20080008 Ver 1_Mitigation Closeout Report_20160818

Lewis Creek Stream Restoration Site
Henderson County, NC
DMS Project # 733
Design -Bid -Build Project
CLOSEOUT REPORT: STREAM
Project Setting & Classifications
Meeting XY Coordinates:
Lat: 35.376450 Long: -82.347939
County:
Henderson
General Location:
NE of Hendersonville, NC
Basin:
French Broad
Physiographic Region:
Blue Ridge Physiographic Province
Ecoregion:
French Broad Basin (Level IV)
USGS Hydro Unit:
06010105
NCDWQSub-basin:
04-03-02
Thermal Regime:
lCold Water
Trout Water:
IYes, Class "C"
Monitoring Year -3
Project Performers
Source Agency:
NC DMS (formerly NC EEP)
Designer:
Jordan, Jones & Goulding, Inc.
Monitoring Firm:
JJG (MY1) / MMI (MY3-5)
Channel Remediation:
Carolina Environmental Contracting, Inc.
Plant Remediation:
Carolina Environmental Contracting, Inc.
Transferred Stewardship:
Yes
Stewards:
NCDEQ Stewardship
Lewis Creek-733—Project Closeout Report.
2016
Project Activities & Timeline
Milestone
Month -Year
Project Instituted
6/29/06
Restore. Plan; Permitted
2007; Feb. 2008
Construction Completed
April 2011
Planting Completed
April 2011
As -built
May 2011
-Survey
Supplemental Planting
February 2012
MY1 (2011) & MY2 (2012)
Submitted as MY1
November 2012
Groundwater Gages
Installed
September 2013
Invasives Treated
September 2013
Monitoring Year -3
October 2013
Invasives Treated -
Multiple Applications
April -June 2014
Monitoring Year -4
September 2014
Beaver Removal
October 2014
Invasives Treated
January 2015
Monitoring Year -5
September 2015
Monthly Beaver
Inspections Initiated
October 2015
Closeout Submission
August 2016
Mage 1 1

Project Setting and Background Summary
The Lewis Creek Stream Restoration Site is located in Henderson County, North Carolina, northeast of the City
of Hendersonville. The regional land use has been historically dominated by agriculture (primarily fruit orchards
and row crops). While the surrounding mountain slopes are primarily forested, many of the nearby forested areas
have been more recently converted to orchards, sod farms, and residential developments. The Lewis Creek stream
restoration project is one of several DMS projects intended to improve stream habitat and water quality in the
French Broad River Watershed. The project consists of Priority Level 2 restoration along the main channel of
Lewis Creek resulting in 1,7501f of restored stream. The restoration plan also included planting the stream banks,
floodplain and riparian zones with native tree and shrub species.
The project constructed and planting was completed in April 2011 and monitored from 2011-2015. During this
time, planted woody stems survivorship was generally high and heavily supplemented with the establishment of
volunteered native woody species. Numerous over -bank events have been recorded since construction, and stream
geomorphology has remained relatively stable. Beavers created dams along the project in 2014 & 2015. These
beaver dams were removed upon discovery. Beaver activity has been actively monitored since the summer of
2015 and is currently not present along the project reach. In sum, the stream and vegetation components of the
project appear to be trending toward a successful restoration.
A small wetland area within the floodplain has been established as a result of project activities. This wetland area
is considered incidental to the project and no wetland credits are being sought by DMS for this feature. Field
indicators suggests that jurisdictional wetlands comprise a 0.18 -acre area in the wettest part of the flood plain,
which is possibly supplemented with surface flow from an adjacent mountain bog. This area was delineated in
2015 as shown on the asset map and is considered a beneficial feature incidental to the requested project assets.
A small mulched walking trail is located on the south side of the project site. This foot path was existing prior to
the implementation of the DMS project and is utilized by members of the Carolina Mountain Land Conservancy
(CMLC) to access the adjacent conservation property and as a nature trail along the DMS mitigation site. This
trail is referenced in the conservation easement deed and an approximate location shapefile has been provided to
DEQ Stewardship.
Lewis Creek-733—Project Closeout Report.
2016 Page 12

Goals and Obiectives
In accordance with the 2007 Restoration Plan, the following Goals and Objectives have been established for the
Lewis Creek Stream Restoration Project:
Goals
1. Restore a natural, stable dimension, pattern and profile along Lewis Creek using natural channel
design techniques.
2. Stabilize and protect degraded or vulnerable streambanks along Lewis Creek to reduce sediment
loading and loss of land.
3. Enhance floodplain connection along Lewis Creek.
4. Establish a bankfull bench along Lewis Creek to reduce velocity and shear stress associates with
bankfull and higher stream flows.
5. Introduce a natural meander pattern along Lewis Creek.
6. Improve aquatic and riparian habitat for macroinvertebrate and fish communities.
Objectives
1. Restore approximately 1,750 linear feet of Lewis Creek.
2. Restoration efforts will consist of constructing an appropriately sized channel for the existing
watershed and sediment load within a new naturally sinuous pattern.
3. The project will include establishing a floodplain at an appropriate elevation for the current stream
bed, creating bankfull benches, stabilizing streambanks, and grading back bank slopes.
4. The streambanks and riparian zone will be replanted using native species appropriate to the area.
Lewis Creek-733—Project Closeout Report.
2016 3

