Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutG_Wetland Delineation Report USACE_8-8-16 HLY 199-090 (PER 01) USACE (08/08/16) EK 122 DOGWOOD DRIVE BOZEMAN, MT 59718 USA PHONE 208-659-8403 August 8, 2016 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Robert Cole, Montana Program Manager 10 West 15th Street, Suite 2200 Helena, Montana 59626 Subject: Bridger Peaks Village – Lot 5 – Transmittal of Wetland and Waterway Delineation Report, Section 404 Joint Application, and Request for Boundary Verification/Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Dear Mr. Cole: Please find enclosed one copy of a Wetland and Waterway Delineation Report (Delineation Report) and Section 404 Joint Application (Joint Application) in support of the Bridger Peaks Village – Lot 5 Project located in Bozeman, Montana. The project investigation area is an 11.85-acre parcel located immediately south of Tschache Lane between North 19th Avenue and North 15th Avenue. The legal description of the investigation area is the northwest quarter of Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. The Delineation Report and Joint Application are being submitted concurrently in order to streamline the review process for USACE and eliminate the need for multiple site visits. Two wetlands and one waterway were delineated within the investigation area. The area of the delineated wetlands totaled approximately 0.70 acre within the project area; the portion of the waterway (Walton’s Stream/Ditch) delineated within the project area totaled 0.02 acre and 539 linear feet. The wetlands and waterway were preliminarily observed to be jurisdictional based on adjacency or an observed hydrologic connection to a known waters of the U.S. The proposed commercial/residential development project will result in 0.25 acre of unavoidable impacts to previously constructed stormwater drainage ditch wetlands and a stormwater settling basin. Impacts to Walton’s Stream/Ditch and its associated riparian wetland will be avoided. If authorized by USACE, the Applicant intends to meet compensatory wetland mitigation requirements through the purchase of credits from the Upper Missouri Mitigation Bank. Please review the enclosed Delineation Report and Joint Application at your earliest convenience, and provide preliminary jurisdictional determinations, verification of delineated wetland and waterway boundaries, and authorization to impact wetlands and purchase mitigation credits within the Upper Missouri Major Watershed Basin. If you have any questions regarding the information provided, please feel free to call me at (208) 659- 8403. Sincerely, Erik S. Nyquist, PWS c: Philip Saccoccia, Jr., Managing Member, Saccoccia Lands LLC c: Jim McLeod, Farran Realty Partners, LLC c: Matt Ekstrom, Morrison-Maierle, Inc. JOINT APPLICATION FOR PROPOSED WORK IN MONTANA’S STREAMS, WETLANDS, FLOODPLAINS, AND OTHER WATER BODIES Use this form to apply for one or all local, state, or federal permits listed below. The applicant is the responsible party for the project and the point of contact unless otherwise designated. “Information for Applicant” includes agency contacts and instructions for completing this application. To avoid delays, submit all required information, including a project site map and drawings. Incomplete applications will result in the delay of the application process. Other laws may apply. The applicant is responsible for obtaining all necessary permits and landowner permission before beginning work.  PERMIT AGENCY FEE 310 Permit Local Conservation District No fee SPA 124 Permit Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks No fee Floodplain Permit Local Floodplain Administrator Varies by city/county ($25 - $500+)  Section 404 Permit, Section 10 Permit U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Varies ($0 - $100) 318 Authorization 401 Certification Department of Environmental Quality $250 (318); $400 - $20,000 (401) Navigable Rivers Land Use License, Lease, or Easement Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, Trust Lands Management Division $50, plus additional fee A. APPLICANT INFORMATION NAME OF APPLICANT (person responsible for project): Jim McLeod, Farran Realty Partners, LLC Has the landowner consented to this project? Yes □ No Mailing Address: 101 East Front, Suite 304, Missoula, MT. 59802 Physical Address: same as above Day Phone: (406) 541-4653 Evening Phone: E-Mail: jmcleod@farranco.com NAME OF LANDOWNER (if different from applicant): Saccoccia Lands LLC, Philip Saccoccia Jr, Managing Member Mailing Address: 1234 Springhill Road, Belgrade, MT. 59714 Physical Address: same as above Day Phone: (228) 326-4447 Evening Phone: E-Mail: philsac@gmail.com NAME OF CONTRACTOR/AGENT (if one is used): Erik Nyquist, POWER Engineers, Inc. Mailing Address: 122 Dogwood Drive, Bozeman, MT. 59718 Physical Address: same as above Day Phone (208) 659-8403 Evening Phone: E-Mail: erik.nyquist@powereng.com B. PROJECT SITE INFORMATION NAME OF STREAM or WATER BODY at project location: Walton’s Stream/Ditch Nearest Town: Bozeman Address/Location: Bridger Peaks Village – Lot 5 Geocode (if available): 06079801202150000 Northwest 1/4, Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana Longitude: 111 degrees, 3 minutes, 31.10 seconds, Latitude: 45 degrees, 41 minutes, 44.17 seconds The state owns the beds of certain state navigable waterways. Is this a state navigable waterway? No If yes, send copy of this application to appropriate DNRC land office – see Information for Applicant. AGENCY USE ONLY: Application # ___________ Date Received ____________ Date Accepted ____________/ Initials _____ Date Forwarded to DFWP ____________ Revised: 6/5/15 (310 form 270). Form may be downloaded from: www.dnrc.mt.gov/ licenses-and-permits/stream-permitting This space is for all Department of Transportation and SPA 124 permits (government projects). Project Name _________________________________________________ Control Number ________________________________ Contract letting date ________________________________________________ MEPA/NEPA Compliance  Yes  No If yes, #14 of this application does not apply. ATTACH A PROJECT SITE MAP OR A SKETCH that includes: 1) the water body where the project will take place, roads, tributaries, landmarks; 2) a circled “X” representing the exact project location. IF NOT CLEARLY STATED ON THE MAP OR SKETCH, PROVIDE WRITTEN DIRECTIONS TO THE SITE. Refer to the following figures for location of the project site and surrounding area, and identification of wetlands and the waterway within the project area. Figure 1 – Topographic/Vicinity Map Figure 2 – Aerial Map Figure 3 – Wetland/Waterway Delineation Map C. PROJECT INFORMATION 1. TYPE OF PROJECT (check all that apply)  Bridge/Culvert/Ford Construction  Fish Habitat  Mining  Bridge/Culvert/Ford Removal  Recreation (docks, marinas, etc.)  Dredging  Road Construction/Maintenance  New Residential Structure  Core Drill  Bank Stabilization/Alteration  Manufactured Home  Placement of Fill  Flood Protection  Improvement to Existing Structure  Diversion Dam  Channel Alteration  Commercial Structure  Utilities  Irrigation Structure  Wetland Alteration  Pond  Water Well/Cistern  Temporary Construction Access  Debris Removal  Excavation/Pit  Other: Replacement of existing constructed stormwater drainage features with culverts and fill material. 2. PLAN OR DRAWING of the proposed project MUST be attached. This plan or drawing must include: • a plan view (looking at the project from above) • a cross section or profile view • dimensions of the project (height, width, depth in feet) • an elevation view • location of storage or stockpile materials • dimensions and location of fill or excavation sites • drainage facilities • location of existing or proposed structures, such as • an arrow indicating north buildings, utilities, roads, or bridges 3. IS THIS APPLICATION FOR an annual maintenance permit?  Yes  No (If yes, an annual plan of operation must be attached to this application – see “Information for Applicant”) 4. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION DATE. Include a project timeline. Start date: 04/01/2017 Finish date: 04/01/2018 Is any portion of the work already completed?  Yes No (If yes, describe the completed work.) 5. WHAT IS THE PURPOSE of the proposed project? The purpose of the proposed project is a residential development (apartment complex) within the 11.85-acre project site. The Applicant intends to develop the property with residential buildings and associated infrastructure (parking areas, access roads, etc.) while maintaining existing on-site aquatic resources as best as practicable. The function of the existing stormwater drainage system will be preserved. 