Ecosystem Enhancement Program quarterly report

              North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Michael F. Easley, Governor William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
May 23, 2006
Col. John E. Pulliam, Jr., Commander
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 29402- 1890
Attn: Scott C. McLendon
Re: Memorandum of Agreement ( MOA) Quarterly Report
Dear Colonel Pulliam:
The Ecosystem Enhancement Program ( EEP) is pleased to submit Quarterly Report # 3 of State Fiscal
Year 2005- 2006 to the United States Army Corps of Engineers ( USACE) Wilmington District. This
Quarterly Report addresses the period beginning January 1 and ending March 31, 2006. The materials
presented within provide information as required under Section VII, Part B of the Memorandum of
Agreement among the USACE, the North Carolina Department of Transportation ( NCDOT) and the
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources ( NCDENR), signed into effect on July
22, 2003.
The Ecosystem Enhancement Program is continuing production according to plan. For your information,
the following activities are underway:
• We have received mitigation impact forecasts from the Department of Transportation. This
information has been analyzed and used to project mitigation targets according to timelines and
schedules of the MOA.
• We have been advised that there may be some revised NCDOT impact projections in the near
future. As a result we prepared and submitted a draft biennial budget to the Department of
Transportation based on the current impact projections. We will revise and finalize the biennial
budget once we receive their final impact data and timing.
• We are in the process of awarding over 20,000 feet of stream and 75 acres of wetland
restoration and opened cost proposals for 292,000 feet of stream and 255 acres of wetland
restoration. Our plans are to award appropriate and needed projects by the end of this fiscal
year.
Col. Pulliam
May 23, 2006
Page 2
In closing, the Ecosystem Enhancement Program continues to make significant progress and is committed
to the success of this innovative partnership. We appreciate the continued leadership provided by your
office. Should you have any questions regarding this report, please advise me.
Respectfully,
William D. Gilmore, PE
Director, Ecosystem Enhancement Program
cc: Dempsey Benton, Chief Deputy Secretary, NCDENR
L. A. Sanderson, PE, Highway Administrator, NCDOT
North Carolina Department
of Environment and Natural
Resources
ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT
PROGRAM
QUARTERLY REPORT
January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006
This quarterly report is intended to satisfy reporting
requirements of the Memorandum of Agreement entered into
by the North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources ( NCDENR), the North Carolina
Department of Transportation ( NCDOT), and the United
States Army Corps of Engineers ( USACE), Wilmington
District, on July 22, 2003, for providing compensatory
mitigation through the NCDENR Ecosystem Enhancement
Program to offset impacts to waters and wetlands due to
activities authorized by Clean Water Act permits.
U. S. Army Corps
of Engineers
Wilmington District
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report
January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006
Table of Contents
Page
i. Introduction 3
ii. Report Structure 3
Section I. EEP Restoration, Enhancement, Creation, and Preservation Projects 4
EEP Gross Assets 4
EEP Gross Asset Summary 5
EEP Net Remaining Assets 5
EEP Gross High Quality Preservation Assets 5
Table 1: High Quality Preservation Sites Acquired This Quarter 7
EEP Net High Quality Preservation Assets 8
Section II. Tri- Party Memorandum of Agreement 9
EEP MOA Gross and Net Assets 9
MOA Current Mitigation Requirements, Debits, and Commitments 9
MOA Future Requirements – Remaining NCDOT Projected Impacts 11
MOA Compliance 11
MOA Future Expectations 12
Section III. In Lieu Fee Memorandum of Understanding 13
EEP ILF MOU Assets – Gross and Net Assets 13
ILF MOU Present and Future Quarter Mitigation Requirements 13
MOU Net Asset Balances – Surplus and Deficits 13
MOU Compliance 14
MOU Future Expectations 15
Section IV. Planning 16
Local Watershed Planning for Projected Impacts 16
Section V. Monitoring 17
USGS 8- Digit Cataloging Units Map 18
Section VI. EEP Compliance Action Strategies by Cataloging Unit 19
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 1
Appendix Listing
Appendix A EEP Gross Asset List of Tier 1 Restoration, Enhancement, Creation, and
Preservation Sites
Appendix B Summary of EEP Gross Assets
Appendix C Net Remaining Asset Credits
Appendix D EEP Gross High Quality Preservation Project List and Summary
D1 – EEP Gross HQP Project List and Summary
D2 – EEP Gross HQP Summary
Appendix E Summaries of EEP High Quality Preservation Assets Utilized and
Remaining
E1 - Net Remaining HQP Assets Summary
E2 – Utilized HQP Assets Summary
Appendix F MOA Mitigation Requirements, Debits, and Commitments
F1A - MOA Permit Requirements
F1B - MOA Permit Debits
F2- List of Current EEP MOA Year 3 Mitigation Requirements
F3- Summary of EEP MOA Year 3 Mitigation Requirements
F4- List of EEP MOA Mitigation Commitments
F5- Summary of Remaining EEP MOA Mitigation Commitments
Appendix G MOA Future Requirements - Remaining NCDOT Projected Impacts
Appendix H MOA Net Asset Balances ( Surplus and Deficits as of 3/ 31/ 06)
Appendix I MOA Outstanding Permit Requirements
Appendix J MOU ILF Present and Future Quarter Mitigation Requirements
Appendix K MOU Net Asset Balances ( Surplus and Deficits as of 3/ 31/ 06)
Appendix L MOU Outstanding Permit Requirements
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 2
i. Introduction
This report covers the period beginning January 1, 2006 through March 31, 2006.
This report documents the quarterly status of both the Memorandum of
Understanding ( MOU) between NCDENR and USACE established in 1998 and
Memorandum of Agreement ( MOA) between NCDENR, USACE and NCDOT,
signed July 22, 2003 establishing EEP programs within a single document. It is
expected that the format of this report will evolve as improvements and
adjustments are suggested and made by USACE and other interested parties. For
more information about the agreements, visit our web site at www. nceep. net.
ii. Report Structure
This report is broken into six main sections:
SECTION I. EEP Restoration, Enhancement, Creation, and Preservation Projects.
This section reports the EEP restoration, enhancement, creation, and preservation
projects that have been developed under the MOA and MOU programs. This
section lists EEP projects, provides a summary of Gross Assets, and a summary of
Net Assets.
SECTION II. MOA– This section details specifics regarding the MOA program.
SECTION III. MOU– This section details specifics regarding the MOU program.
SECTION IV. Planning– This section summarizes watershed planning efforts
during the quarter.
SECTION V. Monitoring– This section summarizes project monitoring efforts
during the quarter.
SECTION VI. Compliance Action Strategies by Cataloging Unit– This section
discusses the specific action strategies EEP has in place to address any
outstanding mitigation needs in the various river basins and cataloging units in
North Carolina.
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 3
SECTION I:
EEP RESTORATION, ENHANCEMENT, CREATION, and PRESERVATION
PROJECTS
Section I is a report on the status of the restoration, enhancement, creation, and
preservation projects developed by the Ecosystem Enhancement Program. High
quality preservation ( HQP) projects are also summarized independently of EEP’s
other restoration, enhancement, and preservation projects.
EEP GROSS ASSETS
Currently, EEP has assets exceeding 1,035,223 feet of stream and 17,961 acres of
wetlands. In addition to these, EEP has instituted HQP assets exceeding
1,196,822 linear feet ( nearly 226.7 miles) of streams and 8,273 acres of wetlands.
EEP projects originate from three main areas:
1. Projects that were developed and constructed by NCDOT;
2. Projects that were initiated by the NC DENR Wetlands Restoration
Program; and
3. Projects that have been initiated by the Ecosystem Enhancement Program.
Appendix A: EEP Gross Asset List of Tier 1 Restoration, Enhancement,
Creation, and Preservation Sites contains a complete listing of the current EEP
individual restoration, enhancement, creation, and preservation projects as of
March 31, 2006 by river basin and eight- digit Cataloging Unit ( CU). ( HQP sites
are not listed in this table.) All of the projects listed in Appendix A have had their
mitigation credits transferred to or originated from EEP. For former NCDOT
projects that had completed construction prior to the formation of EEP, only the
undebited remaining restoration, enhancement, or preservation feet/ acres were
transferred. Thus Appendix A only shows the transferred restoration,
enhancement, or preservation remaining for these projects ( i. e. the assets that had
not been utilized by NCDOT). In some cases, former NCDOT projects had no
remaining credits associated with a specific project. These projects are listed as
having no gross assets in Appendix A. All of the other types of projects show the
gross amount of restoration, enhancement, or preservation associated with these
projects. These numbers are subject to change as design or monitoring results are
received.
Projects initiated ( but not completed/ not debited) by NCDOT’s Project
Development and Environmental Analysis Branch prior to the inception of the
EEP are in various stages of implementation. EEP staff is currently managing
these projects. EEP will use these mitigation credits according to the guidelines
of the Tri- Party MOA. The projects that were initiated by NCDOT as full-delivery
projects are currently under contract with NCDOT but are available for
debiting for the purposes of EEP, as determined by credit release schedules.
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 4
Projects that were initiated and developed by the staff of the NCDENR Wetlands
Restoration Program have been acquired as defined by the 1998 MOU between
the USACE and NCDENR, or the EEP Tri- Party 2003 MOA.
EEP GROSS ASSET SUMMARY
Appendix B: Summary of EEP Gross Assets is a summary of the gross assets
by river basin and CU. Appendix B also provides grand totals for the entire state.
These numbers are subject to change as design and/ or monitoring results are
received or as new projects are added into the program. Also, as stated above,
former NCDOT sites that were completed and partially debited prior to the
formation of EEP contain only the remaining credits from each site. This means
that only the remaining credits ( as determined by NCDOT and USACE) were
summarized in this table for NCDOT transferred projects.
EEP NET REMAINING ASSETS
Appendix C: Net Remaining Asset Credits is a summary of the remaining
assets associated with restoration, enhancement, creation, and preservation
projects that EEP currently has available to meet compensatory mitigation
requirements. The remaining assets are summarized for the MOA and MOU
programs, respectively. Note that the assets have been converted into restoration
and restoration- equivalent credits in this table. The amounts of mitigation
provided in the table are the total remaining amount of mitigation available to a
particular project over time. Where credit- release schedules have been
established, EEP will debit from these projects accordingly.
Also note that amounts of mitigation for any project may change from the current
snapshot as additional design and monitoring information becomes available or as
mitigation units are refined as per the goals set forth in the EEP Tri- Party 2003
MOA.
EEP GROSS HIGH QUALITY PRESERVATION ASSETS
Appendix D1: EEP Gross High Quality Preservation Project List and
Summary lists all HQP that EEP has instituted since July 2003 by ecoregion. All
HQP assets are MOA assets. Gross stream and wetland feet or acreages are
subject to change as additional survey work is completed on these sites. EEP has
protected 226.7 miles of stream, along with 6,843 acres of riverine wetland and
1,430 acres of non- riverine wetland. These assets include both properties secured
with recorded option agreements, permanent conservation easements, and fee-simple
purchases.
EEP has completed purchasing transactions for 185 miles of stream buffers and
7,664 acres of wetlands in high- quality riparian and wetland areas throughout the
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 5
state. Nearly $ 66 million has been spent to date to purchase these conservation
lands.
Riverine wetland assets were not increased this quarter based on the DOT
acquisition of the C. Harris Tract. Mitigation assets for wetlands in that tract are
unknown to EEP at this time, but stream footage has been added.
Appendix D2: EEP Gross High Quality Preservation Summary summarizes
the gross HQP assets by ecoregion.
Preservation Site Status as of March 31, 2006
Seven ecoregions have met HQP targets. EEP is working through the
Conservation Trust for North Carolina and the N. C. Coastal Land Trust to acquire
the Waccamaw River Milliken tract, as discussed in previous reports. The land
trust and landowner are still working toward an agreement. The landowner now
may consider a conservation- easement agreement. The State Property Office will
determine value of the easement and this new offer was sent to the landowner at
the end of February. If no agreement is reached, EEP plans to purchase a portion
of another tract that has been approved for use as HQP by the Preservation
Review Committee. This site is within the same ecoregion and has been targeted
by several agencies.
Table 1 examines HQP sites that are being acquired or have been acquired this
quarter, by amount, type, and eight- digit CU based on the Exhibit B anticipated
impacts attachment of the MOA, and also shows projects that were initiated in a
previous quarter and whose status has changed this quarter. This table is
organized by ecoregion to correlate with preservation accounting.
Site status definitions for Table 1:
All sites were reviewed favorably by Preservation Review Committee.
Optioned: Option to purchase obtained by State Property Office.
Closed: Site purchased or easement obtained by State Property Office.
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 6
Table 1: High Quality Preservation Sites Acquired this Quarter
Ecoregion River Preservation Preservation
Basin
Cataloging
Unit
Site Name
Wetland
Assets ( ac)
Stream
Assets ( ft)
Site
Status
Central
Piedmont
Tar- Pamlico 03020102 Tar River Hodges 18 2,075 Closed
03020102 Shocco Creek Alston 1- 3 43 27,760 Closed
03020102 Little Shocco Creek Wheless 4 598 Closed
03020102 Tar River Winslow 2,800 Closed
03020102
Shelton Creek Thorpe &
Morton 2,750 Optioned
03020102 Cedar Creek Perry 12,415 Optioned
03020102 Shocco Creek Gupton 3,882 Optioned
03020102 Shelton Creek Slaughter 2,400 Optioned
03020102 Tar River Dean 4,750 Optioned
Yadkin 03040105 Dutch Buffalo Creek Wickliff 180 Closed
03040105 Dutch Buffalo Creek Walker 2,428 Closed
03040104 Little River Parker 4,118 Closed
03040103 Uwharrie River Whatley 2,500 Optioned
Total CPD 65 68,656
Northern Inner
Coastal Plain Tar- Pamlico 03020102 Fishing Creek Edwards 1 7.5 4,756 Closed
Total NICP 7.5 4,756
Southern
Piedmont Cape Fear 03030003
Glendon Slate Creek Paschal 1,329 Optioned
Cape Fear 03030003 Deep River M. Paschal 6,700 Optioned
Cape Fear 03030003 Deep River P. Paschal 6,327 Optioned
Total SPD 14,356
Southern Inner
Coastal Plain Cape Fear 03030006 Big Pond Bay Gardner 21.9 Optioned
Total SICP 21.9
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 7
EEP NET HIGH QUALITY PRESERVATION ASSETS
Appendix E1: Net Remaining HQP Assets Summary lists the net remaining
HQP assets available to EEP for future compensatory mitigation needs by eco-region.