Success Criterion - Table 1
Success Criteria
Measured Parameter
Criteria Met
Stream: Dimension
Yes. Significant stream bank
5 Cross Sections
erosion has not been observed
Cross-section measurements
anywhere along the restored
should indicate little change from
reach. Cross-section survey data
the as -built cross sections. W/D
indicate that channel geometry
ratio's should not increase by more
remains relatively stable.
than 15% and stream classification
should not change.
Stream: Pattern & Profile
Yes. Annual longitudinal profiles
Longitudinal Profile
indicate that slight changes in
The channel's profile should not
channel morphology are within
demonstrate any trends in thalweg
the range of natural variation. No
aggradation or degradation over
significant changes to thalweg or
any significant continuous portion
water surface slope are evident.
of its length. Facet slopes should
not increase by more than 30%.
Profile water surface slope should
not increase by more than 30%.
Stream: Substrate
Yes. Particle size distributions
3 Pebble Counts
have generally remained
Substrate measurements should
consistent during monitoring
generally indicate the progression
years and indicate a diverse size
towards known distributions from
gradation.
the design phase. The D50 should
not increase by more than 30%
and the substrate should not show
an increase in silt/sand by more
than 50%
Vegetation: Planted Stems
No - Although 3/5 plots have not
5 Permanent Vegetation Plots
met the MY5 260 planted
The average number of planted
stems/acre criteria, all plots have
stems per acre must meet or
exceeded criteria if native
exceed 260 stems per acre after
volunteers are considered.
the 5th year of monitoring.
Hydrology: Bankfull Events
Yes — At least 4 bankfull events
Crest Stage Gauge Levels
have been observed on separate
Two or more bankfull events
years.
should be observed in separate
years by the end of the 5 -year
monitoring period.
Lewis Creek-733—Project Closeout Report.
2016 Page 14

Table 3: Length and Area Summations by Mitigation Category
Restoration Level Stream (linear Riparian Wetland (acres) Non -riparian Credited
feet) Wetland (acres) Buffer (feet)
Riverine Non-Riverine
Restoration 1750
Enhancement
Enhancement I
Enhancment II
Creation
Preservation
High Quality Preservation
Table 4: Overall Assets
Summar
Asset
Category
Table 2: Mitigation Components
Stream 1,750
RP Wetland
NR Wetland
Buffer
Nitrogen
Phosphorus Nutrient
Stream
Riparian Wetland
Non -Riparian Wetland
Buffer
Nutrient Offset
Offset
Type
R
RE
R
RE
R
RE
N/A
N/A
N/A
Totals
1750 If
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Project Components
Restoration -
Restoration
Project
Stationing/Location
Existing Feet/Acres
Approach
or
Footage or
Mitigation Ratio
Component
Restoration
Acres
Equivalent
Lewis Creek
0+00-17+50
1,663 If
P II
Restoration
1,750 If
1:1
Component Summation
Restoration
Riparian Wetland (ac)
Non -Riparian
Buffer (sq ft)
Upland (ac)
Stream (linear feet)
Wetland (ac)
Level
_
Riverine Non-Riverine
Restoration (R)
1,750
N/A j N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Totals
1,750
N/A N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
BMP Elements
Element
Location
Purpose/Function
Notes
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
BMP Elements
BR = Bioretention
Cell; SF =Sand Filter; SW =Stormwater Wetland; WDP = Wet Detention
Pond; DDP=
Dry Detention Pond; FS = Filter Strip;
S= Grass Swale;
LS = Level Spreader; NI = Natural Infiltration Area; FB = Forested Buffer
SMU =Stream Mitigation Unit; WMU = Wetland Mitigation Mitigation Unit
Table 3: Length and Area Summations by Mitigation Category
Restoration Level Stream (linear Riparian Wetland (acres) Non -riparian Credited
feet) Wetland (acres) Buffer (feet)
Riverine Non-Riverine
Restoration 1750
Enhancement
Enhancement I
Enhancment II
Creation
Preservation
High Quality Preservation
Table 4: Overall Assets
Summar
Asset
Category
Overall
I Credits
Stream 1,750
RP Wetland
NR Wetland
Buffer
Lewis Creek-733—Project Closeout Report.
2016 Page 15

VIM W. �
• �t � � C6i Nr
K R y 3 to -
_.�. ••�4,V {1 L 1 N N
ito
cz
xsA s.
VP 5
41 r8vk
Cn
r
VP 3' 3 0 W c
VP 2 0 LL
`� " ` • ! r r r J 0 CO c
_ o
A;�, ti 77 -xyf�,� - t w Z U
Legend „ VP 0
l 4 -..— ±}
Conservation Easement ^� ;• �(p < 1; Y �`+.5' - (�•)
Removed Beaver Dam `�, O C
Monitoring Wells �,4 L .•.t,,'i S f { Y�' `M�;, di 4 •�`+ N
CMLC Trail i ati _ ui �.�+.1 �.. - ` `'.� N J �W =
Stream Structures Y;�LTJI` 3�—� "� 7 U)
—Cross Sections ., r+ + •b 4j
Thalweg Line y �,
Veg Criteria Met '�i • tf s`
Q Vag Criteria Not Met ,
_.Wetland+,-�� -
f
0 75 150 300 450
druhF NGP9yU�SGS.
Feet u E itaF-b Eu . E t 5 Figure 1
Lewis Creek-733—Project Closeout Report.
2016 Page 16

�Y 1
♦`YYrrrr�rr \ � � � -
r rYY y •> �.
ti -•rte ..•. . • , � ♦♦♦! _
f r-
a� t { tt♦t ,t♦Y �,
r. .l ti _ � � „+7 � �♦t♦ 4444 '. '~'� • •
IN
Legend
Conservation Easement
Soil'�' •
Coclorus loam (Co)
Hatboro loam (Ha)
i 201p,&OMtLrr agery
1 75 150 300 450
Feet
�� 3��zcCG�CoL�4��CtiiCSr3r'Et �Ga�^�GL7�G3rC� �J�1 r
v�,a���M• '_EA_ Gp;f�5G.A-%4l-1Qzbu �utiGSlm�Guisy \�
Lewis Creek-733—Project Closeout Report.
2016 Page 18

