NAME OF PROJECT CLOSEOUT REPORT: PROJECT TYPE
NAME OF PROJECT EEP ID (IMS#) FDP CONTRACT NUMBER USACE ACTION ID # DWQ 401#
CLOSEOUT REPORT: PROJECT TYPE (Project Type = Stream, Wetland, Buffer; note only the type of asset of MUs) General Format Requirements: Delete or replace all guidance text (red font) Page size and layout may be adapted for best fit Ensure that project is formatted to print properly Format report to be double sided where possible Ensure that all tables, graphs, photos are legible when printed INSERT PHOTO THAT REPRESENTS THE PROJECT HERE
Project Setting & Classifications
Meeting XY Coordinates: Enter xy of site visit meeting location here County General Location Basin: Physiographic Region: Ecoregion: USGS Hydro Unit: NCDWQ Sub-basin: Wetland Classification Thermal Regime: Trout Water: Project Performers Source Agency: Provider: Designer: Monitoring Firm Channel Remediation Plant remediation Approved for transfer to Stewardship Stewards
Alexander Town/City nearby Catawba Piedmont Central Piedmont 03050101-120040 11-62-3-1 Warm No WRP/DOT/EEP etc Firm X Firm Y; Firm Z Firm A Firm B Yes/NO NC, DOT, other
Project Activities and Timeline Delete entries that do not apply/add additional
Milestone
Month-Year
Project Instituted Permitted Construction Completed As-built survey Monitoring Year-1 Minor Channel Repair Monitoring Year-2 Beaver removal Monitoring Year 3 Invasive Plant Control Monitoring Year 4 Invasive Plant Control Supplemental Planting Monitoring Year 5 Veg Monitoring Year 6 Closeout Submission
June 2000 April 2001 Oct 2001 Dec 2001 Oct 2002 Jan 2003 Oct 2003 Oct 2003 Oct 2004 June 2005 Oct 2005 June 2006 Dec 2006 Oct 2007 Sep 2008 Apr 2009
Project Setting and Background Summary THIS SECTION SHOULD BE A SUMMARY OF FUNCTIONAL UPLIFT ACHIEVED THROGH THE PROJECT AND HOW THE UPLIFT WAS ACCOMLISHED. INCLUDE REPAIR SUMMARY AND SUMMARY OF UNIQUE PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS. DO NOT INCLUDE DATA THAT CAN BE PRESENTED IN TABULAR FASHION.
Goals and Objectives: This should be excerpted from the Mitigation Plan (formerly restoration plan) in tabular form when possible Example:
Success Criteria Include the success criteria summarized from the mitigation (or As-Built if necessary) plan. Tabular format is strongly suggested. Ensure hydrological success criteria are stated for wetlands. Example: Success Criteria Measured Parameter Criteria Met Stream: 4 Cross Sections: Yes – Cross section data 2 riffle & 2 pool indicates minor adjustments Cross-sections: when compared to as-built cross Measurements should show section data little change from the as-built cross-sections. If changes do occur, they will be evaluated to determine whether they are minor adjustments associated with increased stability or whether they indicate movement toward an unstable condition. Wetland: 5 groundwater gauges Yes – four of five gauges exceeded the required 8.5% 8.5 % success criteria criteria hydrology in all years. Gauge 1 for all wetland assets failed to meet success criteria in all years; the area surrounding gauge 1 was re-delineated. Vegetation: 10 vegetation plots Yes – all 10 plots exceeded 260 stems per acre minimum of 260 stems per acre in year 5 Other
Asset Table: As it appears in Year 5 monitoring report. Assets must be broken into distinct mitigation categories, lf/ac, or sq. defined for each segment as well as credit ratios and resultant mitigation units. If assets have changed since mitigation plan, changes should be noted and explained. Assets reported to nearest lf for streams, two decimal points for wetlands, nearest square foot for buffer, and two decimal places for nutrient offset. Table X. Project XYZ Creek (ID-123456) - Mitigation Components Resto red