All HQP assets are currently MOA assets. Stream feet and/ or wetland
acreages are subject to change as additional survey work is completed on sites.
Across the state EEP has net HQP assets of 639,501 feet ( 121 miles) of stream,
6,239 acres of riverine wetlands and 1,145 acres of non- riverine wetland. These
assets include both properties secured with recorded option agreements,
permanent conservation easements, and fee- simple purchases.
Appendix E2: Utilized HQP Assets Summary summarizes the amount of HQP
assets that have thus far been used by EEP to offset compensatory mitigation
needs.
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 8
SECTION II:
TRI- PARTY MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT ( MOA)
This section of the report provides specifics with regard to the EEP Tri- Party
2003 MOA. Specifically, this section describes the current EEP mitigation
acceptances under the MOA, the debits that have been made thus far, the schedule
for future debits, and the remaining projected impacts that NCDOT has supplied
that may indicate when future requirements may occur.
EEP MOA GROSS AND NET ASSETS
Both gross and net assets are listed in appendices B and C as described in
Section I.
MOA CURRENT MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS, DEBITS, AND
COMMITMENTS
This section describes EEP’s current regulatory requirements, debits, and
commitments for the MOA program. The structure of this section has
been modified from previous quarterly reports in an attempt to provide
additional clarity.
In order for EEP to assume mitigation responsibility for NCDOT
permitted impacts, the EEP, the regulatory agencies, and the NCDOT
follow rigorous procedures.
In accordance with the TriParty MOA, NCDOT forecasts impacts
associated with each of its transportation projects. EEP uses this projected
impact information to develop restoration, enhancement, creation, and
preservation projects sufficient to meet mitigation needs and timelines.
Approximately six- to- nine months in advance of an individual NCDOT
transportation project letting, NCDOT formally submits a request to EEP
to provide the mitigation. EEP reviews each requests and submits
acceptance letters to the NCDOT and the regulatory agencies for each
project where EEP assumes mitigation responsibility. These acceptance
letters are used during NCDOT’s permitting process. Typically there is a
three- to- six month time period between EEP’s acceptance letters and the
permit issuance. The permit specifies the responsible party ( EEP for off-site
mitigation), location, amount, and type of the mitigation. Prior to
permit issuances, all EEP issued acceptance letters are considered
“ commitments.” After permit issuances, EEP’s commitments are
transformed into mitigation “ requirements.” The permit issuance date
determines the timeframes when EEP must provide the mitigation ( this
time frame is often called the debit- due date).
Debit- due dates for compensatory mitigation are outlined in Section IX
and Section X of the Tri- Party MOA. During the transition period, the
debit- due date for all issued permits was July 22, 2005 ( the end of the
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 9
transition period). For permits issued in MOA Years 3, 4, and 5, the debit-due
date for mitigation occurs at the end of the MOA year when the permit
requiring mitigation is issued. Starting in MOA Year 6, the debit- due date
shifts to the permit issuance date.
Appendix F is a series of five tables listing data for MOA Mitigation
Requirements, Debits, and Commitments.
F1A- MOA Permit Requirements and F1B- MOA Permit Debits lists all
mitigation requirements that were due as of March 31, 2006 and lists mitigation
debits that have been made to offset those requirements.
F2- Current EEP MOA Year 3 Mitigation Requirements lists projects for
which permits have been accepted, issued and received by EEP in MOA Year 3.
Mitigation is due for these projects on July 22, 2006. The table also lists HQP
sites that have been debited and applied in advance of the official mitigation due
date. The list of Year 3 mitigation requirements will grow as additional permits
are issued during MOA Year 3. As of March 31, 2006, EEP has received permits
for 12 projects permitted in Year 3. The mitigation for these 12 projects will be
due on July 22, 2006.
F3- Summary of EEP MOA Year 3 Mitigation Requirements summarizes
remaining mitigation requirements for projects listed in Appendix F2. The
mitigation due date for these requirements is July 22, 2006.
F4- List of EEP MOA Mitigation Commitments lists projects in which EEP has
issued mitigation acceptance letters, but permits have not yet been
issued/ received. The mitigation due date is determined by issuance date and
Section IX and X of the TriParty MOA. Since these projects have not yet been
permitted, mitigation has not yet been required. However, EEP has applied some
credits in advance. The table lists the HQP sites that have been debited and
applied in advance of the official mitigation due date.
Mitigation commitments that have permits issued in MOA Year 3 will be due on
July 22, 2006. Projects that have permits issued in other time periods will be due
according to the requirements specified in Section X of the MOA.
Note that the impacts and mitigation requirements listed in table F4 are
projections only. The actual finalized impacts and mitigation requirements will
not be known until permits are issued. However, the table does list the amount of
mitigation that EEP has thus far committed to provide for these projects as
detailed in EEP’s mitigation acceptance letters.
F5- Summary of Remaining EEP MOA Mitigation Commitments summarizes
the list of commitments detailed in Appendix F4.
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 10
MOA FUTURE REQUIREMENTS - REMAINING NCDOT PROJECTED IMPACTS
Appendix G: MOA Future Requirements - Remaining NCDOT Projected
Impacts is a summary of the projected NCDOT transportation project impacts
associated with NCDOT’s seven- year Transportation Improvement Plan ( TIP).
Appendix G is summarized by MOA impact year, river basin, and CU. The data
in Appendix G originates from the original seven- year impact forecast submitted
by NCDOT to EEP in February 2006. Some of the individual project impact
projections have been updated by more recently collected field data. These
revised impacts were submitted by NCDOT on a project- by- project basis over the
last quarter. Appendix G has also been updated to show only the remaining
forecasted impacts covering the seven- year projection time period. In other
words, since February 2006 some of the original forecasted impacts are no longer
forecasts, as NCDOT has formally requested that EEP accept mitigation
responsibility for specific impacts associated with the transportation projects.
Appendix G shows only those projects where NCDOT has yet to request
mitigation or where EEP has not yet formally accepted mitigation responsibility.
NCDOT divisions were unable to provide impacts by individual MOA Year and
developed a lump- sum estimate for seven years. This lump- sum amount was
spread evenly through each of the seven- year TIP years.
All projects that were projected to occur in MOA Years 1 or 2 and that were not
accepted or permitted during the transition period are now included as MOA Year
3 impact projections.
The TIP list is a dynamic list where individual project let dates frequently move in
time. Major accelerations or volatility of project lettings or impact projections
could result in major changes to EEP’s potential mitigation requirements and
EEP’s procurement strategies.
MOA COMPLIANCE
During the current quarter, MOA compliance improved slightly since the last
quarter. Stream compliance increased slightly as 247 additional credits of stream
mitigation requirements were met. Riverine and non nonriverine wetland
compliance remained the same. The total number of permits with remaining
outstanding mitigation remained at 14 permits during the current quarter.
At the end of the last quarter, stream compliance was 98.2%, riverine wetland
compliance was 84.3%, and nonriverine wetland compliance was 98.21%. By the
end of this quarter, stream compliance improved to 98.4%, riverine and
nonriverine compliance remained the same at 84.3% and 98.21% respectively.
The magnitude of outstanding stream mitigation dropped ( by 9%) to 2421.6
stream credits. The magnitude of outstanding riverine and nonriverine wetland
mitigation remained at 13.68 credits and 3.99 credits respectively.
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 11
A complete listing of the MOA permit requirements not in full compliance is
listed in Appendix I: MOA Outstanding Permit Requirements. Thirteen of
the 14 permits needing additional mitigation have been partially fulfilled. EEP’s
Compliance Action Strategies for outstanding mitigation requirements are
detailed in Section VI.
MOA FUTURE EXPECTATIONS
MOA Compliance is expected to remain steady through the current MOA Year.
Substantial advanced mitigation has already been achieved for MOA Year 4 and
MOA Year 5. Significant additional mitigation projects are expected to be
secured during the fourth quarter. Appendix H: MOA Net Asset Balances
( Surplus and Deficits) shows the current health of the program by showing the
current net surpluses and deficits associated with the MOA program as of March
31, 2006.
As shown in Appendix C, EEP has obtained 455,926 surplus stream credits,
2,828.78 surplus riverine wetland credits, 6,477.57 surplus nonriverine wetland
credits, and 137.31 surplus coastal- marsh wetland credits. These surpluses do not
include surplus HQP assets. EEP is aggressively pursuing and instituting
mitigation assets in preparation for the large NCDOT mitigation needs associated
with MOA Years 3, 4, and 5.
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 12
SECTION III:
IN LIEU FEE ( ILF) MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ( MOU)
EEP ILF MOU ASSETS – GROSS AND NET ASSETS
Both gross and net assets are listed in appendices B and C as described in Section
I.
ILF MOU PRESENT AND FUTURE QUARTER MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS
The MOU program had 42 new requirements that became due this quarter,
representing 12,112 credits of stream, 11.306 credits of riverine- wetland, 6.05
credits of nonriverine- wetland, and 0.00 credits of coastal- marsh requirements. A
complete summary of the requirements that became due is listed in Appendix J:
MOU ILF Present and Future Quarter Mitigation Requirements. Appendix J
also lists requirements that will become due over the next quarter. As mentioned
during the last quarterly report, the requirements associated with the last and
future quarters represent a decrease in the overall amount of stream and wetland
requirements that will become due from historical levels ( though the current
quarter can be consider an increase under the new scale). This decrease is a result
of NCDOT departing the ILF MOU program. Almost all new NCDOT mitigation
requirements are now being handled under the Tri- Party MOA.
MOU NET ASSET BALANCES – Surplus and Deficits
Unlike the Tri- Party MOA program, the goal of which is to develop assets up to
seven years in advance of permitted impacts, the MOU program is designed to
produce instituted mitigation assets one year after the permit has been issued.
Another major objective of the MOU program is to have an in- lieu fee appropriate
to pay the actual cost of restoration. Together, these two goals result in a delicate
balance of building assets in just the right sizes and just the right amounts in each
of the CUs to offset permitted requirements. In order to capitalize on efficiencies
of scale, restoration project sizes tend to be large. On the other hand, ILF
mitigation requirements tend to be very small. Thus there is always the potential
to create surplus assets in some CUs and deficits in other CUs. The MOU
program is at optimal performance when there are zero surplus assets and zero
requirement deficits, and zero remaining funds.
The current net ILF program- asset balances ( surpluses and deficits) are shown in
Appendix K: MOU Net Asset Balances ( Surplus and Deficits). The ILF
program has produced a net asset balance of 43,784 surplus stream credits, 155.71
surplus riverine wetlands credits, 124.81 surplus nonriverine wetland credits, and
3.54 surplus coastal marsh wetland credits.
These surplus- asset balances show a decrease from the previous quarter in net
balances for streams, increases in riparian wetlands and nonriparian wetlands and
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 13
no change for coastal marsh wetlands. During the last quarter, the stream net
asset balance was 56,055 credits of stream, 134.90 credits of riverine wetlands,
124.95 credits of nonriverine wetlands, and 3.54 credits of coastal- marsh
wetlands.
( Note that the total amounts of MOU surplus credits are shown in Appendix C.
The total surplus credits are larger because outstanding requirements ( deficits)
are not considered in Appendix C).
MOU COMPLIANCE
The amount of noncompliance ( as measured in credits) decreased significantly
during the current quarter despite the addition of 42 new requirements.
Interestingly, the percentage of requirements in compliance remained about the
same.
During the last quarter 95.8% of requirements were fully met. This quarter 95.2%
of requirements were fully met. As of March 31, the MOU program had 542 total
requirements. Of these, 516 are compliant, seven are in partial compliance and 19
are in non- compliance. Therefore the EEP has 95.2 % of all MOU requirements
in full compliance, 1.29% in partial compliance and 3.5% in non- compliance.
During the previous quarter, 21 requirements had been in partial ( 4) or complete
( 17) noncompliance.
Of these 26 non- compliant requirements, 20 were related to wetland requirements,
and six were related to stream requirements. At the end of the quarter, 277 of 283
stream requirements ( or 97.9%) were compliant. Overall, wetland compliance is
similar at 91.9% ( 227 of 247).
The magnitude of outstanding stream requirements decreased significantly. At
the end of the last quarter, EEP had not met 6,241 credits of stream mitigation.
As of March 31, 2006, the remaining outstanding stream mitigation needs were
4,363 stream credits, or an improvement of 1,878 credits. This represents over a
30% improvement in outstanding stream- mitigation needs.
The magnitude of outstanding riverine requirements decreased from 21.69
wetland credits to 21.43 wetland credits.
The magnitude of outstanding nonriverine requirements increased from 0.90
wetland credits to 1.40 wetland credits.
Overall outstanding wetland needs increased by 0.24 wetland credits during the
current quarter.
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 14
A complete listing of the permit requirements not in full compliance is listed in
Appendix L: MOU Outstanding Permit Requirements. A narrative addressing
EEP action plans for non- compliant CUs is included in this report in Section VI.
MOU FUTURE EXPECTATIONS
The status of the MOU program is expected to continue to improve over the
course of the fiscal year. Additional buying and selling of excess assets between
the MOA and MOU programs is expected to continue. These transactions will
result in improved compliance capabilities for both programs.
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 15
SECTION IV:
PLANNING
LOCAL WATERSHED PLANNING ( LWP) FOR PROJECTED IMPACTS
In Quarter 3, EEP began several new initiatives:
• Phase IV scope of work was developed for the Bald Creek LWP.
• Phase II efforts in the Lockwoods Folly River LWP area.
• Phase IV efforts in the Stoney Creek LWP area.