le.
V.
ba
41 i
ti
VP 5
�l r
r
�y
I
Legend
conservation Easement
Removed Beaver Dam (2015)
p -
Removed Beaver Dam (2014)
CMLC Trail
Targeted Treatment Area for Phalaris arundinacea
„ Targeted Treatment Area for Lonicera japonica
Cross 5eQtiors
Thalweg Line
Wetland
0 75 150 300 450
Feet
Lewis Creek-733—Project Closeout Report.
2016
Page 19
F--
O a_ c
IL 2
O U
L
QILL
Q
U)❑ r
O� c
Uwe o
Y U
LU
LU ~ C
X LLI ur
N
U) O o
;a
W
J
L
Figure 4
Remediation Activities
Month -Year
Treatment
o o N r
Feb 2012
Supplemental planting throughout easement.
° z
Invasives treated throughout easement: foliar
m 0
Se t 2013
p
applications and small stems cut.
v 0
a t C.
Invasives treated throughout easement: foliar
U
ti
Apri1201.4
applications and small stems cut.
Resprayed all areas for invasjves as needed
F
Ma 2014
y
throughout easement, cutting and painting
t
Oct 2014
Retreated Phalaris as required. Larger stems cut -
Nov 2014
Beaver Dam removed and 4 beavers trapped.
Invasives treated throught easement: stems cut
!an 2015
and painted as required.
Sept 2015
Beaver Dam removed.
o
Sept 2015 -
Monthly Inspections for beaver- none seen.
1
d
March 2016
Page 19
F--
O a_ c
IL 2
O U
L
QILL
Q
U)❑ r
O� c
Uwe o
Y U
LU
LU ~ C
X LLI ur
N
U) O o
;a
W
J
L
Figure 4

Stream Morphology Data Summary
Figures 5.0-5.4. Stream Cross-sectional profiles.
Lewis Creek Cross -Section 2 -Mille
Lewis Creek Cross -Section 1- Pool
2157
2156
2155
2154
C
G
a
m
2154
2153
2152
a
m
2151
w
zlsz
2150
2149
2150
2148
0
20 40 60 80 100 120
Station (H)
S==lid! — — water Surface AS Built (4!2011) i MYl (6!2012) MY3-(102013) MY4(82014) t MYS (9!2015)
I Uj/
2149 -
Lewis Creek Cross -Section 2 -Mille
2156
2155
2154
r 2153
a
m
w
zlsz
2151
2150
— — — — — — — — — — A — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
I Uj/
2149 -
2148
0 20 40 60 so loo 120
station (R)
water Surface ...... BaakfuD As -Built (4!2011) — MY1-(62012) MY3-(1012013) MY4-(8!2014) – MY5 (912015)
Lewis Creek-733—Project Closeout Report.
2016 Page 110

Lewis Creek Cross -Section 3 -Riffle
2155
2154
Y.
2153
2152
C
0
W
2151
21M
2149
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Station (ft)
214&
2147
0 20 40 60 8A 100 120
Station (ft)
�Bauktall — —Water Surface —As-BUMR2011) —MY 1-(62012) MY3(102613)—MY4($2014) fMYS(92615)
Lewis Creek - MY4 Cross -Section 4 - Riffle
2153
2152
2151
C
a
m 2150
a
2149
2145
2147
2146
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Station (ft)
�Baukfal — —Water Surface As Built(4U011) MYl-(6)2012) MY3-(IfN2013) MY402014) tMY5(912415)
Lewis Creek-733—Project Closeout Report.
2016 Page 11

Lewis Creek - MY4 Crass -Section 5 - Pool
2153
2152
2151
2150
r
0
>
2149
W
2145—
— — — — — — — — — — — — —
2147
%Atw�-4 I
2145
2145
-
7q
-
2144
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Station (ft)
50
�Bankfu0 Water SuHare A Ilk. (412011) MY 1-(6)2012)MY3(10/24313) NIY4(52014)—&—MY5(W2015)
Lewis Creek-733—Project Closeout Report.
2016 12

Figures 6.0-6.2. Substrate Counts.
10096
901/.
80%
70Y
60%
w
`w 50%
a
a 40%
30%
E
U 20%
10%
0%
1$1 oy
Particle Size (mm)
—MY5-(9/2015) —MY4-(912014)
Substrate Cumulative Percent (Riffle - XS3)
100%
90%
80%
70%
y 60%
y 50%
a
40%
30%
E 20%
u 10'/0
0%
O'
Particle Size [mm)
—MY5-(9/2015) MY4-(9/20.14) MY3-(10/2013)
y y4 100 e
y
—MY3-(10/2013)—MY1-(6/2012) —MYO-(4/2011)
Substrate Cumulative Percent (Pool -XS4)
y0 y1P le
MYi-(6/2011) MYO-(4/2011)
30%
25%
tzo%
v
`v
4
X10%
5%
0%
�'L ytih oyh 05 y ti A ,y'1 6 yy? y�,C'h 3ti Ah 6A 00 y.U4 1� fhb �6ti yyti
O Particle Size (mm)
■ MY5-(9/2015) ■ MY4-(9/2014) MY3-(10/2013)
Substrate Individual Class Percent (Riffle - XS3)
30%
25%
a 20%
„ 15%
u
910%
C
5%
0%
Otih OS y 'L A �1 0 yy3 ym ry,L.? 3ti A5 roA 90 ylB y� ryc}o ,50'Y �yti.
O• O• Particle Size[mm)
■ MY549/20151 ■ MY419/20141 ■ MY:
Substrate Individual Class Percent (Pool - XS4)
Lewis Creek-733—Project Closeout Report.
2016 Page 113

Figure 7.0-7.1. Stream Longitudinal Profiles.
2150
2149
2148
2147
C
Lewis Creek Longitudinal Profile (Sta. 1000-1700)
Lewis Creek-733—Project
Lewis Creek Longitudinal Profile (Sta. 0-1000)
–
2153
2152
♦--
2151
2150
2149
1�
2148
0
2147
w
W
2145
2145
0.00 100.00 200.00 300.00
400.00 500.00 500.00
700.00 800.00
900.00 1000.00
Station (ft)
THW MY5 (9/2015) —�-- THW MY4 THW
MY3 THW MY1 ---- THW As -Built • BNKFL A Grade -control Structure
X WS MY5 (912015)
2150
2149
2148
2147
C
Lewis Creek Longitudinal Profile (Sta. 1000-1700)
Lewis Creek-733—Project
♦--
2144
1406 1106
Station (ti)
�ao�Q ° oo a a a• • • ••
CrossSection4 • •
— � X * Cross Section 5 — —
W�,Poo
400 1500 1640 1740 1800 1966 ZOG
—THWMYS(41201{) 4--THWMY4 THWMY3 THwMYl----THWAs-Built • BNKFL d Grade -control Structure x WSMY5(9/2615)
1200 1340 1
Closeout Report.
2016
Page 114

