The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About024 Appendix P - Surface Water & Wetland Reportmemo Page 1 TO: James Nickelson, PE FROM: Breanne Cline, Environmental Scientist DATE: 04/01/2022 JOB NO.: 10130.001 RE: West Park Surface Water Memo CC: Urgent For Review Please Comment Please Reply For Your Use The purpose of this memo is to document the presence or absence of surface water on the West Park Subdivision property (Norton East Ranch Sub Ph 6, Lot R1A – R1D) in Gallatin County, Montana. A field visit for a wetland delineation was performed on May 25, 2021. The results of the data search and the field visit are presented below. Description of Surface Water Features The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) maintains the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI), which serves as a publicly available resource that provides detailed information on the abundance, characteristics, and distribution of US Wetlands. According to the NWI database, several freshwater emergent wetland (PEM1A and PEM1C) features are present within the investigation area (USFWS 2022). Attachment 1, Figure 1 depicts the NWI features in the project vicinity. According to the Bozeman, Montana (2020), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute Topographic Map, Baxter Creek flows through the northeast corner of the property. An irrigation ditch parallels Baxter Creek through the property. A Wetland Delineation was completed for the subject property on May 25, 2021 and a final report was completed in June 2021 (see Attachment 3). The Wetland Delineation results figure is provided as Attachment 2, Figure 2. A total of five wetlands (6.76 acres), one pond (1.54 acres), Baxter Creek (780 linear feet), and abandoned irrigation ditch (1,166 linear feet) were delineated on the property. The following table provides a description for each of the delineated features. Feature Type Figure ID Size Jurisdictional Status (Y/N) Emergent Wetland WET 1 2.18 acres No (Jan 2021 JD) Emergent Wetland WET 2 0.09 acres Assumed No (Storm Pond) Emergent Wetland WET 3 2.58 acres No (Dec 2021 JD) Emergent Wetland WET 4 1.57 acres Assumed Yes (Baxter Creek Fringe) Emergent Wetland WET 5 0.34 acres No (Jan 2021 JD) Baxter Creek Stream 780 linear feet Assumed Yes (Baxter Creek) Remnant irrigation ditch Ditch 1,166 linear feet Abandoned, Assumed No Borrow pit pond Pond 1.54 acres Assumed No West Park Surface Water Memo Page 2 A Jurisdictional Determination Request was filed in July 2021 and revised and resubmitted again in October 2021. Kilday Stratton received a jurisdictional determination from the USACE on December 9, 2021. Wetland 3 is not jurisdictional, and thus, not subject to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Additionally, a Jurisdictional Determination was received by a former consultant in January 2021 which confirmed the non-jurisdictional nature of Wetland 1 and Wetland 5. Jurisdictional Determination documents are provided as Attachment 4. Proposed Subdivision Impacts Due to its non-jurisdictional status, the proposed development will impact the entire feature delineated as Wetland 3. The delineated Wetland 3 was also delineated in 2006 and was 1.25 acres. For over a decade, this wetland received dewatering water from the borrow pit on the southeast portion on the subject property. This caused the wetland to artificially expand to 2.49 acres, as delineated in 2021. It is proposed that the original 1.25 acres will be recreated near the borrow pit area. The current vision is to convert the borrow area into an enhanced pond feature with a robust buffer of wetlands surrounding the open water. The borrow pit is already used by a variety of waterfowl, and the proposed enhancements will promote wildlife habitat in addition to providing recreation opportunities to the community. Additionally, the recreated/mitigated wetlands will offer a biological connection to the existing wetlands along the southeast corner of the subject property. The remainder of the proposed West Park Subdivision would be designed to avoid impacts to all other delineated features on the subject property. Permits Impacts to Wetland 3 will not require any permitting, as it has been documented by the USACE as non-jurisdictional. No permitting for wetland or waterway impacts are required for the proposed West Park Subdivision at this time. If design determines there will be impacts to any other features, a Montana Joint Application will be completed to acquire the necessary permits prior to construction. References Morrison-Maierle. 2021. Norton East Wetland Delineation. June 2021. US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 2021. National Wetland Inventory Wetlands Mapper. https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.html U.S. Geological Survey. 2020. Bozeman, Montana, 7.5-minute Series Topographic Quadrangle Map. Attachments 1. National Wetland Inventory Map 2. 2021 Wetland Delineation Map 3. 2021 Wetland Delineation Report 4. Jurisdictional Determination Documentation DRAWN BY: BC CHK'D BY: BC APPR. BY: CP DATE: GALLATIN COUNTY MT COPYRIGHT MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2021N:\5418\002 - Master Agreement\GIS\Exhibits\2021_WD\Fig 4_NWI.mxd FIGURE NO. PROJECT NO. 5418.002 1 2880 Technology Bldv.Bozeman, MT 59718 Phone: (406) 587-0721Fax: (406) 922-6702 6/16/2021 W BABCOCK ST ±0 400 800200Feet Legend Investigation Area Freshwater Emergent Wetland Freshwater Pond  NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY MAP WEST PARK SUBDIVISION DRAWN BY: BC CHK'D BY: BC APPR. BY: CP DATE: GALLATIN COUNTY MT COPYRIGHT MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2021N:\5418\002 - Master Agreement\GIS\Exhibits\2021_WD\Fig 5_WD.mxd FIGURE NO. PROJECT NO. 5418.002 2 2880 Technology Bldv.Bozeman, MT 59718 Phone: (406) 587-0721Fax: (406) 922-6702 6/23/2021 !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( W BABCOCK ST WET 1 WET 2 WET 5 WET 3 WE T 4 UDP 1 WDP 1 UDP 2 WDP 3 WDP 2 UDP 3 UDP 4 UDP 5 WDP 4 ±0 250 500125Feet Legend Investigation Area Wetlands (6.76 acres) Stream (780 linear feet) Ditch (1,166 linear feet) Pond (1.54 acres) !(Upland Data Point !(Wetland Data Point  WETLAND DELINEATION MAP WEST PARK SUBDIVISION Feature Area (ac)WET 1 2.18WET 2 0.09WET 3 2.58WET 4 1.57WET 5 0.34 Norton East Wetland Delineation - May 2021 Prepared for: Kilday Stratton Prepared by: 2880 Technology Blvd West Bozeman, MT 59718 June 2021 Project No. 5418.002 Norton East Wetland Delineation Page i Table of Contents 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1 2 Methods ................................................................................................................................................ 1 2.1 Vegetation ..................................................................................................................................... 1 2.2 Soil ................................................................................................................................................. 1 2.3 Hydrology ...................................................................................................................................... 2 3 Results ................................................................................................................................................... 2 3.1 Vegetation ..................................................................................................................................... 2 3.2 Soil ................................................................................................................................................. 2 3.3 Hydrology ...................................................................................................................................... 3 3.3.1 Topography ........................................................................................................................... 3 3.3.2 National Wetland Inventory.................................................................................................. 3 3.3.3 Floodplains and On-Site Hydrology ....................................................................................... 3 4 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 3 5 References ............................................................................................................................................ 4 Appendices Appendix A Figures Appendix B USACE Wetland Determination Forms Appendix C Site Photographs Norton East Wetland Delineation Page 1 1 Introduction Morrison-Maierle, Inc. (Morrison-Maierle) completed a wetland delineation for the Norton East project located in Bozeman, Montana. This technical memo summarizes the findings of the wetland investigation. The project area consisted of 42 acres of land located north of West Babcock Street in Gallatin County, Montana. Appendix A includes figures of the project area location. 2 Methods The wetland investigation utilized the methodology presented in the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) and subsequent modifications outlined in the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast (Version 2.0) (Environmental Laboratory 2010). Upland data points (UDP) and wetland data points (WDP) were established as needed during the field visit. Sample data points were labeled with an UDP or WDP, followed by the number associated with the data point, (e.g. noted here in bold (UDP 1) to correspond to the sample points for that location. Data for vegetation, hydrology, and soils were recorded in the field and entered on Wetland Determination Data Forms located in Appendix B. Photographs of sample points are provided in Appendix C. Sample points and wetland boundaries (if present) were recorded using a handheld Global Positioning System (GPS) unit and post-processed to sub-meter accuracy. Locations were then converted to shapefiles and uploaded into ArcMap 10.7.1 for display on figures included in Appendix A. 2.1 Vegetation Vegetation at upland and wetland data points was classified based on wetland indicator status. The indicator status of vegetation was derived from the 2018 National Wetland Plant List (USACE 2018). Using the current plant list, vegetation cover qualified as hydrophytic where over 50% of the dominant plant species had an indicator status of obligate (OBL), facultative wet (FACW), and/or facultative (FAC). FAC plants, such as Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), are equally likely to occur in wetlands and non-wetlands. Vegetation cover was considered as upland where over 50% of the dominant plant species were classified as upland (UPL), and/or facultative upland (FACU). Plants observed within each data plot were identified using Montana Manual of Vascular Plants (Lesica 2012). 2.2 Soil Wetlands must meet the qualifications of at least one hydric soil indicator, or meet the definition of a hydric soil (a soil that formed under conditions of saturation, flooding or ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part (NRCS 2019a)). Soils at each data point were evaluated and described notating the depth, matrix color, mottle abundance and contrast (if present), texture, etc. (Environmental Laboratory, 1987 and 2010). Norton East Wetland Delineation Page 2 Moist matrix color and moist mottle color of the soils were determined utilizing the Munsell Soil Color Chart (Kollmorgan Instruments Corporation, 2009). 