6. PROVIDE A BRIEF DESCRIPTION of the proposed project. The proposed project will include the construction of the following components:  Residential apartment complex;  Parking areas;  Access roads; and  Associated utility infrastructure. The majority of the project site will be developed following construction. However, the function of the existing stormwater drainage/detention system will remain and the existing stream/ditch and associated riparian wetland will not be impacted through the development of the site. 7. WHAT IS THE CURRENT CONDITION of the proposed project site? Describe the existing bank condition, bank slope, height, nearby structures, and wetlands. The Project area consists of flat, undeveloped land currently in agricultural (hay) production. The Project area is located immediately south of Tschache Lane with undeveloped parcels to the north and east, the Bridger Peaks Town Center commercial shopping mall to the west and southwest, and a residential complex to the south. A topographic map of the Project area is provided as Figure 1 and an aerial map as Figure 2. Two palustrine, emergent/scrub-shrub wetlands (W-1 and W-2) totaling 0.70 acre, and a portion of Walton’s Stream/Ditch (Stream 1; S-1) totaling 0.02 acre/539 linear feet, were delineated within the Project area (Figure 3). Wetland W-1 was delineated as a riverine wetland along the eastern boundary of the Project area totaling 0.26 acre. W-1 is the riparian area associated with Walton’s Stream/Ditch. Wetland W-2 was delineated as a depressional wetland in the northeastern portion of the Project area, with associated stormwater drainage ditches extending west and southwest, and totaling 0.44 acre. W-2 is a constructed stormwater drainage system receiving hydrology (stormwater runoff) from the adjacent commercial developments located to the west and southwest of the Project area. Stormwater enters the Project area via culvert and is conveyed via the drainage ditches located along the northern and southern Project area boundaries into a settling basin in the northeastern corner of the Project area (Figure 3). The ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of Stream S-1 was delineated as a portion of Walton’s Stream/Ditch located along the eastern boundary of the Project area, totaling 539 linear feet and 0.02 acre within the Project area. Water flow was observed during the June 29, 2016 on-site investigation with an average wetted width of approximately 2.5 feet. The substrate of the drainage consisted primarily of silt/fine sediment (approximately 80 percent) with some gravel and cobble (approximately 20 percent). 8. PROJECT DIMENSIONS. How many linear feet of bank will be impacted? How far will the proposed project encroach into and extend away from the water body? No impacts to Walton’s Stream/Ditch will occur from construction of the proposed project; construction activities will avoid impacts to the waterway and its wetland fringe. Proposed construction activities will result in permanent impacts to wetland W-2, primarily the constructed stormwater drainage ditches that extend west and southwest from the depressional portion of W-2 that is located in the northeastern corner of the property (see Figure 4, Proposed Wetland Impacts). Proposed project design consists of replacing the constructed open stormwater drainage ditches with culverts and fill material, while maintaining the proper function of the site’s stormwater drainage system. Proposed permanent impacts to W-2 will total 0.25 acre (Figure 4). 9. VEGETATION. Describe the vegetation present on site. How much vegetation will be disturbed or covered with fill material during project installation? (Agencies require that only vegetation necessary to do the work be removed.) Describe the revegetation plan for all disturbed areas of the project site in detail. The dominant wetland vegetation observed within the Project area includes reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW), climbing nightshade (Solanum dulcamara, FAC), and broad-leaf cattail (Typha latifolia, OBL), with other vegetation observed including Northwest Territory sedge (Carex utriculata, OBL), red-tinge bulrush (Scirpus microcarpus, OBL), American wild mint (Mentha arvensis, FACW), fringed willowherb (Epilobium ciliatum, FACW), and Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense, FAC). The observed upland vegetation is dominated by alfalfa (Medicago sativa, UPL), smooth brome (Bromus inermis, FACU) and Canada thistle, with other upland vegetation including fowl bluegrass (Poa palustris, FAC), tall tumble mustard (Sisymbrium altissimum, FACU), and houndstongue (Cynoglossum officinale, FACU). Permanent impacts to vegetated wetland areas will total 0.25 acre. Permanent impacts to vegetated non-wetland (upland) areas will total up to approximately 9.0 acres (the remainder of the proposed development footprint). Wetland and upland areas that are permanently impacted from the proposed project will not be revegetated. During construction activities, the Contractor intends to limit vegetation disturbance to permanently impacted areas; however, additional upland areas may be temporarily disturbed by heavy equipment and construction activities. In the event that unavoidable temporary upland impacts occur during construction, the following upland seed mix will be utilized for revegetation: Durar Hard Fescue (Festuca trachyphylla): 35% Turf-Type Tall Fescue (Festuca arundinacea): 15% Canada Bluegrass (Poa compressa): 15% Sheep Fescue (Festuca ovina): 35% This seed mix is a vigorous, competitive, and low maintenance mix for areas around the perimeters of lawns or developed areas. It will be drill-seeded at a rate of 10 to 15 pounds/acre or broadcast-seeded at 20 to 30 pounds/acre. As previously stated, permanent impacts to wetland areas will total 0.25 acre. Temporary impacts to adjacent on-site delineated wetland/waterway areas will be avoided through the implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs). 10. MATERIALS. Describe the materials proposed to be used. Note: This may be modified during the permitting process. It is recommended you do not purchase material until all permits are issued. The following is an estimate of proposed materials to be placed in wetland areas. Cubic yards/Linear feet Size and Type Source 1,336.4 cubic yards clean fill dirt local gravel pit or other source 39.5 cubic yards pipe bedding local gravel pit or other source 1,335 linear feet 18-inch corrugated metal pipe construction supply outlet 11. EQUIPMENT. List all equipment that will be used for construction of the project. How will the equipment be used on the bank and/or in the water? Note: Make sure equipment is clean and free of weeds, weed seeds, and excess grease before using it in the water waterway. To prevent the spread of aquatic invasive species, to the extent practical, remove mud and aquatic plants from heavy machinery and other equipment before moving between waters and work sites, especially in waters known to be infested with aquatic invasive species. Drain water from machinery and let dry before moving to another location. Standard construction equipment will be utilized for the proposed Project, including excavators, loaders, dump trucks, and other appropriate heavy equipment to be determined by the Contractor. No equipment will be used within the bed or banks of Walton’s Stream/Ditch (S-1) or its associated riparian wetland (W-1); disturbance and impacts to the waterway and associated wetland fringe will be avoided. Equipment will be used to install culvert sections into the existing constructed stormwater drainage ditches that have been delineated as portions of W-2. Disturbance to the majority of the depressional portion of W-2 (stormwater settling/detention basin) in the northeastern portion of the property will be avoided. Prior to and during construction activities, heavy equipment will be cleaned to remove invasive weeds, weed seeds, and excess dirt and grease in order to prevent and minimize conveyance of those materials into wetland and waterway features on site. 12. DESCRIBE PLANNED EFFORTS TO MINIMIZE PROJECT IMPACTS. Consider the impacts of the proposed project, even if temporary. What efforts will be taken to:  Minimize erosion, sedimentation, or turbidity? Due to the relatively flat topography of the site and the existing vegetative cover that will function as a natural filter, erosion and sedimentation transport into Walton’s Stream/Ditch is not anticipated to occur. A constructed berm exists between the portion of the site that will be developed and Walton’s Stream/Ditch and its associated riparian area. In addition, BMPs will be utilized throughout project construction and site stabilization post- construction. W-2 currently functions as a stormwater system and settling basin; therefore, the potential erosion, sedimentation, and turbidity associated with the installation of culverts into the W-2 stormwater drainage ditches is anticipated to have minimal adverse effects on the wetland function or characteristics of W-2. Appropriate BMPs will be identified by the Contractor, but will likely include silt fence, straw bales, and wattles. BMPs will be installed between W-2 and Walton’s Stream/Ditch (S-1) and its associated riparian wetland (W-1) to protect the waterway from temporary increases in erosion, sedimentation, and turbidity.  Minimize stream channel alterations? No stream channel alterations will occur from proposed project activities; construction activities will not take place within the bed or banks of Walton’s Stream/Ditch.  Minimize effects to stream flow or water quality caused by materials used or removal of ground cover? No adverse effects to stream flow or water quality will occur; construction activities will not take place within a stream channel. BMPs will be utilized to protect the stream flow and water quality of Walton’s Stream/Ditch and its associated riparian wetland.  Minimize effects on fish and aquatic habitat? BMPs (e.g., silt fence, wattles, and/or straw bales) will be installed between W-2 and Walton’s Stream/Ditch and its associated riparian wetland to protect the waterway, fish, and aquatic habitat from temporary increases in erosion, sedimentation, and turbidity.  Minimize risks of flooding or erosion problems upstream and downstream? No risks of flooding or erosion problems upstream or downstream are anticipated. Construction activities will not occur within the Walton’s Stream/Ditch stream channel. BMPs will be utilized on site to prevent erosion from entering the stream channel.  