20130250 Ver 1_Year 4 Monitoring Report 2017_20171220

MONITORING YEAR 4
ANNUAL REPORT
Final
IZ1503INA 92 3:00[4:F111*01%11%1111 Lt11[0PEill14
Union County, NC
DEQ Contract 004673
DMS Project Number 95360
Data Collection Period: April - October 2017
Draft Submission Date: November 30, 2017
Final Submission Date: December 20, 2017
PREPARED FOR:
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652

PREPARED BY:
W
WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Wildlands Engineering (Wildlands) restored and enhanced a total of 10,706 linear feet (LF) of stream on
a full -delivery mitigation site in Union County, NC. The project streams consist of Norkett Branch, a third
order stream, two unnamed first order tributaries to Norkett Branch (UT1 and UT2), and two
intermittent tributaries to Norkett Branch (UT2A and UT3). Water quality treatment Best Management
Practices (BMPs) were installed to treat water quality on the non -jurisdictional headwaters of UT3 and
an adjacent ephemeral drainage feature. The project is expected to provide 10,098 stream mitigation
units (SMUs).
The Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site (Site) is located in southeastern Union County, NC,
approximately ten miles southeast of the City of Monroe and five miles north of the South Carolina state
line. The Site is located in the Yadkin River Basin; eight -digit Cataloging Unit (CU) 03040105 and the 14 -
digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03040105081020 (Figure 1). This CU was identified as a targeted local
watershed in the 2009 Lower Yadkin- Pee Dee River Basin Restoration Priority (RBRP) plan. This plan
identifies agricultural practices and runoff as the probable major sources of water quality impairment in
the Middle Lanes Creek watershed. The 2008 North Carolina Division of Water Resources' (NCDWR)
Basinwide Water Quality Plan (BWQP) lists turbidity and nutrient concentrations of nitrogen and
phosphorus as specific concerns in the Rocky River watershed portion of the Yadkin- Pee Dee River
basin. Other pollutants of concern cited in this report are fecal coliform bacteria, iron, and copper. The
project reaches flow off-site, directly into Lanes Creek, which is included on the NCDWR 303d list of
impaired streams. The section of Lanes Creek downstream of the project Site is listed as impaired due to
turbidity (NCDWR, 2012). The project goals established in the Mitigation Plan (Wildlands, 2013) were
completed with careful consideration of goals and objectives that were described in the RBRP and
NCDWR BWQR and to meet the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) mitigation needs
while maximizing the ecological and water quality uplift within the watershed.
The following project goals were established to address the watershed and project Site stressors:
• Improve aquatic and terrestrial habitat within the riparian corridor and provide habitat
corridor extension from adjacent downstream forested habitat;
• Improve additional water quality aspects within stream channels on Site;
Decrease sediment inputs to the stream channels and decrease turbidity in receiving Lanes
Creek; and
• Decrease phosphorus, nitrogen, and fecal coliform inputs to the stream channels.
Stream restoration and enhancement, water quality treatment BMP construction, and planting efforts
were completed between November 2013 and April 2014. Baseline as -built monitoring activities were
completed between April and May 2014. A conservation easement is in place on the 31.6 acres of
riparian corridor and stream resources to protect them in perpetuity.
Overall, the Site has met the required stream and vegetation mitigation success criteria for MY4. The
average planted stem density for the site is 419 stems per acre and is on track to meet upcoming density
criteria. Visual assessment revealed a decrease in areas with poor herbaceous cover; however, bare
banks and invasive plant populations persist. Adaptive management in the upcoming monitoring year
will address areas of concern. Geomorphically, the stability of each restored and enhanced stream
remains in good standing, with cross section dimensions falling within the range of parameters for the
appropriate Rosgen (1996) stream type. Visual assessment suggests the channels show little sign of
instability within the bed, bank, or engineered structures, except isolated instances of bank erosion. The
Site met final hydrological success criteria after MY3. During MY4, two of the restored reaches (Norkett
Branch and UT2) recorded at least one bankfull or greater event. Water quality monitoring results
indicate continued pollutant removal capacity of both storm water BMPs.
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report - FINAL

NORKETT BRANCH STREAM MITIGATION SITE
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 1:
PROJECT OVERVIEW........................................................................................................1-1
Figure 1
1.1
Project Goals and Objectives...................................................................................................................
1-1
1.2
Monitoring Year 4 Data Assessment........................................................................................................
1-3
1.2.1
Vegetative Assessment....................................................................................................................
1-3
1.2.2
Vegetation Problem Areas..............................................................................................................
1-3
1.2.3
Stream Assessment.........................................................................................................................
1-4
1.2.4
Stream Problem Areas.....................................................................................................................
1-5
1.2.5
Hydrology Assessment....................................................................................................................
1-5
1.2.6
Water Quality BMPs........................................................................................................................
1-6
1.2.7
Existing Wetland Monitoring...........................................................................................................
1-6
1.3
Monitoring Year 4 Summary....................................................................................................................
1-6
Section 2:
METHODOLOGY...............................................................................................................2-1
CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Section3:
REFERENCES....................................................................................................................
3-1
APPENDICES
Appendix 1
General Figures and Tables
Figure 1
Project Vicinity Map
Figure 2
Project Component/Asset Map
Table 1
Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table 2
Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3
Project Contact Table
Table 4
Project Information and Attributes
Table 5
Monitoring Component Summary
Appendix 2
Visual Assessment Data
Figure 3.0-3.6
Integrated Current Condition Plan View
Table 6a -g
Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Table 7
Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Stream Photographs
Vegetation Photographs
Areas of Concern
Appendix 3
Vegetation Plot Data
Table 8
Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Table 9
CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Table 10
Planted and Total Stem Counts (Species by Plot with Annual Means)
Appendix 4
Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Table 11a -c
Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table 12a -c
Morphology and Hydraulic Summary (Dimensional Parameters — Cross Section)
Table 13a -g
Monitoring Data —Stream Reach Data Summary
Cross -Section Plots
Reachwide and Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Appendix 5
Hydrology Data
Table 14
Verification of Bankfull Events
Stream Flow Gage Plots
Appendix 6
Water Quality BMPs
Table 15
Water Quality Sampling Results
Table 16
Pollutant Removal Rates
Water Quality Data
Pollutant Removal Plot
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report - FINAL

Section 1: PROJECT OVERVIEW
The Site is located in southeastern Union County, NC, approximately ten miles southeast of the City of
Monroe and five miles north of the South Carolina state line. The Site is located in the Yadkin River
Basin; eight -digit Cataloging Unit (CU) 03040105 and the 14 -digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC)
03040105081020 (Figure 1). The Site is located in the Carolina Slate Belt of the Piedmont physiographic
province (USGS, 1998). The project watershed consists primarily of agricultural land, pasture, and forest.
A conservation easement was recorded on 31.6 acres within the seven parcels (Deed Book 06095, Pages
0530-0589).
The Site is located within the North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) subbasin 03-07-14.
The project streams consist of Norkett Branch, a third order stream, two unnamed first order tributaries
to Norkett Branch (UT1 and UT2), and two intermittent tributaries to Norkett Branch (UT2A and UT3).
Norkett Branch (DWQ Index No. 13-17-40-8) is the main tributary of the project and is classified as WS -V
waters. Class WS -V waters are protected as water supplies draining to Class WS -IV waters or waters
used by industry to supply drinking water or waters formerly used as water supply, and are protected
for secondary recreation, fishing, wildlife and aquatic life, maintenance of biotic integrity, and
agriculture. The drainage area for the project Site is 2,034 acres (3.18 sq mi) at the lower end of Norkett
Branch Reach 2.
Mitigation work at the Site included restoration on Norkett Branch, UTI, and UT2. Enhancement II was
implemented on UT2A and UT3. Water quality treatment BMPs were also implemented to treat
agricultural drainage upstream of UT3 and agricultural drainage in the right floodplain of Norkett Branch
Reach 2. All onsite riparian areas were planted with native species. Construction and planting activities
were completed in April 2014. Directions and a map of the Site are provided in Figure 1 and project
components are illustrated in Figure 2.
1.1 Project Goals and Objectives
Prior to construction activities, the streams were routinely maintained to provide drainage for
agricultural purposes. Impacts to the stream included straightening and ditching, eroding banks, and a
lack of stabilizing riparian vegetation. The streams were used as a water source for cattle in some areas,
resulting in over -widened, unstable trampled banks. Algal blooms, presumably from agricultural nutrient
loading, were observed during Site visits. Trampled stream banks, over -widened channels, and banks
illustrating signs of instability were a common occurrence throughout the Site. The alterations of the
Site to promote farming resulted in impairment of the ecological function of Site's streams. Specific
functional losses at the Site include degraded aquatic habitat, altered hydrology, and reduction of
quality of in -stream and riparian wetland habitats and related water quality benefits. Table 4 in
Appendix 1 and Tables 11 a -c in Appendix 4 present the Site's pre -restoration conditions in detail.
The mitigation project is intended to provide numerous ecological benefits such as pollutant removal
and improved aquatic and terrestrial habitat. Expected improvements to water quality and ecological
processes are outlined below as project goals and objectives. The agricultural stressors and pollutants
have been specifically addressed by the Site design. The major goals of the stream mitigation project are
to provide ecological and water quality enhancements to the Norkett Branch, Lane's Creek, Rocky River
and Yadkin River Basins while creating a functional riparian corridor at the Site level and restoring a
Piedmont Bottomland Forest as described by Schafale and Weakley (1990). These project goals were
established with careful consideration of goals and objectives that were described in the RBRP and to
meet the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) mitigation needs while maximizing the
ecological and water quality uplift within the watershed.
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report -FINAL 1-1

The following project goals and objectives were established and listed in the Mitigation Plan (Wildlands,
2013) to address the effects listed above:
• Improve aquatic and terrestrial habitat within the riparian corridor and provide habitat corridor
extension from adjacent downstream forested habitat. By restoring appropriate channel cross
section and profile, including riffle and pool sequences, coarse substrate zones for
macro inverte brates and deep pool habitat for fish will also be restored. Introduction of large
woody debris, rock structures, brush toe, and native stream bank vegetation will provide
additional habitat and cover for both fish and macroinvertebrates. Adjacent buffer areas will be
restored by planting native vegetation which will provide habitat and forage for terrestrial
species. These areas will be allowed to receive more regular inundating flows, and vernal pools
may develop over time increasing habitat diversity. A watershed approach, restoring riparian
corridor functions on multiple interconnected tributaries as well as treating agricultural drainage
from headwater features with Best Management Practices (BMPs), will allow for large-scale
riparian corridor connectivity.
Improve additional water quality aspects within stream channels on Site. Riffle/pool sequences
will be restored to provide re -aeration allowing for oxygen levels to be maintained in the
perennial reaches. Creation of deep pool zones will lower temperature, helping to maintain
dissolved oxygen concentrations. Establishment and maintenance of riparian buffers will create
long-term shading of the stream to minimize thermal heating. Water quality BMPs situated in
the headwaters upstream of jurisdictional streams will treat agricultural runoff before it reaches
project streams.
Decrease sediment inputs to the stream channels and decrease turbidity in receiving Lanes
Creek. Cattle will be fenced out of the riparian corridor, eliminating bank trampling. Sediment
input from eroding stream banks will be reduced by bioengineering and installing in -stream
structures while creating a stable channel form using geomorphic design principles. Sediment
from off-site sources will be captured by deposition on restored floodplain areas where native
vegetation will slow overland flow velocities. By allowing for more overbank flooding and by
increasing channel roughness, in -channel velocities can be reduced. This will lower bank shear
stress and decrease bank erosion.
• Decrease phosphorus, nitrogen, and fecal coliform inputs to the stream channels. Nitrogen and
phosphorus chemical fertilizers, pesticides, and cattle waste will be decreased by buffering
adjacent agricultural operations from the restored channels. Cattle will be fenced out to
eliminate in -channel fecal pollution. Off-site nutrient input will be absorbed on-site by filtering
flood flows through restored floodplain areas, water quality BMPs, and vernal pools positioned
to treat concentrated overland flow. Flood flows will be allowed to disperse through native
vegetation across the reconnected floodplain. Increased surface water residency time will
provide contact treatment time and groundwater recharge potential.
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report -FINAL 1-2

1.2 Monitoring Year 4 Data Assessment
Annual monitoring was conducted between April and October 2017 to assess the condition of the project.
The stream restoration success criteria for the Site follows the approved success criteria presented in the
Mitigation Plan (Wildlands, 2013).
1.2.1 Vegetative Assessment
A total of 26 vegetation plots were established during the baseline monitoring within the project
easement area using standard 10 meter by 10 -meter vegetation monitoring plots. Plots were randomly
established within planted portions of the stream restoration and enhancement areas to capture the
heterogeneity of the designed vegetative communities. The plot corners were marked and are
recoverable either through field identification or with the use of a GPS unit. Reference photographs
were taken at the plot origin looking diagonally across the plot to the opposite corner to capture the
same reference photograph locations as the as -built. The final vegetative success criteria will be the
survival of 210 planted stems per acre in the riparian corridor along restored and enhanced reaches at
the end of the seventh year of monitoring (MY7). Planted vegetation must average 10 feet in height in
each plot by MY7. The interim measure of vegetative success for the Site will be the survival of at least
320 planted stems per acre at the end of the third year of monitoring (MY3) and at least 260 stems per
acre at the end of the fifth year of monitoring (MY5). If this performance standard is met by MY5 and
stem density is trending towards success (i.e., no less than 260 five-year-old stems per acre), monitoring
of vegetation on the Site may be terminated provided written approval is provided by the USACE in
consultation with the NC Interagency Review Team.
The MY4 vegetation survey was completed in August 2017 and resulted in 23 out of 26 vegetation plots
meeting the year five interim success criteria (260 stems per acre). Overall, the Site's average planted
stem density resulted in 419 stems per acre which exceeds the year five interim success criteria. The
average woody stem density of the Site with volunteers included is 506 stems per acre. Supplemental
planting added 6,000 stems (37% of the MY1 stem total) on reaches east of Philadelphia Church Road in
February 2015. The supplemental planting was in response to low stem vigor of many plots and high
bare root mortality between the as -built and MY1 which is attributed to dry site conditions, soil fertility,
scouring flows shortly after installation, insects, and disease. Some of the monitoring plots showed an
increase in planted stem densities in MY2 as a result of this supplemental planting. Although the Site
meets the overall stem density requirement, two vegetation plots (plot 5 and 10) have stem densities of
243 stems per acre and another vegetation plot (plot 7) has a stem density of 202 stems per acre. Plots 5
and 10 do not meet the interim success criteria for MY5 and plot 7 does not meet the MY7 final success
criteria. In MY4, planted stems heights averaged 5.2 feet which is a 67% increase in height compared to
the MY3 stem height average of 3.1 feet. A majority of woody stems (67%) had a vigor rating of 3 or
more (indicating that the stem is healthy and more likely to survive) during MY4. Continued stem growth
and maintenance of stem health (vigor) indicate drought and plant stress observed in previous
monitoring years is becoming less of a factor in vegetative success.
Refer to Appendix 3 for vegetation summary tables and raw data tables and Appendix 2 for vegetation
plot photographs, the Current Condition Plan View (CCPV) maps, and the vegetation condition
assessment table.
1.2.2 Vegetation Problem Areas
During the late winter/early spring of MY4, several areas previously identified as "Bare/Poor Herbaceous
Cover" were addressed through a combination of reseeding and the installation of hugelkultur (hugel)
beds. The hugel beds provide additional organic matter and aid in moisture retention to encourage
herbaceous growth in bare areas. Hugel bed installation involved the excavation of small floodplain
trenches that were backfilled with organic matter, covered in a mixture of soil and brush, and planted
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report - FINAL 1-3

with live whips, live stakes and seeded. The live stakes and whips were planted to anchor the beds. As
the woody species establish they will help diffuse the energy of out of bank events and trap additional
organic matter. During the MY4 visual assessment, bare areas were significantly smaller than previously
mapped in MY1 through MY3. The total area designated as 'Bare/Poor Herbaceous Cover" in MY4 is
approximately 0.4 acres or 1% of the planted area of the Site, compared to approximately 1.9 acres or
6% reported in MY3. The MY4 vegetation monitoring and visual assessment identified areas of
"Bare/Poor Herbaceous Cover" which are noted in the Figures 3.0-3.6 and in Table 7.
Several areas of the groundsel tree (eaccharis halimifolia); an aggressive coastal plain native evergreen
shrub, were mechanically and chemically treated during MY4. This species is not typically considered a
species of high concern for DMS -required monitoring; however, the high density of this shrub layer is
competing with planted woody and herbaceous vegetation in the areas of infestation. Other areas of
undesirable species were noted on site including: cattail (Typha latifolia), parrot feather (Myriophyllum
aquaticum), Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), and Chinaberry tree (Melia azedarach). During the
summer (June — July) and fall (November) of 2017, cut/spray techniques were used to address areas of
dense groundsel tree infestation.
Adaptive Management
If warranted future adaptive management activities may be employed to continue to improve
herbaceous vegetative cover and improve the growth rates of planted woody stems such as soil
amendments in targeted areas. Supplemental planting of container plants proposed for early 2017 was
postponed to early 2018 due to unseasonably warm weather during the scheduled planting period. The
supplemental planting will involve approximately 100 stems (less than one percent of the MY4 stem
total) over 2 acres to improve the standing stock of diverse, healthy, woody stems. Areas noted with
invasive plant populations will be treated in accordance with herbicide, not to exceed label prescribed
application rates. If necessary, cut/spray techniques and/or application of a broadleaf -selective
herbicide may be used to control groundsel tree.
1.2.3 Stream Assessment
A total of 20 cross-sections were installed along the stream restoration reaches. One permanent cross-
section was installed per 20 bankfull widths along stream restoration reaches, with riffle and pool
sections in proportion to DMS guidance. Each cross-section was permanently marked with pins to
establish its location. Annual cross-section survey includes points measured at all breaks in slope,
including top of bank, bankfull, edge of water, and thalweg. Photographs were taken looking upstream
and downstream at cross-section. Stream photographs were also taken at 51 permanent photograph
reference points throughout the project area. A reach -wide pebble count was conducted in all
restoration reaches (Norkett Branch Reach 1, Norkett Branch Reach 2, UT1, UT2 Reach 1, UT2 Reach 2,
UT2 Reach 3A, and UT2 Reach 313) for classification purposes. A wetted perimeter pebble count was
conducted at each permanent riffle cross-section to characterize the pavement.
Riffle cross-sections on the restoration reaches should be stable and should show little change in bankfull
area, maximum depth ratio, and width -to -depth ratio. All riffle cross-sections should fall within the
parameters defined for channels of the appropriate Rosgen stream type. If any changes do occur, these
changes will be evaluated to assess whether the stream channel is showing signs of instability. Indicators
of instability include a vertically incising thalweg or eroding channel banks. Changes in the channel that
indicate a movement toward stability or enhanced habitat include a decrease in the width -to -depth ratio
in meandering channels or an increase in pool depth. Substrate materials in the restoration reaches should
indicate a progression towards or the maintenance of coarser materials in the riffle features and smaller
particles in the pool features.
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report -FINAL 1-4

Morphological surveys for MY4 were conducted in August 2017. All streams within the Site appear
stable and have met the success criteria for MY4. Riffle cross-sections surveyed along the restoration
reaches appear stable and typically show little change in the bankfull area, maximum depth ratio, or
width -to -depth ratio. Slight downcutting observed during MY3 on the left channel edge of riffle cross
section 15 on UT2 Reach 2 was observed to have stabilized and not progressed in MY4. The minor
adjustment is not currently an area of concern. All surveyed riffle cross-section dimensions fell within
the parameters defined for channels of the appropriate Rosgen stream type (Rosgen 1996). In -stream
structures used to enhance channel habitat and stability on the outside bank of meander bends; such as
brush toe, are providing stability and habitat as designed. Pattern data will be completed in MY7 only if
there are indicators from the dimensions that significant geomorphic adjustments have occurred. No
changes were observed that indicated a change in the radius of curvature or channel belt width;
therefore, pattern data is not collected or included in the MY4 report. Visual assessment during MY4
revealed few isolated instances of bank scour and eroding banks. These are discussed in more detail in
section 1.2.4.
In general, substrate materials in the restoration reaches indicate maintenance of coarser materials in
the riffle features and finer particles in the pool features. Increases in the silt/clay particle size class
were observed in reachwide counts for UT2 Reaches 1, Reach 2, and Reach 3A as well as riffle 100 -
counts conducted on Norkett Branch Reach 1 (Cross-section 5), Norkett Branch Reach 2 (Cross-section
7), and UT2 Reach 1 (Cross-section 12). The increases may be a result of low flow conditions reducing
transport capacity during the monitoring year. Increased fines in riffle cross-section may also be the
result of low -flow conditions which allow in -stream vegetation to establish and accumulate a thin layer
of fines on top of coarser substrate.
Please refer to Appendix 2 for the stream visual assessment tables, the CCPV maps, and stream
reference photographs. Refer to Appendix 4 for the morphological data and plots.
1.2.4 Stream Problem Areas
During MY4, isolated areas of stream bank erosion were repaired on Norkett Branch Reach 1 and 2.
Specific locations include: the left bank of Norkett Branch Reach 1 between station 119+00 and 119+50,
the right bank of Norkett Branch Reach 1 between 120+00 and 120+50, and along the right bank of
Norkett Branch Reach 2 between stations 132+50 and 133+00. Work included the installation of soil lifts
and live whips which were seeded with temporary and perennial seed mixes. Live whips were also
installed along the left toe of bank of Norkett Branch Reach 2 between stations 132+25 and 132+75. All
repairs were stable during the MY4 visual assessment.
Isolated areas of bare bank were noted during the MY4 visual assessment along Norkett Branch Reach 1.
Adaptive Management
Any areas noted with bare or eroding banks will be watched for advancement in the upcoming
monitoring years. Refer to Appendix 2 for the stream visual assessment tables, the CCPV maps,
reference photographs, and photographs of the stream problem areas.
1.2.5 Hydrology Assessment
Hydrologic monitoring was accomplished using both manual crest gage readings and In-situ Rugged Troll
100 pressure transducers installed at three surveyed cross-sections throughout the site (XS6 on Norkett
Branch Reach 2, XS9 on UT1, and XS18 on UT2 Reach 3a). Rainfall amounts were measured by an Onset
HOBO rain gauge located at the site. To meet hydrological success criteria, two or more bankfull events
must occur in separate years within the restored reaches by the end of MY7. The success criteria have
already been met for the seven-year monitoring period after MY3. During MY4, at least one bankfull or
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report -FINAL 1-5

greater event was recorded along Norkett Branch and UT2. Please refer to Appendix 5 for hydrology
data.
1.2.6 Water Quality BMPs
Water quality grab samples were collected during the monitoring period to assess the functionality of
the Step Pool Storm Conveyance BMP (SPSC BMP) and the Pocket Wetland BMP (PW BMP). This
sampling is not part of the success criteria for the project. The following expected rates for pollutant
removal were established in the Mitigation Plan (Wildlands, 2013) and in accordance with published
rates of removal from similar BMP approaches. The SPSC BMP is expected to provide similar pollutant
removal rates as the published removal rates of a bioretention area with internal water storage
(NCDWQ, 2007), which are 85% TSS removal, 40% TN removal, and 40% TP removal. The PW BMP is
expected to provide 60% TSS removal, 20% TN removal, and 45% TP removal, which is similar to
extended detention wetlands (Center for Watershed Protection, 2000 and United States Environmental
Protection Agency, 2012).
The monitoring plan calls for quarterly sampling; however, samples were unable to be obtained during
Q1 or Q3 due to the timing and intensity of rain events. During Q2, inflow and outflow was sampled at
each BMP after storm events on 4/4/2017 and 5/23/2017. First flush style sample bottles were used to
capture stormflow, which filled during the rain event at a pre -determined stage height, and were
retrieved within 24 hours. In MY4, samples were analyzed for total suspended solids (TSS), phosphorus
as total phosphorus (TP), nitrogen as total nitrogen (TN), Nitrate/Nitrite (NO,), and Total Kjeldahl
Nitrogen (TKN), by Prism Laboratories Inc. A nearby weather station at the Monroe, NC Airport (KEQY)
recorded rainfall of 0.59 inches on 4/4/17. The on-site rain gage recorded 0.87 inches on 5/23/2017.
Refer to in Appendix 6 for water quality sampling results and pollutant removal rates.
The SPSC BMP provided pollutant removal of TN in both sampling events with removal ranging from 33%
to 46%. TP removal could not be calculated on the 4/4/2017 event but on 5/23/2017 TP removal of 29%
was estimated. TSS removal was not available on the 4/4/2017 event. TSS increased 20% between the
inlet and outlet samples on 5/23/2017.
The PW BMP provided reductions in TP in both 2017 sampling events ranging from 13% to 50%. TP
reduction could not be calculated in the April samples while May sampling indicated an increase between
inlet and outlet samples of 89%. TSS was reduced during both sampling events with reduction rates of
82% and 83%, respectively.
1.2.7 Existing Wetland Monitoring
A permanent photo station (photo point #16) was established in the stream -to -wetland conversion area
in Norkett Branch Reach 1 near station 104+00 on the left floodplain. The former channel area appears
to be maintaining wetland hydrology and supports a wetland plant community composition. The photo
point (#16) is included in the Stream Photographs section of Appendix 2.
1.3 Monitoring Year 4 Summary
Overall, the Site has met the required stream and vegetation mitigation success criteria for MY4. The
average planted stem density for the site is 419 stems per acre and is on track to meet upcoming density
criteria. The MY4 average stem height was 5.2 feet which is a 67% increase from the MY3 average stem
height of 3.1 feet. Visual assessment indicated that vegetative adaptive management efforts completed
in March 2017 (reseeding and hugel bed installation) have reduced areas of bare or poor herbaceous
cover. Areas of low density of planted stems and invasive plant populations persist in MY4. Planned
management in the upcoming monitoring year will address these areas of concern. Geomorphically, the
stability of each restored and enhanced stream remains in good standing, with cross section dimensions
falling within the range of parameters for the appropriate Rosgen (1996) stream type. Visual assessment
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report - FINAL 1-6

indicates the channels show little sign of instability within the bed, bank, or engineered structures. Short
segments of soil lifts installed in 150 LF of banks in MY4 remain stable. Norkett Branch and UT2 recorded
at least one bankfull or greater event during MY4. The MY7 hydrological success criteria for the Site was
achieved after MY3. Water quality monitoring results indicate continued pollutant removal capacity of
both storm water BMPs.
Summary information/data related to various project and monitoring elements can be found in the
tables and figures in the report appendices. Narrative background and supporting data can be found in
the Mitigation Plan documents available on the DMS website. All raw data supporting the tables and
figures in the appendices are available upon request.
110- Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report - FINAL 1-7