• Phase II stakeholder team efforts in the Fishing Creek LWP area.
• Phase I efforts in the White Oak LWP area.
• Phase I efforts in the Tickle and Travis Creeks LWP area.
• Phase IV efforts in the Morgan and Little Creeks LWP area.
• Phase IV efforts in the Troublesome and Little Troublesome Creeks LWP area.
EEP continued the following initiatives:
• Phase I efforts in Alamance County area.
• Phase IV efforts the Cathey’s Creek LWP area.
• Phases I and II work in Peachtree- Martins Creek LWP area.
• Phases II and III work in Lower Creek area.
• Phase II efforts in Little River and Brush Creek LWP area.
• Phase III work in the Bald Creek LWP.
• Phase I efforts in the Fishing Creek LWP area.
• Phases II and III efforts in the Little Lick Creek LWP area.
• EEP continued Phase IV efforts to implement plans in the Kerr Scott Reservoir/ Wilkes
County LWP, Upper Rocky River and Coddle Creek LWP, Stoney Creek LWP, and
the Charlotte LWP. The Charlotte Phase IV initiative is focused on stormwater Best
Management Practices ( BMPs).
EEP completed the following initiatives:
• Preliminary Watershed Characterization in the Peachtree- Martins Creek LWP.
• Watershed Management Plan for the South Hominy Creek LWP.
• Met with Stoney Creek stakeholder team to present final Phase III findings.
• Phase III efforts in the Middle Tar- Pamlico LWP area.
• Phase I efforts in the Lower Neuse LWP area.
• Phase IV Bear Swamp LWP report.
• Project sites identified by Watershed Management Plans/ Project Atlases were verified
as viable for restoration for the Troublesome and Little Troublesome Creek LWP,
Catheys Creek LWP, South Hominy Creek LWP, Morgan and Little Creeks LWP,
Pasquotank River LWP, Lower Yadkin LWP, Cranes Creek LWP, Middle Cape Fear
LWP, Bear Swamp LWP, Upper Swift Creek LWP, and Little Lick Creek LWP.
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 16
Eco system Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 17
SECTION V:
MONITORING
For Quarter 3 of fiscal year 2005- 2006, the Monitoring Section oversaw the contracting
and management of 76 projects with 16 monitoring firms. Fifty- two of these projects
included stream components comprising approximately 200,000 linear feet, with 30
projects possessing wetland components totaling approximately 7,000 acres.
The following represents the specific activities for the monitoring staff during Quarter 3:
1. Reviewed and commented on monitoring reports, restoration plans, and
mitigation plans for 116 projects, including both design- bid build and full
delivery.
2. Participation in the field review of full delivery proposals received during this
quarter.
3. Data/ Information management in for the form of document control and
population of the EEP database for a large number of projects.
4. Initiation of web posting of 2005 monitoring reports.
5. Continued development and refinement of monitoring related policies.
6. Continued document and data collection standardization including the
development of new vegetation monitoring protocols and a web- based data
collection system.
7. Development and refinement of EEP research objectives.
8. Oversight of existing EEP research grants.
9. Oversight and development of needed maintenance designs and contracts.
10. Site visitation for Quality Assurance/ Quality Control purposes.
11. Special project involvement/ oversight:
i. Oversight of a pilot BMP project in Mooresville, NC.
ii. Participation in committees and workgroups:
- BMP committee tasked with developing new credit structures for
application to stream and wetland mitigation requirements.
- Habitat committee
iii. Co- management of an innovative coastal headwater stream design.
Eco system Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 18
SECTION VI:
EEP COMPLIANCE ACTION STRATEGIES BY CATALOGING UNIT
Action Strategies for Non- Compliant Cataloging Units
CATAWBA 03050101
Outstanding Mitigation Required
Description Restoration Restoration Equivalent
Streams 148 0
Riparian 2.95 0.45
Non- Riparian 2.38 0.16
Coastal Marsh 0 0
Background:
Catawba 03050101 has historically been a high impact CU. There have been 54
requirements paid and now due in the MOU program ( 41 stream, 12 riparian, and one
nonriparian). The MOA program has 11 requirements ( six stream and two riparian
wetland, and three nonriparian wetland). The number of requests is not surprising since
Catawba 03050101 is one of the largest CUs in the state and is one of the faster growing
areas in the state.
EEP has also been tremendously successful at implementing projects in Catawba
03050101, having instituted over 120,000 feet of stream restoration, enhancement,
creation, and preservation projects ( not including HQP) in the CU. The current 148
outstanding stream- mitigation credit needs are considered only to be an unanticipated
temporal problem and will be remedied during the next quarter as new restoration
projects are instituted.
The Catawba 03050101 CU developed outstanding stream mitigation in Quarter 1 2005-
2006 as a result of asset reductions that had occurred to two sites in Catawba 03050103.
Each site had landowner issues that effectively reduced the project size, and on one of the
sites, a potential hazardous dump was discovered that further reduced the length of the
project. As a consequence of these asset reductions, assets in Catawba 03050101 were
used to offset the older MOU requirements in Catawba 03050103 that had previous
authorization by the USACE and N. C. Division of Water Quality ( DWQ) to utilize
southern Catawba 03050101 assets ( per May 21, 2004 regulatory letter to EEP.) Since
that time, EEP successfully offset 8,406 of the initial outstanding requirements. As stated
above, the remaining 48 outstanding stream requirements will be met during the fourth
quarter. By the end of the fourth quarter, EEP anticipates that this CU will again have
surplus stream mitigation.
As stated in the last quarterly report, riparian mitigation in Catawba 01 is difficult to
offset since the average size of wetlands in the Piedmont is between three and five acres,
and in the Mountains is between zero and one acre. However, EEP has been successful at
acquiring riverine- mitigation projects through the full- delivery process and is actively
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 19
pursuing these sites through its watershed planning efforts. The long- term outlook for
this CU remains positive. At this time, there appear to be stream- and wetland- mitigation
opportunities in the CU.
CU Immediate Action Plan:
The current stream mitigation action plan for this CU is to implement the acquired
Hoppers Creek project to meet the 148 outstanding stream- mitigation needs. Once
implemented, Catawba 01 will again have surplus stream credits.
To address outstanding wetland needs, EEP is utilizing a two- pronged approach:
( 1) EEP issued a full- delivery RFP request for 25 riparian and five nonriparian
wetland credits in this CU. The submittals for this RFP will be reviewed and
contracted during the next quarter. If successful, the projects resulting from the
RFP will completely satisfy all current and projected requirements in this CU for
the next six permitting years. If the RFP fails to produce the quantities requested,
EEP plans to reissue the RFP in this CU.
( 2) EEP is also utilizing existing LWPs and project staff to identify and implement
stream and wetland projects sufficient to offset the remaining stream, riparian,
and nonriparian- wetland mitigation needs. Implementing Hoppers Creek will
restore at least one riparian credit.
CU Long- Range Action Plan:
The primary strategy for stream in this CU is for EEP to implement currently identified
Tier II, III and untiered sites. The primary strategy for wetlands is to procure mitigation
through the full- delivery process and to complete and implement the Lower Creek LWP.
EEP is also assessing whether any of its older projects restored/ created nonriverine
wetlands that can be used for credits.
Strategies being considered ( but not being implemented at this time) include potentially
requesting adjacent CU policy for wetlands and potentially implementing the results of
the alternative mitigation committee.
Notes: EEP issued a RFP for riverine wetland- restoration projects in 2004; received and
accepted proposals for 19.5 acres of riverine restoration. In 2004, EEP requested 80,000
credits stream, 75 credits riverine, and five credits nonriverine, and accepted proposals of
25,103 credits stream and 5.3 credits riverine. The 2005 RFP requested 5,000 stream
credits, 25 riverine credits, and five nonriverine credits. The 2005 RFP will be assessed
and awarded during the next quarter. The ILF MOU program is allowed to use credits
located in the southern half of Catawba 01 for impacts to Catawba 03 ( per regulatory
letter to EEP).
LWP: Lower Creek LWP
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 20
Current Tier II/ III Projects: The table below shows EEP’s current design bid build
projects being developed, the MOA Year ( Y) they are expected to be developed, and the
amount of potential Restoration Credits ( R) and Restoration Equivalent Credits ( RE)
associated with each project are listed in the table below.
DESIGN BID BUILD Stream
Riparian
Wetlands
Nonriparian
Wetlands
Coastal
Marsh
Project Name Y Tier R RE R RE R RE R RE
Hoppers Creek 3 2
3,500
160
1.00
Muddy Creek 3 2
3,500
Lower Creek 4 2
3,500
Total Design Bid Build
10,500
160
1.00
-
-
-
-
-
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 21
CATAWBA 03050103
Outstanding Mitigation Required
Description Restoration Restoration Equivalent
Streams 0 0
Riparian 4.75 4.17
Non- Riparian 0 0
Coastal Marsh 0 0
Background:
The status of this CU remained unchanged since the last quarter. Catawba 03050103 has
been identified as a critical CU watershed in the state by EEP, as it is a very difficult CU
to produce compensatory mitigation for streams and wetlands. The Catawba 03050103 is
comprised mostly of the greater Charlotte metropolitan area. Most streams in Catawba
03050103 are degraded and have experienced the growing pains of 200 years of
urbanization and, more recently, suburban sprawl. Urbanization presents challenges in
producing stream- mitigation projects due to the heavy constraints often in place along
these streams. Typical constraints include sewer lines along and in the streams;
residential, industrial and commercial development in the floodplain; FEMA regulated
streams; hazardous waste; stormwater outlets; unknown pipe outlets; local ordinances;
leaking sewer lines; chemical spills; local landfills within the stream; the relative large
size of streams per acre watershed; large numbers of landowners per potential project
site; etc. Each of these constraints limits the type and size of the potential stream-restoration
project, and also significantly increases the cost of these projects.
Nevertheless, EEP has worked closely with Mecklenburg County, the City of Charlotte,
and the regulatory agencies to produce adequate stream- mitigation projects to
compensate for impacts. However, since impacts are continuing at a rapid rate, it is
unlikely that EEP can continue to produce traditional stream- mitigation projects within
the Cataloging Unit at the same rate that mitigation requirements are being produced.
Wetlands restoration is extremely limited within this CU. Currently, nearly all of
remaining wetlands within the CU are located along large river floodplains, or are
relatively small mafic- type depressional wetlands. These wetlands are continually being
impacted, as development and urbanization is occurring at very high levels within this
CU. Restoration opportunities for these types of wetlands do not exist in any significant
quantity within this CU. Most of the historical wetlands loss is currently occupied either
by development or located along riparian systems. Wetlands restoration along riparian
systems is also typically not possible because the streams are regulated under stringent
FEMA no- rise regulations. In order to perform most riparian- wetlands restoration, the
stream level often needs to be elevated so that the stream can access its historic
floodplain. FEMA and local regulations make this exceedingly difficult in most of this
CU. Also, raising flood elevations is problematic because of the amount of floodplain
development located in this CU. Finally, locating suitable wetlands- restoration
opportunities has been made more difficult because of the soil mapping in Mecklenburg
County. The current Mecklenburg Division of Soil and Water soil map has not indicated
any hydric A soils. While hydric A soils certainly exist in Mecklenburg, the maps do not
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 22
detail their locations. Typically floodplains are mapped as Monacan soils, which often
have hydric inclusions.
Another problem associated with wetlands restoration within this CU is the amount of
time it will take for a specific wetlands- restoration project to be constructed. Due to
FEMA and local regulations, most wetlands projects will need to undergo a long flood-level
modeling and evaluation period. The result is one to three additional years to
complete construction beyond projects that do not require this level of modeling.
The overall degree of difficulty in identifying stream and wetlands restoration
opportunities is reflected in the results of the last five RFPs issued by EEP and the
Wetlands Restoration Program. After five RFP requests, EEP/ WRP has received zero
wetland project submittals and only two small stream projects. The stream projects were
located along the outer edge of the developing regions. The last four requests have
received no response. The current RFP has had some submittals. These submittals will
be reviewed during the next quarter.
Historically, there have been 40 requirements paid and now due in the MOU Program in
Catawba 03050103. Of these, 33 have been stream requirements, six riparian
requirements and one nonriparian requirement. The MOA program has had no
requirements due in Catawba 03 as of September 30, 2005.
CU Immediate Action Plan:
The lower Catawba CU is a chronic problem and critical watershed for implementing
stream- and wetland- mitigation projects due to the urban nature of the CU, local and
federal laws, and flooding concerns. Also, there is very little opportunity for high- quality
wetland projects. The EEP is relying on a number of traditional and alternative strategies
to meet this need.
1. Issuance of an RFP for 15,000 stream credits, 25 riverine credits, and five
nonriverine credits during the quarter. ( Note: EEP received a few
submittals for the current RFP. The current RFP review and awards are
expected to occur during the next quarter.)
2. Implementation of nontraditional projects based on the Charlotte LWP
Initiative. Numerous sites identified through this planning effort have
yielded nontraditional wetland- and stream- mitigation opportunities. Sites
have been reviewed during the last quarter; EEP needs more guidance on
credit potential of these sites. EEP has formed an Alternative Mitigation
Steering Committee and multiple technical work teams to investigate
developing, crediting, and utilizing nontraditional forms of mitigation. The
Alternative Mitigation Steering Committee presented some functional/ credit
studies completed by EEP to the Program Assessment and Consistency
Group Technical Committee ( PACG- TC) during the last quarter.
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 23
3. Evaluation of the CU for wetlands- preservation opportunities that may be
able to provide some mitigation credit towards the wetland deficits. EEP
Planning has identified multiple preservation sites and is directing local
watershed planning to identify and assess these sites. EEP requests an
approval and guidance letter from USACE and DWQ on using preservation
for mitigation in the CU to offset restoration needs.
4. Use existing or generate new assets in the lower portion of Catawba
03050101. EEP has approval from USACE ( reference letter May 21, 2004
from Ken Jolly to Bill Gilmore) to use wetlands assets in the lower portion
of Catawba 03050101 to offset these deficits. EEP currently has no
additional assets in Catawba 01 that could be used for mitigation needs in
Catawba 03. The last full- delivery RFP in Catawba 01 yielded fewer
wetlands than anticipated. EEP is also issuing a new request in Catawba 01
to address wetland needs in Catawba 01 and 03.