Table 5: Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary (Cross Sections)
Lewis Creek Restoration DMS Project # 733
PARAMETER
Cross -Section 1 (Pool)
Cross -Section 2 (Riffle)
DIMENSION
Baseline
MY1-2011
MY2-2012 MY3-2013
MY4-2014 MY5-2015
Baseline
MY1-2011
MY2-2012
MY3-2013
MY4-2014 MY5-2015
Bankfull Width (ft)
23.4
25.3
N/A 20.5
22.77
23.10
22.70
23.2
N/A
23.3
26.46
23.93
Floodprone Width (ft)
114.9
114.0
N/A 117.2
117.79
120.00
114.20
116.1
N/A
123.6
119.05
120.00
Bankfull Mean Depth
1.9
1.6
N/A 1.5
1.71
1.06
1.60
1.5
N/A
1.3
1.26
1.68
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
3.2
3.3
N/A 3.3
3.42
2.66
3.10
2.6
N/A
2.6
2.73
2.69
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ft 2)
44.3
40.6
N/A 31.1
38.85
36.00
36.30
1 34.5
N/A
29.3
33.28
28.10
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
12.4
15.8
N/A 13.5
13.35
21.79
14.20
15.5
N/A
18.5
21.04
14.24
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
4.9
4.5
N/A 5.7
5.17
5.19
5.0
5.0
N/A
5.3
4.50
5.02
Bankfull Bankheight Ratio
1.0
1.3
N/A 1.0
1.27
1.0
1.0
1.0
N/A
1,0
1.00
1.0
Cross Sectional Area between end pins (ft2)
46.8
1 46.8
N/A 266.2
247.4
247.8
347.1
347.1
N/A
334.9
368.9
330.9
d50 (mm)
0.2
2.0
N/A N/A
N/A
N/A
105.40
5.0
N/A
7.0
11.0
21.0
PARAMETER
Cross -Section 3 Riffle
Cross -Section 4 Rifle
DIMENSION
Baseline
MY1-2011
MY2-2012 MY3-2013
MY4-2014 MY5-2015
Baseline
MY1-2011
MY2-2012
MY3-2013
MY4-2014 MY5-2015
Bankfull Width (ft)
24.7
25.8
N/A 25.0
21.07
25.58
23.80
23.4
N/A
19.3
19.78
26.44
Floodprone Width (ft)
122.3
120.3
N/A 99.7
119.07
120.00
148.90
147.8
N/A
130.7
143.47
150.00
Bankfull Mean Depth
1.7
1.5
N/A 1.5
1.42
0.79
2.00
1.8
N/A
0.9
1.90
0.58
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
2.6
2.6
N/A 2.6
2.49
3.16
3.00
2.9
N/A
2.1
3.26
3.43
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ft z)
41.7
38.3
N/A 36.9
29.91
52.10L33
40.9
N/A
51.0
37.66
62.30
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
14.6
17.4
N/A 16.9
14.84
32.38
13.4
N/A
22.4
10.39
45.59
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
5.0
4.7
N/A 1.2
5.65
4.69
6.3
N/A
6.8
3.62
5.67
Bankfull Bankheight Ratio
1.0
1.0
N/A 1.0
1.24
1.0
1.0
N/A
1.0
1.00
1.0
Cross Sectional Area between end pins (ftz)
335.7
335.7
N/A 353.6
376.23
372.5
335.7
N/A
309.6
327.91
279.9
d50 (mm)
32.0
14.7
N/A 10.0
12.0
16.0
7.3
N/A
8.9
16.0
10.0
PARAMETER Cross -Section 5 Pool
DIMENSION Baseline MY1-2011 MY2-2012 MY3-2013 MY4-2014 MY5-2015
Bankfull Width (ft) 23.3 24.0 N/A 22.6 19.78 24.16
Floodprone Width (ft) 69.8 68.8 N/A 72.7 71.57 75.00
Bankfull Mean Depth 1.7 1.9 N/A 2.0 1.90 2.14
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 3.3 3.6 N/A 4.0 3.26 3.35
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ft 2) 40.0 45.1 N/A 44.7 37.66 42.40
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 13.5 12.8 N/A 11.4 10.39 11.29
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 3.0 2.9 N/A 3.2 3.62 3.10
Bankfull Bankheight Ratio 1.0 1.0 N/A 1.0 1.00 1.0
Cross Sectional Area between end pins (ft2) 217.2 1 217.2 N/A 192.7 175.3 210.9
d50 (mm)l 0.4 1 0.8 1 N/A I N/A I N/A I N/A
Lewis Creek -733 -Project Closeout Report.
2016 P age 115