Section 2: METHODOLOGY
Geomorphic data collected followed the standards outlined in The Stream Channel Reference Site: An
Illustrated Guide to Field Techniques (Harrelson et al., 1994) and in the Stream Restoration: A Natural
Channel Design Handbook (Doll et al., 2003). Longitudinal and cross-sectional data were collected using
a total station and were georeferenced to established benchmarks and NC State Plane coordinates.
Morphological surveys were conducted using a total station tied to these geo-referenced (control)
points. Reachwide pebble counts were conducted along each restored reach for channel classification.
Cross-section substrate analyses conducted in each surveyed riffle followed the 100 count wetted
perimeter methodology to characterize pavement. All CCPV mapping was recorded using a Trimble
handheld GPS with sub -meter accuracy and processed using was Pathfinder and ArcView. Crest gauges
were installed during the baseline monitoring period in surveyed riffle cross-sections and are monitored
quarterly. Hydrology attainment installation and monitoring methods are in accordance with the USACE
(2003) standards. Vegetation monitoring protocols followed the Carolina Vegetation Survey-NCEEP Level
2 Protocol (Lee et al., 2008).
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report -FINAL 2-1

Section 3: REFERENCES
Center for Watershed Protection, 2000. National Pollutant Removal Performance Database for
Stormwater Treatment Practices, 2nd Edition. Elliot City, Maryland.
Doll, B.A., Grabow, G.L., Hall, K.A., Halley, J., Harman, W.A., Jennings, G.D., and Wise, D.E. 2003. Stream
Restoration: A Natural Channel Design Handbook.
Harrelson, C.C., Rawlins, C.L., Potyondy, J.P. 1994. Stream Channel Reference Sites: An Illustrated Guide
to Field Techniques. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM -245. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 61 p.
Lee, M.T., Peet, R.K., S.D., Wentworth, T.R. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation Version
4.2. Retrieved from: http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/protocol/cvs-eep-protocol-v4.2-lev1-5.pdf.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ), 2007. Stormwater Best Management Practices
Manual. Retrieved from: http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ws/su/bmp-ch9
North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) Basinwide Planning Program, 2008. Yadkin Pee -
Dee River Basinwide Water Quality Plan. Retrieved from:
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ps/bpu/basin/yadkinpeedee/2008
North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR), 2012. North Carolina 303(d) List - Category 5.
August 24, 2012. Retrieved from:
http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document_li brary/get_file?uuid=9d45b3b4-d066-4619-82e6-
ea8ea0e01930&groupld=38364
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP), 2009. Lower Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin
Restoration Priorities (RBRP). Retrieved from:
http://www.nceep.net/services/restplans/Yadkin_Pee_Dee_RBRP_2009_Final.pdf
Rosgen, D.L. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Pagosa Springs, CO: Wildland Hydrology Books.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina, 3rd
approx. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, North Carolina.
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines. USACE, NCDENR-
DWQ, USEPA, NCWRC
United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2012. Stormwater Wetland Factsheet. Retrieved
from: https://www.epa.gov/npdes/national-menu-best-management-practices-bmps-
stormwater#edu
United States Geological Survey (USGS). 1998. North Carolina Geology. Retrieved from:
http://www.geology.enr.state.nc.us/usgs/carolina.htm
Weakley, A.S. 2008. Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, Georgia, Northern Florida, and Surrounding Areas
(Draft April 2008). University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill: Chapel Hill, NC.
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. 2013. Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site Mitigation Plan. DMS, Raleigh,
NC.
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. 2014. Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site Baseline Monitoring Document
and As -Built Baseline Report. DMS, Raleigh, NC.
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report -FINAL 3-1

APPENDIX 1. General Figures and Tables

!• � ♦ Opi
too if' I
- LM o n,roi r
.v
hl�
i
V
C
0
r
u
•
•'Wickes
f,f
.i
a
SOUTH CAF, I NA
des Cteek
v
Directions:
The Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site is
located in the southeastern portion of Union
County, NC. From Charlotte, NC,
take US -74 south approximately 25 miles to
US -601 in Monroe, NC. Turn right on US -601
South and continue approximately 10.5 miles
and then turn left onto Landsford Road.
Travel approximately 3 miles and take a left
onto Philadelphia Church Road. Travel 2 miles
and cross over UT2 to Norkett Branch. The
project site is located upstream and downstream
of the Philadelphia Church Road stream crossing.
%�o rk� 0
WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
O
A.:vit
—Winaate
Hydrologic Unit Code (14)
*� DMS Targeted Local Watershed
0 Project Location
1 •
•
Oeaverdam 64 500 (1
+� ta0,b
aw 8 03040-1050811 Oe
• - p
.• ,
i
50&R
I
f
NA I
The subject project site is an environmental restoration
site of the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)
Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) and is encompassed
by a recorded conservation easement,but is bordered
by land under private ownership. Accessing the site
may require traversing areas near or along the easement
boundary and therefore access by the general public is not
permitted. Access by authorized personnel of state and
federal agencies or their designees/contractors involved in
the development, oversight,and stewardship of the restoration
site is permitted within the terms and timeframes of their
defined roles. Any intended site visitation or activity by
any person outside of these previously sanctioned roles
and activites requires prior coordination with DMS.
Figure 1 Project Vicinity Map
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
1 2 Miles DMS Project No. 95360
1 1 l Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Union County, NC

Figure 2 Project Component/Asset Map
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
kt� 0 300 600 Feet DMS Project No. 95360
WILDLANDS rkt I I I 1-i
ENGINEERING Monitoring Year 5 - 2017
Union County, NC

Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
N/A: not applicable
1. Stationing based off of centerline as -built alignment which matched with the design alignment.
2. Credits are based off of the as -built thalweg alignment.
3. Credits determined for the BMPs were established in the mitigation plan (2013).
Mitigation Credits
Nitrogen
Stream
Riparian Wetland Non -Riparian Wetland
Buffer
Nutrient
Phosphorous Nutrient Offset
Offset
Type
R
RE
R
RE R RE
MEMMINEMENIMIM
Totals
9,196
902
N/A
N/A N/A N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
..
As -Built
Existing
Restoration or Restoration
Restoration Footage/
Mitigation
z
Reach ID
1
Stationing
Footage/
Approach
Equivalent
Acreage
Ratio
Credits (SMU)
Acreage
STREAMS
100+31-117+60
Norkett Branch Reach 1
& 118+60-
1,980 LF
P1
R
2,313
1:1
2,313
124+00
124+00-131+84
Norkett Branch Reach 2
& 132+25-
1,505 LF
P1
R
1,513
1:1
1,513
138+99
UT1
200+00-211+98
840 LF
P1
R
1,212
1:1
1,212
UT2 Reach 1
300+41-310+80
820 LF
P1
R
1,033
1:1
1,033
310+80-321+71
UT2 Reach 2
& 322+06-
1,272 LF
P1
R
1,416
1:1
1,416
325+20
UT2 Reach 3A
325+20-335+58
923 LF
P1
R
1,041
1:1
1,041
UT2 Reach 3B
336+90-343+48
380 LF
P1/2
R
668
1:1
668
401+53-411+46
UT2A
& 411+84-
1,296 LF
Ell
Ell
1,340
2.5:1
536
415+31
UT3
505+42-507+12
163 LF
Ell
Ell
170
2.5:1
68
Upstream of UT3 intermittent
Step Pool Storm
SPSC BMP
WQ BMP
29.7 ac treated
1:8
2383
drainage
Conveyance
non -jurisdictional drainage in
PW BMP
eastern Norkett Branch
Pocket Wetland
WQ BMP
19.9 ac treated
1:3
603
floodplain
Component
Stream Riparian Wetland Non -
Buffer Upland
Restoration Level Riparian
(LF) (acres) Wetland (square feet) (acres)
N/A: not applicable
1. Stationing based off of centerline as -built alignment which matched with the design alignment.
2. Credits are based off of the as -built thalweg alignment.
3. Credits determined for the BMPs were established in the mitigation plan (2013).

Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
W Report
Data Collection Complete
Completion or Scheduled
Delivery
July 2013
Mitigation Plan July 2012 - October 2012
Final Design - Construction Plans
Emily Reinicker, PE, CFM
July 2013 - November 2013
November 2013
Construction
December 2013 - April 2014
April 2014
Temporary S&E mix applied to entire project area'
Land Mechanic Designs, Inc.
December 2013 - April 2014
April 2014
Permanent seed mix applied to reach/segments
December 2013 - April 2014
April 2014
Bare root and live stake plantings for reach/segments
March 2014 - April 2014
April 2014
Baseline Monitoring Document (Year 0)
April 2014 - May 2014
June 2014
Year 1 Monitoring
Fremont, NC 27830
September 2014 - October 2014
December 2014
Bruton Natural Systems, Inc
Stream Assessment
October 2014
December 2014
Vegetation Assessment September 2014
Maintenance and Replanting
Fremont, NC 27830
October 2014 -January 2014
February 2015
Year 2 Monitoring
April 2015 - October 2015
December 2015
Stream Assessment
April 2015
December 2015
Vegetation Assessment September 2015
Year 3 Monitoring
Monitoring Performers
April 2016 - October 2016
December 2016
Stream Assessment
April 2016
December 2016
Vegetation Assessment June 2016
Invasive Treatment
July 2016
December 2016
Bank repairs and hugel bed installation in bare areas
March 2017
Spring 2017
Year 4 Monitoring
April 2017 - November 2017
December 2017
Stream Assessment
August 2017
December 2017
Vegetation Assessment August 2017
Invasive Treatment
June -July, November 2017
N/A
Year 5 Monitoring
2018
December 2018
Year 6 Monitoring
2019
December 2019
Year 7 Monitoring
2020
December 2020
'Seed and mulch is added as each section of construction is completed.
Table 3. Project Contact Table
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No.95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Designer
1430 S Mint St. Suite 104
Emily Reinicker, PE, CFM
Charlotte, NC 28203
704.332.7754
Land Mechanic Designs, Inc.
Construction Contractor
126 Circle G Lane
Willow Spring, NC 27592
Bruton Natural Systems, Inc
Planting Contractor
P.O. Box 1197
Fremont, NC 27830
Bruton Natural Systems, Inc
Seeding Contractor
P.O. Box 1197
Fremont, NC 27830
Seed Mix Sources
Green Resource, Colfax, NC
Nursery Stock Suppliers
Bruton Natural Systems, Inc
Bare Roots
Dykes and Son Nursery, McMinnville, TN
Live Stakesl
Foggy Bottom Nursery, Lansing, NC
Monitoring Performers
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Kirsten Gimbert
Monitoring, POC
704.332.7754, ext. 110

Table 4. Project Information and Attributes
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Project Name
Project Information
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
County
lunion County
Project Area (acres)
131.6
Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude)
34°52'47.56"N, 80°22'9.19"W
Physiographic Province
Carolina Slate Belt
of the Piedmont Physiographic Province
River Basin
Yadkin
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8 -digit
03040105
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14 -digit
03040105081020
DWQ Sub -basin
03-07-14
Project Drainage Area (acres)
2,034
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area
<1%
CGIA Land Use Classification
Reach
Parameters
143% forested, 29% managed herbaceous cover, 28% cultivated land
Summary Inf
Norkett Norkett
Branch Reach Branch UT3 UT2 1UT2A UT3
1 Reach 2
Length of reach (linear feet) - Post -Restoration'
2,369
1,499
1,198 4,175 1,378
170
Drainage area (acres)
1490
2034
48 457 72
28
Drainage area (sqmi)
2.3
1 3.2
1 0.08 1 0.72 0.11
0.04
NCDWQ stream identification score
43.75
1 41.5
1 32.25 1 35.75 23;30.75
25.75
NCDWQ Water Quality Classification
WS -V
Morphological Desription (stream type)
P
P
P P
I I
Evolutionary trend (Simon's Model) - Pre- Restoration
III
III/IV
II/III II, IV
IV II/ III
Underlying mapped soils
Floodplain Soil Types for Site
Badin channery silt loam
Badin channery silt clay
loam
Cid channery silt
loam
Secrest-Cid
complex
Drainage class
well -drained
well -drained
well -drained
with moderate
potential
well-drainedshrink-swell
Soil Hydric status
N
N
N
Y
Slope
2-8%
2-8%
1-5%
0-3%
FEMA classification
AE
AE
N/A I N/A
N/A
N/A
Native vegetation community
Piedmont Bottomland Forest
Percent composition exotic invasive vegetation -
Post -Restoration
MMRegulatory
Considerations
0�
Regulation
Applicable?
Resolved?
Supporting Documentation
Waters of the United States - Section 404
X
X
USACE Nationwide Permit No.27 and DWQ 401 Water
Quality Certification No. 3885.
Waters of the United States - Section 401
X
X
Division of Land Quality (Dam Safety)
N/A
N/A
N/A
Endangered Species Act
X
X
Norkett Branch Mitigation Plan; Wildlands determined "no
effect" on Union County listed endangered species.
Historic Preservation Act
X
X
No historic resources were found to be impacted (letter
from SHPO dated 8/20/2012).
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)/Coastal Area
Management Act (CAMA)
N/A
N/A
N/A
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
X
X
CLOMR and LOMR Approved
Essential Fisheries Habitat
N/A
N/A
N/A
1. Total stream length does not exclude easement crossings.

Table 5. Monitoring Component Summary
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Parameter
Monitoring Feature
Norkett Branch
Reach 1
Norkett Branch
Reach 2
UT1
Quantity/ Length by Reach
UT2 Reach 1 UT2 Reach 2 UT2 Reach 3A
UT2 Reach 36
UT3
Storm Water BMPs
Frequency
Riffle Cross Section
3
2
1
1
2
1
1
N/A
N/A
Annual
Pool Cross Section
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
N/A
N/A
Pattern
Pattern
N/A
N/A
Profile
Longitudinal Profile
N/A
N/A
Substrate
Reach Wide (RW) / Riffle (RF)
100 Pebble Count
RW -1, RF -3
RW -1, RF -2
RW -1, RF -1
RW -1, RF -1
RW -1, RF -2
RW -1, RF -1
RW -1, RF -1
N/A
N/A
Annual
Stream Hydrology
Crest Gage
1
1
1
N/A
N/A
Quarterly
Wetland Hydrology
Groundwater Gages
N/A
N/A
Vegetation'
CVS Level 2
26
Annual
Visual Assessment
All Streams
Photographs
Y
y
Y
y
Y
51
y
Y
y
Y
Annual
Annual
Exotic and nuisance vegetation
Project Boundary
Reference Photos2
1 deviation from the vegetation plot quantity indicated in the Mitigation Plan is due to a smaller than expected planted area.
2Additional reference photo locations were added for site documentation to exceed quantity indicated in the Mitigation Plan.

APPENDIX 2. Visual Assessment Data

Figure 3.0 Integrated Current Condition Plan View (Key)
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
0 500 1,000 Feet DMS Project No. 95360
WILDLANDS 1 I I I I I
ENGINEERING Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Union County, INC

Conservation Easement
Step Pool Storm Conveyance BMP
OPocket Wetland BMP
Structure or Riffle
Stream Restoration
Stream Enhancement II
Non Project Stream
--•— Bankfull
Cross -Section (XS)
Photo Point
Crest Gage (CG)
Vegetation Plot Conditions - MY4
- Criteria Not Met
OCriteria Met
IN
'<,''�>. !/I. '_'''>>. ♦•♦♦♦♦♦♦♦s♦ `\moi �\`�®��\ .�s.
.17
/ � ���..► � , •,� � •._� � 1x0
s
w�
Reach 1
�•.
'e- W-4
Oft
WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
Figure 3.1 Integrated Current Condition Plan View (Sheet 1 of 6)
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
100 200 Feet DMS Project No. 95360
i i I Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Union County, NC

LI 111 �
Conservation Easement
-11110
Step Pool Storm Conveyance BMP
OPocket Wetland BMP
Structure or Riffle
Stream Restoration
Stream Enhancement II
Non Project Stream
--•— Bankfull
Cross -Section (XS)
Photo Point
Crest Gage (CG)
Vegetation Plot Conditions - MY4
- Criteria Not Met
OCriteria Met
Vegetation Problem Area - MY4
Invasive Groundsel Tree - Treated November 2017
Bare/Poor Herbaceous Cover
Stream Problem Area - MY4
Bank Scour/Eroded
Work Completed - MY4
Live stakes
Soil lifts
� Hugel Beds
WSW
■111111111111
1 n'.1-- nuuuu1n1n1
' ;♦ � '��11�r •,� •■ •■•'"'••• � y■
♦ ��' ® -
Al
sss1" ." "I ...
1111111 ■..1..1... ....11• ...�/.■■■♦
•••••••••••••••'•••♦nnnn11111111•■•■•1.1•jjjjllnnnn•
kt�
WILDLANDS rk�
ENGINEERING
_x r
Z?
Qlz
/+,
XSO
r ♦♦ A �` M • rAt.
v�
♦_
it y� y �' w ♦'♦♦♦♦♦♦ �' w •♦� \ A; w r
a ♦♦
♦♦♦ /Y . r »
IN
Reach 3A
'O
0. i♦♦ /moi•/ i. .iw�' r,..
nor—
A
Aid r
it
yl
I
-41,
I�f/ • i- w•y j I -
All
• f f • �"� . .. s
: ®� lX0
Figure 3.2 Integrated Current Condition Plan View (Sheet 2 of 6)
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
I 100 2 I Feet DMS Project No. 95360
i i i Monitoring Year 4- 2017
Union County, NC

3u■■r�■n■.�■■u■n..■rr■.r■rr■.r■rr■rr■rr■..r.ru.■..■rr■rr■..ur!
• fir. (°AJC �
1
IV3L�1'flTA1J `=flan=unu^%ui ,
MATCHLINE 331+50
c.. ♦.♦ �.� ♦♦♦
Id 1 ' (�rra�jj♦• @( Mg g
(•i1 Q' I _ I �1� �1
MATCHLINE 130+50 I
70% aerial coverage of herbaceous in MY4
75% aerial coverage of herbacoue in MY4
♦ ! / ♦♦`
teach 3B
Norkett Branch
Reach 2
♦♦ 1 / ♦♦♦
♦ I I
�.` 1 ♦`
IMATCHILINE 342+00 �� •♦
1/ qu r' 1
♦♦
.♦
�� /.- - 1 / ♦♦♦♦ �••••s Conservation Easement
x /
j / �/" `\ �/ ♦♦` Step Pool Storm Conveyance BMP
;L
• / .r ��� // �♦ �Pocket Wetland BMP
E ♦♦ Structure or Riffle
+� ♦�• Stream Restoration
♦♦ O /� / t'•• `',,'•".�,:r•e - Stream Enhancement II
Non
�tunnnn•tu•t•t•t•.•.•.•♦•.•.Project Stream
/��� _�_ i- �/ '•.'•••,•.,'••••••. --•- Bankfull
����•�•��..���� / /
♦•t•••
Cross-Section(XS)
•. - • i
:
Photo Point
I
\
�
• �
� -�„h
+ Crest Gage (CG)
Rain Gage and Barotroll
M
q
1
_ • ray`
1
• •; .9Y -S
t3 0
0 100 200 Feet
WILDLANDS 1 I I I I I
ENGINEERING
Vegetation Plot Conditions - MY4
- Criteria Not Met
- Criteria Met
Vegetation Problem Area - MY4
®Invasive GroundselTree - Treated November 2017
® Bare/Poor Herbaceous Cover
Work Completed - MY4
Live stakes
-Soil lifts
Hugel Beds
Figure 3.3 Integrated Current Condition Plan View (Sheet 3 of 6)
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Union County, NC

WILDLANDS 1
ENGINEERING
(14
11111111 Ill INN Ill 11111111111110:11,
qT. ,
41;
N,
= F
\
••
•
,
Conservation Easement
Step Pool Storm Conveyance BMP
OPocket Wetland BMP
Structure or Riffle
Stream Restoration
Stream Enhancement II
Non Project Stream
--•— Bankfull
Cross -Section (XS)
Photo Point
Crest Gage (CG)
Vegetation Plot Conditions - MY4
- Criteria Not Met
OCriteria Met
Vegetation Problem Area - MY4
Invasive Groundsel Tree - Treated November 2017
Bare/Poor Herbaceous Cover
Stream Problem Area - MY4
Bank Scour/Eroded
Work Completed - MY4
Live stakes
Soil lifts
Hugel Beds - MY4
Norkett Branch
Reach 1
VXW
Figure 3.4 Integrated Current Condition Plan View (Sheet 4 of 6)
100 200 Feet Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
I I I I I DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Union County, NC

Figure 3.5 Integrated Current Condition Plan View (Sheet 5 of 6)
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
\� 0 100 200 Feet DMS Project No. 95360
WILDLANDS 1 I I I I I
ENGINEERING Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Union County, INC

Figure 3.6 Integrated Current Condition Plan View (Sheet 6 of 6)
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
kt� 0 100 200 Feet DMS Project No. 95360
WILDLANDS rkt I I I I I
ENGINEERING Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Union County, INC

Table 6a. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Norkett Branch Reach 1- 2.313 LF
Major Channel
Category
Channel Sub -Category
Number
Stable,
Metric
Performing as
Intended
Number of Amount of %Stable,
Total Number
Unstable Unstable Performing as
in As -Built
Segments Footage Intended
Numberwith
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Footagewith
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Adjust %for
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
1. Vertical Stability
Aggradation 0 0 100%
(Riffle and Run units)
Degradation 0 0 100%
2. Riffle Condition
Texture/Substrate 17 17 100%
3. Meander Pool
Depth Sufficient 16 16 100%
1. Bed
Condition
Length Appropriate 16 16 100%
Thalweg centering at upstream of 17 17 100%
meander bend (Run)
4. Thalweg Position
Thalweg centering at downstream of 17 17 100%
meander bend (Glide)
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting
1. Scoured/Eroded
simply from poor growth and/or scour
2
140
97%
100%
100%
100%
and erosion
Banks undercut/overhanging to the
2. Bank
extent that mass wasting appears likely.
2. Undercut
Does NOT include undercuts that are
0
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
modest, appear sustainable and are
providing habitat.
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
Totals
2
140
97%
100%
100%
100%
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no
dislodged boulders or logs.
2
2
100%
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting
maintenance of grade across the sill
2
2
100%
3. Engineered
2a. Piping
P g
Structures lacking any substantial flow
underneath sills or arms.
2
2
100%
Structures'
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent
of influence does not exceed 15%.
2
2
100%
Pool forming structures maintaining
4. Habitat
"Max Pool Depth : Bankfull Depth >_ 1.6
Rootwads/logs providing some cover at
2
2
100%
baseflow.
'Excludes constructed riffles since they are evaluated in section 1.

