ML14177A280
| ML14177A280 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Humboldt Bay |
| Issue date: | 07/31/2013 |
| From: | Stillwater Sciences |
| To: | NRC/FSME, Pacific Gas & Electric Co |
| References | |
| Download: ML14177A280 (47) | |
Text
FINAL REPORT o JULY 2013 Preliminary Wetland Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Project, Humboldt County, California
ýýItEEWW L
PREPARED FOR Pacific Gas & Electric Company 245 Market Street San Francisco, CA 94105 PREPARED BY Stillwater Sciences 850 G Street, Suite K Arcata, CA 95519 Stillwater Sciences
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wet/and Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remed/ation Project Suggested citation:
Stillwater Sciences. 2013. Preliminary Wetland Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Project, Final Report. Prepared by Stillwater Sciences, Arcata, California for Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Francisco., California.
Cover photos (clockwise from upper left): West of discharge canal; seasonal wetland east of discharge canal; intake canal; discharge canal.
July 2013 Stillwater Sciences i
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wedand Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Project Table of Contents 1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION..............................................................................................
1 1.1 Project Scope and Purpose...........................................................................................
1 1.2 Project Location and Survey Area...........................................................................
1 1.3 Purpose of the Wetland Delineation........................................................................
4 2
METHODS..............................................................................................................................
5 2.1 Existing Conditions................................................................................................
5 2.2 Field D elineation...................................................................................................
.. 5 2.2.1 W aters......................................................................................................
5 2.2.2 W etlands..........................................................................................................
.. 6 3
RESULTS................................................................................................................................
8 3.1 Existing Conditions................................................................................................
8 3.1.1 V egetation.......................................................................................................
.. 8 3.1.2 H ydro logy........................................................................................................
.. 8 3.1.3 S o il un its..........................................................................................................
.. 8 3.2 Precip itation..........................................................................................................
.. 12 3.3 Preliminary Waters and Wetlands........................................................................
12 3.3.1 Waters of the U.S...........................................................................................
12 3.3.2 Palustrine persistent emergent wetlands...........................................................
15 3.3.3 CCC jurisdictional wetlands...........................................................................
16 4
SUMMARY
AND CONCLUSIONS...............................................................................
18 5
REFERENCES......................................................................................................................
19 Tables Table 1.
Preliminary USACE jurisdictional waters and wetlands and CCC jurisdictional wetlands in the project area....................................................................................
12 Figures Figure 1. HBPP location and canal rernediation project area.......................................................
2 Figure 2.
Project features at the HBPP property (Source: CH2M Hill 2012)...............................
3 Figure 3.
National Wetlands Inventory Map of the project area (Source: USFWS 2013)......... 10 Figure 4.
Mapped soil units in the project area.......................................................................
II Figure 5.
Waters and wetlands in the discharge canal portion of the project area.................. 13 Figure 6.
Waters and wetlands in the intake canal portion of the project area.......................
14 Figure 7.
Typical high tide line indicators in the discharge canal including wrack debris line and algal growth on rip-rap...........................................................................................
15 Figure 8.
Typical vegetation in the area surrounding the intake canal above the high tide line. 16 Figure 9.
Upland vegetation in the area northeast of the discharge canal................................
17 Appendices Appendix A. Wetland Delineation Datasheets Appendix B. Photographs of Wetland Delineation Sample Points July 2013 Stillwater Sciences
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wetland Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Project 1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1.1 Project Scope and Purpose Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) is in the process of decommissioning the 143-acre (ac) (58-hectare [ha] Humboldt Bay Power Plant (HBPP) property in King Salmon, CA. As a part of the decommissioning, PG&E is proposing to conduct a canal remediation project that consists of removing contaminated sediment from the HBPP intake and discharge canals, temporarily using the dredged discharge canal for storage of clean soils generated by other HBPP decommissioning activities, and preparing the canals for final site restoration after remediation (Figures 1-2). PG&E has determined that sediments in the HBPP intake and discharge canals are contaminated with low levels of radioniIclides, and the discharge canal additionally contaminated with chemicals from past operations. Clean soils temporarily stored within the discharge canal will be removed from the site at the conclusion of the decommissioning project or may be used to restore the HBPP site following decommissioning.