5. Due to the extreme hardship in providing mitigation in Catawba 03, the
PACG- TC and PACG are reviewing the service area for providing
mitigation to impacts in Catawba 03. The results of their review are
expected in the next quarter and pending such authorization, EEP will
deliver strategies to satisfy needs accordingly.
6. Evaluation of wetlands restoration on Chewacla soils. EEP has discussed
with USACE the possibility of pursuing wetlands restoration sites with
Chewacla soil types in association with priority one stream restoration
opportunities. No new sites were identified during the last quarter.
HIWASSEE 06020002
Background:
The Hiwassee River Basin has historically been an area of limited activity for EEP. As a
result it has taken the program more time to develop restoration projects. At the end of
the transition period on July 22, 2005, EEP did not have the restoration available to
supplement the HQP used to cover impacts during the transition. Until the restoration
has been instituted, EEP is continuing to cover the affected permit with 10: 1 preservation.
Outstanding Mitigation Required
Description Restoration Restoration Equivalent
Streams 2,101 0
Riparian 0.82 0
Non- Riparian 0 0
Coastal Marsh 0 0
CU Immediate Action Plan:
Compliance improved by 247 stream credits during the current quarter. EEP currently
has identified three projects totaling approximately 14,000 feet of stream restoration and
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 24
eight riparian restoration credits for which land- acquisition negotiations are underway.
Once these projects are instituted, EEP will have surplus stream and wetland credits in
this Cataloging Unit.
CU Long- Range Action Plan:
EEP is developing a LWP in this CU in partnership with the Hiwassee River Watershed
Coalition to continue to develop quality restoration opportunities to meet current and
future needs in this CU.
LITTLE TENNESSEE 06010203
Background:
The first and only ILF requirement for 288 linear feet came due in this CU in early 2005.
The use of the ILF program for this river basin is a new activity.
Very small impacts in remote CUs that have little to no activity can be problematic for
the ILF program for two main reasons. First, EEP builds projects that average about
3,000 feet for streams, five acres for riparian wetlands, and 10 acres for nonriparian
wetlands. ( There are some geographic variations to these averages.) Since the ILF
program charges the average cost of mitigation for each applicant paying into the
program, the ILF program does not have sufficient funds to build surplus credits in these
remote regions. Therefore, there is a balancing act in terms of managing the funding and
producing sufficient mitigation projects to adequately offset mitigation needs. Also,
some CUs in the state are experiencing heavy activity and heavy mitigation demands.
Because of the relative needs of other CUs, EEP will often prioritize where to place its
staff and monetary resources in order to maximize the effectiveness of the ILF program.
Thus, very small deficits in remote CUs that experience little activity are expected in the
ILF program from time to time. EEP has recommended to USACE and DWQ that new
policies need to be developed to appropriately evaluate how and when EEP should
address these small impacts.
Outstanding Mitigation Required
Description Restoration Restoration Equivalent
Streams 144 144
Riparian 0 0
Non- Riparian 0 0
Coastal Marsh 0 0
CU Immediate Action Plan:
EEP has issued a full delivery RFP for this CU to offset the outstanding mitigation as
well as to address upcoming MOA needs. The request is for 15,000 linear feet of stream
restoration, three acres of riverine wetland restoration, and five acres of non- riverine
wetland restoration. Proposals related to this RFP came due on March 14, 2006.
Assuming that the program receives proposals that meet staff reviews of technical merit
and cost, EEP will fund a stream project with ILF funds to offset these outstanding needs,
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 25
and thus satisfy this requirement. The results of this RFP will be known during the next
quarter.
LUMBER 03040203
Background:
Historically there has been very little activity in this CU. To date, only five MOU
requirements and seven MOA requirements have been accepted and become due in
Lumber 03040203. Of these, three were stream, seven were riparian wetland, and three
were nonriparian. The sum of each of these requirements was fairly small in magnitude,
with one moderately large stream impact. Consequently, little project development has
been needed to provide sufficient projects to offset requirements. During the previous
quarter, two projects experienced asset changes based on changed restoration designs.
These changes reduced the number of riparian and nonriparian wetland credits available
to offset mitigation requirements and resulted in the current outstanding mitigation needs.
Middle Swamp Creek will only be a stream restoration, and Bush Island is only a
nonriparian preservation project. Before these design changes, asset totals were expected
to provide enough mitigation to address mitigation needs through MOA Year 4. Thus,
the outstanding mitigation needs are relatively new and were unanticipated. However,
mitigation opportunities exist within the watershed, and replacement mitigation is seen
only as a temporal problem.
Outstanding Mitigation Required
Description Restoration Restoration Equivalent
Streams 0 0
Riparian 9.95 3.51
Non- Riparian 0 0
Coastal Marsh 0 0
Action Plan:
The current Action Plan for this CU is to initiate Phase 4 of the Bear Swamp LWP Plan
for this CU ( currently in Phase 3) for this deficit and to use the LWP to identify sufficient
future stream and riverine mitigation sites. EEP has identified one stream and one
wetland project through the LWP process thus far. The wetland project is projected to
produce 25 riparian restoration credits and 13.30 riparian restoration equivalent credits.
The stream project is projected to produce 4,400 stream restoration credits. The wetland
project is targeted for acquisition in the next quarter. As soon as these projects become
assets, this CU will have surplus stream and wetland credits though additional long range
needs have been projected.
CU Long- Range Action Plan:
The long range plan for this CU is to complete and implement projects identified in the
Bear Swamp Local Watershed Plan. Additionally, EEP plans to utilize the Full Delivery
process in this area to supplement production for long range mitigation needs.
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 26
LUMBER 03040204
Background:
Lumber 03040204 CU is an extremely low activity CU. Since the inception of the
Wetlands Restoration Program in 1996, no entity has utilized the MOU program for
streams or wetlands. The Tri- Party MOA program had one permit with a requirement for
0.28 credits of nonriverine mitigation during the transition period.
Outstanding Mitigation Required
Description Restoration Restoration Equivalent
Streams 0 0
Riparian 0.14 0.14
Non- Riparian 0 0
Coastal Marsh 0 0
Action Plan:
Due to the relative lack of historical activity for EEP in the watershed, EEP issued a full-delivery
RFP for in this CU during the quarter for 5,000 stream, 16 riverine- wetland, and
five nonriverine- wetland credits. These amounts were expected to cover NCDOT
projected mitigation needs through MOA Year 4 in the CU, as well as the immediate
outstanding needs. Results of the RFP will be known during the next quarter. If the
current RFP fails to produce sufficient mitigation assets, EEP plans to reissue the RFP.
LUMBER 03040207
Background:
Lumber 03040207 CU is an extremely low activity CU. Since the inception of the
Wetlands Restoration Program in 1996, two payments have been made that are currently
due. The MOA program has not had any requirements in Lumber 03040207. The
outstanding requirements were new last quarter.
Outstanding Mitigation Required
Description Restoration Restoration Equivalent
Streams 0 0
Riparian 0 0
Non- Riparian 0.69 0.25
Coastal Marsh 0 0
Action Plan:
Due to the relative lack of historical activity for EEP in the watershed, EEP issued a full-delivery
RFP for in this CU during the last quarter for 5,000 stream, three riverine
wetland, and 10 nonriverine- wetland credits. These amounts were expected to cover
NCDOT projected mitigation needs through MOA Year 4 in the CU, as well as the
immediate outstanding needs. Results of the RFP will be known during the next quarter.
If the current RFP fails to produce sufficient mitigation assets, EEP plans to reissue the
RFP.
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 27
NEUSE 03020201
Background:
EEP has been extremely successful at implementing projects in the Neuse 03020201 CU,
having instituted 102,703 feet of stream restoration, enhancement, creation, and
preservation projects ( not including HQP) and over 472 acres of wetland restoration,
enhancement, creation, and preservation projects ( not including HQP). The current 1,122
outstanding stream- mitigation credits are a result of an accounting error ( 1300 credits)
that was identified during the current quarter, combined with 4,732 stream credit
requirements becoming due during the current quarter. The current shortfall is
considered only to be an unanticipated temporal problem and will be remedied during the
next quarter as a new restoration project is instituted.
Outstanding Mitigation Required
Description Restoration Restoration Equivalent
Streams 120 1,002
Riparian 0 0
Non- Riparian 0 0
Coastal Marsh 0 0
CU Immediate Action Plan:
EEP has identified and is in the process of completing acquisition of a stream and
wetland restoration project at Crossings Golf Course in Neuse 03020201. Crossings Golf
Course is projected to be 4,000 stream restoration credits, one riparian restoration credit,
and one non- riparian restoration credit. The project is expected to become an asset
during the next quarter, at which time all of the outstanding mitigation requirements will
have been met. ( Note: The current outstanding needs are within the MOU program and
that overall, EEP has current restoration equivalent credit surpluses when the HQP
assets are considered).
CU Long- Range Action Plan:
EEP has invested heavily in Local Watershed Plans within this CU. Currently there are
four Local Watershed Plans:
• Ellerbe Creek, Phase 4
• Lake Rogers, Phase 4
• Little Lick Creek, Phase 3
• Upper Swift Creek, Phase 4
EEP plans to utilize the Local Watershed Plans to identify and implement restoration
projects sufficient to meet future needs in the CU. EEP has also already acquired 7,000
stream credits of High Quality Preservation it intends to utilize to address future MOA
stream restoration equivalent needs.
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 28
NEUSE 03020202
Background:
EEP has one MOU permit in non- compliance for which all mitigation needs have not
been met ( part of the needs associated with the permit have been provided). The
remaining need is presented in the table below.
Outstanding Mitigation Required
Description Restoration Restoration Equivalent
Streams 1,242 1,242
Riparian 0 0
Non- Riparian 0 0
Coastal Marsh 0 0
CU Immediate Action Plan:
EEP has been developing a large stream restoration project ( 10,000 lf) in this CU. Due to
the project’s size and complexity, achieving institution has taken a significant amount of
time. Institution of this project was expected this quarter but acquisition has not been
completed. Acquisition is now expected to be completed before the end of the next
quarter.
ROANOKE 03010103
Background:
Historically, the Roanoke 03010103 CU has had very little activity. Roanoke 03010103
has only had two requirements paid and currently due in this CU. Of these, one has
remaining outstanding stream mitigation. To date, only two MOU and one MOA
requirements have been paid and become due in Roanoke 03010103, and until the first
quarter this year, there were no mitigation requirements in this CU. All of the current
requirements in this CU are for stream mitigation.
Outstanding Mitigation Required
Description Restoration Restoration Equivalent
Streams 358 139
Riparian 0 0
Non- Riparian 0 0
Coastal Marsh 0 0
Action Plan:
A full- delivery RFP is closed during the current quarter for 8,000 stream mitigation
credits and seven riverine wetland mitigation credits in the Roanoke 03010103. The bid
packages were due on March 15, 2006. If any mitigation sites submitted are viable, EEP
anticipates that contracts will be executed by fourth quarter ( 2005- 2006) or the first
quarter ( 2006- 2007) and will completely satisfy this outstanding requirement.
Additionally, EEP is developing two potential stream- mitigation projects through the
DBB program representing 8,388 stream credits and five riparian credits ( see table
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 29
below). The DBB projects are projected to become assets during the next quarter. Due
to the volume of expected assets coming online, EEP is no longer planning to utilize HQP
program assets for the restoration equivalent mitigation needs in this CU.
Current Tier II/ III Projects: The table below shows EEP’s current DBB projects being
developed, the MOA Year ( Y) they are expected to be developed, and the amount of
potential Restoration Credits ( R) and Restoration Equivalent Credits ( RE) associated with
each project are listed in the table below.
DESIGN BID BUILD Stream RW NRW CM
Project Name Y Tier R RE R RE R RE R RE
Left Fork Belews
Creek 3 2
4,000
5.00
North Double Creek 3 2
4,388
TOTAL Design Bid Build
8,388
-
5.00
-
-
-
-
-
TAR- PAMLICO 03020105
Outstanding Mitigation Required
Description Restoration Restoration Equivalent
Streams 146 0
Riparian 0 0
Non- Riparian 0 0
Coastal Marsh 0 0
Background:
The Tar- Pamlico 03020105 CU has seen virtually no activity since the inception of the
Wetlands Restoration Program in 1996. Currently, the MOU program has only accepted
conservation easements as mitigation on behalf of USACE. The MOU program has zero
stream, riparian or nonriparian mitigation requirements due. However, this status will
change soon, as recent activity has been very high: one riparian, 15 nonriparian and one
coastal marsh payments have been made during the last year that will come due over the
next few quarters. Although activity has been high, the magnitude is very small. The 17
future requirements total 3.2 credits of wetland mitigation. The Tri- Party MOA program
had one small stream and one small nonriparian requirement associated with one permit
come due in the last quarter. The permit’s nonriparian mitigation needs are fully covered.
The permit’s stream requirement is currently covered with 10: 1 HQP assets, but the
remaining restoration requirement ( 146 stream restoration credits) is outstanding.
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 30
CU Action Plan:
The primary plan for this CU is to utilize the full- delivery process to meet current and
future needs. During the quarter, EEP issued a full- delivery RFP to procure 5,000
stream, five riparian, 10 nonriparian, and 16 coastal marsh credits. The coastal- marsh
request is only for the Dare County portion of Tar- Pamlico 03020105. This request is
intended to offset all current and future needs for the MOU and MOA programs through
MOA Year 5. Submittals were expected this quarter but delayed to the next quarter at the
request of the USACE. The institution of any viable submittals is anticipated in Quarter
4 ( 2005- 2006) or Quarter 1 of ( 2006- 2007). Successful response to this RFP will
completely satisfy all requirements in this CU.
Note: Bonner Bridge project is a future MOA projected impact. The PACG- TC is
looking at coastal issues that may affect this CU in the future.