Table 6b. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Norkett Branch Reach 2 - 1,513 LF
Major Channel
Category
Channel Sub -Category
Number
Stable,
Metric
Performing as
Intended
Number of
Total Number
Unstable
in As -Built Segments
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
%Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Numberwith
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Footagewith
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Adjust %for
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
1. Vertical Stability
Aggradation 0
0
100%
0
100%
(Riffle and Run units)
Degradation 0
2. Riffle Condition
Texture/Substrate 10 10
100%
3. Meander Pool
100%
Depth Sufficient 11 11
1. Bed
Condition
Length Appropriate 11 11
100%
4. Thalweg Position
100%
Thalweg centering at upstream of 12 12
meander bend (Run)
Thalweg centering at downstream of 12 12
meander bend (Glide)
100%
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting
1.Scoured/Eroded
simply from poor growth and/or scour
0
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
and erosion
Banks undercut/overhanging to the
2. Bank
extent that mass wasting appears likely.
2. Undercut
Does NOT include undercuts that are
0
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
modest, appear sustainable and are
providing habitat
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
Totals
0
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no
dislodged boulders or logs.
1
1
100%
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting
maintenance of grade across the sill
1
1
100%
3. Engineered
2a. Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow
underneath sills or arms.
1
1
100%
Structures'
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent
of influence does not exceed 15%.
1
1
100%
Pool forming structures maintaining
4. Habitat
"Max Pool Depth : Bankfull Depth >_ 1.6
Rootwads/logs providing some cover at
1
1
100%
baseflow.
'Excludes constructed riffles since they are evaluated in section 1.

Table 6c. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
UT1- 1,212 LF
Major Channel
Category
Channel Sub -Category
Number
Stable,
Metric
Performing as
Intended
Number of Amount of %Stable,
Total Number
Unstable Unstable Performing as
in As -Built Segments Footage Intended
Numberwith
Stabilizing
Woody
Ve etation
Footagewith
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Adjust %for
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
1. Vertical Stability
Aggradation 0 0 100%
(Riffle and Run units)
Degradation 0 0 100%
2. Riffle Condition
Texture/Substrate 27 27 100%
3. Meander Pool
Depth Sufficient 26 26 100%
1. Bed
Condition
Length Appropriate 27 27 100%
4. Thalweg Position
Thalweg centering at upstream of 27 27 100%
meander bend (Run)
Thalweg centering at downstream of 27 27 100%
meander bend (Glide)
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting
1. Scoured/Eroded
simply from poor growth and/or scour
0
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
and erosion
Banks undercut/overhanging to the
2. Bank
extent that mass wasting appears likely.
2. Undercut
Does NOT include undercuts that are
0
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
modest, appear sustainable and are
providing habitat
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
Totals
0
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no
dislodged boulders or logs.
1
1
100%
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting
maintenance of grade across the sill
1
1
100%
3. Engineered
2a. Piping
p g
Structures lacking any substantial flow
underneath sills or arms.
1
1
100%
Structures'
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent
of influence does not exceed 15%.
1
1
100%
Pool forming structures maintaining
4. Habitat
-Max Pool Depth : Bankfull Depth >_ 1.6
Rootwads/logs providing some cover at
1
1
100%
baseflow.
'Excludes constructed riffles since they are evaluated in section 1.

Table 6d. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
UT2 Reach 1-1,033 LF
Major Channel
Category
Channel Sub -Category
Number
Stable,
Metric
Performing as
Intended
Number of Amount of %Stable,
Total Number
Unstable Unstable Performing as
in As -Built Segments Footage Intended
Numberwith
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Footagewith
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Adjust %for
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
1. Vertical Stability
Aggradation 0 0 100%
(Riffle and Run units)
Degradation 0 0 100%
2. Riffle Condition
Texture/Substrate 24
24 100%
3. Meander Pool
Depth Sufficient 24
24 100%
1. Bed
Condition
24 100%
Length Appropriate 24
4. Thalweg Position
Thalweg centering at upstream of 25
meander bend (Run)
25 100%
25 100%
Thalweg centering at downstream of 25
meander bend (Glide)
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting
1. Scoured/Eroded
simply from poor growth and/or scour
0
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
and erosion
Banks undercut/overhanging to the
2. Bank
extent that mass wasting appears likely.
2. Undercut
Does NOT include undercuts that are
0
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
modest, appear sustainable and are
providing habitat
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
Totals
0
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no
dislodged boulders or logs.
2
2
100%
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting
maintenance of grade across the sill
2
2
100%
3. Engineered
2a. Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow
underneath sills or arms.
2
2
100%
Structures'
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent
of influence does not exceed 15%.
2
2
100%
Pool forming structures maintaining
4. Habitat
-Max Pool Depth : Bankfull Depth >_ 1.6
Rootwads/logs providing some cover at
2
2
100%
baseflow.
'Excludes constructed riffles since they are evaluated in section 1.

Table 6e. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
UT2 Reach 2 -1,416 LF
Major Channel
Category
Channel Sub -Category
Number
Stable,
Metric
Performing as
Intended
Number of Amount of %Stable,
Total Number
Unstable Unstable Performing as
in As -Built Segments Footage Intended
Numberwith
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Footagewith
Stabilizing
Woody
Ve etation
Adjust %for
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
1. Vertical Stability
Aggradation 0 0 100%
(Riffle and Run units)
Degradation 0 0 100%
2. Riffle Condition
Texture/Substrate 31
31 100%
3. Meander Pool
Depth Sufficient 31
31 100%
1. Bed
Condition
33 100%
Length Appropriate 33
4. Thalweg Position
Thalweg centering at upstream of 34
meander bend (Run)
34 100%
34 100%
Thalweg centering at downstream of 34
meander bend (Glide)
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting
1. Scoured/Eroded
simply from poor growth and/or scour
0
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
and erosion
Banks undercut/overhanging to the
2. Bank
extent that mass wasting appears likely.
2. Undercut
Does NOT include undercuts that are
0
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
modest, appear sustainable and are
providing habitat
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
Totals
0
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no
dislodged boulders or logs.
4
4
100%
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting
maintenance of grade across the sill
4
4
100%
3. Engineered
2a. Piping
p g
Structures lacking any substantial flow
underneath sills or arms.
4
4
100%
Structures'
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent
of influence does not exceed 15%.
4
4
100%
Pool forming structures maintaining
4. Habitat
-Max Pool Depth : Bankfull Depth >_ 1.6
Rootwads/logs providing some cover at
4
4
100%
baseflow.
Excludes constructed riffles since they are evaluated in section 1.

Table 6f. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
UT2 Reach 3A -1,041 LF
Major Channel
Category
Channel Sub -Category
Number
Stable,
Metric
Performing as
Intended
Number of Amount of
Total Number
Unstable Unstable
in As -Built Segments Footage
%Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Numberwith
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Footagewith
Stabilizing
Woody
Ve etation
Adjust %for
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
1. Vertical Stability
Aggradation 0 0
100%
100%
(Riffle and Run units)
Degradation 0 0
2. Riffle Condition
Texture/Substrate 25 25
100%
3. Meander Pool
100%
Depth Sufficient 24 24
1. Bed
Condition
Length Appropriate 24 24
100%
4. Thalweg Position
100%
Thalweg centering at upstream of 25 25
meander bend (Run)
Thalweg centering at downstream of 25 25
meander bend (Glide)
100%
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting
1. Scoured/Eroded
simply from poor growth and/or scour
0
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
and erosion
Banks undercut/overhanging to the
2. Bank
extent that mass wasting appears likely.
2. Undercut
Does NOT include undercuts that are
0
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
modest, appear sustainable and are
providing habitat
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
Totals
0
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no
dislodged boulders or logs.
1
1
100%
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting
maintenance of grade across the sill
1
1
100%
3. Engineered
2a. Piping
P g
Structures lacking any substantial flow
underneath sills or arms.
1
1
100%
Structures'
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent
of influence does not exceed 15%.
1
1
100%
Pool forming structures maintaining
4. Habitat
"Max Pool Depth : Bankfull Depth_ 1.6
Rootwads/logs providing some cover at
1
1
100%
baseflow.
'Excludes constructed riffles since they are evaluated in section 1.

Table 6g. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
UT2 Reach 36 - 668 LF
Major Channel
Category
Channel Sub -Category
Number
Stable,
Metric
Performing as
Intended
Number of Amount of %Stable,
Total Number
Unstable Unstable Performing as
in As -Built Segments Footage Intended
Numberwith
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
Footagewith
Stabilizing
Woody
Ve etation
Adjust %for
Stabilizing
Woody
Vegetation
1. Vertical Stability
Aggradation 0 0 100%
(Riffle and Run units)
Degradation 0 0 100%
2. Riffle Condition
Texture/Substrate 10 10 100%
3. Meander Pool
Depth Sufficient 10 10 100%
1. Bed
Condition
Length Appropriate 10 10 100%
4. Thalweg Position
Thalweg centering at upstream of 11 11 100%
meander bend (Run)
Thalweg centering at downstream of 11 11 100%
meander bend (Glide)
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting
1. Scoured/Eroded
simply from poor growth and/or scour
0
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
and erosion
Banks undercut/overhanging to the
2. Bank
extent that mass wasting appears likely.
2. Undercut
Does NOT include undercuts that are
0
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
modest, appear sustainable and are
providing habitat
3. Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
Totals
0
0
100%
100%
100%
100%
1. Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no
dislodged boulders or logs.
2
2
100%
2. Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting
maintenance of grade across the sill
2
2
100%
3. Engineered
2a. Piping
p g
Structures lacking any substantial flow
underneath sills or arms.
2
2
100%
Structures'
3. Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent
of influence does not exceed 15%.
2
2
100%
Pool forming structures maintaining
4. Habitat
-Max Pool Depth : Bankfull Depth >_ 1.6
Rootwads/logs providing some cover at
2
2
100%
baseflow.
'Excludes constructed riffles since they are evaluated in section 1.

Table 7. Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4-2017
Planted Acreage 29.9
Vegetation Category Definitions
Mapping
Threshold (acres)
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
% of Planted
Acreage
Bare Areas Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material
0.1
15
0.4
1%
Low Stem Density Areas' Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on MY3, 4, 5, or 7 stem count criteria.
0.1
3
0.1
0%
Total
18
0.5
2%
Areas of Poor Growth Rates or Vigor
Areas with woody stems of a size class that are obviously small given the monitoring year.
0
0
0.0
0%
Cumulative Total
18
0.5
2%
Easement Acreage 31.6
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Mapping
Threshold (SF)
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
% of Planted
Acreage
Invasive Areas of Concern
Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale).
1000
8
2.3
8%
Easement Encroachment Areas Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale).
none
0
0
0%
'Acreage calculated from vegetation plots monitored for site.

Stream Photographs

� � i,r.! i. A• �'i-;7y9 � h fix° � �� � ti
��k 7
�A 1

k zn i J a r
�c aa- 7 C• / Y w
' �'►Fi r �- �d �tSyL�. ru � •_�� w� 1 ��,� " l ie.� '`r.">Zh �,. �-
4— -``-1�y''ti���
.... - '` ka'exVIM
It -,7
� x
• • ':111IMMIM •• RIM . I: 1 • • •• .. •• I:
Photo • .int 5 — looking upstream(0812212017) Photo • .int 5 — looking ..(0812212017)
R

s �
I
s
r
��
!E
r
s �
�
f '
r.A
Y� 1_
\t4
I
s
r
s n.
r
s �
Y� 1_

Photo Point 10 — looking upstream (08/15/2017) 1 Photo Point 10 — looking downstream (08/15/2017) 1
I Photo Point 11— looking upstream (08/15/2017) 1 Photo Point 11— looking downstream (08/15/2017)
Photo Point 12 — looking upstream (08/15/2017) Photo Point 12 — looking downstream (08/15/2017)

Photo Point 13 — looking upstream (08/15/2017) Photo Point 13 — looking downstream (08/15/2017) 1
I Photo Point 14— looking upstream (08/15/2017) 1 Photo Point 14— looking downstream (08/15/2017)
Photo Point 15 — looking upstream (08/15/2017) Photo Point 15 — looking downstream (08/15/2017)

1 v taw v"IFA�
5 1
If.
a t
fs:

_�! ,� 4�'+ �1 �, � 4 - �a, +�,� ear";►\
��� fivJ-``p�f� r �"N�ks�. � -t ��C ?7•^'y ,,;'fie 0 i ��.,� _ �� y� �, � � T Y t �
§,.�� + iA,'• � � z Rt.. ,z :. \ % "�� r' - � '.� 7-7
i_tel
Z. r �� z� ? C by 0� �r
� �• 444 _
• • •• •• • I: I • . '. •• •• I:
r +
I�+d• y `� a. -
Photo '• •• • (08 11512017) Photo '. •• •• I:
r �
x.

Photo Point 25 — looking upstream (08/15/2017) 1 Photo Point 25 — looking downstream (08/15/2017) 1
I Photo Point 26 — looking upstream (08/15/2017) 1 Photo Point 26 — looking downstream (08/15/2017)
Photo Point 27 — looking upstream (08/15/2017) 1 Photo Point 27 — looking downstream (08/15/2017)

fisc,.
f,
•h 1
11W
� E
, 7,�"t

Photo Point 31— looking upstream (08/15/2017) 1 Photo Point 31— looking downstream (08/15/2017) 1
Photo Point 32 — looking upstream (08/15/2017) 1 Photo Point 32 — looking downstream (08/15/2017)
Photo Point 33 — looking upstream (08/15/2017) Photo Point 33 — looking downstream (08/15/2017)

Photo Point 34— looking upstream (08/15/2017) 1 Photo Point 34— looking downstream (08/15/2017) 1
I Photo Point 35 — looking upstream (08/15/2017) 1 Photo Point 35 — looking downstream (08/15/2017)
Photo Point 36 — looking upstream (08/15/2017) Photo Point 36 — looking downstream (08/15/2017)

Photo Point 37 — looking upstream (08/15/2017) 1 Photo Point 37 — looking downstream (08/15/2017) 1
I Photo Point 38 — looking upstream (08/15/2017) 1 Photo Point 38 — looking downstream (08/15/2017)
Photo Point 39 — looking upstream (08/15/2017) Photo Point 39 — looking downstream (08/15/2017)

Photo Point 40 — looking upstream (08/15/2017) 1 Photo Point 40 — looking downstream (08/15/2017) 1
I Photo Point 41— looking upstream (08/15/2017) 1 Photo Point 41— looking downstream (08/15/2017)
Photo Point 42 — looking upstream (08/15/2017) 1 Photo Point 42 — looking downstream (08/15/2017)

Photo Point 43 — looking upstream (08/15/2017) Photo Point 43 — looking downstream (08/15/2017) 1
I Photo Point 44 — looking upstream (08/15/2017) 1 Photo Point 44 — looking downstream (08/15/2017)
Photo Point 45 — looking upstream (08/15/2017) 1 Photo Point 45 — looking downstream (08/15/2017)

Photo Point 46 — looking upstream (08/15/2017) 1 Photo Point 46 — looking downstream (08/15/2017) 1
I Photo Point 47 — looking upstream (08/15/2017) 1 Photo Point 47 — looking downstream (08/15/2017)
Photo Point 48 — looking upstream (08/15/2017) 1 Photo Point 48 — looking downstream (08/15/2017)

Vegetation Photographs

1jy
s
�•3i Xd � 9+��f /�M- `d'Mrc�,. i'� �1r a} ��l.�illi� -
e
d -
t
es}���"...� 11: fat,_"_ IC�r�r

`
A
n
!,
T
n'.- 81'x.
a .'Y•
.al
_
L
7
''
F l IY1M yt,� k
`
A
n
!,
�x
n'.- 81'x.
a .'Y•
.al
_
7
''

ti
\ Y
J
�
10
t1 .a��xK
Fr
�
's
ti
\ Y
J
�
\ Y

f

Areas of Concern

Invasive Plant Population (Groundsel Tree) —10/17/2017 1 Invasive Plant Population (Parrotfeather) —10/17/2017 1
Bare / Poor Herbaceous Cover —10/17/2017 1 Bare / Poor Herbaceous Cover —10/17/2017 1
Bare Banks: Norkett Branch Station 104+00 — 10/17/2017

APPENDIX 3. Vegetation Plot Data

Table 8. Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Plot MY4 Success Criteria Met
Tract Mean
1 Y
88%
2 Y
3 Y
4 Y
5 N
6 Y
7 N
8 Y
9 Y
10 N
11 Y
12 Y
13 Y
14 Y
15 Y
16 Y
17 Y
18 Y
19 Y
20 Y
21 Y
22 Y
23 Y
24 Y
25 Y
26 Y

Table 9. CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4-2017
Report Prepared By
Ian Eckardt
Date Prepared
10/13/2017 14:59
database name
cvs-eep-entrytool-v2.3.1 MY4.mdb
database location
Q:\ActiveProjects\005-02134 Norkett Branch FDP\Monitoring\Monitoring Year 4\Vegetation Assessment
computer name
IAN -PC
file size
48234496
DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN THIS DOCUMENT------------
Metadata
Description of database file, the report worksheets, and a summary of project(s) and project data.
Proj, planted
Each project is listed with its PLANTED stems per acre, for each year. This excludes live stakes.
Proj, total stems
Each project is listed with its TOTAL stems per acre, for each year. This includes live stakes, all planted stems, and all natural/volunteer stems.
Plots
List of plots surveyed with location and summary data (live stems, dead stems, missing, etc.).
Vigor
Frequency distribution of vigor classes for stems for all plots.
Vigor by Spp
Frequency distribution of vigor classes listed by species.
Damage
List of most frequent damage classes with number of occurrences and percent of total stems impacted by each.
Damage by Spp
Damage values tallied by type for each species.
Damage by Plot
Damage values tallied by type for each plot.
Planted Stems by Plot and Spp
A matrix of the count of PLANTED living stems of each species for each plot; dead and missing stems are excluded.
ALL Stems by Plot and spp
A matrix of the count of total living stems of each species (planted and natural volunteers combined) for each plot; dead and missing stems are excluded.
PROJECT SUMMARY -------------------------------------
Project Code
95360
project Name
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
Description
River Basin
length(ft)
10706
stream -to -edge width (ft)
50
area (sq m)
127880.66
Required Plots (calculated)
22
Sampled Plots
26

Table 10. Planted and Total Stem Counts (Species by Plot with Annual Means)
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4-2017
Current Plot Data (MY4 2017)
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
95360-WEI-0001 95360-WEI-0002 95360-WEI-0003
PnoLSFP-all T PnoLS P -all T PnoLS P -all T
95360-WEI-0004 95360-WEI-0005
Pnol-S P -all T PnoLS P -all T
95360-WEI-0006
PnoLS P -all T
95360-WEI-0007
PnoLS P -all T
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
1
1
1 1
1
1
2 2
2
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
3
3
3 1
1
1 1
1
1
2
2
2
2 2
2
1 1
1
Carya sp.
hickory
Tree
Celtis laevigata
sugarberry
Tree
Cephalanthus occidentalis
common buttonbush
Shrub
2
Cercis canadensis
eastern redbud
Tree
1
1
1
Cornus florida
flowering dogwood
Tree
Diospyros virginiana
common persimmon
Tree
3
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
2
2
2 5
5
5
1
1
1
4 4
4
3 3
3
Hamamelis virginiana
American witchhazel
Tree
Liquidambar styraciflua
sweetgum
Tree
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
Pinus rigida
pitch pine
Tree
1
Pinus strobus
eastern white pine
Tree
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
5
5
5 6
6
6 7
7
7
8 8
8 2
2
2
3 3
3
1 1
1
Populus deltoides
eastern cottonwood
Tree
1
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
1 1
1
Quercus rubra
northern red oak
Tree
1
1
1
3
3
3
1 1
1
Salix
Unknown willow
Shrub or Tree
Salix nigra
black willow
Tree
Sambucus canadensis
Common Elderberry
Shrub
1 1
1
Taxodium distichum
bald cypress
Tree
Ulmus alata
1winged elm I
Tree
Unknown
Shrub or Tree
Stem count
11
11
13 13
13
16 12
12
14
12 12
12 6
6
6
10 1 10
10
5 5
5
size (ares)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
size (ACRES)
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
Species count
41
4
1 5 4
4
5 4
1 4
6
1 4
1 4
4 4
4
4
4
1 4
4
3
3
3
Stems per ACREJ
445
1 445
1 526 1 526
1 526
1 647 1 486
1 486
1 567
1 486
1 486
1 486 1 243
1 243
1 243
1 405
1 405
1 405 1
202
202
202
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Volunteer species included in total
PnoLS: Planted Stems excluding live stakes
P -all: All planted stems
T: Total stems including volunteers
* Supplemental planting was performed in MY2 (February 2015)
included 6,000 stems or approximately 37% of MY1 stem total.

