Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout019 - Appendix S - AquaticDelineationReport-FinalNovember 5, 2025 HEADWATERS ENGINEERING, INC. Baxter 80 Aquatic Resource Delineation Report PROJECT NUMBER: 0260239-0000 PROJECT CONTACT: Brian Sandefur EMAIL: brian.sandefur@powereng.comPHONE: 406-600-2286 POWER Engineers, Inc. Aquatic Resource Delineation Report SLC 25-0199-12707 0260239_0000 (2025-07-25) BS Aquatic Resource Delineation Report PREPARED FOR:HEADWATERS ENGINEERING, INC. PREPARED BY:BRIAN SANDEFUR 406-600-2286 BRIAN.SANDEFUR@POWERENG.COM POWER Engineers, Inc. Aquatic Resource Delineation Report PAGE i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Site Description ............................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Regulatory Authority .................................................................................................... 1 2.0 METHODS ...................................................................................................................... 2 2.1 Analysis of Existing Data.............................................................................................. 2 2.2 Field Investigation ........................................................................................................ 3 2.2.1 Wetlands ............................................................................................................... 3 2.2.2 Waterways ............................................................................................................ 5 2.3 Wetland/Waterway Classification ................................................................................. 5 2.4 MDT Montana Wetland Assessment ............................................................................ 5 3.0 RESULTS ....................................................................................................................... 6 3.1 Desktop Analysis ......................................................................................................... 6 3.1.1 Topographic Map .................................................................................................. 6 3.1.2 Aerial Map ............................................................................................................ 6 3.1.3 Soils ...................................................................................................................... 6 3.1.4 Waterways ............................................................................................................ 7 3.1.5 Wetlands ............................................................................................................... 7 3.1.6 Floodplains ........................................................................................................... 7 3.1.7 Antecedent Precipitation ....................................................................................... 8 3.2 Field Investigation ........................................................................................................ 8 4.0 SUMMARY .....................................................................................................................11 5.0 REFERENCES ...............................................................................................................13 TABLES TABLE 1 PLANT INDICATOR STATUS ............................................................................................ 4 TABLE 2 ON-SITE NRCS SOIL MAP UNITS .................................................................................... 6 TABLE 3 SUMMARY DATA FOR SURVEYED AQUATIC FEATURES ............................................ 8 FIGURES FIGURE 1 TOPOGRAPHIC/VICINITY MAP ...................................................................................... 15 FIGURE 2 2023 NAIP MAP ................................................................................................................ 16 FIGURE 3 NRCS SOILS MAP............................................................................................................ 17 FIGURE 4 NWI/HND MAP .................................................................................................................. 18 FIGURE 5 SURVEYED AQUATIC RESOURCE MAP ....................................................................... 19 APPENDICES APPENDIX A ANTECEDENT PRECIPITATION TOOL RESULTS APPENDIX B PROJECT PHOTOGRAPHS APPENDIX C USACE WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEETS APPENDIX D MDT MONTANA WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORMS POWER Engineers, Inc. Aquatic Resource Delineation Report PAGE ii ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS APT Antecedent Precipitation Tool CWA Clean Water Act FAC Facultative FACU Facultative Upland FACW Facultative Wetland MWAM Montana Wetland Assessment Method NAIP National Agriculture Imagery Program NHD National Hydrography Dataset NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service NWI National Wetlands Inventory OBL Obligate Wetland OHWM Ordinary High Water Mark POWER POWER Engineers, Inc. Project Baxter 80 UPL Obligate Upland USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers U.S.C.United States Code USGS United States Geological Survey WOTUS waters of the United States WL Wetland WW Waterway POWER Engineers, Inc. Aquatic Resource Delineation Report PAGE 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION POWER Engineers, Inc. (POWER) was retained by Headwaters Engineering, Inc. to complete a delineation for waters of the United States (WOTUS) within an approximate 80-acre undeveloped tract and adjacent right of way (Project Area) situated between Baxter Lane and West Oak Street in Gallatin County, Montana. The purpose of this Aquatic Delineation Report is to provide the results of a desktop analysis and field survey of the Project Area for wetlands and waterways that may be subject to regulatory jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). It should be noted that the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Regulatory Branch – Omaha District maintains final decision-making authority regarding the jurisdictional status of all surface water features for projects located within its district boundaries and may require an on-site inspection. This report presents the professional opinion of POWER regarding the potential presence/absence of federally regulated wetlands and waterways within the Project Area. 1.1 Site Description The Project Area includes approximately 87 acres directly abutting the western boundary of the city of Bozeman (Figure 1). The site is in the Northern Rocky Mountain Valleys major land resource area (Natural Resources Conservation Service [NRCS] 2022). The Project Area includes one dilapidated barn and has historically been used for agricultural purposes including livestock grazing and hay production. The Project Area is currently maintained as a hayfield with vegetation common to valley grasslands and wet meadow planted in pasture mix. Topography within the site is generally flat with a prominent swale and drainage toward the north. Elevation ranges between 4,704 and 4,738 feet above mean sea level. The Project Area is in the Lower Hyalite Creek Hydrologic Unit Code 12 (100200081302) watershed within the Gallatin basin. Undeveloped farmland and high-density residential are dominant land uses within the vicinity of the Project Area. 1.2 Regulatory Authority The USACE has primacy over the regulation of federal jurisdictional waters under Sections 9 and 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 and Section 404 of the CWA. Federal jurisdictional waters include navigable waters and all other waters that are regulated by USACE, which together are referred to as WOTUS. Impacts to WOTUS are regulated by USACE through Section 404 of the CWA (33 United States Code [U.S.C.] Section [§] 1344) and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. § 403). In addition, prior to federal authorization for impacts to waters or wetlands, a water quality certification must first be obtained from the applicable state as defined in Section 401 of the CWA (33 U.S.C. § 1341). The USACE administers the CWA Section 404 permitting program and issues permits pursuant to Sections 9 and 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. § 1344 and 33 U.S.C. § 403, respectively). These permitting programs address impacts to federally regulated jurisdictional waters or WOTUS. Pursuant to Section 401 of the federal CWA, any permit or license issued by a federal agency for an activity that may result in a discharge into WOTUS requires certification from the state in which the discharge originates. This requirement allows each state to have input into federally approved projects that may affect its waters (rivers, streams, lakes, and wetlands) and to ensure projects will comply with state water quality standards and any other water quality requirements of state law. State certification ensures that the Project will not adversely impact impaired waters (waters that do not meet water quality standards) and that the Project complies with applicable water quality improvement plans (total POWER Engineers, Inc. Aquatic Resource Delineation Report PAGE 2 maximum daily loads). The states must grant, deny, or waive water quality certification for a project before a federal permit or license can be issued. In Montana, the 401 Water Quality Certification is issued by Montana Department of Environmental Quality. Pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA, Montana Department of Environmental Quality must issue or waive a water quality certification prior to USACE issuing a permit (33 U.S.C. § 1341). On September 8, 2023, the United States Environmental Protection Agency and USACE amended the revised definition of WOTUS, which was originally published in the Federal Register on January 18, 2023, to reflect the United States Supreme Court in Sackett v. United States. The “Amended 2023 Rule” took effect on September 8, 2023, in 23 states. In the other 27 states, including Montana, the 2023 rule remains enjoined from implementation, and “Pre- 2015 regulatory regime” for WOTUS is being used to make jurisdictional determinations. Determinations under the Pre-2015 regime also consider the Sackett decision. Of note, the definition of WOTUS under both the Amended 2023 Rule and Pre-2015 regulatory regime no longer includes non- “relatively permanent waters” and wetlands lacking a continuous surface connection to WOTUS; as such, these features are not currently federally regulated. On March 12, 2025, the USACE issued “Memorandum to the field between the USACE and United States Environmental Protection Agency concerning the proper implementation of ‘continuous surface connection’ under the definition of WOTUS under the CWA”. This memorandum provides guidance and clarification on the meaning of continuous surface connection. In summary, the USACE is interpreting WOTUS to include “only those adjacent wetlands that have a continuous surface connection because they directly abut the [requisite jurisdictional water] (e.g., they are not separated by uplands, a berm, dike, or similar feature)”. 2.0 METHODS 2.1 Analysis of Existing Data Prior to the on-site field investigation, POWER reviewed available technical documents, databases, and maps to determine the potential extent of wetlands and waterways within the Project Area. The reviewed data sources included: » United States Department of Agriculture’s National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP) 2023 imagery (NAIP 2023) » United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute Topographic Quadrangle Map: Bozeman (USGS 1987) » Recent and Historical Aerial Photography (Google Earth Imagery 1985 to 2022) » United States Department of Agriculture’s NRCS Soil Survey Geographic database for Gallatin County Area, Montana (NRCS 2019) » USGS National Hydrography Dataset (NHD; USGS 2023) » United States. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Wetlands Mapper (USFWS 2023) » Federal Emergency Management Agency 100-year Floodplain maps (FEMA 2015). POWER Engineers, Inc. Aquatic Resource Delineation Report PAGE 3 2.2 Field Investigation This on-site field investigation focused on determining the presence of potentially jurisdictional aquatic features, including wetlands and waterways, within the Project Area. The following USACE guidance documents were used to determine WOTUS jurisdictional limits: » “Routine Onsite Determination Method” described in the USACE Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) »Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0, USACE 2010) »National Ordinary High Water Mark Field Delineation Manual for Rivers and Streams (Final Version, USACE 2025) 2.2.1 Wetlands Wetlands are defined as those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated conditions. The identification of wetlands is based on a three-parameter approach involving indicators for hydrophytic vegetation, wetland hydrology, and hydric soils. Any wetlands encountered were assessed using the Western Mountain, Valleys, Coast Region Wetland Determination Data Form provided in the regional supplement (USACE 2010). Data were recorded to fill all required fields of the Wetland Determination Data Form. Sample points were established as needed to characterize existing soil, hydrologic and vegetative conditions of wetlands. The following provides specific methods for characterizing and evaluating vegetation, hydrology, and soils. USACE jurisdictional wetlands must exhibit characteristics within each of these three parameters as discussed below. Soils At the center of each sampling plot, the wetland scientist conducted borings with a shovel to depths necessary to accurately determine a soil’s hydric status (typically 16 inches below ground surface). The identification and delineation of hydric soils was based on the current NRCS Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States (Version 8.2, 2024). The information collected for each soil profile included soil horizons, depth, texture, color, and hydric soil characteristics including organic content, accumulation of sulfides, gley formation, redoximorphic concentrations and depletions, and the visually detectable depletion of minerals such as iron and manganese. Colors of the soil matrix and concentrations/depletions were identified using Munsell Soil Color Charts (Munsell 2000). Hydric soil determinations were based on criteria established in the 1987 USACE Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) along with the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, Coast Region (USACE 2010). Vegetation Species abundance at wetland points were visually estimated and recorded. Dominant trees and shrubs/saplings were recorded within a 30-foot and 15-foot radius, respectively, from the center of each sampling plot. Woody vines were recorded within a 30-foot radius of the sampling plot. Dominant herbaceous vegetation was recorded within a five-foot radius of the sampling plot. The indicator status of each species was identified using the National Wetland POWER Engineers, Inc. Aquatic Resource Delineation Report PAGE 4 Plant List (Version 3.5; USACE 2020) for the USACE Western Mountains, Valleys, Coast Regional Supplement. Species that have an indicator status of Obligate Wetland (OBL), Facultative Wetland (FACW), or Facultative (FAC) were considered hydrophytes (Table 1). The presence of hydrophytic vegetation within a representative plant community was positively identified if more than 50% of the dominant species within the community had an indicator status of OBL, FACW, or FAC. This determination method is referred to as the dominance test. Dominant plant species are determined using the “50/20 rule” defined in the 1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987). If the plant community failed the dominance test, but indicators for hydric soils or wetland hydrology were present, the plant community was examined for additional hydrophytic vegetation indicators. These hydrophytic vegetation indicators are identified in the Regional Supplement and include the prevalence index, evidence of morphological adaptations for growth in a wetland, and problematic hydrophytic vegetation (USACE 2010). The presence of upland plant species was also identified and recorded at the wetland/upland sample points. Species not associated with wetlands (non-hydrophytes) are typically those with indicator status of Facultative Upland (FACU) and Obligate Upland (UPL). TABLE 1 PLANT INDICATOR STATUS INDICATOR CODE INDICATOR STATUS DESIGNATION PROBABILITY TO OCCUR IN WETLANDS COMMENT OBL Obligate Wetland Hydrophyte >99%Almost always occur in wetlands FACW Facultative Wetland Hydrophyte 99-67%Usually occur in wetlands, but may occur in non-wetlands FAC Facultative Hydrophyte 33-67%Occur in wetlands and non-wetlands FACU Facultative Upland Non- hydrophyte 1-33%Usually occur in non-wetlands, but may occur in wetlands UPL Obligate Upland Non- hydrophyte <1%Almost never occur in wetlands Hydrology Site hydrology was evaluated during the field survey by initially observing whether the soil at the surface was inundated or saturated. If the ground surface was dry, the depth to freestanding groundwater or saturated soil was measured, and the presence or absence of other indicators of wetland hydrology (e.g., drift lines, water-stained leaves) was noted. The wetland hydrology criterion was met if one or more primary or two or more secondary field indicators were present (Environmental Laboratory 1987). However, during the survey, those wetlands which lacked any hydrology indicators due to temporarily dry conditions, disturbance, or other factors and did not meet the 1987 USACE manual criteria were evaluated using criteria from the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, Coast Region (USACE 2010). POWER Engineers, Inc. Aquatic Resource Delineation Report PAGE 5 Antecedent Precipitation The Antecedent Precipitation Tool (APT) is a desktop tool developed by USACE that is commonly used by USACE and the United States Environmental Protection Agency to support decisions as to whether field data collection and other site-specific observations occurred under normal climatic conditions. This tool streamlines the review of climatic data, which supports decision-making related to wetland delineations. The APT facilitates the comparison of antecedent or recent rainfall conditions for a given location to the range of normal rainfall conditions that occurred during the preceding 30 years. In addition to providing a standardized methodology to evaluate normal precipitation conditions (“precipitation normalcy”), the APT can also be used to assess the presence of drought conditions, as well as the approximate dates of the wet and dry seasons for a given location. 2.2.2 Waterways Waterways or open water areas within the Project Area were examined for the presence/absence of an Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) as defined in 33 Code of Federal Regulations § 328.3(e). The OHWM is defined by the line of the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics. Such physical characteristics include a clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, and the presence of litter and debris (USACE 2025). These indicators were observed in the field and used to determine the location of the OHWM. In the absence of wetlands, the limit of USACE jurisdiction is where the OHWM is no longer perceptible (CWA Sec. 328.4). 2.3 Wetland/Waterway Classification Wetlands and waterways were classified according to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al. 1979). The Cowardin classification is a taxonomic system that divides wetlands and deepwater habitats into five systems based on hydrologic factors (Marine, Estuarine, Riverine, Lacustrine, and Palustrine). Additionally, wetlands were classified based on hydrogeomorphic system (Brinson 1993). This approach considers wetland function and places an emphasis on geomorphic and hydrologic attributes, rather than using a system that is limited to biotic characteristics. This system recognizes water inputs and outputs which drive wetlands systems. This classification system includes seven major hydrogeomorphic classes (riverine, depressional, slope, mineral soil flats, organic soil flats, estuarine fringe, and lacustrine fringe wetlands). 2.4 MDT Montana Wetland Assessment The 2008 Montana Department of Transportation Montana Wetland Assessment Method (MWAM) (Berglund and McEldowney 2008) was used to evaluate functions and values for assessment areas within the site. This method provides an objective means of assessing wetland functions. Functions are self-sustaining properties of a wetland ecosystem that exist in the absence of society and relate to ecological significance without regard to subjective human values. Field data for these assessments were collected during the field investigations. Wetland assessment forms were completed for four assessment areas. POWER Engineers, Inc. Aquatic Resource Delineation Report PAGE 6 3.0 RESULTS 3.1 Desktop Analysis The desktop analysis completed by POWER included soils, waterways, topographic, wetlands, and floodplain data to determine the potential presence of wetland/waterway features. The results of the desktop analysis are provided in the following sections. A topographic map (Figure 1), aerial map (Figure 2), NRCS soils map (Figure 3), and NWI/NHD water resources map (Figure 4) were all reviewed as part of the desktop analysis and have been included in this report. Additionally, Federal Emergency Management Agency floodplain data were evaluated to identify potential hydrologic characteristics. 3.1.1 Topographic Map The USGS topographic map shows the Project Area as undeveloped land with drainage toward the north. Baxter Lane is shown along the northern boundary, and an old farmstead is shown east of the Project Area. Baxter Creek is shown along the eastern boundary of the Project Area and bisects the access spur. Aajker Creek is located west of the site. The topographic map does not provide evidence that aquatic resources are present within the Project Area. 3.1.2 Aerial Map The aerial map (Figure 2) shows dark green vegetation signatures bisecting the Project Area, along the western boundary, along the Baxter Creek corridor, and within the northern extent of the site. A review of the historical imagery shows that dark green vegetation persists well into the growing season with periodic open water along the prominent swale bisecting the Project Area. The site appears to have been historically used for livestock/hay production. A few patches of scrub/shrub vegetation community are apparent along the swale. A review of the aerial imagery indicates aquatic features are likely present within the Project. 3.1.3 Soils Six soil map units (Table 2) have been mapped across the Project Area and are shown in Figure 3. In general, soils within the Project Area have formed in alluvium along stream terraces and the toe slopes of the Gallatin Mountain range and consist of cobbles, gravels, sand, silt and clay. Two mapped soils units have been classified as hydric by the NRCS and include Enbar loam and Lamoose silt loam that account for approximately 57 percent of the Project Area. These two soil series generally correspond with the swale and other areas where wetlands were identified within the Project Area. TABLE 2 ON-SITE NRCS SOIL MAP UNITS Label MAP UNIT SYMBOL LANDFORM DRAINAGE CLASS HYDRIC RATING PEERCENTAGE OF PROJECT AREA Amsterdam-Quagle silt loams, 0-4% slopes 453B Stream terraces Well-drained No 41.3 POWER Engineers, Inc. Aquatic Resource Delineation Report PAGE 7 Quable-Brodyk silt loams, 4-8% slopes 451C Stream terraces Well-drained No 0.3 Hyalite-Beaverton complex, 0-4% slopes 748A Alluvial fans, stream terraces Well drained No 0.0 Enbar loam, 0-4% slopes 509B Flood plains Somewhat poorly drained Yes (10%)7.6 Lamoose silt loam, 0-2% slopes 537A Stream terraces Poorly drained Yes (95%)49.2 Turner loam, moderately wet, 0-2% slopes 457A Stream terraces Well-drained No 1.6 3.1.4 Waterways USGS topographical mapping and NHD data were evaluated to identify potential waterway features within the Project Area (Figure 1 and Figure 4, respectively). According to the USGS and NHD data, one waterway was mapped within the site and includes Baxter Creek bisecting the eastern access spur of the Project Area. 3.1.5 Wetlands According to the MNHP Montana Spatial Data Infrastructure digital wetland mapping (Figure 4), approximately 0.60 acres of pond, 0.56 acres of riverine, 12.68 acres of emergent, and 1.69 acres of scrub-shrub wetland habitats were mapped within the Project Area. These resources include are specifically classified as: » Palustrine, Aquatic Bed, Intermittently Exposed, Diked/Impoundment (PABGh) » Riverine, Intermittent, Streambed, Temporarily Flooded (R4SBA) » Riverine, Intermittent, Streambed, Seasonally Flooded (R4SBC) » Palustrine, Emergent, Persistent, Temporarily Flooded (PEM1A) » Palustrine, Emergent, Persistent, Seasonally Flooded (PEM1C) » Palustrine, Scrub-Shrub, Broad-Leaved Deciduous, Temporarily Flooded (PSS1A) » Palustrine, Scrub-Shrub, Broad-Leaved Deciduous, Seasonally Flooded (PSS1C) NWI data are typically based on aerial photography interpretation and are not always ground- truthed. The NWI-mapped wetland areas within the Project Area generally corresponds to the aquatic resources identified during the field survey. 3.1.6 Floodplains Federal Emergency Management Agency floodplain data were evaluated to identify potential wetlands and waterways that may occur within waterway floodplains. The Project Area is located on FIRM panel 30031C0803D (FEMA 2015) and is mapped as Zone X. Zone X indicates areas of minimal flood hazard and does not suggest that wetlands are likely within the site. POWER Engineers, Inc. Aquatic Resource Delineation Report PAGE 8 3.1.7 Antecedent Precipitation Results of the APT analysis for the latitude and longitude of the Project Area are provided in Appendix A. Based on this analysis, “Normal Conditions” were present at the time of the field survey. The drought index indicated that extreme drought conditions were present during this field survey, conducted during the wet season. 