Project activities that have the potential to affect waters and wetlands include remediation dredging, removing rip-rap around the canals, removing the intake and outfall structures, installing water control structures, equipment access and staging areas, re-sloping the canals following dredging, and relocating the water discharge pipe from the groundwater treatment system east of the discharge canal.
The Project proponent and property owner, PG&E, may be contacted at:
Ernie Ralston, Principal Land Planmer PG&E 245 Market Street San Francisco, CA 94105 (415) 973-3215 (office)
EER2@pge.com 1.2 Project Location and Survey Area The project area is a 5-ac (2-ha) portion of the HBPP property located at 1000 King Salmon Avenue in King Salmon, CA (Figure 1). The project area includes the intake and discharge canals and areas of potential ground disturbance around the canals and associated structures (e.g., intake structure, outfall structure, and sheet pile wall in Humboldt Bay to isolate the outfall structure)
(Figure 2). The project area is located in Section 8 of Township 4 North, Range I West, of the Fields Landing, California U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle (Figure 1). The project area as defined for this wetland delineation report encompasses the entire intake canal, although physical work will only be conducted in a portion of the canal as shown in Figure 2.
July 2013 Stillwater Sciences
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wetland Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Project Figure 1. HBPP location and canal remediation project area.
July 2013 Stillwater Sciences 2
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wetland Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Project Figure 2. Project features at the HBPP property (Source: CH2M HilM 2012).
July 2013 Stillwater Sciences 3
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wetland Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Proiect The project area can be accessed via the King Salmon Avenue exit off of U.S. Highway 101, heading west on King Salmon Avenue and right into the HBPP Bravo Road entrance. Access is by permission of PG&E HBPP security only. The HBPP property is located in unincorporated Humboldt County approximately 3 miles (4.8 kin) south of the city of Eureka. It is bordered to the north by Humboldt Bay, to the south and east by diked former salt marsh, and to the west by the residential and commercial community of King Salmon. The elevation of the project area ranges from approximately 0 to 20 ft (0 to 6 m) above mean sea level.
This delineation was conducted in portions of the project area previously identified as wetlands or potential wetlands during surveys conducted from 2006 to 2009 for the Humboldt Bay Repowering Project (construction of the Humboldt Bay Generating Station) and the HBPP Decommissioning Project (CH2M Hill 2006, Mad River Biologists et al. 2009, and Mad River Biologists 2010), as well as additional areas not included in these previous surveys that may be impacted by the canal remediation project.
1.3 Purpose of the Wetland Delineation The purpose of this preliminary wetland delineation is to: (1) assess the wetland resources in the project area; (2) delineate any waters of the U.S., including wetlands, that are subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act; and (3) delineate any waters of the State that may be subject to the jurisdiction of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), and/or the California Coastal Commission (CCC).
This waters and wetland delineation is considered preliminary until verified by the San Francisco Regulatory Branch of the USACE.
July 2013 Stillwater Sciences 4
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wetland Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Project 2
METHODS 2.1 Existing Conditions Prior to the delineation of jurisdictional waters and wetlands, information onl existing soils, hydrology, and precipitation for the project area was evaluated. Information on potentially jurisdictional waters and wetlands was obtained from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) online application, Wetlands Mapper (USFWS 2013). The most recent soil survey covering the PG&E HBPP property, which was completed in 1965, was reviewed, as were previous wetland delineation reports (CH2M Hill 2006, Mad River Biologists et al. 2009, and Mad River Biologists 2010). Precipitation records from California Department of Water Resources (CDWR 2013) were reviewed for a nearby weather station in Eureka, California.
2.2 Field Delineation A delineation of potential jurisdictional waters and wetlands within the project area was conducted in accordance with the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (USACE 1987) and Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0) (WMVC Supplement) (USACE 2010). The delineation was conducted on 2-3 July 2013 by a botanist and an ecologist with training in wetland delineation.
2.2.1 Waters Definitions of USACE jurisdictional "waters of the U.S." that are pertinent to the Project include:
" all waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide; and
" wetlands adjacent to waters (other than waters that are themselves wetlands) identified above.