Table 10. Planted and Total Stem Counts (Species by Plot with Annual Means)
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4-2017
Current Plot Data (MY4 2017)
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
95360-WEI-0008
PnoLSFP-all T
95360-WEI-0009 95360-WEI-0010
PnoLS P -all T PnoLS P -all T
95360-WEI-0011 95360-WEI-0012
PnoLS P -all T PnoLS P -all T
95360-WEI-0013 95360-WEI-0014
PnoLS P -all T PnoLS P -all T
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
1
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
3
3
3
2
2
2
1 1
1 1
1
1
1
1
1 1
1
1
Carya sp.
hickory
Tree
Celtis laevigata
sugarberry
Tree
5
Cephalanthus occidentalis
common buttonbush
Shrub
Cercis canadensis
eastern redbud
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
Cornus florida
flowering dogwood
Tree
Diospyros virginiana
common persimmon
Tree
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
5
5
5
2 2
7 2
2
2
6 6
6 1
1
1
2
2
2 3
3
3
Hamamelis virginiana
American witchhazel
Tree
Liquidambar styraciflua
sweetgum
Tree
1
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
1
1
1
Pinus rigida
pitch pine
Tree
1
Pinus strobus
eastern white pine
Tree
1
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
4
4
4
6 6
6 1
1
1
4 4
4 7
7
7
4
4
4 2
2
2
Populus deltoides
eastern cottonwood
Tree
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
1
1
1
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
2 2
2
1
1
1
Quercus rubra
northern red oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 1
1
1
Salix
Unknown willow
Shrub or Tree
4
1
Salix nigra
black willow
Tree
Sambucus canadensis
Common Elderberry
Shrub
Taxodium distichum
bald cypress
Tree
Ulmus alata
1winged elm I
Tree
6
Unknown
Shrub or Tree
Stem count
15
1 15
17
10 1 10
22 6
6
6
11 11
15 10
1 10
10
9
9
16 8
8
8
size (ares)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
size (ACRES)
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
Species count
6
6
8
3
3
5 4
1 4
1 4
3
3
4 4
1 4
4
5
1 5
1 8 5
5
5
StemsperACREJ
607
607
688
405
1 405
890 243
1 243
1 243
445
445
607 405
1 405
405
364
1 364
1 647 324
324
324
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Volunteer species included in total
PnoLS: Planted Stems excluding live stakes
P -all: All planted stems
T: Total stems including volunteers
* Supplemental planting was performed in MY2 (February 2015)
included 6,000 stems or approximately 37% of MY1 stem total.

Table 10. Planted and Total Stem Counts (Species by Plot with Annual Means)
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4-2017
Current Plot Data (MY4 2017)
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
95360-WEI-0015
PnoLSFP-all T
95360-WEI-0016
PnoLS P -all T
95360-WEI-0017
PnoLS P -all T
95360-WEI-0018
PnoLS P -all T
95360-WEI-0019
PnoLS P -all T
95360-WEI-0020
PnoLS P -all T
95360-WEI-0021
PnoLS P -all T
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
2
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Carya sp.
hickory
Tree
Celtis laevigata
sugarberry
Tree
1
Cephalanthus occidentalis
common buttonbush
Shrub
Cercis canadensis
eastern redbud
Tree
1
1
1
4
4
4
Cornus florida
flowering dogwood
Tree
Diospyros virginiana
common persimmon
Tree
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
5
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
1
Hamamelis virginiana
American witchhazel
Tree
2
2
2
Liquidambar styraciflua
sweetgum
Tree
6
2
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
Pinus rigida
pitch pine
Tree
Pinus strobus
eastern white pine
Tree
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
3
3
3
1
1
1
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
6
6
6
Populus deltoides
eastern cottonwood
Tree
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Quercus rubra
northern red oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
Salix
Unknown willow
Shrub or Tree
Salix nigra
black willow
Tree
Sambucus canadensis
Common Elderberry
Shrub
Taxodium distichum
bald cypress
Tree
Ulmus alata
1winged elm I
Tree
3
3
1
1
Unknown
Shrub or Tree
1
Stem count
10
10
10
7
7
10
12
12
24
9
9
10
12
12
16
10
10
10
15
15
18
size (ares)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
size (ACRES)
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
Species count
5
5
5
5
5
6
5
5
8
4
1 4 1
5
7
7
10
5
1 5
5
6
6
8
StemsperACREJ
405
1 405
1 405
283
283
405 1
486
486
971
1 364
1 364 1
405
486
486
647
405
1 405
405
607
607
728
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Volunteer species included in total
PnoLS: Planted Stems excluding live stakes
P -all: All planted stems
T: Total stems including volunteers
* Supplemental planting was performed in MY2 (February 2015)
included 6,000 stems or approximately 37% of MY1 stem total.

Table 10. Planted and Total Stem Counts (Species by Plot with Annual Means)
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Current Plot Data (MY4 2017)
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
95360-WEI-0022
Pnol-S P -all T
95360-WEI-0023 95360-WEI-0024
PnoLS P -all T PnoLS P -all T
95360-WEI-0025
PnoLS P -all T
95360-WEI-0026
PnoLS P -all T
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1 1
1
1
1
1
1
Carya sp.
hickory
Tree
Celtis laevigata
sugarberry
Tree
Cephalanthus occidentalis
common buttonbush
Shrub
Cercis canadensis
eastern redbud
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
Cornus florida
flowering dogwood
Tree
Diospyrosvirginiana
common persimmon
Tree
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
6
6
6
3
3
3 3
3
3
3
3
3
5
5
5
Hamamelis virginiana
American witchhazel
Tree
1
1
1
Liquidambar styraciflua
sweetgum
Tree
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Pinus rigida
pitch pine
Tree
Pinus strobus
eastern white pine
Tree
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
5
5
5
3
3
3 4
4
4
2
2
2
2
2
2
Populus deltoides
eastern cottonwood
Tree
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
1
1
1 1
1
1
1
1
1
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
2
2
2
2
2
2 1
1
1
Quercus rubra
northern red oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
Salix
Unknown willow
Shrub or Tree
Salix nigra
black willow
Tree
Sambucus canadensis
Common Elderberry
Shrub
Taxodium distichum
bald cypress
Tree
Ulmus alata
winged elm
Tree
1
Unknown
Shrub or Tree
Stem count
14
14
14
13
13
13 10
10
10
10
10
10
11
11
12
size (ares)
1
1
1
1
1
size (ACRES)
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
Species count
1 4
4
4 1
8
8
8 1 5
5
5 1
7
7
7
5
5
6
Stems per ACRE
1 567
567
567 1
526
526
526 1 405
405
405 1
405
405
405
445
445
486
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Volunteer species included in total
PnoLS: Planted Stems excluding live stakes
P -all: All planted stems
T: Total stems including volunteers
* Supplemental planting was performed in MY2 (February 2015)
included 6,000 stems or approximately 37% of MY1 stem total.

Table 10. Planted and Total Stem Counts (Species by Plot with Annual Means)
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Annual Sumarry
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
MY4 (2017)
Pnol-S P -all T
MY3 (2016)
PnoLS P -all I T
MY2 (2015)
PnoLS P -all T
MY1 (2014)
PnoLS P -all T
MYO (2014)
PnoLS P -all T
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
4
4
7
4
4
6
4
4
4
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
25
25
25
32
32
32
Carya sp.
hickory
Tree
6
Celtis laevigata
sugarberry
Tree
6
1
1
1
7
7
7
Cephalanthus occidentalis
common buttonbush
Shrub
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
Cercis canadensis
eastern redbud
Tree
10
10
10
12
12
12
14
14
14
25
25
25
42
42
42
Cornus florida
flowering dogwood
Tree
8
8
8
10
10
10
48
48
48
75
75
75
Diospyrosvirginiana
common persimmon
Tree
3
2
3
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
75
75
83
76
76
82
73
73
75
63
63
63
67
67
67
Hamamelis virginiana
American witchhazel
Tree
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
7
7
7
8
8
8
Liquidambar styraciflua
sweetgum
Tree
9
5
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
6
6
6
9
9
16
11
11
11
24
24
24
59
59
59
Pinus rigida
pitch pine
Tree
2
Pinus strobus
eastern white pine
Tree
1
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
100
100
100
105
105
106
106
106
106
67
67
67
57
57
57
Populus deltoides
eastern cottonwood
Tree
1
1
1
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
18
18
18
36
36
36
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
17
17
17
19
19
19
20
20
20
34
34
34
27
27
27
Quercus rubra
northern red oak
Tree
19
19
19
20
20
20
23
23
23
24
24
24
24
24
24
Salix
Unknown willow
Shrub or Tree
5
Salix nigra
black willow
Tree
7
1
Sambucus canadensis
Common Elderberry
Shrub
1
1
1
2
2
3
2
2
2
10
10
11
13
13
13
Taxodium distichum
bald cypress
Tree
I
I
1
1
1
Ulmus alata
winged elm
Tree
15
17
6
Unknown
Shrub or Tree
1
Stem count
269
269
325
293
293
343
302
1 302
321
346
346
347
447
447
447
size (ares)
26
26
26
26
26
size (ACRES)
0.64
0.64
0.64
0.64
0.64
Species count
11
1 11
21
13
13
18
14
14
19
12
12
12
12
12
12
Stems per ACRE
419
1 419
506
456
1 456
534
470
1 470
500
539
539
540
696
696
696
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Volunteer species included in total
PnoLS: Planted Stems excluding live stakes
P -all: All planted stems
T: Total stems including volunteers
* Supplemental planting was performed in MY2 (February 2015)
included 6,000 stems or approximately 37% of MY1 stem total.

APPENDIX 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots

Table 11a. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Norkett Branch Reaches 1 and 2
WParameter
Gage
Norkett
PRE -RESTORATION CONDITION
Branch Reach 1 Norkett Branch
Reach 2
Spencer
Creek
REFERENCE REACHES
LIT to Spencer Creek
LIT Richland
Creek
Reach 2
Norkett
Branch
Reach I
DESIGN
Norkett
Branch
Reach 2
Norkett
Branch Reach
AS-BUILT/BASELINE
I Norkett
Branch Reach
2
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft)
12.8
21.5
22.0
29.5
10.7
11.2
7.0
13.3
15.2
22.0
23.0
22.5
26.6
25.6
25.7
Floodprone Width (ft)
35
58
72
85
60
114+
>81
>50
48
>110
61
>115
>200
>200
>200
>200
Bankfull Mean Depth
1.7
1.8
1.4
2.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
1.1
1.3
1.8
1.9
1.6
1.8
1.8
2.0
Bankfull Max Depth
3.1
3.2
2.3
2.9
2.1
2.6
1.1
1.8
2.1
2.8
2.8
2.6
3.3
3.0
3.3
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ft)
n/a
28.1
35.6
40.6
52.8
17.8
19.7
7.7
16.5
17.5
40.6
43.2
38.8
44.6
46.7
50.8
Width/Depth Ratio
5.9
13.0
9.2
21.4
5.8
7.1
6.4
10.1
13.9
11.9
12.2
13.1
16.7
13.0
14.1
Entrenchment Ratio
2.1
4.5
2.9
3.3
5.5
10.2
>11.6
>2.5
2.2
>5.0
2.2
>5.0
>2.2
>2.2
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.4
1.3
1.6
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
D50 (mm)
8.6
0.4
---
---
18.4
59.6
7.3
9.9
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
14
84
19
111
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.0036
0.0039
0.0032
0.0120
0.0130
0.0140
0.0183
0.0355
0.0018
0.0120
0.0023
0.0180
0.0000
0.0152
0.0009
0.0163
Pool Length (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
12
88
51
102
Pool Max Depth (ft)
n/a
4.0
4.0
2.9
4.0
3.3
2.5
1.8
2.8
7.8
2.8
7.9
3.3
5.1
3.5
4.8
Pool Spacing (ft)^
Pool Volume (ft3)
Pattern
62
300
60
300
71.0
19
42
33.0
93.0
29
163
30
170
67
183
98
172
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
N/A
N/A
38
41
11
27
N/A
35
161
37
168
38
147
38
155
Radius of Curvature (ft)
N/A
N/A
11
15
6
16
N/A
40
66
41
69
38
65
40
64
Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft)
n/a
N/A
N/A
1.0
1.3
0.8
2.3
N/A
1.8
3.0
1.8
3.0
1.7
2.4
1.6
2.5
Meander Length (ft)
N/A
N/A
46
48
37.7
43
N/A
66
264
69
276
167
263
181
277
Meander Width Ratio
N/A
N/A
3.6
3.7
1.6
3.8
N/A
1.6
7.3
1.6
7.3
1.7
5.5
1.5
6.0
Substrate, Bed and Transport Parameters
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
n/a
SC/4.6/8.7/28.5/64/2048
0.41 0.44
SC/SC/0.4/21.1/>2048/>2048
0.17 0.38
---
---
---
=15-25
0.40
20-35
0.4/3.6/7.4/52.3/139.4/362
0.27 0.29
15-25
2.6/6.7/13.0/62.6/210.9/>2048
0.30 0.32
20-35
SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95/d100
Reach Shear Stress (Competency) Ib/ft'
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
Stream Power (Capacity) W/mz
Additional Reach Parameters
Drainage Area (SM)
2.3
3.2
0.96
0.01
0.28
2.3
3.2
2.3
3.2
Watershed Impervious Cover Estimate (%)
<1%t
<1%t
---
---
---
<1%t
<1%t
<1%t
<1%t
Rosgen Classification
E4
C/E5
E4
ES
C4/E4
C4
CS
C4
C4/E4
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
3.5
4.0
2.5
3.5
4.9
5.4
3.2
3.5
4.1
2.8
3.3
2.6
2.8
2.8
2.9
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
n/a
110
---
140
---
97
---
25
---
29
---
32
110
1,910
140
1,249
105
1,910
124
130
1,249
148
Q-NFF regression
Q-USGS extrapolation
Q -Mannings
Valley Length (ft)
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)'
1,980
1,505
---
---
---
2,369
1,499
2,369
1,499
Sinuosity (ft)3
1.10
1.10
2.30
2.50
1.00
1.24
1.20
1.24
1.20
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)'
0.0039
0.0013
0.0046
---
---
--
0.0025
0.0036
0.0031
0.0033
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
---
---I
---
---
I
---
I
---
---
0.0029
0.0034
'No impervious land use is present within the project watershed per the CGIA Land Use Classification data set.
2 Channel Length represented does not include easement breaks.
(---): Data was not provided
N/A: Not Applicable
SC: Silt/Clay

Table 11b. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
UTI and UT2 Reaches 1 and 2
Parameter
Gage
UTI
PRE -RESTORATION CONDITION
UT2 Reach 1
LT2
Reach
2
REFERENCE REACHES
See Table Ila
UTI
UT2
DESIGN
Reach
I
UT2
Reach
2
UTI
AS BUILT/ BASELINE
UT2 Reach 1
UT2
Reach
2
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Min
I
Max
Min
I
Max
Min
I
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft)
2.9
8.2
13.6
7.1
7.5
8.0
8.0
10.5
9.4
9.0
9.6
Floodprone Width (ft)
6
40
29
53
16.5
>38
>40
>40
136
144
>200
>200
Bankfull Mean Depth
0.9
1
0.6
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.7
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.6
Bankfull Max Depth
1.2
2
1
1.5
0.9
0.9
1.0
0.8
1.2
1.1
1.2
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ft')
n/a
2.6
8.6
7.9
5.1
See Table 11a
4.6
4.6
5.3
4.5
4.5
5.2
5.3
Width/Depth Ratio
2.6
8.6
23.4
9.8
12.2
13.9
12.1
24.5
19.8
15.3
17.6
Entrenchment Ratio
2.2
4.9
>7
>8
2.2
>5
>5
>5
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
Bank Height Ratio
1.5
2.4
1
1
1.7
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
D50 (mm)
SC
7.3
7.3
20.9
19.5
20.1
27.4
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
---
---
---
7
39
7
34
6
27
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.017
0.054
0.009
0.032
0.006
0.013
0.045
0.01
0.032
0.013
0.028
0.007
0.044
0.006
0.037
0.009
0.039
Pool Length (ft)
See Table Ila
---
---
---
12
69
11
35
11
45
n/a
Pool Max Depth (ft)
1.4
1.7
1.3
2.5
0.9
2.6
0.9
2.4
1.0
2.8
1.2
2.5
1.5
2.6
1.5
2.5
Pool Spacing (ft)^
61
295
190
51
130
10
56
10
56
10
56
30
SS
21
64
22
71
Pool Volume (ft')
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
n/a
N/A
N/A
N/A
26.9
49.5
See Table Ila
12
55
13
44
13
44
13
49
10
42
12
52
Radius of Curvature (ft)
N/A N/A N/A 6.92 33.39
12 23 13.0 24.0 13 24 14 23 15 21 14
22
Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft)
N/A N/A N/A 0.98 4.73
1.6 3 1.6 3.0 1.6 3 1.3 2.2 1.6 2.2 1.6
2.3
Meander Length (ft)
N/A N/A N/A 83.5 141.4
23 90 24.0 96.0 24 96 61 88 45 92 44
83
Meander Width Ratio
N/A N/A N/A 3.8 7.01
1.6 7.3 1.6 5.5 1.6 5.5 1.2 4.7 1.0 4.4 1.3
5.4
Substrate, Bed and Transport Parameters
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be%
dl6/d35/d50/d84/d95/d 100
SC/SC/SC/SC/0.77/9.38/>2048
SC/SC/7.3/47.7/85.7/>2048
SC/SC/7.3/47.7/85.7/>2048
See Table Ila
SC/1.0/12.7/55.3/90/256
SC/7.1/12.2/28.5/42.9/90
2.4/11.6/20.7/56.1/86.7/180
Reach Shear Stress (Competency) Ib/ftz
n/a
0.57
0.82
0.14
0.42
0.38
!10!-201
0.27
0.27
0.16
0.21
0.23
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
20-35
15-25
15-25
30-20
15-25
Stream Power (Capacity) W/mZ
Additional Reach Parameters
Drainage Area (SM)
n/a
1
3.3
0.08
<1%'
E6
12
840
840
1.0
0.15
4.2
0.40
<1%'
C/E4
1.4
11
820
820
1.0
0.004
0.48
<1%'
E4
3.4
17
1156
1,272
1.1
0.012
See Table Sa
See Table Sa
0.08
<1%'
C/E6
2.6
12
998
1,198
1.20
0.010
0.15
<1%'
C/E4
2.4
11
866
1,039
1.20
0.005
0.22
<1%'
C/E4
3.2
17
1108
1,440
1.30
0.007
0.08
<1%'
C4
2.1
10
998
1,198
1.20
0.011
0.011
0.15
<1%'
C4
1.6
7
866
1,039
1.20
0.006
0.006
1.9
10
0.22
<1%'
C4
1108
1,440
1.30
0.007
0.007
2.0
11
Watershed Impervious Cover Estimate (%)
Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
Q-NFF regression
Q-USGS extrapolation
Q -Mannings
Valley Length (ft)
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)'
Sinuosity (ft)'
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)'
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
'No impervious land use is present within the project watershed per the CGIA Land Use Classification data set.
Channel Length represented does not include easement breaks.
(---): Data was not provided
N/A: Not Applicable
SC: Silt/Clay

Table 11c. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
UT2 Reaches 3A and 3B
F- Parameter
Gage
RE -RESTORATION CONDITION
ILIT2 Reach 3
REFERENCE REACHES
See Table 11a
LIT2
Reach
3A
DESIGN
UT2
Reach
3B
UT2
Reach
AS BUILT/BASELINE
3A JUTZ
Reach
3B
Min
Max
Min Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft)
7.5
9.0
11.0
10.5
13.9
Floodprone Width (ft)
24
45+
55+
>200
130
Bankfull Mean Depth
1.1
0.8
1.0
0.7
0.8
Bankfull Max Depth
1.6
1.2
1.5
1.2
1.6
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ft')
n/a
83
See Table 11a
6.9
10.8
7.2
11.8
Width/Depth Ratio
6.7
11.7
11.2
15.3
16.5
Entrenchment Ratiol
1
3.2
5.0+
1
5.0+
>2.2>2.2
Bank Height Ratio
1.3
1.8
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
D50 (mm)
7.32
32.0
33.4
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
---
---
8
25
13
28
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.014
0.025
0.011
0.032
0.008
1
0.017
0.010
0.046
0.001
0.024
Pool Length (ft)
See Table 11a
---
---
10
42
32
45
Pool Max Depth (ft)
n/a
2
1.20
3.20
1.50
4.10
1.77
2.98
2.45
3.32
Pool Spacing (ft)^
26
53
12
63
14
77
26
66
38
72
Pool Volume (43)
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
n/a
N/A
N/A
See Table 11a
14
50
18
61
8
37
20
61
Radius of Curvature (ft)
15 63.4
14 27 20 33 14 27 24
31
Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft)
2 8.45
1.6 3.0 1.8 3.0 1.3 2.6 1.7
2.2
Meander Length (ft)
N/A N/A
27 108 33 132 58 88 87
105
Meander Width Ratio
N/A N/A
1.6 5.5 1.6 5.5 0.8 3.5 1.4
4.4
Substrate, Bed and Transport Parameters
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95/d100
SC/SC/7.3/47.7/85.7/>2048
See Table 11a
T0.23
22.6/27.4/32/53.7/69.7/128
SC/4.9/13.3/67.2/89.9/128
Reach Shear Stress (Competency)lb/ftz
n/a
0.29
0.23
0.14
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
15
25
12
17
10
Stream Power (Capacity) W/mZ
Additional Reach Parameters
Drainage Area (SM)
n/a
26
0.71
<1%t
E4
3.7
1184
1,303
1.1
0.009
33
See Table 5a
See Table 5a
0.46
<1%t
C/E4
3.7
26
830
1,038
1.25
0.006
---
0.46
<1%t
C/E4
3.0
33
548
658
1.20
0.004
---
0.46
<1%t
E4
2.1
15
830
1,038
1.25
0.006
0.007
0.46
<1%t
C4
1.7
20
548
658
1.20
0.003
0.002
Watershed Impervious Cover Estimate (%)
Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
Q-NFF regression
Q-U5G5 extrapolation
Q- Man nings
Valley Length (ft)
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)'
Sinuosity (ft)3
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)z
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
'No impervious land use is present within the project watershed per the CGIA Land Use Classification data set.
Channel Length represented does not include easement breaks.
(---): Data was not provided
N/A: Not Applicable
SC: Silt/Clay

Table 12a. Morphology and Hydraulic Summary(Dimensional Parameters - Cross -Section)
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
OMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Norkett Branch Reach 1 and 2
---: Not Applicable
' MY3 calculations were adjusted on Cross-section 8 because they were found to omit a portion of the bankfull area.
Cross -Section
1,
Norkett
Branch
Reach 1(Pool) .!
Cross -Section
2,
Norkett
Branch
Reach 1, (Riffle) E_
Cross -Section
3,
Norkett
Branch Reach 1,
(Pool) -ik
Cross -Section
4,
Norkett
Branch Reach 1, (Riffle)
Bankfull Width
Floodprone Width (it)
Cross -Section
5,
Norkett
Branch
Reach 1 (Riffle) ,
Cross -Section
6,
Norkett
Branch
Reach 2, (Riffle)
Cross -Section
7,
Norkett
Branch Reach 2,
(Riffle)
Cross -Section
8,
Norkett
Branch Reach 2, (Pool)
based on fixed backfull elevation
Bankfull Width
Floodprone Width (it)
---: Not Applicable
' MY3 calculations were adjusted on Cross-section 8 because they were found to omit a portion of the bankfull area.