Minimize vegetation disturbance, protect existing vegetation, and control weeds? Throughout construction activities, disturbance to wetland and upland vegetation will be minimized as much as practicable. The areas within the project site which will not be permanently impacted by construction will be identified (e.g., flagging or temporary fencing) by the Contractor prior to commencement of construction, in order to prevent heavy equipment and construction personnel from entering/disturbing those areas. Additionally, chemical weed control will be implemented concurrent with spring plant growth beginning in 2017. As required by Gallatin County, noxious weeds will be controlled (sprayed) on an annual basis with herbicides selected for the species and conditions present. Weeds will be sprayed during the active growing season when weed species are in the rosette stage up to the early bolting stage (before flowering). 13. WHAT ARE THE NATURAL RESOURCE BENEFITS of the proposed project? The natural resource benefits of the proposed project include avoiding impacts to Walton’s Stream/Ditch and the majority of the depressional portion wetland W-2. Avoidance of these aquatic features will allow for continued health and function of the associated habitat and aquatic/terrestrial species that utilize it. In addition, the function of the on-site stormwater drainage and settling basin (W-2) will be maintained, which will prevent increased turbidity, pollution, and potential flooding from adversely affecting the project site and surrounding areas. 14. LIST ALTERNATIVES to the proposed project. Why was the proposed alternative selected? Development alternatives included designs which would result in (1) permanent impacts to all of Wetland W-2 and (2) permanent impacts to all or portions of Walton’s Stream/Ditch (S-1) and its associated riparian area (Wetland W-1). Following analysis of alternatives by Project engineers and scientists, it was determined that permanently impacting the entirety of the depressional portion of W-2 would threaten the functional integrity of the existing stormwater system. Additionally, the aquatic/riparian habitat associated with Walton’s Stream/Ditch (S-1 and W-1) was recognized as being important to the local ecosystem, and a beneficial natural resource and aesthetic feature, regardless of the surrounding urban development. Therefore, it was concluded that permanent impacts to Walton’s Stream/Ditch were not warranted to achieve the development objectives of the Project. Based on the development objectives for the site and the desire to preserve existing natural resource features as best as practicable, the proposed project alternative was carried forward. Project stakeholders believe that limiting permanent wetland impacts primarily to the constructed stormwater drainage ditches of W-2 will allow both the project objectives and the protection of existing natural resources to be achieved. D. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR SECTION 404, SECTION 10, AND FLOODPLAIN PERMITS ONLY. If applying for a Section 404 or Section 10 permit, fill out questions 1-3. If applying for a floodplain permit, fill out questions 3-6. (Additional information is required for floodplain permits – See “Information for Applicant.”) 1. Will the project involve placement of dredged (excavated) and/or fill material below the ordinary high water mark, in a wetland, or other waters of the US? If yes, what is the surface area to be filled? How many cubic yards of fill material will be used? Note: Wetland delineations are required if wetlands are affected. Yes, the proposed Project will involve placement of fill material into portions of W-2 as previously described. The surface area to be filled totals 0.25 acre, and 1,336.4 cubic yards of fill material will be utilized. Please refer to Figure 3 and Figure 4 for wetland/waterway delineations and proposed wetland impact details/quantifications, respectively. 2. Description of avoidance, mitigation, and compensation (see Information for Applicant). Attach additional sheets if necessary. As previously described, impacts to existing on-site wetlands will be avoided to the greatest extent practicable. Permanent wetland impacts will be limited to previously constructed stormwater drainage s and will total 0.25 acre. In order to fulfill the compensatory mitigation requirements for the proposed wetland impacts, wetland credits at a 1:1 (mitigation:impact) ratio will be purchased from the Upper Missouri Mitigation Bank. Correspondence on July 22, 2016 with Mr. Kent Carter, Eco-Asset Management, LLC, concluded that the desired credits are available for purchase within the Upper Missouri Major Watershed Basin. Mr. Carter confirmed the commitment to sell wetland credits to the Applicant in order to satisfy compensatory mitigation requirements for the proposed Project. 3. List the names and address of landowners adjacent to the project site. This includes properties adjacent to and across from the project site. (Some floodplain communities require certified adjoining landowner lists). Lowes Home Centers Inc. Christian Center First Assembly of God Inc. ATTN: Tax Dept. NB3TA 921 W. Mendenhall Street Mooresville, NC 28117 Bozeman, MT 59715-3349 BRIDGER PEAKS VILLAGE - LOT 5 SECTION 1, T2S, R5E, BOZEMAN, GALLATIN COUNTY, MONTANA USGS 1:24,000 TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE MAPS: BOZEMAN (1998) PROJECT AREA ( IN FEET ) 0 3000 TOPOGRAPHIC / VICINITY MAP BRIDGER PEAKS VILLAGE - LOT 5 . FIG. 1 BOZEMAN MONTANA PROJECT NO. FIGURE NUMBER F:\CIVIL 3D PROJECTS\Civil 3D Projects\16020\ACAD\EXHIBITS\FIG 1 - VIC MAP.dwg Plotted on Jun/30/2016 06/2016Date: HUFFINE LN OAK STDAVIS LNN 19TH AVEI-90 DURSTON RD BAXTER LN N 7TH AVEI- 9 0 2880 Technology Blvd WestBozeman, MT 59718 Phone: 406.587.0721Fax: 406.922.6702 COPYRIGHT ©MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC.,2016engineers surveyors planners scientists TSCHACHE LNN 19TH AVEBAXTER LN DURSTON RD 3 TYPICAL CROSS SECTION A-A18" CULVERT AND MATERIALS IN WETLAND SCALE: NTSIMPORTED FILL A=27.03 SFTYPE 1 PIPE BEDDING A=0.80 SF18" CULVERTCOPYRIGHT ©MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC.,SHEET NUMBERPROJECT NUMBERDRAWING NUMBERVERIFY SCALE!THESE PRINTS MAY BEREDUCED. LINE BELOWMEASURES ONE INCH ONORIGINAL DRAWING. MODIFY SCALE ACCORDINGLY!DATEDESCRIPTIONNO.BYN:\3959\021\ACAD\EXHIBITS\WETLAND CROSS-SECTION AND VOLUMES.DWG PLOTTED BY:CHIP NIELSEN ON Aug/02/20162016REVISIONSDRAWN BY:DSGN. BY:APPR. BY:DATE:Q.C. REVIEWDATE:BY:2880 Technology Blvd WestBozeman, MT 59718Phone: 406.587.0721Fax: 406.922.6702engineers surveyors planners scientistsPROPOSED WETLAND IMPACTSBOZEMANMTPLAN AND PROFILE3959.0211FIGURE 4CRNCRNMEE07/2016XXXMM/YYYYIMPACTED WETLANDAREA "A"A=0.07 ACIMPACTEDWETLANDAREA "B"A=0.18 ACWETLANDIMPACTAREAAREA(AC)IMPORTFILL(CY)PIPEBEDDING(CY)LENGTH(FT)AB0.07495.514.64950.18840.924.9840AAHORIZ. SCALE IN FEET0100100200TOTALS0.251,336.439.51,335WETLAND IMPACT DETAILSW-2W-1S-1PROPERTYBOUNDARYLEGENDPROPOSED WETLAND IMPACTSDELINEATED WATERWAYDELINEATED WETLANDMATERIALSTOCKPILE ANDSTORAGELOCATIONCONSTRUCTEDSTORMWATERDRAINAGECONSTRUCTEDSTORMWATERDRAINAGE July 12, 2016 BRIDGER PEAKS VILLAGE – LOT 5 WETLAND AND WATERWAY DELINEATION REPORT PROJECT NUMBER: 142963.02.01 PROJECT CONTACT: Erik Nyquist, PWS EMAIL: erik.nyquist@powereng.com PHONE: (208)659-8403 POWER ENGINEERS, INC. WETLAND AND WATERWAY DELINEATION REPORT PREPARED FOR: MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC. PREPARED BY: POWER ENGINEERS, INC. ERIK NYQUIST, PWS (208) 659-8403 ERIK.NYQUIST@POWERENG.COM POWER ENGINEERS, INC. HLY 199-074(BOI PER 02 01) MORRISON-MAIERLE (7/12/2016) EN PAGE i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 SITE DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 JURISDICTIONAL AUTHORITY ................................................................................................. 1 2.0 METHODS ................................................................................................................................ 3 2.1 ANALYSIS OF EXISTING DATA ................................................................................................ 3 2.2 FIELD INVESTIGATION ............................................................................................................ 3 2.2.1 Soils ................................................................................................................................ 4 2.2.2 Vegetation....................................................................................................................... 4 2.2.3 Hydrology ....................................................................................................................... 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 Wetlands ......................................................................................................................... 7 3.1.5 Waterways ...................................................................................................................... 7 3.1.6 Floodplains ..................................................................................................................... 7 3.2 FIELD INVESTIGATION ............................................................................................................ 7 3.2.1 Results ............................................................................................................................ 8 4.0 SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................. 10 5.0 LITERATURE CITED .......................................................................................................... 11 APPENDICES: APPENDIX A WETLAND/WATERWAY PHOTOGRAPHS ......................................................... 18 APPENDIX B USACE WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEETS .................................... 19 FIGURES: FIGURE 1 TOPOGRAPHIC/VICINITY MAP ........................................................................... 13 FIGURE 2 AERIAL MAP ............................................................................................................ 14 FIGURE 3 SOILS MAP ............................................................................................................... 15 FIGURE 4 NWI-NHD MAP ........................................................................................................ 