In tidal waters, USACEjurisdictional waters of the U.S. (not including adjacent wetlands) extend to the high tide line'. During the field delineation, the high tide line was identified by a nearly continuous deposit of fine debris on the shore, the landward edge of mud flats, algae growth on rip-rapped shorelines, and vegetation lines that delineate the general height reached by a rising tide. Because the majority of the project area was inaccessible clue to steep slopes surrounding deep water canals with unconsolidated bottom substrate, the high tide line was recorded using several point measurements taken with a Trimble GeoXH 6000-series Geographic Positioning System (GPS) unit and a Trimble TruePulse 360 laser range finder.
The GPS data were then post-processed and corrected. The GPS data were incorporated into a Geographic Information System (GIS), and the results of the high tide line field mapping were extrapolated to inaccessible portions of the project area using interpretation of aerial photographs and topography.
'In addition to Section 404 of the CWA. the USACE also has jurisdiction over tidal and freshwater systems under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. An important difference is that Section 10 jurisdiction does not extend to adjacent wetlands that are outside the high tide line in tidal waters.
July 2013 Stillwater Sciences 5
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wetland Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Project 2.2.2 Wetlands As noted above, the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (USACE 1987) and Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. WMVC Supplement (USACE 2010) were used to delineate wetlands. The 1987 Manual and WMVC Supplement provided technical guidelines and methods for the three-parameter approach to determining the location and boundaries of USACE jurisdictional wetlands. This approach requires that an area must support positive indicators of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology to be a considered a jurisdictional wetland. Waters of the State can include all the waters and wetlands under the jurisdiction of the USACE, and wetlands under the jurisdiction of the CCC can include areas with only one or two of the three wetland parameters (vegetation, soils, and hydrology) that are within the Coastal Zone.
A total of 7 sampling points were established in potential wetland areas in the project area. If a sample point met all three wetland parameters, it was labeled as a USACE wetland; if the point only met one or two wetland parameters, it was labeled as a CCC wetland; if a sample point met no wetland parameters, it was labeled upland. Potential wetland areas were identified based on information generated from the pre-field review (e.g., the NWI Wetland Mapper results),
wetlands delineations conducted previously in the area (CH2M Hill 2006, Mad River Biologists et al. 2009, and Mad River Biologists 2010), and observations of hydrology and vegetation in the field. If a sampling point met all three parameters for a wetland, a paired sampling point was placed along the preliminary transition zone (the area in which a change from wetland to non-wetland conditions occurs) to determine the wetland/upland boundary. If the sampling point did not meet all three parameters, the point was considered upland and a paired point was not collected. At each sampling point, a soil core was taken and the following information was recorded using USACE (2010) data forms:
- 1. Vegetation: Dominant plant species for each stratum (i.e., tree, sapling/shrub, herb, woody vine) by scientific name (genus and species) following the taxonomy of The Jepson Manual, Second Edition (Baldwin et al. 2012). Absolute percent cover and dominance were determined using the 50/20 rule outlined in the WMVC Supplement, as well as the wetland indicator status (OBL [obligate], FACW [facultative-wet], FAC [facultative],
FACU [facultative-upland], and UPL [upland]) using the 2012 National Wetland Plant List for the State of Cali/brnia (USACE 2012). Plant species not listed in the 2012 National Wetland Plant List were considered upland (UPL) species. A dominance test was performed to determine if the sample point exhibited hydrophytic vegetation.
- 2. Hydrology: Presence and depth of surface water, groundwater, and/or soil saturation were recorded. In addition, primary indicators (e.g., oxidized rhizopheres along living roots, surface soil cracks, inundation visible on aerial imagery, biotic crust), and secondary indicators (e.g., drainage patterns, dry-season water table, saturation visible on aerial imagery, FAC-neutral test) were also recorded at each sampling point.
- 3. Soils: Moistened soil matrix descriptions were recorded for each sampling point using the following: depth of the sample, color (as defined in Munsell soil color charts [Munsell Color 2000]), and texture. If present, redox features were described by type (e.g.,
concentration, depletion, reduced matrix) and location (e.g., pore lining, root channel, or matrix). Hydric soils were determined using the WMVC Supplement primary indicators, which include sandy redox (S5), loamy mucky mineral (F1), depleted matrix (F3), redox dark surface (F6), and depleted dark surface (F7).