Creditible
P ro ject
Wetland
Fo o tage
Fo o tage,
Fo o tage,
Co mpo nent
P o sitio n and
or
A creage,
A creage
Resto ratio n
P rio rity
M itigatio n
M itigatio n
(reach ID, etc.)1
Hydro Type2
A creage
Statio ning
o r SF 3
o r SF 4
Level
Level
Ratio (X:1)
Credits
XYZ M ain Upper
1020
10+00 -21+69
1169
1169
R
PI
1
Full Channel Resto ratio n, P lanted B uffer, Exclusio n o f Livesto ck, P ermanent Co nservatio n 1169 Easement
XYZ M ain Lo wer
904
22+19 -32+38
1019
1019
R
PI
1
Full Channel Resto ratio n, P lanted B uffer, Exclusio n o f Livesto ck, P ermanent Co nservatio n 1019 Easement
XYZ M ain P reservatio n
675
10+00 - 16+75
5010
5010
P
-
5
1002 Co nservatio n Easement
UT1
485
10+00 - 14+85
485
485
EII
-
2.5
194 Livesto ck Exclusio n, Invasive Co ntro l, A umtented Understo ry, Habitat Structures Dimensio n and P ro file mo dified in keeping with reference, livesto ck exclusio n, planting, permananent easement. 90 Feet remo ved fro m creditible fo o tage (50 due o t single sided 413 easement with 40 feet remo ved due to a 50% reductio n resulting fro m 80 feet o f utility cro ssings)
UT2
UT 3 (Headwater)
Existing
710
10+00 - 17+10
710
620
1908
10+00 - 30+54
2054
A ppro ach
E1
P III
1.5
2044
R
Headwater
1
No tes/Co mments
Headwater resto ratio n - valley axis = asset length. 50% reductio n fro m a 20 fo o t utility cro ssing. 2044 Remo ved 10 feet o f creditible fo o tage P lanted, excluded livesto ck, remediated co mpactio n and enco mpassess sectio n o f prio rity 1reach. 4.63 0.66 acres impacted by utility @ 50%, creditible acreage reduced by 0.33 acres
Wetland Gro up 1
RR
4.96
4.96
4.63
R
1
Wetland Gro up 2
RNR
1.12
1.12
1.12
R
1
Wetland Gro up 3
NR
0.86
0.86
0.76
R
1
Remo ved ditching in a seep wetland o utside riparian zo ne. 0.2 acres o f wetland impacted @ 50% by 0.76 utility reducing creditibale acreage by 0.1acres
Wetland Gro up 4
RR
7.86
7.86
7.86
E
2
3.93 Excluded Livesto ck, plugged ditches - hydro enhancement.
Wetland Gro up 5
NR
0
2.11
2.11
C
3
Remo ved abo ut 4 inches o f o verburden neighbo ring P I reach, so ils bo rderline at time o f pre-co n 0.70 assessment, expect develo pment o f features with P I, planted and excluded livesto ck
Wetland Gro up 6
RR
11.4
11.4
10.6
P
5
2.12 Co nservatio n Easement. 1.6 acres o f preservatio n impacted @ 50% by utilities. Remo ved 0.8 acres
B uffer Gro up 1
67,541
67,541
R
1
67,541 Resto red riparian buffer fo r buffer credit
B uffer Gro up 2
16,456
16,456
E
2
8,228 Supplemented riparian buffer plantings
B uffer Gro up 3
485,126
472,168
P
5
1.12 P lugged a ditch, planted and augmented a to e o f slo pe seep within the riparian zo ne
P reserved riparian buffer fo r B uffer Credit. 12,958 SF remo ved fro m creditible buffer to 94,434 acco mmo date utilities
Asset Map: Include all project assets by reach and wetland type as indicted in Asset Table, include monitoring stations (vegetation plots, cross sections, gauges). Format the page layout to best fit the project map, separate Asset Map and Monitoring Station Map if necessary. The example below depicts the stream buffer zone as being adequate in width (yellow line = 50 ft. buffer). If stream buffer widths are a potential concern, suggest depicting the stream buffer areas which exceed, meet or fall short of the required width as defined by physiographic region.