WHITE OAK 03030001
Background:
The White Oak/ Cape Fear 03030001 is one of the most unusual CUs in North Carolina in
that it is one of only four CUs ( out of 54) that have boundary overlap problems with the
State River Basin Boundaries. For accounting purposes, EEP references this CU within
the White Oak River Basin because the majority of the CU is located in the basin. The
Natural Resource Conservation Service ( NRCS) is currently examining redrawing the
boundaries for this CU to ensure that it is completely located within the basin. NRCS is
also considering renumbering this CU. This CU is also unusual in that it is composed
mostly of a series of independent watersheds that are actually connected to either the
Cape Fear or the White Oak. It is also unusual in that it runs parallel to the coast.
EEP issued an RFP intended to offset all of the outstanding mitigation needs for this CU
during November 2004. Unfortunately, there was no response to that CU request. Based
on interviews and surveys with the private mitigation providers, this CU was not
addressed primarily because it was geographically remote, a minimum amount was
requested, and their focus was on other areas in the state where more substantial RFPs
had been requested. This indicates that future requests may still be productive because
the lack of response was not based on the lack of restoration opportunities.
Outstanding Mitigation Required
Description Restoration Restoration Equivalent
Streams 0 0
Riparian 2.96 2.77
Non- Riparian 1.45 0.00
Coastal Marsh 0 0
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 31
Action Plan:
EEP has four ongoing initiatives to meet the outstanding mitigation:
• The Jacksonville Country Club stream- restoration project will include stormwater
wetlands which could generate wetland credit. However, credit potential and ratios still
need to be determined.
• EEP is actively searching for sites in this area with local resource agents. Several
potential projects have been identified.
• EEP has issued a full- delivery RFP’s for 5,000 feet of stream and 17 acres of riverine
mitigation to provide for anticipated needs, as well as those needs not met as a result of
the last RFP. Proposals will be due April 12, 2006 and these credits will likely be
unavailable until the fourth quarter.
• Finally, EEP is initiating a LWP that will produce stream, riverine and nonriverine credits
for both present and future MOU and MOA needs.
YADKIN 03040105
Background:
Yadkin 03040105 is similar in some ways to Catawba 03050103. Yadkin 03040105 does
not have many wetlands- restoration opportunities present within the CU. It is also
experiencing some of the same development pressures that are present in the lower
Catawba. Yadkin 03040105 includes portions of Charlotte, Huntersville, Mooresville,
Davidson, Concord, Kannapolis, Monroe, Mint Hill and other smaller towns. It should
be considered a CU of concern for future wetlands- restoration efforts. The Yadkin
0304105 is different than the lower Catawba in that it has more rural landscape remaining
within the watershed and is larger. EEP has invested heavily in local watershed planning
in the Yadkin 0304105 and expects to generate both stream and wetlands projects from
these endeavors in the future.
Outstanding Mitigation Required
Description Restoration Restoration Equivalent
Streams 0 0
Riparian 2.52 0
Non- Riparian 0.23 0.23
Coastal Marsh 0 0
Action Plan:
Previously, the action plan for this CU was to utilize a full- delivery RFP. The RFP did
generate submittals for stream restoration, but not for wetland restoration.
To develop additional mitigation assets in Yadkin 05, EEP is using a multi- pronged
approach. EEP is planning to expand the Rocky River LWP to a Phase IV, acquire and
implement existing Tier II and III projects; identify and implement using the DBB
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 32
process at least three additional stream restoration projects, and one riparian wetland
project; maximize use of existing HQP credits; and reevaluate a potential 70,000- foot
preservation project ( Rowan County). The EEP Monitoring section is also investigating
whether the Cato project produced nonriparian or riparian credits as a component of the
priority one stream restoration project. EEP also intends to propose to use the Adjacent
CU Guidance for Yadkin 05, as this CU is a well- documented, challenging area to
produce wetland mitigation. Finally, EEP has issued another full- delivery RFP for the
CU requesting 45,000 feet of stream restoration, 26 acres of riverine restoration and 10
acres of non- riverine restoration. Proposals related to this RFP came due on March 14,
2006. Assuming that the program receives proposals that meet staff reviews of technical
merit and cost, EEP will fund projects to offset outstanding needs, and thus satisfy these
requirements. The results of this RFP will be known during the next quarter. If the
current RFP fails to produce sufficient mitigation assets, EEP plans to reissue the RFP.
Current Tier II/ III Projects: The table below shows EEP’s current DBB projects being
developed, the MOA Year ( Y) they are expected to be developed, and the amount of
potential Restoration Credits ( R) and Restoration Equivalent Credits ( RE) associated with
each project are listed in the table below.
DESIGN BID BUILD Stream RW NRW CM
Project Name Y Tier R RE R RE R RE R RE
Mooresville School 4 3
3,430
0.30
Afton Run at Dorton
Park 4 2
3,033
LWP identified 4 3
15,000
TOTAL Design Bid Build
21,463
-
-
0.30
-
-
-
-
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Quarterly Report January 1, 2006 – March 31, 2006 33
Appendix A: EEP Gross Asset List of Tier 1 Restoration, Enhancement, Creation, and Preservation Sites Alphabetically * ( High Quality Preservation Sites are not listed in table
below)
Project Name
Tier
Last Update
River Basin
8- digit CU
Stream
Restoration
Stream
Enhancement I
Stream
Enhancement II
Stream
Preservation
Riverine
Restoration
Riverine
Creation
Riverine
Enhancement
Riverine
Preservation
Nonriverine
Restoration
Nonriverine
Creation
Nonriverine
Enhancement
Nonriverine
Preservation
Coastal Marsh
Restoration
Coastal Marsh
Creation
Coastal Marsh
Enhancement
Coastal Marsh
Preservation
Stream Buffer
Abbott 1 3/ 31/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 584 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
ABC 1 3/ 31/ 2006 TAR- PAMLICO 03020104 0 0 4,107 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 110.0 0.0 0.0 19.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Adam's Creek Sea Gate Woods 1 2/ 23/ 2006 WHITE OAK 03020106 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 122.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Afton Run 1 4/ 3/ 2006 YADKIN 03040105 261 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Back Creek 1 3/ 31/ 2006 YADKIN 03040105 3,713 0 0 0 0.3 0.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Bailey Fork ( EBX) 1 3/ 13/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050101 6,017 0 9,765 0 11.8 0.0 5.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Bailey Fork ( WRC) 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050101 5,500 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Ballance Farm 1 3/ 31/ 2006 PASQUOTANK 03010205 0 0 0 0 196.3 0.0 0.0 49.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 40.3 0.0 50.0 0
Ballance Farm ( Buffer) 1 3/ 3/ 2006 NEUSE 03020203 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 50
Barra Farms I 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030006 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 160.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Bear Creek 1 2/ 7/ 2006 NEUSE 03020202 0 0 0 0 88.0 0.0 34.0 300.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Bear Swamp Creek 1 3/ 31/ 2006 TAR- PAMLICO 03020101 1,500 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Beaver Creek 1 3/ 31/ 2006 YADKIN 03040101 4,300 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Beaverdam Creek 1 4/ 3/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050101 10,139 3,528 0 2,409 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Benbow Park 1 2/ 21/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 1,752 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Benson Grove 1 3/ 31/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Bethel Church 1 3/ 31/ 2006 YADKIN 03040101 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Big Bull Creek 1 3/ 23/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 35
Big Harris Creek 1 3/ 6/ 2006 BROAD 03050105 2,500 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Billy's Creek 1 3/ 23/ 2006 TAR- PAMLICO 03020101 1,901 200 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.6
Bishop Road ( 1 mi to CU 05) 1 4/ 3/ 2006 TAR- PAMLICO 03020104 0 0 0 0 1.0 0.0 0.0 61.6 112.6 0.0 0.0 521.0 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Black Gum Creek 1 3/ 23/ 2006 LUMBER 03040203 10,000 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Blounts Creek 1 3/ 17/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030004 6,972 574 656 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Blue Mitigation Site 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030004 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 120.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
BMP ( River Bend Site) 1 4/ 3/ 2006 NEUSE 03020204 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
BMP ( Town of Cary) 1 3/ 24/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201
Bogue Sound 1 3/ 31/ 2006 WHITE OAK 03020106 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Bogue Sound ( Weeks Property) 1 2/ 7/ 2006 WHITE OAK 03020106 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Bold Run Creek 1 4/ 4/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 1,454 0 176 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 27.1
Branson Creek 1 4/ 4/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030004 2,000 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Briles 1 4/ 3/ 2006 YADKIN 03040103 1,446 1,182 0 0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Brock 1 4/ 3/ 2006 NEUSE 03020204 1,485 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.35
Brogden Road 1 3/ 23/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15
Brown Bark Park 1 2/ 21/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 2,748 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Brown Branch 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050101 5,400 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Brown Farm 1 2/ 14/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 0 0 0 0 21.6 4.8 0.0 9.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Brush Creek 1 3/ 31/ 2006 NEW 05050001 1,350 490 1,750 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Brushy Fork 1 3/ 14/ 2006 YADKIN 03040101 4,400 3,000 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Bryan Blvd/ Oakridge 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002
Bugaboo Creek 1 3/ 31/ 2006 YADKIN 03040101 6,600 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Bull Farm 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030006 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Burnt Mill Creek 1na 3/ 31/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030007 0 0 0 0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Bush Island 1 3/ 8/ 2006 LUMBER 03040203 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 300.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Caldwell Station 1 3/ 14/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050101 3,600 420 0 0 1.6 0.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Campbell Creek 1 4/ 11/ 2006 TAR- PAMLICO 03020104 0 0 0 0 0.0 4.1 0.0 14.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.0 0
Camp Branch @ Bishop Site 1 4/ 3/ 2006 YADKIN 03040105 1,900 1,190 4,400 7,000 0.0 0.0 1.0 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Camp Lejeurne USMC 1 3/ 31/ 2006 WHITE OAK 03030001 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
1 of 7 Updated 3/ 31/ 2006
Appendix A: EEP Gross Asset List of Tier 1 Restoration, Enhancement, Creation, and Preservation Sites Alphabetically * ( High Quality Preservation Sites are not listed in table
below)
Project Name
Tier
Last Update
River Basin
8- digit CU
Stream
Restoration
Stream
Enhancement I
Stream
Enhancement II
Stream
Preservation
Riverine
Restoration
Riverine
Creation
Riverine
Enhancement
Riverine
Preservation
Nonriverine
Restoration
Nonriverine
Creation
Nonriverine
Enhancement
Nonriverine
Preservation
Coastal Marsh
Restoration
Coastal Marsh
Creation
Coastal Marsh
Enhancement
Coastal Marsh
Preservation
Stream Buffer
Cane Creek 1 4/ 4/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 2,330 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Carbonton Dam 1 3/ 3/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030003 90,494 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Casey Dairy 1 2/ 7/ 2006 NEUSE 03020202 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 72
Casey Tract 1 3/ 31/ 2006 PASQUOTANK 03010205 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Cat Creek 1 2/ 7/ 2006 LITTLE TENNESSEE 06010202 9,000 0 0 0 3.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Cato 1 3/ 31/ 2006 YADKIN 03040105 2,200 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Caviness 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030003 1 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Chapel Creek 1 4/ 4/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 1,500 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Charles Creek 1 4/ 4/ 2006 PASQUOTANK 03010205 0 0 0 0 1.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Chavis Park 1 3/ 31/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 2,200 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Cheviot Hills* 1 3/ 23/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 0 3,350 0 1,500 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
City Pond 1 2/ 7/ 2006 YADKIN 03040201 10,667 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Clayhill Farm 1 3/ 31/ 2006 WHITE OAK 03020106 5,132 0 0 0 32.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 96.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Clear Creek 1 3/ 31/ 2006 FRENCH BROAD 06010105 1,500 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Cleghorn Creek 1 3/ 13/ 2006 BROAD 03050105 5,167 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Coddle Creek Tributary ( Indian Run) 1 4/ 3/ 2006 YADKIN 03040105 1,840 1,000 1,190 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Collington Cut 1 2/ 7/ 2006 PASQUOTANK 03010205
Collins Site 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 9,786 1,070 750 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Company Swamp 1 2/ 7/ 2006 ROANOKE 03010107 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 557.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Conetoe Creek 1 3/ 23/ 2006 TAR- PAMLICO 03020103 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10
Conoconnara Swamp 1 2/ 7/ 2006 ROANOKE 03010107 4,800 0 0 1,000 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 78.0 0.0 0.0 45.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Corbett Tract 1 2/ 7/ 2006 LUMBER 03040207 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Cox Property 1 3/ 31/ 2006 NEUSE 03020204 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Cox Site 1 2/ 7/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 7,263 285 0 0 25.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Croatan Mitigation Bank 1 3/ 31/ 2006 NEUSE 03020204 0 0 0 0 49.6 0.0 45.8 7.6 1,435.2 72.2 991.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Cross Creek 1 3/ 17/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030004 2,400 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Crowns West 1 4/ 7/ 2006 WHITE OAK 03030001 3,800 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Dale Tract 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030005 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 126.3 0.0 17.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Daniels Farm 1 1/ 19/ 2006 TAR- PAMLICO 03020101 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Daniels Farm # 2 1 4/ 3/ 2006 TAR- PAMLICO 03020101 0 0 0 0 12.0 0.0 3.5 10.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Deaton 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030003 505 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Deep Creek ( Harding) 1 2/ 7/ 2006 YADKIN 03040101 5,500 0 0 0 30.4 5.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Dismal Swamp 1 3/ 31/ 2006 PASQUOTANK 03010205 0 0 0 0 15.5 0.0 20.8 0.0 252.8 0.0 0.0 91.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Dismal Swamp Full- Delivery 1 2/ 14/ 2006 PASQUOTANK 03010205 0 0 0 0 180.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 275.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Dowd Dairy 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030005 0 0 0 0 5.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 501.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Dula Thoroughfare@ Bishop 1 3/ 6/ 2006 YADKIN 03040104 2,568 0 2,900 3,200 5.6 0.0 0.9 3.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Dutchman's Creek 1 3/ 31/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Dye Branch I Stormwater BMP 1na 2/ 23/ 2006 YADKIN 03040105 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Dye Branch II Stream Restoration 1 3/ 28/ 2006 YADKIN 03040105 3,400 0 1,088 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Eagle Brunswick 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030005