3.2 Field Investigation A Professional Wetland Scientist with POWER completed an on-site field investigation on June 30, 2025, to identify and survey aquatic features within the 80-acre tract; an additional field investigation was completed on October 30, 2025, to survey aquatic features within the adjacent right of way. A total of 14.40 acres of aquatic habitat were documented and include four waterways and six wetlands. A summary of the delineated features is provided in Table 2. Photographs of sampling points and associated field observations are included in Appendix B. The location of wetland determination sampling points and the extent of the aquatic resource boundaries that were surveyed in the field are depicted in Figure 5. Completed USACE wetland determination data forms, for both wetland and adjacent upland areas, are provided in Appendix C. Completed MDT Montana Wetland Assessment forms are provided in Appendix D. TABLE 3 SUMMARY DATA FOR SURVEYED AQUATIC FEATURES WATERWAY ID WETLAND TYPE1 JURISDICTIONAL STATUS2 SIZE (ACRES) LENGTH (FEET) LOCATION (LAT/LONG) WW-1 R4SBC Jurisdictional 0.18 2,979 45.695825 -111.11683 WL-1 PEM1E/PSS1B Jurisdictional 12.12 --45.696796 -111.118103 WW-2 R3UB Jurisdictional 0.01 105 45.695684 -111.113165 WL-2 PEM1E Jurisdictional 0.12 --45.695831 -111.113188 WW-3 R4SBC Jurisdictional 0.04 1,390 45.697845 -111.11383 WL-3 PEM1E Jurisdictional 0.70 --45.697992 -111.11387 WW-4 R4SBC Jurisdictional 0.005 105 45.698168 -111.110625 WL-4 PEM1E Jurisdictional 0.01 --45.698164 -111.110624 WL-5 PEM1E Jurisdictional 1.05 --45.699333 -111.115845 WL-6 PEM1E Jurisdictional 0.17 --45.700071 -111.116539 TOTAL 14.40 4,579 Note: R4SBC = Riverine, intermittent, streambed; PEM1E = Palustrine, emergent, persistent, seasonally flooded/saturated; PSS1B = Palustrine,scrub/shrub, broad-leaved deciduous, seasonally saturated; R3UB = Riverine, upper perennial,unconsolidated bed. 1 Cowardin et al. 1979 2 The determination of each wetland/waterway’s jurisdictional or connected status represents POWER’s professional opinion; the final determination of jurisdictional status is under the purview of the USACE. Waterway 1 (WW-1) Waterway WW-1 is a small intermittent channel that originates at a stormwater pond just upgradient (south) of the Project Area. This stream flows north through a culvert under Oak Street and into a well-vegetated swale that bisects the Project Area. It appears this channel POWER Engineers, Inc. Aquatic Resource Delineation Report PAGE 9 gains hydrology as it flows for approximately 2,979 feet (0.18-acre OHWM) through the Project Area, drains into a roadside ditch (WL-6), and out the northern boundary toward Aajker Creek. Aajker Creek eventually drains into Baxter Creek, Hyalite Creek, East Gallatin River, Gallatin River, and Missouri River. WW-1 was preliminarily determined to be jurisdictional based on a surface water connection to downstream WOTUS. Wetland 1 (WL-1) Wetland WL-1 occupies the prominent swale bisecting the Project Area and accounts for approximately 12.12 acres of palustrine emergent and scrub-shrub habitat. Hydrology within WL-1 appears to be supported by a seasonally shallow water table and groundwater discharge arising within the Project Area. The wetland hydrology indicators for WL-1 include high water table, saturation within 12 inches of the soil surface, algal mat, hydrogen sulfide odor, saturation visible on aerial imagery, geomorphic position, frost-heave hummocks, and a positive FAC- neutral test. The hydric soil indicators included a redox dark surface, depleted below dark surface, and loamy gleied matrix. The hydrophytic vegetation indicators included a positive dominance test and a prevalence index within the range indicating the presence of hydrophytic vegetation. Hydrophytic vegetation observed within WL-1 predominantly include field meadow foxtail (Alopecurus pratensis, FAC), Northwest Territory sedge (Carex utriculate, OBL), tall manna grass (Glyceria elata, FACW), spotted touch-me-not (Impactiens capensis, FACW), silverweed (Potentilla anserina, OBL), wheat sedge (Carex atherodes, OBL), Baltic rush (Juncus balticus, FACW), Regel’s rush (Juncus regelii, FACW), reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW), slim-stem reed grass (Calamagrostis stricta, FACW), dagger-leaf rush (Juncus ensifolius, FACW), and blue water speedwell (Veronica anagallis-aquatica, OBL). Adjacent uplands were generally characterized by field meadow foxtail, meadow false rye grass (Schedonorus pratensis, FACU), nodding wild rye (Elymus canadensis, FAC), Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis, FAC), orchard grass (Dactylis glomerata, FACU), and common Timothy (Phleum pratense, FAC). In general, the transition between WL-1 and the adjacent uplands was well defined by a distinct topographic break and change in the vegetation community although some areas along this boundary exhibited gradual, less-defined conditions. WL-1 is directly connected to WW-1 and has been preliminarily determined to be jurisdictional based on eventually connection to known WOTUS. Waterway 2 (WW-2) Waterway WW-2 includes an approximate 100-foot reach of Baxter Creek as it flows through the Project Area. This channel appears to have been historically impacted by agricultural practices including irrigation and livestock grazing and is influenced by surrounding residential development. An existing headgate is located along WW-2 just east of the Project Area boundary and diverts water onto the Project Area through an unnamed tributary (WW-3). The streambanks along WW-2 are well vegetated with hydrophytic species including reed canary grass, and field meadow foxtail. WW-2 was preliminarily determined to be jurisdictional based on a direct downstream surface water connection to known WOTUS. Wetland 2 (WL-2) Wetland WL-2 includes wetlands directly adjacent to Baxter Creek and accounts for approximately 0.12 acres of palustrine emergent habitat. Of note, the Baxter Creek corridor was surveyed beyond the immediate bounds of the Project Area to account for City of Bozeman regulations and potential watercourse setbacks that may apply to this Project. Hydrology for POWER Engineers, Inc. Aquatic Resource Delineation Report PAGE 10 WL-2 is supported by WW-2 and a seasonally high ground water table. The wetland hydrology indicators for WL-2 include high water table, saturation within 12 inches of the ground surface, saturation visible on aerial imagery, geomorphic position, frost-heave hummocks, and a positive FAC-neutral test. Hydrophytic vegetation observed within WL-2 includes field meadow foxtail, Baltic rush, fowl blue grass (Poa palustris, FAC), spreading bent grass (Agrostis stolonifera, FAC), and sedges. Adjacent uplands were generally characterized by field meadow foxtail, smooth brome, orchard grass, common Timothy, and common dandelion (Taraxacum officinale, FACU). WL-2 drains directly into WW-2 and was preliminarily determined to be jurisdictional based on a surface water connection to downstream WOTUS. Waterway 3 (WW-3) Waterway WW-3 includes approximately 1,390 linear feet (0.04 acre OHWM) of an unnamed irrigation ditch of Baxter Creek diverted just upgradient of the Project Area. This linear, man- made canal provides irrigation for downstream irrigation activities with return flows generally flowing back into to Baxter Creek. Streambanks along the OHWM are well-vegetated with hydrophytic species and wetland habitat is present throughout this drainage swale. With return flows from WW-3 back into Baxter Creek, this waterway was preliminarily determined to be jurisdictional based on a surface water connection to downstream WOTUS. Of note, this feature does not qualify as a “watercourse” under City of Bozeman authority as this feature was created exclusively for the conveyance of irrigation water. Wetland 3 (WL-3) Wetland WL-3 is a depressional swale that includes approximately 0.70 acres of palustrine emergent wetland habitat supported by WW-3 and a high ground water table. The wetland hydrology indicators for WL-3 include high water table, saturation within 12 inches of the ground surface, saturation visible on aerial imagery, geomorphic position, frost-heave hummocks, and a positive FAC-neutral test. The hydric soil indicators included a redox dark surface and loamy gleyed matrix. The hydrophytic vegetation indicators included a positive rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation, a positive dominance test, and a prevalence index within the range indicating the presence of hydrophytic vegetation. Hydrophytic vegetation observed within WL-3 include field meadow foxtail, broadleaf cattail (Typha latifolia, OBL), American wild mint (Mentha arvensis, FACW), and showy milkweed (Asclepias speciosa, FAC), and Northwest Territory sedge. Adjacent uplands were generally characterized by field meadow foxtail, smooth brome, orchard grass, and common Timothy. WL-3 directly abuts WW-3 and was preliminarily determined to be jurisdictional based on a direct surface water connection to downstream WOTUS. Waterway 4 (WW-4) WW-4 includes approximately 105 linear feet (0.01-acre OHWM) of an unnamed intermittent waterway situated within a linear excavated swale that carries channelized surface flow through the Project Area. This channel supports a narrow wetland fringe (WL-4). Based on an analysis of aerial imagery, WW-4 eventually drains into Baxter Creek and was preliminarily determined to be jurisdictional based on a direct surface water connection to downstream WOTUS. POWER Engineers, Inc. Aquatic Resource Delineation Report PAGE 11 Wetland 4 (WL-4) Wetland WL-4 consists of a narrow palustrine emergent wetland fringe along WW-4. Hydrology within WL-4 is provided by WW-4. Dominant hydrophytic vegetation includes broadleaf cattail, reed canary grass, field meadow foxtail, and Northwest Territory sedge. The wetland/upland boundary is characterized by a distinct topographic break. Vegetation along the adjacent uplands includes smooth brome, various pasture grass, and cultivated wheat. Based on the direct hydrologic connection with WW-4, WL-4 was preliminarily determined to be jurisdictional based on a direct surface water connection to downstream WOTUS. Wetland 5 (WL-5) Wetland WL-5 is a depressional swale that includes approximately 1.05 acres of palustrine emergent wetland habitat. Hydrology within WL-5 is supported by a high ground water table and surface water discharge. The wetland hydrology indicators for WL-5 include saturation within 12 inches of the ground surface, geomorphic position, frost-heave hummocks, and a positive FAC- neutral test. The hydric soil indicator included a depleted matrix below a dark surface and exhibited redoximorphic concentration starting around 10 inches below the soil surface. The hydrophytic vegetation indicators included a positive dominance test and a prevalence index within the range indicating the presence of hydrophytic vegetation. Hydrophytic vegetation observed within WL-5 includes field meadow foxtail, Baltic rush, fowl blue grass, spreading bent grass, and silverweed. Adjacent uplands were generally characterized by field meadow foxtail, smooth brome, orchard grass, common Timothy, and common dandelion. WL-5 drains directly into WL-6 and was preliminarily determined to be jurisdictional based on a surface water connection to downstream WOTUS. Wetland 6 (WL-6) Wetland WL-6 is a man-made roadside ditch along Baxter Lane and accounts for approximately 0.17 acres of palustrine emergent wetland habitat. This ditch appears to have been excavated to a depth that intercepts the high ground water table and receives surface water directly from WL-1 and WL-5. The wetland hydrology indicators for WL-6 include surface water, high water table, saturation within 12 inches of the ground surface, drainage patterns, geomorphic position, and a positive FAC-neutral test. The hydric soil indicator included loamy gleied matrix. The hydrophytic vegetation indicators included a positive rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation, a positive dominance test, and a prevalence index within the range indicating the presence of hydrophytic vegetation. Hydrophytic vegetation observed within WL-6 include broad-leaf cat-tail, Northwest Territory sedge, hard-stem club-rush (Schoenoplectus acutus, OBL), American wild mint, Baltic rush, and tall cotton-grass (Eriphorum angustifolium, OBL). Adjacent uplands were generally characterized by smooth brome and Kentucky blue grass. Along the wetland boundary where the drainage ditch is bordered by upland habitat, the transition between WL-6 and the adjacent uplands is defined by a distinct topographic break and change in the vegetation community. WL-6 drains into Aajker Creek and was preliminarily determined to be jurisdictional based on a surface water connection to downstream WOTUS. 4.0 SUMMARY A desktop analysis and field survey for aquatic resource survey was completed throughout the approximate 87-acre Project Area to identify and delineate potentially jurisdictional wetlands and waterways. Based on the results of the field survey, approximately 14.40 acres of aquatic POWER Engineers, Inc. Aquatic Resource Delineation Report PAGE 12 resources were identified through the Project Area and include four waterways and six wetlands. Employing the current definition for WOTUS, all aquatic resources were identified as likely jurisdictional and support a surface water connection to downstream WOTUS. The final determination of the limits and jurisdictional status of on-site wetlands and waterways is under the purview of the USACE. Any impacts to jurisdictional waters within the Project Area may require authorization from the USACE under Section 404 of the CWA and from the Montana Department Environmental Quality under Section 401 of the CWA. POWER Engineers, Inc. Aquatic Resource Delineation Report PAGE 13 5.0 REFERENCES Berglund, J., and R. McEldowney. 2008. MDT Montana Wetland Assessment Method. Prepared for Montana Department of Transportation, Helena, Montana. Post, Buckley, Schuh, & Jernigan, Helena, Montana. 42pp. Brinson, M.M. 1993. A Hydrogeomorphic Classification for Wetlands. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS, USA. Technical Report WRP-DE-4, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. Cowardin, L.M., F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Office of Biological Services, US Fish and Wildlife Service, US Department of the Interior, Washington, DC. 103 p. Ecological Mapping, Monitoring and Analysis Group – University of Montana. 2022. Montana Wetland and Riparian Framework. Helena, Montana. Available online at: https://ftpgeoinfo.msl.mt.gov/Data/Spatial/MSDI/Wetlands/ Accessed March 2025. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1. US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. 100 p., plus appendices. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2015. FEMA Flood Map Service Center. Available online at: https://msc.fema.gov/portal. Accessed July 2025. Google Earth Imagery. 1985-2022. Munsell. 2000. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Macbeth Division of Kollmorgan Instruments. New Windsor, NY. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2022. Major Land Resource Area Geographic Database, version 5.2 (entire US, zipped shapefile format, 27 MB). _____. 2019. Soil Survey Geographic database for Gallatin County Area, Montana. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2025. National Ordinary High Water Mark Field Delineation Manual for Rivers and Streams. Final Version. Engineer Research and Development Center. _____. 2020. National Wetland Plant List. Version 3.5. NWPL Home v3.4-f9c (army.mil) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Engineering Research and Development Center. Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, NH _____. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valley, and Coast Region (Version 2.0). Army Engineer Research and Development Center. Vicksburg, MS. https://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/Civil- Works/Regulatory-Program-and-Permits/reg_supp/ United Stated Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2024. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, Version 9.0. POWER Engineers, Inc. Aquatic Resource Delineation Report PAGE 14 United States Department of Agriculture’s National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP). 2023. National Agriculture Imagery Program imagery. United States Geological Survey (USGS). 2023. National Hydrography Dataset. Available online at http://nhd.usgs.gov/. _____. 1987. Bozeman 7.5-minute Topographic Quadrangle Map. Woods, A.J., D.A. Lammers, S.A. Bryce, J.M. Omernik, R.L. Denton, M. Domeier, and J.A. Comstock. 2001. Ecoregions (color poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and photographs): Reston, Virginia, U.S. Geological Survey (map scale 1:1,175,000). 2S 5E 1S 5E Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed MONTANAGallatin County Project Location 0 1,500 3,000750 Feet Baxter 80 Figure 1:Vicinity/Topographic Map Legend Baxter 80 Project Area PLSS Township Ü Project area W OAK ST BAXTER LN MONTANAGallatin County Project Location 0 250 500125 Feet Baxter 80 Figure 2:2023 NAIP Map Legend Baxter 80 Project Area Roads Ü 537A 537A 537A 537A 537A 451C 509B 453B 453B 457A 748A MONTANAGallatin County Project Location 0 250 500125 Feet Baxter 80 Figure 3:NRCS Soils Map Legend Baxter 80 Project AreaLabel 451C-Quable-Brodyk silt loams, 4-8% slopes 453B-Amsterdam-Quagle silt loams, 0-4% slopes 457A-Turn er loam, moderately wet, 0-2% slopes 509B-Enbar loam, 0-4% slopes 537A-Lamoose silt loam, 0-2% slopes 748A-Hyalite-Beaverton complex, 0-4% slopes Ü BAXTER CREEKPABFx PABFx PABGh R4SBA R4SBC R4SBC R4SBC PSS1C PEM1CPEM1C PEM1C PEM1A PEM1A PEM1A PEM1A PEM1A PEM1A PEM1A PEM1A MONTANAGallatin County Project Location 0 250 500125 Feet Baxter 80 Figure 4:NHD/NWI Map Legend Baxter 80 Project AreaNHD FlowlinePerennial Stream/RiverNWI WetlandsFreshwater Emergent WetlandFreshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Freshwater PondRiverine Ü !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !.!. !.!. !.!. !.!. SP1 SP2 SP5 SP4 SP6 SP7 SP11 SP12 SP9 SP10 SP8 SP3 SP13 SP14 SP15 SP16 SP17 SP18 SP19SP20 WL-5 WL-1 WL-1 WL-1 WL-3 WL-3 WL-2 WL-2 WL-2 WW-4WL-4 WL-6 WW-1 WW-1 WW-2 WW-3 WW-3 MONTANAGallatin County Project Location 0 250 500125 Feet Baxter 80 Figure 5:Surveyed Aquatics Map Legend Baxter 80 Project Area !.Sampling Points Surveyed Aquatics Waterway Wetland Ü POWER Engineers, Inc. Aquatic Resource Delineation Report APPENDIX A APPENDIX A ANTECEDENT PRECIPITATION TOOL RESULTS Dec 2024 Jan 2025 Feb 2025 Mar 2025 Apr 2025 May 2025 Jun 2025 Jul 2025 Aug 2025 Sep 2025 Oct 2025 Nov 2025 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Rainfall (Inches)2025-06-30 2025-05-31 2025-05-01 Antecedent Precipitation vs Normal Range based on NOAA's Daily Global Historical Climatology Network Daily Total 30-Day Rolling Total 30-Year Normal Range 30 Days Ending 30th %ile (in)70th %ile (in)Observed (in)Wetness Condition Condition Value Month Weight Product 2025-06-30 2.208268 3.30315 0.925197 Dry 1 3 3 2025-05-31 1.748425 3.113386 1.814961 Normal 2 2 4 2025-05-01 1.42126 2.319291 2.149606 Normal 2 1 2 Result Drier than Normal - 9 Coordinates 45.69582, -111.11683 Observation Date 2025-06-30 Elevation (ft)4722.835 Drought Index (PDSI)Severe drought WebWIMP H2O Balance Dry Season Weather Station Name Coordinates Elevation (ft)Distance (mi)Elevation Weighted Days Normal Days Antecedent BOZEMAN 6 W EXP FARM 45.6728, -111.1547 4774.935 2.423 52.1 1.217 11172 90 BOZEMAN 7.4 WSW 45.6519, -111.1924 4764.108 2.324 10.827 1.071 4 0 BOZEMAN 1.5 WNW 45.6862, -111.0708 4791.995 4.155 17.06 1.941 6 0 BOZEMAN MONTANA STATE UNIV 45.6622, -111.0464 4913.058 5.28 138.123 3.105 169 0 BOZEMAN 1.5 SSE 45.6578, -111.0272 4937.992 6.243 163.057 3.827 1 0 BOZEMAN 4.4 S 45.6138, -111.0566 5176.837 6.251 401.902 5.325 1 0 Apr 2025 May 2025 Jun 2025 Jul 2025 Aug 2025 Sep 2025 Oct 2025 Nov 2025 Dec 2025 Jan 2026 Feb 2026 Mar 2026 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Rainfall (Inches)2025-10-30 2025-09-30 2025-08-31 Antecedent Precipitation vs Normal Range based on NOAA's Daily Global Historical Climatology Network Daily Total 30-Day Rolling Total 30-Year Normal Range 30 Days Ending 30th %ile (in)70th %ile (in)Observed (in)Wetness Condition Condition Value Month Weight Product 2025-10-30 1.087795 1.764567 2.720473 Wet 3 3 9 2025-09-30 0.79252 1.61811 1.0 Normal 2 2 4 2025-08-31 0.58937 1.577559 1.444882 Normal 2 1 2 Result Wetter than Normal - 15 Coordinates 45.69933, -111.11584 Observation Date 2025-10-30 Elevation (ft)4707.556 Drought Index (PDSI)Not available (2025-09) WebWIMP H2O Balance Dry Season Weather Station Name Coordinates Elevation (ft)Distance (mi)Elevation Weighted Days Normal Days Antecedent BOZEMAN 6 W EXP FARM 45.6728, -111.1547 4774.935 2.623 67.379 1.357 11162 85 BOZEMAN 7.4 WSW 45.6519, -111.1924 4764.108 2.324 10.827 1.071 4 0 BOZEMAN 1.5 WNW 45.6862, -111.0708 4791.995 4.155 17.06 1.941 10 0 BOZEMAN MONTANA STATE UNIV 45.6622, -111.0464 4913.058 5.28 138.123 3.105 175 5 BOZEMAN 1.5 SSE 45.6578, -111.0272 4937.992 6.243 163.057 3.827 1 0 BOZEMAN 4.4 S 45.6138, -111.0566 5176.837 6.251 401.902 5.325 1 0 POWER Engineers, Inc. Aquatic Resource Delineation Report APPENDIX B APPENDIX B PROJECT PHOTOGRAPHS Photo 1: View south at SP1, wetland data point within WL-1. Photo 2 View east at SP2, upland data point. Photo 3: View south at SP3, wetland data point within WL-1. Photo 4: View north at SP4, upland data point. Photo 5: View southeast at SP5, wetland data point within WL-1 . Photo 6: View southwest at SP6, wetland data point within WL-1. Photo 7: View northwest at SP7, upland data point. Photo 8: View south at SP8, upland data point. Photo 9: View north at SP9, wetland data point within WL-1. Photo 10: View west at SP10, upland data point. Photo 11: View south at SP11, wetland data point within WL-4. Photo 12: View north at SP12, upland data point. Photo 13: View west at SP13, wetland data point within WL-5. Photo 14: View west at SP14, upland data point. Photo 15: View east at SP15, wetland data point within WL-3. Photo 16: View east at SP16, upland data point. Photo 17: View south at SP17, wetland data point within WL-3. Photo 18: View north at SP18, upland data point. Photo 19: View west at SP19, wetland data point within WL-4. Photo 20: View west at SP20, upland data point between WL-2 and WL-4. Photo 21: View south along WW-1.Photo 22: View south along Baxter Creek (WW-2). Photo 23: View northeast at head of WW-3.Photo 24: View south along WW-4 and WL-4. POWER Engineers, Inc. Aquatic Resource Delineation Report APPENDIX C APPENDIX C USACE WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEETS State: Lat:Long:Datum: Yes No ,Soil Yes No ,Soil Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No ) 1. 2. 3. 4. ) 1. 2. 3.x 1 = 4.x 2 = 5.x 3 = x 4 = )x 5 = 1.(A) 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.X 7.X 8. 9. 10. 11. ) 1. 2. No 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Remarks: 30 ft. None Observed Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: X 100 Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes = Total Cover Are Vegetation ,or Hydrology ,or Hydrology significantly disturbed? naturally problematic? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Project/Site:City/County: Bozeman, Gallatin Co. Applicant/Owner: Investigator(s): Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): MT Sampling Date: 6/30/2025 Sampling Point: Baxter 80 Brian Sandefur, PWS X Soil Map Unit Name: SP1Headwaters Engineering, Inc Subregion (LRR): X No Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 10 = Total Cover NoCirsium arvense Salix bebbiana Alopecurus pratensis Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?X No PSS1C537A-Lamoose silt loam, 0-2% slopes NWI classification: Section, Township, Range: LRR E, MLRA 44 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) (If no, explain in Remarks.) 45.694506 Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? WGS84 Sec. 4, T2S R5E X Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%):0-1 No No Swale X X VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: Indicator Status 3 Remarks: The NWPL 2020 wetland ratings were used. 30 ft. 3None Observed (B) 0 0 FAC species Total % Cover of: 0 180 100.00% 30 60 20OBL species (A/B) (A) Dominance Test worksheet: This point was determined to be within a wetland due to the presence of all three wetland criteria. According to APT results, drier than normal conditions UPL species Tree Stratum (Plot size: = Total Cover Column Totals: Prevalence Index = B/A = 110 20 20 Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Multiply by: 60 FACW species FACW 55 NoAre Vegetation No -111.116240 Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? = Total Cover No FACW15Glyceria elata 5Impatiens capensis FACWNo 5 Carex utriculata FACU species 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Yes Yes OBLYes 15 ft. Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? 2.36 Herb Stratum (Plot size:0 Hydric Soil Present? 10 5 ft. Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum (B) WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Prevalence Index worksheet: 260 2 - Dominance Test is >50% A positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (>50% of dominant species indexed as OBL, FACW, or FAC). A positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (Prevalence Index is ≤ 3.0). FAC FAC Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0US Army Corps of Engineers %% 2/2 100 3/2 95 4/6 5 X Yes No X X X X X X Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: SP1Sampling Point: — 6-16 SOIL M 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Wetland Hydrology Present? Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) High Water Table (A2) Depth (inches): X7 Surface Soil Cracks (B6) 8 X Iron Deposits (B5) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Raised Ant Mounds (D6)(LRR A) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Other (Explain in Remarks) Water Marks (B1) Sediment Deposits (B2) Drift Deposits (B3)Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 2 cm Muck (A10) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Red Parent Material (TF2) Other (Explain in Remarks) X Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(except Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(MLRA 1, 2 4A, and 4B) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Surface Water (A1) HYDROLOGY Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Restrictive Layer (if observed): X Depth (inches): Remarks: X Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Field Observations: (includes capillary fringe) Drainage Patterns (B10) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Type: Depth(inches): Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Redox Depressions (F8) Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)(except MLRA 1) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Hydric Soil Present? US Army Corps of Engineers A positive indication of hydric soil was observed. Saturation Present? Depth (inches): Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Surface Water Present? Water Table Present? A positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed (at least one primary indicator). Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) A positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed (at least two secondary indicators). Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Salt Crust (B11) Remarks: 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 10YR Type1 Texture Remarks 10YR Depth (inches) None Color (moist) 0-6 Color (moist)Loc2 Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Depleted Matrix (F3) 10YR Loam C Matrix Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Redox Features Clay Loam — State: Lat:Long:Datum: Yes No ,Soil Yes No ,Soil Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No ) 1. 2. 3. 4. ) 1. 2. 3.x 1 = 4.x 2 = 5.x 3 = x 4 = )x 5 = 1.(A) 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. ) 1. 2. No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 No positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (≥50% of dominant species indexed as FACU or drier). Remarks: % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 15 Yes X 85 = Total Cover 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30 ft. Clematis vitalba 5 Yes FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? 5 = Total Cover 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 (B) Schedonorus pratensis 35 Yes FACU Prevalence Index = B/A =3.21 Maianthemum racemosum 5 No FAC 5 ft.UPL species 0 0 Phalaris arundinacea 15 No FACW Column Totals:190 610 Solanum dulcamara 5 No FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Alopecurus pratensis 25 Yes FAC 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% FAC species 120 360 100 = Total Cover FACU species 55 220 Prevalence Index worksheet: Rosa multiflora 20 Yes FACU Total % Cover of:Multiply by: Ribes inerme 10 No FAC OBL species 0 0 FACW species 15 30 = Total Cover 40.00% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15 ft. Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size:30 ft.Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:None Observed 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:5 (B) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Salix scouleriana 70 Yes FAC Herb Stratum (Plot size: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Remarks: The NWPL 2020 wetland ratings were used. This point was determined not to be within a wetland due to the lack of all three wetland criteria. According to APT results, drier than normal conditions VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?X Hydric Soil Present?X Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Wetland Hydrology Present?X X Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Soil Map Unit Name:537A-Lamoose silt loam, 0-2% slopes NWI classification: PSS1C Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?X Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%):0-1 Subregion (LRR): LRR E, MLRA 44 45.694777 -111.116093 WGS84 Applicant/Owner: Headwaters Engineering, Inc MT Sampling Point: SP2 Investigator(s): Brian Sandefur, PWS Section, Township, Range: Sec. 4, T2S R5E WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Baxter 80 City/County: Bozeman, Gallatin Co. Sampling Date: 6/30/2025 %% 2/2 100 3/2 100 — 4/2 100 — Yes No X Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Remarks: No positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 Wetland Hydrology Present?X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?X Depth (inches): Saturation Present?X Depth (inches): 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) HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(except Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(MLRA 1, 2 High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) 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) Remarks: No positive indication of hydric soils was observed. Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present?X 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)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)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth (inches)Type1 RemarksLoc2Texture 12-16 10YR None ——Clay Loam —Loam 8-12 10YR None ——Clay Loam Matrix Redox Features Color (moist)Color (moist) 0-8 10YR None — SOIL Sampling Point:SP2 State: Lat:Long:Datum: Yes No ,Soil Yes No ,Soil Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No ) 1. 2. 3. 4. ) 1. 2. 3.x 1 = 4.x 2 = 5.x 3 = x 4 = )x 5 = 1.(A) 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.X 7.X 8. 9. 10. 11. ) 1. 2. No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 A positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (>50% of dominant species indexed as OBL, FACW, or FAC). A positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (Prevalence Index is ≤ 3.0). Remarks: % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Yes X 100 = Total Cover 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30 ft. None Observed Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? = Total Cover 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 (B) Potentilla anserina 10 No OBL Prevalence Index = B/A =2.45 Carex atherodes 15 No OBL 5 ft.UPL species 0 0 Glyceria elata 5 No FACW Column Totals:100 245 Alopecurus pratensis 70 Yes FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% FAC species 70 210 = Total Cover FACU species 0 0 Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 25 25 FACW species 5 10 = Total Cover 100.00% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15 ft. Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size:30 ft.Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:None Observed 1 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:1 (B) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status None Observed Herb Stratum (Plot size: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Remarks: The NWPL 2020 wetland ratings were used. This point was determined to be within a wetland due to the presence of all three wetland criteria. According to APT results, drier than normal conditions VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?X Hydric Soil Present?X Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Wetland Hydrology Present?X X Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Soil Map Unit Name:537A-Lamoose silt loam, 0-2% slopes NWI classification: PEM1A Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?X Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Swale Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%):0-1 Subregion (LRR): LRR E, MLRA 44 45.695307 -111.116090 WGS84 Applicant/Owner: Headwaters Engineering, Inc MT Sampling Point: SP3 Investigator(s): Brian Sandefur, PWS Section, Township, Range: Sec. 4, T2S R5E WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Baxter 80 City/County: Bozeman, Gallatin Co. Sampling Date: 6/30/2025 %% 2/2 100 3/2 100 — 5/2 95 4/6 5 X Yes No X X X Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Remarks: A positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed (at least one primary indicator). US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 Wetland Hydrology Present?X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?X Depth (inches): Saturation Present?X Depth (inches):12 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) HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(except Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(MLRA 1, 2 High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) 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) Remarks: A positive indication of hydric soil was observed. Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present?X 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)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)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth (inches)Type1 RemarksLoc2Texture 12-16 10YR 10YR C M Silty Clay —Loam 6-12 10YR None ——Silt Loam Matrix Redox Features Color (moist)Color (moist) 0-6 10YR None — SOIL Sampling Point:SP3 State: Lat:Long:Datum: Yes No ,Soil Yes No ,Soil Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No ) 1. 2. 3. 4. ) 1. 2. 3.x 1 = 4.x 2 = 5.x 3 = x 4 = )x 5 = 1.(A) 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. ) 1. 2. No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 No positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (≥50% of dominant species indexed as FACU or drier). Remarks: % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Yes X 100 = Total Cover 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30 ft. None Observed Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? = Total Cover 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 (B) Elymus canadensis 15 No FAC Prevalence Index = B/A =3.30 Schedonorus pratensis 20 Yes FACU 5 ft.UPL species 0 0 Alopecurus pratensis 45 Yes FAC Column Totals:100 330 Poa pratensis 10 No FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Dactylis glomerata 10 No FACU 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% FAC species 70 210 = Total Cover FACU species 30 120 Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 0 0 FACW species 0 0 = Total Cover 50.00% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15 ft. Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size:30 ft.Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:None Observed 1 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:2 (B) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status None Observed Herb Stratum (Plot size: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Remarks: The NWPL 2020 wetland ratings were used. This point was determined not to be within a wetland due to the lack of all three wetland criteria. According to APT results, drier than normal conditions VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?X Hydric Soil Present?X Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Wetland Hydrology Present?X X Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Soil Map Unit Name:537A-Lamoose silt loam, 0-2% slopes NWI classification: PEM1A Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?X Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Valley bottom Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%):0-1 Subregion (LRR): LRR E, MLRA 44 45.695488 -111.117249 WGS84 Applicant/Owner: Headwaters Engineering, Inc MT Sampling Point: SP4 Investigator(s): Brian Sandefur, PWS Section, Township, Range: Sec. 4, T2S R5E WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Baxter 80 City/County: Bozeman, Gallatin Co. Sampling Date: 6/30/2025 %% 3/3 100 5/3 100 — Yes No X Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Remarks: No positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 Wetland Hydrology Present?X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?X Depth (inches): Saturation Present?X Depth (inches): 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) HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(except Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(MLRA 1, 2 High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) 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) Remarks: No positive indication of hydric soils was observed. Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present?X 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)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)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth (inches)Type1 RemarksLoc2Texture —Silt Loam 8-16 10YR None ——Loam Matrix Redox Features Color (moist)Color (moist) 0-8 10YR None — SOIL Sampling Point:SP4 State: Lat:Long:Datum: Yes No ,Soil Yes No ,Soil Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No ) 1. 2. 3. 4. ) 1. 2. 3.x 1 = 4.x 2 = 5.x 3 = x 4 = )x 5 = 1.(A) 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.X 7.X 8. 9. 10. 11. ) 1. 2. No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 A positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (>50% of dominant species indexed as OBL, FACW, or FAC). A positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (Prevalence Index is ≤ 3.0). Remarks: % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Yes X 100 = Total Cover 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30 ft. None Observed Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? = Total Cover 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 (B) Juncus balticus 20 Yes FACW Prevalence Index = B/A =2.45 Carex praegracilis 5 No FACW 5 ft.UPL species 0 0 Alopecurus pratensis 55 Yes FAC Column Totals:100 245 Juncus regelii 10 No FACW Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Carex utriculata 10 No OBL 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% FAC species 55 165 = Total Cover FACU species 0 0 Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 10 10 FACW species 35 70 = Total Cover 100.00% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15 ft. Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size:30 ft.Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:None Observed 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:2 (B) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status None Observed Herb Stratum (Plot size: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Remarks: The NWPL 2020 wetland ratings were used. This point was determined to be within a wetland due to the presence of all three wetland criteria. According to APT results, drier than normal conditions VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?X Hydric Soil Present?X Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Wetland Hydrology Present?X X Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Soil Map Unit Name:537A-Lamoose silt loam, 0-2% slopes NWI classification: PEM1A Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?X Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Valley bottom Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%):0-1 Subregion (LRR): LRR E, MLRA 44 45.696042 -111.117800 WGS84 Applicant/Owner: Headwaters Engineering, Inc MT Sampling Point: SP5 Investigator(s): Brian Sandefur, PWS Section, Township, Range: Sec. 4, T2S R5E WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Baxter 80 City/County: Bozeman, Gallatin Co. Sampling Date: 6/30/2025 %% 2/1 100 2/2 100 — 4/2 95 4/6 5 X Yes No X X X X Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Remarks: A positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed (at least one primary indicator). A positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed (at least two secondary indicators). US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 Wetland Hydrology Present?X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?X Depth (inches): Saturation Present?X Depth (inches):16 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) HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(except Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(MLRA 1, 2 High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) 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) Remarks: A positive indication of hydric soil was observed. Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present?X 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)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)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth (inches)Type1 RemarksLoc2Texture 20-25 10YR 10YR C M Silty Clay —Loam 10-20 10YR None ——Clay Loam Matrix Redox Features Color (moist)Color (moist) 0-10 10YR None — SOIL Sampling Point:SP5 State: Lat:Long:Datum: Yes No ,Soil Yes No ,Soil Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No ) 1. 2. 3. 4. ) 1. 2. 3.x 1 = 4.x 2 = 5.x 3 = x 4 = )x 5 = 1.(A) 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.X 7.X 8. 9. 10. 11. ) 1. 2. No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 A positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (>50% of dominant species indexed as OBL, FACW, or FAC). A positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (Prevalence Index is ≤ 3.0). Remarks: % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Yes X 100 = Total Cover 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30 ft. None Observed Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? = Total Cover 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 (B) Calamagrostis stricta 10 No FACW Prevalence Index = B/A =2.70 Juncus balticus 10 No FACW 5 ft.UPL species 0 0 Phalaris arundinacea 5 No FACW Column Totals:100 270 Juncus ensifolius 5 No FACW Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Alopecurus pratensis 70 Yes FAC 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% FAC species 70 210 = Total Cover FACU species 0 0 Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 0 0 FACW species 30 60 = Total Cover 100.00% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15 ft. Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size:30 ft.Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:None Observed 1 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:1 (B) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status None Observed Herb Stratum (Plot size: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Remarks: The NWPL 2020 wetland ratings were used. This point was determined to be within a wetland due to the presence of all three wetland criteria. According to APT results, drier than normal conditions VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?X Hydric Soil Present?X Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Wetland Hydrology Present?X X Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Soil Map Unit Name:537A-Lamoose silt loam, 0-2% slopes NWI classification: PEM1A Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?X Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Valley bottom Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%):0-1 Subregion (LRR): LRR E, MLRA 44 45.695684 -111.118935 WGS84 Applicant/Owner: Headwaters Engineering, Inc MT Sampling Point: SP6 Investigator(s): Brian Sandefur, PWS Section, Township, Range: Sec. 4, T2S R5E WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Baxter 80 City/County: Bozeman, Gallatin Co. Sampling Date: 6/30/2025 %% 3/3 100 4/2 100 — 5/2 95 4/6 5 X Yes No X X X Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Remarks: A positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed (at least one primary indicator). A positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed (at least two secondary indicators). US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 Wetland Hydrology Present?X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?X Depth (inches): Saturation Present?X Depth (inches):12 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) HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(except Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(MLRA 1, 2 High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) 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) Remarks: A positive indication of hydric soil was observed. Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present?X 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)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)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth (inches)Type1 RemarksLoc2Texture 16-20 10YR 10YR C M Clay Loam —Silt Loam 6-16 10YR None ——Loam Matrix Redox Features Color (moist)Color (moist) 0-6 10YR None — SOIL Sampling Point:SP6 State: Lat:Long:Datum: Yes No ,Soil Yes No ,Soil Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No ) 1. 2. 3. 4. ) 1. 2. 3.x 1 = 4.x 2 = 5.x 3 = x 4 = )x 5 = 1.(A) 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. ) 1. 2. No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 No positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (≥50% of dominant species indexed as FACU or drier). Remarks: % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Yes X 100 = Total Cover 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30 ft. None Observed Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? = Total Cover 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 (B) Dactylis glomerata 20 Yes FACU Prevalence Index = B/A =3.60 Poa pratensis 20 Yes FAC 5 ft.UPL species 10 50 Alopecurus pratensis 30 Yes FAC Column Totals:100 360 Schedonorus pratensis 20 Yes FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Bromus inermis 10 No UPL 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% FAC species 50 150 = Total Cover FACU species 40 160 Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 0 0 FACW species 0 0 = Total Cover 50.00% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15 ft. Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size:30 ft.Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:None Observed 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:4 (B) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status None Observed Herb Stratum (Plot size: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Remarks: The NWPL 2020 wetland ratings were used. This point was determined not to be within a wetland due to the lack of all three wetland criteria. According to APT results, drier than normal conditions VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?X Hydric Soil Present?X Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Wetland Hydrology Present?X X Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Soil Map Unit Name:537A-Lamoose silt loam, 0-2% slopes NWI classification: Non-Wetland Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?X Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Valley bottom Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%):0-1 Subregion (LRR): LRR E, MLRA 44 45.695397 -111.118683 WGS84 Applicant/Owner: Headwaters Engineering, Inc MT Sampling Point: SP7 Investigator(s): Brian Sandefur, PWS Section, Township, Range: Sec. 4, T2S R5E WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Baxter 80 City/County: Bozeman, Gallatin Co. Sampling Date: 6/30/2025 %% 3/3 100 5/3 100 — Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Remarks: No positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 Wetland Hydrology Present?X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?X Depth (inches): Saturation Present?X Depth (inches): 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) HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(except Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(MLRA 1, 2 High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) 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) Remarks: No positive indication of hydric soils was observed. Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present?X 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)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)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth (inches)Type1 RemarksLoc2Texture —Loam 8-16 10YR None ——Clay Loam Matrix Redox Features Color (moist)Color (moist) 0-8 10YR None — SOIL Sampling Point:SP7 State: Lat:Long:Datum: Yes No ,Soil Yes No ,Soil Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No ) 1. 2. 3. 4. ) 1. 2. 3.x 1 = 4.x 2 = 5.x 3 = x 4 = )x 5 = 1.(A) 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. ) 1. 2. No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 No positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (≥50% of dominant species indexed as FACU or drier). Remarks: % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Yes X 100 = Total Cover 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30 ft. None Observed Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? = Total Cover 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 (B) Schedonorus pratensis 10 No FACU Prevalence Index = B/A =4.12 Alopecurus pratensis 30 Yes FAC 5 ft.UPL species 60 300 Bromus inermis 60 Yes UPL Column Totals:170 700 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% FAC species 40 120 70 = Total Cover FACU species 70 280 Prevalence Index worksheet: Ribes aureum 10 No FAC Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 0 0 FACW species 0 0 = Total Cover 33.33% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15 ft. Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size:30 ft.Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:None Observed 1 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:3 (B) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Symphoricarpos albus 60 Yes FACU Herb Stratum (Plot size: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Remarks: The NWPL 2020 wetland ratings were used. This point was determined not to be within a wetland due to the lack of all three wetland criteria. According to APT results, drier than normal conditions VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?X Hydric Soil Present?X Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Wetland Hydrology Present?X X Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Soil Map Unit Name:537A-Lamoose silt loam, 0-2% slopes NWI classification: Non-Wetland Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?X Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): Convex Slope (%):0-1 Subregion (LRR): LRR E, MLRA 44 45.694004 -111.119135 WGS84 Applicant/Owner: Headwaters Engineering, Inc MT Sampling Point: SP8 Investigator(s): Brian Sandefur, PWS Section, Township, Range: Sec. 4, T2S R5E WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Baxter 80 City/County: Bozeman, Gallatin Co. Sampling Date: 6/30/2025 %% 2/2 100 3/2 100 — 4/2 100 — Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Remarks: No positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 Wetland Hydrology Present?X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?X Depth (inches): Saturation Present?X Depth (inches): 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) HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(except Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(MLRA 1, 2 High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) 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) Remarks: No positive indication of hydric soils was observed. Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present?X 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)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)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth (inches)Type1 RemarksLoc2Texture 16-20 10YR None ——Clay Loam —Loam 8-16 10YR None ——Clay Loam Matrix Redox Features Color (moist)Color (moist) 0-8 10YR None — SOIL Sampling Point:SP8 State: Lat:Long:Datum: Yes No ,Soil Yes No ,Soil Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No ) 1. 2. 3. 4. ) 1. 2. 3.x 1 = 4.x 2 = 5.x 3 = x 4 = )x 5 = 1.(A) 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.X 7.X 8. 9. 10. 11. ) 1. 