Topographic Map (project extent and watershed delineated)
Soils Map (Use project specific delineation if available, if not use NRCS soils map with soil series clearly labeled.
Remediation Map Include any supplemental planting zones and/or repair areas.
Stream Morphology Data: Cross sections, Longitudinal Profiles, and Morphology Table Ensure that graphs are legible
Hydrology Data: Verification of Bankfull Events Table, Historic Vs. Average Rainfall Graph, Wetland Gauge Data
Wetland Hydrology Data: Include the hydro period performance standard as established in the Mitigation Plan, the total growing season days and dates, and the maximum number of consecutive growing season days success criteria met and associated percentage. If monitoring occurred during a drought, inclusion of reference wetland data if available or comparison of average to actual rainfall data may be useful in interpreting data.
Vegetation Data: Remember to exclude exotics from reported stem densities. Data should be presented by plot and species in stems per acre in current year as well as average density by plot across all years.
EEP Recommendation and Conclusion Briefly summarize the performance standards achieved, the ecological value of the mitigation, and include a statement that requests the project close with the mitigation units as shown in the Asset Table.
Contingencies Do not include ongoing treatments/work in this section such as currently contracted invasive treatment or beaver management. This section is reserved for items that should appear in the IRT closeout summary.
Pre & Post Construction Photos: Include photos of representative reaches
Appendix A: Watershed Planning Context of Project X (To be completed by EEP Planer)
Appendix B: Property Ownership & Protection (To be completed by EEP Property Specialist, this is where the Transfer Illustration will appear if one is required)
Appendix C: Permits & Jurisdictional Determinations (Insert 404, 401, and associated jurisdictional determination for streams and wetlands if available)
Appendix D: Debit Ledger (To be inserted by DMS closeout coordinator)
Appendix E: Additional Data (Reserved for any additional data necessary to support project closure)
CLOSEOUT REPORT: PROJECT TYPE (Project Type = Stream, Wetland, Buffer; note only the type of asset of MUs) General Format Requirements: Delete or replace all guidance text (red font) Page size and layout may be adapted for best fit Ensure that project is formatted to print properly Format report to be double sided where possible Ensure that all tables, graphs, photos are legible when printed INSERT PHOTO THAT REPRESENTS THE PROJECT HERE
Project Setting & Classifications
Meeting XY Coordinates: Enter xy of site visit meeting location here County General Location Basin: Physiographic Region: Ecoregion: USGS Hydro Unit: NCDWQ Sub-basin: Wetland Classification Thermal Regime: Trout Water: Project Performers Source Agency: Provider: Designer: Monitoring Firm Channel Remediation Plant remediation Approved for transfer to Stewardship Stewards
Alexander Town/City nearby Catawba Piedmont Central Piedmont 03050101-120040 11-62-3-1 Warm No WRP/DOT/EEP etc Firm X Firm Y; Firm Z Firm A Firm B Yes/NO NC, DOT, other
Project Activities and Timeline Delete entries that do not apply/add additional
Milestone
Month-Year
Project Instituted Permitted Construction Completed As-built survey Monitoring Year-1 Minor Channel Repair Monitoring Year-2 Beaver removal Monitoring Year 3 Invasive Plant Control Monitoring Year 4 Invasive Plant Control Supplemental Planting Monitoring Year 5 Veg Monitoring Year 6 Closeout Submission
June 2000 April 2001 Oct 2001 Dec 2001 Oct 2002 Jan 2003 Oct 2003 Oct 2003 Oct 2004 June 2005 Oct 2005 June 2006 Dec 2006 Oct 2007 Sep 2008 Apr 2009
Project Setting and Background Summary THIS SECTION SHOULD BE A SUMMARY OF FUNCTIONAL UPLIFT ACHIEVED THROGH THE PROJECT AND HOW THE UPLIFT WAS ACCOMLISHED. INCLUDE REPAIR SUMMARY AND SUMMARY OF UNIQUE PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS. DO NOT INCLUDE DATA THAT CAN BE PRESENTED IN TABULAR FASHION.
