22 Jul‐22 MY‐1 Vegetation Survey 30‐Aug‐22 N/A MY‐1 Stream Survey 29‐Nov‐22 N/A MY‐1 Monitoring Report Nov‐22 Jan‐23 MY‐2 Vegetation Survey 16‐Jun‐23 N/A MY‐2 Stream Survey 24‐Aug‐23 N/A MY‐2 Invasive Treatment ‐ Chinese privet, multiflora rose N/A Oct‐23 MY‐2 Monitoring Report Nov‐23 Jan‐24 Remediation Items (e.g. beaver removal, supplements, repairs etc.) Encroachment     Table 15. Project Contacts Provider Clearwater Mitigation Solutions 604 Macon Pl. Raleigh, NC 27609 Mitigation Provider POC Kevin Yates 919‐624‐6901 Designer Axiom Environmental, Inc. 218 Snow Ave Raleigh, NC 27603 Primary project design POC Grant Lewis 919‐215‐1693 Construction Contractor KBS Earthworks, Inc. 5616 Coble Church Rd Julian, NC 27283 Kory Strader 336‐362‐0289 Bull Chute/100137    MY2 Monitoring Report (Project No. 100137) Appendices  Bull Chute Stream and Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Clearwater Mitigation Solutions  Randolph County, North Carolina January 2024                          Appendix F  Boundary Inspection Report – MY2     1 November 17, 2023 Matthew Reid Project Manager NCDEQ - Division of Mitigation Services Asheville Regional Office 2090 U.S. 70 Highway Swannanoa, NC 28778-8211 Subject: Boundary Inspection Report – MY2 Bull Chute, Randolph County, NC; DMS ID No. 100137 Matthew, The MY2 boundary inspection was conducted by DMS on November 16, 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. Office Review: • The plat clearly depicted the conservation easement and numbered corners. • No encroachments were noted in the MY1 report. • Aerial photography did not indicate any areas of concern. Field Inspection: • The easement corners were monumented with stamped aluminum caps. Multiple caps were confirmed and #5 rebar was present at the newly installed corner locations. • The site corners were generally well marked, two signs were commonly installed at gated entrances. Some of the corner monuments lacked a witness post with conservation easement signs as shown on the attached kmz. • In-line marking was generally deficient where multiple line segments with an excess of 200’ sign spacing were noted. • One witness post was missing, and one was located too far from the monument. • A downed tree was resting across the fence in the north central portion of the site. Action Items • Install witness signs/posts at each unmarked corner. • Install in-line marking at a frequency of 200’ spacing or less. Shorter segments should have the signs installed equidistant from the corners, but signs must be installed at a spacing no greater than 200’. • Remove fallen tree from the exclusion fencing in the north central section of the site. 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: (919) 723-7565 cc: R:\EEP PROJECT LIBRARY FILES\PROJECT DELIVERABLES(REPORTS)\FD PROJECTS\Bull Chute Site_7878-01 (#100137)\4_T2_Cons_Ease\DMS Easement Inspections