2.3 Hydrology Primary and secondary hydrologic indicators were assessed at each wetland and upland data point; one primary indicator or two secondary indicators are required to qualify the area as containing wetland hydrology. Examples of primary hydrologic indicators are saturation within 12 inches of the ground surface, surface water, and water table within 12 inches of the ground surface. Examples of secondary hydrologic indicators are FAC-neutral test and geomorphic position on the landscape. 3 Results A wetland delineation of the project area was performed by a Morrison-Maierle environmental scientist on May 25, 2021. The vegetation, hydrology, and soil characteristics at each of nine data points were documented in the field and recorded on Wetland Determination Data Forms for the Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast (Supplement, 2010). 3.1 Vegetation Vegetation communities were evaluated and documented to delineate wetland and upland boundaries. The upland herbaceous areas within the project consisted of reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW), wood’s rose (Rosa woodsia, FACU), and American licorice (Glycyrrhiza lepidota, FAC). The wetlands within the project area were dominated by reed canary grass and cattail (Typha latifolia, OBL). The location of all data points is identified on Figure 5 of Appendix A. 3.2 Soil Mapped soil types within the project area were obtained from the Web Soil Survey (NRCS 2021b). According to the Web Soil Survey, five soil types are located within the project area: • Hyalite-Beaverton complex, moderately wet, 0 to 2 percent slopes (448A) • Enbar loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes (509B) • Meadowcreek loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes (510B) • Lamoose silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes (537A) • Hyalite-Beaverton complex, 0 to 4 percent slopes (748A) Soils were analyzed in the field for texture and color using the Munsell Soil Color Charts (Munsell 2009). The upland soils exhibited a 10YR 2/1 silty clay down to approximately 12 inches. Soil in the wetland areas also exhibited a 10YR 2/1 silty clay down to approximately 12 inches and the hydric soil indicator is loamy mucky mineral (F1). It was noted that there was not much difference between the soils in the upland and wetland areas. This field has gone though several changes over the years including draining, farming, excavation, and fill. Norton East Wetland Delineation Page 3 3.3 Hydrology 3.3.1 Topography The project area lies within the Bozeman, Montana (2020), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5- minute Topographic Map. The project area lies at approximately 4,800 feet above sea level (Appendix A, Figure 1). A perennial stream, Baxter Creek, is shown to intersect the project area. 3.3.2 National Wetland Inventory The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) maintains the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI), which serves as a publicly available resource that provides detailed information on the abundance, characteristics, and distribution of US Wetlands. According to the NWI database, several freshwater emergent wetland (PEM1A and PEM1C) features are present within the investigation area (USFWS 2021). Appendix A, Figure 4 depicts the NWI features in the project vicinity. 3.3.3 Floodplains and On-Site Hydrology The project area is located within Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) FIRM Panel 30031C0811D with an effective date of September 2, 2011 (FEMA 2021). The floodplain data for this area is not printed and cannot be viewed. The project area consists of several wetland areas with similar hydrology indicator. These include geomorphic position, standing water, and shallow water table. Upland areas did not exhibit any hydrology indicators. 4 Conclusion The western half of the subject property contained 4 seemingly isolated wetlands, which included a stormwater pond. The eastern half of the subject property contained remnants of an unused irrigation ditch and the OHWM of Baxter Creek. Baxter Creek also maintained a wetland fringe. In total the following resources were delineated on the subject property: Feature Size Wetlands 6.76 acres Baxter Creek 780 linear feet Remnant irrigation ditch 1,166 linear feet Borrow pit pond 1.54 acres Based on the results of the wetland delineation performed according to USACE guidelines, it is Morrison-Maierle’s professional judgement that portions of the project area meet the technical criteria to be classified as wetlands and waterways. The USACE is the final authority over Waters of the U.S., and a jurisdictional determination would need to be submitted to the USACE for review to make that determination. Norton East Wetland Delineation Page 4 5 References Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS-79/31. USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington, D.C. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station. Vicksburg, MS. Environmental Laboratory. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corp of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast. (Version 2.0) U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Environmental Laboratory. Vicksburg, MS. Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA). 2021. FEMA Flood Map Service Center. https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home Lesica, P. 2012. Manual of Montana Vascular Plants. Brit Press. Fort Worth, Texas. Montana Department of Agriculture. 2017. Montana Noxious Weed List. Effective: February 2017. https://agr.mt.gov/Portals/168/Documents/Weeds/2017%20Noxious%20Weed %20List.pdf Munsell. 2009. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Macbeth Division of Kollmorgan Instruments. New Windsor, NY. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2019b. Hydric Soils Definition. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/use/hydric/?cid=nrcs142p2_053961 Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2021a. Web Soil Survey. https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 2018. National Wetland Plant List 2018. http://wetland-plants.usace.army.mil/ US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 2021. National Wetland Inventory Wetlands Mapper. https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.html U.S. Geological Survey. 2020. Bozeman, Montana, 7.5-minute Series Topographic Quadrangle Map. APPENDIX A: FIGURES DRAWN BY: BC CHK'D BY: BC APPR. BY: CP DATE: GALLATIN COUNTY MT COPYRIGHT MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2021 N:\5418\002 - Master Agreement\GIS\Exhibits\2021_WD\Fig 1_Vicinity.mxd FIGURE NO. PROJECT NO. 5418.002 1 2880 Technology Bldv.Bozeman, MT 59718 Phone: (406) 587-0721Fax: (406) 922-6702 6/16/2021 DURSTON RD HUFFLINE RD GOOCH HILL RDCOTTONWOOD RD±0 1 20.5 Miles Legend Investigation Area  TOPOGRAPHIC & VICINITY MAP NORTON EAST RANCH PROPERTY NORTON EAST RANCH PROPERTYBOZEMAN, MONTANAT2S R5E SEC 9GALLATIN COUNTY DRAWN BY: BC CHK'D BY: BC APPR. BY: CP DATE: GALLATIN COUNTY MT COPYRIGHT MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2021 C:\GISTemp\Fig 2_Aerial.mxd FIGURE NO. PROJECT NO. 5418.002 2 2880 Technology Bldv.Bozeman, MT 59718 Phone: (406) 587-0721Fax: (406) 922-6702 6/16/2021 DURSTON RD HUFFLINE RD COTTONWOOD RD±0 800 1,600400Feet Legend Investigation Area  2019 NAIP AERIAL MAP NORTON EAST RANCH PROPERTY DRAWN BY: BC CHK'D BY: BC APPR. BY: CP DATE: GALLATIN COUNTY MT COPYRIGHT MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2021 N:\5418\002 - Master Agreement\GIS\Exhibits\2021_WD\Fig 3_Soils.mxd FIGURE NO. PROJECT NO. 5418.002 3 2880 Technology Bldv.Bozeman, MT 59718 Phone: (406) 587-0721Fax: (406) 922-6702 6/16/2021 W BABCOCK ST 510B 537A 748A 509B 509B 448A 537A 509B 448A 510B±0 400 800200Feet Legend Investigation Area NRCS Soil Map Unit  NRCS SOILS MAP NORTON EAST RANCH PROPERTY DRAWN BY: BC CHK'D BY: BC APPR. BY: CP DATE: GALLATIN COUNTY MT COPYRIGHT MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2021 N:\5418\002 - Master Agreement\GIS\Exhibits\2021_WD\Fig 4_NWI.mxd FIGURE NO. PROJECT NO. 5418.002 4 2880 Technology Bldv.Bozeman, MT 59718 Phone: (406) 587-0721Fax: (406) 922-6702 6/16/2021 W BABCOCK ST ±0 400 800200Feet Legend Investigation Area Freshwater Emergent Wetland Freshwater Pond  NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY MAP NORTON EAST RANCH PROPERTY DRAWN BY: BC CHK'D BY: BC APPR. BY: CP DATE: GALLATIN COUNTY MT COPYRIGHT MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2021 N:\5418\002 - Master Agreement\GIS\Exhibits\2021_WD\Fig 5_WD.mxd FIGURE NO. PROJECT NO. 5418.002 5 2880 Technology Bldv.Bozeman, MT 59718 Phone: (406) 587-0721Fax: (406) 922-6702 6/23/2021 !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( W BABCOCK ST WET 1 WET 2 WET 5 WET 3 WET 4 UDP 1 WDP 1 UDP 2 WDP 3 WDP 2 UDP 3 UDP 4 UDP 5 WDP 4 ±0 250 500125Feet Legend Investigation Area Wetlands (6.76 acres) Stream (780 linear feet) Ditch (1,166 linear feet) Pond (1.54 acres) !(Upland Data Point !(Wetland Data Point  WETLAND DELINEATION MAP NORTON EAST RANCH PROPERTY Feature Area (ac)WET 1 2.18WET 2 0.09WET 3 2.58WET 4 1.57WET 5 0.34 APPENDIX B: USACE WETLAND DETERMINATION FORMS Project Site:City/County:Sampling Date:5/25/2021 Applicant/Owner: Greg & Kilday Stratton State:Montana Sampling Point:UDP 1 Investigator(s):C. Pearcy Section/Range:Slope (%):0-5 Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Upland concave Datum:NAD83 SP MT Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Rocky Mountain Range and Forest Lat:45.67902 Long:-111.114753 Soil Map Unit Name:509B none Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks) Are Vegetation Soil Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are Vegetation Soil Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks) Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes No X SUMMARY OF FINDINGS- Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, ect. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No X Yes No X Yes Yes No X No X Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2)MLRA 1, 2, 4A, an d4B)4A, an d4B) Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) (LRR F) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches) Water Table Present?Yes No X Depth (inches)Wetland Hydrology Present? Saturation Present?Yes No X Depth (inches)Yes (includes cappillary fringe)No X Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Morrison-Maierle, Inc. Norton East Gallatin Local relief (concave, convex, none): NWI classification: S9 T2 S R5 E WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Is the Sample Area within a Wetland?Wetland Hydrology Present? Hydric Soils Present? Remarks: Based on the absence of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils and wetland hydrology, this location does not meet the criteria of a wetland. HYDROLOGY Remarks: Hydrologic indicators were not observed at this location. Vegetation- Use scientific names of plants Montana UDP 1 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1 Number of Dominant Species 1 (A) 2 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 4 Total Number of Dominant 2 (B) 5 Species Across All Strata: 6 7 Percent of Dominant Species 50%(A/B) Total Cover 0 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Prevalance Index Worksheet: 1 2 OBL species 0 x 1 =0 3 FACW species 65 x 2 =130 4 FAC species 0 x 3 =0 5 FACU species 35 x 4 =140 6 UPL species 0 x 5 =0 7 Column Totals:100 (A) (B)270 Total Cover 0 Prevalence Index = B/A =3 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 35 YES FACU Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 Dominance Test is >50% 3 Prevalence Index < 3.01 4 Morphological Adaptation1 (Provide supporting data) 5 Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 6 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 7 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present. Total Cover 35 Definitions for Four Vegetation Strata: Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 inches or more 1 65 YES FACW in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of 2 height 3 4 Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines less 5 than 3 inch DBH and greater than 1 meter tall. 6 7 Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless 8 of size, and wood plants less than 1 meter tall. 9 10 Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 1 meter in 11 height. 