Goals and Objectives: This should be excerpted from the Mitigation Plan (formerly restoration plan) in tabular form when possible Example:
Success Criteria Include the success criteria summarized from the mitigation (or As-Built if necessary) plan. Tabular format is strongly suggested. Ensure hydrological success criteria are stated for wetlands. Example: Success Criteria Measured Parameter Criteria Met Stream: 4 Cross Sections: Yes – Cross section data 2 riffle & 2 pool indicates minor adjustments Cross-sections: when compared to as-built cross Measurements should show section data little change from the as-built cross-sections. If changes do occur, they will be evaluated to determine whether they are minor adjustments associated with increased stability or whether they indicate movement toward an unstable condition. Wetland: 5 groundwater gauges Yes – four of five gauges exceeded the required 8.5% 8.5 % success criteria criteria hydrology in all years. Gauge 1 for all wetland assets failed to meet success criteria in all years; the area surrounding gauge 1 was re-delineated. Vegetation: 10 vegetation plots Yes – all 10 plots exceeded 260 stems per acre minimum of 260 stems per acre in year 5 Other
Asset Table: As it appears in Year 5 monitoring report. Assets must be broken into distinct mitigation categories, lf/ac, or sq. defined for each segment as well as credit ratios and resultant mitigation units. If assets have changed since mitigation plan, changes should be noted and explained. Assets reported to nearest lf for streams, two decimal points for wetlands, nearest square foot for buffer, and two decimal places for nutrient offset. Table X. Project XYZ Creek (ID-123456) - Mitigation Components Resto red
Creditible
P ro ject
Wetland
Fo o tage
Fo o tage,
Fo o tage,
Co mpo nent
P o sitio n and
or
A creage,
A creage
Resto ratio n
P rio rity
M itigatio n
M itigatio n
(reach ID, etc.)1
Hydro Type2
A creage
Statio ning
o r SF 3
o r SF 4
Level
Level
Ratio (X:1)
Credits
XYZ M ain Upper
1020
10+00 -21+69
1169
1169
R
PI
1
Full Channel Resto ratio n, P lanted B uffer, Exclusio n o f Livesto ck, P ermanent Co nservatio n 1169 Easement
XYZ M ain Lo wer
904
22+19 -32+38
1019
1019
R
PI
1
Full Channel Resto ratio n, P lanted B uffer, Exclusio n o f Livesto ck, P ermanent Co nservatio n 1019 Easement
XYZ M ain P reservatio n
675
10+00 - 16+75
5010
5010
P
-
5
1002 Co nservatio n Easement
UT1
485
10+00 - 14+85
485
485
EII
-
2.5
194 Livesto ck Exclusio n, Invasive Co ntro l, A umtented Understo ry, Habitat Structures Dimensio n and P ro file mo dified in keeping with reference, livesto ck exclusio n, planting, permananent easement. 90 Feet remo ved fro m creditible fo o tage (50 due o t single sided 413 easement with 40 feet remo ved due to a 50% reductio n resulting fro m 80 feet o f utility cro ssings)
UT2
UT 3 (Headwater)
Existing
710
10+00 - 17+10
710
620
1908
10+00 - 30+54
2054
A ppro ach
E1
P III
1.5
2044
R
Headwater
1
No tes/Co mments
Headwater resto ratio n - valley axis = asset length. 50% reductio n fro m a 20 fo o t utility cro ssing. 2044 Remo ved 10 feet o f creditible fo o tage P lanted, excluded livesto ck, remediated co mpactio n and enco mpassess sectio n o f prio rity 1reach. 4.63 0.66 acres impacted by utility @ 50%, creditible acreage reduced by 0.33 acres
Wetland Gro up 1
RR
4.96
4.96
4.63
R
1
Wetland Gro up 2
RNR
1.12
1.12
1.12
R
1
Wetland Gro up 3
NR
0.86
0.86
0.76
R
1
Remo ved ditching in a seep wetland o utside riparian zo ne. 0.2 acres o f wetland impacted @ 50% by 0.76 utility reducing creditibale acreage by 0.1acres