Lewis Creek -733 -Project Closeout Report.
2016 116
Table 6a: Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary (Longitudinal Profile)
Lewis Creek Restoration DMS Project # 733
Parameter
Baseline
MY01-2011
MY02-2012
DIMENSION
Min
Mean
Med Max SO
n
Min
Mean Med Max
SD
n
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Bankfull Width (ft)
22.70
23.73
23.80 24.70 *
3
23.16
24.11 23.41 25.78
*
3
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Floodprone Width (ft)
114.20
128.47
122.30 148.90 *
3
116.14
128.07 120.34 147.75
*
3
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.60
1.77
1.70 2.00 *
3
1.48
1.57 1.49 1.75
*
3
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
2.60
2.90
3.00 3.10 *
3
2.55
2.67 2.63 2.85
*
3
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
36.30
41.87
41.70 47.60 *
3
34.52
37.88 38.28 40.85
*
3
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Width/Depth Ratio
11.90
13.57
14.20 14.60 *
3
13.38
15.44 15.54 17.42
*
3
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Entrenchment Ratio
5.00
5.43
5.00 6.30 *
3
4.67
5.33 5.01 6.31
*
3
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Bank Height Ratio
1.00
1.00
1.00 1.00 *
3
1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
*
3
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
6.27
10.22
11.23 13.16 *
3
1.23
1.73 1.47 2.49
*
3
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
PROFILE
Riffle Length (ft)
11.75
34.2
- 58.75
3
30.62
51.02
-
71.88
*
3
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.0100
0.0120
0.0500
3
0.0101
0.0144
0.0245
*
3
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Pool Length (ft)
14.92
19.4
23.86
3
19.97
42.60
62.56
*
3
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Pool Max depth
0.5
0.8
1.2
3
1.04
1.24
1.46
*
3
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Pool Spacing (ft)
62.64
188.3
277.4
3
97.17
135.33
206.32
*
3
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
PATTERN
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
49.42
-
98.83
-
49.42
-
98.83
-
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Radius of Curvature (ft)
49.42
76.60
49.42
76.60
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Meander Wavelength (ft)
197.67
296.50
197.67
296.50
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Meander Width Ratio
2
4
2
4
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ADDITIONAL REACH PARAMETERS
Rosgen Classification
C5
C4
N/A
Channel Thalweg length (ft)
1750
1750
N/A
Sinuosity (ft)
1.29
1.29
N/A
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
0.0022
0.00266
N/A
BF slope (ft/ft)
0.0024
0.00247
N/A
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
20/25/27/22/4
20/26/28/24/4
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be%
0.01/0.53/0.13/0.29/0.02
16/185/290/9/0
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
60=19.30 d84=110.18 d95=126.39
0.46/2.76/5.98/21.70/36.73
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
% of reach with eroding banks
0.01%
0.01%
N/A
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
-
Biological or Other
Lewis Creek -733 -Project Closeout Report.
2016 116

Lewis Creek -733 -Project Closeout Report.
2016 Page 1 17
Table 6b: Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary (Longitudinal Profile)
Lewis Creek Restoration DMS Project # 733
Parameter
MY03-2013
MY04-2014
MY05-2015
DIMENSION
Min
Mean
Med Max SD
n
Min
Mean Med Max
SD
n Min
Mean
Med Max
SD
n
Bankfull Width (ft)
19.30
22.54
23.30 25.03 2.93
3
19.78
22.44 21.07 26.46
2.89
3 23.93
25.32
25.58 26.44
1.28
3
Floodprone Width (ft)
99.74
118.01
123.58 130.71 16.22
3
71.57
103.23 119.05 119.07 22.39
3 120.00
130.00
120.00 150.00
17.32
3
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
0.86
1.20
1.26 1.48 0.31
3
1.26
1.53 1.42 1.90
0.27
3 0.58
1.02
0.79 1.68
0.58
3
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
2.12
2.43
2.58 2.60 0.27
3
2.49
2.83 2.73 3.26
0.32
3 2.69
3.09
3.16 3.43
0.38
3
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
29.30
39.07
36.93 50.98 11.00
3
29.91
33.62 33.28 37.66
3.17
3 28.10
47.50
52.10 62.30
17.56
3
Width/Depth Ratio
16.91
19.28
18.49 22.44 2.84
3
10.39
15.43 14.84 21.04
4.37
3 14.24
30.74
32.38 45.59
15.74
3
Entrenchment Ratio
1.14
4.40
5.30 6.77 2.92
3
3.62
4.59 4.50 5.65
0.83
3 4.69
5.13
5.02 5.67
0.50
3
Bank Height Ratio
1.00
1.00
1.00 1.00
3
1.00
1.08 1.00 1.24
0.11
3 1.00
1.00
1.00 1.00
0.00
3
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
1.23 1
1.52
1 1.46 1 1.86 1 0.32 1
3
1.36
1 1.45 1 1.45 1 1.54 1
0.07 1
3 0.81
1 1.11
1 1.05 1 1.47 1
0.33 1
3
PROFILE
Riffle Length (ft)
30.10
59.47
- 94.04 -
-
18.76
50.14 - 98.40
-
- 18.76
50.14
- 98.40
-
-
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.0101
0.01
- 0.0245
0.01
0.02 - 0.03
- 0.01
0.02
- 0.03
-
Pool Length (ft)
24.39
40.51
- 65.72
19.72
19.72 - 19.72
- 19.72
19.72
- 19.72
-
Pool Max depth
3.31
3.63
- 3.95
2.02
2.02 - 2.02
- 2.02
2.02
- 2.02
-
Pool Spacing (ft)
24.39 1
93.99
1 - 193.21 1
NA
I NA NA
- NA
NA
- NA
-
PATTERN
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
49.42
-
- 98.83
49.42
- 98.83
-
- 49.42
- 98.83
-
Radius of Curvature (ft)
49.42
- 76.60
-
49.42
- 76.60
-
- 49.42
- 76.60
-
Meander Wavelength (ft)
197.67
- 296.50
-
197.67
- 296.50
-
- 197.67
- 296.50
-
Meander Width Ratio
2
- 4
-
2.00
- 4.00
-
- 2.00
- 4.00
-
ADDITIONAL REACH PARAMETERS
Rosgen Classification
C4
C4
C4
Channel Thalweg length (ft)
1750
1750
1750
Sinuosity (ft)
1.29
1.29
1.29
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
0.0017
0.00171
0.00171
BF slooe (ft/ft)
0.00247
0.00308
0.00308
Ri%/Ru%/P°/a/G%/S%
17/28/21/27/5
9 / 28 / 1 / 27 / 5
9 / 28 / 1 / 27 / 5
SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be%
0/17.6/92.3/0/0
5 / 2.3 / 87.3 / 0 / 5.3 / 0
0.3 / 20.3 / 63 / 6.7/ 9.3 / 0.3
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95
3.6/7.0/8.6/15.66/22.16
5.7/11.3/16/32/362
2.5/8.1/15.7/160.3/712.7
% of reach with eroding banks
0.01%
0.01%
0.01%
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
Lewis Creek -733 -Project Closeout Report.
2016 Page 1 17