12 Total Cover 65 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status 1 2 3 X 4 YES NO 5 Total Cover 0 Shrub Stratum (30') Herb Stratum (30') Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below) Hydrophytic vegetation was not observed at this location. Woody Vine Stratum (30') Sapling Stratum (30') Phalaris arundinacea Rosa woodsii Tree Stratum (Plot Sizes: 30') Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Total % Cover of:Multiply by: SOIL Profile Desription: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)Montana UDP 1 Depth (inches) % % Type1 Loc2 Texture 0-12 100 silty clay 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Yes No X 3Indicators of hydrolophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present. Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: Hydric soil indicators were not observed at this location. Remarks Color (moist) 10YR 2/1 Color (moist) Redox Fetures Hydric Soil Present? Matrix Project Site:City/County:Sampling Date:5/25/2021 Applicant/Owner: Greg & Kilday Stratton State:Montana Sampling Point:UDP 2 Investigator(s):C. Pearcy Section/Range:Slope (%):0-5 Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): upland plain concave Datum:NAD83 SP MT Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Rocky Mountain Range and Forest Lat:45.6799 Long:-111.112283 Soil Map Unit Name:510B none Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks) Are Vegetation Soil Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are Vegetation Soil Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks) Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes No X SUMMARY OF FINDINGS- Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, ect. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No X Yes No X Yes Yes No X No X Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2)MLRA 1, 2, 4A, an d4B)4A, an d4B) Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) (LRR F) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches) Water Table Present?Yes No X Depth (inches)Wetland Hydrology Present? Saturation Present?Yes No X Depth (inches)Yes (includes cappillary fringe)No X Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Morrison-Maierle, Inc. Norton East Gallatin Local relief (concave, convex, none): NWI classification: S9 T2 S R5 E WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Is the Sample Area within a Wetland?Wetland Hydrology Present? Hydric Soils Present? Remarks: Based on the absence of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils and wetland hydrology, this location does not meet the criteria of a wetland. HYDROLOGY Remarks: Hydrologic indicators were not observed at this location. Vegetation- Use scientific names of plants Montana UDP 2 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1 Number of Dominant Species 1 (A) 2 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 4 Total Number of Dominant 2 (B) 5 Species Across All Strata: 6 7 Percent of Dominant Species 50%(A/B) Total Cover 0 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Prevalance Index Worksheet: 1 2 OBL species 0 x 1 =0 3 FACW species 60 x 2 =120 4 FAC species 20 x 3 =60 5 FACU species 20 x 4 =80 6 UPL species 0 x 5 =0 7 Column Totals:100 (A) (B)260 Total Cover 0 Prevalence Index = B/A =3 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 20 YES FACU Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 Dominance Test is >50% 3 Prevalence Index < 3.01 4 Morphological Adaptation1 (Provide supporting data) 5 Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 6 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 7 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present. Total Cover 20 Definitions for Four Vegetation Strata: Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 inches or more 1 60 YES FACW in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of 2 10 NO FAC height 3 10 NO FAC 4 Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines less 5 than 3 inch DBH and greater than 1 meter tall. 6 7 Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless 8 of size, and wood plants less than 1 meter tall. 9 10 Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 1 meter in 11 height. 12 Total Cover 80 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status 1 2 3 X 4 YES NO 5 Total Cover 0 Shrub Stratum (30') Herb Stratum (30') Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below) Hydrophytic vegetation was not observed at this location. Woody Vine Stratum (30') Sapling Stratum (30') Phalaris arundinacea Rosa woodsii Tree Stratum (Plot Sizes: 30') Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Total % Cover of:Multiply by: Glycyrrhiza lepidota Equisetum arvense SOIL Profile Desription: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)Montana UDP 2 Depth (inches) % % Type1 Loc2 Texture 0-12 100 silty clay 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Yes No X 3Indicators of hydrolophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present. Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: Hydric soil indicators were not observed at this location. Remarks Color (moist) 10YR 2/1 Color (moist) Redox Fetures Hydric Soil Present? Matrix Project Site:City/County:Sampling Date:5/25/2021 Applicant/Owner: Greg & Kilday Stratton State:Montana Sampling Point:UDP 3 Investigator(s):C. Pearcy Section/Range:Slope (%):0-5 Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): upland plain concave Datum:NAD83 SP MT Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Rocky Mountain Range and Forest Lat:45.68217 Long:-111.112606 Soil Map Unit Name:748A none Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks) Are Vegetation Soil Hydrology x significantly disturbed? Are Vegetation Soil Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks) Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes No X SUMMARY OF FINDINGS- Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, ect. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Yes No X Yes Yes No X No X Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2)MLRA 1, 2, 4A, an d4B)4A, an d4B) Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) (LRR F) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches) Water Table Present?Yes No X Depth (inches)Wetland Hydrology Present? Saturation Present?Yes No X Depth (inches)Yes (includes cappillary fringe)No X Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Morrison-Maierle, Inc. Norton East Gallatin Local relief (concave, convex, none): NWI classification: S9 T2 S R5 E WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Is the Sample Area within a Wetland?Wetland Hydrology Present? Hydric Soils Present? Remarks: Based on the absence of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils and wetland hydrology, this location does not meet the criteria of a wetland. HYDROLOGY Remarks: Hydrologic indicators were not observed at this location. Vegetation- Use scientific names of plants Montana UDP 3 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1 Number of Dominant Species 1 (A) 2 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 4 Total Number of Dominant 1 (B) 5 Species Across All Strata: 6 7 Percent of Dominant Species 100%(A/B) Total Cover 0 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Prevalance Index Worksheet: 1 2 OBL species 0 x 1 =0 3 FACW species 100 x 2 =200 4 FAC species 0 x 3 =0 5 FACU species 0 x 4 =0 6 UPL species 0 x 5 =0 7 Column Totals:100 (A) (B)200 Total Cover 0 Prevalence Index = B/A =2 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 X Dominance Test is >50% 3 Prevalence Index < 3.01 4 Morphological Adaptation1 (Provide supporting data) 5 Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 6 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 7 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present. Total Cover 0 Definitions for Four Vegetation Strata: Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 inches or more 1 100 YES FACW in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of 2 height 3 4 Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines less 5 than 3 inch DBH and greater than 1 meter tall. 6 7 Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless 8 of size, and wood plants less than 1 meter tall. 9 10 Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 1 meter in 11 height. 12 Total Cover 100 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status 1 2 3 X 4 YES NO 5 Total Cover 0 Shrub Stratum (30') Herb Stratum (30') Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below) Hydrophytic vegetation was observed at this location. Woody Vine Stratum (30') Sapling Stratum (30') Phalaris arundinacea Tree Stratum (Plot Sizes: 30') Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Total % Cover of:Multiply by: SOIL Profile Desription: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)Montana UDP 3 Depth (inches) % % Type1 Loc2 Texture 0-14 100 silty clay 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Yes No X 3Indicators of hydrolophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present. Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: Hydric soil indicators were not observed at this location. Remarks Color (moist) 10YR 2/1 Color (moist) Redox Fetures Hydric Soil Present? Matrix Project Site:City/County:Sampling Date:5/25/2021 Applicant/Owner: Greg & Kilday Stratton State:Montana Sampling Point:UDP 4 Investigator(s):C. Pearcy Section/Range:Slope (%):0-5 Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): upland plain concave Datum:NAD83 SP MT Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Rocky Mountain Range and Forest Lat:45.68189 Long:-111.111882 Soil Map Unit Name:748A none Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks) Are Vegetation Soil Hydrology x significantly disturbed? Are Vegetation Soil Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks) Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes No X SUMMARY OF FINDINGS- Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, ect. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Yes No X Yes Yes No X No X Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2)MLRA 1, 2, 4A, an d4B)4A, an d4B) Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) (LRR F) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches) Water Table Present?Yes No X Depth (inches)Wetland Hydrology Present? Saturation Present?Yes No X Depth (inches)Yes (includes cappillary fringe)No X Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Morrison-Maierle, Inc. Norton East Gallatin Local relief (concave, convex, none): NWI classification: S9 T2 S R5 E WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Is the Sample Area within a Wetland?Wetland Hydrology Present? Hydric Soils Present? Remarks: Based on the absence of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils and wetland hydrology, this location does not meet the criteria of a wetland. HYDROLOGY Remarks: Hydrologic indicators were not observed at this location. Vegetation- Use scientific names of plants Montana UDP 4 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1 Number of Dominant Species 2 (A) 2 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 4 Total Number of Dominant 2 (B) 5 Species Across All Strata: 6 7 Percent of Dominant Species 100%(A/B) Total Cover 0 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Prevalance Index Worksheet: 1 2 OBL species 0 x 1 =0 3 FACW species 40 x 2 =80 4 FAC species 50 x 3 =150 5 FACU species 10 x 4 =40 6 UPL species 0 x 5 =0 7 Column Totals:100 (A) (B)270 Total Cover 0 Prevalence Index = B/A =3 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 X Dominance Test is >50% 3 Prevalence Index < 3.01 4 Morphological Adaptation1 (Provide supporting data) 5 Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 6 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 7 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present. Total Cover 0 Definitions for Four Vegetation Strata: Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 inches or more 1 50 YES FAC in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of 2 40 YES FACW height 3 10 NO FACU 4 Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines less 5 than 3 inch DBH and greater than 1 meter tall. 6 7 Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless 8 of size, and wood plants less than 1 meter tall. 9 10 Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 1 meter in 11 height. 12 Total Cover 100 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status 1 2 3 X 4 YES NO 5 Total Cover 0 Shrub Stratum (30') Herb Stratum (30') Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below) Hydrophytic vegetation was observed at this location. Hydrology appears to have been altered, as there are dead cattails but no new cattail growth.l Woody Vine Stratum (30') Sapling Stratum (30') Cirsium arvense Tree Stratum (Plot Sizes: 30') Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Total % Cover of:Multiply by: Phalaris arundinacea Sisymbrium altissimum SOIL Profile Desription: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)Montana UDP 4 Depth (inches) % % Type1 Loc2 Texture 0-14 100 silty clay 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Yes No X 3Indicators of hydrolophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present. Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: Hydric soil indicators were not observed at this location. Remarks Color (moist) 10YR 2/1 Color (moist) Redox Fetures Hydric Soil Present? Matrix Project Site:City/County:Sampling Date:5/25/2021 Applicant/Owner: Greg & Kilday Stratton State:Montana Sampling Point:UDP 5 Investigator(s):C. Pearcy Section/Range:Slope (%):0-5 Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): upland plain concave Datum:NAD83 SP MT Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Rocky Mountain Range and Forest Lat:45.6818 Long:-111.110153 Soil Map Unit Name:537A PEMA Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks) Are Vegetation Soil Hydrology x significantly disturbed? Are Vegetation Soil Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks) Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes No X SUMMARY OF FINDINGS- Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, ect. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Yes No X Yes Yes No X No X Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2)MLRA 1, 2, 4A, an d4B)4A, an d4B) Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) (LRR F) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No X Depth (inches) Water Table Present?Yes No X Depth (inches)Wetland Hydrology Present? Saturation Present?Yes No X Depth (inches)Yes (includes cappillary fringe)No X Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Morrison-Maierle, Inc. Norton East Gallatin Local relief (concave, convex, none): NWI classification: S9 T2 S R5 E WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Is the Sample Area within a Wetland?Wetland Hydrology Present? Hydric Soils Present? Remarks: Based on the absence of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils and wetland hydrology, this location does not meet the criteria of a wetland. HYDROLOGY Remarks: Hydrologic indicators were not observed at this location. Vegetation- Use scientific names of plants Montana UDP 5 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1 Number of Dominant Species 2 (A) 2 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 4 Total Number of Dominant 3 (B) 5 Species Across All Strata: 6 7 Percent of Dominant Species 67%(A/B) Total Cover 0 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Prevalance Index Worksheet: 1 2 OBL species 0 x 1 =0 3 FACW species 50 x 2 =100 4 FAC species 30 x 3 =90 5 FACU species 20 x 4 =80 6 UPL species 0 x 5 =0 7 Column Totals:100 (A) (B)270 Total Cover 0 Prevalence Index = B/A =3 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 20 YES FACU Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 X Dominance Test is >50% 3 Prevalence Index < 3.01 4 Morphological Adaptation1 (Provide supporting data) 5 Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 6 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 7 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present. Total Cover 20 Definitions for Four Vegetation Strata: Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 inches or more 1 50 YES FACW in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of 2 30 YES FAC height 3 4 Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines less 5 than 3 inch DBH and greater than 1 meter tall. 6 7 Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless 8 of size, and wood plants less than 1 meter tall. 9 10 Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 1 meter in 11 height. 12 Total Cover 80 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status 1 2 3 X 4 YES NO 5 Total Cover 0 Shrub Stratum (30') Herb Stratum (30') Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below) Hydrophytic vegetation was observed at this location. Woody Vine Stratum (30') Sapling Stratum (30') Phalaris arundinacea Rosa woodsii Tree Stratum (Plot Sizes: 30') Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Total % Cover of:Multiply by: Glycyrrhiza lepidota SOIL Profile Desription: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)Montana UDP 5 Depth (inches) % % Type1 Loc2 Texture 0-14 100 silty clay 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Yes No X 3Indicators of hydrolophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present. Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: Hydric soil indicators were not observed at this location. Remarks Color (moist) 10YR 2/1 Color (moist) Redox Fetures Hydric Soil Present? Matrix Project Site:City/County:Sampling Date:5/25/2021 Applicant/Owner: Kilday Stratton State:Montana Sampling Point:WDP 1 Investigator(s):C. Pearcy Section/Range:Slope (%):0-5 Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): concave Datum:NAD83 SP MT Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Rocky Mountain Range and Forest Lat:45.67916 Long:-111.114851 Soil Map Unit Name:509B none Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks) Are Vegetation Soil Hydrology x significantly disturbed? Are Vegetation Soil Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks) Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes No X SUMMARY OF FINDINGS- Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, ect. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Yes X No Yes X Yes X No No Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) X Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2)MLRA 1, 2, 4A, an d4B)4A, an d4B) Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)X Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) (LRR F) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes X No Depth (inches 2 Water Table Present?Yes No X Depth (inches)Wetland Hydrology Present? Saturation Present?Yes No X Depth (inches)Yes X (includes cappillary fringe)No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Morrison-Maierle, Inc. Norton East Gallatin Local relief (concave, convex, none): NWI classification: S9 T2 S R5 E WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Is the Sample Area within a Wetland?Wetland Hydrology Present? Hydric Soils Present? Remarks: Based on the presence of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils and wetland hydrology, this location meets the criteria of a wetland. HYDROLOGY Remarks: Hydrologic indicators were observed at this location. Vegetation- Use scientific names of plants Montana WDP 1 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1 Number of Dominant Species 2 (A) 2 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 4 Total Number of Dominant 2 (B) 5 Species Across All Strata: 6 7 Percent of Dominant Species 100%(A/B) Total Cover 0 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Prevalance Index Worksheet: 1 2 OBL species 50 x 1 =50 3 FACW species 50 x 2 =100 4 FAC species 0 x 3 =0 5 FACU species 0 x 4 =0 6 UPL species 0 x 5 =0 7 Column Totals:100 (A) (B)150 Total Cover 0 Prevalence Index = B/A =2 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 X Dominance Test is >50% 3 X Prevalence Index < 3.01 4 Morphological Adaptation1 (Provide supporting data) 5 Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 6 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 7 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present. Total Cover 0 Definitions for Four Vegetation Strata: Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 inches or more 1 50 YES FACW in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of 2 50 YES OBL height 3 4 Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines less 5 than 3 inch DBH and greater than 1 meter tall. 6 7 Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless 8 of size, and wood plants less than 1 meter tall. 9 10 Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 1 meter in 11 height. 12 Total Cover 100 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status 1 2 3 X 4 YES NO 5 Total Cover 0 Shrub Stratum (30') Herb Stratum (30') Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below) Hydrophytic vegetation was observed at this location. Woody Vine Stratum (30') Sapling Stratum (30') Phalaris arundinacea Tree Stratum (Plot Sizes: 30') Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Total % Cover of:Multiply by: Typha latifolia SOIL Profile Desription: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)Montana WDP 1 Depth (inches) % % Type1 Loc2 Texture 0-12 100 silty clay loam 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3)X Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Yes X No 3Indicators of hydrolophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present. Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: Hydric soil indicators were observed at this location. Remarks Color (moist) 10YR 2/1 heavy organics/muck Color (moist) Redox Fetures Hydric Soil Present? Matrix Project Site:City/County:Sampling Date:5/25/2021 Applicant/Owner: Greg & Kilday Stratton State:Montana Sampling Point:WDP 2 Investigator(s):C. Pearcy Section/Range:Slope (%):0-5 Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): wet meadow concave Datum:NAD83 SP MT Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Rocky Mountain Range and Forest Lat:45.67858 Long:-111.114497 Soil Map Unit Name:510B none Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks) Are Vegetation Soil Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are Vegetation Soil Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks) Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes No X SUMMARY OF FINDINGS- Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, ect. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Yes X No Yes X Yes X No No Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) X Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, X High Water Table (A2)MLRA 1, 2, 4A, an d4B)4A, an d4B) Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)X Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) (LRR F) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes X No Depth (inches 4 Water Table Present?Yes X No Depth (inches 4 Wetland Hydrology Present? Saturation Present?Yes No X Depth (inches)Yes X (includes cappillary fringe)No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Wetland Hydrology Present? Hydric Soils Present? Remarks: Based on the presence of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils and wetland hydrology, this location meets the criteria of a wetland. HYDROLOGY Remarks: Hydrologic indicators were observed at this location. This data point was recorded in the location of a man-made storm water pond. Morrison-Maierle, Inc. Norton East Gallatin Local relief (concave, convex, none): NWI classification: S9 T2 S R5 E WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Is the Sample Area within a Wetland? Vegetation- Use scientific names of plants Montana WDP 2 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1 Number of Dominant Species 3 (A) 2 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 4 Total Number of Dominant 3 (B) 5 Species Across All Strata: 6 7 Percent of Dominant Species 100%(A/B) Total Cover 0 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Prevalance Index Worksheet: 1 2 OBL species 80 x 1 =80 3 FACW species 20 x 2 =40 4 FAC species 0 x 3 =0 5 FACU species 0 x 4 =0 6 UPL species 0 x 5 =0 7 Column Totals:100 (A) (B)120 Total Cover 0 Prevalence Index = B/A =1 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 X Dominance Test is >50% 3 X Prevalence Index < 3.01 4 Morphological Adaptation1 (Provide supporting data) 5 Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 6 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 7 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present. Total Cover 0 Definitions for Four Vegetation Strata: Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 inches or more 1 60 YES OBL in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of 2 20 YES OBL height 3 20 YES FACW 4 Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines less 5 than 3 inch DBH and greater than 1 meter tall. 6 7 Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless 8 of size, and wood plants less than 1 meter tall. 9 10 Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 1 meter in 11 height. 12 Total Cover 100 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status 1 2 3 X 4 YES NO 5 Total Cover 0 Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Total % Cover of:Multiply by: Carex utriculata Phalaris arundinacea Tree Stratum (Plot Sizes: 30') Sapling Stratum (30') Typha latifolia Shrub Stratum (30') Herb Stratum (30') Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below) Hydrophytic vegetation was observed at this location. Woody Vine Stratum (30') SOIL Profile Desription: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)Montana WDP 2 Depth (inches) % % Type1 Loc2 Texture 0-12 100 silty clay loam 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3)X Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Yes X No Hydric Soil Present? Matrix Color (moist) Redox Fetures 10YR 2/1 heavy organics/muck Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: Hydric soil indicators were observed at this location. Remarks Color (moist) 3Indicators of hydrolophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present. Project Site:City/County:Sampling Date:5/25/2021 Applicant/Owner: Greg & Kilday Stratton State:Montana Sampling Point:WDP 3 Investigator(s):C. Pearcy Section/Range:Slope (%):0-5 Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): wet meadow concave Datum:NAD83 SP MT Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Rocky Mountain Range and Forest Lat:45.67978 Long:-111.112387 Soil Map Unit Name:510B PEMA Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks) Are Vegetation Soil Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are Vegetation Soil Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks) Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes No X SUMMARY OF FINDINGS- Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, ect. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Yes X No Yes X Yes X No No Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, X High Water Table (A2)MLRA 1, 2, 4A, an d4B)4A, an d4B) Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)X Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) (LRR F) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches) Water Table Present?Yes X No Depth (inches 3 Wetland Hydrology Present? Saturation Present?Yes No X Depth (inches)Yes X (includes cappillary fringe)No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Wetland Hydrology Present? Hydric Soils Present? Remarks: Based on the presence of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils and wetland hydrology, this location meets the criteria of a wetland. HYDROLOGY Remarks: Hydrologic indicators were observed at this location. Morrison-Maierle, Inc. Norton East Gallatin Local relief (concave, convex, none): NWI classification: S9 T2 S R5 E WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Is the Sample Area within a Wetland? Vegetation- Use scientific names of plants Montana WDP 3 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1 Number of Dominant Species 3 (A) 2 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 4 Total Number of Dominant 3 (B) 5 Species Across All Strata: 6 7 Percent of Dominant Species 100%(A/B) Total Cover 0 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Prevalance Index Worksheet: 1 2 OBL species 60 x 1 =60 3 FACW species 20 x 2 =40 4 FAC species 20 x 3 =60 5 FACU species 0 x 4 =0 6 UPL species 0 x 5 =0 7 Column Totals:100 (A) (B)160 Total Cover 0 Prevalence Index = B/A =2 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 X Dominance Test is >50% 3 X Prevalence Index < 3.01 4 Morphological Adaptation1 (Provide supporting data) 5 Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 6 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 7 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present. Total Cover 0 Definitions for Four Vegetation Strata: Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 inches or more 1 60 YES OBL in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of 2 20 YES FAC height 3 20 YES FACW 4 Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines less 5 than 3 inch DBH and greater than 1 meter tall. 6 7 Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless 8 of size, and wood plants less than 1 meter tall. 9 10 Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 1 meter in 11 height. 12 Total Cover 100 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status 1 2 3 X 4 YES NO 5 Total Cover 0 Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Total % Cover of:Multiply by: Equisetum arvense Phalaris arundinacea Tree Stratum (Plot Sizes: 30') Sapling Stratum (30') Typha latifolia Shrub Stratum (30') Herb Stratum (30') Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below) Hydrophytic vegetation was observed at this location. Woody Vine Stratum (30') SOIL Profile Desription: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)Montana WDP 3 Depth (inches) % % Type1 Loc2 Texture 0-12 100 silty clay loam 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3)X Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Yes X No Hydric Soil Present? Matrix Color (moist) Redox Fetures 10YR 2/1 heavy organics/muck Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: Hydric soil indicators were observed at this location. Remarks Color (moist) 3Indicators of hydrolophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present. Project Site:City/County:Sampling Date:5/25/2021 Applicant/Owner: Greg & Kilday Stratton State:Montana Sampling Point:WDP 4 Investigator(s):C. Pearcy Section/Range:Slope (%):0-5 Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): fringe to Baxter Creek concave Datum:NAD83 SP MT Subregion (LRR or MLRA):Rocky Mountain Range and Forest Lat:45.68202 Long:-111.110429 Soil Map Unit Name:537A PEMA Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks) Are Vegetation Soil Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are Vegetation Soil Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks) Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes No X SUMMARY OF FINDINGS- Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, ect. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes X No Yes X No Yes X Yes X No No Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, X High Water Table (A2)MLRA 1, 2, 4A, an d4B)4A, an d4B) Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)X Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) (LRR F) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches) Water Table Present?Yes X No Depth (inches 4 Wetland Hydrology Present? Saturation Present?Yes No X Depth (inches)Yes X (includes cappillary fringe)No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Wetland Hydrology Present? Hydric Soils Present? Remarks: Based on the presence of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils and wetland hydrology, this location meets the criteria of a wetland. HYDROLOGY Remarks: Hydrologic indicators were observed at this location. Morrison-Maierle, Inc. Norton East Gallatin Local relief (concave, convex, none): NWI classification: S9 T2 S R5 E WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Is the Sample Area within a Wetland? Vegetation- Use scientific names of plants Montana WDP 4 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet: 1 Number of Dominant Species 1 (A) 2 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 4 Total Number of Dominant 1 (B) 5 Species Across All Strata: 6 7 Percent of Dominant Species 100%(A/B) Total Cover 0 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Prevalance Index Worksheet: 1 2 OBL species 100 x 1 =100 3 FACW species 0 x 2 =0 4 FAC species 0 x 3 =0 5 FACU species 0 x 4 =0 6 UPL species 0 x 5 =0 7 Column Totals:100 (A) (B)100 Total Cover 0 Prevalence Index = B/A =1 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 X Dominance Test is >50% 3 X Prevalence Index < 3.01 4 Morphological Adaptation1 (Provide supporting data) 5 Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 6 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 7 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present. Total Cover 0 Definitions for Four Vegetation Strata: Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 inches or more 1 100 YES OBL in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of 2 height 3 4 Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines less 5 than 3 inch DBH and greater than 1 meter tall. 6 7 Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless 8 of size, and wood plants less than 1 meter tall. 9 10 Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 1 meter in 11 height. 