East Tarboro Canal 1 3/ 23/ 2006 TAR- PAMLICO 03020103 0 2,989 1,876 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Elizabeth City State BMP 1 2/ 7/ 2006 PASQUOTANK 03010205 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Elk Shoals RFP* 1 2/ 27/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050101 5,168 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Ellerbee Creek 1 3/ 31/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 6,279 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Eno River Cabe's Ford 1 1/ 13/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201
Ephemeral Pool 1 3/ 31/ 2006 LUMBER 03040204 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
FD- Cane Creek 1 1/ 19/ 2006 ROANOKE 03010104 12,720 1,232 3,499 463 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
2 of 7 Updated 3/ 31/ 2006
Appendix A: EEP Gross Asset List of Tier 1 Restoration, Enhancement, Creation, and Preservation Sites Alphabetically * ( High Quality Preservation Sites are not listed in table
below)
Project Name
Tier
Last Update
River Basin
8- digit CU
Stream
Restoration
Stream
Enhancement I
Stream
Enhancement II
Stream
Preservation
Riverine
Restoration
Riverine
Creation
Riverine
Enhancement
Riverine
Preservation
Nonriverine
Restoration
Nonriverine
Creation
Nonriverine
Enhancement
Nonriverine
Preservation
Coastal Marsh
Restoration
Coastal Marsh
Creation
Coastal Marsh
Enhancement
Coastal Marsh
Preservation
Stream Buffer
Finley- McMillan 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030007 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 398.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Fish Property 1 4/ 4/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 48
Fisher River Mit. Bank ( Ring FDP) 1 2/ 7/ 2006 YADKIN 03040101 0 0 0 2,376 25.5 8.1 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Five Mile Branch 1 2/ 28/ 2006 YADKIN 03040102 17,595 0 0 0 25.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Fletcher- Meritor site 1 2/ 23/ 2006 FRENCH BROAD 06010105 4,000 0 0 0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Flintrock Farm 1 4/ 4/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 0 0 0 3,000 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Forest Hills 1 2/ 27/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 3,200 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Four Mile Ck RFP* 1 3/ 10/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050103 2,223 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Freedom Park 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050103 4,200 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Friedburg Marsh 1 2/ 7/ 2006 YADKIN 03040101 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Gatlin Swamp 1 3/ 23/ 2006 ROANOKE 03010107 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 125.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Gibson Pond 1 2/ 7/ 2006 YADKIN 03040201 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 36.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Gillespie Golf Course 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 3,427 1,200 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Glen Raven 1 4/ 7/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 3,290 700 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Goldsboro Housing Auth* 1 4/ 3/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 0 0 2,100 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Goose Creek 1 4/ 4/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 1,800 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Goshen Swamp 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030007 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Gray Farm 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050101 7,610 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Great Dismal Swamp 1 3/ 23/ 2006 PASQUOTANK 03010205 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 553.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Gregory ( stream) 1 2/ 7/ 2006 TAR- PAMLICO 03020102 6,500 0 0 0 75.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Grimesland Site 1 2/ 7/ 2006 TAR- PAMLICO 03020103 0 0 0 0 49.0 0.0 0.0 348.0 0.0 80.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.59
Grove Creek 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030007 0 0 0 0 6.0 10.2 0.0 352.0 3.9 0.0 7.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Gurley 1 3/ 31/ 2006 NEUSE 03020203 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Hall Branch 1 4/ 3/ 2006 YADKIN 03040201 2,000 0 0 0 2.7 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Hammock's State Park 1 3/ 31/ 2006 WHITE OAK 03020106 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Hanging Rock Creek ( A3) 1 3/ 31/ 2006 WATAUGA 06010103 2,800 1,000 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Hargett/ Tucker Farm 1 2/ 27/ 2006 NEUSE 03020204 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.5
Harrell Site 1 3/ 23/ 2006 TAR- PAMLICO 03020101 8,238 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Harris Farm 1 3/ 28/ 2006 TAR- PAMLICO 03020101 3,000 1,500 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Haw Branch 1 3/ 17/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030007 10,060 0 0 0 25.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Haw River Bouchard 1 3/ 1/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Haw River Swamp I 1 12/ 9/ 2005 CAPE FEAR 03030002 0 0 0 0 12.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Haw River Swamp II 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 0 0 0 0 14.7 0.0 2.5 18.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Haw River Tract 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 80.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Haw's Run 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030007 0 0 0 0 11.8 0.0 25.0 171.0 49.4 0.0 0.0 11.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Heath Dairy Road 1 4/ 3/ 2006 YADKIN 03040103 8,700 2,900 0 700 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Helms 1 2/ 7/ 2006 YADKIN 03040105 342 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Hendersonville Wetlands 1 2/ 7/ 2006 FRENCH BROAD 06010105 1,000 0 0 0 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
High Vista 1 3/ 31/ 2006 FRENCH BROAD 06010105 3,100 400 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Hillcrest Bay 1 3/ 23/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030004 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 27.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Hillsdale Park 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 5,963 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Hoffman Forest Bank ( MOA) 1 2/ 7/ 2006 WHITE OAK 03030001 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 38.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Hoffman Forest Bank ( MOU) 1 2/ 7/ 2006 WHITE OAK 03030001 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Homestead ( wetland) 1 2/ 7/ 2006 YADKIN 03040102 5,500 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.6 39.5 5.1 8.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Hominy Swamp Creek 1 2/ 7/ 2006 NEUSE 03020203 2,232 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Horsepen Creek 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 0 0 0 0 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Howard Farm 1 4/ 3/ 2006 NEUSE 03020203 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 26.3
3 of 7 Updated 3/ 31/ 2006
Appendix A: EEP Gross Asset List of Tier 1 Restoration, Enhancement, Creation, and Preservation Sites Alphabetically * ( High Quality Preservation Sites are not listed in table
below)
Project Name
Tier
Last Update
River Basin
8- digit CU
Stream
Restoration
Stream
Enhancement I
Stream
Enhancement II
Stream
Preservation
Riverine
Restoration
Riverine
Creation
Riverine
Enhancement
Riverine
Preservation
Nonriverine
Restoration
Nonriverine
Creation
Nonriverine
Enhancement
Nonriverine
Preservation
Coastal Marsh
Restoration
Coastal Marsh
Creation
Coastal Marsh
Enhancement
Coastal Marsh
Preservation
Stream Buffer
Howell Woods 1 2/ 7/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 0 0 0 0 20.0 0.0 80.0 39.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Huskanaw Swamp 1 2/ 7/ 2006 TAR- PAMLICO 03020103 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 23.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Indian Creek 1 3/ 7/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050102 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Irwin Creek Whitehurst Road 1 3/ 28/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050103 2,000 0 0 0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Jacksonville Country Club 1 4/ 4/ 2006 WHITE OAK 03030001 3,400 400 400 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Jalo 1 2/ 7/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 2,500 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Johnson Site ( Hunting Creek) 1 3/ 21/ 2006 YADKIN 03040102 2,200 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Johnson- Dale Stream Restoration 1 3/ 30/ 2006 NEUSE 03020203 0 1,500 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6
Jones Creek 1 2/ 7/ 2006 YADKIN 03040201 3,100 0 0 5,150 25.5 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Jumping Run Creek 1 4/ 3/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030004 4,000 0 0 0 67.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Jumping Run Creek 1 3/ 31/ 2006 WHITE OAK 03020106 0 0 0 0 4.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Juniper Bay 1 3/ 31/ 2006 LUMBER 03040203 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 697.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Kentwood Park 1 3/ 31/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 1,400 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Key Branch 1 3/ 31/ 2006 YADKIN 03040104 0 0 0 0 18.4 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.1
Kings Creek 1 2/ 7/ 2006 FRENCH BROAD 06010105 2,300 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Knobs Creek 1 2/ 7/ 2006 PASQUOTANK 03010205 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
La Grange 1 4/ 3/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030003 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 14.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Lake Wheeler 1 2/ 7/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Lengyel 1 2/ 7/ 2006 NEUSE 03020204 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.6 0.0 0.0 4.7 0
Lick Creek 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030004 9,500 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Little Beaver Creek 1 4/ 7/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 0 5,298 0 0 4.8 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Little Buffalo 1 2/ 7/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 27
Little Contentnea Creek ( Farmville C. C.) 1 4/ 4/ 2006 NEUSE 03020203 950 1,330 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Little Contentnea- Buffer 1 2/ 7/ 2006 NEUSE 03020203 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 54.16
Little Grassy Creek 1 4/ 4/ 2006 ROANOKE 03010102 0 0 5,000 12,300 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Little McQueen 1 2/ 14/ 2006 LUMBER 03040203 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Little River 1 3/ 13/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030004 0 0 0 7,315 40.0 11.0 56.0 42.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Little Sugar Creek I 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050103 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Little Troublesome 1 4/ 4/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 2,000 0 0 3,150 4.0 0.0 6.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Lloyd Site 1 3/ 10/ 2006 WHITE OAK 03030001 4,750 0 0 0 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Long Creek 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050101 0 0 0 0 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Long Swamp 1 2/ 7/ 2006 LUMBER 03040203 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Louisburg ( UT to Tar River) 1 2/ 21/ 2006 TAR- PAMLICO 03020101 0 1,970 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Lowell Mill 1 3/ 3/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 34,990 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Lower Creek 1 3/ 17/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050101 3,500 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Mallard Creek 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050103 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Manning Farm 1 4/ 3/ 2006 TAR- PAMLICO 03020103 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10
Mann's Harbor 1 2/ 7/ 2006 PASQUOTANK 03010205
Mark's Creek TESC 1 3/ 1/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 0 0 0 3,693 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Mary's Creek 1 4/ 4/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 2,500 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Mashoe's Road 1 3/ 31/ 2006 PASQUOTANK 03010205 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 130.9 0
Mason Farm 1 3/ 27/ 2006 TAR- PAMLICO 03020105 0 0 0 0 16.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
McCain Property 1 4/ 3/ 2006 YADKIN 03040103 2,445 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
McCotter- Raines 1 2/ 7/ 2006 NEUSE 03020204 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.4
McDonald's Pond 1 2/ 7/ 2006 YADKIN 03040201 3,492 656 6,550 0 18.5 0.0 4.1 34.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
McIntyre Creek @ Hornets Nest Park 1 4/ 3/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050101 4,800 0 0 0 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
4 of 7 Updated 3/ 31/ 2006
Appendix A: EEP Gross Asset List of Tier 1 Restoration, Enhancement, Creation, and Preservation Sites Alphabetically * ( High Quality Preservation Sites are not listed in table
below)
Project Name
Tier
Last Update
River Basin
8- digit CU
Stream
Restoration
Stream
Enhancement I
Stream
Enhancement II
Stream
Preservation
Riverine
Restoration
Riverine
Creation
Riverine
Enhancement
Riverine
Preservation
Nonriverine
Restoration
Nonriverine
Creation
Nonriverine
Enhancement
Nonriverine
Preservation
Coastal Marsh
Restoration
Coastal Marsh
Creation
Coastal Marsh
Enhancement
Coastal Marsh
Preservation
Stream Buffer
McIntyre Property 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030005 0 0 0 0 12.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 37.3 0.0 79.9 0.0 0
McLeansville 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 0 0 0 0 0.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Meredell Farm Site 1 4/ 3/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030003 3,865 4,704 0 5,136 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Methodist College 1 3/ 6/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030004 2,500 2,000 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Middle Swamp Creek 1 3/ 13/ 2006 LUMBER 03040203 7,070 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Mildred Woods 1 2/ 7/ 2006 TAR- PAMLICO 03020103 0 0 0 0 129.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 23.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Mill Branch 1 4/ 3/ 2006 LUMBER 03040206 3,282 0 0 1,750 0.0 0.3 0.4 35.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Mineral Springs 1 4/ 3/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030007 1,190 0 2,000 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Mocassin Creek 1 3/ 26/ 2006 NEUSE 03020203 180 0 0 0 0.4 0.0 5.3 39.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.72
Moccasin Creek- Buffer 1 3/ 23/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.2