Hydrology Data Summary
Table 7: Summary of Bankful Events 2012-2015
Date of Collection
Date of
Occurrence
Method of Assessment
Feet Above Average
Bankfull Elevation
September 2012
Unknown
Crest Gauge; visual indicators
1.5
October 2013
Sping/Summer
Crest Gauge; visual indicators
0.8
August 2014
Spring/Summer
Crest Gauge; visual indicators
1
September 2015
Spring/Summer
Crest Gauge; visual indicators
0.7
10.00 -
9.00
5.00
7.00
N
a
r
6.00
C
O 5.00
A
S 4.00
C;
a 3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
Figure 8: Percentile Graph for Rainfall 2013-2015
Jan -15 Feb -15 Mar -15 Apr -15 M ay -15 Jun -15 Jul -15 Aug -15 Sep -15 Oct -15 Nov -15 Dec -15
Date
Rafnfall2013 �Rafnfall 2014 �RaiWa112015 -30th Percenffle =70th Percentile
Lewis Creek-733—Project Closeout Report.
2016 Page 18

Vegetation Plot Data
Stems per plot across all years
MY 5 Report Data
Current Meansf20151 I Annual Means
2015 (MY5)
2014 (MY4)
2013 (MY3)
Fall of 2012 (MY 1 &2)
As -Built: April 2011
Plot
Planted
stems
Total
Stems
Total
Stems/ac
Planted
stems
Total
stems
Total
Stems/ac
Planted
stems
Total
stems
Total
Stems/ac
Planted
stems
Total
stems
Total
Stems/ac
Planted
stems
Total
stems
Total
Stems/ac
1
2
60
2428
3
58
2347
7
76
3076
5
21
850
8
8
324
2
7
191
7729
7
185
7487
8
187
7568
10
10
405
11
11
445
3
2
41
1659
2
36
1457
7
21
850
12
13
526
12
12
486
4
9
62
2509
9
62
2509
10
59
2388
14
14
567
14
14
567
5
6
23
931
6
27
1093
10
21
850
15
15
607
15
15
607
MY 5 Report Data
Current Meansf20151 I Annual Means
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10% _
Lewis Creek-733—Project Closeout Report.
2016 Page 119
stem count
0
000 ©©
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10% _
Lewis Creek-733—Project Closeout Report.
2016 Page 119

DMS Recommendations and Conclusions
The Lewis Creek Stream Restoration Site (#733) has met its assigned performance requirements for woody stem
density and bankfull hydrology events. Although three of the five CVS vegetation plots have not met the MY5
criteria of 260 planted stems per acre, all plots far exceeded the criterion if native volunteers are considered. Over -
bank flow events occurred at least once each year, far exceeding performance requirements. While there are
documented wetlands on site, DMS will not be seeking wetland credits at project close-out. This is primarily due
to the fact that wetland credit was not requested in the mitigation plan and also due to the lack of complete
groundwater gauge hydrology data. Data from cross-sectional monitoring and annual stream profiles indicate
that the stream geomorphology has remained generally stable throughout the monitoring period. Several small,
vegetated center bars have established in the stream channel yet these do not appear to be affecting the adjacent
banks. Based on our field observations and review of the data collected during 2011-2015, we conclude that the
Lewis Creek project is trending toward a successful stream restoration project. DMS recommends closing out this
project with 1,750 stream mitigation units as shown in Table 4.
Photo Comparison MYO (2011) -MY5 (2015)
Lewis Creek-733—Project Closeout Report.
2016 Page 120

Lewis Creek-733—Project Closeout Report.
2016 Page 121

1 YL h1. I X f
ate,
a. -
r
•
-
.-
-�r �
, + - -,
_ \ !
y
-sem
1 YL h1. I X f

Appendix A. Watershed Planning Context of Lewis Creek Stream Restoration
733 - Lewis Creek
Watershed Characteristics Overview
The Lewis Creek project is located in Henderson County, approximately six miles northeast of the Town of
Hendersonville in the French Broad River Basin (CU 06010105). It is located within HUC 06010105030040
(Clear Creek), which is listed as a Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) in the 2009 French Broad River Basin
Restoration Priorities (RBRP) plan. This TLW is located within the Mud Creek Local Watershed Plan (LWP)
area. It is 45 square miles in area, comprising a predominantly rural landscape of forest lands, residential
subdivisions, and farms, including apple orchards. Based on information in the 2009 RBRP document, the TLW
is characterized by 35% agriculture, 53% forest cover, 13% developed area, and 48% degraded (non -forested)
riparian buffers. The 2014 statewide list of impaired waters [303(d)] includes the entirety of Lewis Creek
(impaired benthic community) and a 3.9 -mile stretch of Clear (impaired fish and benthic communities). The
watershed includes 11 natural heritage element occurrences (NHEOs), but only one percent of the land area is
conserved. Within the Lewis Creek subwatershed, in recent years much of the remaining forested land is being
rapidly converted to orchards and residential subdivision. The Lewis Creek stream restoration project is adjacent
to a protected mountain bog.
Links to Watershed Goals and Obiectives
The table below summarizes major watershed stressors identified by the Mud Creek LWP effort, recommended
management strategies to address the stressors, and how the Lewis Creek project contributes to meeting these
goals/strategies. [Note: the list of major stressors comes from the LWP Summary of Findings &
Recommendations. Only those stressors directly Pplicable to the Lewis Creek project catchment (2.9 -square
mile drainage _area) are included in the table.]
Stressors and Issues
Management Strategies
Lewis Creek Project
Stormwater
Promote stormwater BMPs, low impact
Restored approximately 1,700 linear feet of stream
development (LID), and impervious surface
channel and adjoining riparian buffer, including
reductions in local ordinances; retrofit BMPs into
riparian wetlands on Lewis Creek floodplain.
existing stormwater systems; promote public
Runoff from adjacent agricultural fields and
education on stormwater management.
residential subdivision is detained and treated as it
flows through riparian buffer and wetland.
Aquatic Habitat
Stream restoration; riparian buffer & wetland
Restored approximately 1,700 linear feet of stream
Degradation
restoration; various agricultural, forestry, and
channel and adjoining riparian buffer, including
residential BMPs; stream & buffer preservation.
riparian wetlands on Lewis Creek floodplain. Re-
established hydrologic connection between stream
channel and floodplain. Installed in -stream
structures promoting development of riffle -run -
pool sequences that support aquatic habitat.
Agricultural Nonpoint
Work with landowners/farmers to implement
Restored approximately 1,700 linear feet of stream
Source (NPS) Pollution —
innovative pest management and agricultural
channel and adjoining riparian buffer, including
sediment, fertilizers,
BMPs like livestock exclusion, buffer strips,
riparian wetlands on Lewis Creek floodplain.
pesticides, fecal coliform.
cover crops, no/low tillage, and animal waste
Livestock exclusion fencing installed. Runoff
management.
from adjacent agricultural fields is detained and
treated as it flows through riparian buffer and
wetland.
Lewis Creek-733—Project Closeout Report.
2016 Page 123