2. No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 A positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (>50% of dominant species indexed as OBL, FACW, or FAC). A positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (Prevalence Index is ≤ 3.0). Remarks: % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 30 Yes X 70 = Total Cover 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30 ft. None Observed Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? = Total Cover 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 (B) Alopecurus pratensis 45 Yes FAC Prevalence Index = B/A =2.57 Juncus regelii 5 No FACW 5 ft.UPL species 0 0 Juncus balticus 5 No FACW Column Totals:70 180 Cirsium arvense 5 No FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Veronica anagallis-aquatica 10 No OBL 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% FAC species 50 150 = Total Cover FACU species 0 0 Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 10 10 FACW species 10 20 = Total Cover 100.00% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15 ft. Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size:30 ft.Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:None Observed 1 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:1 (B) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status None Observed Herb Stratum (Plot size: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Remarks: The NWPL 2020 wetland ratings were used. This point was determined to be within a wetland due to the presence of all three wetland criteria. According to APT results, drier than normal conditions VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?X Hydric Soil Present?X Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Wetland Hydrology Present?X X Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Soil Map Unit Name:537A-Lamoose silt loam, 0-2% slopes NWI classification: Non-Wetland Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?X Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Drainageway Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%):0-1 Subregion (LRR): LRR E, MLRA 44 45.698355 -111.118002 WGS84 Applicant/Owner: Headwaters Engineering, Inc MT Sampling Point: SP9 Investigator(s): Brian Sandefur, PWS Section, Township, Range: Sec. 4, T2S R5E WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Baxter 80 City/County: Bozeman, Gallatin Co. Sampling Date: 6/30/2025 %% 2/1 100 3/0 100 — X Yes No X X X X Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Remarks: A positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed (at least one primary indicator). A positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed (at least two secondary indicators). US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 Wetland Hydrology Present?X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?X Depth (inches):10 Saturation Present?X Depth (inches):8 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) HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(except Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(MLRA 1, 2 High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) 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) Remarks: A positive indication of hydric soil was observed. Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present?X 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)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)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth (inches)Type1 RemarksLoc2Texture —Muck 6-10 5BG None ——Loam Matrix Redox Features Color (moist)Color (moist) 0-6 10YR None — SOIL Sampling Point:SP9 State: Lat:Long:Datum: Yes No ,Soil Yes No ,Soil Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No ) 1. 2. 3. 4. ) 1. 2. 3.x 1 = 4.x 2 = 5.x 3 = x 4 = )x 5 = 1.(A) 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.X 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. ) 1. 2. No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 A positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (>50% of dominant species indexed as OBL, FACW, or FAC). Remarks: % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Yes X 100 = Total Cover 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30 ft. None Observed Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? = Total Cover 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 (B) Schedonorus pratensis 10 No FACU Prevalence Index = B/A =3.20 Dactylis glomerata 10 No FACU 5 ft.UPL species 0 0 Alopecurus pratensis 60 Yes FAC Column Totals:100 320 Phleum pratense 10 No FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Poa pratensis 10 No FAC 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% FAC species 80 240 = Total Cover FACU species 20 80 Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 0 0 FACW species 0 0 = Total Cover 100.00% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15 ft. Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size:30 ft.Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:None Observed 1 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:1 (B) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status None Observed Herb Stratum (Plot size: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Remarks: The NWPL 2020 wetland ratings were used. This point was determined not to be within a wetland due to the lack of hydric soils and wetland hydrology. According to APT results, drier than normal conditions VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?X Hydric Soil Present?X Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Wetland Hydrology Present?X X Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Soil Map Unit Name:537A-Lamoose silt loam, 0-2% slopes NWI classification: Non-Wetland Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?X Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Valley bottom Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%):0-1 Subregion (LRR): LRR E, MLRA 44 45.698416 -111.117863 WGS84 Applicant/Owner: Headwaters Engineering, Inc MT Sampling Point: SP10 Investigator(s): Brian Sandefur, PWS Section, Township, Range: Sec. 4, T2S R5E WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Baxter 80 City/County: Bozeman, Gallatin Co. Sampling Date: 6/30/2025 %% 3/3 100 4/2 100 — Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Remarks: No positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 Wetland Hydrology Present?X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?X Depth (inches): Saturation Present?X Depth (inches): 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) HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(except Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(MLRA 1, 2 High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) 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) Remarks: No positive indication of hydric soils was observed. Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present?X 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)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)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth (inches)Type1 RemarksLoc2Texture —Loam 8-16 10YR None ——Clay Loam Matrix Redox Features Color (moist)Color (moist) 0-8 10YR None — SOIL Sampling Point:SP10 State: Lat:Long:Datum: Yes No ,Soil Yes No ,Soil Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No ) 1. 2. 3. 4. ) 1. 2. 3.x 1 = 4.x 2 = 5.x 3 = x 4 = )x 5 = 1.(A) 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.X 7.X 8. 9. 10. 11. ) 1. 2. No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 A positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (>50% of dominant species indexed as OBL, FACW, or FAC). A positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (Prevalence Index is ≤ 3.0). Remarks: % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Yes X 100 = Total Cover 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30 ft. None Observed Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? = Total Cover 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 (B) Juncus balticus 30 Yes FACW Prevalence Index = B/A =2.60 Poa palustris 20 Yes FAC 5 ft.UPL species 0 0 Alopecurus pratensis 40 Yes FAC Column Totals:100 260 Agrostis stolonifera 5 No FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Potentilla anserina 5 No OBL 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% FAC species 65 195 = Total Cover FACU species 0 0 Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 5 5 FACW species 30 60 = Total Cover 100.00% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15 ft. Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size:30 ft.Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:None Observed 3 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:3 (B) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status None Observed Herb Stratum (Plot size: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Remarks: The NWPL 2020 wetland ratings were used. This point was determined to be within a wetland due to the presence of all three wetland criteria. According to APT results, drier than normal conditions VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?X Hydric Soil Present?X Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Wetland Hydrology Present?X X Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Soil Map Unit Name:537A-Lamoose silt loam, 0-2% slopes NWI classification: PEM1C Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?X Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Swale Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%):0-1 Subregion (LRR): LRR E, MLRA 44 45.698763 -111.115571 WGS84 Applicant/Owner: Headwaters Engineering, Inc MT Sampling Point: SP11 Investigator(s): Brian Sandefur, PWS Section, Township, Range: Sec. 4, T2S R5E WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Baxter 80 City/County: Bozeman, Gallatin Co. Sampling Date: 6/30/2025 %% 2/2 100 3/2 100 — 5/2 95 4/6 5 X Yes No X X X X Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Remarks: A positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed (at least one primary indicator). A positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed (at least two secondary indicators). US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 Wetland Hydrology Present?X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?X Depth (inches): Saturation Present?X Depth (inches):16 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) HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(except Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(MLRA 1, 2 High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) 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) Remarks: A positive indication of hydric soil was observed. Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present?X 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)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)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth (inches)Type1 RemarksLoc2Texture 10-16 10YR 10YR C M Clay Loam —Loam 6-10 10YR None ——Loam Matrix Redox Features Color (moist)Color (moist) 0-6 10YR None — SOIL Sampling Point:SP11 State: Lat:Long:Datum: Yes No ,Soil Yes No ,Soil Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No ) 1. 2. 3. 4. ) 1. 2. 3.x 1 = 4.x 2 = 5.x 3 = x 4 = )x 5 = 1.(A) 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. ) 1. 2. No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 No positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (≥50% of dominant species indexed as FACU or drier). Remarks: % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Yes X 100 = Total Cover 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30 ft. None Observed Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? = Total Cover 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 (B) Bromus inermis 30 Yes UPL Prevalence Index = B/A =3.80 Dactylis glomerata 15 No FACU 5 ft.UPL species 30 150 Alopecurus pratensis 40 Yes FAC Column Totals:100 380 Phleum pratense 10 No FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Taraxacum officinale 5 No FACU 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% FAC species 50 150 = Total Cover FACU species 20 80 Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 0 0 FACW species 0 0 = Total Cover 50.00% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15 ft. Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size:30 ft.Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:None Observed 1 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:2 (B) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status None Observed Herb Stratum (Plot size: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Remarks: The NWPL 2020 wetland ratings were used. This point was determined not to be within a wetland due to the lack of all three wetland criteria. According to APT results, drier than normal conditions VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?X Hydric Soil Present?X Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Wetland Hydrology Present?X X Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Soil Map Unit Name:537A-Lamoose silt loam, 0-2% slopes NWI classification: Non-Wetland Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?X Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Valley bottom Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%):0-1 Subregion (LRR): LRR E, MLRA 44 45.698524 -111.115322 WGS84 Applicant/Owner: Headwaters Engineering, Inc MT Sampling Point: SP12 Investigator(s): Brian Sandefur, PWS Section, Township, Range: Sec. 4, T2S R5E WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Baxter 80 City/County: Bozeman, Gallatin Co. Sampling Date: 6/30/2025 %% 3/3 100 4/3 100 — Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Remarks: No positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 Wetland Hydrology Present?X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?X Depth (inches): Saturation Present?X Depth (inches): 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) HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(except Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(MLRA 1, 2 High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) 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) Remarks: No positive indication of hydric soils was observed. Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present?X 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)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)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth (inches)Type1 RemarksLoc2Texture —Silt Loam 8-16 10YR None ——Loam Matrix Redox Features Color (moist)Color (moist) 0-8 10YR None — SOIL Sampling Point:SP12 State: Lat:Long:Datum: Yes No ,Soil Yes No ,Soil Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No ) 1. 2. 3. 4. ) 1. 2. 3.x 1 = 4.x 2 = 5.x 3 = x 4 = )x 5 = 1.(A) 2. 3. 4. 5.X 6.X 7.X 8. 9. 10. 11. ) 1. 2. No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 A positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation). A positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (>50% of dominant species indexed as OBL, FACW, or FAC). A positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (Prevalence Index is ≤ 3.0). Remarks: % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Yes X 100 = Total Cover 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30 ft. None Observed Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? = Total Cover 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 (B) Schoenoplectus acutus 30 Yes OBL Prevalence Index = B/A =1.20 Juncus balticus 15 No FACW 5 ft.UPL species 0 0 Typha latifolia 30 Yes OBL Column Totals:100 120 Mentha arvensis 5 No FACW Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Eriophorum angustifolium 5 No OBL 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Carex utriculata 15 No OBL 2 - Dominance Test is >50% FAC species 0 0 = Total Cover FACU species 0 0 Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 80 80 FACW species 20 40 = Total Cover 100.00% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15 ft. Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size:30 ft.Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:None Observed 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:2 (B) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status None Observed Herb Stratum (Plot size: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Remarks: The NWPL 2020 wetland ratings were used. This point was determined to be within a wetland due to the presence of all three wetland criteria. According to APT results, drier than normal conditions VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?X Hydric Soil Present?X Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Wetland Hydrology Present?X X Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Soil Map Unit Name:509B-Enbar loam, 0-4% slopes NWI classification: Non-Wetland Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?X Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Drainageway Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%):0-1 Subregion (LRR): LRR E, MLRA 44 45.700059 -111.114103 WGS84 Applicant/Owner: Headwaters Engineering, Inc MT Sampling Point: SP13 Investigator(s): Brian Sandefur, PWS Section, Township, Range: Sec. 4, T2S R5E WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Baxter 80 City/County: Bozeman, Gallatin Co. Sampling Date: 6/30/2025 %% 3/0 100 X Yes No X X X X X X Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Remarks: A positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed (at least one primary indicator). A positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed (at least two secondary indicators). US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 Wetland Hydrology Present?X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?X Depth (inches):1 Water Table Present?X Depth (inches):0 Saturation Present?X Depth (inches):0 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) HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(except Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(MLRA 1, 2 High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) 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) Remarks: A positive indication of hydric soil was observed. Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present?X 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)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)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth (inches)Type1 RemarksLoc2Texture —Loam Matrix Redox Features Color (moist)Color (moist) 0-8 5BG None — SOIL Sampling Point:SP13 State: Lat:Long:Datum: Yes No ,Soil Yes No ,Soil Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No ) 1. 2. 3. 4. ) 1. 2. 3.x 1 = 4.x 2 = 5.x 3 = x 4 = )x 5 = 1.(A) 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. ) 1. 2. No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 No positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (≥50% of dominant species indexed as FACU or drier). Remarks: % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Yes X 100 = Total Cover 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30 ft. None Observed Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? = Total Cover 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 (B) Poa pratensis 20 Yes FAC Prevalence Index = B/A =4.60 5 ft.UPL species 80 400 Bromus inermis 80 Yes UPL Column Totals:100 460 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% FAC species 20 60 = Total Cover FACU species 0 0 Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 0 0 FACW species 0 0 = Total Cover 50.00% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15 ft. Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size:30 ft.Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:None Observed 1 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata:2 (B) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status None Observed Herb Stratum (Plot size: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Remarks: The NWPL 2020 wetland ratings were used. This point was determined not to be within a wetland due to the lack of all three wetland criteria. According to APT results, drier than normal conditions VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?X Hydric Soil Present?X Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Wetland Hydrology Present?X X Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Soil Map Unit Name:509B-Enbar loam, 0-4% slopes NWI classification: Non-Wetland Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?X Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Valley bottom Local relief (concave, convex, none): Convex Slope (%):0-1 Subregion (LRR): LRR E, MLRA 44 45.700047 -111.114079 WGS84 Applicant/Owner: Headwaters Engineering, Inc MT Sampling Point: SP14 Investigator(s): Brian Sandefur, PWS Section, Township, Range: Sec. 4, T2S R5E WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Baxter 80 City/County: Bozeman, Gallatin Co. Sampling Date: 6/30/2025 %% 3/3 100 4/3 100 — Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Remarks: No positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 Wetland Hydrology Present?X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?X Depth (inches): Saturation Present?X Depth (inches): 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) HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(except Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(MLRA 1, 2 High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) 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) Remarks: No positive indication of hydric soils was observed. Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present?X 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)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)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth (inches)Type1 RemarksLoc2Texture —Loam 10-16 10YR None ——Loam Matrix Redox Features Color (moist)Color (moist) 0-10 10YR None — SOIL Sampling Point:SP14 State: Lat:Long:Datum: Yes No ,Soil Yes No ,Soil Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No ) 1. 2. 3. 4. ) 1. 2. 3.x 1 = 4.x 2 = 5.x 3 = x 4 = )x 5 = 1.(A) 2. 3. 4. 5.X 6.X 7.X 8. 9. 10. 11. ) 1. 2. No Prevalence Index worksheet: 200 A positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (>50% of dominant species indexed as OBL, FACW, or FAC). A positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (Prevalence Index is ≤ 3.0). FACW OBL 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum (B) 2.00 Herb Stratum (Plot size: 10 0 Alopecurus pratensis FACU species UPL species No Phalaris arundinacea Yes 5 ft. = Total Cover Column Totals: Prevalence Index = B/A = 100 Carex utriculata 10 Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0US Army Corps of Engineers 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 Wetland Hydrology Present? Subregion (LRR): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%):0-1 No No Drainageway X X X No Hydric Soil Present? FACW species 0 0 FAC species Total % Cover of: = Total Cover NoAre Vegetation No -111.113852 Multiply by: None Observed 30 ft. Dominance Test worksheet: None Observed (B) Remarks: The NWPL 2022 wetland ratings were used. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? FACNo 15 ft. Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? (A/B) (A)1 10 Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 10 0 30 100.00% 80 160 10OBL species WGS84 Sec. 4, T2S R5E X This point was determined to be within a wetland due to the presence of all three wetland criteria. According to APT results, wetter than normal conditions Tree Stratum (Plot size: VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: Indicator Status 1 80 Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: SP15Headwaters Engineering, Inc Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?X No Non-Wetland509B-Enbar loam, 0-4% slopes NWI classification: Section, Township, Range: LRR E, MLRA 44 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Are Vegetation ,or Hydrology ,or Hydrology significantly disturbed? naturally problematic? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Project/Site:City/County: Bozeman, Gallatin Co. Applicant/Owner: Investigator(s): Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): MT Sampling Date: 10/30/2025 Sampling Point: Baxter 80 Brian Sandefur, PWS X Soil Map Unit Name: (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) (If no, explain in Remarks.) 45.698810 Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Remarks: A positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation). 30 ft. None Observed Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: X 100 Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes = Total Cover = Total Cover %% 2/1 100 3/2 95 4/6 5 X Yes No X X X X Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Loc2 C Matrix Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Depleted Matrix (F3) 10YR Clay Loam Redox Features Silt Loam — 10YR Depth (inches) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Salt Crust (B11) Remarks: 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 10YR Type1 Texture Remarks None Color (moist) 0-8 Color (moist) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Redox Depressions (F8) Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)(except MLRA 1) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Hydric Soil Present? US Army Corps of Engineers A positive indication of hydric soil was observed. Saturation Present? Depth (inches): Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Surface Water Present? Water Table Present? A positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed (at least one primary indicator). Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) A positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed (at least two secondary indicators). X Depth (inches): Remarks: X Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Field Observations: (includes capillary fringe) Drainage Patterns (B10) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Type: Depth(inches): Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) X Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(except Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(MLRA 1, 2 4A, and 4B) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Surface Water (A1) HYDROLOGY Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Restrictive Layer (if observed): 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Wetland Hydrology Present? Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) High Water Table (A2) Depth (inches): X8 Surface Soil Cracks (B6) 10 X Iron Deposits (B5) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Raised Ant Mounds (D6)(LRR A) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)(LRR A) Other (Explain in Remarks) Water Marks (B1) Sediment Deposits (B2) Drift Deposits (B3)Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 2 cm Muck (A10) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Red Parent Material (TF2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: SP15Sampling Point: — 8-12 SOIL M State: Lat:Long:Datum: Yes No ,Soil Yes No ,Soil Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No ) 1. 