Table 12b. Morphology and Hydraulic Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross -Section)
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
UTI and UT2 Reaches 1 and 2
Dimension
Base
MY3
MY
MY3
MY4
MY5 MY6 MY7
Base
MY3
MY2
MY3
i
MY4
MVS MY6 MY7
Base
MY3 •
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 MY6 MY7
Base
MY3 •
MY2
MY3
MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
based on fixed bankfull elevation
Bankfull Width (ft) 10.5
11.6
11.1
10.2
10.2
18.1
15.9
17.3
13.5
11.7
10.6
11.1
11.3
12.1
9.1
9.4L22.O16.4
10.8
9.9
Floodprone Width (ft) 136
136
138
131
107.3
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
1445
146.5 152.9
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.4
0.5
0.6
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.9
0.9
0.8
1.0
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.6
1.0
0.5
0.4
0.6
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 0.8
1.1
0.9
0.6
0.9
1.8
2.0
2.1
1.9
2.1
1.9
2.0
0.8
1.7
1.9
1.2
1.0
1.1
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft2) 4.5
6.2
6.7
4.0
4.4
9.8
14.0
12.7
10.3
12.2
7.5
9.4
8.8
6.7
9.1
4.5
]19.8.4
3.9
5.8
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 24.5
21.7
18.5
25.7
23.6
33.3
18.0
23.5
17.7
11.2
15.2
13.2
14.6
21.9
9.0
29.6
17.1Bankfull
Entrenchment Ratio 13.0
11.7
12.4
12.9
10.6
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
15.2.3
13.6
15.4Bankfull
Bank Height Ratio 1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
1.0
1.0
1.0
Dimension Base
MY3
MY2
• MY3
MY4
MY5 MY6 MY7 Base
MY3 •
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5 MY6 MY7 Base
MY3
MY2
MY3
MY4
MYS MY6 MY7 Base
MY3
MY2
' MY3
MY4 MYS • •MY6 MY7
based on fixed bankfull elevation
Bankfull Width (ft) 9.0
9.5
9.1
8.9
8.2
13.9
13.7
14.8
12.9
15.3
9.6
10.5
11.5
11.9
11.2
9.6
9.4
7.9
9.6
8.6
Floodprone Width (ft) >200
>200
>200
>200
>200
---
---
---
---
---
>200
>200
>200
>200
>200
---
---
---
---
---
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.6
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.7
0.8
1.0
0.8
0.9
0.8
0.5
0.7
0.8
0.7
0.8
0.7
0.9
1.0
1.0
1.0
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 1.2
1.2
1.2
1.1
1.0
2.1
2.2
2.0
2.0
1.9
1.1
1.4
1.3
1.6
1.5
1.8
1.9
1.9
2.0
1.9
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft2) 5.3
7.1
6.4
5.6
5.5
11.7
14.1
12.0
11.3
11.6
5.2
7.6
8.7
8.8
8.7
7.0
8.1
8.1
9.2
8.8
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 15.3
12.8
13.0
14.1
12.4
16.4
13.2
18.2
14.7
20.1
17.6
14.5
15.4
15.9
14.5
13.3
10.9
7.7
10.1
8.4
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio >22
>21
>22
>22.5 >24.4
---
---
>15
>19
>17.3 >16.9 >17.9
---
---
---
---
---
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
---
---
---
---
---
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
---
---
---
---
---
---: Not Applicable

Table 12c. Morphology and Hydraulic Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross -Section)
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4. 2017
UT2 Reaches 3A and 3B
ol) Cross -Section 18, ILIT2 Reach 3A, (Riffle)
Dimension Base MY3MY2 Cross -Section , Cross -Section Cross -Section •
MY3 MY4 MYS MY6 MY7 Base MYS MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS MY6 MY7 Base MY3 MY2MY3 MY4 MYS MY6 MY7 Base MY3MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS MY6 MY7
based on fixed bankfull elevation
Bankfull Width (ft)
10.5
10.9
11.3
10.1
10.2
10.5
11.1
10.1 10.5
10.2
13.9
12.6
14.3
13.6
13.2
14.7
15.0 15.5
14.5
14.5
Floodprone Width (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
>200
>200
>200 >200
>200
130
130
146
131.9
135.3
---
--- ---
---
---
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1.0
1.2
1.1
1.3
1.3
0.7
0.7
0.7 0.9
0.9
0.8
1.2
1.0
0.9
1.0
1.4
1.5 1.5
1.5
1.5
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
2.0
2.0
2.2
2.1
2.3
1.2
1.3
1.4 1.5
1.5
1.6
1.8
1.8
1.7
1.6
2.6
2.7 2.7
2.8
2.6
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area (ft')
10.7
12.9
12.1
13.0
13.7
7.2
7.6
7.6 9.3
9.5
11.8
14.9
14.3
12.6
12.6
21.2
22.7 23.0
21.3
21.5
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
10.2
9.2
10.5
7.8
7.6
15.3
16.2
13.6 11.9
11.1
16.5
10.6
14.4
14.7
13.7
10.2
9.9 10.4
9.8
9.8
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
---
---
---
---
---
>19
>18
>9.3 >19.0
>15.6
9.3
10.3
10.2
9.7
10.3
---
--- ---
---
---
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
---
---
---
---
---
1.0
1.0
1.0 1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
---: Not Applicable

Table 13a. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Norkett Branch Reach 1
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min Max Min Max Min Max
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft)
22.5
26.6
23.1
23.5
23.3
26.2
22.3
22.8
21.8
24.1
Floodprone Width (ft)
>200
>200
>200
>200
>200
Bankfull Mean Depth
1.6
1.8
1.8
2.1
1.7
2.0
1.7
2.0
1.6
2.0
Bankfull Max Depth
2.6
3.3
3.0
3.4
2.9
3.4
2.7
3.3
2.9
3.3
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (fe)
38.8
44.6
42.3
47.7
40.5
48.8
37.4
44.1
39.5
45.2
Width/Depth Ratio
13.1
16.7
11.1
13.1
11.4
14.1
11.4
13.2
11.1
14.7
Entrenchment Ratio
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
D50 (mm)
18.4
59.6
13.3
26.9
24.7
90.0
20.9
51.8
4.0
34.3
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
14
84
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.0000
0.0152
Pool Length (ft)
12
88
Pool Max Depth (ft)
3.3
5.1
Pool Spacing (ft)
67
183
Pool Volume (ft3)
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
38
147
Radius of Curvature (ft)
38
65
Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft)
1.7
2.4
Meander Wave Length (ft)
167
263
Meander Width Ratio
1.7
5.5
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
C4
C4
C4
C4
C4
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)
2,369
Sinuosity (ft)
1.24
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
0.003
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
0.003
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95/d10C
0.4/3.6/7.4/52.3/139.4/362
1.0/8.0/16.7/50.6/90/1024
0.3/11.0/29.3/121.7/180/1024
SC/0.79/18.4/132.0/214.7/>2048
SC/6.40/11.8/39.8/89.6/180
%of Reach with Eroding Banks
6%
0%
6%
3%

Table 13b. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Norkett Branch Reach 2
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max Min Max Min Max Min Max
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft)
25.6
25.7
24.9
26.0
25.6
25.6
23.2
25.0
23.0
24.3
Floodprone Width (ft)
>200
>200
>200
>200
>200
Bankfull Mean Depth
1.8
2.0
2.0
2.0
1.9
2.1
1.9
2.0
1.9
2.0
Bankfull Max Depth
3.0
3.3
3.2
3.3
3.1
3.6
3.1
3.2
3.1
3.1
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ft)
46.7
50.8
48.7
52.0
48.5
53.4
44.6
49.6
43.3
48.5
Width/Depth Ratio
13.0
14.1
12.7
13.0
12.3
13.6
12.1
12.6
12.2
12.3
Entrenchment Ratio
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
D50 (mm)
7.3
9.9
3.6
12.1
1.0
27.8
4.4
11.0
1.7
5.6
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
19
111
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.0009
0.0163
Pool Length (ft)
51
102
Pool Max Depth (ft)
3.5
4.8
Pool Spacing (ft)
98
172
Pool Volume (ft)
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
38
155
Radius of Curvature (ft)
40
64
Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft) 1
1.6
2.5
Meander Wave Length (ft)l
181
1
277
Meander Width Ratio 1
1.5
1
6.0
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
C4/E4
C4/E4
C4/E4
C4/E4
C4/E4
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)
1,499
Sinuosity (ft)
1.20
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
0.003
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
0.003
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95/d 100 2.6/6.7/13.0/62.6/210.9/>2048
0.3/10.4/15.3/49.1/90/362
4.2/16/2411
.9/83.4/151.8/362
SC/6.7/11.6/52.6/101.2/256.0
SC/2.95/11.9/56.9/90.8/180
%of Reach with Eroding Banks
7%
5%
12%
2%

Table 13c. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
UTI
Min
Max
Min Max
Min Max
Min Max
Min I Max Min Max Min Max Min IMax
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft)
10.5
11.6
11.1
10.2
10.2
Floodprone Width (ft)
136
136
138
131
107.3
Bankfull Mean Depth
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.4
0.4
Bankfull Max Depth
0.8
1.1
0.9
0.6
0.9
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ft)
4.5
6.2
6.7
4.0
4.4
Width/Depth Ratio
24.5
21.7
18.5
20.8
23.6
Entrenchment Ratio
13.0
11.7
12.4
14.4
10.6
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1
D50 (mm)
20.9
48.3
21.9
68.2
8.3
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
7
39
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.007
0.044
Pool Length (ft)
12
69
Pool Max Depth (ft)
1.2
2.5
Pool Spacing (ft)
30
58
Pool Volume (ft')
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
13
49
Radius of Curvature (ft)l
14
1
23
Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft)
1.3
2.2
Meander Wave Length (ft)l
61
1
88
Meander Width Ratio
1.2
4.7
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
C4
C4
C4
C4
C4
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)
1,198
Sinuosity (ft)
1.20
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
0.011
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
0.011
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95/d100 I
SC/1.0/12.7/55.3/90/256
SC/2.4/9.4/61.2/139.4/256.0
SC/0.1/8.6/82.6/139.4/256
SC/SC/5.6/49.8/107.3/>2048
SC/1.04/8.3/69.2/143/256
%of Reach with Eroding Banks
0%
0%
0%
0%

Table 13d. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
UT2 Reach 1
Min
Max
Min Max
Min Max
Min Max
Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft)
9.4
11.1
9.5
10.8
9.9
Floodprone Width (ft)
144
151
155
147
152.9
Bankfull Mean Depth
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.4
0.6
Bankfull Max Depth
1.2
1.1
1.2
1.0
1.1
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ft)
4.5
5.6
5.5
3.9
5.8
Width/Depth Ratio
19.8
22.0
16.4
29.6
17.1
Entrenchment Ratio
15.2
13.6
16.3
13.6
15.4
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1
D50 (mm)
19.5
32.0
37.9
49.8
53.7
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
7
34
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.006
0.037
Pool Length (ft)
11
35
Pool Max Depth (ft)
1.5
2.6
Pool Spacing (ft)
21
64
Pool Volume (ft3)
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
10
42
Radius of Curvature (ft)
15
21
Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft)
1.6
2.2
Meander Wave Length (ft)
45
92
Meander Width Ratio
1.0
4.4
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
C4
C4
C4
C4
C4
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)
1,039
Sinuosity (ft)
1.20
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
0.006
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
0.006
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95/d100
SC/7.1/12.2/28.5/42.9/90
SC/12/20.6/58.1/111.2/256
SC/5.6/16.7/57.4/107.3/362
SC/0.25/12.9/69.7/120.7/362.0
SC/SC/SC/52.8/96.6/180
%of Reach with Eroding Banks
0%
0%
0%
0%

Table 13e. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
UT2 Reach 2
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max
Min
Max Min Max Min Max Min Max
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft)
9.0
9.6
9.5
10.5
9.1
11.5
8.9
11.9
8.2
11.2
Floodprone Width (ft)
>200
>200
>200
>200
>200
Bankfull Mean Depth
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.6
0.7
0.7
0.8
Bankfull Max Depth
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.4
1.2
1.3
1.1
1.6
1.0
1.5
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ft)
5.2
5.3
7.1
7.6
6.4
8.7
5.6
8.8
5.5
8.7
Width/Depth Ratio
15.3
17.6
12.8
14.5
13.0
15.4
14.1
15.9
12.4
14.5
Entrenchment Ratio
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
D50 (mm)
20.1
27.4
41.3
50.6
39.0
39.3
35.4
51.4
53.7
68.5
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
6
27
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.009
0.039
Pool Length (ft)
11
45
Pool Max Depth (ft)
1.5
2.5
Pool Spacing (ft)
22
71
Pool Volume (ft')
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
12
52
Radius of Curvature (ft)
14
22
Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft)
1.6
2.3
Meander Wave Length (ft)
44
83
Meander Width Ratio
1.3
5.4
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
C4
C4
C4
C4
C4
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)
1,440
1.30
Sinuosity (ft)
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
0.007
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
0.007
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be%
2.4/11.6/20.7/56.1/86.7/180
8.5/20.1/32/90/160.7/512
0.3/18.4/45/119.3/196.6/1024
SC/SC/SC/73.4/118.9/180.0
SC/SC/12.5/71.7/112.2/180
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95/d100
%of Reach with Eroding Banks
0%
0%
0%
0%

Table 13f. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
UT2 Reach 3A
Min
Max
Min Max
Min Max
Min Max
Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft)
10.5
11.1
10.1
10.5
10.2
Floodprone Width (ft)
>200
>200
>200
>200
>200
Bankfull Mean Depth
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.9
0.9
Bankfull Max Depth
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.5
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ftp)
7.2
7.6
7.6
9.3
9.5
Width/Depth Ratio
15.3
16.2
13.6
11.9
11.1
Entrenchment Ratio
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
>2.2
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
D50 (mm)
32.0
45.0
25.7
40.8
53.7
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
8
25
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.010
0.046
Pool Length (ft)
30
42
Pool Max Depth (ft)
1.77
2.98
Pool Spacing (ft)
26
66
Pool Volume (ft)
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
8
37
Radius of Curvature (ft)
14
27
Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft)
1.3
2.6
Meander Wave Length (ft)
58
88
Meander Width Ratio
0.8
3.5
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
C4
C4
C4
C4
C4
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)
658
Sinuosity (ft)
1.20
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
0.003
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
0.002
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
5C%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be%
d16/d35/d5D/d84/d95/d10D
22.6/27.4/32/53.7/69.7/128
16.0/30.3/41.5/87.0/202.4/362.0
6.7/24.8/40.6/116.3/173.3/1024
12.8/27.8/41.3/85.7/128.0/180.0
SC/11/42.5/112.6/>2048/>2048
%of Reach with Eroding Banks
0%
0%
0%
0%

Table 13g. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
UT2 Reach 3B
Min
Max
Min Max
Min I Max
Min Max
Min Max Min Max Min Max Min Max
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft)
13.9
12.6
14.3
13.6
13.2
Floodprone Width (ft)
130
130
146
132
135.3
Bankfull Mean Depth
0.8
1.2
1.0
0.9
1
Bankfull Max Depth
1.6
1.8
1.8
1.7
1.6
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ft)
11.8
14.9
14.3
12.6
13.2
Width/Depth Ratio
16.5
10.6
14.4
14.7
13.7
Entrenchment Ratio
9.3
10.3
10.2
9.7
10.3
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1
D50 (mm)
33.4
30.6
68.5
48.3
45
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
13
28
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.001
0.024
Pool Length (ft)
32
45
Pool Max Depth (ft)
2.45
3.32
Pool Spacing (ft)
38
72
Pool Volume (ft)
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
20
61
Radius of Curvature (ft)
24
31
Rc:Bankfull Width (ft/ft)
1.7
2.2
Meander Wave Length (ft)
87
105
Meander Width Ratio
1.4
4.4
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
C4
C4
C4
C4
C4
Channel Thalweg Length (ft)
658
Sinuosity (ft)
1.20
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
0.003
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
0.002
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S%
SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95/d10D
SC/4.9/13.3/67.2/89.9/128
SC/4.5/14.8/60.0/98.3/180.0
SC/0.7/12.7/71.7/128/362
SC/SC/SC/60.4/107.3/180.0
SC/6.12/19/82.6/151.8/>2048
%of Reach with Eroding Banks
3%
0%
0%
0%

Cross Section Plots
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Cross -Section 1-Norkett Branch Reach 1
108+82 Pool
x -section area (ft.sq.)
470
width (ft)
2.0
mean depth (ft)
3.6
max depth (ft)
32.4
wetted parimeter (ft)
1.9
hyd radi (ft)
15.9
width -depth ratio
468
466
x
c
0
464
v
w
462
460
-20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180
Width (ft)
+MYO (04/2014) +MYI (10/2014) tMY2 (04/2015) tMY3 (04/2016) +MY4 (08/2017) —Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
61.7
x -section area (ft.sq.)
31.3
width (ft)
2.0
mean depth (ft)
3.6
max depth (ft)
32.4
wetted parimeter (ft)
1.9
hyd radi (ft)
15.9
width -depth ratio
Survey Date: 08/2017
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Cross -Section 2-Norkett Branch Reach 1
109+30 Riffle
42.6
470
21.8
width (ft)
2.0
mean depth (ft)
2.9
max depth (ft)
22.6
wetted parimeter (ft)
468
hyd radi (ft)
11.1
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
>11.6
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
466
c
464
v
w
462
460
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
Width (ft)
- 0 MYO (04/2014) TMY1 (10/2014) +MY2 (04/2015) tMY3 (04/2016) tMY4 (08/2017) —Bankfull—Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
42.6
x -section area (ft.sq.)
21.8
width (ft)
2.0
mean depth (ft)
2.9
max depth (ft)
22.6
wetted parimeter (ft)
1.9
hyd radi (ft)
11.1
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
>11.6
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 08/2017
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Cross -Section 3-Norkett Branch Reach 1
113+70 Pool
x -section area (ft.sq.)
468
width (ft)
3.0
mean depth (ft)
5.6
max depth (ft)
27.5
wetted parimeter (ft)
2.7
hyd radi (ft)
8.2
width -depth ratio
466
464
c
462
v
w
460
458
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
Width (ft)
+MYO (04/2014) +MY1 (10/2014) tMY2 (04/2015) tMY3 (04/2016) 6 MY4 (08/2017) —Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions �
n
74.4
x -section area (ft.sq.)
24.8
width (ft)
3.0
mean depth (ft)
5.6
max depth (ft)
27.5
wetted parimeter (ft)
2.7
hyd radi (ft)
8.2
width -depth ratio
Survey Date: 08/2017
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2018
Cross -Section 4-Norkett Branch Reach 1
114+30 Riffle
45.2
470
23.4
width (ft)
1.9
mean depth (ft)
3.3
max depth (ft)
24.3
wetted parimeter (ft)
1.9
hyd radi (ft)
12.1
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
>8.5
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
468
466
c
0
464
>
v
w
462
460
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
Width (ft)
-+MYO (04/2014) tMY1 (10/2014) +MY2 (04/2015) tMY3 (04/2016) tMY4 (08/2017) —Bankfull—Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
45.2
x -section area (ft.sq.)
23.4
width (ft)
1.9
mean depth (ft)
3.3
max depth (ft)
24.3
wetted parimeter (ft)
1.9
hyd radi (ft)
12.1
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
>8.5
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 08/2017
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
it
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2018
Cross -Section 5-Norkett Branch Reach 1
Bankfull Dimensions
39.5
122+84 Riffle
24.1
width (ft)
1.6
mean depth (ft)
466
max depth (ft)
24.9
wetted parimeter (ft)
1.6
hyd radi (ft)
14.7
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
464
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
462
c
0
v
460
w
458
456
-20 -10 0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Width (ft)
+MYO (4/2014)
MY1 (10/2014) +MY2 (04/20/15) 4 MY3 (04/2016) +MY4 (08/2017) —Bankfull—Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
39.5
x -section area (ft.sq.)
24.1
width (ft)
1.6
mean depth (ft)
2.9
max depth (ft)
24.9
wetted parimeter (ft)
1.6
hyd radi (ft)
14.7
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
>8.3
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 08/2017
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2018
Cross -Section 6-Norkett Branch Reach 2
131+06 Riffle
48.5
464
24.3
width (ft)
2.0
mean depth (ft)
3.1
max depth (ft)
25.3
wetted parimeter (ft)
462
hyd radi (ft)
12.2
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
>8.6
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
460
c
458
v
w
456
454
-20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130
Width (ft)
+MYO (04/20/14) tMY1 (10/2014) - MY2 (04/20/15) tMY3 (04/2016) tMY4 (08/2017) —Bankfull—Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
48.5
x -section area (ft.sq.)
24.3
width (ft)
2.0
mean depth (ft)
3.1
max depth (ft)
25.3
wetted parimeter (ft)
1.9
hyd radi (ft)
12.2
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
>8.6
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 08/2017
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
IF
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2018
Cross -Section 7-Norkett Branch Reach 2
Bankfull Dimensions
43.3
135+13 Riffle
23.0
width (ft)
1.9
mean depth (ft)
462
max depth (ft)
24.1
wetted parimeter (ft)
1.8
hyd radi (ft)
12.3
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
>6.8
460
1.0
low bank height ratio
458
c
v
456
w
454
452
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
Width (ft)
+MYO (04/20/14) —W MY1 (10/2014) +MY2 (04/20/15) tMY3 (04/2016) tMY4 (08/2017) —Bankfull —Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
43.3
x -section area (ft.sq.)
23.0
width (ft)
1.9
mean depth (ft)
3.1
max depth (ft)
24.1
wetted parimeter (ft)
1.8
hyd radi (ft)
12.3
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
>6.8
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 08/2017
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Cross -Section 8-Norkett Branch Reach 2
Bankfull Dimensions
71.9
135+73 Pool
462
width (ft)
460
mean depth (ft)
458
max depth (ft)
c
wetted parimeter (ft)
456
v
hyd radi (ft)
12.6
width -depth ratio
w
454
Ot
452
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
Width (ft)
+MYO (04/20/15) MY1 (10/2014)
-o—MY2 (04/2015) tMY3 (04/2016) 4 MY4 (08/2017) —Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
71.9
x -section area (ft.sq.)
30.1
width (ft)
2.4
mean depth (ft)
4.7
max depth (ft)
32.3
wetted parimeter (ft)
2.2
hyd radi (ft)
12.6
width -depth ratio
Survey Date: 08/2017
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Cross -Section 9-UT1
204+08 Riffle
4.4
474
10.2
width (ft)
0.4
mean depth (ft)
473
max depth (ft)
10.4
wetted parimeter (ft)
0.4
hyd radi (ft)
23.6
width -depth ratio
107.3
W flood prone area (ft)
10.6
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
c 472
0
v
w
471
470
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Width (ft)
+MYO (04/2014) +MY1 (10/2014) tMY2 (04/2015) +MY3 (04/2016) +MY4 (08/2017) -Bankfull Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
4.4
x -section area (ft.sq.)
10.2
width (ft)
0.4
mean depth (ft)
0.9
max depth (ft)
10.4
wetted parimeter (ft)
0.4
hyd radi (ft)
23.6
width -depth ratio
107.3
W flood prone area (ft)
10.6
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 08/2017
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Cross -Section 10-UT3
204+30 Pool
x -section area (ft.sq.)
473
width (ft)
1.0
472
2.1
max depth (ft)
13.1
wetted parimeter (ft)
0.9
c 471
0
11.2
width -depth ratio
v
w
470
469
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Width (ft)
+MYO (04/2014) MY1 (10/2014) —MY2 (04/2015) +MY3 (04/2016) +MY4 (08/2017) —Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
12.2
x -section area (ft.sq.)
11.7
width (ft)
1.0
mean depth (ft)
2.1
max depth (ft)
13.1
wetted parimeter (ft)
0.9
hyd radi (ft)
11.2
width -depth ratio
Survey Date: 08/2017
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Cross -Section 11-UT2 Reach 1
304+70 Pool
x -section area (ft.sq.)
485
width (ft)
1.0
mean depth (ft)
1.9
max depth (ft)
9.9
wetted parimeter (ft)
0.9
hyd radi (ft)
484
width -depth ratio
x
c 483
2
v
482
481
-30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Width (ft)
6 MYO (04/2014) +MY1(10/2014) s MY2 (04/2015) +MY3 (04/2016) tMY4 (08/2017) Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
9.1
x -section area (ft.sq.)
9.1
width (ft)
1.0
mean depth (ft)
1.9
max depth (ft)
9.9
wetted parimeter (ft)
0.9
hyd radi (ft)
9.0
width -depth ratio
Survey Date: 08/2017
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Cross -Section 12-UT2 Reach 1
304+92 Riffle
5.8
486
9.9
width (ft)
0.6
mean depth (ft)
1.1
max depth (ft)
10.2
wetted parimeter (ft)
0.6
hyd radi (ft)
17.1
width -depth ratio
152.9
W flood prone area (ft)
c 484
0
v
w
entrenchment ratio
�
low bank height ratio
482
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Width (ft)
+MYO (04/2014) —*—MY1 (10/2014) +MY2 (04/2015) tMY3 (04/2016) +MY4 (08/2017) —Bankfull—Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
5.8
x -section area (ft.sq.)
9.9
width (ft)
0.6
mean depth (ft)
1.1
max depth (ft)
10.2
wetted parimeter (ft)
0.6
hyd radi (ft)
17.1
width -depth ratio
152.9
W flood prone area (ft)
15.4
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 08/2017
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering

Cross -Section Plots
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Cross -Section 13-UT2 Reach 2
316+66 Riffle
5.5
480
8.2
width (ft)
0.7
mean depth (ft)
1.0
max depth (ft)
8.6
wetted parimeter (ft)
0.6
hyd radi (ft)
12.4
479
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
>24.4
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
c 478
0
>
v
w
477
476
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Width (ft)
T MYO (4/2014) t MY1(10/2014) s MY2 (04/20/15) +MY3 (04/2016) +MY4 (08/2017) -Bankfull-Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
5.5
x -section area (ft.sq.)
8.2
width (ft)
0.7
mean depth (ft)
1.0
max depth (ft)
8.6
wetted parimeter (ft)
0.6
hyd radi (ft)
12.4
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
>24.4
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 08/2017
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Cross -Section 14-UT2 Reach 2
316+98 Pool
x -section area (ft.sq.)
479
width (ft)
0.8
mean depth (ft)
1.9
max depth (ft)
478
wetted parimeter (ft)
0.7
hyd radi (ft)
20.1
width -depth ratio
c 477
0
v
w
476
475
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Width (ft)
tMYO (04/20/15) +MY1 (10/2014) tMY2 (04/2015) +MY3 (04/2016) +MY4 (08/2017) -Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
11.6
x -section area (ft.sq.)
15.3
width (ft)
0.8
mean depth (ft)
1.9
max depth (ft)
16.1
wetted parimeter (ft)
0.7
hyd radi (ft)
20.1
width -depth ratio
Survey Date: 08/2017
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Cross -Section 15-UT2 Reach 2
316+98 Riffle
8.7
474
11.2
width (ft)
0.8
mean depth (ft)
1.5
max depth (ft)
11.8
473
0.7
hyd radi (ft)
14.5
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
>17.9
c 472
0
1.0
low bank height ratio
orv
w
471
470
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Width (ft)
+MYO (04/20/14) +MY1 (10/2014) 4 MY2 (04/20/15) +MY3 (04/2016) +MY4 (08/2017) -Bankfull-Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
8.7
x -section area (ft.sq.)
11.2
width (ft)
0.8
mean depth (ft)
1.5
max depth (ft)
11.8
wetted parimeter (ft)
0.7
hyd radi (ft)
14.5
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
>17.9
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 08/2017
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Cross -Section 16-UT2 Reach 2
324+55 Pool
x -section area (ft.sq.)
473
width (ft)
1.0
mean depth (ft)
1.9
max depth (ft)
9.8
wetted parimeter (ft)
0.9
hyd radi (ft)
8.4
472
c 471
0
v
�
w
470
469
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Width (ft)
+MYO (04/20/15) +MY1 (10/2014) tMY2 (04/2015) +MY3 (04/2016) +MY4 (08/2017) -Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
8.8
x -section area (ft.sq.)
8.6
width (ft)
1.0
mean depth (ft)
1.9
max depth (ft)
9.8
wetted parimeter (ft)
0.9
hyd radi (ft)
8.4
width -depth ratio
Survey Date: 08/2017
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Cross -Section 17-UT2 Reach 3A
332+03 Pool
468
467
c 466
0
1.3
mean depth (ft)
2.3
max depth (ft)
11.5
wetted parimeter (ft)
1.2
hyd radi (ft)
7.6
width -depth ratio
v
w 465
464
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Width (ft)
+MYO (04/2014) +MY1 (10/2014) tMY2 (04/2015) tMY3 (04/2016) +MY4 (08/2017) -Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
13.7
x -section area (ft.sq.)
10.2
width (ft)
1.3
mean depth (ft)
2.3
max depth (ft)
11.5
wetted parimeter (ft)
1.2
hyd radi (ft)
7.6
width -depth ratio
Survey Date: 08/2017
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Cross -Section 18-UT2 Reach 3A
332+03 Riffle
469
468
c
467
0
M i
>
v
466
465
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Width (ft)
+MYO (04/2014) +MY1 (10/2014) tMY2 (04/2015) +MY3 (04/2016) +MY4 (08/2017) -Bankfull-Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
9.5
x -section area (ft.sq.)
10.2
width (ft)
0.9
mean depth (ft)
1.5
max depth (ft)
10.6
wetted parimeter (ft)
0.9
hyd radi (ft)
11.1
width -depth ratio
>200
W flood prone area (ft)
>15.6
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 08/2017
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Cross -Section 19-UT2 Reach 3B
338+70 Riffle
464
462
c
0
v 460
w
458
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Width (ft)
+MYO (04/2014) tMYI (10/2014) +MY2 (04/2015) tMY3 (04/2016) t MY4 (08/2017) -Bankfull-Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
12.6
x -section area (ft.sq.)
13.2
width (ft)
1.0
mean depth (ft)
1.6
max depth (ft)
13.7
wetted parimeter (ft)
0.9
hyd radi (ft)
13.7
width -depth ratio
135.3
W flood prone area (ft)
10.3
entrenchment ratio
1.0
low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 08/2017
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Cross -Section Plots
Norkett Branch Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Cross -Section 20-UT2 Reach 3B
339+01 Pool
464
462
c
0
v 460
w
458
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Width (ft)
+MYO (04/2014) tMY1 (10/2014) +MY2 (04/2015) +MY3 (04/2016) +MY4 (08/2017) -Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
21.5
x -section area (ft.sq.)
14.5
width (ft)
1.5
mean depth (ft)
2.6
max depth (ft)
15.5
wetted parimeter (ft)
1.4
hyd radi (ft)
9.8
width -depth ratio
Survey Date: 08/2017
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream

Reachwide and Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Norkett Branch Reach 1, Reachwide
Reachwide
Diameter (mm)
Particle Count
Reach Summary
Particle Class
6.40
D50 =
11.8
D84 =
39.8
Class
Percent
D100 =
min
max
Riffle
Pool
Total
90
gp
Percentage
Cumulative
Silt/Clay
0.000
0.062
7
14
21
21
21
Very fine
0.062
0.125
1
1
1
22
Fine
0.125
0.250
a
h
50
22
Medium
0.25
0.50
50
u
40
22
Coarse
0.5
1.0
1
1
1
23
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
2
2
4
4
27
®®®®®®® ®®®®® Very Fine
2.0
2.8
27
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
1
1
1
28
a 20
0
°aas.� "oroyo; Fine
4.0
5.6
2
2
4
4
32
Fine
5.6
8.0
3
6
9
9
41
®®®®®®®®®®a ®®®®®®®
Medium
8.0
11.0
1
6
7
7
48
g ° Medium
11.0
16.0
11
3
14
14
61
����age0000
®®®®®®®®® Coa rse
16.0
22.6
7
6
13
13
74
®®®®®®®®®®o+o®®®®®®®
Coa rse
22.6
32
4
2
6
6
80
Very Coarse
32
45
4
2
6
6
86
Very Coarse
45
1 64
3
1 2
5
5
91
Small
64
90
2
2
4
4
95
Small
90
128
3
1
4
4
99
Large
128
180
1
1
1
100
Large
180
256
100
Small
256
362
100
111is
1Small
362
512
100
MHUH: is
:is:: Medium
512
1024
100
llaly al :::is
H
:IN Large/Very Large
....................................
1024
2048
100
Bedrock
2048
>2048
100
Total
50
51
101
100
100
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D16=
Silt/Clay
Di5 =
6.40
D50 =
11.8
D84 =
39.8
D95 =
89.6
D100 =
180.0
Norkett Branch Reach 1, Reachwide
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
Norkett Branch Reach 1, Reachwide
100
Individual Class Percent
100
90
Silt/claySand'avel
Vol
90
gp
c
er
Bedrock
m
70
60
a
h
50
A
50
u
40
30
E
s
>
�? 40
20
y 30
10is
a 20
0
r�'L .ti5 .lh h
00 oy o. o•
1 'L 0 b 6 W y1 yto 0 .,�'L by raR �O ,LW �O 56 6ti yti ,tiQ Og' A6
ti• h' tiv ti ti ti 3 h do ,yo �o
Particle Class Size (mm)
10
0MY0-04/2014
•MYI-10/2014 •MY2-04/2015 ■MY344/2016 0MY4-08/2017
0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
MYM4/2014 MYI-10/2014 MY2-04/2015 MY3-04/2016 MY4-08/2017
Norkett Branch Reach 1, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
c
m
70
60
a
h
50
A
u
40
30
s
>
20
10is
0
r�'L .ti5 .lh h
00 oy o. o•
1 'L 0 b 6 W y1 yto 0 .,�'L by raR �O ,LW �O 56 6ti yti ,tiQ Og' A6
ti• h' tiv ti ti ti 3 h do ,yo �o
Particle Class Size (mm)
0MY0-04/2014
•MYI-10/2014 •MY2-04/2015 ■MY344/2016 0MY4-08/2017

Reachwide and Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Norkett Branch Reach 1, Cross -Section 2
100
90
80
a' 70
60
50
E
v 40
30
a 20
10
Norkett Branch Reach 1, Cross -Section 2
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0 ,I 1 61 1 1 Ir,����+ I I i I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
--*-- MYO-04/2014 --0-- MVI -10/2014 --*-- MY2-04/2015 --*-- MY3-04/2016 --*-- MY4-08/2017
Diameter (mm)
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
Summary
Particle Class
12.37
D50 =
Riffle 100 -Count
Class
Percent
D95 =
min
max
256.0
Percentage Cumulative
Silt/Clay
0.000
0.062
6
6
6
Very fine
0.062
0.125
70
6
Fine
0.125
0.250
6
Medium
0.25
0.50
6
Coarse
0.5
1.0
m
6
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
6
6
12
Very Fine
2.0
1 2.8
30
12
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
8
8
20
eeo®oe,�eeec�
e`e •o;•o;•o;ssa ce •o •o
a. a. a..a..o�•o�•o• Fine
4.0
5.6
4
4
24
Fine
®®®®®®®®® ®®®®®® Medium
5.6
8.0
8.0
11.0
4
2
4
2
28
30
Medium
11.0
16.0
16
16
46
Coarse
16.0
6
232
4
14
60
Coarse
22.6
1
8
8
68
Very Coarse
32
45
6
6
74
Very Coarse
45
64
8
8
82
Small
64
90
10
10
92
Small
90
128
2
2
94
Large
128
180
4
4
98
Large
180
256
2
2
100
......................................
......................................
.. ii Small
256
362
100
ill.. Small
362
512
100
..lillilli
Medium
11HH .. i
512
1024
100
:::::: Large/Very Large
1024
2048
100
Bedrock
2048
>2048
100
Total
100
100
100
100
90
80
a' 70
60
50
E
v 40
30
a 20
10
Norkett Branch Reach 1, Cross -Section 2
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0 ,I 1 61 1 1 Ir,����+ I I i I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
--*-- MYO-04/2014 --0-- MVI -10/2014 --*-- MY2-04/2015 --*-- MY3-04/2016 --*-- MY4-08/2017
Cross Section 2
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
3.35
D85 =
12.37
D50 =
17.7
D80. =
68.5
D95 =
139.4
D100 =l
256.0
100
90
80
a' 70
60
50
E
v 40
30
a 20
10
Norkett Branch Reach 1, Cross -Section 2
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0 ,I 1 61 1 1 Ir,����+ I I i I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
--*-- MYO-04/2014 --0-- MVI -10/2014 --*-- MY2-04/2015 --*-- MY3-04/2016 --*-- MY4-08/2017
Norkett Branch Reach 1, Cross -Section 2
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
d
70
y
60
a
50
N
m
u
40
30
a
20
10
0
p6ti ytih by py
p. p. O•
1 'ti ,ti0 A tib 0 ,y1 1rO ,tib ,�'ti Ay 6A Cp 1,ti0 $ Cyd �6ti yyti pya pp6
'1, y 'L b
Particle Class Size (mm)
■MVO -04/2014
■MY3-10/2014 MY2-04/2015 ■MV3-04/2016 ■MV4-08/2017

Reachwide and Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Norkett Branch Reach 1, Cross -Section 4
100
90
80
3e 70
60
j 50
40
y 30
a 20
10
Norkett Branch Reach 1, Cross -Section 4
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0 i i ii--, 6° 1
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
tMYO-04/2014 MYI-10/2014 ­41--MY2-04/2015 MY3-04/2016 MY4-08/2017
Diameter (mm)
Channel materials (mm)
Summary
Particle Class
D35 =
23.17
Riffle 100 -Count
Class
Percent
107.3
min
max
D100 =1
Percentage
Cumulative
Silt/Clay
0.000
0.062
2
2
2
Very fine
0.062
0.125
c
70
2
Fine
0.125
0.250
2
2
4
Medium
0.25
1 0.50
a
4
Coarse
0.5
1.0
4
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
2
2
6
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
6
® ®®
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
>
6
;aye,`ya,;o ;o ;ossss,&,gyaaayooz
a. o;'o;'o •o; s..a..a.w „, Fine
s�'orororo;�xsao..,.
4.0
5.6
2
2
8
s'�a°s �a�s� o°a�s�s'�a°s"•�s
Fine
5.6
8.0
8
8
16
®®®®®®®®®®® ®®®®®
eec�a eec; Medium
a`caa;sa`ccz
8.0
1
11.0
4
4
20
yp Q, 'p
ti$ d h� % y1 y� "p, Qy rot` CO y,14
1 -1b -
o•o,g
o
Medium
11.0
16.0
8
8
28
®®® Coarse
16.0
22.6
6
6
34
Coarse
22.6
32
14 1
14
48
Very Coarse
32
45
10
10
58
Very Coarse
45
1 64
8
8
66
Small
64
90
14
14
80
Small
90
128
8
8
88
Large
128
180
10
10
98
-------------
Large
180
256
2
2
100
illill Small
256
362
100
Small
362
512
100
ii Medium
512
1024
100
iiiiii
Large/Very Large
1024
2048
100
Bedrock
2048
>2048
100
Totall
100
100 1
100
100
90
80
3e 70
60
j 50
40
y 30
a 20
10
Norkett Branch Reach 1, Cross -Section 4
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0 i i ii--, 6° 1
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
tMYO-04/2014 MYI-10/2014 ­41--MY2-04/2015 MY3-04/2016 MY4-08/2017
Cross Section 4
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
8.00
D35 =
23.17
D50 =
34.3
DS4 =
107.3
D95 =
162.5
D100 =1
256.0
100
90
80
3e 70
60
j 50
40
y 30
a 20
10
Norkett Branch Reach 1, Cross -Section 4
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0 i i ii--, 6° 1
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
tMYO-04/2014 MYI-10/2014 ­41--MY2-04/2015 MY3-04/2016 MY4-08/2017
Norkett Branch Reach 1, Cross -Section 4
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
c
70
w
60
a
n
50
M
v
40
v
30
>
'v
20
10
0
yp Q, 'p
ti$ d h� % y1 y� "p, Qy rot` CO y,14
1 -1b -
o•o,g
o
�,yC"
Particle Class Size (mm)
■MYO-04/2014
0MY1-10/2014 ■MY2-04/2015 ■MY3-04/2016 ■MY4-08/2017

Reachwide and Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Norkett Branch Reach 1, Cross -Section 5
100
90
80
j 70
> 60
m
50
E
40
ami 30
a 20
10
Norkett Branch Reach 1, Cross -Section 5
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
tMYO-04/2014 tMYl-10/2014 tMY2-04/2015 --0 --- tMY4-08/2017
Diameter (mm)
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
Summary
Particle Class
1.16
D50 =
Riffle 100 -Count
Class
Percent
D95 =
min
max
90.0
Percentage Cumulative
Silt/Clay
0.000
0.062
32
32
32
Very fine
0.062
0.125
60
32
Fine
0.125
0.250
32
Medium
0.25
1 0.50
32
Coarse
0.5
1.0
32
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
14
14
46
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
46
®®®®® ®®® VeFine
2.8
4.0
4
4
50
Fine
4.0
5.6
4
4
54
aa$�;oossas•;or
s$s coassaso:
Fine
c®®®®®®®®®®® ®®®®®®
eeo®®o cc® Medium
5.6
8.0
1 8.0
11.0
6
2
6
2
60
62
w.ac•o•. 'a`w.ao.
Medium
11.0
16.0
10
10
72
®®® ®®® Coarse
16.0
22.6
8
8
80
Coarse
22.6
32
12
12
92
Very Coarse
32
45
2
2
94
Very Coarse
45
1 64
4
4
98
Small
64
90
2
2
100
Small
90
128
100
Large
128
180
100
Large
180
256
100
i Small
256
362
100
Small
362
512
100
Medium
a
512
1024
100
Large/Very Large
1024
2048
100
Bedrock
2048
>2048
100
Total
100
100
100
100
90
80
j 70
> 60
m
50
E
40
ami 30
a 20
10
Norkett Branch Reach 1, Cross -Section 5
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
tMYO-04/2014 tMYl-10/2014 tMY2-04/2015 --0 --- tMY4-08/2017
Cross Section 5
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
Silt/Clay
D35 =
1.16
D50 =
4.0
D. =
25.4
D95 =
49.1
D100 =1
90.0
100
90
80
j 70
> 60
m
50
E
40
ami 30
a 20
10
Norkett Branch Reach 1, Cross -Section 5
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
tMYO-04/2014 tMYl-10/2014 tMY2-04/2015 --0 --- tMY4-08/2017
Norkett Branch Reach 1, Cross -Section 5
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
a
70
60
a
N
50
M
40
30
?
20
v
10
0
'
Obti ytih tih Oh
o, o• o•
ti ti ,LW P 5� 0 til ,y0 ,tib .5'ti b� bb �O .tib �O hb 0ti titi .t,P 04 A6
ti 1 1 'ti 0
Particle Class Size (mm)
0MYO-04/2014
■MYl-10/2014 0MY2-04/2015 0MY3-04/2016 ■MY4-08/2017

Reachwide and Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Norkett Branch Reach 2, Reachwide
Reachwide
Diameter (mm)
Particle Count
Reach Summary
Particle Class
2.95
D50 =
11.9
Dal, =
56.9
Class
Percent
D100 =
min
max
Riffle
Pool
Total
90
80
Percentage
Cumulative
Silt/Clay
0.000
0.062
11
10
21
21
21
Very fine
0.062
0.125
1
1
1
22
Fine
0.125
0.250
a
N
50
22
Medium
0.25
0.50
2
2
2
24
Coarse
0.5
1.0
24
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
6
4
10
10
35
®®®®®® ®®®®®® Very Fine
2.0
2.8
20
35
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
2
2
2
37
10
$"�"�"•°�"°�"°•'°• Fine
,o,,o o,00, s s sso•.o•.o;
4.0
5.6
3
2
5
5
42
a�+ao
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO-04/2014
0 MYl-10/2014 0 MY244/2015 0 MY3-04/2016 111 MY4-OB/2017
Fine
5.6
8.0
1
3
4
4
46
Medium
8.0
11.0
2
1
3
3
49
Medium
11.0
16.0
2
3
5
5
54
%s s'<yaoo;
Coarse
16.0
22.6
2
5
7
7
61
Coarse
22.6
32
6
2
8
8
69
Very Coarse
32
45
5
4
9
9
79
Very Coarse
45
64
3
5
8
8
87
Small
64
90
6
2
8
8
95
Small
90
128
1
3
4
4
99
Large
128
180
1
1
1
100
Large
180
256
100
...................................
i Small
256
362
100
II€iii Small
362
512
100
HH€ Medium
512
1024
100
iiiii liHill:
Large/Very Large
1024
2048
100
Bedrock
2048
>2048
100
Total
49
49
98
100
100
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D16=
Silt/Clay
D35 =
2.95
D50 =
11.9
Dal, =
56.9
D95 =
90.8
D100 =
180.0
100
90
80
X 70
60
50
E
�? 40
30
y 20
10
Norkett Branch Reach 2, Reachwide
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
—0--MYO-04/2014 tMYl-10/2014 --*--MY2-04/2015 —41—MYM4/2016 --*--MY4-08/2017
Norkett Branch Reach 2, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
=
d
70
y
60
a
N
50
u
40
v
30
>
20
C
10
0
6'L .ti�i .tis h
pp p1 O• O•
1 ti 0 ,y'L by yP p0 ,tib �O 56 0ti titi ,tib
N y' _ti. 1 1 'ti 'S h 'V ,ti0 pp
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO-04/2014
0 MYl-10/2014 0 MY244/2015 0 MY3-04/2016 111 MY4-OB/2017

Reachwide and Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Norkett Branch Reach 2, Cross -Section 6
100
90
80
7 70
> 60
m
50
E
U= 40
30
a 20
10
Norkett Branch Reach 2, Cross -Section 6
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
t MVO -04/2014 t MYl-10/2014 t MV2-04/2015 t MV3-04/2016 t MV4-08/2017
Diameter (mm)
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
Summary
Particle Class
1.14
D50 =
Riffle 100 -Count
Class
Percent
D95 =
min
max
22.6
Percentage Cumulative
Silt/Clay
0.000
0.062
26
26
26
Very fine
0.062
0.125
V
y
60
26
Fine
0.125
0.250
26
Medium
0.25
1 0.50
4
4
30
Coarse
0.5
1.0
30
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
26
26
56
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
2
2
58
®®®®®®® ®®®®® Very Fine
2.8
4.0
4
4
62
:w`gc`�:o`®^o®a®s°'s,�•&�:w�:c`w:o`ao•.
.ate •orororo•.o; aaa� •ororo
a.w.o•.o•.o•o; ..a..a.w.•o•o• Fine
4.0
5.6
8
8
70
a.a •o:•o:•oos s aa •o:•o
Fine
c®®®®®®®®®®® ®®®®®®
eeo®®o ccs Medium
5.6
8.0
8.0
11.0
12
6
12
6
82
88
ww ac.e:o�:o
...w.o-o. Medium
11.0
16.0
8
8
96
Coarse
®®®®®®®®®®
16.0
22.6
4
4
100
®®®®®
Coarse
22.6
32
100
Very Coarse
32
45
100
Very Coarse
45
64
100
Small
64
90
100
Small
90
128
100
Large
128
180
100
Large
180
256
100
Ililli Small
256
362
100
.HUMMUMM. Small
362
512
100
HHHHHUM
Medium
H
512
1024
100
Large/Very Large
1024
2048
100
Bedrock
2048
>2048
100
Totall
100
100
100
100
90
80
7 70
> 60
m
50
E
U= 40
30
a 20
10
Norkett Branch Reach 2, Cross -Section 6
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
t MVO -04/2014 t MYl-10/2014 t MV2-04/2015 t MV3-04/2016 t MV4-08/2017
Cross Section 6
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
Silt/Clay
D35 =
1.14
D50 =
1.7
Day =
8.9
D95 =
15.3
D100 =1
22.6
100
90
80
7 70
> 60
m
50
E
U= 40
30
a 20
10
Norkett Branch Reach 2, Cross -Section 6
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
t MVO -04/2014 t MYl-10/2014 t MV2-04/2015 t MV3-04/2016 t MV4-08/2017
Norkett Branch Reach 2, Cross -Section 6
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
c
70
V
y
60
a
N
N
50
m
V
40
V
30
20
=a
"Ll
s
10
LA Ll L&0
LL
obp tip tip o`•'
o, o, o•
ti ti ti� a h6 m titi tie tib 3ti th bo 0o ti� q51 _,O eti yti ya ab
ti ti ti ti 3 h 10 yo° "o
Particle Class Size (mm)
0MVO-04/2014
■MYl-10/2014 0MV2-04/2015 0MV3-04/2016 ■MV4-08/2017