Watershed Context Summary
In addition to the Lewis Creek project, there is currently one other DMS mitigation project within this TLW:
Clear Creek (#92), an approximately 1,200 -ft stream restoration now in long-term management. Per data provided
by the NC Division of Soil & Water Conservation as of March 2015, there is one documented agricultural BMP
project associated with stream or riparian restoration in the 14 -digit HU. The NC DWR 319 grant program has
also funded the implementation of three water quality BMPs (unspecified) within the TLW (through 2014). [See
map figure below.]
2016 DMS Project Closeout: Lewis Creek
Asheville
If
BUNCOMBE fF
� e
` HENDERSON
m
4 J � FIe4c�her -
I UaC
4
_ Mud
Creek
LW P
N'
Clear Greek
© 1 2
�I
BROAD
Lewis Creek-733—Project Closeout Report.
2016 Page 124
I
Legend
�
Gounty Boundary
DMS Prod-ts (2�
.— 319 Projects (3)
Lewis Creek
/
L Agricultural BMPs(1(
CVMTFPr.i—
Inter nW,
— US Hwy
CI mterb.*
SVeems
Cataloging Unit
.
�i 14019it Hydra1n91c Urtt
7 gt Local Watersheds.
4
/!f L I Watershed Ft—
= Miles
Munlclpal BaunCarles
Lewis Creek-733—Project Closeout Report.
2016 Page 124

Appendix B: Property Ownership & Protection
The site protection instrument for this mitigation project includes the following document(s), available at the specified
County Register of Deeds office, and is linked to the property portfolio at: http://ncdenr.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-
public/Mitigation%20Services/Document%20Management%20Libra ry/Prope rty/Property%20PortfoIio/733 LewisCreek
PD 2009.pdf
Project
Total Project
JIMTSCounty
I
Grantor EEP Name
I I
Type Deed
I
Name
Acres
Lewis
733
Henderson
Carolina Mountain Land Lewis Creek-
�CM
Conservation DB 1399, P 4.7
Creek
Conservancy LC Tract
Easement 620
Lewis
733
Henderson
Barbara Dixon Ingle Lewis Creek-
onservation DB 1399, P
rEase
Creek
Ingle Tract
ment 632
Long-term stewardship of this property is managed by the NC DEQ Stewardship Program.
Lewis Creek-733—Project Closeout Report.
2016 Page 125

Appendix C. Permits and Jurisdictional Determinations
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action ID. SAW -2008-0072 County: Henderson USGS Quad: Bat Cave
GENERAL PERMIT (REGIONAL AND NATIONWIDE) VERIFICATION
Property Owner/ Authorized Agent: NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program, Attn: Salam Murtada
Address: 1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1619
Telephone No.: 919-715-1972
Size and location of property (water body, road name/number, town, etc.): Lewis Creek Stream Restoration Project
incornorating the main stem of Lewis Creek on approx. 5.5 acres off North Ridge Road east of Hendersonville.
Description of projects area and activity: Restoration of 1,663 linear feet of perennial stream channel. Work will
include channel relocation and resizing, establishing floodplain and floodplain benches, construction of root wad
revetments, rock and log vanes, reshaping and stabilizing streambanks, establishment and reveeetation of of
stream buffers.
Applicable Law: X Section 404 (Clean Water Act, 33 USC 1344)
❑ Section 10 (Rivers and Harbors Act, 33 USC 403)
Authorization: Regional General Permit Number:
Nationwide Permit Numbers: 27
Your work is authorized by the above referenced permit provided it is accomplished in strict accordance with the attached
conditions and your submitted plans. Any violation of the attached conditions or deviation from your submitted plans may subject the
permittee to a stop work order, a restoration order and/or appropriate legal action.
This verification will remain valid until the expiration date identified below unless the nationwide authorization is modified,
suspended or revoked. If, prior to the expiration date identified below, the nationwide permit authorization is reissued and/or
modified, this verification will remain valid until the expiration date identified below, provided it complies with all requirements of
the modified nationwide permit. If the nationwide permit authorization expires or is suspended, revoked, or is modified, such that the
activity would no longer comply with the terms and conditions of the nationwide permit, activities which have commenced (i.e., are
under construction) or are under contract to commence in reliance upon the nationwide permit, will remain authorized provided the
activity is completed within twelve months of the date of the nationwide permit's expiration, modification or revocation, unless
discretionary authority has been exercised on a case-by-case basis to modify, suspend or revoke the authorization.
Activities subject to Section 404 (as indicated above) may also require an individual Section 401 Water Quality Certification. You
should contact the NC Division of Water Quality (telephone [phone]) to determine Section 401 requirements.
For activities occurring within the twenty coastal counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA),
prior to beginning work you must contact the N.C. Division of Coastal Management.
This Department of the Army verification does not relieve the permittee of the responsibility to obtain any other required Federal,
State or local approvals/permits.
If there are any questions regarding this verification, any of the conditions of the Permit, or the Corps of Engineers regulatory
program, please contact Steven Lund at telephone [phone].
Corps Regulatory Official: Steven Lundy Date: February 21, 2008
Expiration Date of Verification: February 21, 2010
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we continue to do so,
please complete the attached customer Satisfaction Survey or visit http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/WETLANDS/index.html to
complete the survey online.
•.
FEES 2 5 1J
NC ECOSYSTEM
ENHANCEMEi1T PROC-PRAM
Lewis Creek-733—Project Closeout Report.
2016 Page 126