2. 3. 4. ) 1. 2. 3.x 1 = 4.x 2 = 5.x 3 = x 4 = )x 5 = 1.(A) 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. ) 1. 2. No WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Baxter 80 City/County: Bozeman, Gallatin Co. Sampling Date: 10/30/2025 Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Valley bottom Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%):0-1 Subregion (LRR): LRR E, MLRA 44 45.698841 -111.113787 WGS84 Applicant/Owner: Headwaters Engineering, Inc MT Sampling Point: SP16 Investigator(s): Brian Sandefur, PWS Section, Township, Range: Sec. 4, T2S R5E Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Soil Map Unit Name:509B-Enbar loam, 0-4% slopes NWI classification: Non-Wetland Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?X Remarks: The NWPL 2022 wetland ratings were used. This point was determined not to be within a wetland due to the lack of all three wetland criteria. According to APT results, wetter than normal conditions VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?X Hydric Soil Present?X Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Wetland Hydrology Present?X X 1 (B) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status None Observed Herb Stratum (Plot size: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:= Total Cover 0.00% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15 ft. Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size:30 ft.Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:None Observed 0 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: FAC species 15 45 = Total Cover FACU species 0 0 Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 0 0 FACW species 0 0 5 ft.UPL species 85 425 Bromus inermis 85 Yes UPL Column Totals:100 470 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 (B) Phleum pratense 15 No FAC Prevalence Index = B/A =4.70 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Yes X 100 = Total Cover 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30 ft. None Observed Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 No positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (≥50% of dominant species indexed as FACU or drier). %% 2/2 100 3/2 100 — 4/3 100 — Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No 0-3 10YR None — SOIL Sampling Point:SP16 7-15 10YR None ——Clay Loam —Loam 3-7 10YR None ——Loam Matrix Redox Features Color (moist)Color (moist)Loc2 Texture 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)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)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth (inches)Type1 Remarks Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2) Remarks: No positive indication of hydric soils was observed. Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present?X Depth (inches): 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) HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(except Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(MLRA 1, 2 High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) 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) Wetland Hydrology Present?X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?X Depth (inches): Saturation Present?X Remarks: No positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 State: Lat:Long:Datum: Yes No ,Soil Yes No ,Soil Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No ) 1. 2. 3. 4. ) 1. 2. 3.x 1 = 4.x 2 = 5.x 3 = x 4 = )x 5 = 1.(A) 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.X 7.X 8. 9. 10. 11. ) 1. 2. No WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Baxter 80 City/County: Bozeman, Gallatin Co. Sampling Date: 10/30/2025 Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Drainageway Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%):0-1 Subregion (LRR): LRR E, MLRA 44 45.697616 -111.113946 WGS84 Applicant/Owner: Headwaters Engineering, Inc MT Sampling Point: SP17 Investigator(s): Brian Sandefur, PWS Section, Township, Range: Sec. 4, T2S R5E Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Soil Map Unit Name:453B-Amsterdam-Quagle silt loams, 0-4% slopes NWI classification: Non-Wetland Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?X Remarks: The NWPL 2022 wetland ratings were used. This point was determined to be within a wetland due to the presence of all three wetland criteria. According to APT results, wetter than normal conditions VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?X Hydric Soil Present?X Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Wetland Hydrology Present?X X 2 (B) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status None Observed Herb Stratum (Plot size: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:= Total Cover 100.00% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15 ft. Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size:30 ft.Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:None Observed 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: FAC species 70 210 = Total Cover FACU species 0 0 Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 30 30 FACW species 0 0 5 ft.UPL species 0 0 Alopecurus pratensis 70 Yes FAC Column Totals:100 240 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 (B) Typha latifolia 30 Yes OBL Prevalence Index = B/A =2.40 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Yes X 100 = Total Cover 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30 ft. None Observed Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? A positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (>50% of dominant species indexed as OBL, FACW, or FAC). A positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (Prevalence Index is ≤ 3.0). Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 %% 2/1 100 3/0 100 — X Yes No X X X X X X Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No 0-6 10YR None — SOIL Sampling Point:SP17 —Silt Loam 6-12 5BG None ——Loam Matrix Redox Features Color (moist)Color (moist)Loc2 Texture 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)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)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth (inches)Type1 Remarks Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2) Remarks: A positive indication of hydric soil was observed. Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present?X Depth (inches):6 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) HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(except Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(MLRA 1, 2 High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) 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) Wetland Hydrology Present?X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?X Depth (inches):8 Saturation Present?X Remarks: A positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed (at least one primary indicator). A positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed (at least two secondary indicators). US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 State: Lat:Long:Datum: Yes No ,Soil Yes No ,Soil Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No ) 1. 2. 3. 4. ) 1. 2. 3.x 1 = 4.x 2 = 5.x 3 = x 4 = )x 5 = 1.(A) 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. ) 1. 2. No WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Baxter 80 City/County: Bozeman, Gallatin Co. Sampling Date: 10/30/2025 Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Valley bottom Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%):0-1 Subregion (LRR): LRR E, MLRA 44 45.697565 -111.113968 WGS84 Applicant/Owner: Headwaters Engineering, Inc MT Sampling Point: SP18 Investigator(s): Brian Sandefur, PWS Section, Township, Range: Sec. 4, T2S R5E Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Soil Map Unit Name:453B-Amsterdam-Quagle silt loams, 0-4% slopes NWI classification: Non-Wetland Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?X Remarks: The NWPL 2022 wetland ratings were used. This point was determined not to be within a wetland due to the lack of all three wetland criteria. According to APT results, wetter than normal conditions VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?X Hydric Soil Present?X Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Wetland Hydrology Present?X X 3 (B) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Rosa woodsii 10 Yes FACU Herb Stratum (Plot size: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:= Total Cover 0.00% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15 ft. Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size:30 ft.Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:None Observed 0 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: FAC species 10 30 10 = Total Cover FACU species 30 120 Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 0 0 FACW species 0 0 5 ft.UPL species 70 350 Bromus inermis 70 Yes UPL Column Totals:110 500 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 (B) Dactylis glomerata 20 Yes FACU Prevalence Index = B/A =4.55 Poa pratensis 10 No FAC 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Yes X 100 = Total Cover 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30 ft. None Observed Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 No positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (≥50% of dominant species indexed as FACU or drier). %% 3/3 100 4/3 100 — Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No 0-8 10YR None — SOIL Sampling Point:SP18 —Clay Loam 8-16 10YR None ——Clay Loam Matrix Redox Features Color (moist)Color (moist)Loc2 Texture 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)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)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth (inches)Type1 Remarks Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2) Remarks: No positive indication of hydric soils was observed. Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present?X Depth (inches): 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) HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(except Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(MLRA 1, 2 High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) 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) Wetland Hydrology Present?X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?X Depth (inches): Saturation Present?X Remarks: No positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 State: Lat:Long:Datum: Yes No ,Soil Yes No ,Soil Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No ) 1. 2. 3. 4. ) 1. 2. 3.x 1 = 4.x 2 = 5.x 3 = x 4 = )x 5 = 1.(A) 2. 3. 4. 5.X 6.X 7.X 8. 9. 10. 11. ) 1. 2. No WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Baxter 80 City/County: Bozeman, Gallatin Co. Sampling Date: 10/30/2025 Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Drainageway Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%):0-1 Subregion (LRR): LRR E, MLRA 44 45.696289 -111.113729 WGS84 Applicant/Owner: Headwaters Engineering, Inc MT Sampling Point: SP19 Investigator(s): Brian Sandefur, PWS Section, Township, Range: Sec. 4, T2S R5E Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Soil Map Unit Name:453B-Amsterdam-Quagle silt loams, 0-4% slopes NWI classification: Non-Wetland Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?X Remarks: The NWPL 2022 wetland ratings were used. This point was determined to be within a wetland due to the presence of all three wetland criteria. According to APT results, wetter than normal conditions VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?X Hydric Soil Present?X Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Wetland Hydrology Present?X X 1 (B) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status None Observed Herb Stratum (Plot size: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:= Total Cover 100.00% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15 ft. Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size:30 ft.Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:None Observed 1 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: FAC species 10 30 = Total Cover FACU species 0 0 Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 0 0 FACW species 90 180 5 ft.UPL species 0 0 Phalaris arundinacea 85 Yes FACW Column Totals:100 210 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 (B) Asclepias speciosa 10 No FAC Prevalence Index = B/A =2.10 Mentha arvensis 5 No FACW 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Yes X 100 = Total Cover 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30 ft. None Observed Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? A positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (>50% of dominant species indexed as OBL, FACW, or FAC). A positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (Prevalence Index is ≤ 3.0). Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 A positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation). %% 2/2 100 3/2 95 4/6 5 X Yes No X X X Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No 0-8 10YR None — SOIL Sampling Point:SP19 —Clay Loam 8-16 10YR 10YR C M Clay Loam Matrix Redox Features Color (moist)Color (moist)Loc2 Texture 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)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)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth (inches)Type1 Remarks Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2) Remarks: A positive indication of hydric soil was observed. Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present?X Depth (inches): 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) HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(except Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(MLRA 1, 2 High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) 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) Wetland Hydrology Present?X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?X Depth (inches): Saturation Present?X Remarks: A positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed (at least two secondary indicators). US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 State: Lat:Long:Datum: Yes No ,Soil Yes No ,Soil Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No ) 1. 2. 3. 4. ) 1. 2. 3.x 1 = 4.x 2 = 5.x 3 = x 4 = )x 5 = 1.(A) 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. ) 1. 2. No WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: Baxter 80 City/County: Bozeman, Gallatin Co. Sampling Date: 10/30/2025 Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Valley bottom Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%):0-1 Subregion (LRR): LRR E, MLRA 44 45.696262 -111.113761 WGS84 Applicant/Owner: Headwaters Engineering, Inc MT Sampling Point: SP20 Investigator(s): Brian Sandefur, PWS Section, Township, Range: Sec. 4, T2S R5E Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Soil Map Unit Name:453B-Amsterdam-Quagle silt loams, 0-4% slopes NWI classification: Non-Wetland Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? X (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation No No ,or Hydrology No significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?X Remarks: The NWPL 2022 wetland ratings were used. This point was determined not to be within a wetland due to the lack of all three wetland criteria. According to APT results, wetter than normal conditions VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?X Hydric Soil Present?X Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland?Wetland Hydrology Present?X X 1 (B) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status None Observed Herb Stratum (Plot size: Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:= Total Cover 0.00% (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15 ft. Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size:30 ft.Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:None Observed 0 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: FAC species 0 0 = Total Cover FACU species 0 0 Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of:Multiply by: OBL species 0 0 FACW species 0 0 5 ft.UPL species 100 500 Bromus inermis 100 Yes UPL Column Totals:100 500 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A =5.00 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Yes X 100 = Total Cover 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30 ft. None Observed Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 No positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (≥50% of dominant species indexed as FACU or drier). %% 2/2 100 3/3 100 — Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No 0-6 10YR None — SOIL Sampling Point:SP20 —Loam 6-16 10YR None ——Clay Loam Matrix Redox Features Color (moist)Color (moist)Loc2 Texture 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)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)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth (inches)Type1 Remarks Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2) Remarks: No positive indication of hydric soils was observed. Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present?X 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) HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(except Water-Stained Leaves (B9)(MLRA 1, 2 High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) 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) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?X Depth (inches): Water Table Present?X Depth (inches): Saturation Present?X Depth (inches): Remarks: No positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast - Version 2.0 Wetland Hydrology Present?X (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: POWER Engineers, Inc. Aquatic Resource Delineation Report APPENDIX D APPENDIX D MDT MONTANA WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORMS MDT Montana Wetland Assessment Form (revised March 2008) 1. Project Name:Baxter 80 2. MDT Project #:NA Control #:NA 3. Evaluation Date:06/30/2025 4. Evaluator(s):Brian Sandefur, PWS 5. Wetlands/Site #(s):WL-1, WW-1 6. Wetland Location(s): i. Legal:T2S,R5E,04 ii. Approx. Stationing or Mileposts:NA iii. Watershed:HUC12 100200081002 Watershed Name, County: Upper Missouri, Gallatin 7. a. Evaluating Agency:POWER Engineers b. Purpose of Evaluation: 1. 2. 3. 4. Wetlands potentially affected by MDT project Mitigation wetlands; pre-construction Mitigation wetlands; post-construction Other:X Pre-disturbance 8. Wetland size: 12.300 acres (measured) 9. Assessment area (AA): 12.300 acres (measured) 10. Classification of Wetland and Aquatic Habitats in AA HGM Class (Brinson) Class (Cowardin) Modifier (Cowardin) Water Regime % of AA D EM NA SI 88.5 D SS NA SI 10 R UB NA SI 1.5 Abbreviations:(see manual for definitions) HGM Classes: Riverine (R), Depressional (D), Slope (S), Mineral Soil Flats (MSF), Organic Soil Flats (OSF), Lacustrine Fringe (LF); Cowardin Classes: Rock Bottom (RB), Unconsolidated bottom (UB), Aquatic Bed (AB), Unconsolidated Shore (US), Moss-lichen Wetland (ML), Emergent Wetland (EM), Scrub-Shrub Wetland (SS), Forested Wetland (FO) Modifiers: Excavated (E), Impounded (I), Diked (D), Partly Drained (PD), Farmed (F), Artificial (A) Water Regimes: Permanent / Perennial (PP), Seasonal / Intermittent (SI), Temporary / Ephemeral (TE) 11. Estimated relative abundance:(of similarly classified sites within the same Major Montana Watershed Basin, see definitions) COMMON 12. General condition of AA: i. Disturbance: (use matrix below to determine [circle] appropriate response – see instructions for Montana-listed noxious weed and aquatic nuisance vegetation species (ANVS) list) Conditions within AA Managed in predominantly natural state; is not grazed, hayed, logged, or otherwise converted; does not contain roads or buildings; and noxious weed or ANVS cover is >=15%. Land not cultivated, but may be moderately grazed or hayed or selectively logged; or has been subject to minor clearing; contains few roads or buildings; noxious weed or ANVS cover is <= 30%. Land cultivated or heavily grazed or logged; subject to substantial fill placement, grading, clearing, or hydrological alteration; high road or building density; or noxious weed or ANVS cover is > 30%. Predominant conditions adjacent to (within 500 feet of) AA AA cultivated or heavily grazed or logged; subject to relatively substantial fill placement, grading, clearing, or hydrological alteration; high road or building density; or noxious weed or ANVS cover is > 30%. AA not cultivated, but may be moderately grazed or hayed or selectively logged; or has been subject to relatively minor clearing, fill placement, or hydrological alteration; contains few roads or buildings; noxious weed or ANVS cover is <= AA occurs and is managed in predominantly natural state; is not grazed, hayed, logged, or otherwise converted; does not contain roads or occupied buildings; and noxious weed or ANVS cover is <= 15%. low disturbance low disturbance moderate disturbance moderate disturbance moderate disturbance high disturbance high disturbance high disturbance high disturbance moderate disturbance Comments: (types of disturbance, intensity, season, etc.): AA includes all delineated aquatic features within the prominent swale through project area ii. Prominent noxious, aquatic nuisance, & other exotic vegetation species: Canada thistle, houndstongue iii. Provide brief descriptive summary of AA and surrounding land use/habitat: AA located along forefront of west-trending residential developments within the City of Bozeman 13. Structural Diversity: (based on number of "Cowardin" vegetated classes present [do not include unvegetated classes], see #10 above) Existing # of “Cowardin” Vegetated Classes in AA Initial Rating Is current management preventing (passive) existence of additional vegetated classes?Modified Rating >= 3 (or 2 if 1 is forested) classes H NA NA NA 2 (or 1 if forested) classes MM NA NA NA 1 class, but not a monoculture M <-- NO YES -->L 1 class, monoculture (1 species comprises >= 90% of total cover)L NA NA NA Comments: Includes scrub-shrub and emergent habitat 45.696796, -111.118103 : Centroid of WL-1Latitude/Longitude: 1 SECTION PERTAINING to FUNCTIONS & VALUES ASSESSMENT 14A. Habitat for Federally Listed or Proposed Threatened or Endangered Plants or Animals: i. AA is Documented (D) or Suspected (S) to contain (circle one based on definitions contained in instructions): Primary or critical habitat (list species)Secondary habitat (list species)Incidental habitat (list species) No usable habitat ii. Rating (use the conclusions from i above and the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) Highest Habitat Level doc/primary sus/primary doc/secondary sus/secondary doc/incidental sus/incidental None Functional Points and Rating 1H .9H .8M .7M .3L .1L 0L0L Sources for documented use (e.g. observations, records, etc):USFWS IPaC report for project area, field observations Incidental habitat (list species) i. AA is Documented (D) or Suspected (S) to contain (circle one based on definitions contained in instructions): ii. Rating (use the conclusions from i above and the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) No usable habitat 14B. Habitat for plant or animals rated S1, S2, or S3 by the Montana Natural Heritage Program: (not including species listed in14A above) Primary or critical habitat (list species)Secondary habitat (list species) sus/secondary S1 Species: Functional Points and Rating doc/primary sus/primary sus/incidentalHighest Habitat Level Nonedoc/secondary doc/incidental 1H .8H .7M .6M .2L .1L 0L S2 and S3 Species: Functional Points and Rating .9H .7M .6M .5M .2L .1L 0L0L Sources for documented use (e.g. observations, records, etc):MTNHP Natural Heritage Program, field observations 14C. General Wildlife Habitat Rating: i. Evidence of overall wildlife use in the AA (circle substantial, moderate, or low based on supporting evidence): Substantial (based on any of the following [check]):Minimal (based on any of the following [check]): observations of abundant wildlife #s or high species diversity (during any period) abundant wildlife sign such as scat, tracks, nest structures, game trails, etc. presence of extremely limiting habitat features not available in the surrounding area interviews with local biologists with knowledge of the AA few or no wildlife observations during peak use periods little to no wildlife sign sparse adjacent upland food sources interviews with local biologists with knowledge of the AA Moderate (based on any of the following [check]): observations of scattered wildlife groups or individuals or relatively few species during peak periods interviews with local biologists with knowledge of the AA common occurrence of wildlife sign such as scat, tracks, nest structures, game trails, etc. adequate adjacent upland food sourcesX ii. Wildlife habitat features (Working from top to bottom, circle appropriate AA attributes in matrix to arrive at rating. Structural diversity is from #13. For class cover to be considered evenly distributed, the most and least prevalent vegetated classes must be within 20% of each other interms of their percent composition of the AA (see #10). Abbreviations for surface water durations are as follows: P/P = permanent/perennial; S/I = seasonal/intermittent; T/E = temporary/ephemeral; and A = absent [see instructions for further definitions of these terms]) Structural diversity (see #13)High Moderate Low Class cover distribution (all vegetated classes)Even Uneven Even Uneven Even Duration of surface water in >=10% of AA P/P S/I T/E A P/P S/I T/E A P/P S/I T/E A P/P S/I T/E A P/P S/I T/E A Low disturbance at AA (see #12i)E E E H E E H H E H H M E H M M E H M M Moderate disturbance at AA (see #12i)H H H H H H H M H H M M H MM M L H M L L High disturbance at AA (see #12i)M M M L M M L L M M L L M L L L L L L L iii. Rating (use the conclusions from i and ii above and the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) Evidence of wildlife use (i)Wildlife habitat features rating (ii) Exceptional High Moderate Moderate Substantial 1E .9H .8H .7M Moderate .9H .7M .5M.5M .3L Minimal .6M .4M .2L .1L Assessment area along edge of residential developmentComments: 2 14D. General Fish Habitat Rating: (Assess this function if the AA is used by fish or the existing situation is “correctable” such that the AA could be used by fish [i.e., fish use is precluded by perched culvert or other barrier, etc.]