Reachwide and Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Norkett Branch Reach 2, Cross -Section 7
100
90
80
a' 70
60
50
E
v 40
aei 30
a 20
10
Norkett Branch Reach 2, Cross -Section 7
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0 , l
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
--*-- MYO-04/2014 --0-- MVI -10/2014 --*-- MY2-04/2015 --*-- MY3-04/2016 --*-- MY4-08/2017
Diameter (mm)
Channel materials (mm)
D16=
Summary
Particle Class
1.23
D50 =
Riffle 100 -Count
Class
Percent
D95 =
min
max
128.0
Percentage Cumulative
Silt/Clay
0.000
0.062
24
24
24
Very fine
0.062
0.125
70
24
Fine
0.125
0.250
24
Medium
0.25
0.50
2
2
26
Coarse
0.5
1.0
6
6
32
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
10
10
42
Very Fine
2.0
1 2.8
1
42
Ver Fine
y
2.8
4.0
2
2
44
%aw;;°;;;o;;;o;;,o s$a�a�w;.o;;.o;;• Fine
4.0
5.6
6
6
50
aa A�; o As s aso�•o;
s•$s$o$ss•$a•o:
Fine
c®®®®®®®®®®® ®®®®®®
eeo®®o cc® Medium
5.6
8.0
8.0
11.0
2
6
2
6
52
58
10
Medium
11.0
16.0
6
6
64
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO-04/2014
■ MY3-10/2014 ■ MY2-04/2015 ■ MY3-04/2016 ■ MY4-08/2017
®®® ®®®® Coarse
16.0
1 22.6
4
4
68
Coarse
22.6
32
4
4
72
Very Coarse
32
45
6
6
78
Very Coarse
45
64
8
8
86
Small
64
90
10
10
96
Small
90
128
4
4
100
Large
128
1 180
100
Large
180
256
100
......................................
......................................
Small
256
362
100
HHHUH€€ Small
362
512
100
HHUM:IIIII Medium
IIIIIIIIIIi€€
512
1024
100
MOM Large/Very Large
1024
2048
100
Bedrock
2048
;2048
1 100
Total
100
100
1 100
100
90
80
a' 70
60
50
E
v 40
aei 30
a 20
10
Norkett Branch Reach 2, Cross -Section 7
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0 , l
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
--*-- MYO-04/2014 --0-- MVI -10/2014 --*-- MY2-04/2015 --*-- MY3-04/2016 --*-- MY4-08/2017
Cross Section 7
Channel materials (mm)
D16=
Silt/Clay
Di5 =
1.23
D50 =
5.6
D80. =
58.6
D95 =
87.0
D100 =l
128.0
100
90
80
a' 70
60
50
E
v 40
aei 30
a 20
10
Norkett Branch Reach 2, Cross -Section 7
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0 , l
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
--*-- MYO-04/2014 --0-- MVI -10/2014 --*-- MY2-04/2015 --*-- MY3-04/2016 --*-- MY4-08/2017
Norkett Branch Reach 2, Cross -Section 7
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
d
70
y
60
a
50
N
M
u
40
30
a
20
10
0
p6ti ytih by py 1
p• p• p'
-L ,ti0 t. tib % ,y1 ti° tib 3l by 6A cp 1,L0 y�0 Cyd �6ti yyti Pa ti9� �"CO
ti ti b
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO-04/2014
■ MY3-10/2014 ■ MY2-04/2015 ■ MY3-04/2016 ■ MY4-08/2017

Reachwide and Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
UT1, Reachwide
Reachwide
Diameter (mm)
Particle Count
Reach Summary
Particle Class
1.04
D50 =
8.3
D84 =
69.2
Class
Percent
D100 =
min
max
Riffle
Pool
Total
Percentage
Cumulative
Silt/Clay
0.000
0.062
2
27
29
29
29
Very fine
0.062
0.125
3
3
3
32
Fine
0.125
0.250
00
2
2
2
34
Medium
0.25
0.50
70
1
1
1
35
Coarse
0.5
1.0
40
60
35
Very Coarse
1.0
1 2.0
4
2
6
6
41
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
r
41
®®®®®®®® ®®®®®®®®
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
1
1
1
42
10
0
U3 40
Fine
4.0
5.6
Particle Class Size (mm)
2
2
2
44
Fine
5.6
8.0
3
3
6
6
50
Medium
8.0
11.0
4
1
5
5
54
o•,o•,o•,o• a,•o,•„•oro;. Medium
0•,0•,0•,0•
11.0
16.0
5
5
5
59
..s.�:.o•.00;
Coarse
16.0
22.6
4
4
4
63
Coarse
22.6
32
3
2
5
5
1 68
a..a..o.o.o.o.
Very Coarse
32
45
6
2
8
8
76
Very Coarse
45
64
6
6
6
82
Small
64
90
6
2
8
8
90
Small
90
128
1
2
3
3
93
Large
128
180
6
6
6
99
Large
180
256
1
1
1
100
....................................
....................................
ii Small
256
362
100
Small
362
512
100
Medium
llllllll eeieee
5121024
100
€€ Large/Very Large
1024
2048
100
Bedrock
2048
>2048
100
Total
51
50
101
100
100
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
Silt/Clay
Di5 =
1.04
D50 =
8.3
D84 =
69.2
D95 =
143.0
D100 =
256.0
UTI, Reachwide
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
UT1, Reachwide
100
Individual Class Percent
100
90
SiltlClay
Sandavel
80
bble
70
er
w
60
80
—
00
a ro
50
70
u
40
60
3
30
50
r
20
E
10
0
U3 40
ti ti ,ti0 P h� 0 y'v Nb ,tid 3ti p5 bb C° .y� �' yb ba, y'L ,yb p0 bb
ti 1 1 ti 3 6 do yo �o
Particle Class Size (mm)
0MYM4/2014
0MYI-10/2014 0MY2-04/2015 0MYM4/2016 0MY4-08/2017
y 30
a 20
10
o
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
t MYO-04/2014 —MYl-10/2014 tMY2-04/2015 tMY3-04/2016 tMY408/2017
UT1, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
E
70
w
60
—
a
�
50
u
40
3
30
v
>
r
20
10
0
°bti ti10 .y5 oy
0 0• °
ti ti ,ti0 P h� 0 y'v Nb ,tid 3ti p5 bb C° .y� �' yb ba, y'L ,yb p0 bb
ti 1 1 ti 3 6 do yo �o
Particle Class Size (mm)
0MYM4/2014
0MYI-10/2014 0MY2-04/2015 0MYM4/2016 0MY4-08/2017

neochwideand Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
momettBranch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. es3oo
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
UTI, Cross -Section y
Diameter (mm)
Channel materials (mm)
Summary
cle Class
Riffle 100 -Count
Class
Percent
min
max
I
256.0
Percentage Cumulative
Silt/Clay
0.000
0.062
10
10
10
Very fine
0.062
0.125
10
Fine
0.125
0.250
10
Medium
0.25
0.50
10
Coarse
0.5
1.0
10
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
4
4
14
Very Fine
2.0
1 2.8
14
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
4
4
18
Medium
8.0
11.0
2
2
26
Medium
11.0
16.0
4
4
30
Coarse
16.0
1 22.6
6
6
36
Coarse
22.6
32
14
14
50
Very Coarse
32
45
10
10
60
Very Coarse
45
64
10
10
70
Small
64
90
12
12
82
Small
90
128
10
10
92
Large
128
1 180
4
4
96
Large
180
1 256
4
4
100
Small
256
362
100
-MUM: Small
362
512
100
Medium
512
1024
100
Large/Very Large
1024
2048
100
Bedrock
2048
>2��
100
Totall
100
100
100
Cross Section 9
Channel materials (mm)
Individual Class Percent
D100 �l
256.0
Individual Class Percent
Particle Class Size (mm)

Reachwide and Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DIVIS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
UT2 Reach 1, Reachwide
Reachwide
Diameter (mm)
Particle Count
Reach Summary
cle Class
Silt/Clay
D50 �
Silt/Clay
D84 �
52.8
Class
Percent
D100 �
min
max
Riffle
Pool
Total
80
Percentage
Cumulative
Silt/Clay
0.000
0.062
20
47
67
67
67
Very fine
0.062
0.125
67
Fine
0.125
0.250
67
Medium
0.25
0.50
J
67
Coarse
0.5
1.0
30 -
67
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
67
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
r
-
1
68
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
0 - . A h
� . � . . . A
68
Cp "p o 'ba, po
'Ile lf� tp
Particle Class Size (mm)
0 MYM4/2014
E MYI-10/2014 E MY2-N/2015 N MYM4/2016 0 MY4�8/2017
Fine
4.0
5.6
68
Fine
5.6
8.0
1
1
1
69
1
Medium
8.0
11.0
69
Medium
11.0
16.0
1
1
1
70
Coarse
16.0
22.6
1
1
1
71
Coarse
22.6
32
1
1 1
1
72
Very Coarse
32
1 45
7
7
7
79
Very Coarse
45
64
11
1
11
11
90
Small
64
90
4
4
4
94
Small
90
128
5
5
5
99
Large
128
180
1
1
1
100
Large
180
256
100
..............................
256
1 36 2
100 1
UO
Hiiiiiiiiiii.. ... HHH!
Small
362
512
100
Medium
512
1024
100
..............................
..................................... Large/Very Large
1024
2048
100
Bedrock
2048
>2048
100
�MmmM
Total
—50-1
5-0 1
100
100
100
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D16 �
Silt/Clay
D35 �
Silt/Clay
D50 �
Silt/Clay
D84 �
52.8
D95 �
96.6
D100 �
180.0
100
90
80
70
60
50
E
40
30
20
10
UT2 Reach 1, Reachwide
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0 i I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I _�
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
--0-- MYO�4/2014 � MYl-10/2014 --*- MY2�4/2015 --0-- MY3-04/2016 --*-- MY�08/2017
UT2 Reach 1, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
E
70 -
60 -
50 -
J
30 -
20 -
r
-
1 0
0
0 - . A h
� . � . . . A
p,
c�
Cp "p o 'ba, po
'Ile lf� tp
Particle Class Size (mm)
0 MYM4/2014
E MYI-10/2014 E MY2-N/2015 N MYM4/2016 0 MY4�8/2017

Reachwide and Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
UT2 Reach 1, Cross -Section 12
100
90
80
a' 70
j 60
50
E
U3 40
30
a 20
30
UT2 Reach 1, Cross -Section 12
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
MVO -04/2014 tMvl-10/2014 ­41—MV2-04/2015 MV3-04/2016 tMv4-08/2017
Diameter (mm)
Channel materials (mm)
D16=
Summary
Particle Class
35.45
D50 =
Riffle 100 -Count
Class
Percent
D95 =
min
max
180.0
Percentage Cumulative
Silt/Clay
0.000
0.062
30
30
30
Very fine
0.062
0.125
30
Fine
0.125
0.250
30
Medium
0.25
0.50
30
Coarse
0.5
1.0
a
30
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
N
30
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
30
®®®®®®®®®®® ®®®®®®
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
30
•o;•0;•0;•0;:0;.a..a..a..,o;•o;•o•.
.atew.o•.o•.o�•o;;.�..a..a.w •„•„•, Fine
4.0
5.6
30
s,�•sg.9 e go�.s�s�a,�•sg ;;o;;
Fine
o®®®®®®®®®®®a ®®®®®® Medium
wwacsw`ce •o;•o
5.6
8.0
8.0
11.0
30
30
g..g: •°.•°..o •°
s o• o: Q.$..4. a• o�•o�•o Medium
a,�•sg%s, ,;.0;0,0;0
11.0
16.0
'v
20
30
aogs�s�s�
Coarse
16.0
22.6
2
2
32
Coarse
22.6
32
32
Very Coarse
32
45
10
10
42
Very Coarse
45
64
16
16
58
Small
64
90
20
20
78
Small
90
128
10
10
88
Large
128
180
12
12
100
Large
180
256
100
111:1: Small
256
362
100
iisi Small
362
512
100
1'11111 Medium
...
512
1024
100
”""""LLLLLLLI'• 11 Large/Very Large
................................ -1111
1024
1 2048
100
Bedrock
2048
1 >2048
100
Total
100
100
100
100
90
80
a' 70
j 60
50
E
U3 40
30
a 20
30
UT2 Reach 1, Cross -Section 12
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
MVO -04/2014 tMvl-10/2014 ­41—MV2-04/2015 MV3-04/2016 tMv4-08/2017
Cross Section 12
Channel materials (mm)
D16=
Silt/Clay
D35 =
35.45
D50 =
53.7
D80. =
111.2
D95 =
156.2
D100 =
180.0
100
90
80
a' 70
j 60
50
E
U3 40
30
a 20
30
UT2 Reach 1, Cross -Section 12
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
MVO -04/2014 tMvl-10/2014 ­41—MV2-04/2015 MV3-04/2016 tMv4-08/2017
UT2 Reach 1, Cross -Section 12
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
70
w
60
a
50
N
m
�
40
30
a
'v
20
30
0
Doti 1tih by og
o, o, o•
ti ti tiw a h� a titi do �� 3ti �� 0o- o
Cti$ �o yo oti titi ya a$ ��
ti ti ti ti 3 5 do ,yo ao
Particle Class Size (mm)
■MVO -04/2014
0MYl-10/2014 0MV2-04/2015 ■MV3-04/2016 ■MV4-08/2017

Reachwide and Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
UT2 Reach 2, Reachwide
Reachwide
Diameter (mm)
Particle Count
Reach Summary
Particle Class
Silt/Clay
D50 =
12.5
D84 =
71.7
Class
Percent
D100 =
min
max
Riffle
Pool
Total
90
80
Percentage
Cumulative
Silt/Clay
0.000
0.062
4
39
43
43
43
Very fine
0.062
0.125
43
Fine
0.125
0.250
a
h
50
43
Medium
0.25
0.50
43
Coarse
0.5
1.0
3
30
43
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
43
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
10
43
®®®®®®®®® ®®®®®®®®
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
0
43
$"�'%'°•'°•'°'°
Oora'LOy.IS olh Oh
1 'L ,y0 b y6 0 y1 y� ��d 0ti by 6R �O y,LW y�0 �y10 �6'L yy'L yO,yO�Opa tZ
Particle Class Size (mm)
0MY0-04/2014
�. as.�'ororo;• Fine
4.0
5.6
1
1
1
44
Fine
5.6
8.0
1
2
3
3
47
%ca®sass %w;�os Medium
8.0
11.0
1
1
1
48
°••?••?••?' � •<�•o�•o�•o%: Medium
11.0
16.0
2
4
6
6
54
Coarse
16.0
22.6
6
2
8
8
62
Coarse
22.6
32
4
4
4
66
o;�;0000.;.; s..�..w.ys•.•o•,o,
Very Coarse
32
4S
5
1
5
5
71
Very Coarse
45
64
9
1
10
10
81
Small
64
90
8
1
9
9
90
Small
90
128
8
8
8
98
Large
128
180
2
2
2
100
Large
180
1 256
1
100
....................................
....................................
ii Small
256
1 362
100
€€€€€€ Small
362
512
100
€ Medium
512
1024
100
EEEEElENNNNNNNNNNHHHHNNNNNNN'N....'.'.'.'�'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.eEEEEEEEi
¢: Large/Very Large
1024
2048
100
Bedrock
2048
>2048
100
Total
s0
s0
100
100
100
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D16=
Silt/Clay
Di5 =
Silt/Clay
D50 =
12.5
D84 =
71.7
D95 =
112.2
D100 =
180.0
UT2 Reach 2, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
c
m
70
60
a
h
50
m
u
40
3
30
a
>
20
10
0
Oora'LOy.IS olh Oh
1 'L ,y0 b y6 0 y1 y� ��d 0ti by 6R �O y,LW y�0 �y10 �6'L yy'L yO,yO�Opa tZ
Particle Class Size (mm)
0MY0-04/2014
•MYI-10/2014 •MY2-04/2015 ■MY344/2016 0MY4-08/2017

Reachwide and Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
UT2 Reach 2, Cross -Section 13
Cross Section 13
Diameter (mm)
D16 =
37.61
Summary
Particle Class
D50 =
68.5
Riffle 100 -Count
Class
Percent
165.3
min
max
Percentage Cumulative
Silt/Clay
0.000
0.062
0
Very fine
0.062
0.125
0
Fine
0.125
0.250
0
Medium
0.25
1 0.50
0
Coarse
0.5
1.0
0
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
0
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
0
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
0
Fine
4.0
5.6
0
Fine
5.6
8.0
0
®®®®®®®®®®®® o®®®®®
eco®®o coo Medium
ecc�a cc
8.0
11.0
0
a:
Medium
11.0
16.0
2
2
2
®®® ®®® Coarse
16.0
22.6
3
3
5
Coarse
22.6
32
2
2
7
ta�agAg': ms�c�aa�agsg . Very Coarse
32
45
19
19
26
Very Coarse
45
64
18
18
44
Small
64
90
30
30
74
Small
90
128
18
18
92
Large
128
180
4
4
96
Large
180
256
4
4
100
......................................
......................................
Small
256
362
100
Small
362
512
100
IIIII Medium
I
512
1024
100
€€ Large/Very Large
.
.....€
1024
2048
100
Bedrock
2048
>2048
100
Total
100
100
100
Cross Section 13
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
37.61
Di5 =
53.67
D50 =
68.5
D80. =
109.5
D95 =
165.3
D100 =l
256.0
100
90
80
2' 70
60
M
3 50
E
v 40
ami 30
a 20
10
0
0.01
UT2 Reach 2, Cross -Section 13
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
100
90
80
70
v
60
a
50
M
U 40
3 30
v
v
20
c 10
0
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
MYO-04/2014 MV3-10/2014 MV2-04/2015 MV3-04/2016 MV4-08/2017
UT2 Reach 2, Cross -Section 13
Individual Class Percent
p6ti ytih by py 1 'ti ,ti0 A tib 0 ,y1 1rO ,tib ,�'ti Ay 6A cp 1,ti0 $ Cyd �6ti yyti Pa �9� pp6
p. p. Q, 1, y _ b
Particle Class Size (mm)
■MVO -04/2014 ■MV3-10/2014 MY2-04/2015 ■MV3-04/2016 ■MV4-08/2017

Reachwide and Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
UT2 Reach 2, Cross -Section 15
100
90
80
a' 70
60
50
E
v 40
30
a 20
10
UT2 Reach 2, Cross -Section 15
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
o
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
--*-- MYO-04/2014 --0-- MVI -10/2014 --*-- MY2-04/2015 --*-- MY3-04/2016 --*-- MY4-08/2017
Diameter (mm)
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
Summary
Particle Class
39.04
D50 =
Riffle 100 -Count
Class
Percent
D95 =
min
max
362.0
Percentage Cumulative
Silt/Clay
0.000
0.062
6
6
6
Very fine
0.062
0.125
70
6
Fine
0.125
0.250
6
Medium
0.25
0.50
6
Coarse
0.5
1.0
m
6
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
u
40
6
Very Fine
2.0
1 2.8
30
6
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
6
a •orororo`.,o;;.a. a..a..,o;'o;'o` Fine
sao:o:o�•o; aasao;,o,•
4.0
5.6
6
aa w�; o ws s as,.oro;
•ascoass•aao:
Fine
c®®®®®®®®®®® ®®®®®® Medium
5.6
8.0
8.0
11.0
2
2
6
8
Medium
11.0
16.0
2
2
10
0
p6ti ytih by py
p. p. Q,
1 'L ,ti0 A tib 0 y1 y� tib 3ti Ay 6A cp tiy0 $ Cyd �6ti ;y, PP 19� pp6
1, y _1 b
Coarse
16.0
1 22.6
8
8
18
Coarse
wwoo;sss, e
22.6
32
10
10
28
cz;o;
e;c;;c;:o;:oko:s..�..w.y •o •o•
.&�•;;`'o;''o;°'oro;: $..�..�:.,,,,,,,,
.�.p.o`.o`.q.g.g..g..g..o..o..
Very Coarse
32
45
12
12
40
Very Coarse
45
64
20
20
60
Small
64
90
16
16
76
Small
90
128
14
14
90
Large
128
1 180
6
6
96
Large
180
256
2
2
98
......................................
......................................
.. ii Small
256
362
2
2
100
ill.. Small
362
512
100
..11llllli
Medium
11111111 i
512
1024
100
:::::: Large/Very Large
1024
2048
100
Bedrock
2048
>2048
100
Total
100
100
100
100
90
80
a' 70
60
50
E
v 40
30
a 20
10
UT2 Reach 2, Cross -Section 15
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
o
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
--*-- MYO-04/2014 --0-- MVI -10/2014 --*-- MY2-04/2015 --*-- MY3-04/2016 --*-- MY4-08/2017
Cross Section 15
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
20.73
D85 =
39.04
D50 =
53.7
D80. =
110.1
D95 =
170.1
D100 =l
362.0
100
90
80
a' 70
60
50
E
v 40
30
a 20
10
UT2 Reach 2, Cross -Section 15
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
o
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
--*-- MYO-04/2014 --0-- MVI -10/2014 --*-- MY2-04/2015 --*-- MY3-04/2016 --*-- MY4-08/2017
UT2 Reach 2, Cross -Section 15
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
70
u
y
60
a
50
N
m
u
40
30
a
20
10
0
p6ti ytih by py
p. p. Q,
1 'L ,ti0 A tib 0 y1 y� tib 3ti Ay 6A cp tiy0 $ Cyd �6ti ;y, PP 19� pp6
1, y _1 b
Particle Class Size (mm)
■MYO-04/2014
■MY3-10/2014 Mv2-04/2015 ■MY3-04/2016 ■MY4-08/2017

Reachwide and Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
UT2 Reach 3A, Reachwide
Reachwide
Diameter (mm)
Particle Count
Reach Summary
Particle Class
11.00
D50 =
42.5
Da4 =
112.6
Class
Percent
D100 =1
min
max
Riffle
Pool
Total
Percentage
Cumulative
Silt/Clay
0.000
0.062
6
28
34
34
34
Very fine
0.062
0.125
d
34
Fine
0.125
0.250
34
Medium
0.25
0.50
a
in
50
34
Coarse
0.5
1.0
34
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
3
34
®®®®®®® ®®®® Very Fine
2.0
2.8
>
34
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
:6
20
34
e;o;;o;;o;;o; ss..a.e •o;•o;•o
Fine
4.0
5.6
34
Fine
®®®®®®®®®®® ®®®®®®
Medium
w`.w.o.o.
5.6
8.0
8.0
11.0
1 1
1 1
1
34
35
ww�y0000ys
�a.a.o•.o •a Medium
11.0
16.0
1
1
2
2
37
Coarse
16.0
22.6
1
1
2
2
39
Coarse
22.6
32
3
3
6
6
45
Very Coarse
32
45
3
3
6
6
51
• a:.;•..s.s;s:o;
Very Coarse
45
64
10
2
12
12
63
Small
64
90
11
1 3
14 1
14
77
Small
90
128
8
3
11
11
88
Large
128
180
5
5
S
93
Large
180
256
93
Small
256
362
93
HH:Small
362
512
93
HUM::::€: Medium
HUM
512
1024
93
i.•..HUM:..........'e................e...................•..•..•..•...............e.............'e...•..•..•.'e............•`e..........•`e..'...•..t.•`e..........•`e.........•`e..........•`e..........•`o..........•`e..•......•`e..........•`o..............•`e.......•......•`eiiiiiiEi
HUM:Large/Very Large
1024
2048
93
Bedrock
2048
>2048
2
5
7
7
100
Total
50
50
100
100
100
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D16=
Silt/Clay
D35 =
11.00
D50 =
42.5
Da4 =
112.6
D95 =
>2048
D100 =1
>2048
100
90
80
X 70
60
50
E
�? 40
y 30
y 20
10
UT2 Reach 3A, Reachwide
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0,1 1 1 11riIU- i -i IIII'IT 1 r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i i i i I I I I I i i i i III1-Hi
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
�MYO-04/2014 —0--MYl-10/2014 --*—MY2-04/2015 --&--MYM4/2016 --*--MY4-08/2017
UT2 Reach 3A, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
c
d
70
y
60
a
in
50
M
U
40
3
v
30
>
:6
20
10
L16
11)11111180
6'L .ti�i .tis h
00 oy o. o
1 'ti b 0 0 .yh ye �o ,y'L b5 6P �O ,tib �O 56 0ti 1ti ,tib
v h' titi' ti ti ti 3 5 do yo �o
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MYO-04/2014
• MYl-10/2014 MY2-04/2015 0 MY3-04/2016 ■ MY40B/2017