Wetland Gro up 4
RR
7.86
7.86
7.86
E
2
3.93 Excluded Livesto ck, plugged ditches - hydro enhancement.
Wetland Gro up 5
NR
0
2.11
2.11
C
3
Remo ved abo ut 4 inches o f o verburden neighbo ring P I reach, so ils bo rderline at time o f pre-co n 0.70 assessment, expect develo pment o f features with P I, planted and excluded livesto ck
Wetland Gro up 6
RR
11.4
11.4
10.6
P
5
2.12 Co nservatio n Easement. 1.6 acres o f preservatio n impacted @ 50% by utilities. Remo ved 0.8 acres
B uffer Gro up 1
67,541
67,541
R
1
67,541 Resto red riparian buffer fo r buffer credit
B uffer Gro up 2
16,456
16,456
E
2
8,228 Supplemented riparian buffer plantings
B uffer Gro up 3
485,126
472,168
P
5
1.12 P lugged a ditch, planted and augmented a to e o f slo pe seep within the riparian zo ne
P reserved riparian buffer fo r B uffer Credit. 12,958 SF remo ved fro m creditible buffer to 94,434 acco mmo date utilities
Asset Map: Include all project assets by reach and wetland type as indicted in Asset Table, include monitoring stations (vegetation plots, cross sections, gauges). Format the page layout to best fit the project map, separate Asset Map and Monitoring Station Map if necessary. The example below depicts the stream buffer zone as being adequate in width (yellow line = 50 ft. buffer). If stream buffer widths are a potential concern, suggest depicting the stream buffer areas which exceed, meet or fall short of the required width as defined by physiographic region.
Topographic Map (project extent and watershed delineated)
Soils Map (Use project specific delineation if available, if not use NRCS soils map with soil series clearly labeled.
Remediation Map Include any supplemental planting zones and/or repair areas.
Stream Morphology Data: Cross sections, Longitudinal Profiles, and Morphology Table Ensure that graphs are legible
Hydrology Data: Verification of Bankfull Events Table, Historic Vs. Average Rainfall Graph, Wetland Gauge Data
Wetland Hydrology Data: Include the hydro period performance standard as established in the Mitigation Plan, the total growing season days and dates, and the maximum number of consecutive growing season days success criteria met and associated percentage. If monitoring occurred during a drought, inclusion of reference wetland data if available or comparison of average to actual rainfall data may be useful in interpreting data.
Vegetation Data: Remember to exclude exotics from reported stem densities. Data should be presented by plot and species in stems per acre in current year as well as average density by plot across all years.
EEP Recommendation and Conclusion Briefly summarize the performance standards achieved, the ecological value of the mitigation, and include a statement that requests the project close with the mitigation units as shown in the Asset Table.
Contingencies Do not include ongoing treatments/work in this section such as currently contracted invasive treatment or beaver management. This section is reserved for items that should appear in the IRT closeout summary.
Pre & Post Construction Photos: Include photos of representative reaches
Appendix A: Watershed Planning Context of Project X (To be completed by EEP Planer)
Appendix B: Property Ownership & Protection (To be completed by EEP Property Specialist, this is where the Transfer Illustration will appear if one is required)
Appendix C: Permits & Jurisdictional Determinations (Insert 404, 401, and associated jurisdictional determination for streams and wetlands if available)
Appendix D: Debit Ledger (To be inserted by DMS closeout coordinator)
Appendix E: Additional Data (Reserved for any additional data necessary to support project closure)