. If the AA is not used by fish, fish use is not restorable due to habitat constraints, or is not desired from a management perspective [such as fish entrapped in a canal], then mark X Type of Fishery:Cold Water (CW)Warm Water (WW)Use the CW or WW guidelines in the user manual to complete the matrix i. Habitat Quality and Known / Suspected Fish Species in AA (use matrix to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) Duration of surface water in AA Permanent / Perennial Seasonal / Intermittent Temporary / Ephemeral Aquatic hiding / resting / escape cover Optimal Adequate Poor Optimal Adequate Poor Optimal Adequate Poor Thermal cover optimal / suboptimal O S O S O S O S O S O S O S O S O S FWP Tier I fish species 1E .9H .8H .7M .6M .5M .9H .8H .7M .6M .5M .4M .7M .6M .5M .4M .3L .2L FWP Tier II or Native Game fish species .9H .8H .7M .6M .5M .5M .8H .7M .6M .5M .4M .4M .6M .5M .4M .3L .2L .2L FWP Tier III or Introduced Game fish .8H .7M .6M .5M .5M .4M .7M .6M .5M .4M .4M .3L .5M .4M .3L .2L .2L .1L FWP Non-Game Tier IV or No fish species .5M .5M .5M .4M .4M .3L .4M .4M .4M .3L .3L .2L .2L .2L .2L .1L .1L .1L Sources used for identifying fish sp. potentially found in AA: ii. Modified Rating (NOTE: Modified score cannot exceed 1 or be less than 0.1) a) Is fish use of the AA significantly reduced by a culvert, dike, or other man-made structure or activity or is the waterbody included on the current life support, or do aquatic nuisance plant or animal species (see Appendix E) occur in fish habitat? final MDEQ list of waterbodies in need of TMDL development with listed “Probable Impaired Uses” including cold or warm water fishery or aquatic b) Does the AA contain a documented spawning area or other critical habitat feature (i.e., sanctuary pool, upwelling area, etc.- specify in comments) for native fish or introduced game fish? iii. Final Score and Rating:NA Comments:WW-1 is small intermittent channel that does not support fish. 14E. Flood Attenuation: (Applies only to wetlands subject to flooding via in-channel or overbank flow. If wetlands in AA are not flooded from in-channel or overbank flow, mark X i. Rating (working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) Estimated or Calculated Entrenchment (Rosgen 1994, 1996)Slightly entrenched - C, D, E stream types Moderately entrenched – B stream type Entrenched-A, F, G stream types % of flooded wetland classified as forested and/or scrub/shrub 75%25-75%<25%75%25-75%<25%75%25-75%<25% AA contains no outlet or restricted outlet 1H .9H .6M .8H .7M .5M .4M .3L .2L AA contains unrestricted outlet .9H .8H .5M .7M .6M .4M .3L .2L .1L Entrenchment ratio (ER) estimation – see User’s Manual for additional guidance. Entrenchment ratio = (flood-prone width)/(bankfull width) Flood-prone width = estimated horizontal projection of where 2 x maximum bankfull depth elevation intersects the floodplain on each side of the stream. / Flood-prone width = Bankfull width Entrenchment ratio (ER) Slightly Entrenched ER = >2.2 Moderately Entrenched ER = 1.41 – 2.2 Entrenched ER = 1.0 – 1.4 C stream type D stream type E stream type B stream type A stream type F stream type G stream type NA and proceed to 14E.) If yes, reduce score in i above by 0.1. If yes, add 0.1 to the adjusted score in i or iia. NA and proceed to 14F.) ii. Are ≥10 acres of wetland in the AA subject to flooding AND are man-made features which may be significantly damaged by floods located within 0.5 mile downstream of the AA (circle)?Comments:System does not appear to be susceptible to high flows, hydrology primarily from ground water. 3 14F. Short and Long Term Surface Water Storage: (Applies to wetlands that flood or pond from overbank or in-channel flow, precipitation, upland surface flow, or groundwater flow. If no wetlands in the AA are subject to flooding or ponding, i. Rating (Working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating. Abbreviations for surface water durations are as follows: P/P = permanent/perennial; S/I = seasonal/intermittent; and T/E = temporary/ephemeral [see instructions for further definitions of these terms].) Estimated maximum acre feet of water contained in wetlands within the AA that are subject to periodic flooding or ponding >5 acre feet 1.1 to 5 acre feet <=1 acre foot Duration of surface water at wetlands within the AA P/P S/I T/E P/P S/I T/E P/P S/I T/E Wetlands in AA flood or pond >= 5 out of 10 years 1H .9H .8H .8H .6M.6M .5M .4M .3L .2L Wetlands in AA flood or pond < 5 out of 10 years .9H .8H .7M .7M .5M .4M .3L .2L .1L Comments:AA influenced by ground water flow. 14G. Sediment/Nutrient/Toxicant Retention and Removal: (Applies to wetlands with potential to receive sediments, nutrients, or toxicants through influx of surface or ground water or direct input. If no wetlands in the AA are subject to such input, i. Rating (working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating [H=high, M=moderate, or L=low]) Sediment, nutrient, and toxicant input levels within AA AA receives or surrounding land use with potential to deliver levels of sediments, nutrients, or compounds at levels such that other functions are not substantially impaired. Minor sedimentation, sources of nutrients or toxicants, or signs of eutrophication present. Waterbody on MDEQ list of waterbodies in need of TMDL development for “probable causes” related to sediment, nutrients, or toxicants or AA receives or surrounding land use with potential to deliver high levels of sediments, nutrients, or compounds such that other functions are substantially impaired. Major sedimentation, sources of nutrients or toxicants, or signs of eutrophication present. % cover of wetland vegetation in AA >= 70%< 70%>= 70%< 70% Evidence of flooding / ponding in AA Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No AA contains no or restricted outlet 1H .8H .7M .5M .5M .4M .3L .2L AA contains unrestricted outlet .9H.9H .7M .6M .4M .4M .3L .2L .1L Comments:AA receives hydrology from stormwater pond. 14H Sediment/Shoreline Stabilization: (Applies only if AA occurs on or within the banks or a river, stream, or other natural or man-made drainage, or on the shoreline of a standing water body which is subject to wave action. If 14H does not apply, i. Rating (working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) % Cover of wetland streambank or shoreline by species with stability ratings of >=6 (see Appendix F). Duration of surface water adjacent to rooted vegetation Permanent / Perennial Seasonal / Intermittent Temporary / Ephemeral >= 65%1H .9H.9H .7M 35-64%.7M .6M .5M 35%.3L .2L .1L Comments:AA includes a ground water fed waterway 14I. Production Export/Food Chain Support: i. Level of Biological Activity (synthesis of wildlife and fish habitat ratings [circle]) General Fish Habitat Rating (14D.iii.) General Wildlife Habitat Rating (14C.iii.) E/H M L E/H H H M M H M M L M M L N/A H MM L ii. Rating (Working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating. Factor A = acreage of vegetated wetland component in the AA; Factor B = level of biological activity rating from above (14I.i.); Factor C = whether or not the AA contains a surface or subsurface outlet; the final three rows pertain to duration of surface water in the AA, where P/P, S/I, and T/E are as previously defined, and A = “absent” [see instructions for further definitions of these terms].) NA and proceed to 14G.) NA and proceed to 14H.) NA and proceed to 14I.) ii. Rating (Working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating. Factor A = acreage of vegetated wetland component in the AA; Factor B = level of biological activity rating from above (14I.i.); Factor C = whether or not the AA contains a surface or subsurface outlet; the final three rows pertain to duration of surface water in the AA, where P/P, S/I, and T/E are as previously defined, and A = “absent” [see instructions for further definitions of these terms].) A Vegetated component >5 acres Vegetated component 1-5 acres Vegetated component < 1 acre B High Moderate Low High Moderate Low High Moderate Low C Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No P/P 1H .7M .8H .5M .6M .4M .9H .6M .7M .4M .5M .3L .8H .6M .6M .4M .3L .2L S/I .9H .6M .7M.7M .4M .5M .3L .8H .5M .6M .3L .4M .2L .7M .5M .5M .3L .3L .2L T/E/A .8H .5M .6M .3L .4M .2L .7M .4M .5M .2L .3L .1L .6M .4M .4M .2L .2L .1L iii. Modified Rating (NOTE: Modified score cannot exceed 1 or be less than 0.1.) Vegetated Upland Buffer (VUB): Area with >= 30% plant cover, = 15% noxious weed or ANVS cover, and that is not subjected to periodic mechanical mowing or clearing (unless for weed control). a) Is there an average >= 50 foot-wide vegetated upland buffer around >= 75% of the AA circumference? X iv. Final Score and Rating: 0.80H Comments:AA mostly surrounded by hayfield. If yes, add 0.1 to the score in ii above. 4 14J. Groundwater Discharge/Recharge: (check the appropriate indicators in i & ii below) i. Discharge Indicators The AA is a slope wetland X Springs or seeps are known or observed Vegetation growing during dormant season/drought Wetland occurs at the toe of a natural slope AA permanently flooded during drought periods Wetland contains an outlet, but no inlet Shallow water table and the site is saturated to the surface Other: ii. Recharge Indicators Permeable substrate present without underlying impeding layer Wetland contains inlet but no outlet Stream is a known ‘losing’ stream; discharge volume decreases Other: iii. Rating (use the information from i and ii above and the table below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) Criteria Duration of saturation at AA Wetlands FROM GROUNDWATER DISCHARGE OR WITH WATER THAT IS RECHARGING THE GROUNDWATER SYSTEM P/P S/I T None Groundwater Discharge or Recharge 1H .7M.7M .4M .1L Insufficient Data/Information N/A Comments:AA likely influenced by seasonal draw-down of ground water level. 14K. Uniqueness: i. Rating (working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) Replacement potential AA contains fen, bog, warm springs or mature (>80 yr-old) forested wetland or plant association listed as “S1” by the MTNHP AA does not contain previously cited rare types and structural diversity (#13) is high or contains plant association listed as “S2” by the MTNHP AA does not contain previously cited rare types or associations and structural diversity (#13) is low- moderate Estimated relative abundance (#11)rare common abundant rare common abundant rare common abundant Low disturbance at AA (#12i)1H .9H .8H .8H .6M .5M .5M .4M .3L Moderate disturbance at AA (#12i).9H .8H .7M .7M .5M .4M .4M .3L.3L .2L High disturbance at AA (#12i).8H .7M .6M .6M .4M .3L .3L .2L .1L 14L. Recreation/Education Potential: (affords “bonus” points if AA provides recreation or education opportunity) i. Is the AA a known or potential rec./ed. site: (circle)(if ‘Yes’ continue with the evaluation; if ‘No’ then mark X NA and proceed to the overall summary and rating page) ii. Check categories that apply to the AA:Educational/scientific study;Consumptive rec.;Non-consumptive rec.; Other : iii. Rating: Known or Potential Recreation or Education Area Known Potential Public ownership or public easement with general public access (no permission required).2H .15H Private ownership with general public access (no permission required).15H .1M Private or public ownership without general public access, or requiring permission for public access .1M .05L Comments:AA on private land within city limits General Site Notes No unique plants or habitat identified during field investigationComments: 5 FUNCTION & VALUE SUMMARY & OVERALL RATING FOR WETLAND/SITE #(S):WL-1, WW-1 Function & Value Variables Rating Actual Functional Points Possible Functional Points Functional Units: (Actual Points x Wetland Acreage) Indicate the four most prominent functions with an asterisk (*) A. Listed/Proposed T&E Species Habitat L 0.00 0.001 B. MT Natural Heritage Program Species Habitat L 0.00 1 0.00 C. General Wildlife Habitat M 0.50 1 6.15 D. General Fish Habitat NA E. Flood Attenuation NA F. Short and Long Term Surface Water Storage M 0.60 1 7.38 G. Sediment/Nutrient/Toxicant Removal H 0.90 1 11.07 * H. Sediment/Shoreline Stabilization H 0.90 1 11.07 * I. Production Export/Food Chain Support H 0.80 1 9.84 * J. Groundwater Discharge/Recharge M 0.70 1 8.61 * K. Uniqueness L 0.30 1 3.69 L. Recreation/Education Potential (bonus points)NA Totals: 4.70 9.00 57.81 Percent of Possible Score 52% Category I Wetland: (must satisfy one of the following criteria; otherwise go to Category II) Score of 1 functional point for Listed/Proposed Threatened or Endangered Species; or Score of 1 functional point for Uniqueness; or Score of 1 functional point for Flood Attenuation and answer to Question 14E.ii is "yes"; or Percent of possible score > 80% (round to nearest whole #). Category II Wetland: (Criteria for Category I not satisfied and meets any one of the following criteria; otherwise go to Category IV) Score of 1 functional point for MT Natural Heritage Program Species Habitat; or Score of .9 or 1 functional point for General Wildlife Habitat; or Score of .9 or 1 functional point for General Fish Habitat; or "High" to “Exceptional” ratings for both General Wildlife Habitat and General Fish/Aquatic Habitat; or Score of .9 functional point for Uniqueness; or Percent of possible score > 65% (round to nearest whole #). Category III Wetland: (Criteria for Categories I, II, or IV not satisfied) Category IV Wetland: (Criteria for Categories I or II are not satisfied and all of the following criteria are met; otherwise go to Category III) "Low" rating for Uniqueness; andX Vegetated wetland component 1 acre (do not include upland vegetated buffer); and Percent of possible score 35% (round to nearest whole #). OVERALL ANALYSIS AREA RATING:III Summary Comments: AA historically impacted by livestock grazing 6 MDT Montana Wetland Assessment Form (revised March 2008) 1. Project Name:Baxter 80 2. MDT Project #:NA Control #:NA 3. Evaluation Date:10/30/2025 4. Evaluator(s):Brian Sandefur, PWS 5. Wetlands/Site #(s):WW-2, WL-2, WW-3, WL-3 6. Wetland Location(s): i. Legal:T2S,R5E,04 ii. Approx. Stationing or Mileposts:NA iii. Watershed:HUC12 100200081002 Watershed Name, County: Upper Missouri, Gallatin 7. a. Evaluating Agency:POWER Engineers b. Purpose of Evaluation: 1. 2. 3. 4. Wetlands potentially affected by MDT project Mitigation wetlands; pre-construction Mitigation wetlands; post-construction Other:X Pre-disturbance 8. Wetland size: 0.870 acres (measured) 9. Assessment area (AA): 0.870 acres (measured) 10. Classification of Wetland and Aquatic Habitats in AA HGM Class (Brinson) Class (Cowardin) Modifier (Cowardin) Water Regime % of AA D EM NA SI 95 R UB E SI 4 R UB NA PP 1 Abbreviations:(see manual for definitions) HGM Classes: Riverine (R), Depressional (D), Slope (S), Mineral Soil Flats (MSF), Organic Soil Flats (OSF), Lacustrine Fringe (LF); Cowardin Classes: Rock Bottom (RB), Unconsolidated bottom (UB), Aquatic Bed (AB), Unconsolidated Shore (US), Moss-lichen Wetland (ML), Emergent Wetland (EM), Scrub-Shrub Wetland (SS), Forested Wetland (FO) Modifiers: Excavated (E), Impounded (I), Diked (D), Partly Drained (PD), Farmed (F), Artificial (A) Water Regimes: Permanent / Perennial (PP), Seasonal / Intermittent (SI), Temporary / Ephemeral (TE) 11. Estimated relative abundance:(of similarly classified sites within the same Major Montana Watershed Basin, see definitions) COMMON 12. General condition of AA: i. Disturbance: (use matrix below to determine [circle] appropriate response – see instructions for Montana-listed noxious weed and aquatic nuisance vegetation species (ANVS) list) Conditions within AA Managed in predominantly natural state; is not grazed, hayed, logged, or otherwise converted; does not contain roads or buildings; and noxious weed or ANVS cover is >=15%. Land not cultivated, but may be moderately grazed or hayed or selectively logged; or has been subject to minor clearing; contains few roads or buildings; noxious weed or ANVS cover is <= 30%. Land cultivated or heavily grazed or logged; subject to substantial fill placement, grading, clearing, or hydrological alteration; high road or building density; or noxious weed or ANVS cover is > 30%. Predominant conditions adjacent to (within 500 feet of) AA AA cultivated or heavily grazed or logged; subject to relatively substantial fill placement, grading, clearing, or hydrological alteration; high road or building density; or noxious weed or ANVS cover is > 30%. AA not cultivated, but may be moderately grazed or hayed or selectively logged; or has been subject to relatively minor clearing, fill placement, or hydrological alteration; contains few roads or buildings; noxious weed or ANVS cover is <= AA occurs and is managed in predominantly natural state; is not grazed, hayed, logged, or otherwise converted; does not contain roads or occupied buildings; and noxious weed or ANVS cover is <= 15%. low disturbance low disturbance moderate disturbance moderate disturbance moderate disturbance high disturbance high disturbance high disturbance high disturbance high disturbance Comments: (types of disturbance, intensity, season, etc.): AA includes Baxter Creek (WW-2), diversion canal of Baxter Creek (WW-3), and wetlands associated with both waterways. ii. Prominent noxious, aquatic nuisance, & other exotic vegetation species: Canada thistle, houndstongue iii. Provide brief descriptive summary of AA and surrounding land use/habitat: AA includes undeveloped farmland, road corridors, and residential development. 13. Structural Diversity: (based on number of "Cowardin" vegetated classes present [do not include unvegetated classes], see #10 above) Existing # of “Cowardin” Vegetated Classes in AA Initial Rating Is current management preventing (passive) existence of additional vegetated classes?Modified Rating >= 3 (or 2 if 1 is forested) classes H NA NA NA 2 (or 1 if forested) classes M NA NA NA 1 class, but not a monoculture MM <-- NO YES -->L 1 class, monoculture (1 species comprises >= 90% of total cover)L NA NA NA Comments: AA includes emergent community 45.697992, -111.11387 : Centroid for WL-3Latitude/Longitude: 1 SECTION PERTAINING to FUNCTIONS & VALUES ASSESSMENT 14A. Habitat for Federally Listed or Proposed Threatened or Endangered Plants or Animals: i. AA is Documented (D) or Suspected (S) to contain (circle one based on definitions contained in instructions): Primary or critical habitat (list species)Secondary habitat (list species)Incidental habitat (list species) No usable habitat ii. Rating (use the conclusions from i above and the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) Highest Habitat Level doc/primary sus/primary doc/secondary sus/secondary doc/incidental sus/incidental None Functional Points and Rating 1H .9H .8M .7M .3L .1L 0L0L Sources for documented use (e.g. observations, records, etc):USFWS IPaC, field observations Incidental habitat (list species) i. AA is Documented (D) or Suspected (S) to contain (circle one based on definitions contained in instructions): ii. Rating (use the conclusions from i above and the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) No usable habitat 14B. Habitat for plant or animals rated S1, S2, or S3 by the Montana Natural Heritage Program: (not including species listed in14A above) Primary or critical habitat (list species)Secondary habitat (list species) sus/secondary S1 Species: Functional Points and Rating doc/primary sus/primary sus/incidentalHighest Habitat Level Nonedoc/secondary doc/incidental 1H .8H .7M .6M .2L .1L 0L S2 and S3 Species: Functional Points and Rating .9H .7M .6M .5M .2L .1L 0L0L Sources for documented use (e.g. observations, records, etc):MTNHP Natural Heritage Database, field observation 14C. General Wildlife Habitat Rating: i. Evidence of overall wildlife use in the AA (circle substantial, moderate, or low based on supporting evidence): Substantial (based on any of the following [check]):Minimal (based on any of the following [check]): observations of abundant wildlife #s or high species diversity (during any period) abundant wildlife sign such as scat, tracks, nest structures, game trails, etc. presence of extremely limiting habitat features not available in the surrounding area interviews with local biologists with knowledge of the AA few or no wildlife observations during peak use periods little to no wildlife sign sparse adjacent upland food sources interviews with local biologists with knowledge of the AA Moderate (based on any of the following [check]): observations of scattered wildlife groups or individuals or relatively few species during peak periods interviews with local biologists with knowledge of the AA common occurrence of wildlife sign such as scat, tracks, nest structures, game trails, etc. adequate adjacent upland food sourcesX ii. Wildlife habitat features (Working from top to bottom, circle appropriate AA attributes in matrix to arrive at rating. Structural diversity is from #13. For class cover to be considered evenly distributed, the most and least prevalent vegetated classes must be within 20% of each other interms of their percent composition of the AA (see #10). Abbreviations for surface water durations are as follows: P/P = permanent/perennial; S/I = seasonal/intermittent; T/E = temporary/ephemeral; and A = absent [see instructions for further definitions of these terms]) Structural diversity (see #13)High Moderate Low Class cover distribution (all vegetated classes)Even Uneven Even Uneven Even Duration of surface water in >=10% of AA P/P S/I T/E A P/P S/I T/E A P/P S/I T/E A P/P S/I T/E A P/P S/I T/E A Low disturbance at AA (see #12i)E E E H E E H H E H H M E H M M E H M M Moderate disturbance at AA (see #12i)H H H H H H H M H H M M H M M L H M L L High disturbance at AA (see #12i)M M M L M M L L M MM L L M L L L L L L L iii. Rating (use the conclusions from i and ii above and the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) Evidence of wildlife use (i)Wildlife habitat features rating (ii) Exceptional High Moderate Moderate Substantial 1E .9H .8H .7M Moderate .9H .7M .5M.5M .3L Minimal .6M .4M .2L .1L Wildlife use likely limited by adjacent development.Comments: 2 14D. General Fish Habitat Rating: (Assess this function if the AA is used by fish or the existing situation is “correctable” such that the AA could be used by fish [i.e., fish use is precluded by perched culvert or other barrier, etc.]. If the AA is not used by fish, fish use is not restorable due to habitat constraints, or is not desired from a management perspective [such as fish entrapped in a canal], then mark Type of Fishery:Cold Water (CW)X Warm Water (WW)Use the CW or WW guidelines in the user manual to complete the matrix i. Habitat Quality and Known / Suspected Fish Species in AA (use matrix to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) Duration of surface water in AA Permanent / Perennial Seasonal / Intermittent Temporary / Ephemeral Aquatic hiding / resting / escape cover Optimal Adequate Poor Optimal Adequate Poor Optimal Adequate Poor Thermal cover optimal / suboptimal O S O S O S O S O S O S O S O S O S FWP Tier I fish species 1E .9H .8H .7M .6M .5M .9H .8H .7M .6M .5M .4M .7M .6M .5M .4M .3L .2L FWP Tier II or Native Game fish species .9H .8H .7M .6M .5M .5M .8H .7M .6M .5M .4M .4M .6M .5M .4M .3L .2L .2L FWP Tier III or Introduced Game fish .8H .7M .6M .5M .5M .4M.4M .7M .6M .5M .4M .4M .3L .5M .4M .3L .2L .2L .1L FWP Non-Game Tier IV or No fish species .5M .5M .5M .4M .4M .3L .4M .4M .4M .3L .3L .2L .2L .2L .2L .1L .1L .1L Sources used for identifying fish sp. potentially found in AA:MFWP fish distribution GIS database ii. Modified Rating (NOTE: Modified score cannot exceed 1 or be less than 0.1) a) Is fish use of the AA significantly reduced by a culvert, dike, or other man-made structure or activity or is the waterbody included on the current life support, or do aquatic nuisance plant or animal species (see Appendix E) occur in fish habitat? final MDEQ list of waterbodies in need of TMDL development with listed “Probable Impaired Uses” including cold or warm water fishery or aquatic b) Does the AA contain a documented spawning area or other critical habitat feature (i.e., sanctuary pool, upwelling area, etc.- specify in comments) for native fish or introduced game fish? iii. Final Score and Rating: 0.3L Comments:Mottled sculpin identified within Baxter Creek by FWP. 14E. Flood Attenuation: (Applies only to wetlands subject to flooding via in-channel or overbank flow. If wetlands in AA are not flooded from in-channel or overbank flow, mark i. Rating (working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) Estimated or Calculated Entrenchment (Rosgen 1994, 1996)Slightly entrenched - C, D, E stream types Moderately entrenched – B stream type Entrenched-A, F, G stream types % of flooded wetland classified as forested and/or scrub/shrub 75%25-75%<25%75%25-75%<25%75%25-75%<25% AA contains no outlet or restricted outlet 1H .9H .6M .8H .7M .5M .4M .3L .2L AA contains unrestricted outlet .9H .8H .5M.5M .7M .6M .4M .3L .2L .1L Entrenchment ratio (ER) estimation – see User’s Manual for additional guidance. Entrenchment ratio = (flood-prone width)/(bankfull width) Flood-prone width = estimated horizontal projection of where 2 x maximum bankfull depth elevation intersects the floodplain on each side of the stream. 10 / Flood-prone width 3 = Bankfull width 3.33 Entrenchment ratio (ER) Slightly Entrenched ER = >2.2 Moderately Entrenched ER = 1.41 – 2.2 Entrenched ER = 1.0 – 1.4 C stream type D stream type E stream type B stream type A stream type F stream type G stream type NA and proceed to 14E.) If yes, reduce score in i above by 0.1. If yes, add 0.1 to the adjusted score in i or iia. NA and proceed to 14F.) ii. Are ≥10 acres of wetland in the AA subject to flooding AND are man-made features which may be significantly damaged by floods located within 0.5 mile downstream of the AA (circle)?Comments:AA subject to flooding by Baxter Creek 3 14F. Short and Long Term Surface Water Storage: (Applies to wetlands that flood or pond from overbank or in-channel flow, precipitation, upland surface flow, or groundwater flow. If no wetlands in the AA are subject to flooding or ponding, i. Rating (Working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating. Abbreviations for surface water durations are as follows: P/P = permanent/perennial; S/I = seasonal/intermittent; and T/E = temporary/ephemeral [see instructions for further definitions of these terms].) Estimated maximum acre feet of water contained in wetlands within the AA that are subject to periodic flooding or ponding >5 acre feet 1.1 to 5 acre feet <=1 acre foot Duration of surface water at wetlands within the AA P/P S/I T/E P/P S/I T/E P/P S/I T/E Wetlands in AA flood or pond >= 5 out of 10 years 1H .9H .8H .8H .6M .5M .4M .3L .2L Wetlands in AA flood or pond < 5 out of 10 years .9H .8H .7M .7M .5M .4M .3L.3L .2L .1L Comments:Flooding along WW-3 below irrigation diversion unlikely. 