12 Total Cover 100 Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status 1 2 3 X 4 YES NO 5 Total Cover 0 Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Total % Cover of:Multiply by: Tree Stratum (Plot Sizes: 30') Sapling Stratum (30') Typha latifolia Shrub Stratum (30') Herb Stratum (30') Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below) Hydrophytic vegetation was observed at this location. Woody Vine Stratum (30') SOIL Profile Desription: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)Montana WDP 4 Depth (inches) % % Type1 Loc2 Texture 0-12 100 silty clay loam 1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators:Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3)X Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Yes X No Hydric Soil Present? Matrix Color (moist) Redox Fetures 10YR 2/1 heavy organics/muck Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: Hydric soil indicators were observed at this location. Remarks Color (moist) 3Indicators of hydrolophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present. APPENDIX C: SITE PHOTOGRAPHS Norton East Wetland Delineation Photo Log – June 2021 Photo 1: Wetland Data Point 1 (WDP1) Photo 2: Upland Data Point 1 (UDP 1) Norton East Wetland Delineation Photo Log – June 2021 Photo 3: Stormwater Pond Photo 4: Borrow area pond Norton East Wetland Delineation Photo Log – June 2021 Photo 5: Wetland Data Point 3 (WDP3) Photo 6: Wetland complex overview, view south from northern boundary Norton East Wetland Delineation Photo Log – June 2021 Photo 7: Wetland Data Point 4 (WDP 4) Photo 8: Historic ditch infrastructure no longer in use DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, OMAHA DISTRICT HELENA REGULATORY OFFICE 10 WEST 15TH STREET, SUITE 2200 HELENA, MONTANA 59626 REPLY TO ATTENTION OF Printed on Recycled Paper January 22, 2018 Regulatory Branch Montana State Program Corps No. NWO-2007-01084-MTH Subject: Norton Properties, LLC (Vaughn Environmental Services) Norton East Subdivision – Jurisdictional Determination Kevin Spencer Norton Properties, LLC 63026 Lower Meadow Drive, Suite 200 Bend, Oregon 97701-6984 Dear Mr. Spencer: We are responding to your request for an approved jurisdictional determination regarding the above-referenced project. The approximate 50.0-acre project site is located within Section 9, Township 2 S, Range 5 E, Latitude 45.681976°, Longitude -111.119475°, Gallatin County, Montana. Based on available information, and site visit conducted by Tim McNew, Senior Regulatory Manager, on September 14, 2020, an approved jurisdictional determination has been completed for the areas identified in your request and is enclosed for your information. We concur with the estimate of waters of the United States, as depicted on the enclosed map, and exhibit dated December 15, 2020, titled “Norton Properties, Inc. Norton East Ranch Subdivision Gallatin County, EX1”, prepared by C&H Engineering and Surveying, Inc. Approximately 9.0506 acres of palustrine emergent wetlands are present within the survey area. The 9.0506-acres of additional waters identified on the attached map as Gray Wetland (5.0402 acres), Green Wetland (3.3819 acres) and Blue Wetland (0.6285 acres), do not meet the definition of waters of United States as they are non-adjacent wetlands [excluded (b)(1) waters]. As such, these waters are not currently regulated by under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. This disclaimer of jurisdiction is only for Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act. Other Federal, State, and local laws may apply to your activities. Please note, though the 5.0402 acres of wetland identified as “Gray Wetland” are not jurisdictional waters of the U.S., they remain protected from impacts, as detailed in the deed restriction executed on April 21, 2008. This letter contains an approved jurisdictional determination for your subject site. If you object to this determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. A Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) and Request for Appeal (RFA) form is enclosed. If you request to appeal this determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the Northwestern Division Office at the following address: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Northwestern Division ATTN: Melinda Larsen, Regulatory Appeals Review Officer 1201 NE Lloyd Blvd., Suite 400 Portland, OR 97232 Telephone: (503) 808-3888 Email: Melinda.M.Larsen@usace.army.mil -2- Printed on Recycled Paper The JD will be available at the following website within 30 days http://www.nwo.usace.army.mil/Missions/RegulatoryProgram/Montana.aspx. If you are not in agreement with the JD, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps of Engineers (Corps) regulations found at 33 C.F.R. §331. The Request for Appeal must be received within 60 days from the date of this correspondence. If you would like more information on the jurisdictional appeal process, contact this office. It is not necessary to submit a Request for Appeal if you do not object to the JD. In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal under 33 C.F.R. part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP. Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by March 23, 2021. It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this letter. This determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps of Engineers' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site identified in this request. This determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service prior to starting work. This determination is valid for five (5) years from the date of this letter, unless new information warrants revision of the determination before the expiration date. The Omaha District, Regulatory Branch is committed to providing quality and timely service to our customers. In an effort to improve customer service, please take a moment to complete our Customer Service Survey found on our website at http://per2.nwp.usace.army.mil/survey.html. If you do not have Internet access, you may call and request a paper copy of the survey that you can complete and return to us by mail or fax. Please refer to identification number NWO-2020-00500-MTH in any correspondence concerning this project. If you have any questions, please contact Timothy McNew at Helena Regulatory Office 10 West 15 Street, Suite 2200 Helena, Montana 59626, by email at Timothy.M.McNew@usace.army.mil, or telephone at (406) 441-1375. Sincerely, Sage L. Joyce State Program Manager Copy Furnished with enclosures (via email): Ms. Barbara Vaughn, #COMPANY NAME (bvaughn@montana.com) Enclosures: Request for Appeal Form Norton Properties, Inc. Norton East Ranch Subdivision, Wetland Delineation Exhibit Covenant of Dedication and Deed Restriction U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS REGULATORY PROGRAM APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM (INTERIM) NAVIGABLE WATERS PROTECTION RULE Page 1 of 3 Form Version 29 July 2020_updated I. ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION Completion Date of Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD): 1/22/2021 ORM Number: NWO-2007-01084-MTH Associated JDs: AJD Completed on January 4, 2018 Review Area Location1: State/Territory: MT City: Bozeman County/Parish/Borough: Gallatin Center Coordinates of Review Area: Latitude 45.681976 Longitude -111.119475 II. FINDINGS A. Summary: Check all that apply. At least one box from the following list MUST be selected. Complete the corresponding sections/tables and summarize data sources. ☐ The review area is comprised entirely of dry land (i.e., there are no waters or water features, including wetlands, of any kind in the entire review area). Rationale: N/A ☐ There are “navigable waters of the United States” within Rivers and Harbors Act jurisdiction within the review area (complete table in Section II.B). ☐ There are “waters of the United States” within Clean Water Act jurisdiction within the review area (complete appropriate tables in Section II.C). ☒ There are waters or water features excluded from Clean Water Act jurisdiction within the review area (complete table in Section II.D). B. Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 Section 10 (§ 10)2§ 10 Name § 10 Size § 10 Criteria Rationale for § 10 Determination N/A. N/A. N/A N/A. N/A. C. Clean Water Act Section 404Territorial Seas and Traditional Navigable Waters ((a)(1) waters):3 (a)(1) Name (a)(1) Size (a)(1) Criteria Rationale for (a)(1) Determination N/A. N/A. N/A. N/A. N/A. Tributaries ((a)(2) waters): (a)(2) Name (a)(2) Size (a)(2) Criteria Rationale for (a)(2) Determination N/A. N/A. N/A. N/A. N/A. Lakes and ponds, and impoundments of jurisdictional waters ((a)(3) waters): (a)(3) Name (a)(3) Size (a)(3) Criteria Rationale for (a)(3) Determination N/A. N/A. N/A. N/A. N/A. Adjacent wetlands ((a)(4) waters): (a)(4) Name (a)(4) Size (a)(4) Criteria Rationale for (a)(4) Determination N/A. N/A. N/A. N/A. N/A. 1 Map(s)/figure(s) are attached to the AJD provided to the requestor. 2 If the navigable water is not subject to the ebb and flow of the tide or included on the District’s list of Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 navigable waters list, do NOT use this document to make the determination. The District must continue to follow the procedure outlined in 33 CFR part 329.14 to make a Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 navigability determination. 3 A stand-alone TNW determination is completed independently of a request for an AJD. A stand-alone TNW determination is conducted for a specific segment of river or stream or other type of waterbody, such as a lake, where upstream or downstream limits or lake borders are established. A stand-alone TNW determination should be completed following applicable guidance and should NOT be documented on the AJD Form. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS REGULATORY PROGRAM APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM (INTERIM) NAVIGABLE WATERS PROTECTION RULE Page 2 of 3 Form Version 29 July 2020_updated D. Excluded Waters or FeaturesExcluded waters ((b)(1) – (b)(12)):4 Exclusion Name Exclusion Size Exclusion5 Rationale for Exclusion Determination Gray Wetland 5.0402 acre(s) (b)(1) Non-adjacent wetland. This wetland is protected by a deed restriction that was executed on April 21, 2008, and is connected to the Blue Wetland and the Green Wetland. There is approximately 250 feet of upland area that separates the Blue Wetland and Aaijker Creek. This upland buffer is dominated by smooth brome, western wheatgrass and Canada thistle. The purpose of the ditch that was excavated in 2015, is prevent flooding of adjacent properties and to allow excess water to overflow from storm water pond. The ditch does not have any wetland characteristics and is dominated by smooth brome and western wheat grass and does not exhibit an ordinary highwater mark. Green Wetland 3.3819 acre(s) (b)(1) Non-adjacent wetland. This wetland is a result of an expansion of the Gray Wetland outside the boundaries of the wetland that is protected by a deed restriction. This wetland is connected to the Blue Wetland which is separated from Aajker Creek by a 250-foot wide upland buffer. This upland buffer is dominated by smooth brome, western wheatgrass and Canada thistle. The purpose of the ditch that was excavated in 2015, is prevent flooding of adjacent properties and to allow excess water to overflow from storm water pond. The ditch does not have any wetland characteristics and is dominated by smooth brome and western wheat grass and does not exhibit an ordinary highwater mark. Blue Wetland 0.6285 acre(s) (b)(1) Non-adjacent wetland. The Blue Wetland is situated within a drain ditch and is separated by an approximate 250-foot upland