16 FIGURE 5 WETLAND/WATERWAY DELINEATION MAP .................................................. 17 TABLES: TABLE 1 MAPPED SOIL UNITS ............................................................................................... 7 TABLE 2 SUMMARY DATA FOR WETLANDS/WATERWAYS........................................... 9 TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF OBSERVED WETLAND CRITERIA ............................................. 9 POWER ENGINEERS, INC. HLY 199-074(BOI PER 02 01) MORRISON-MAIERLE (7/12/2016) EN PAGE ii ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS CFR Code of Federal Regulations CWA Clean Water Act EPA Environmental Protection Agency FAC Facultative FACW Facultative Wetland FEMA Federal Emergency Management Act FR Federal Register NAIP National Agriculture Imagery Program NHD National Hydrography Dataset NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service NS No Status NWI National Wetland Inventory OBL Obligate Wetland OHWM Ordinary High Water Mark PEMA Palustrine, Emergent, Temporarily Flooded PSS Palustrine, Scrub-Shrub POWER POWER Engineers, Inc. Project Bridger Peaks Village – Lot 5 RHA River and Harbors Act UPL Upland U.S.C. United States Code U.S. United States USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers USDA United States Department of Agriculture USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service USGS United States Geological Survey WQC Water Quality Certification POWER ENGINEERS, INC. HLY 199-074(BOI PER 02 01) MORRISON-MAIERLE (7/12/2016) EN PAGE 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION POWER Engineers, Inc. (POWER) was retained by Morrison-Maierle, Inc. to complete a delineation of potentially regulated wetlands and waterways (i.e., identifying boundaries of wetlands and waterways potentially regulated by the federal government [waters of the United States (U.S.)]) within an approximately 11.85-acre site identified as Bridger Peaks Village – Lot 5 (Project). The legal description of the Project area is the northwest quarter of Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. This report presents the professional opinion of POWER regarding the presence/absence of potentially regulated wetlands and waterways. The final determination of the limits and jurisdictional status of on-site wetlands and waterways is under the purview of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and may require an on-site inspection with the USACE. 1.1 Site Description The Project area consists of flat, undeveloped land currently in agricultural (hay) production. The Project area is located immediately south of Tschache Lane with undeveloped parcels to the north and east, the Bridger Peaks Town Center commercial shopping mall to the west and southwest, and a residential complex to the south. A total of approximately 11.85 acres were investigated for the presence of wetlands and waterways associated with the Project area. A topographic map of the Project area is provided as Figure 1 and an aerial map as Figure 2. 1.2 Jurisdictional Authority The USACE has primacy over the regulation of navigable waters of the U.S. under Sections 9 and 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (RHA) and federal jurisdictional waters under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). Navigable waters are defined as waters that are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide and/or are presently used, have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce. Federal jurisdictional waters include navigable waters and all other waters that are regulated by the USACE, which together are referred to as “waters of the U.S.” Impacts to waters of the U.S. are regulated by the USACE through Section 404 of the CWA (33 United States Code [U.S.C.] § 1344) and Section 10 of the RHA (33 U.S.C. § 403). In addition, prior to federal authorization for impacts to waters or wetlands, a water quality certification (WQC) must first be obtained from the applicable state as defined in Section 401 of the CWA (33 U.S.C. § 1341). Waters of the U.S. currently include traditional navigable waters and their adjacent wetlands; non- navigable tributaries of traditional navigable waters that are relatively permanent (tributaries that flow year round or have continuous flow at least seasonally [three months]); and wetlands that directly abut such tributaries (40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 230.3(s)). The CWA jurisdiction also covers non-navigable tributaries and their adjacent wetlands that are not relatively permanent and wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting a relatively permanent non-navigable tributary when a fact-specific analysis determines that those waters have a significant nexus with traditional navigable waters. A significant nexus determination must be completed in order to prove whether or not a water feature in question has more than an insubstantial or speculative hydrological or ecological effect on the chemical, physical, and/or biological integrity of a downstream traditional navigable water (EPA 2008; USACE and EPA 2014). POWER ENGINEERS, INC. HLY 199-074(BOI PER 02 01) MORRISON-MAIERLE (7/12/2016) EN PAGE 2 Under current guidance, the USACE generally will not assert jurisdiction over swales or erosional features (e.g., gullies, small washes characterized by low volume, infrequent, or short duration flow), and ditches (including roadside ditches) excavated wholly in and draining only uplands that do not carry a relatively permanent flow of water (EPA 2008). POWER ENGINEERS, INC. HLY 199-074(BOI PER 02 01) MORRISON-MAIERLE (7/12/2016) EN PAGE 3 2.0 METHODS 2.1 Analysis of Existing Data Prior to the commencement of 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. These data included: • United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute Topographic Quadrangle Map: Bozeman, Montana (USGS 1998). • National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP) Aerial Photography (NAIP 2013). • United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Digital General Soil Map of the U.S. (NRCS 2006) and the NRCS Web Soil Survey (NRCS 2016). • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetland Inventory (NWI) Wetlands Mapper (USFWS 2016). • U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) mapper (USGS 2016). • Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 100-year Floodplain maps (FEMA 2016). 2.2 Field Investigation This review focused on determining the presence of potentially jurisdictional wetlands or waterways within the Project area. Field surveys were conducted in accordance with the “Routine Onsite Determination Method” described in the USACE Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0) (USACE 2010). 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. Under normal circumstances, three parameters must be present for an area to be considered a wetland; hydrophytic vegetation, wetland hydrology, and hydric soils. The Project area was traversed evaluating vegetation, soils, and hydrology at sampling plots to determine the presence of wetland indicators for each parameter (hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and hydrology) according to methodologies outlined in the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0) (USACE 2010). The boundaries of those areas determined to meet the three criteria were demarcated with pin flags by POWER and surveyed using a Trimble GeoXH global positioning system (GPS) unit with sub-meter accuracy. 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 CFR 328.3(e) and a defined bed and bank. Generally, if these characteristics were observed in a water body and a significant nexus was observed, it was determined to be a regulated waterway (i.e. water of the U.S.). If these characteristics POWER ENGINEERS, INC. HLY 199-074(BOI PER 02 01) MORRISON-MAIERLE (7/12/2016) EN PAGE 4 were absent, a significant nexus to a water of the U.S. was not identified, or atypical circumstances existed, these areas were determined to be a swale, ditch, or other erosional feature, and likely not a CWA-regulated feature (i.e., not a water of the U.S.). Swales or erosional features (e.g., gullies, small washes characterized by low volume, infrequent, or short duration flow) and ditches excavated wholly in and draining only uplands that do not carry a relatively permanent flow of water are generally non-jurisdictional features and not considered waters of the U.S. (EPA 2008). The field survey included the delineation of features considered to have, in POWER’s professional opinion, a significant nexus. Any waterways (OHWM and/or defined bed and bank) observed within the survey areas were classified based on the observed flow and channel characteristics at the time of field review. These features were also surveyed by POWER with a GPS unit. The specific methods for characterizing and evaluating vegetation, hydrology, and soils for determining the presence of jurisdictional areas are identified below. 2.2.1 Soils At the center of each data plot, the wetland scientist completed borings with a hand-held auger to depths necessary to accurately determine a soil’s hydric status (typically 18 to 24 inches below ground surface). 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 Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987), along with Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States (NRCS 2010), and the Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Regional Supplement. 