14G. Sediment/Nutrient/Toxicant Retention and Removal: (Applies to wetlands with potential to receive sediments, nutrients, or toxicants through influx of surface or ground water or direct input. If no wetlands in the AA are subject to such input, i. Rating (working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating [H=high, M=moderate, or L=low]) Sediment, nutrient, and toxicant input levels within AA AA receives or surrounding land use with potential to deliver levels of sediments, nutrients, or compounds at levels such that other functions are not substantially impaired. Minor sedimentation, sources of nutrients or toxicants, or signs of eutrophication present. Waterbody on MDEQ list of waterbodies in need of TMDL development for “probable causes” related to sediment, nutrients, or toxicants or AA receives or surrounding land use with potential to deliver high levels of sediments, nutrients, or compounds such that other functions are substantially impaired. Major sedimentation, sources of nutrients or toxicants, or signs of eutrophication present. % cover of wetland vegetation in AA >= 70%< 70%>= 70%< 70% Evidence of flooding / ponding in AA Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No AA contains no or restricted outlet 1H .8H .7M .5M .5M .4M .3L .2L AA contains unrestricted outlet .9H.9H .7M .6M .4M .4M .3L .2L .1L Comments:AA well-vegetated 14H Sediment/Shoreline Stabilization: (Applies only if AA occurs on or within the banks or a river, stream, or other natural or man-made drainage, or on the shoreline of a standing water body which is subject to wave action. If 14H does not apply, i. Rating (working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) % Cover of wetland streambank or shoreline by species with stability ratings of >=6 (see Appendix F). Duration of surface water adjacent to rooted vegetation Permanent / Perennial Seasonal / Intermittent Temporary / Ephemeral >= 65%1H1H .9H .7M 35-64%.7M .6M .5M 35%.3L .2L .1L Comments:Streambanks along project area appear historically impacted by livestock grazing, currently well-vegetated. 14I. Production Export/Food Chain Support: i. Level of Biological Activity (synthesis of wildlife and fish habitat ratings [circle]) General Fish Habitat Rating (14D.iii.) General Wildlife Habitat Rating (14C.iii.) E/H M L E/H H H M M H M M L M MM L N/A H M L ii. Rating (Working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating. Factor A = acreage of vegetated wetland component in the AA; Factor B = level of biological activity rating from above (14I.i.); Factor C = whether or not the AA contains a surface or subsurface outlet; the final three rows pertain to duration of surface water in the AA, where P/P, S/I, and T/E are as previously defined, and A = “absent” [see instructions for further definitions of these terms].) NA and proceed to 14G.) NA and proceed to 14H.) NA and proceed to 14I.) ii. Rating (Working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating. Factor A = acreage of vegetated wetland component in the AA; Factor B = level of biological activity rating from above (14I.i.); Factor C = whether or not the AA contains a surface or subsurface outlet; the final three rows pertain to duration of surface water in the AA, where P/P, S/I, and T/E are as previously defined, and A = “absent” [see instructions for further definitions of these terms].) A Vegetated component >5 acres Vegetated component 1-5 acres Vegetated component < 1 acre B High Moderate Low High Moderate Low High Moderate Low C Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No P/P 1H .7M .8H .5M .6M .4M .9H .6M .7M .4M .5M .3L .8H .6M .6M.6M .4M .3L .2L S/I .9H .6M .7M .4M .5M .3L .8H .5M .6M .3L .4M .2L .7M .5M .5M .3L .3L .2L T/E/A .8H .5M .6M .3L .4M .2L .7M .4M .5M .2L .3L .1L .6M .4M .4M .2L .2L .1L iii. Modified Rating (NOTE: Modified score cannot exceed 1 or be less than 0.1.) Vegetated Upland Buffer (VUB): Area with >= 30% plant cover, = 15% noxious weed or ANVS cover, and that is not subjected to periodic mechanical mowing or clearing (unless for weed control). a) Is there an average >= 50 foot-wide vegetated upland buffer around >= 75% of the AA circumference? iv. Final Score and Rating: 0.60M Comments:Very small portion of AA with likely perennial surface flow duration. If yes, add 0.1 to the score in ii above. 4 14J. Groundwater Discharge/Recharge: (check the appropriate indicators in i & ii below) i. Discharge Indicators The AA is a slope wetland X Springs or seeps are known or observed Vegetation growing during dormant season/drought Wetland occurs at the toe of a natural slope AA permanently flooded during drought periods Wetland contains an outlet, but no inlet Shallow water table and the site is saturated to the surface Other: ii. Recharge Indicators X Permeable substrate present without underlying impeding layer Wetland contains inlet but no outlet Stream is a known ‘losing’ stream; discharge volume decreases Other: iii. Rating (use the information from i and ii above and the table below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) Criteria Duration of saturation at AA Wetlands FROM GROUNDWATER DISCHARGE OR WITH WATER THAT IS RECHARGING THE GROUNDWATER SYSTEM P/P S/I T None Groundwater Discharge or Recharge 1H .7M.7M .4M .1L Insufficient Data/Information N/A Comments:General area with known ground water discharge, stream likely gains through area. 14K. Uniqueness: i. Rating (working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) Replacement potential AA contains fen, bog, warm springs or mature (>80 yr-old) forested wetland or plant association listed as “S1” by the MTNHP AA does not contain previously cited rare types and structural diversity (#13) is high or contains plant association listed as “S2” by the MTNHP AA does not contain previously cited rare types or associations and structural diversity (#13) is low- moderate Estimated relative abundance (#11)rare common abundant rare common abundant rare common abundant Low disturbance at AA (#12i)1H .9H .8H .8H .6M .5M .5M .4M .3L Moderate disturbance at AA (#12i).9H .8H .7M .7M .5M .4M .4M .3L .2L High disturbance at AA (#12i).8H .7M .6M .6M .4M .3L .3L .2L.2L .1L 14L. Recreation/Education Potential: (affords “bonus” points if AA provides recreation or education opportunity) i. Is the AA a known or potential rec./ed. site: (circle)(if ‘Yes’ continue with the evaluation; if ‘No’ then mark X NA and proceed to the overall summary and rating page) ii. Check categories that apply to the AA:Educational/scientific study;Consumptive rec.;Non-consumptive rec.; Other : iii. Rating: Known or Potential Recreation or Education Area Known Potential Public ownership or public easement with general public access (no permission required).2H .15H Private ownership with general public access (no permission required).15H .1M Private or public ownership without general public access, or requiring permission for public access .1M .05L Comments:AA on private land with very limited recreation potential General Site Notes No unique vegetation communities identifiedComments: 5 FUNCTION & VALUE SUMMARY & OVERALL RATING FOR WETLAND/SITE #(S):WW-2, WL-2, WW-3, WL-3 Function & Value Variables Rating Actual Functional Points Possible Functional Points Functional Units: (Actual Points x Wetland Acreage) Indicate the four most prominent functions with an asterisk (*) A. Listed/Proposed T&E Species Habitat L 0.00 0.001 B. MT Natural Heritage Program Species Habitat L 0.00 1 0.00 C. General Wildlife Habitat M 0.50 1 0.44 D. General Fish Habitat L 0.30 1 0.26 E. Flood Attenuation M 0.50 1 0.44 F. Short and Long Term Surface Water Storage L 0.30 1 0.26 G. Sediment/Nutrient/Toxicant Removal H 0.90 1 0.78 * H. Sediment/Shoreline Stabilization H 1.00 1 0.87 * I. Production Export/Food Chain Support M 0.60 1 0.52 * J. Groundwater Discharge/Recharge M 0.70 1 0.61 * K. Uniqueness L 0.20 1 0.17 L. Recreation/Education Potential (bonus points)NA Totals: 5.00 11.00 4.35 Percent of Possible Score 45% Category I Wetland: (must satisfy one of the following criteria; otherwise go to Category II) Score of 1 functional point for Listed/Proposed Threatened or Endangered Species; or Score of 1 functional point for Uniqueness; or Score of 1 functional point for Flood Attenuation and answer to Question 14E.ii is "yes"; or Percent of possible score > 80% (round to nearest whole #). Category II Wetland: (Criteria for Category I not satisfied and meets any one of the following criteria; otherwise go to Category IV) Score of 1 functional point for MT Natural Heritage Program Species Habitat; or Score of .9 or 1 functional point for General Wildlife Habitat; or Score of .9 or 1 functional point for General Fish Habitat; or "High" to “Exceptional” ratings for both General Wildlife Habitat and General Fish/Aquatic Habitat; or Score of .9 functional point for Uniqueness; or Percent of possible score > 65% (round to nearest whole #). Category III Wetland: (Criteria for Categories I, II, or IV not satisfied) Category IV Wetland: (Criteria for Categories I or II are not satisfied and all of the following criteria are met; otherwise go to Category III) "Low" rating for Uniqueness; andX Vegetated wetland component 1 acre (do not include upland vegetated buffer); andX Percent of possible score 35% (round to nearest whole #). OVERALL ANALYSIS AREA RATING:III Summary Comments: AA consists of hydrophytic vegetation common to agriculture settings in area. 6 MDT Montana Wetland Assessment Form (revised March 2008) 1. Project Name:Baxter 80 2. MDT Project #:NA Control #:NA 3. Evaluation Date:10/30/2025 4. Evaluator(s):Brian Sandefur, PWS 5. Wetlands/Site #(s):WW-4, WL-4 6. Wetland Location(s): i. Legal:T2S,R5E,04 ii. Approx. Stationing or Mileposts:NA iii. Watershed:HUC12 100200081002 Watershed Name, County: Upper Missouri, Gallatin 7. a. Evaluating Agency:POWER Engineers b. Purpose of Evaluation: 1. 2. 3. 4. Wetlands potentially affected by MDT project Mitigation wetlands; pre-construction Mitigation wetlands; post-construction Other:X Pre-disturbance 8. Wetland size: 0.014 acres (measured) 9. Assessment area (AA): 0.014 acres (measured) 10. Classification of Wetland and Aquatic Habitats in AA HGM Class (Brinson) Class (Cowardin) Modifier (Cowardin) Water Regime % of AA D EM NA SI 90 R UB NA SI 10 Abbreviations:(see manual for definitions) HGM Classes: Riverine (R), Depressional (D), Slope (S), Mineral Soil Flats (MSF), Organic Soil Flats (OSF), Lacustrine Fringe (LF); Cowardin Classes: Rock Bottom (RB), Unconsolidated bottom (UB), Aquatic Bed (AB), Unconsolidated Shore (US), Moss-lichen Wetland (ML), Emergent Wetland (EM), Scrub-Shrub Wetland (SS), Forested Wetland (FO) Modifiers: Excavated (E), Impounded (I), Diked (D), Partly Drained (PD), Farmed (F), Artificial (A) Water Regimes: Permanent / Perennial (PP), Seasonal / Intermittent (SI), Temporary / Ephemeral (TE) 11. Estimated relative abundance:(of similarly classified sites within the same Major Montana Watershed Basin, see definitions) ABUNDANT 12. General condition of AA: i. Disturbance: (use matrix below to determine [circle] appropriate response – see instructions for Montana-listed noxious weed and aquatic nuisance vegetation species (ANVS) list) Conditions within AA Managed in predominantly natural state; is not grazed, hayed, logged, or otherwise converted; does not contain roads or buildings; and noxious weed or ANVS cover is >=15%. Land not cultivated, but may be moderately grazed or hayed or selectively logged; or has been subject to minor clearing; contains few roads or buildings; noxious weed or ANVS cover is <= 30%. Land cultivated or heavily grazed or logged; subject to substantial fill placement, grading, clearing, or hydrological alteration; high road or building density; or noxious weed or ANVS cover is > 30%. Predominant conditions adjacent to (within 500 feet of) AA AA cultivated or heavily grazed or logged; subject to relatively substantial fill placement, grading, clearing, or hydrological alteration; high road or building density; or noxious weed or ANVS cover is > 30%. AA not cultivated, but may be moderately grazed or hayed or selectively logged; or has been subject to relatively minor clearing, fill placement, or hydrological alteration; contains few roads or buildings; noxious weed or ANVS cover is <= AA occurs and is managed in predominantly natural state; is not grazed, hayed, logged, or otherwise converted; does not contain roads or occupied buildings; and noxious weed or ANVS cover is <= 15%. low disturbance low disturbance moderate disturbance moderate disturbance moderate disturbance high disturbance high disturbance high disturbance high disturbance high disturbance Comments: (types of disturbance, intensity, season, etc.): AA includes historically altered drainageway ii. Prominent noxious, aquatic nuisance, & other exotic vegetation species: Canada thistle iii. Provide brief descriptive summary of AA and surrounding land use/habitat: AA includes cultivated wheat field and current residential development 13. Structural Diversity: (based on number of "Cowardin" vegetated classes present [do not include unvegetated classes], see #10 above) Existing # of “Cowardin” Vegetated Classes in AA Initial Rating Is current management preventing (passive) existence of additional vegetated classes?Modified Rating >= 3 (or 2 if 1 is forested) classes H NA NA NA 2 (or 1 if forested) classes M NA NA NA 1 class, but not a monoculture MM <-- NO YES -->L 1 class, monoculture (1 species comprises >= 90% of total cover)L NA NA NA Comments: AA includes palustrine emergent wetland 45.695831, -111.113188 : Centroid for WL-2Latitude/Longitude: 1 SECTION PERTAINING to FUNCTIONS & VALUES ASSESSMENT 14A. Habitat for Federally Listed or Proposed Threatened or Endangered Plants or Animals: i. AA is Documented (D) or Suspected (S) to contain (circle one based on definitions contained in instructions): Primary or critical habitat (list species)Secondary habitat (list species)Incidental habitat (list species) No usable habitat ii. Rating (use the conclusions from i above and the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) Highest Habitat Level doc/primary sus/primary doc/secondary sus/secondary doc/incidental sus/incidental None Functional Points and Rating 1H .9H .8M .7M .3L .1L 0L0L Sources for documented use (e.g. observations, records, etc):USFWS IPac, field observations Incidental habitat (list species) i. AA is Documented (D) or Suspected (S) to contain (circle one based on definitions contained in instructions): ii. Rating (use the conclusions from i above and the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) No usable habitat 14B. Habitat for plant or animals rated S1, S2, or S3 by the Montana Natural Heritage Program: (not including species listed in14A above) Primary or critical habitat (list species)Secondary habitat (list species) sus/secondary S1 Species: Functional Points and Rating doc/primary sus/primary sus/incidentalHighest Habitat Level Nonedoc/secondary doc/incidental 1H .8H .7M .6M .2L .1L 0L S2 and S3 Species: Functional Points and Rating .9H .7M .6M .5M .2L .1L 0L0L Sources for documented use (e.g. observations, records, etc):MTNHP Natural Heritage Database, field observations 14C. General Wildlife Habitat Rating: i. Evidence of overall wildlife use in the AA (circle substantial, moderate, or low based on supporting evidence): Substantial (based on any of the following [check]):Minimal (based on any of the following [check]): observations of abundant wildlife #s or high species diversity (during any period) abundant wildlife sign such as scat, tracks, nest structures, game trails, etc. presence of extremely limiting habitat features not available in the surrounding area interviews with local biologists with knowledge of the AA few or no wildlife observations during peak use periods little to no wildlife sign sparse adjacent upland food sources interviews with local biologists with knowledge of the AA X Moderate (based on any of the following [check]): observations of scattered wildlife groups or individuals or relatively few species during peak periods interviews with local biologists with knowledge of the AA common occurrence of wildlife sign such as scat, tracks, nest structures, game trails, etc. adequate adjacent upland food sources ii. Wildlife habitat features (Working from top to bottom, circle appropriate AA attributes in matrix to arrive at rating. Structural diversity is from #13. For class cover to be considered evenly distributed, the most and least prevalent vegetated classes must be within 20% of each other interms of their percent composition of the AA (see #10). Abbreviations for surface water durations are as follows: P/P = permanent/perennial; S/I = seasonal/intermittent; T/E = temporary/ephemeral; and A = absent [see instructions for further definitions of these terms]) Structural diversity (see #13)High Moderate Low Class cover distribution (all vegetated classes)Even Uneven Even Uneven Even Duration of surface water in >=10% of AA P/P S/I T/E A P/P S/I T/E A P/P S/I T/E A P/P S/I T/E A P/P S/I T/E A Low disturbance at AA (see #12i)E E E H E E H H E H H M E H M M E H M M Moderate disturbance at AA (see #12i)H H H H H H H M H H M M H M M L H M L L High disturbance at AA (see #12i)M M M L M M L L M MM L L M L L L L L L L iii. Rating (use the conclusions from i and ii above and the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) Evidence of wildlife use (i)Wildlife habitat features rating (ii) Exceptional High Moderate Moderate Substantial 1E .9H .8H .7M Moderate .9H .7M .5M .3L Minimal .6M .4M .2L.2L .1L AA includes a waterway with unknown flow duration, at least intermittent.Comments: 2 14D. General Fish Habitat Rating: (Assess this function if the AA is used by fish or the existing situation is “correctable” such that the AA could be used by fish [i.e., fish use is precluded by perched culvert or other barrier, etc.]. If the AA is not used by fish, fish use is not restorable due to habitat constraints, or is not desired from a management perspective [such as fish entrapped in a canal], then mark X Type of Fishery:Cold Water (CW)Warm Water (WW)Use the CW or WW guidelines in the user manual to complete the matrix i. Habitat Quality and Known / Suspected Fish Species in AA (use matrix to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) Duration of surface water in AA Permanent / Perennial Seasonal / Intermittent Temporary / Ephemeral Aquatic hiding / resting / escape cover Optimal Adequate Poor Optimal Adequate Poor Optimal Adequate Poor Thermal cover optimal / suboptimal O S O S O S O S O S O S O S O S O S FWP Tier I fish species 1E .9H .8H .7M .6M .5M .9H .8H .7M .6M .5M .4M .7M .6M .5M .4M .3L .2L FWP Tier II or Native Game fish species .9H .8H .7M .6M .5M .5M .8H .7M .6M .5M .4M .4M .6M .5M .4M .3L .2L .2L FWP Tier III or Introduced Game fish .8H .7M .6M .5M .5M .4M .7M .6M .5M .4M .4M .3L .5M .4M .3L .2L .2L .1L FWP Non-Game Tier IV or No fish species .5M .5M .5M .4M .4M .3L .4M .4M .4M .3L .3L .2L .2L .2L .2L .1L .1L .1L Sources used for identifying fish sp. potentially found in AA: ii. Modified Rating (NOTE: Modified score cannot exceed 1 or be less than 0.1) a) Is fish use of the AA significantly reduced by a culvert, dike, or other man-made structure or activity or is the waterbody included on the current life support, or do aquatic nuisance plant or animal species (see Appendix E) occur in fish habitat? final MDEQ list of waterbodies in need of TMDL development with listed “Probable Impaired Uses” including cold or warm water fishery or aquatic b) Does the AA contain a documented spawning area or other critical habitat feature (i.e., sanctuary pool, upwelling area, etc.- specify in comments) for native fish or introduced game fish? iii. Final Score and Rating:NA Comments:Very small channel not mapped by NHD, multiple culverts through urbanized watershed. Fish presence unlikely. 14E. Flood Attenuation: (Applies only to wetlands subject to flooding via in-channel or overbank flow. If wetlands in AA are not flooded from in-channel or overbank flow, mark i. Rating (working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) Estimated or Calculated Entrenchment (Rosgen 1994, 1996)Slightly entrenched - C, D, E stream types Moderately entrenched – B stream type Entrenched-A, F, G stream types % of flooded wetland classified as forested and/or scrub/shrub 75%25-75%<25%75%25-75%<25%75%25-75%<25% AA contains no outlet or restricted outlet 1H .9H .6M .8H .7M .5M .4M .3L .2L AA contains unrestricted outlet .9H .8H .5M .7M .6M .4M.4M .3L .2L .1L Entrenchment ratio (ER) estimation – see User’s Manual for additional guidance. Entrenchment ratio = (flood-prone width)/(bankfull width) Flood-prone width = estimated horizontal projection of where 2 x maximum bankfull depth elevation intersects the floodplain on each side of the stream. 2 / Flood-prone width 1 = Bankfull width 2 Entrenchment ratio (ER) Slightly Entrenched ER = >2.2 Moderately Entrenched ER = 1.41 – 2.2 Entrenched ER = 1.0 – 1.4 C stream type D stream type E stream type B stream type A stream type F stream type G stream type NA and proceed to 14E.) If yes, reduce score in i above by 0.1. If yes, add 0.1 to the adjusted score in i or iia. NA and proceed to 14F.) ii. Are ≥10 acres of wetland in the AA subject to flooding AND are man-made features which may be significantly damaged by floods located within 0.5 mile downstream of the AA (circle)?Comments:Wetlands occupy excavated swale along WW-2, larger swale may experience overbank flow. 3 14F. Short and Long Term Surface Water Storage: (Applies to wetlands that flood or pond from overbank or in-channel flow, precipitation, upland surface flow, or groundwater flow. If no wetlands in the AA are subject to flooding or ponding, i. Rating (Working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating. Abbreviations for surface water durations are as follows: P/P = permanent/perennial; S/I = seasonal/intermittent; and T/E = temporary/ephemeral [see instructions for further definitions of these terms].) Estimated maximum acre feet of water contained in wetlands within the AA that are subject to periodic flooding or ponding >5 acre feet 1.1 to 5 acre feet <=1 acre foot Duration of surface water at wetlands within the AA P/P S/I T/E P/P S/I T/E P/P S/I T/E Wetlands in AA flood or pond >= 5 out of 10 years 1H .9H .8H .8H .6M .5M .4M .3L .2L Wetlands in AA flood or pond < 5 out of 10 years .9H .8H .7M .7M .5M .4M .3L .2L.2L .1L Comments:Frequency of flooding unknown, no visible signs of overbank flow along OHWM. 14G. Sediment/Nutrient/Toxicant Retention and Removal: (Applies to wetlands with potential to receive sediments, nutrients, or toxicants through influx of surface or ground water or direct input. If no wetlands in the AA are subject to such input, i. Rating (working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating [H=high, M=moderate, or L=low]) Sediment, nutrient, and toxicant input levels within AA AA receives or surrounding land use with potential to deliver levels of sediments, nutrients, or compounds at levels such that other functions are not substantially impaired. Minor sedimentation, sources of nutrients or toxicants, or signs of eutrophication present. Waterbody on MDEQ list of waterbodies in need of TMDL development for “probable causes” related to sediment, nutrients, or toxicants or AA receives or surrounding land use with potential to deliver high levels of sediments, nutrients, or compounds such that other functions are substantially impaired. Major sedimentation, sources of nutrients or toxicants, or signs of eutrophication present. % cover of wetland vegetation in AA >= 70%< 70%>= 70%< 70% Evidence of flooding / ponding in AA Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No AA contains no or restricted outlet 1H .8H .7M .5M .5M .4M .3L .2L AA contains unrestricted outlet .9H .7M.7M .6M .4M .4M .3L .2L .1L Comments:AA includes well-vegetated streambanks along WW-2. 14H Sediment/Shoreline Stabilization: (Applies only if AA occurs on or within the banks or a river, stream, or other natural or man-made drainage, or on the shoreline of a standing water body which is subject to wave action. If 14H does not apply, i. Rating (working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) % Cover of wetland streambank or shoreline by species with stability ratings of >=6 (see Appendix F). Duration of surface water adjacent to rooted vegetation Permanent / Perennial Seasonal / Intermittent Temporary / Ephemeral >= 65%1H .9H.9H .7M 35-64%.7M .6M .5M 35%.3L .2L .1L Comments:Shoreline vegetated with deep-rooted hydrophytes. 14I. Production Export/Food Chain Support: i. Level of Biological Activity (synthesis of wildlife and fish habitat ratings [circle]) General Fish Habitat Rating (14D.iii.) General Wildlife Habitat Rating (14C.iii.) E/H M L E/H H H M M H M M L M M L N/A H M LL ii. Rating (Working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating. Factor A = acreage of vegetated wetland component in the AA; Factor B = level of biological activity rating from above (14I.i.); Factor C = whether or not the AA contains a surface or subsurface outlet; the final three rows pertain to duration of surface water in the AA, where P/P, S/I, and T/E are as previously defined, and A = “absent” [see instructions for further definitions of these terms].) NA and proceed to 14G.) NA and proceed to 14H.) NA and proceed to 14I.) ii. Rating (Working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating. Factor A = acreage of vegetated wetland component in the AA; Factor B = level of biological activity rating from above (14I.i.); Factor C = whether or not the AA contains a surface or subsurface outlet; the final three rows pertain to duration of surface water in the AA, where P/P, S/I, and T/E are as previously defined, and A = “absent” [see instructions for further definitions of these terms].) A Vegetated component >5 acres Vegetated component 1-5 acres Vegetated component < 1 acre B High Moderate Low High Moderate Low High Moderate Low C Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No P/P 1H .7M .8H .5M .6M .4M .9H .6M .7M .4M .5M .3L .8H .6M .6M .4M .3L .2L S/I .9H .6M .7M .4M .5M .3L .8H .5M .6M .3L .4M .2L .7M .5M .5M .3L .3L.3L .2L T/E/A .8H .5M .6M .3L .4M .2L .7M .4M .5M .2L .3L .1L .6M .4M .4M .2L .2L .1L iii. Modified Rating (NOTE: Modified score cannot exceed 1 or be less than 0.1.) Vegetated Upland Buffer (VUB): Area with >= 30% plant cover, = 15% noxious weed or ANVS cover, and that is not subjected to periodic mechanical mowing or clearing (unless for weed control). a) Is there an average >= 50 foot-wide vegetated upland buffer around >= 75% of the AA circumference? X iv. Final Score and Rating: 0.40M Comments:Residential development occurring near AA. If yes, add 0.1 to the score in ii above. 