Modlin Site 1 4/ 3/ 2006 ROANOKE 03010107 0 0 0 0 40.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Moore Property 1 4/ 7/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 0 0 0 0 0.0 45.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Morgan Creek Floodplain 1 4/ 4/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 0 0 0 0 19.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Moye Farm Phase I 1 2/ 7/ 2006 NEUSE 03020203 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 37.1
Moye Farm Phase II 1 2/ 20/ 2006 NEUSE 03020203 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 50
Mud Creek 1 2/ 7/ 2006 FRENCH BROAD 06010105 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 15.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Naked Creek 1 4/ 4/ 2006 YADKIN 03040101 3,000 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Neu- Con Mitigation Bank 1 2/ 7/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 7,500 0 0 0 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Neu- Con Mitigation Bank 1 2/ 7/ 2006 NEUSE 03020202 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Neu- Con Mitigation Bank 1 2/ 7/ 2006 NEUSE 03020203 7,500 0 0 0 175.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 60.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Neu- Con Mitigation Bank 1 2/ 7/ 2006 NEUSE 03020204 7,500 0 0 0 60.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Nichols Farm ( Troublesome Creek) 1 4/ 3/ 2006 CHOWAN 03010203 0 1,700 0 3,300 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
North River 1na 3/ 31/ 2006 WHITE OAK 03020106 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 250.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Northgate Park ( Ellerbe) 1 4/ 4/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 1,800 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Norwood Gainey Site 1 3/ 26/ 2006 NEUSE 03020202 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 47
Oakley Crossroads 1 4/ 4/ 2006 TAR- PAMLICO 03020103 3,298 0 0 0 4.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.9 0.0 1.8 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 26.41
Oakwood Cemetary 1 2/ 27/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 1,300 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Open Springs 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030003 4,520 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Paschal GC ( Richland Ck) 1 3/ 27/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 0 2,900 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Patton Branch 1 2/ 7/ 2006 LITTLE TENNESSEE 06010202 2,400 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Payne Dairy 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050101 5,177 470 1,350 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Pea Island 1 2/ 7/ 2006 PASQUOTANK 03010205 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Pembroke Creek I 1 2/ 7/ 2006 PASQUOTANK 03010205 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Pembroke Creek II 1 3/ 31/ 2006 PASQUOTANK 03010205 0 0 0 0 - 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Perry Property ( UT to Pembroke) 1 4/ 4/ 2006 PASQUOTANK 03010205 2,700 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Philips 1 2/ 7/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Pott Creek 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050102 3,500 0 0 0 5.5 31.3 0.8 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Pott Creek II 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050102 10,054 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Prestonwood G. C. 1 2/ 21/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 4,100 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Price Park 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 1,776 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Pridgen Flats 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030006 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Privateer Farms 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030005 34,005 0 0 0 402.5 0.0 25.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Purlear Creek 1 2/ 21/ 2006 YADKIN 03040101 13,000 0 0 0 2.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Purlear Creek II 1 3/ 31/ 2006 YADKIN 03040101 1,500 0 0 0 1.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
R- 2719 BA 1 2/ 7/ 2006 NEUSE 03020202 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Randleman Lake 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030003 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 90
5 of 7 Updated 3/ 31/ 2006
Appendix A: EEP Gross Asset List of Tier 1 Restoration, Enhancement, Creation, and Preservation Sites Alphabetically * ( High Quality Preservation Sites are not listed in table
below)
Project Name
Tier
Last Update
River Basin
8- digit CU
Stream
Restoration
Stream
Enhancement I
Stream
Enhancement II
Stream
Preservation
Riverine
Restoration
Riverine
Creation
Riverine
Enhancement
Riverine
Preservation
Nonriverine
Restoration
Nonriverine
Creation
Nonriverine
Enhancement
Nonriverine
Preservation
Coastal Marsh
Restoration
Coastal Marsh
Creation
Coastal Marsh
Enhancement
Coastal Marsh
Preservation
Stream Buffer
Ratcliff Cove Branch 1 3/ 3/ 2006 FRENCH BROAD 06010106 5,000 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Reeds Creek 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050101 0 0 0 0 4.2 0.0 2.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Reedy Branch 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 2,400 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Rich Fork FDP ( Bodenheimer- Parker) 1 2/ 7/ 2006 YADKIN 03040103 3,000 0 0 0 20.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Richland Creek 1 3/ 31/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 300 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
River Bend 1 4/ 4/ 2006 ROANOKE 03010104 0 0 0 0 89.0 0.0 0.0 19.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Rocky Branch 1 3/ 14/ 2006 YADKIN 03040102 4,400 0 0 0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Rocky Branch ( NCSU) Phase I 1 3/ 31/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Rocky Branch ( NCSU) Phase II 1 3/ 31/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Roquist 1 3/ 13/ 2006 ROANOKE 03010107 0 0 0 500 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.0 0.0 0.0 3,386.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Rowan Branch 1 2/ 23/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030006 600 0 0 0 13.5 0.0 13.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Rowel Branch 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030005
Sand Shoals 1 2/ 7/ 2006 WHITE OAK 03020106 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Sandy Creek 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030003 0 0 0 0 5.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Sandy Creek 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 0 3,000 0 0 3.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Sandy Mush 1 2/ 14/ 2006 FRENCH BROAD 06010105 8,000 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Sawmill 1 2/ 21/ 2006 NEUSE 03020204 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.81
Scuppernong River Mitigation Bank 1 2/ 7/ 2006 PASQUOTANK 03010205 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.8 0.0 0.0 19.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Second Creek Wetlands, Double Thumb 1 3/ 17/ 2006 YADKIN 03040103 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Seven Springs 1 2/ 7/ 2006 NEUSE 03020202 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Sharpe Wetland Preservation 1 4/ 4/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Sheperd's Tree 1 3/ 31/ 2006 YADKIN 03040102 3,238 1,429 0 0 19.8 94.1 8.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Silas Creek 1 3/ 31/ 2006 YADKIN 03040101 4,500 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Silver Creek 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050101 5,127 1,392 2,036 1,077 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Silver Creek- Conway 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050101 4,520 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Simpson Buffer 1 2/ 7/ 2006 TAR- PAMLICO 03020104 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 45
Simpson Wetland 1 2/ 7/ 2006 TAR- PAMLICO 03020104 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Smith Creek Site 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030007 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Smith/ Austin Creek 1 3/ 31/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 8,000 2,000 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Snow Creek 1 3/ 31/ 2006 ROANOKE 03010103 3,000 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
South Buffalo Creek 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 0 0 0 0 4.0 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
South Fork 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050102 11,260 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
South Fork Hopper 1 3/ 21/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050101 7,213 0 0 0 5.1 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
South Muddy Creek 1 3/ 20/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050101 12,646 2,653 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Sparta Bog 1 2/ 7/ 2006 NEW 05050001 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Speas Property 1 3/ 3/ 2006 TAR- PAMLICO 03020101 0 2,295 0 0 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.34
Speight Branch 1 3/ 31/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Spring Branch 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030007 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Spring Valley Park 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030003 1,000 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Stallings 1 3/ 2/ 2006 NEUSE 03020204 4,476 0 0 0 11.0 0.0 4.0 19.0 12.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.5
Starmount Forest CC 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Starmount Park 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Stillhouse Creek 1 4/ 4/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 1,200 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Stone Mountain 1 3/ 31/ 2006 YADKIN 03040101 7,000 0 2,590 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Stonebridge 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030003 6,240 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
6 of 7 Updated 3/ 31/ 2006
Appendix A: EEP Gross Asset List of Tier 1 Restoration, Enhancement, Creation, and Preservation Sites Alphabetically * ( High Quality Preservation Sites are not listed in table
below)
Project Name
Tier
Last Update
River Basin
8- digit CU
Stream
Restoration
Stream
Enhancement I
Stream
Enhancement II
Stream
Preservation
Riverine
Restoration
Riverine
Creation
Riverine
Enhancement
Riverine
Preservation
Nonriverine
Restoration
Nonriverine
Creation
Nonriverine
Enhancement
Nonriverine
Preservation
Coastal Marsh
Restoration
Coastal Marsh
Creation
Coastal Marsh
Enhancement
Coastal Marsh
Preservation
Stream Buffer
Sturgeon City ( Phase I) 1 3/ 31/ 2006 WHITE OAK 03030001 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Sturgeon City ( Phase II) 1 2/ 21/ 2006 WHITE OAK 03030001 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Suck Creek 1 2/ 21/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030003 3,000 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Sussman's Park 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Swift Creek Watershed Wetlands 1 3/ 1/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 65.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Tarlton Swamp 1 4/ 3/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030004 3,400 540 0 200 7.0 0.0 5.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Tate Farm 1 2/ 7/ 2006 NEW 05050001 3,525 13,000 0 10,550 4.0 0.0 7.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Trout Cove Branch 1 3/ 31/ 2006 HIWASSEE 06020002 3,900 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Tucker Farm 1 2/ 7/ 2006 PASQUOTANK 03010205 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Tulula Bog 1 3/ 31/ 2006 LITTLE TENNESSEE 06010204 4,683 0 0 0 47.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Underhill 1 2/ 7/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Upper UT to Cane Creek ( Picard) 1 4/ 4/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 6,440 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
UT Green Mill Run/ Greenville Country
Club 1 3/ 27/ 2006 TAR- PAMLICO 03020103 814 3,979 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
UT to Barnes Creek ( HurleySite) 1 4/ 3/ 2006 YADKIN 03040103 2,975 1,000 0 0 1.0 0.0 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
UT to Deep River 1 3/ 17/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030003 1,500 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
UT to Hendricks 1 2/ 23/ 2006 TAR- PAMLICO 03020103 1,400 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3
UT to Lilliput Creek ( Hog Branch
Ponds) 1 4/ 3/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030005 0 2,000 0 2,000 23.0 0.0 0.0 15.0 30.0 0.0 234.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
UT to Little Coharie Creek ( Roseboro
Site) 1 4/ 4/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030006 1,630 700 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
UT to Rocky River ( Smith Tract) 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030003 1,335 955 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.2
UT to Sandy Creek ( Williams Tract) 1 4/ 4/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030003 2,590 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
UT to South Fork Creek ( Hadley-
Newlin) 1 2/ 21/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 6,000 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
UT to South Fork Creek ( Stephens) 1 4/ 4/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 4,500 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
UT to Zack's Fork 1 3/ 17/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050101 1,500 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Valley Fields Farm Site 1 4/ 3/ 2006 YADKIN 03040103 9,500 300 0 8,730 5.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Wake Forest C. C. 1 2/ 7/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 3,400 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Walnut Creek ( Buffer) 1 2/ 7/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 25
Warrior Creek 1 3/ 31/ 2006 YADKIN 03040101 9,200 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Watts Property 1 4/ 4/ 2006 PASQUOTANK 03010205 1,000 0 0 0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 40.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Weaver Site 1 NEW 05050001 1,025 935 0 2,000 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Wells Creek 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CAPE FEAR 03030002 6,000 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
White Oak Creek 1 3/ 31/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 0 0 0 0 10.0 6.0 1.0 18.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Whitehall Reserve 1 2/ 7/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050103 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Whitelace Ck* 1 4/ 7/ 2006 NEUSE 03020202 0 0 0 0 22.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.4
Whitley Site 1 3/ 23/ 2006 NEUSE 03020201 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 27.5
Wiggins Mill 1 3/ 31/ 2006 NEUSE 03020203 247 0 0 0 12.7 0.0 6.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Wike Property ( Lyle Creek) 1 3/ 31/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050101 2,400 0 800 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
Zack's Fork Ck RFP* 1 3/ 10/ 2006 CATAWBA 03050101 3,900 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0
7 of 7 Updated 3/ 31/ 2006
Appendix B: Summary of EEP Gross Assets
River
Basin
8- digit
CU
Stream
Restoration
Stream
Enhancement I
Stream
Enhancement II
Stream
Preservation
Riverine
Restoration
Riverine
Creation
Riverine
Enhancement
Riverine
Preservation
Nonriverine
Restoration
Nonriverine
Creation
Nonriverine
Enhancement
Nonriverine
Preservation
Coastal Marsh
Restoration
Coastal Marsh
Creation
Coastal Marsh
Enhancement
Coastal Marsh
Preservation
BROAD 7,667 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03050105 7,667 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CAPE FEAR 258,919 22,741 3,406 20,801 705.46 32 134.47 895.48 902.06 0 275.68 409 37.3 0 79.9 0
03030002 65,612 11,268 750 6,150 85.07 10.8 9.47 195.13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03030003 115,050 5,659 0 5,136 5.69 0 0 0 4 0 14 0 0 0 0 0
03030004 30,772 3,114 656 7,515 114 11 61.5 162.35 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03030005 34,005 2,000 0 2,000 443.6 0 25 15 657.25 0 251.9 0 37.3 0 79.9 0