Photographs were taken and the location of each sampling point was recorded with the GPS unit.
Sampling points were marked on aerial photographs and the boundaries of the wetlands were July 2013 St/llwater Sc/ences 6
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wetland Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Project either walked and recorded with the GPS unit or drawn on aerial photographs. As with the high tide line data, the sample point spatial data were post-processed and corrected. The GPS data were incorporated into a GIS, and the drawn wetland boundaries were digitized. Mapped wetlands were later classified according to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats ofthe United States (Cowardin et al. 1979), based on the vegetation composition and structure at the sample points.
July 2013 Stillwater Sciences 7
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wetland Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Project 3
RESULTS 3.1 Existing Conditions 3.1.1 Vegetation The vegetation in the project area consists of managed grassland communities, seasonal wetlands and drainages, coyote brush (Baccharis pilhdaris) scrub, and northern coastal salt marsh on the fringes of the intake canal (Mad River Biologists et al. 2009). Open water portions of the project area also include rip-rap and mudflats that are below the high tide line. Eelgrass (Zostera marina) is sparsely distributed in both the intake and discharge canals in areas of 0-10 ft (0-3 m) below sea level (Stillwater Sciences 2013). At the wetland sample points, vegetation is dominated by common spike rush (Eleocharis palustris), tufted hairgrass (Deschampsia cespitosa), and common rush (Juncus effusus). The vegetated upland portions of the project area are dominated by sweet vernal grass (Anthoxanthun odoratum), brome fescue (Vulpia bromoides), hairy catsear (Hypochaeris radicata), and common horsetail rush (Equisetum arvense) in the herbaceous layer, and by Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) and California blackberry (Rubus ursinus) in the shrub layer.
3.1.2 Hydrology The intake and discharge canals are both hydrologically connected to Humboldt Bay, which is regularly used for recreation and interstate and foreign commerce. The intake canal is conmected to the bay via the Fisherman's Channel and the discharge canal through four 36-inch (91-centimeters) unscreened culverts. No freshwater water bodies or tributary streams occur in the project area.
The NWI Wetlands Miapper categorizes the intake canal as Estuarine and Marine Deepwater wetlands and the discharge canal as a Freshwater Pond (Figure 3). Though the discharge canal is behind a coastal levee, the canal is connected to Humboldt Bay through the aforementioned culverts and the canal is tidally influenced.
3.1.3 Soil units Soil in the project area is mapped as residential/business/industrial, which has no official soil survey description (McLaughlin and Harradine 1965) (Figure 4). Soil sample plots within this area are considered a hydric soil if positive primary indicators are identified, such as retaining a sulfidic odor, presence of an aquic moisture regime, reducing conditions, or gleyed or low-chroma. The majority of the sample points contained fill and/or rock in the upper six inches.
HBPP site protocols prevented excavation below the depth of six inches, so the depth of the fill layer is unknown. However, in all but one sample location (sample point 3; Appendix A), fill and/or rock prevented digging to a depth of six inches (15 centimeters). Sample points without fill contained clay-loam soil which is consistent with soil found in the adjacent Bayside series mapped soil unit. Bayside series is a very deep, poorly drained soil that is characterized by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey Division (2005):
The Bayside series consists of very deep, poorly drained soils that formed in alluvium derived from mixed sources. Bayside soils are in depressional areas of flood plains with slopes 0 to 3 percent. Elevations are 0 to 50 feet. The climate is humid, characterized by warm wet winters and warm moist summers with fog. A strong marine influence limits the diurnal and annual range of temperature. Characteristically, Bayside soils consist of a silty clay loam that is a very dark grayish brown with hard, firm sticky and plastic textured A July 2013 Stillwater Sciences 8
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wet/and Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Project horizons that are moderately acidic overlying similar colored C horizons which are strongly acidic with common iron accumulation masses. The Bayside series is distributed in flood plains of southwestern Oregon and northwestern California coast and mainly used for improved pasture. Native vegetation is Douglas fir, Sitka spruce, redwood, red alder, willow, sedges, rushes, bulrushes and bentgrass.
Bayside series is listed as a hydric soil on the NRCS National Hydric Soils List (NRCS 2012).