2.2.2 Vegetation Species abundance in both upland and wetland communities were visually estimated. Dominant trees and shrubs/saplings were recorded within a 30-foot and 15-foot radius, respectively, from the center of each documentation plot. Woody vines were recorded within a 30-foot radius of the plot. Dominant herbaceous vegetation was recorded within a 5-foot radius of the plot. The indicator status of each species was identified using the National Wetland Plant List for the Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Lichvar et al. 2016). The presence of hydrophytic vegetation within a representative plant community was positively identified if more than 50 percent of the dominant species within the community had an indicator status of Obligate Wetland (OBL), Facultative Wetland (FACW), or Facultative (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). POWER ENGINEERS, INC. HLY 199-074(BOI PER 02 01) MORRISON-MAIERLE (7/12/2016) EN PAGE 5 2.2.3 Hydrology Site hydrology was evaluated during field surveys 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. In the field, 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). POWER ENGINEERS, INC. HLY 199-074(BOI PER 02 01) MORRISON-MAIERLE (7/12/2016) EN 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), soils map (Figures 3), and NWI/NHD map (Figure 4) were all reviewed as part of the desktop analysis. Additionally, FEMA data were evaluated to identify potential wetlands and waterways due to the presence of mapped 100-year floodplains. 3.1.1 Topographic Map According to the USGS topographic map (Figure 1), the project area is a relatively flat, undeveloped area located immediately south of Tschache Lane. No features are depicted on the USGS map within or immediately adjacent to the Project area that indicate wetlands or waterways are present. 3.1.2 Aerial Map The aerial map (Figure 2) depicts the majority of the Project area as flat, undeveloped land currently in agricultural (hay) production. A stream/ditch (Walton’s Stream/Ditch) and its associated riparian area are located along the eastern boundary of the Project area. Constructed stormwater ditches are located along the northern, southern, and eastern property boundaries that drain into a stormwater settling area in the northeast corner of the property. As previously stated, the Project area is located immediately south of Tschache Lane with undeveloped parcels to the north and east, the Bridger Peaks Town Center commercial shopping mall to the west and southwest, a Lowe’s Home Improvement Store to the north/northwest, and a residential complex to the south. Patrick Street and North 15th Avenue are located along the eastern Project area boundary. Review of the aerial photograph indicated that wetlands and waterways could potentially be associated with Walton’s Stream/Ditch and the on-site constructed stormwater system. 3.1.3 Soils Soil map units and their associated hydric rating are identified for the Project area in Table 1 (Figure 3). 542A – Blossberg loam is identified as hydric by NRCS associated with stream terraces and terraces. The other two on-site soil map units (50B and 509B) are not identified by NRCS as hydric. However, the 509B (Enbar) soil map unit contains 10 percent of a hydric soil (Nythar) component. The 50B soil map unit is classified as well drained, the 509B soil map unit is classified as somewhat poorly drained, and the 542A soil map unit is classified as poorly drained. POWER ENGINEERS, INC. HLY 199-074(BOI PER 02 01) MORRISON-MAIERLE (7/12/2016) EN PAGE 7 TABLE 1 MAPPED SOIL UNITS SOIL MAP UNIT NAME SOIL MAP UNIT CODE DRAINAGE CLASS HYDRIC RATING ACREAGE IN SURVEY AREA Blackdog Silt Loam 50B Well Drained Non-hydric 11.6 Enbar Loam 509B Somewhat Poorly Drained Non-hydric (10 percent of map unit classified as hydric) 0.2 Blossberg Loam 542A Poorly Drained Hydric 0.1 3.1.4 Wetlands According to the NWI data, one palustrine, emergent, persistent, seasonally flooded (PEM1C) wetland was identified within the Project area (Figure 4). The NWI data indicate that this wetland corresponds to Walton’s Stream/Ditch that extends along the eastern boundary of the Project area. During the on-site investigation completed by POWER on June 29, 2016, it was determined that the PEM1C wetland corresponds to the wetland/riparian area associated with Walton’s Stream/Ditch. No other NWI wetland features are depicted within the Project area boundary. Palustrine wetlands are identified as all non-tidal wetlands dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergents, emergent mosses, or lichens, and all such tidal wetlands where ocean-derived salinities are below 0.5 percent. This category also includes wetlands lacking such vegetation but with all of the following characteristics: (1) area less than 20 acres (8.0 hectares); (2) lacking an active wave-formed or bedrock boundary; (3) water depth in the deepest part of the basin less than 6.6 feet (2.0 meters) at low water; and (4) ocean-derived salinities less than 0.5 percent (Cowardin et al. 1979). 3.1.5 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, no water features (streams, wetlands, or open water areas) are identified within the Project area. As previously stated, a perennial drainage, Walton’s Stream/Ditch and an associated riparian wetland corridor are located along the eastern boundary of the Project area (Figure 2). Freshwater ponds are also located northeast of the Project area. Stormwater drainage ditches and a settling basin are also located within the Project area, which are not depicted on the NWI/NHD map (Figure 4). 3.1.6 Floodplains FEMA data were evaluated to identify potential wetlands and waterways due to the presence of mapped 100-year floodplains. No FEMA-designated floodplain areas were identified within or immediately adjacent to the Project area. 3.2 Field Investigation A Professional Wetland Scientist with POWER completed an on-site field investigation on June 29, 2016 to identify wetlands/waterways associated with the proposed Project. The results of the investigation are discussed below. POWER ENGINEERS, INC. HLY 199-074(BOI PER 02 01) MORRISON-MAIERLE (7/12/2016) EN PAGE 8 Photographs and associated field observations of the vegetation, hydrology, and soils of the delineated wetland/waterway features identified within the Project area are included as Appendix A. The extent of the wetland/waterway boundaries that were identified in the field are depicted on Figure 5. Completed USACE wetland determination data forms, for both upland and wetland areas, are provided in Appendix B. 3.2.1 Results Table 2 provides a summary of the wetland/waterway characteristics for the features that were delineated within the Project area. Figure 5 depicts the location of the delineated features within the Project area and location of associated sample points utilized to make the wetland/upland boundary determination. Appendix A contains representative photographs. Details regarding observed wetland criteria are provided on USACE wetland determination forms in Appendix B. Additionally, Table 3 provides a summary of the dominant vegetative species, hydric soil indicators, and hydrology indicators observed. Two palustrine, emergent/scrub-shrub wetlands (W-1 and W-2) totaling 0.70 acre and a portion of Walton’s Stream/Ditch (Stream 1; S-1) totaling 0.02 acre/539 linear feet were delineated within the Project area. Wetland W-1 Wetland W-1 was delineated as a riverine wetland (the riparian area associated with Walton’s Stream/Ditch) along the eastern boundary of the Project area totaling 0.26 acre (Figure 5). The wetland hydrology indicators for W-1 included saturation in the upper 12 inches of the soil profile (observed at the soil surface), geomorphic position, drainage patterns and a positive FAC-neutral test. Flow was observed in Walton’s Stream/Ditch during the on-site investigation completed on June 29, 2016. The dominant vegetation observed within the wetland included reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW) and climbing nightshade (Solanum dulcamara, FAC) with other vegetation observed including Northwest Territory sedge (Carex utriculata, OBL), red-tinge bulrush (Scirpus microcarpus, OBL), and Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense, FAC). The hydrophytic vegetation indicators included a positive dominance test and prevalence index within the range indicating the presence of hydrophytic vegetation. The hydric soil indicator is depleted below dark surface based on observations of a 10YR 2/1 soil layer from 0-6 inches below the soil surface underlain by a 10YR 4/1 soil layer, 6 to 24 inches, with five percent redoximorphic concentrations (10Y/R 5/6) in the soil matrix. The wetland/upland boundary primarily follows a change in topography and vegetation from wetland- to upland-dominated species. The observed upland vegetation was dominated by smooth brome (Bromus inermis, FACU) and Canada thistle with other upland vegetation including fowl bluegrass (Poa palustris, FAC). W-1 was preliminarily determined to be jurisdictional based on an observed hydrologic connection to the East Gallatin River to the north of the Project area. Wetland W-2 Wetland W-2 was delineated as a depressional wetland with associated drainage ditches located along the northeastern boundary of the Project area totaling 0.44 acre (Figure 5). W-2 is a constructed stormwater system receiving hydrology (stormwater runoff) from the adjacent commercial developments located to the west and southwest of the Project area. Stormwater enters the Project area via culvert and is conveyed via the ditches located along the northern and southern Project area boundaries into a settling basin in the northeastern corner of the Project area. The observed wetland hydrology indicators for W-2 included saturation in the upper 12 inches of the soil profile (observed at the soil surface) and a positive FAC-neutral test. The dominant vegetation observed within the wetland included broad-leaf cattail (Typha latifolia, OBL) with other vegetation observed including NorthWest Territory sedge, red-tinge bulrush, American wild mint (Mentha arvensis, FACW), fringed willowherb (Epilobium ciliatum, FACW), and Canada thistle. The hydrophytic vegetation POWER ENGINEERS, INC. HLY 199-074(BOI PER 02 01) MORRISON-MAIERLE (7/12/2016) EN PAGE 9 indicators included the prevalence index within the range indicating the presence of hydrophytic vegetation. The hydric soil indicator is depleted below dark surface based on observations of a 10YR 2/1 soil layer from 0-6 inches below the soil surface underlain by a 10YR 4/1 soil layer, 6 to 24 inches, with five percent redoximorphic concentrations (10Y/R 5/6) in the soil matrix. The wetland/upland boundary primarily follows a change in topography and vegetation from wetland- to upland-dominated species. The observed upland vegetation was dominated by smooth brome and Canada thistle with other upland vegetation including tall tumble mustard (Sisymbrium altissimum, FACU), houndstongue (Cynoglossum officinale, FACU), and reed canary grass. Due to W-2 being located adjacent to W-1 (approximately 100 feet), W-2 was preliminarily determined to be jurisdictional. Stream S-1 The OHWM of Stream S-1 was delineated as a portion of Walton’s Stream/Ditch located along the eastern boundary of the Project area totaling 539 linear feet and 0.02 acre within the Project area. Water flow was observed during the June 29, 2016 on-site investigation with an average wetted width of approximately 2.5 feet. The substrate of the drainage consisted primarily of silt/fine sediment (approximately 80 percent) with some gravel and cobble (approximately 20 percent). S-1 was preliminarily determined to be jurisdictional based on an observed hydrologic connection to the East Gallatin River to the north of the Project area. TABLE 2 SUMMARY DATA FOR WETLANDS/WATERWAYS WETLAND/ WATERWAY ID WETLAND OR WATERWAY TYPE1 WETLAND TYPE (HGM)2 JURISDICTIONAL STATUS3 SIZE (ACRES) LINEAR FEET LOCATION (LAT/LONG) Wetland 1 (W-1) PEM/PSS Riverine Jurisdictional 0.26 N/A 45o41'45.9730", 111o03'24.9236" Wetland 2 (W-2) PEM/PSS Depressional/ Riverine Jurisdictional 0.44 N/A 45o41'47.1895", 111o03'26.0307" Stream 1 (S-1) PEM Riverine Jurisdictional 0.02 539 45o41'45.69", 111o03'24.82" TOTAL 0.72 539 Note: PEM = Palustrine, Emergent; PSS = Palustrine, Scrub-Shrub 1 Cowardin et al. 1979 2 Brinson 1993 3 The determination of each wetland’s jurisdictional or connected status represents POWER’s professional opinion; the final determination of jurisdictional status is under the purview of the USACE. TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF OBSERVED WETLAND CRITERIA DOMINANT VEGETATION HYDROLOGY INDICATORS HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS Phalaris arundinacea Saturation Depleted below dark surface Typha latifolia Geomorphic position Solanum dulcamara FAC-Neutral test Drainage patterns POWER ENGINEERS, INC. HLY 199-074(BOI PER 02 01) MORRISON-MAIERLE (7/12/2016) EN PAGE 10 4.0 SUMMARY A routine wetland survey was completed on the approximately 11.85-acre Project area located in Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. A total of two wetlands (0.70 acre) and one stream (539 linear feet; 0.02 acre) were identified and delineated within the Project survey area. A preliminary determination that the delineated wetlands/stream identified in this report are jurisdictional was based on an observed hydrologic connection/significant nexus to a waters of the U.S (East Gallatin River). The preliminary wetland boundaries identified within the Project area, and their assessments, are based on POWER’s professional opinion. Any impacts to jurisdictional waters within the Project area may require authorization under Sections 404 and 401 of the CWA. Current regulations require authorization of any impacts to these features from the USACE and the Montana Department of Environmental Quality. POWER ENGINEERS, INC. HLY 199-074(BOI PER 02 01) MORRISON-MAIERLE (7/12/2016) EN PAGE 11 5.0 LITERATURE CITED 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. 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). 2016. FEMA Flood Map Service Center. Available online at: https://msc.fema.gov/portal. Accessed June 22, 2016. Federal Register. 2015. Definition of “Waters of the United States” Under the Clean Water Act Proposed Rule; Notice of Availability. https://federalregister.gov/a/2014-25138. Accessed June 22, 2016. Lichvar R.W., D.L. Banks, W.N. Kirchner, and N.C. Melvin. 2016. The National Wetland Plant List: 2016 Wetland Ratings. Phytoneuron 2016-30: 1-17. Published 28 April 2016. ISSN 2153 733X. Munsell. 2000. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Macbeth Division of Kollmorgan Instruments. New Windsor, NY. National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP). 2013. Orthographic Aerial Photography, Bozeman, Montana. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2006. Digital General Soil Map of the U.S. Available online at: http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/70046648. Accessed June 22, 2016. _____. 2010. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States. A Guide for Identifying and Delineating Hydric Soils, Version 7.0, 2010. _____. 2016. Web Soil Survey. Available at http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm. Accessed January 29, 2016. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region, Version 2.0. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. Vicksburg, MS. _____. 2016. National Wetland Plant List, version 3.3. Available online at: http://wetland_plants.usace.army.mil/. Accessed June 22, 2016. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2014. Definition of ‘‘Waters of the United States’’ Under the Clean Water POWER ENGINEERS, INC. HLY 199-074(BOI PER 02 01) MORRISON-MAIERLE (7/12/2016) EN PAGE 12 Act. Federal Register 79(76): 22188-22274. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014-04- 21/pdf/2014-07142.pdf. Accessed March 18, 2015. United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2008. Clean Water Act Jurisdiction Following the U.S. Supreme Court's Decision in Rapanos v. United States & Carabell v. United States. http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/guidance/wetlands/upload/2008_12_3_wetlands_CWA_Jurisdic tion_Following_Rapanos120208.pdf. Accessed June 22, 2015. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2016. National Wetland Inventory (NWI) Mapper. Available online at: http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/Mapper.html. Accessed June 22, 2016. United States Geologic Survey (USGS). 1998. 7.5-minute Topographic Quadrangle Map. Bozeman, Montana. _____. 2016. National Hydrography Dataset Mapper. Available online at http://nhd.usgs.gov/. Accessed June 22, 2016. BRIDGER PEAKS VILLAGE - LOT 5 SECTION 1, T2S, R5E, BOZEMAN, GALLATIN COUNTY, MONTANA USGS 1:24,000 TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE MAPS: BOZEMAN (1998) PROJECT AREA ( IN FEET ) 0 3000 TOPOGRAPHIC / VICINITY MAP BRIDGER PEAKS VILLAGE - LOT 5 . FIG. 1 BOZEMAN MONTANA PROJECT NO. FIGURE NUMBER F:\CIVIL 3D PROJECTS\Civil 3D Projects\16020\ACAD\EXHIBITS\FIG 1 - VIC MAP.dwg Plotted on Jun/30/2016 06/2016Date: HUFFINE LN OAK STDAVIS LNN 19TH AVEI-90 DURSTON RD BAXTER LN N 7TH AVEI- 9 0 2880 Technology Blvd WestBozeman, MT 59718 Phone: 406.587.0721Fax: 406.922.6702 COPYRIGHT ©MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC.,2016engineers surveyors planners scientists TSCHACHE LNN 19TH AVEBAXTER LN DURSTON RD POWER ENGINEERS, INC. HLY 199-074(BOI PER 02 01) MORRISON-MAIERLE (7/12/2016) EN PAGE 18 APPENDIX A WETLAND/WATERWAY PHOTOGRAPHS Photo 3. View S of Stream S-1 (Walton’s Stream/Ditch). Photo 5. View SW of SP-4, upland data point. Photo 1. View N of SP-1, wetland data point (W-1). Photo 2. View NW of SP-2, upland data point. Photo 4. View SW of SP-3, wetland data point (W-2). Photo 6. View N of W-2/constructed stormwater ditch. upland data point. Photo 9. View SW of W-2, constructed stormwater drain. Photo 7. View E of W-2/constructed stormwater ditch. Photo 8. View NE of SP-5, upland data point. Photo 10. View S of S-1/Walton’s Stream/Ditch. POWER ENGINEERS, INC. HLY 199-074(BOI PER 02 01) MORRISON-MAIERLE (7/12/2016) EN PAGE 19 APPENDIX B USACE WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEETS Project/Site: Applicant/Owner: State: Investigator(s):and Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Subregion (LRR):Lat:Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.) ,Soil ,or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes No Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No Hydric Soil Present?Yes No Is the Sampled Area Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No within a Wetland?Yes No Remarks: Dominance Test worksheet: (Plot size:30 ft.)Number of Dominant Species 1.That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) 2. 3.Total Number of Dominant 4.Species Across All Strata: (B) = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15 ft.)Percent of Dominant Species 1.That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) 2. 3.Prevalence Index Worksheet: 4. 5.OBL species x 1 = = Total Cover FACW species x 2 = Herb Stratum (Plot size:5 ft.)FAC species x 3 = 1.FACU species x 4 = 2.UPL species x 5 = 3.Column Totals:(A)(B) 4.Prevalence Index = B/A = 5. 6.Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 7.1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 8.X 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 9.X 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 10.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting 11. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) = Total Cover 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30 ft.)Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1.1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must 2.be present, unless disturbed or problematic. = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0 30 60 20 0 0 110 120 60 VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Total % Cover of: 0 1.91 0 210 Multiply by: 30 2 FAC 10 XNo No No No X OBL WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region County: Slope (%):Concave E. Nyquist Brider Peaks Village - Lot 5 Sec. 1, T. 2S, R. 5E Gallatin Sampling Date:June 29, 2016 Sampling Point:SP-1MMIMT PEM1C50B Blackdog Silt Loam NWI classification: Section, Township, Range: Local relief (concave, convex, none):Drainage 1 LRR E 45.69610 Long:111.05692 NAD83 None Observed None Observed NoAre Vegetation No SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. X X X 2 100% Tree Stratum Absolute Dominant Indicator % cover Species?Status Scirpus microcarpus 20 No OBL Cirsium arvense 15 No 60 Yes FACW No 0 Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?X Phalaris arundinacea Carex utriculata Solanum dulcamara 105 5 Yes FAC 5 This point was determined to be within a wetland due to the presence of all 3 wetland criteria. 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). Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth (inches)%% 2/1 100 — 4/1 95 5/6 5 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soils 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) X Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8)wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present?Yes No Remarks: 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) X Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)X Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)X Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)X FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No(includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0 X HYDROLOGY Type1 Loc2 C SP-1 10YR Sandy Clay Loam Color (moist) Matrix None10YR 6-24 Color (moist) —0-6 SOIL Sampling Point: Remarks — Sandy Clay Loam10YR Texture M >20 X 0 Redox Features 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). A positive indication of hydric soil was observed. X X N/A X Project/Site: Applicant/Owner: State: Investigator(s):and Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Subregion (LRR):Lat:Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.) ,Soil ,or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes No Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No Hydric Soil Present?Yes No Is the Sampled Area Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No within a Wetland?Yes No Remarks: Dominance Test worksheet: (Plot size:30 ft.)Number of Dominant Species 1.That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) 2. 3.Total Number of Dominant 4.Species Across All Strata: (B) = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15 ft.)Percent of Dominant Species 1.That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) 2. 3.Prevalence Index Worksheet: 4. 5.OBL species x 1 = = Total Cover FACW species x 2 = Herb Stratum (Plot size:5 ft.)FAC species x 3 = 1.FACU species x 4 = 2.UPL species x 5 = 3.Column Totals:(A)(B) 4.Prevalence Index = B/A = 5. 6.Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 7.1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 8.X 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 9.X 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 10.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting 11. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) = Total Cover 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30 ft.)Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1.1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must 2.be present, unless disturbed or problematic. = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Yes No Remarks: 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). Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?0 X 100 None Observed Poa palustris 10 No FAC 100 300 3.00 100 300 Bromus inermis 50 Yes FAC 0 0 Cirsium arvense 40 Yes FAC 0 0 Multiply by: 0 0 0 0 Total % Cover of: None Observed 100% 2 None Observed 2 This point was determined not to be within a wetland due to the lack of hydric soils and wetland hydrology. VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum % cover Species?Status SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. X X X X Are Vegetation No No No X No No No LRR E 45.69607 Long:111.05700 NAD83 50B Blackdog Silt Loam NWI classification:N/A E. Nyquist Section, Township, Range:Sec. 1, T. 2S, R. 5E Terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none):Convex Slope (%):2 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Brider Peaks Village - Lot 5 County:Gallatin Sampling Date:June 29, 2016 MMI MT Sampling Point:SP-2 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth (inches)%% 4/2 100 — 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soils 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) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8)wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present?Yes No Remarks: 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) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No(includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0 X >20 X No positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed. No positive indication of hydric soils was observed. HYDROLOGY X N/A X >20 X Color (moist)Color (moist)Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-24 10YR None ——Sandy Clay Loam SOIL Sampling Point:SP-2 Matrix Redox Features Project/Site: Applicant/Owner: State: Investigator(s):and Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Subregion (LRR):Lat:Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.) ,Soil ,or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes No Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No Hydric Soil Present?Yes No Is the Sampled Area Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No within a Wetland?Yes No Remarks: Dominance Test worksheet: (Plot size:30 ft.)Number of Dominant Species 1.That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) 2. 3.Total Number of Dominant 4.Species Across All Strata: (B) = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15 ft.)Percent of Dominant Species 1.That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) 2. 3.Prevalence Index Worksheet: 4. 5.OBL species x 1 = = Total Cover FACW species x 2 = Herb Stratum (Plot size:5 ft.)FAC species x 3 = 1.FACU species x 4 = 2.UPL species x 5 = 3.Column Totals:(A)(B) 4.Prevalence Index = B/A = 5. 6.Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 7.1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 8.X 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 9.X 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 10.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting 11. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) = Total Cover 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30 ft.)Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1.1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must 2.be present, unless disturbed or problematic. = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Yes No Remarks: 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). Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?0 X 100 None Observed Epilobium ciliatum 5 No FACW Mentha arvensis 5 No FACW Carex utriculata 10 No OBL 100 130 Scirpus microcarpus 10 No OBL 1.30 10 30 Typha latifolia 60 Yes OBL 0 0 Cirsium arvense 10 No FAC 0 0 Multiply by: 80 80 10 20 Total % Cover of: None Observed 100% 1 None Observed 1 This point was determined to be within a wetland due to the presence of all 3 wetland criteria. VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum % cover Species?Status No No No SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. X X X X 50B Blackdog Silt Loam NWI classification:N/A Are Vegetation No No No X Depression Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave Slope (%):1 LRR E 45.69644 Long:111.05723 NAD83 MMI MT Sampling Point:SP-3 E. Nyquist Section, Township, Range:Sec. 1, T. 2S, R. 5E WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Brider Peaks Village - Lot 5 County:Gallatin Sampling Date:June 29, 2016 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth (inches)%% 2/1 100 4/2 95 5/6 5 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soils 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) X Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8)wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present?Yes No Remarks: 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) X Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)X FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No(includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0 X 0 X A positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed (at least one primary indicator). A positive indication of hydric soil was observed. HYDROLOGY X N/A X >20 X 6-24 10YR 10YR C M Sandy Clay Loam Color (moist)Color (moist)Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-6 10YR Sandy Clay Loam SOIL Sampling Point:SP-3 Matrix Redox Features Project/Site: Applicant/Owner: State: Investigator(s):and Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Subregion (LRR):Lat:Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.) ,Soil ,or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes No Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No Hydric Soil Present?Yes No Is the Sampled Area Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No within a Wetland?Yes No Remarks: Dominance Test worksheet: (Plot size:30 ft.)Number of Dominant Species 1.That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) 2. 3.Total Number of Dominant 4.Species Across All Strata: (B) = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15 ft.)Percent of Dominant Species 1.That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) 2. 3.Prevalence Index Worksheet: 4. 