4 14J. Groundwater Discharge/Recharge: (check the appropriate indicators in i & ii below) i. Discharge Indicators The AA is a slope wetland Springs or seeps are known or observed Vegetation growing during dormant season/drought Wetland occurs at the toe of a natural slope AA permanently flooded during drought periods Wetland contains an outlet, but no inlet X Shallow water table and the site is saturated to the surface Other: ii. Recharge Indicators X Permeable substrate present without underlying impeding layer Wetland contains inlet but no outlet Stream is a known ‘losing’ stream; discharge volume decreases Other: iii. Rating (use the information from i and ii above and the table below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) Criteria Duration of saturation at AA Wetlands FROM GROUNDWATER DISCHARGE OR WITH WATER THAT IS RECHARGING THE GROUNDWATER SYSTEM P/P S/I T None Groundwater Discharge or Recharge 1H .7M.7M .4M .1L Insufficient Data/Information N/A Comments:General area around AA with known groundwater discharge points. 14K. Uniqueness: i. Rating (working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) Replacement potential AA contains fen, bog, warm springs or mature (>80 yr-old) forested wetland or plant association listed as “S1” by the MTNHP AA does not contain previously cited rare types and structural diversity (#13) is high or contains plant association listed as “S2” by the MTNHP AA does not contain previously cited rare types or associations and structural diversity (#13) is low- moderate Estimated relative abundance (#11)rare common abundant rare common abundant rare common abundant Low disturbance at AA (#12i)1H .9H .8H .8H .6M .5M .5M .4M .3L Moderate disturbance at AA (#12i).9H .8H .7M .7M .5M .4M .4M .3L .2L High disturbance at AA (#12i).8H .7M .6M .6M .4M .3L .3L .2L .1L.1L 14L. Recreation/Education Potential: (affords “bonus” points if AA provides recreation or education opportunity) i. Is the AA a known or potential rec./ed. site: (circle)(if ‘Yes’ continue with the evaluation; if ‘No’ then mark X NA and proceed to the overall summary and rating page) ii. Check categories that apply to the AA:Educational/scientific study;Consumptive rec.;Non-consumptive rec.; Other : iii. Rating: Known or Potential Recreation or Education Area Known Potential Public ownership or public easement with general public access (no permission required).2H .15H Private ownership with general public access (no permission required).15H .1M Private or public ownership without general public access, or requiring permission for public access .1M .05L Comments:AA very small General Site Notes AA includes common agricultural-influenced vegetation species.Comments: 5 FUNCTION & VALUE SUMMARY & OVERALL RATING FOR WETLAND/SITE #(S):WW-4, WL-4 Function & Value Variables Rating Actual Functional Points Possible Functional Points Functional Units: (Actual Points x Wetland Acreage) Indicate the four most prominent functions with an asterisk (*) A. Listed/Proposed T&E Species Habitat L 0.00 0.001 B. MT Natural Heritage Program Species Habitat L 0.00 1 0.00 C. General Wildlife Habitat L 0.20 1 0.00 D. General Fish Habitat NA E. Flood Attenuation M 0.40 1 0.01 * F. Short and Long Term Surface Water Storage L 0.20 1 0.00 G. Sediment/Nutrient/Toxicant Removal M 0.70 1 0.01 * H. Sediment/Shoreline Stabilization H 0.90 1 0.01 * I. Production Export/Food Chain Support M 0.40 1 0.01 J. Groundwater Discharge/Recharge M 0.70 1 0.01 * K. Uniqueness L 0.10 1 0.00 L. Recreation/Education Potential (bonus points)NA Totals: 3.60 10.00 0.05 Percent of Possible Score 36% Category I Wetland: (must satisfy one of the following criteria; otherwise go to Category II) Score of 1 functional point for Listed/Proposed Threatened or Endangered Species; or Score of 1 functional point for Uniqueness; or Score of 1 functional point for Flood Attenuation and answer to Question 14E.ii is "yes"; or Percent of possible score > 80% (round to nearest whole #). Category II Wetland: (Criteria for Category I not satisfied and meets any one of the following criteria; otherwise go to Category IV) Score of 1 functional point for MT Natural Heritage Program Species Habitat; or Score of .9 or 1 functional point for General Wildlife Habitat; or Score of .9 or 1 functional point for General Fish Habitat; or "High" to “Exceptional” ratings for both General Wildlife Habitat and General Fish/Aquatic Habitat; or Score of .9 functional point for Uniqueness; or Percent of possible score > 65% (round to nearest whole #). Category III Wetland: (Criteria for Categories I, II, or IV not satisfied) Category IV Wetland: (Criteria for Categories I or II are not satisfied and all of the following criteria are met; otherwise go to Category III) "Low" rating for Uniqueness; andX Vegetated wetland component 1 acre (do not include upland vegetated buffer); andX Percent of possible score 35% (round to nearest whole #). OVERALL ANALYSIS AREA RATING:III Summary Comments: AA located along likely stream crossing for residential road. 6 MDT Montana Wetland Assessment Form (revised March 2008) 1. Project Name:Baxter 80 2. MDT Project #:NA Control #:NA 3. Evaluation Date:10/30/2025 4. Evaluator(s):Brian Sandefur, PWS 5. Wetlands/Site #(s):WL-5 and WL-6 6. Wetland Location(s): i. Legal:T2S,R5E,04 ii. Approx. Stationing or Mileposts:NA iii. Watershed:HUC12 100200081002 Watershed Name, County: Upper Missouri, Gallatin 7. a. Evaluating Agency:POWER Engineers b. Purpose of Evaluation: 1. 2. 3. 4. Wetlands potentially affected by MDT project Mitigation wetlands; pre-construction Mitigation wetlands; post-construction Other:X Pre-disturbance 8. Wetland size: 1.220 acres (measured) 9. Assessment area (AA): 1.220 acres (measured) 10. Classification of Wetland and Aquatic Habitats in AA HGM Class (Brinson) Class (Cowardin) Modifier (Cowardin) Water Regime % of AA D EM NA SI 100 Abbreviations:(see manual for definitions) HGM Classes: Riverine (R), Depressional (D), Slope (S), Mineral Soil Flats (MSF), Organic Soil Flats (OSF), Lacustrine Fringe (LF); Cowardin Classes: Rock Bottom (RB), Unconsolidated bottom (UB), Aquatic Bed (AB), Unconsolidated Shore (US), Moss-lichen Wetland (ML), Emergent Wetland (EM), Scrub-Shrub Wetland (SS), Forested Wetland (FO) Modifiers: Excavated (E), Impounded (I), Diked (D), Partly Drained (PD), Farmed (F), Artificial (A) Water Regimes: Permanent / Perennial (PP), Seasonal / Intermittent (SI), Temporary / Ephemeral (TE) 11. Estimated relative abundance:(of similarly classified sites within the same Major Montana Watershed Basin, see definitions) COMMON 12. General condition of AA: i. Disturbance: (use matrix below to determine [circle] appropriate response – see instructions for Montana-listed noxious weed and aquatic nuisance vegetation species (ANVS) list) Conditions within AA Managed in predominantly natural state; is not grazed, hayed, logged, or otherwise converted; does not contain roads or buildings; and noxious weed or ANVS cover is >=15%. Land not cultivated, but may be moderately grazed or hayed or selectively logged; or has been subject to minor clearing; contains few roads or buildings; noxious weed or ANVS cover is <= 30%. Land cultivated or heavily grazed or logged; subject to substantial fill placement, grading, clearing, or hydrological alteration; high road or building density; or noxious weed or ANVS cover is > 30%. Predominant conditions adjacent to (within 500 feet of) AA AA cultivated or heavily grazed or logged; subject to relatively substantial fill placement, grading, clearing, or hydrological alteration; high road or building density; or noxious weed or ANVS cover is > 30%. AA not cultivated, but may be moderately grazed or hayed or selectively logged; or has been subject to relatively minor clearing, fill placement, or hydrological alteration; contains few roads or buildings; noxious weed or ANVS cover is <= AA occurs and is managed in predominantly natural state; is not grazed, hayed, logged, or otherwise converted; does not contain roads or occupied buildings; and noxious weed or ANVS cover is <= 15%. low disturbance low disturbance moderate disturbance moderate disturbance moderate disturbance high disturbance high disturbance high disturbance high disturbance moderate disturbance Comments: (types of disturbance, intensity, season, etc.): AA includes depression in hay field and excavated road-side ditch along Baxter Road. ii. Prominent noxious, aquatic nuisance, & other exotic vegetation species: Canada thistle iii. Provide brief descriptive summary of AA and surrounding land use/habitat: AA surrounded by hayfield, road corridor, rural residential. 13. Structural Diversity: (based on number of "Cowardin" vegetated classes present [do not include unvegetated classes], see #10 above) Existing # of “Cowardin” Vegetated Classes in AA Initial Rating Is current management preventing (passive) existence of additional vegetated classes?Modified Rating >= 3 (or 2 if 1 is forested) classes H NA NA NA 2 (or 1 if forested) classes M NA NA NA 1 class, but not a monoculture MM <-- NO YES -->L 1 class, monoculture (1 species comprises >= 90% of total cover)L NA NA NA Comments: PEM throughout AA 45.699333, -111.115845 : Centroid for WL-5Latitude/Longitude: 1 SECTION PERTAINING to FUNCTIONS & VALUES ASSESSMENT 14A. Habitat for Federally Listed or Proposed Threatened or Endangered Plants or Animals: i. AA is Documented (D) or Suspected (S) to contain (circle one based on definitions contained in instructions): Primary or critical habitat (list species)Secondary habitat (list species)Incidental habitat (list species) No usable habitat ii. Rating (use the conclusions from i above and the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) Highest Habitat Level doc/primary sus/primary doc/secondary sus/secondary doc/incidental sus/incidental None Functional Points and Rating 1H .9H .8M .7M .3L .1L 0L0L Sources for documented use (e.g. observations, records, etc):USFWS IPaC, field observations Incidental habitat (list species) i. AA is Documented (D) or Suspected (S) to contain (circle one based on definitions contained in instructions): ii. Rating (use the conclusions from i above and the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) No usable habitat 14B. Habitat for plant or animals rated S1, S2, or S3 by the Montana Natural Heritage Program: (not including species listed in14A above) Primary or critical habitat (list species)Secondary habitat (list species) sus/secondary S1 Species: Functional Points and Rating doc/primary sus/primary sus/incidentalHighest Habitat Level Nonedoc/secondary doc/incidental 1H .8H .7M .6M .2L .1L 0L S2 and S3 Species: Functional Points and Rating .9H .7M .6M .5M .2L .1L 0L0L Sources for documented use (e.g. observations, records, etc):MTNHP database, field observations 14C. General Wildlife Habitat Rating: i. Evidence of overall wildlife use in the AA (circle substantial, moderate, or low based on supporting evidence): Substantial (based on any of the following [check]):Minimal (based on any of the following [check]): observations of abundant wildlife #s or high species diversity (during any period) abundant wildlife sign such as scat, tracks, nest structures, game trails, etc. presence of extremely limiting habitat features not available in the surrounding area interviews with local biologists with knowledge of the AA few or no wildlife observations during peak use periods little to no wildlife sign sparse adjacent upland food sources interviews with local biologists with knowledge of the AA X Moderate (based on any of the following [check]): observations of scattered wildlife groups or individuals or relatively few species during peak periods interviews with local biologists with knowledge of the AA common occurrence of wildlife sign such as scat, tracks, nest structures, game trails, etc. adequate adjacent upland food sources ii. Wildlife habitat features (Working from top to bottom, circle appropriate AA attributes in matrix to arrive at rating. Structural diversity is from #13. For class cover to be considered evenly distributed, the most and least prevalent vegetated classes must be within 20% of each other interms of their percent composition of the AA (see #10). Abbreviations for surface water durations are as follows: P/P = permanent/perennial; S/I = seasonal/intermittent; T/E = temporary/ephemeral; and A = absent [see instructions for further definitions of these terms]) Structural diversity (see #13)High Moderate Low Class cover distribution (all vegetated classes)Even Uneven Even Uneven Even Duration of surface water in >=10% of AA P/P S/I T/E A P/P S/I T/E A P/P S/I T/E A P/P S/I T/E A P/P S/I T/E A Low disturbance at AA (see #12i)E E E H E E H H E H H M E H M M E H M M Moderate disturbance at AA (see #12i)H H H H H H H M H HH M M H M M L H M L L High disturbance at AA (see #12i)M M M L M M L L M M L L M L L L L L L L iii. Rating (use the conclusions from i and ii above and the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) Evidence of wildlife use (i)Wildlife habitat features rating (ii) Exceptional High Moderate Moderate Substantial 1E .9H .8H .7M Moderate .9H .7M .5M .3L Minimal .6M .4M.4M .2L .1L AA use by wildlife likely severely impacted by proximity of roadway.Comments: 2 14D. General Fish Habitat Rating: (Assess this function if the AA is used by fish or the existing situation is “correctable” such that the AA could be used by fish [i.e., fish use is precluded by perched culvert or other barrier, etc.]. If the AA is not used by fish, fish use is not restorable due to habitat constraints, or is not desired from a management perspective [such as fish entrapped in a canal], then mark X Type of Fishery:Cold Water (CW)Warm Water (WW)Use the CW or WW guidelines in the user manual to complete the matrix i. Habitat Quality and Known / Suspected Fish Species in AA (use matrix to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) Duration of surface water in AA Permanent / Perennial Seasonal / Intermittent Temporary / Ephemeral Aquatic hiding / resting / escape cover Optimal Adequate Poor Optimal Adequate Poor Optimal Adequate Poor Thermal cover optimal / suboptimal O S O S O S O S O S O S O S O S O S FWP Tier I fish species 1E .9H .8H .7M .6M .5M .9H .8H .7M .6M .5M .4M .7M .6M .5M .4M .3L .2L FWP Tier II or Native Game fish species .9H .8H .7M .6M .5M .5M .8H .7M .6M .5M .4M .4M .6M .5M .4M .3L .2L .2L FWP Tier III or Introduced Game fish .8H .7M .6M .5M .5M .4M .7M .6M .5M .4M .4M .3L .5M .4M .3L .2L .2L .1L FWP Non-Game Tier IV or No fish species .5M .5M .5M .4M .4M .3L .4M .4M .4M .3L .3L .2L .2L .2L .2L .1L .1L .1L Sources used for identifying fish sp. potentially found in AA: ii. Modified Rating (NOTE: Modified score cannot exceed 1 or be less than 0.1) a) Is fish use of the AA significantly reduced by a culvert, dike, or other man-made structure or activity or is the waterbody included on the current life support, or do aquatic nuisance plant or animal species (see Appendix E) occur in fish habitat? final MDEQ list of waterbodies in need of TMDL development with listed “Probable Impaired Uses” including cold or warm water fishery or aquatic b) Does the AA contain a documented spawning area or other critical habitat feature (i.e., sanctuary pool, upwelling area, etc.- specify in comments) for native fish or introduced game fish? iii. Final Score and Rating:NA Comments:Not applicable 14E. Flood Attenuation: (Applies only to wetlands subject to flooding via in-channel or overbank flow. If wetlands in AA are not flooded from in-channel or overbank flow, mark X i. Rating (working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) Estimated or Calculated Entrenchment (Rosgen 1994, 1996)Slightly entrenched - C, D, E stream types Moderately entrenched – B stream type Entrenched-A, F, G stream types % of flooded wetland classified as forested and/or scrub/shrub 75%25-75%<25%75%25-75%<25%75%25-75%<25% AA contains no outlet or restricted outlet 1H .9H .6M .8H .7M .5M .4M .3L .2L AA contains unrestricted outlet .9H .8H .5M .7M .6M .4M .3L .2L .1L Entrenchment ratio (ER) estimation – see User’s Manual for additional guidance. Entrenchment ratio = (flood-prone width)/(bankfull width) Flood-prone width = estimated horizontal projection of where 2 x maximum bankfull depth elevation intersects the floodplain on each side of the stream. / Flood-prone width = Bankfull width Entrenchment ratio (ER) Slightly Entrenched ER = >2.2 Moderately Entrenched ER = 1.41 – 2.2 Entrenched ER = 1.0 – 1.4 C stream type D stream type E stream type B stream type A stream type F stream type G stream type NA and proceed to 14E.) If yes, reduce score in i above by 0.1. If yes, add 0.1 to the adjusted score in i or iia. NA and proceed to 14F.) ii. Are ≥10 acres of wetland in the AA subject to flooding AND are man-made features which may be significantly damaged by floods located within 0.5 mile downstream of the AA (circle)?Comments:Not applicable 3 14F. Short and Long Term Surface Water Storage: (Applies to wetlands that flood or pond from overbank or in-channel flow, precipitation, upland surface flow, or groundwater flow. If no wetlands in the AA are subject to flooding or ponding, i. Rating (Working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating. Abbreviations for surface water durations are as follows: P/P = permanent/perennial; S/I = seasonal/intermittent; and T/E = temporary/ephemeral [see instructions for further definitions of these terms].) Estimated maximum acre feet of water contained in wetlands within the AA that are subject to periodic flooding or ponding >5 acre feet 1.1 to 5 acre feet <=1 acre foot Duration of surface water at wetlands within the AA P/P S/I T/E P/P S/I T/E P/P S/I T/E Wetlands in AA flood or pond >= 5 out of 10 years 1H .9H .8H .8H .6M .5M .4M .3L .2L Wetlands in AA flood or pond < 5 out of 10 years .9H .8H .7M .7M .5M.5M .4M .3L .2L .1L Comments:AA subject to periodic adjacent upland surface flow from a small contributing drainage 14G. Sediment/Nutrient/Toxicant Retention and Removal: (Applies to wetlands with potential to receive sediments, nutrients, or toxicants through influx of surface or ground water or direct input. If no wetlands in the AA are subject to such input, i. Rating (working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating [H=high, M=moderate, or L=low]) Sediment, nutrient, and toxicant input levels within AA AA receives or surrounding land use with potential to deliver levels of sediments, nutrients, or compounds at levels such that other functions are not substantially impaired. Minor sedimentation, sources of nutrients or toxicants, or signs of eutrophication present. Waterbody on MDEQ list of waterbodies in need of TMDL development for “probable causes” related to sediment, nutrients, or toxicants or AA receives or surrounding land use with potential to deliver high levels of sediments, nutrients, or compounds such that other functions are substantially impaired. Major sedimentation, sources of nutrients or toxicants, or signs of eutrophication present. % cover of wetland vegetation in AA >= 70%< 70%>= 70%< 70% Evidence of flooding / ponding in AA Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No AA contains no or restricted outlet 1H .8H .7M .5M .5M .4M .3L .2L AA contains unrestricted outlet .9H .7M.7M .6M .4M .4M .3L .2L .1L Comments:Unrestricted outlet into WL-6 drainage ditch. 14H Sediment/Shoreline Stabilization: (Applies only if AA occurs on or within the banks or a river, stream, or other natural or man-made drainage, or on the shoreline of a standing water body which is subject to wave action. If 14H does not apply, i. Rating (working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) X % Cover of wetland streambank or shoreline by species with stability ratings of >=6 (see Appendix F). Duration of surface water adjacent to rooted vegetation Permanent / Perennial Seasonal / Intermittent Temporary / Ephemeral >= 65%1H .9H .7M 35-64%.7M .6M .5M 35%.3L .2L .1L Comments:Not applicable 14I. Production Export/Food Chain Support: i. Level of Biological Activity (synthesis of wildlife and fish habitat ratings [circle]) General Fish Habitat Rating (14D.iii.) General Wildlife Habitat Rating (14C.iii.) E/H M L E/H H H M M H M M L M M L N/A H MM L ii. Rating (Working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating. Factor A = acreage of vegetated wetland component in the AA; Factor B = level of biological activity rating from above (14I.i.); Factor C = whether or not the AA contains a surface or subsurface outlet; the final three rows pertain to duration of surface water in the AA, where P/P, S/I, and T/E are as previously defined, and A = “absent” [see instructions for further definitions of these terms].) NA and proceed to 14G.) NA and proceed to 14H.) NA and proceed to 14I.) ii. Rating (Working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating. Factor A = acreage of vegetated wetland component in the AA; Factor B = level of biological activity rating from above (14I.i.); Factor C = whether or not the AA contains a surface or subsurface outlet; the final three rows pertain to duration of surface water in the AA, where P/P, S/I, and T/E are as previously defined, and A = “absent” [see instructions for further definitions of these terms].) A Vegetated component >5 acres Vegetated component 1-5 acres Vegetated component < 1 acre B High Moderate Low High Moderate Low High Moderate Low C Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No P/P 1H .7M .8H .5M .6M .4M .9H .6M .7M .4M .5M .3L .8H .6M .6M .4M .3L .2L S/I .9H .6M .7M .4M .5M .3L .8H .5M .6M.6M .3L .4M .2L .7M .5M .5M .3L .3L .2L T/E/A .8H .5M .6M .3L .4M .2L .7M .4M .5M .2L .3L .1L .6M .4M .4M .2L .2L .1L iii. Modified Rating (NOTE: Modified score cannot exceed 1 or be less than 0.1.) Vegetated Upland Buffer (VUB): Area with >= 30% plant cover, = 15% noxious weed or ANVS cover, and that is not subjected to periodic mechanical mowing or clearing (unless for weed control). a) Is there an average >= 50 foot-wide vegetated upland buffer around >= 75% of the AA circumference? iv. Final Score and Rating: 0.60M Comments:Area include PEM depression within hay field and excavated ditch along Baxter Road. If yes, add 0.1 to the score in ii above. 4 14J. Groundwater Discharge/Recharge: (check the appropriate indicators in i & ii below) i. Discharge Indicators The AA is a slope wetland X Springs or seeps are known or observed Vegetation growing during dormant season/drought Wetland occurs at the toe of a natural slope AA permanently flooded during drought periods Wetland contains an outlet, but no inlet Shallow water table and the site is saturated to the surface Other: ii. Recharge Indicators X Permeable substrate present without underlying impeding layer Wetland contains inlet but no outlet Stream is a known ‘losing’ stream; discharge volume decreases Other: iii. Rating (use the information from i and ii above and the table below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) Criteria Duration of saturation at AA Wetlands FROM GROUNDWATER DISCHARGE OR WITH WATER THAT IS RECHARGING THE GROUNDWATER SYSTEM P/P S/I T None Groundwater Discharge or Recharge 1H .7M.7M .4M .1L Insufficient Data/Information N/A Comments:Known ground water discharge within vicinity of AA. 14K. Uniqueness: i. Rating (working from top to bottom, use the matrix below to arrive at [circle] the functional points and rating) Replacement potential AA contains fen, bog, warm springs or mature (>80 yr-old) forested wetland or plant association listed as “S1” by the MTNHP AA does not contain previously cited rare types and structural diversity (#13) is high or contains plant association listed as “S2” by the MTNHP AA does not contain previously cited rare types or associations and structural diversity (#13) is low- moderate Estimated relative abundance (#11)rare common abundant rare common abundant rare common abundant Low disturbance at AA (#12i)1H .9H .8H .8H .6M .5M .5M .4M .3L Moderate disturbance at AA (#12i).9H .8H .7M .7M .5M .4M .4M .3L.3L .2L High disturbance at AA (#12i).8H .7M .6M .6M .4M .3L .3L .2L .1L 14L. Recreation/Education Potential: (affords “bonus” points if AA provides recreation or education opportunity) i. Is the AA a known or potential rec./ed. site: (circle)(if ‘Yes’ continue with the evaluation; if ‘No’ then mark X NA and proceed to the overall summary and rating page) ii. Check categories that apply to the AA:Educational/scientific study;Consumptive rec.;Non-consumptive rec.; Other : iii. Rating: Known or Potential Recreation or Education Area Known Potential Public ownership or public easement with general public access (no permission required).2H .15H Private ownership with general public access (no permission required).15H .1M Private or public ownership without general public access, or requiring permission for public access .1M .05L Comments:Not applicable. General Site Notes No unique vegetation identified.Comments: 5 FUNCTION & VALUE SUMMARY & OVERALL RATING FOR WETLAND/SITE #(S):WL-5 and WL-6 Function & Value Variables Rating Actual Functional Points Possible Functional Points Functional Units: (Actual Points x Wetland Acreage) Indicate the four most prominent functions with an asterisk (*) A. Listed/Proposed T&E Species Habitat L 0.00 0.001 B. MT Natural Heritage Program Species Habitat L 0.00 1 0.00 C. General Wildlife Habitat M 0.40 1 0.49 D. General Fish Habitat NA E. Flood Attenuation NA F. Short and Long Term Surface Water Storage M 0.50 1 0.61 * G. Sediment/Nutrient/Toxicant Removal M 0.70 1 0.85 * H. Sediment/Shoreline Stabilization NA I. Production Export/Food Chain Support M 0.60 1 0.73 * J. Groundwater Discharge/Recharge M 0.70 1 0.85 * K. Uniqueness L 0.30 1 0.37 L. Recreation/Education Potential (bonus points)NA Totals: 3.20 8.00 3.90 Percent of Possible Score 40% Category I Wetland: (must satisfy one of the following criteria; otherwise go to Category II) Score of 1 functional point for Listed/Proposed Threatened or Endangered Species; or Score of 1 functional point for Uniqueness; or Score of 1 functional point for Flood Attenuation and answer to Question 14E.ii is "yes"; or Percent of possible score > 80% (round to nearest whole #). Category II Wetland: (Criteria for Category I not satisfied and meets any one of the following criteria; otherwise go to Category IV) Score of 1 functional point for MT Natural Heritage Program Species Habitat; or Score of .9 or 1 functional point for General Wildlife Habitat; or Score of .9 or 1 functional point for General Fish Habitat; or "High" to “Exceptional” ratings for both General Wildlife Habitat and General Fish/Aquatic Habitat; or Score of .9 functional point for Uniqueness; or Percent of possible score > 65% (round to nearest whole #). Category III Wetland: (Criteria for Categories I, II, or IV not satisfied) Category IV Wetland: (Criteria for Categories I or II are not satisfied and all of the following criteria are met; otherwise go to Category III) "Low" rating for Uniqueness; andX Vegetated wetland component 1 acre (do not include upland vegetated buffer); and Percent of possible score 35% (round to nearest whole #). OVERALL ANALYSIS AREA RATING:III Summary Comments: AA with limited functions 6