Determination of Jurisdiction:
❑ Based on preliminary information, there appear to be waters of the US including wetlands within the above described project area.
This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process
( Reference 33 CFR Part 331).
❑ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area subject to the permit requirements of
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
X There are waters of the US and/or wetlands within the above described project area subject to the permit requirements of Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ The jurisdictional areas within the above described project area have been identified under a previous action. Please reference
jurisdictional determination issued . Action ID
Basis of Jurisdictional Determination: Lewis Creek is a perennial stream (RPW) flowing to the French Broad River, a
traditionally navigable water (TNW).
Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations.)
Attached to this verification is an approved jurisdictional determination. If you are not in agreement with that approved jurisdictional
determination, you can make an administrative appeal under 33 CFR 331. Enclosed you will find a Notification of Appeal Process
(NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this determination you must submit a completed RFA
form to the following address:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division
Attn: Steven W. Lund, Project Manager
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal
under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the District Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP. Should you
decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by 1/2/2008.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the District Office if you do not object to the determination in this correspondence.**
Corps Regulatory Official: Steven Lund
Date February 21, 2008
SURVEY PLATS, FIELD SKETCH, WETLAND DELINEATION FORMS, PROJECT PLANS, ETC., MUST BE
ATTACHED TO THE FILE COPY OF THIS FORM, IF REQUIRED OR AVAILABLE.
Copy Furnished: N/A
Lewis Creek-733—Project Closeout Report.
2016 Page 127

Action ID Number: SAW -2008-0072 County: Henderson
Permittee: NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program, Attn: Salam Murtada
NW 27 Lewis Creek Stream Restoration
Date Permit Issued: February 21, 2008
Project Manager: Lund
Upon completion of the activity authorized by this permit and any mitigation required by the permit,
sign this certification and return it to the following address:
US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
ASHEVILLE REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
151 PATTON AVENUE, ROOM 208
ASHEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 28801-5006
Please note that your permitted activity is subject to a compliance inspection by a U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers representative. If you fail to comply with this permit you are subject to permit suspension,
modification, or revocation.
I hereby certify that the work authorized by the above referenced permit has been completed in
accordance with the terms and condition of the said permit, and required mitigation was completed in
accordance with the permit conditions.
Signature of Permittee
Lewis Creek-733—Project Closeout Report.
2016
Date
Page 128

EAIt OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
Applicant: NC Ecosystem Enhancement File Number: 2008-0072 Date: Feb 21, 2008
Attached is:
See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of
A
permission)
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter ofpermission)
B
PERMIT DENIAL
C
X APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
D
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
E
SECTION I -,The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above
decision. Additional information nnay be found at hit vvww.usace.arrn pill/inetffutictions/cwlcee wo/re�--,�or
Cors regulations at 33 Cf, RPart 331. 2�.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature
on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the
permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that the
permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district engineer. Your
objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right to appeal
the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a) modify the
permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify the permit
having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections, the district engineer
will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature
on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the
permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you
may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form
and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of
this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by
completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer
within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or
provide new information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the date of
this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative
Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by
the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
Lewis Creek-733—Project Closeout Report.
2016 Page 129

E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps
regarding the preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved
JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new
information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD.
SECTION II - REQUEST FOR APPEAL;, .�}I3JECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your
objections to an initial proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to
this form to clarify where your reasons or objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps
memorandum for the record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the
review officer has determined is needed to clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps
may add new information or analyses to the record. However, you may provide additional information to clarify
the location of information that is already in the administrative record.
POINT 01, CONTACT FCR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION.'
If you have questions regarding this decision
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you
and/or the appeal process you may contact:
may also contact:
Mr. Steven Lund, Project Manager
CESAW-RG-A
US Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any
government consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You
will be provided a 15 day notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site
investigations.
Date:
Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or agent.
DIVISION ENGINEER:
Commander
U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic
60 Forsyth Street, Room 9M15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3490
401 permit deemed issued after the 30 -day review window; no notification e-
mail sent by Cyndi Caroly.
Lewis Creek-733—Project Closeout Report.
2016 30

Mitigation Project
DMS Project ID
River Basin
Cataloging Unit
Lewis Creek
733
FRENCH BROAD
06010105
Appendix D - Debit Ledger
Applied Credit Ratios: 1:1 1.5:1 2.5:1 5:1 1:1 3:1 2:1 5:1 1:1 3:1 2:1 5:1 1:1 3:1 2:1 5:1
Information from DMS Debit Ledger dated 08/08/2016
C
E 2
E
W
E
W
C C
m o
M M
O
m E
R
_
c
w
O
m A
A
_N
Q
C C
O
O
z
C
cE
O
z
C=
C
OM
z c
W
C c
d
NN
Oz �
z Q
N C
o
R O
N
an d
O�
U
PL/1
.o
1N0 d0
m U
o
U
C
Ed
OC
.NQ
m
O
U W
N c
i
N
Nq
o
U
Beginning Balance (feet and acres)
1,750.00
Beginning Balance (mitigation credits)
1,750.00
NCDOT Pre -DMS Debits (feet and acres): Not Applicable
DMS Debits (feet and acres):
DWR Permit No USACE Action ID Impact Project Name
2013-00944 NCDOT TIP B-4289
190.00
2013-00666 NCDOT TIP B-4765
240.00
2013-00506 SR 1338 - Bridge 163 - Division 14
90.00
2013-00499 SR 1388 - Bridge 221 - Division 14
156.00
2013-01103 SR 1593 - Bridge 301 - Division 14
81.00
2013-01942 SR 1537 - Bridge 159 - Division 14
126.00
2013-01943 SR 1131 - Bridge 273 - Division 14
126.00
2013-02168 SR 1107 - Bridge 83 - Division 14
84.00
2014-01666 SR 1361 - Bridge 162 - Division 14
74.00
2014-01668 SR 1502 - Bridge 106 - Division 14
98.00
2014-01664 SR 1568 - Bridge 163 - Division 14
82.00
2005-0071 2004-30595 1 NCDOT TIP R -0619E
403.00
Remaining Balance (feet and acres)
0.00
Remaining Balance (mitigation credits)
1 0.001
1
Information from DMS Debit Ledger dated 08/08/2016