Reachwide and Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
UT2 Reach 3A, Cross -Section 18
100
90
80
a' 70
60
50
E
v 40
30
a 20
10
UT2 Reach 3A, Cross -Section 18
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0, 1 1 1
' ✓,�1 I I i� I ei+1-110 +—e1 �4
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
--*-- MYO-04/2014 --0-- MVI -10/2014 --*-- MY2-04/2015 --*-- MY3-04/2016 --*-- MY4-08/2017
Diameter (mm)
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
Summary
Particle Class
39.04
D50 =
Riffle 100 -Count
Class
Percent
D95 =
min
max
362.0
Percentage Cumulative
Silt/Clay
0.000
0.062
6
6
6
Very fine
0.062
0.125
70
6
Fine
0.125
0.250
6
Medium
0.25
0.50
6
Coarse
0.5
1.0
m
6
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
u
40
6
Very Fine
2.0
1 2.8
30
6
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
6
a •orororo`.,o;;.a. a..a..,o;'o;'o` Fine
sao:o:o�•o; aasao;,o,•
4.0
5.6
6
•ascoass•aao:
Fine
c®®®®®®®®®®® ®®®®®® Medium
5.6
8.0
8.0
11.0
2
2
6
8
Medium
11.0
16.0
2
2
10
O, ytih by Oy
p. p- O•
1 t. yb % " ". tib _V Ay 6A cO ti,',7 tiro ,�y� �6ti ytiti oya �w "CO
'1, y 'L b
Coarse
16.0
1 22.6
8
8
18
Coarse
wwoo;sss, e
22.6
32
10
10
28
cz;o;
e;c;;c;:o;:oko:s..�..w.y •o •o•
.�.p.o`.o`.q.g.g..g..g..o..o..
Very Coarse
32
45
12
12
40
Very Coarse
45
64
20
20
60
Small
64
90
16
16
76
Small
90
128
14
14
90
Large
128
180
6
6
96
Large
180
256
2
2
98
......................................
......................................
.. ii Small
256
362
2
2
100
ill.. Small
362
512
100
..lillilli
Medium
11111111 i
512
1024
100
:::::: Large/Very Large
1024
2048
100
Bedrock
2048
>2048
100
Total
100
100
100
100
90
80
a' 70
60
50
E
v 40
30
a 20
10
UT2 Reach 3A, Cross -Section 18
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0, 1 1 1
' ✓,�1 I I i� I ei+1-110 +—e1 �4
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
--*-- MYO-04/2014 --0-- MVI -10/2014 --*-- MY2-04/2015 --*-- MY3-04/2016 --*-- MY4-08/2017
Cross Section 18
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
20.73
D85 =
39.04
D50 =
53.7
D80. =
110.1
D95 =
170.1
D100 =l
362.0
100
90
80
a' 70
60
50
E
v 40
30
a 20
10
UT2 Reach 3A, Cross -Section 18
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0, 1 1 1
' ✓,�1 I I i� I ei+1-110 +—e1 �4
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
--*-- MYO-04/2014 --0-- MVI -10/2014 --*-- MY2-04/2015 --*-- MY3-04/2016 --*-- MY4-08/2017
UT2 Reach 3A, Cross -Section 18
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
d
70
y
60
a
50
N
m
u
40
30
a
20
10
0
O, ytih by Oy
p. p- O•
1 t. yb % " ". tib _V Ay 6A cO ti,',7 tiro ,�y� �6ti ytiti oya �w "CO
'1, y 'L b
Particle Class Size (mm)
■MYO-04/2014
■MY3-10/2014 Mv2-04/2015 ■MY3-04/2016 ■MY4-08/2017

Reachwide and Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
UT2 Reach 3B, Reachwide
Reachwide
Diameter (mm)
Particle Count
Reach Summary
Particle Class
6.12
D50 =
19.0
D84 =
82.6
Class
Percent
D100 =
min
max
Riffle
Pool
Total
90
80
Percentage
Cumulative
Silt/Clay
0.000
0.062
6
16
22
22
22
Very fine
0.062
0.125
22
Fine
0.125
0.250
1
3
4
4
26
Medium
0.25
0.50
50
3
3
3
29
Coarse
0.5
1.0
2
2
2
31
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
2
2
2
33
Very Fine
®®®®®®®®®®
2.0
2.8
C
20
33
®®®®®®®
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
10
33
0
1110
U
r�'L .ti5 .lh h
00 oy o. o•
1 'L 0 b 6 0 ,y1 y0 0 .,�'L p5 6R �O ,LW �O 56 6ti 1ti ti� Og' A6
ti• htiv ti ti ti 3 h do ,yo bo
Fine
4.0
5.6
•MYI-10/2014 •MY2-04/2015 ■MY344/2016 0MY4-08/2017
1
1
1
34
Fine
5.6
8.0
1
3
4
4
38
o®®®®®®®®®$ ®®®®®®®
Medium
8.0
11.0
2
3
5
5
43
... ' .�.Y:.•prp.•p
a.:a.�'prprp;Medium
11.0
16.0
1
3
4
4
47
Coa
16.0
22.6
3
3
6
6
53
®®®®®®®®® ®®®®®® rse
Coarse
22.6
32
5
2
7
7
60
Very Coarse
32
45
5
1 2
7
7
67
Very Coarse
45
64
8
3
11
11
78
Small
64
90
7
1
8
8
86
Small
90
128
6
1
7
7
93
Large
128
180
3
1
4
4
97
Large
180
256
2
2
2
99
....................................
....................................
ii Small
256
36299
€€€€ Small
362
512
99
HHHH€ Medium
512
1024
99
EEEEEEl..........................................................................'.°..........................`...........`...........`...........`...........`.....................�..........•.........•.........•..........•.............`eEEEEEEEit
HUHN
Large/Very Large
1024
2048
99
Bedrock
2048
>2048
1 1
1 1
1
100
Total
50
50 1
100 1
100
100
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D16=
Silt/Clay
Di5 =
6.12
D50 =
19.0
D84 =
82.6
D95 =
151.8
D100 =
>2048
UT2 Reach 36, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
c
m
70
60
a
h
50
A
u
40
3
30
a
>
C
20
�
10
Jill LU
0
1110
U
r�'L .ti5 .lh h
00 oy o. o•
1 'L 0 b 6 0 ,y1 y0 0 .,�'L p5 6R �O ,LW �O 56 6ti 1ti ti� Og' A6
ti• htiv ti ti ti 3 h do ,yo bo
Particle Class Size (mm)
0MY0-04/2014
•MYI-10/2014 •MY2-04/2015 ■MY344/2016 0MY4-08/2017

Reachwide and Cross -Section Pebble Count Plots
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
UT2 Reach 3B, Cross -Section 19
100
90
80
a' 70
> 60
50
E
v 40
30
a 20
10
UT2 Reach 36, Cross -Section 19
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
MYO-04/2014 --*--MYl-10/2014 MY2-04/2015 MY3-04/2016 MY4-08/2017
Diameter (mm)
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
Summary
Particle Class
26.12
D50 =
Riffle 100 -Count
Class
Percent
D95 =
min
max
128.0
Percentage Cumulative
Silt/Clay
0.000
0.062
80
0
Very fine
0.062
0.125
2
2
2
Fine
0.125
0.250
6
6
8
Medium
0.25
0.50
8
Coarse
0.5
1.0
8
Very Coarse
1.0
1 2.0
8
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
a
8
Very Fine
2.8
4.0
2
2
10
a •orororo•.o;.a. a..a..o.,o.,o• Fine
s.a.o..o..o.•o;�. as.�,oyo,•
4.0
5.6
2
2
12
Fine
c®®®®®®®®®®® ®®®®®® Medium
5.6
8.0
8.0
11.0
2
2
14
14
Medium
11.0
1 16.0
10
10
24
Lag. A111111 I
0 _�J
JJ
Coarse
16.0
22.6
6
6
30
Coarse
22.6
32
12
12
42
t;cY,c::?;v+9•+k9..g..c.y:.o•:o•
Very Coarse
32
45
8
8
50
Very Coarse
45
64
22
22
72
Small
64
90
16
16
88
Small
90
128
12
12
100
Large
128
180
100
Large
180
256
100
Small
256
362
100
.11111111111 1Small
362
512
100
Medium
IIIIIIIIIII€
5 12
1024
100
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::...... Large/Very Large 1
1024
1 2048
100
Bedrock
2048
1 >2048
100
Total
100
100
100
100
90
80
a' 70
> 60
50
E
v 40
30
a 20
10
UT2 Reach 36, Cross -Section 19
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
MYO-04/2014 --*--MYl-10/2014 MY2-04/2015 MY3-04/2016 MY4-08/2017
Cross Section 19
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
11.86
D85 =
26.12
D50 =
45.0
D80. =
82.6
D95 =
110.5
D100 =l
128.0
100
90
80
a' 70
> 60
50
E
v 40
30
a 20
10
UT2 Reach 36, Cross -Section 19
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Class Size (mm)
MYO-04/2014 --*--MYl-10/2014 MY2-04/2015 MY3-04/2016 MY4-08/2017
UT2 Reach 36, Cross -Section 19
Individual Class Percent
100
90
80
E
70
u
y
60
a
N
50
m
u
40
30
a
20
10
Lag. A111111 I
0 _�J
JJ
p6ti ytih by 'p
".0t. tib 0 ,y1 ,y6 ,tib 3-V ph 6A Cp yl0 y00 Cyd ,bl yyti Pa F?0 pp6
Particle Class Size (mm)
0MYO-04/2014
■MY3-10/2014 Mv2-04/2015 ■MY3-04/2016 ■MY4-08/2017

APPENDIX 5. Hydrology Data

Table 14. Verification of Bankfull Events
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Monitoring Year
Reach
Date of Data
Collection
Date of
Occurrence
Method
UT2
Reach 3A (CG #1 XS18)
6/3/2014
5/30/2014
Stream Gage
9/4/2014 7/21/2014 Stream Gage
10/17/2014 9/16/2014 Wrack Line
MY1
UT1 (CG #2 XS9)
6/3/2014
5/30/2014
Stream Gage
9/4/2014 7/21/2014 Stream Gage
Norkett
Branch Reach 2 (CG #3 XS6)
6/3/2014
5/30/2014
Stream Gage
9/4/2014 7/21/2014 Stream Gage
10/17/2014 9/16/2014 Stream Gage
UT2
Reach 3A (CG #1 XS18)
1/4/2015
1/4/2015
Stream Gage
1/12/2015 1/12/2015 Stream Gage
2/26/2015 2/26/2015 Stream Gage
3/5/2015 3/5/2015 Stream Gage
4/19/2015 4/19/2015 Stream Gage
10/3/2015 10/3/2015 Stream Gage, Crest
Gage
MY2
Norkett
Branch Reach 2 (CG #3 XS6)
1/4/2015
1/4/2015
Stream Gage
1/12/2015 1/12/2015 Stream Gage
2/26/2015 2/26/2015 Stream Gage
3/5/2015 3/5/2015 Stream Gage, Crest
Gage
4/19/2015 4/19/2015 Stream Gage, Crest
Gage
10/3/2015 10/3/2015 Stream Gage, Crest
Gage
UT2
Reach 3A (CG #1 XS18)
2/3/2016
2/3/2016
Stream Gage
2/16/2016 2/16/2016 Stream Gage
2/24/2016 2/24/2016 Stream Gage
3/28/2016 3/28/2016 Stream Gage, Crest
Gage
10/8/2016 10/8/2016 Stream Gage
MY3
UT1 (CG #2 XS9)
4/22/2016
Spring 2016
Crest Gage
10/8/2016 10/8/2016 Stream Gage
Norkett
Branch Reach 2 (CG #3 XS6)
2/3/2016
2/3/2016
Stream Gage
2/16/2016 2/16/2016 Stream Gage
2/24/2016 2/24/2016 Stream Gage
3/28/2016 3/28/2016 Stream Gage, Crest
Gage
10/8/2016 10/8/2016 Stream Gage
MY4
UT2
Reach 3A (CG #1 XS18)
1/22/2017
1/22/2017
Stream Gage
4/24/2017 4/24/2017 Stream Gage
5/22/2017 5/22/2017 Stream Gage
5/24/2017 5/24/2017 Stream Gage
6/20/2017 6/20/2017 Stream Gage
6/29/2017 N/A Crest Gage
Norkett
Branch Reach 2(CG #3 XS6)
1/23/2017
1/23/2017
Stream Gage
5/24/2017 5/24/2017 Stream Gage

Stream Flow Gage Plots
Norkett Branch Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
2.0
1.0
0.0
-3.0
-4.0
Stream Gage for UT2 Reach 3A (X518 -CG #1)
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
c a a > c 7S m a t'i > u
o z° o
Rainfall Monroe Airport (KEQY) UT2 Reach 3A (XS18- CG #1) Water Depth — — Bankfull
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
c
1.0
0.5
0.0

Stream Flow Gage Plots
Norkett Branch Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Stream Gage for UT1 (XS9-CG #2)
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
2.0
4.0
3.5
1.0
3.0
0.0
—
2.5
c
v
m
-1.0
w
2.0
c
m
3
z
1.5
-2.0
1.0
-3.0
0.5
4.0L
0.0
75
O z
Rainfall Monroe Airport (KEQY) — UTI (XS9- CG #2) Water Depth — — Bankfull

Stream Flow Gage Plots
Norkett Branch Mitigation Project
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Stream Gage for Norkett Branch Reach 2 (XS6-CG#3)
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
2.0 4.0
3.5
1.0
3.0
0.0
2.5
c
v –
a
-1.0 2.0 m
c
M
m s
3 1.5
-z.o
1.0
-3.0 _ r 0.5
-4.0 I i 0.0
¢ s � a' v01i 4 z �
Rainfall Monroe Airport (KEQY) — Norkett Branch Reach 2 (X56- CG #3) Water Depth — — Bankfull

APPENDIX 6. Water Quality BMPs

Table 15. Water Quality Sampling Results
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
Monitoring Year
Location
Sample Collection
Date
TN
(mg/L)
NO,
(mg/L)
TKN
(mg/L)
TP
(mg/L)
TSS
(mg/L)
FC
(CFU/300mL)
Conductivity
(VS/cm)
Temp °C
pH
TN
SPSC BMP Inlet
4/22/2014
(Baseflow)
1.1
0.2
0.9
0.4
16.0
31
151.0
21.4
7.0
SPSC BMP Outlet
0.9 DL 0.9 0.5 25.0 11 127.6 23.5
7.3
PW BMP Inlet
DL DL 0.5 0.2 11.0 68 65.0 25.3
7.4
PW BMP Outlet
DL 0.1 DL 0.3 39.0 110 69.8 26.2
7.0
N/A
SPSC BMP Inlet
5/15/2014
100.0
50.0
50.0
19.0
970.0
20000
1230.0
21.0
6.8
SPSC BMP Outlet
47.0 18.0 29.0 7.0 410.0 20000 1185.0 21.0
6.9
PW BMP Inlet
2.5 0.2 2.3 0.6 15.0 5600 95.5 22.9
6.9
PW BMP Outlet
1.8 0.2 1.6 0.5 150.0 2100 11.3 23.8
6.9
MY1
SPSC BMP Inlet
10/15/2014
5.5
1.3
4.2
5.4
27.0
490
437.0
19.8
7.1
SPSC BMP Outlet
1.8 0.2 1.7 0.7 1.7 2300 333.0 21.0
7.1
PW BMP Inlet
NF
PW BMP Outlet
SPSC BMP Inlet
11/26/2014
7.2
2.2
5.0
5.0
30.0
HT
201.1
196.2
57.8
82.0
10.1
10.0
11.2
11.1
7.2
7.2
6.7
6.8
SPSC BMP Outlet
6.5
2.0 4.6
4.9 32.0
PW BMP Inlet
2.8
1.1 1.7
0.6 6.6
PW BMP Outlet
2.6
1.0 1.7
1.0 6.3
SPSC BMP Inlet
3/30/2015
1.2
0.16
1.0
0.3
6.2
120
277.8
10.0
7.1
SPSC BMP Outlet
1.5
0.12 1.3
0.3 DL
DL 329.9 10.5
7.2
PW BMP Inlet
DL
0.12 DL
0.3 16.0
120 180.0 9.5
7.3
PW BMP Outlet
1.2
0.12 1.1
0.2 9.0
64 184.0 11.8
8.1
MY2
SPSC BMP Inlet
10/28/2015
3.8
1.3
2.5
1.2
16.0
150.0
141.9
17.5
6.6
SPSC BMP Outlet
4.5
2.4 2.1
1.0 20.0
140.0 154.8 17.0
6.4
PW BMP Inlet
2.9
1.1 1.8
0.8 48.0
DL 97.7 17.1
4.2
PW BMP Outlet
1.7
DL 1.7
0.3 7.6
DL 92.7 18.7
7.2
MY3
SPSC BMP Inlet
9/3/2016
13.0
1.6
11.0
5.2
140.0
HT
---
---
---
---
---
---
SPSC BMP Outlet
8.5
5.2 3.2
2.5 DL
PW BMP Inlet
2 3
1.0 1.3
0.9 6.7
PW BMP Outlet
NF
29%
-20%
SPSC BMP Inlet
4/4/2017
5.9
0.7
5.2
0.2
480.0
---
---
---
---
SPSC BMP Outlet
3.2 1.2 2.1 --- --- --- --- ---
---
PW BMP Inlet
6.1 1.4 4.7 0.3 840.0 --- --- ---
---
PW BMP Outlet
5.3 0.3 5.0 DL 150.0 --- --- ---
---
SPSC BMP Inlet
5/23/2017
5.2
1.3
4.0
2.1
25.0
---
170.0
---
6.7
SPSC BMP Outlet
3.5 0.6 2.9 1.5 30.0 --- --- ---
6.6
PW BMP Inlet
2 6 0.4 2.2 0.2 21.0 42.0 ---
5.8
PW BMP Outlet
1.3 DL 1.3 0.3 3.5 51.0
6.4
DL: Parameter was below the detection limit
NF: No Flow was available for sample collection/insufficient sample volume
HT: Laboratory analysis was not available due to the short holding time for this parameter
---: Data was not provided
Table 16. Pollutant Removal Rates
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 - 2017
'Positive values indicate a reduction in pollutant concentration from inlet to outlet samples, negative values indicate an increase in concentration
N/A: Metric cannot be calculated
Sample Collection
Percent
Reduction'
Monitoring Year
Location
TN
NO„
TKN
TP
TSS
FC
Date
SPSC BMP
4/22/2014
18%
57%
1%
-29%
-56%
65%
PW BMP
(Baseflow)
N/A
N/A
0%
-74%
-255%
-62%
SPSC BMP
53%
64%
42%
63%
58%
0%
5/15/2014
PW BMP
28%
27%
30%
18%
-900%
63%
MYl
SPSC BMP
10/15/2014
67%
88%
60%
88%
94%
-369%
PW BMP
N/A
SPSC BMP
11/26/2014
10%
9%
8%
2%
-7%
N/A
PW BMP
7%
14%
0%
-67%
5%
SPSC BMP
-25%
25%
-30%
-3%
N/A
N/A
3/30/2015
PW BMP
N/A
0%
N/A
24%
44%
47%
MY2
SPSC BMP
10/28/2015
-18%
-85%
16%
17%
-25%
7%
PW BMP
41%
N/A
6%
57%
84%
N/A
SPSC BMP
35%
-225%
71%
52%
N/A
N/A
MY3
9/3/2016
PW BMP
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
SPSC BMP
46%
-67%
60%
N/A
N/A
N/A
4/4/2017
PW BMP
13%
78%
-6%
N/A
82%
N/A
MY4
SPSC BMP
33%
55%
28%
29%
-20%
N/A
5/23/2017
PW BMP
50%
N/A
41%
-89%
83%
N/A
'Positive values indicate a reduction in pollutant concentration from inlet to outlet samples, negative values indicate an increase in concentration
N/A: Metric cannot be calculated

Water Quality Data
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4 -2017
(100)(47)
15
14
13
12
11
10
m
9
`w
0 8
2
— 7
O
6
~ 5
4
3
2
1
0
5/15/2014 10/15/2014 11/26/2014 3/30/2015 10/28/2015 9/3/2016 4/4/2017 5/23/2017
Q2 MY1 Q4 MY1 Q4 MY1 Q1 MY2 Q4 MY2 Q3 MY3 Q2 MY4 Q2 MY4
TN (Total Nitrogen)
8 (19)
7
6
E 5
`o
a
o 4
a
A
:. 3
2
1
0 - — — - - - — — — — -
5/15/2014 10/15/2014 11/26/2014 3/30/2015 10/28/2015 9/3/2016 4/4/2017 5/23/2017
Q2 MY3 Q4 MY3 Q4 MY3 Q3 MY2 Q4 MY2 Q3 MY3 Q2 MY4 Q2 MY4
TP (Total Phosphorus)
SPSC BMP Inlet
SPSC BMP Outlet
PW BMP Inlet
PW BMP Outlet
— — — Detection Limit
(970)(410) (150) (140) (480) (840) (150)
50
45
40
m
35
£
-0 30
0
a 25
v
o.
20
0
15
10
5
0
5/15/2014 10/15/2014 11/26/2014 3/30/2015 10/28/2015 9/3/2016 4/4/2017 5/23/2017
Q2 MY3 Q4 MY1 Q4 MY3 Q1 MY2 Q4 MY2 Q3 MY3 Q2 MY4 Q2 MY4
TSS (Total Suspended Solids)

Pollutant Removal Plot
Norkett Branch Stream Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 95360
Monitoring Year 4-2017
Pollutant Removal Rates
May -15-2014 May -15-2014 Oct -15-2014 Oct -15-2014 Nov -26-2014 Nov -26-2014 Mar -30-2015 Mar -30-2015 Oct -28-2015 Oct -28-2015 Sept -03-2016 Sept -03-2016 Apr -04-2017 Apr -04-2017 May -23-2017 May -23-2017
SPSC BMP PW BMP SPSC BMP PW BMP SPSC BMP PW BMP SPSC BMP PW BMP SPSC BMP PW BMP SPSC BMP PW BMP SPSC BMP PW BMP SPSC BMP PW BMP
avv o
Q2 MY2
Q4 MYl
Q4 MYl
Ql MY2
Q4 MY2
Q3 MY3
Q2 MY4
80%
60%
C
40%
s
20%
c
a.
a(NF)
r
(DL) (NF)
(NA)(NA) INA
(DL) (DL)
0%
-20%
-40%
-60%
-80%
-100%
(-900%)
■ TN ■ TP ■ TSS
DL: Parameter was below the detection limit
NF: No flow was available for sample collection/insufficient sample volume
NA: No data available at inlet and/or outlet sample for comparison
'Positive values indicate a reduction in pollutant concentration from inlet to outlet samples, negative values indicate an increase in concentration