July 2013 Stillwater Sciences 9
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wetland Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediat/on Project al A !National Wetlands -inventory_
I HBPP Canal Remediation Project J.. 28,2013 Wetandas E.*1sw, Mu.
Ee...n ~
Er 4MmmDOM
-0 I User Remarks:
Figure 3. National Wetlands Inventory Map of the project area (Source: USFWS 2013).
July 2013 Stillwater Sciences I0
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wetland Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Project o3 Pwo9..Yw-,
so i
- my"d tv
.- A~~t~ct corn" Figure 4. Mapped soil units in the project area.
July 2013 Stillwater Sciences II
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wetland Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Project 3.2 Precipitation Rainfall during and just prior to thle field delineation was low for the region (NOAA 2013 Eureka Climate information). Rainfall from January to May of 2013 was less than half that of the preceding two years (CDWR 2013). Weather conditions during the delineation were mostly sunny and warm (-68°F [20'C]). Soils did not appear atypically moist or saturated during the delineation.
3.3 Preliminary Waters and Wetlands The project area contains both USACE jurisdictional waters and wetlands as well as areas considered wetlands under the jurisdiction of the CCC. These waters and wetlands are summarized in Table 1, described below, and mapped in Figures 5-6. It should be noted that the canal remediation project will not impact all waters and wetlands delineated within the project area. The waters and wetlands described below have the potential to be impacted by the project.
Table 1. Waters and wetlands in the project area.
Description Area ac J ha Waters of the U.S.
2.89 1.17 Palustrine persistent emergent 0.14 0.06 wetlands CCC jurisdictional 0.25 0.10 3.3.1 Waters of the U.S.
There are 2.89 ac (1.17 ha) of waters of the U.S. within the project area (Table I). These waters include the intake canal (1.86 ac [0.75 ha]) and the discharge canal (0.78 ac [0.32 ha]), both of which are connected to Humboldt Bay, as well as a portion of Humboldt Bay that is in the project area (0.25 ac [0. 10 ha]). All of the waters of the U.S. in the project area are considered portions of Humboldt Bay, which is used for interstate and foreign commerce. Indicators of the high tide line of these waters include algae growth on rip-rapped shorelines, a nearly continuous deposit of fine debris on the shore, and vegetation lines (Figure 7). The portions of these waters that are continuously submerged are classified by Cowardin et al. (1979) as estuarine subtidal habitat. The portions that are exposed and flooded by tides, but are beneath the high tide line, are classified by Cowardin et al. (1979) as intertidal emergent wetlands. These waters are also waters of the State.
July 2013 Stil/water Sciences 12
FINAL REPORT P/eRWoPna'y Wetland Del-ooon (c-Me PG&E HumbNolt &9y P-a 9-nt Cana/ Raeceiafron Prvjec Figure S. Waters and wetlands in the discharge canal portion of the project area.
July 2013 Stll/water Sieoces 13
FINAL REPORT LPrelRFRry WeanAPOD~LRmbR
/c, Me PG&E HrnbltSa b
Plant CaaORR dto EEOR R~t 7
--ww-I-a~
Figure 6. Waters and wetlands in the intake canat portion of the project area.
Jly 2013 Stillwater Scinces 14
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wetland Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Project Figure 7. Typical high tide Line indicators in the discharge canal including wrack debris line and algal growth on rip-rap.
3.3.2 Palustrine persistent emergent wetlands Palustrine persistent emergent wetlands are characterized by erect, rooted, herbaceous hydrophytes excluding mosses and lichens, present for most of the growing season in most years (Cowardin et al. 1979). Sample points 3 and 6 are examples of typical palustrine persistent emergent wetlands observed in the project area (Figure 5). Dominant emergent vegetation at these sampled locations consisted of common spike rush (OBL), tufted hairgrass (FACW), and common rush (FACW). The soil profiles (0-6 in [0-15 cm] in depth) included a clay loam soil with a matrix color of low value and chroma (IOYR3/2 and 10YR 4/3) and a moderate percentage (10-25 percent) of redox concentrations occurring as pore linings (Appendix A). Dry hydrologic conditions were expected at this location since the survey was conducted in early summer, July 2013, of an atypically dry year. Observations at this location during an earlier survey in early April 2013 documented surface water (approximately I in [2.5 cm]) at W2 and surface water of an unknown depth at WI. River otters were seen using the area in and around W2 during the April 2013 site visit. In contrast, upland sample points 4 and 7were dominated by sweet vernal grass (FACU) and common velvetgrass (Holcus lanatus; FAC) and had soils consisting mainly of fill and rock with little to no redox concentrations (Appendix A).