03030006 2,230 700 0 0 13.5 0 13.5 0 160.51 0 2.18 0 0 0 0 0
03030007 11,250 0 2,000 0 43.6 10.2 25 523 53.3 0 7.6 409 0 0 0 0
CATAWBA 127,454 8,463 13,951 3,486 31.29 32.82 14.26 0.36 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03050101 94,217 8,463 13,951 3,486 25.84 0 13.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03050102 24,814 0 0 0 5.45 31.32 0.76 0.36 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03050103 8,423 0 0 0 0 1.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CHOWAN 0 1,700 0 3,300 0 0 0 15 5 0 0 10 0 0 0 0
03010203 0 1,700 0 3,300 0 0 0 15 5 0 0 10 0 0 0 0
FRENCH BROAD 24,900 400 0 0 30 0 15.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
06010105 19,900 400 0 0 30 0 15.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
06010106 5,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
HIWASSEE 3,900 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
06020002 3,900 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
LITTLE TENNESSEE 16,083 0 0 0 50.84 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
06010202 11,400 0 0 0 3 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
06010204 4,683 0 0 0 47.84 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
LUMBER 20,352 0 0 1,750 0 0.25 0.44 35.8 697.38 0 0 301.5 0 0 0 0
03040203 17,070 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 697.38 0 0 300 0 0 0 0
03040204 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03040206 3,282 0 0 1,750 0 0.25 0.44 35.8 0 0 0 1.5 0 0 0 0
03040207 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NEUSE 110,640 11,365 2,276 5,193 494.79 52 178.25 506.37 1674.7 77.2 997.4 1.65 5.64 0 0.18 4.94
03020201 86,070 8,535 2,276 5,193 76.08 52 82.22 140.1 116.9 5 0.2 0 0 0 0 0
03020202 0 0 0 0 110 0 34 300 50 0 5.4 0 0 0 0 0
03020203 11,109 2,830 0 0 188.11 0 11.95 39.67 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03020204 13,461 0 0 0 120.6 0 50.08 26.6 1447.8 72.2 991.8 1.65 5.64 0 0.18 4.94
NEW 5,900 14,425 1,750 12,550 4 0 7.35 0 11.9 0 0 0.25 0 0 0 0
05050001 5,900 14,425 1,750 12,550 4 0 7.35 0 11.9 0 0 0.25 0 0 0 0
PASQUOTANK 3,700 0 0 0 396.639 0 21.7 68.65 1161.55 0 0 139.32 0 40.25 0 180.94
03010205 3,700 0 0 0 396.639 0 21.7 68.65 1161.55 0 0 139.32 0 40.25 0 180.94
ROANOKE 20,520 1,232 8,499 14,263 129 0 0 576.43 236 0 0 3431 0 0 0 0
03010102 0 0 5,000 12,300 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03010103 3,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 of 2 Updated 03/ 31/ 2006
Appendix B: Summary of EEP Gross Assets
River
Basin
8- digit
CU
Stream
Restoration
Stream
Enhancement I
Stream
Enhancement II
Stream
Preservation
Riverine
Restoration
Riverine
Creation
Riverine
Enhancement
Riverine
Preservation
Nonriverine
Restoration
Nonriverine
Creation
Nonriverine
Enhancement
Nonriverine
Preservation
Coastal Marsh
Restoration
Coastal Marsh
Creation
Coastal Marsh
Enhancement
Coastal Marsh
Preservation
03010104 12,720 1,232 3,499 463 89 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03010107 4,800 0 0 1,500 40 0 0 557.43 236 0 0 3431 0 0 0 0
TAR- PAMLICO 26,651 12,933 5,983 0 286.67 6.9 27.1 443.4 343.46 80 1.77 541.96 3.3 0 0 19
03020101 14,639 5,965 0 0 12 2.8 3.5 10.9 45.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03020102 6,500 0 0 0 75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03020103 5,512 6,968 1,876 0 182.67 0 23.6 356 25.76 80 1.77 1.96 0 0 0 0
03020104 0 0 4,107 0 1 4.1 0 76.5 252.6 0 0 540 3.3 0 0 19
03020105 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
WATAUGA 2,800 1,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
06010103 2,800 1,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
WHITE OAK 17,082 400 400 0 39.7 1 0 0 399.1 0 0 122 6.18 0 0 0
03020106 5,132 0 0 0 36.4 1 0 0 346 0 0 122 0.18 0 0 0
03030001 11,950 400 400 0 3.3 0 0 0 53.1 0 0 0 6 0 0 0
YADKIN 155,482 12,657 18,718 29,532 200.74 109.05 34.67 89 22.6 39.5 23.1 8.4 0 0 0 0
03040101 59,000 3,000 2,590 4,752 58.9 13.41 2.91 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03040102 32,933 1,429 0 0 44.84 95.64 12 0 18.6 39.5 9.1 8.4 0 0 0 0
03040103 28,066 5,382 0 9,430 26 0 9.12 2 4 0 14 0 0 0 0 0
03040104 2,568 0 2,900 3,200 24 0 0.94 6.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03040105 13,656 2,190 6,678 7,000 0.3 0 4.5 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
03040201 19,259 656 6,550 5,150 46.7 0 5.2 71.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Grand Total 802,050 87,316 54,983 90,875 2369.129 234.02 433.84 2632.49 5453.75 196.7 1297.95 4965.08 52.42 40.25 80.08 204.88
2 of 2 Updated 03/ 31/ 2006
Appendix C: Net Remaining Asset Credits ( March 31, 2006)
Stream
Restoration
Stream
Restoration
Equivalent
Riverine
Restoration
Riverine
Restoration
Equivalent
Nonriverine
Restoration
Nonriverine
Restoration
Equivalent
Coastal
Marsh
Restoration
Coastal
Marsh
Restoration
Equivalent
Broad 6,045 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
03050105 Total 6,045 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 830 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 5,215 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cape Fear 147,136 2,057 595.68 184.06 886.76 161.41 37.30 26.63
03030001 0
03030002 Total 4,775 630 58.31 19.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 2,194 0 3.41 10.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 2,581 630 54.90 8.98 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
03030003 Total 83,712 1,027 5.48 0.00 3.89 4.67 0.00 0.00
MOU 8,687 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 75,026 1,027 5.48 0.00 3.89 4.67 0.00 0.00
03030004 Total 19,619 0 46.57 38.43 26.74 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 11,635 0 45.49 14.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 7,984 0 1.08 24.03 26.74 0.00 0.00 0.00
03030005 Total 34,826 400 440.24 8.98 645.78 73.52 37.30 26.63
MOU 1,084 400 20.65 0.65 19.23 67.55 0.00 0.00
MOA 33,742 0 419.59 8.33 626.55 5.97 37.30 26.63
03030006 Total 2,437 0 12.43 4.50 160.51 0.73 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 2,437 0 12.43 4.50 160.51 0.73 0.00 0.00
03030007 Total 1,766 0 32.65 112.92 49.84 82.50 0.00 0.00
MOU 1,350 0 9.90 0.00 0.00 1.62 0.00 0.00
MOA 416 0 22.75 112.92 49.84 80.87 0.00 0.00
Catawba 25,776 482 18.77 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
03050101 Total 3,320 482 1.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 3,320 482 1.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
03050102 Total 22,456 0 17.73 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 22,456 0 17.73 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
03050103 Total 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Chowan 1,133 660 0.00 3.00 5.00 2.00 0.00 0.00
03010203 Total 1,133 660 0.00 3.00 5.00 2.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 1,133 660 0.00 3.00 5.00 2.00 0.00 0.00
03010201 Total 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
03010202 Total 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
03010204 Total 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
French Broad 13,776 0 26.39 5.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
06010105 Total 8,776 0 26.39 5.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 494 0 25.87 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 8,282 0 0.52 5.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
06010106 Total 5,000 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 5,000 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
06010108 Total 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hiwassee 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
06020002 Total 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
06020003 Total 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Little Tennessee 16,083 0 50.84 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
06010202 Total 11,400 0 3.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 11,400 0 3.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
River Basin
Cataloging
Unit
Net Remaining Asset Credits March 31, 2006
1 of 3 Updated 03/ 31/ 2006
Appendix C: Net Remaining Asset Credits ( March 31, 2006)
Stream
Restoration
Stream
Restoration
Equivalent
Riverine
Restoration
Riverine
Restoration
Equivalent
Nonriverine
Restoration
Nonriverine
Restoration
Equivalent
Coastal
Marsh
Restoration
Coastal
Marsh
Restoration
Equivalent
River Basin
Cataloging
Unit
Net Remaining Asset Credits March 31, 2006
06010203 Total 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
06010204 Total 4,683 0 47.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 4,683 0 47.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Lumber 11,034 350 0.11 7.31 637.13 60.28 0.00 0.00
03040203 Total 7,752 0 0.00 0.00 637.13 60.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 1,682 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 6,070 0 0.00 0.00 637.13 60.00 0.00 0.00
03040204 Total 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
03040206 Total 3,282 350 0.11 7.31 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 3,282 350 0.11 7.31 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.00
03040207 Total 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Neuse 30,723 22 469.13 138.07 1,680.04 328.42 5.64 1.05
03020201 Total 4,801 22 69.36 32.93 91.08 0.07 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 1.84 25.37 1.23 0.07 0.00 0.00
MOA 4,801 22 67.51 7.56 89.85 0.00 0.00 0.00
03020202 Total 0 0 91.83 71.21 50.00 1.80 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 5.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 0 0 86.52 71.21 50.00 1.80 0.00 0.00
03020203 Total 12,836 0 187.35 11.92 59.44 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 2,072 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 10,764 0 187.35 11.92 59.44 0.00 0.00 0.00
03020204 Total 13,087 0 120.60 22.01 1,479.52 326.55 5.64 1.05
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 13,087 0 120.60 22.01 1,479.52 326.55 5.64 1.05
New 14,316 2,510 2.32 2.45 11.90 0.05 0.00 0.00
05050001 Total 14,316 2,510 2.32 2.45 11.90 0.05 0.00 0.00
MOU 1,075 1,110 1.91 2.12 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00
MOA 13,240 1,400 0.41 0.33 11.90 0.00 0.00 0.00
Pasquotank 2,561 0 395.08 19.44 1,151.40 27.76 19.91 35.97
03010205 Total 2,561 0 395.08 19.44 1,151.40 27.76 19.91 35.97
MOU 0 0 3.98 2.58 31.48 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 2,561 0 391.10 16.86 1,119.92 27.76 19.91 35.97
Roanoke 20,971 2,853 123.66 110.50 233.80 684.80 0.00 0.00
03010102 Total 2,000 2,460 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 2,000 2,460 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
03010103 Total 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
03010104 Total 14,941 93 88.29 3.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 14,941 93 88.29 3.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
03010106 Total 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
03010107 Total 4,030 300 35.37 106.95 233.80 684.80 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 4,030 300 35.37 106.95 233.80 684.80 0.00 0.00
Savannah 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
03060101 Total 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
03060102 Total 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Tar- Pamlico 34,796 0 280.93 97.03 346.86 108.98 3.30 3.80
03020101 Total 17,828 0 9.02 2.67 16.94 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 4,060 0 0.00 0.00 1.94 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 13,768 0 9.02 2.67 15.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
03020102 Total 6,500 0 70.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2 of 3 Updated 03/ 31/ 2006
Appendix C: Net Remaining Asset Credits ( March 31, 2006)
Stream
Restoration
Stream
Restoration
Equivalent
Riverine
Restoration
Riverine
Restoration
Equivalent
Nonriverine
Restoration
Nonriverine
Restoration
Equivalent
Coastal
Marsh
Restoration
Coastal
Marsh
Restoration
Equivalent
River Basin
Cataloging
Unit
Net Remaining Asset Credits March 31, 2006
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 6,500 0 70.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
03020103 Total 8,826 0 182.65 79.07 58.72 0.98 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 8,826 0 182.65 79.07 58.72 0.98 0.00 0.00
03020104 Total 1,643 0 3.05 15.30 252.60 108.00 3.30 3.80
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 1,643 0 3.05 15.30 252.60 108.00 3.30 3.80
03020105 Total 0 0 15.94 0.00 18.60 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 2.14 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 0 0 15.94 0.00 16.46 0.00 0.00 0.00
Watauga 3,300 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
06010103 Total 3,300 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 3,300 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
White Oak 10,801 0.00 32.66 0.00 104.30 0.00 3.72 0.00
03030001 Total 6,194 0 0.00 0.00 27.33 0.00 3.54 0.00
MOU 3,739 0 0.00 0.00 0.90 0.00 3.54 0.00
MOA 2,455 0 0.00 0.00 26.43 0.00 0.00 0.00
03020106 Total 4,608 0 32.66 0.00 76.97 0.00 0.18 0.00
MOU 0 0 2.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 4,608 0 30.60 0.00 76.97 0.00 0.18 0.00
Yadkin 103,111 5,431.20 242.41 23.01 38.64 8.05 0.00 0.00
03040101 Total 18,109 475 60.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 3,914 0 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 14,195 475 60.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
03040102 Total 27,140 0 91.70 3.31 38.35 4.71 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 27,140 0 91.70 3.31 38.35 4.71 0.00 0.00
03040103 Total 24,434 1,886 25.17 2.99 0.29 3.33 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 24,434 1,886 25.17 2.99 0.29 3.33 0.00 0.00
03040104 Total 3,728 640 23.42 1.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 3,728 640 23.42 1.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
03040105 Total 8,126 1,400 0.00 1.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 2,564 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 5,561 1,400 0.00 1.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
03040201 Total 21,574 1,030 41.69 13.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 1,258 0 0.48 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 20,316 1,030 41.21 12.87 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
03040202 Total 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOU 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
MOA 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Grand Total Total 441,562 14,364.40 2,237.98 590.80 5,095.83 1,381.74 69.86 67.45
Grand Total MOU 46,638 1,510.00 121.21 55.93 56.92 69.29 3.54 0.00
Grand Total MOA 394,924 12,854.40 2,116.77 534.87 5,038.91 1,312.45 66.33 67.45
3 of 3 Updated 03/ 31/ 2006
Appendix D1: EEP Gross High Quality Preservation Project List and Summary
Site Name County Ecoregion River Basin CU TOTAL
Stream
TOTAL
Riverine
TOTAL Non-
Riverine
Allen Site Franklin CP Tar- Pamlico 03020101 15,900 26.00 0.00
Camp Chestnut Ridge Orange CP Neuse 03020201 5,426 0.00 0.00
Cedar Creek ( Perry) Franklin CP Tar- Pamlico 03020102 12,415 0.00 0.00
Country Line Cr ( Mackovich) Caswell CP Roanoke 03010104 2,304 0.00 0.00
Crowther North Rowan CP Yadkin 03040102 2,150 31.00 0.00
Cypress Creek ( Langley) Franklin CP Tar- Pamlico 03020101 1,459 19.72 0.00
Davis ( Yadkin River) Davie CP Yadkin 03040101 4,750 0.00 0.00
Deep Creek ( Hanson) Chatham CP Cape Fear 03030003 2,505 0.00 0.00
Dutch Second Creek ( Hill) Rowan CP Yadkin 03040103 2,685 0.00 0.00
Eno River ( Cabe's Ford) Orange CP Cape Fear 03030003 2,203 0.00 0.00
Eno River ( Poplar Ridge) Orange CP Neuse 03020201 3,665 0.00 0.00
Eno River ( Wilderness) Orange CP Neuse 03020201 21,671 0.00 0.00
Fishing Creek ( Capps) Warren CP Tar- Pamlico 03020102 3,300 0.00 0.00
Fishing Creek ( Green) Warren CP Tar- Pamlico 03020102 1,117 0.00 0.00
Fishing Creek ( Shearin) Warren CP Tar- Pamlico 03020102 3,943 28.00 0.00
Fishing Creek ( Slaughter) Granville CP Tar- Pamlico 03020102 2,400 0.00 0.00
Fishing Creek ( Sturgis) Franklin CP Tar- Pamlico 03020102 1,077 0.00 0.00
Flat River ( Treyburn) Durham CP Neuse 03020201 25,013 0.00 0.00
Harris Franklin CP Tar- Pamlico 03020101 51,736 187.00 0.00
Haw River ( Duke Forest) Chatham CP Cape Fear 03030002 32,000 0.00 0.00
Haw River ( Phillips) Guilford CP Cape Fear 03030002 3,628 0.00 0.00
Hyco Lake ( Bessemer) Caswell CP Roanoke 03010104 12,333 0.00 0.00
Len's Knob/ Little Mountain Surry CP Yadkin 03040101 42,000 0.00 0.00
Little Fishing Warren CP Tar- Pamlico 03020102 14,500 0.00 0.00
Little River ( Baker) Randolph CP Yadkin 03040104 1,079 0.00 0.00
Little River ( Lewis) Randolph CP Yadkin 03040104 4,118 0.00 0.00
Little River ( Parker) Randolph CP Yadk