buffer that is dominated by smooth brome, western wheatgrass and Canada thistle. The purpose of the ditch that was excavated in 2015, is to prevent flooding of adjacent properties and to allow excess water to overflow from storm water pond. The ditch does not have any wetland characteristics within the 250-foot buffer and is dominated by smooth brome and western wheat grass and does not exhibit a defined ordinary highwater mark. 4 Some excluded waters, such as (b)(2) and (b)(4), may not be specifically identified on the AJD form unless a requestor specifically asks a Corps district to do so. Corps districts may, in case-by-case instances, choose to identify some or all of these waters within the review area. 5 Because of the broad nature of the (b)(1) exclusion and in an effort to collect data on specific types of waters that would be covered by the (b)(1) exclusion, four sub-categories of (b)(1) exclusions were administratively created for the purposes of the AJD Form. These four sub-categories are not new exclusions, but are simply administrative distinctions and remain (b)(1) exclusions as defined by the NWPR. I I I I I I ® ---' I J I I J J U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS REGULATORY PROGRAM APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM (INTERIM) NAVIGABLE WATERS PROTECTION RULE Page 3 of 3 Form Version 29 July 2020_updated III. SUPPORTING INFORMATION A. Select/enter all resources that were used to aid in this determination and attach data/maps to this document and/or references/citations in the administrative record, as appropriate. ☒ Information submitted by, or on behalf of, the applicant/consultant: Upland Data sheet completed on July 28, 2020 This information is sufficient for purposes of this AJD. Rationale: The data point was taken within the ditch confirming the lack of hydric soils, hydrology and wetland vegetation. ☐ Data sheets prepared by the Corps: Title(s) and/or date(s). ☐ Photographs: Other: Photos received on December 8, 2020, ☐ Corps site visit(s) conducted on: September 1, 2020 ☒ Previous Jurisdictional Determinations (AJDs or PJDs): NWO-2007-01084-MTH, January 4, 2018 ☐ Antecedent Precipitation Tool: provide detailed discussion in Section III.B. ☐ USDA NRCS Soil Survey: Title(s) and/or date(s). ☐ USFWS NWI maps: Drainage Channel, Norton East Ranch, August 6, 2020 ☐ USGS topographic maps: Title(s) and/or date(s). Other data sources used to aid in this determination: Data Source (select) Name and/or date and other relevant information USGS Sources N/A. USDA Sources N/A. NOAA Sources N/A. USACE Sources N/A. State/Local/Tribal Sources N/A. Other Sources N/A. B. Typical year assessment(s): N/A C. Additional comments to support AJD: N/A ···· DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, OMAHA DISTRICT HELENA REGULATORY OFFICE 10 WEST 15TH STREET, SUITE 2200 HELENA, MONTANA 59626 REPLY TO ATTENTION OF Printed on Recycled Paper December 9, 2021 Subject: Norton Properties, LLC (Vaughn Environmental Services) Norton East Subdivision - Various Waterways (Gallatin County); USACE File Number: NWO-2007- 01084-MTH Kevin Spencer Norton Properties, LLC 63026 Lower Meadow Drive, Suite 200 Bend, Oregon 97701-6984 Dear Mr. Spencer: We are responding to your Department of the Army (DA) Jurisdictional Determination request for an approved jurisdictional determination. The project is located at Latitude 45.681384°, Longitude -111.112626°, near Baxter Creek Ditch, within Section 9, Township 2 S, Range 5 E, Gallatin County, Montana. Based on available information and a site visit conducted by USACE staff on October 19, 2021, a jurisdictional determination has found no waters or wetlands regulated under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 U.S.C. 403) or Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) on the property listed above. Only the area labeled WET 3 on the enclosed map titled, "Wetland Delineation Map, Norton East Ranch Property" (copy attached) prepared by the Morrison-Maierle and dated November 16, 2021, was reviewed for this determination. Wetland 3 in the review area was determined to be an isolated water with no apparent interstate or foreign commerce connection and does not carry relatively permanent flow to regulated waters of the United States. As such, this water is not currently regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). This disclaimer of jurisdiction is only for Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act. Other Federal, State, and local laws may apply to your activities. This letter contains an approved jurisdictional determination for your subject site. If you object to this determination, you may request an administrative appeal under USACE regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. A Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) and Request for Appeal (RFA) form is enclosed. If you request to appeal this determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the Northwestern Division Office, Regulatory -2- Printed on Recycled Paper Appeals Review Officer, Melinda Larsen at Melinda.M.Larsen@usace.army.mil. For any questions you may contact her at (503) 808-3888. In order for an RFA to be accepted, USACE must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal under 33 C.F.R. part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP. Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by February 7, 2022. It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this letter. This determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps of Engineers' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site identified in this request. This determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service prior to starting work. This determination is valid for five (5) years from the date of this letter, unless new information warrants revision of the determination before the expiration date. Please refer to identification number NWO-2007-01084-MTH in any correspondence concerning this project. If you have any questions, please contact Tim McNew by email at Timothy.M.McNew@usace.army.mil, or by telephone at (406) 441-1375. Sincerely, Sage L. Joyce Chief, Montana Regulatory Program 2 Enclosures: 1. NAP/RFA 2. Review Area Map APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook. SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD): November 30, 2021 B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Omaha District, Norton Properties, NWO-2007-01084-MTH C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: State: Montana County/parish/borough: Gallatin County City: Bozeman Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 45.681233°, Long. -111.112632° Universal Transverse Mercator: Zone 11, (X) 49122592, (Y) 5088655.16 Name of nearest waterbody: Stillwater River Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Missouri River Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 10020008 Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request. Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc…) are associated with this action and are recorded on a different JD form: At Latitude 45.680646, Longitude -111.114964 a deed restriction was put in place and this area was preserved, enhanced and created as a mitigation site for previous impacts, a copy of the deed restriction and applicable attachment is available upon request. A prelimary jurisdictional determination was completed on November 28, 2006 and reveled through a wetland delineation that Wetland 3 (referred to as Wetland 4 in the previous delineation) was approxiamtly 1.25 acres. D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): Office (Desk) Determination. Date: November 23, 2021 Field Determination. Date(s): October 19, 2021 SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There Are no “navigable waters of the U.S.” within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the review area. [Required] Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide. Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce. Explain: B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There Are no “waters of the U.S.” within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required] 1. Waters of the U.S. a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): 1 TNWs, including territorial seas Wetlands adjacent to TNWs Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs Impoundments of jurisdictional waters Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area: Non-wetland waters: linear feet, wide, and/or acres. Wetlands: acres. c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: Pick List Elevation of established OHWM (if known): 2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):3 Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional. Explain: Wetland 3 is approxiamtly 140 feet from the next jurisdictional feature and approxiamtly 460 feet from the nearest RPW and approxiamtly 25.5 miles from the nearest TNW. A wetland delineation was completed in 2006 that revealed that the wetland is 1.25 acres and the 1 Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below. 2 For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least “seasonally” (e.g., typically 3 months). 3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F. - 2 - delienation that was completed in 2021 indicated that the wetland grew to 2.56 acres indicating that the hydrology for this wetland is restricted to this area. Wetland 3 is so remote that the physical, biological or chemical effect on the nearest TNW (Missouri River) is speculative or in substantial. SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2 and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below. 1. TNW Identify TNW: Summarize rationale supporting determination: 2. Wetland adjacent to TNW Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is “adjacent”: B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY): This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met. The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are “relatively permanent waters” (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3 months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round (perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow, skip to Section III.D.4. A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law. If the waterbody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.C below. 1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW (i) General Area Conditions: Watershed size: Pick List Drainage area: Pick List Average annual rainfall: inches Average annual snowfall: inches (ii) Physical Characteristics: (a) Relationship with TNW: Tributary flows directly into TNW. Tributary flows through Pick List tributaries before entering TNW. Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW. Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW. Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW. Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW. Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain: 4 Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the arid West. - 3 - Identify flow route to TNW5: Tributary stream order, if known: (b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply): Tributary is: Natural Artificial (man-made). Explain: Manipulated (man-altered). Explain: Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate): Average width: feet Average depth: feet Average side slopes: Pick List. Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply): Silts Sands Concrete Cobbles Gravel Muck Bedrock Vegetation. Type/% cover: Other. Explain: Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain: Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain: Tributary geometry: Pick List Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): % (c) Flow: Tributary provides for: Pick List Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: Pick List Describe flow regime: Other information on duration and volume: Surface flow is: Pick List. Characteristics: Subsurface flow: Pick List . Explain findings: Dye (or other) test performed: Tributary has (check all that apply): Bed and banks OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply): clear, natural line impressed on the bank the presence of litter and debris changes in the character of soil destruction of terrestrial vegetation shelving the presence of wrack line vegetation matted down, bent, or absent sediment sorting leaf litter disturbed or washed away scour sediment deposition multiple observed or predicted flow events water staining abrupt change in plant community other (list): Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain: If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply): High Tide Line indicated by: Mean High Water Mark indicated by: oil or scum line along shore objects survey to available datum; fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) physical markings; physical markings/characteristics vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types. tidal gauges other (list): (iii) Chemical Characteristics: 5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW. 6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody’s flow regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break. 7Ibid. - 4 - Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.). Explain: Identify specific pollutants, if known: (iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply): Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width): Wetland fringe. Characteristics: Habitat for: Federally Listed species. Explain findings: Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings: Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings: Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings: 2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW (i) Physical Characteristics: (a) General Wetland Characteristics: Properties: Wetland size: acres Wetland type. Explain: Wetland quality. Explain: Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain: (b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW: Flow is: Pick List . Explain: Surface flow is: Pick List Characteristics: Subsurface flow: Pick List . Explain findings: Dye (or other) test performed: (c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW: Directly abutting Not directly abutting Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain: Ecological connection. Explain: Separated by berm/barrier. Explain: (d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW Project wetlands are Pick List river miles from TNW. Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW. Flow is from: Pick List. Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the Pick List floodplain. (ii) Chemical Characteristics: Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed characteristics; etc.). Explain: Identify specific pollutants, if known: (iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply): Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width): Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain: Habitat for: Federally Listed species. Explain findings: Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings: Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings: Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings: 3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any) All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: Pick List Approximately acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis. For each wetland, specify the following: Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) - 5 - Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed: C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW. Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus. Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example: • Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW? • Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW? • Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that support downstream foodwebs? • Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or biological integrity of the TNW? Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented below: 1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D: 2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D: 3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D: D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): 1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area: TNWs: linear feet, wide, Or acres. Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres. 2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that tributary is perennial: Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow “seasonally” (e.g., typically three months each year) are jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows seasonally: Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply): Tributary waters: linear feet wide. Other non-wetland waters: acres. Identify type(s) of waters: - 6 - 3. Non-RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C. Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply): Tributary waters: linear feet, wide. Other non-wetland waters: acres. Identify type(s) of waters: 4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an RPW: Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow “seasonally.” Provide data indicating that tributary is seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an RPW: Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. 5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C. Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. 6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C. Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. 7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9 As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional. Demonstrate that impoundment was created from “waters of the U.S.,” or Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below). E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE, DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10 which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes. from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce. which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce. Interstate isolated waters. Explain: Other factors. Explain: Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination: Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply): Tributary waters: linear feet, wide. Other non-wetland waters: acres. Identify type(s) of waters: Wetlands: acres. 8See Footnote # 3. 9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook. 10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos. - 7 - F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements. Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce. Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in “SWANCC,” the review area would have been regulated based solely on the “Migratory Bird Rule” (MBR). Waters do not meet the “Significant Nexus” standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain: Wetland 3 is approxiamtly 140 feet from the next jurisdictional feature and approxiamtly 460 feet from the nearest RPW and approxiamtly 25.5 miles from the nearest TNW. Wetland 3 is so remote that the physical, biological or chemical effect on the nearest TNW (Missouri River) is speculative or in substantial. Other: (explain, if not covered above): Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional judgment (check all that apply): Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, wide. Lakes/ponds: acres. Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource: Wetlands: 2.56 acres. Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the “Significant Nexus” standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply): Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, wide. Lakes/ponds: acres. Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource: Wetlands: acres. SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES. A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked and requested, appropriately reference sources below): Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant: Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant. Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report. Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Data sheets prepared by the Corps: Corps navigable waters’ study: U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas: USGS NHD data. USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps. U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Upper Flathead Valley Area, Montana National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: USFWS wetlands mapper retrieved on November 30, 2021 State/Local wetland inventory map(s): FEMA/FIRM maps: 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929) Photographs: Aerial (Name & Date): Google Earth 6/2021 photos or Other (Name & Date): Ground photos taken on 10/19/2021 Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter: Applicable/supporting case law: Applicable/supporting scientific literature: Other information (please specify): B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: The subject wetland is approxiamtly 2.58 acres in size. A previous prelimary jurisdictional determination was completed on November 28, 2006 and reveled through a wetland delineation that Wetland 3 (referred to as Wetland 4 in the previous delineation) was approxiamtly 1.25 acres and the delineation conducted on May 25, 2021, indicated that the wetland grew to 2.56 acres, therefore indicating that hydrology was being restricted or retained within that area. Wetland 3 is approxiamtly 140 feet from the next jurisdictional feature and approxiamtly 460 feet from the nearest RPW and approxiamtly 25.5 miles from the nearest TNW. Wetland 3 is so remote that the physical, biological or chemical effect on the nearest TNW (Missouri River) is speculative or in substantial. DRAWN BY: BC CHK'D BY: BC APPR. BY: CP DATE: GALLATIN COUNTY MT COPYRIGHT MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2021N:\5418\002 - Master Agreement\GIS\Exhibits\2021_WD\Fig 4_NWI.mxd FIGURE NO. PROJECT NO. 5418.002 1 2880 Technology Bldv.Bozeman, MT 59718 Phone: (406) 587-0721Fax: (406) 922-6702 6/16/2021 W BABCOCK ST ±0 400 800200Feet Legend Investigation Area Freshwater Emergent Wetland Freshwater Pond  NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY MAP WEST PARK SUBDIVISION DRAWN BY: BC CHK'D BY: BC APPR. BY: CP DATE: GALLATIN COUNTY MT COPYRIGHT MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2021N:\5418\002 - Master Agreement\GIS\Exhibits\2021_WD\Fig 5_WD.mxd FIGURE NO. PROJECT NO. 5418.002 2 2880 Technology Bldv.Bozeman, MT 59718 Phone: (406) 587-0721Fax: (406) 922-6702 6/23/2021 !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( W BABCOCK ST WET 1 WET 2 WET 5 WET 3 WE T 4 UDP 1 WDP 1 UDP 2 WDP 3 WDP 2 UDP 3 UDP 4 UDP 5 WDP 4 ±0 250 500125Feet Legend Investigation Area Wetlands (6.76 acres) Stream (780 linear feet) Ditch (1,166 linear feet) Pond (1.54 acres) !(Upland Data Point !(Wetland Data Point  WETLAND DELINEATION MAP WEST PARK SUBDIVISION Feature Area (ac)WET 1 2.18WET 2 0.09WET 3 2.58WET 4 1.57WET 5 0.34