5.OBL species x 1 = = Total Cover FACW species x 2 = Herb Stratum (Plot size:5 ft.)FAC species x 3 = 1.FACU species x 4 = 2.UPL species x 5 = 3.Column Totals:(A)(B) 4.Prevalence Index = B/A = 5. 6.Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 7.1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 8.X 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 9.3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 10.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting 11. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) = Total Cover 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30 ft.)Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1.1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must 2.be present, unless disturbed or problematic. = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Yes No Remarks: 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). Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?5 X 95 None Observed Cynoglossum officinale 15 No FACU Phalaris arundinacea 10 No FACW 95 305 Sisymbrium altissimum 15 No FACU 3.21 55 165 Bromus inermis 30 Yes FAC 30 120 Cirsium arvense 25 Yes FAC 0 0 Multiply by: 0 0 10 20 Total % Cover of: None Observed 100% 2 None Observed 2 This point was determined not to be within a wetland due to the lack of hydric soils and wetland hydrology. VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum % cover Species?Status No No No SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. X X X X 50B Blackdog Silt Loam NWI classification:N/A Are Vegetation No No No X Slope Local relief (concave, convex, none):Convex Slope (%):2 LRR E 45.69649 Long:111.05718 NAD83 MMI MT Sampling Point:SP-4 E. Nyquist Section, Township, Range:Sec. 1, T. 2S, R. 5E WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Brider Peaks Village - Lot 5 County:Gallatin Sampling Date:June 29, 2016 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth (inches)%% 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soils 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) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8)wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present?Yes No Remarks: 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) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No(includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0 X >20 X No positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed. No positive indication of hydric soils was observed. HYDROLOGY X N/A X >20 X Color (moist)Color (moist)Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks SOIL Sampling Point:SP-4 Matrix Redox Features Project/Site: Applicant/Owner: State: Investigator(s):and Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Subregion (LRR):Lat:Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.) ,Soil ,or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes No Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No Hydric Soil Present?Yes No Is the Sampled Area Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No within a Wetland?Yes No Remarks: Dominance Test worksheet: (Plot size:30 ft.)Number of Dominant Species 1.That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) 2. 3.Total Number of Dominant 4.Species Across All Strata: (B) = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15 ft.)Percent of Dominant Species 1.That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) 2. 3.Prevalence Index Worksheet: 4. 5.OBL species x 1 = = Total Cover FACW species x 2 = Herb Stratum (Plot size:5 ft.)FAC species x 3 = 1.FACU species x 4 = 2.UPL species x 5 = 3.Column Totals:(A)(B) 4.Prevalence Index = B/A = 5. 6.Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 7.1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 8.2 - Dominance Test is >50% 9.3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 10.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting 11. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) = Total Cover 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30 ft.)Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1.1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must 2.be present, unless disturbed or problematic. = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0 X No positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (≥50% of dominant species indexed as FACU or drier). Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?5 95 None Observed Phalaris arundinacea 5 No FACW Poa palustris 10 No FAC 95 310 Cirsium arvense 5 No FAC 3.26 15 45 Melilotus officinalis 60 Yes FACU 60 240 Carex nebrascensis 15 No OBL 0 0 Multiply by: 15 15 5 10 Total % Cover of: None Observed 0 1 None Observed 0 This point was determined not to be within a wetland due to the lack of all three wetland criteria. VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum % cover Species?Status No No No SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. X X X X 50B Blackdog Silt Loam NWI classification:N/A Are Vegetation No No No X Depression Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave Slope (%):1.5 LRR E 45.69638 Long:111.05742 NAD83 MMI MT Sampling Point:SP-5 E. Nyquist Section, Township, Range:Sec. 1, T. 2S, R. 5E WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Brider Peaks Village - Lot 5 County:Gallatin Sampling Date:June 29, 2016 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth (inches)%% 4/2 100 — 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soils 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) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8)wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present?Yes No Remarks: 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) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No(includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0 X >20 X No positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed. No positive indication of hydric soils was observed. HYDROLOGY X N/A X >20 X Color (moist)Color (moist)Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-24 10YR None ——Sandy Clay Loam SOIL Sampling Point:SP-5 Matrix Redox Features Project/Site: Applicant/Owner: State: Investigator(s):and Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Subregion (LRR):Lat:Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.) ,Soil ,or Hydrology significantly disturbed?Are "Normal Circumstances" present?Yes No Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No Hydric Soil Present?Yes No Is the Sampled Area Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No within a Wetland?Yes No Remarks: Dominance Test worksheet: (Plot size:30 ft.)Number of Dominant Species 1.That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) 2. 3.Total Number of Dominant 4.Species Across All Strata: (B) = Total Cover Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:15 ft.)Percent of Dominant Species 1.That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) 2. 3.Prevalence Index Worksheet: 4. 5.OBL species x 1 = = Total Cover FACW species x 2 = Herb Stratum (Plot size:5 ft.)FAC species x 3 = 1.FACU species x 4 = 2.UPL species x 5 = 3.Column Totals:(A)(B) 4.Prevalence Index = B/A = 5. 6.Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 7.1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 8.2 - Dominance Test is >50% 9.3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 10.4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting 11. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) = Total Cover 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1 Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:30 ft.)Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 1.1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must 2.be present, unless disturbed or problematic. = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Yes No Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0 X No positive indication of hydrophytic vegetation was observed (≥50% of dominant species indexed as FACU or drier). Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?5 95 None Observed Cirsium arvense 5 No FAC Phalaris arundinacea 5 No FACW Carex nebrascensis 10 No OBL 100 340 Poa palustris 5 No FAC 3.40 10 30 Melilotus officinalis 55 Yes FACU 70 280 Lactuca serriola 15 No FACU 0 0 Multiply by: 10 10 5 10 20 Total % Cover of: Salix exigua 5 Yes FACW 50% 2 None Observed 1 This point was determined not to be within a wetland due to the lack of all three wetland criteria. VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum % cover Species?Status No No No SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. X X X X 50B Blackdog Silt Loam NWI classification:N/A Are Vegetation No No No X Depression Local relief (concave, convex, none):Concave Slope (%):1.5 LRR E 45.69621 Long:111.05721 NAD83 MMI MT Sampling Point:SP-6 E. Nyquist Section, Township, Range:Sec. 1, T. 2S, R. 5E WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Brider Peaks Village - Lot 5 County:Gallatin Sampling Date:June 29, 2016 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth (inches)%% 4/2 100 — 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soils 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) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8)wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present?Yes No Remarks: 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) Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)X FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present?Yes No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No(includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0 X >20 X No positive indication of wetland hydrology was observed. No positive indication of hydric soils was observed. HYDROLOGY X N/A X >20 X Color (moist)Color (moist)Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 0-24 10YR None ——Sandy Clay Loam SOIL Sampling Point:SP-6 Matrix Redox Features