July 2013 Stillwater Sciences 15
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wetland Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Project 3.3.3 CCC jurisdictional wetlands Wetlands potentially subject to the jurisdiction of the CCC that are outside of USACE jurisdictional wetlands were dominated by hydrophytic vegetation, but did not display positive indicators for hydric soils or wetland hydrology. Dominant vegetation at these locations consisted of tufted hairgrass (FACW), bird's foot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus, FAQ), and common rush (FACW). In contrast, adjacent upland areas were typically dominated by hairy catsear (FACU),
sweet vernal grass (FACU), and brome fescue (FACU). The area between the intake canal and the adjacent roads (Figure 6) was considered upland because of the dominance of hairy catsear (FACU) and coyote brush (FACU) (Figure 8). Though the area northeast of the discharge channel (Figure 5) was shown to contain CCC jurisdictional wetlands based on previous surveys (Mad River Biologists 2010), no depressions or areas where water may pond were noted in this area and current vegetation was dominated by sweet vernal grass (FACU), Himalayan blackberry (FACU), and hairy catsear (FACU). Therefore, this area was considered upland (Figure 9) and not a CCC jurisdictional wetland.
Figure 8. Typical vegetation in the area surrounding the intake canal above the high tide Line.
July 2013 Stillwater Sciences 16
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wetland Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Project Figure 9. Upland vegetation in the area northeast of the discharge canal.
July 2013 Stillwater Sciences 17
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wet/and Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Project 4
SUMMARY
AND CONCLUSIONS This delineation of potential jurisdictional waters and wetlands was conducted in accordance with the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (USACE 1987) and WMVC Supplement (USACE 2010) and utilized information from previous wetland delineations and biological surveys conducted within the project area (CH2M Hill 2006, Mad River Biologists et al. 2009, Mad River Biologists 2010, and Stillwater Sciences 2013). The delineation met the objective of identifying and delineating all potential USACE waters and wetlands and CCC jurisdictional wetlands within the project area and contains sufficient information to assess potential wetlands impacts on the project. Assessment of potential wetland impacts and development of mitigation will be completed during the permitting process for the Canal Remediation Project.
July 2013 Stillwater Sciences 18
FINAL REPORT Preliminaly Wetland Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Project 5
REFERENCES Baldwin, B. G., D. H. Goldman, D. J. Keil, R. Patterson, and T. J. Rosatti. editors. 2012. The Jepson manual, vascular plants of California. Second edition. University of California Press, Berkeley, California.
CDWR (California Department of Water Resources). 2013. Current and historical precipitation data for single station: Eureka, California. California Data Exchange Center, CDWR, Sacramento, California. http://cdec.water.ca.gov/
CH2M Hill. 2006. Application for certification: Humboldt Bay Repowering Project. Volume I.
Prepared for Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Francisco., California.
Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS-79/31. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington., D.C.
Mad River Biologists. 2010. Addendum to biological resources evaluation and delineation of wetlands and waters of the U.S. for Humboldt Bay Power Plant Phase 2 Decommissioning Preparatory Projects. Prepared by Mad River Biologists, Eureka, California for Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Humboldt Bay Power Plant, Eureka, California.
Mad River Biologists, V. Dains, and CH2M Hill. 2009. Biological resources evaluation and delineation of wetlands and waters of the U.S. for Humboldt Bay Power Plant Phase 2 Decommissioning Preparatory Project North Access Road and LFO Tank #1 Project. Prepared for Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Francisco, California.
McLaughlin, J. and F. Harradine. 1965. Soils of western Humboldt County California.
Department of Soils and Plant Nutrition, University of California, Davis in cooperation with County of Humboldt, California. November 1965.
Munsell Color. 2000. Munsell soil color charts, revised washable edition. Munsell Color, Grand Rapids, Michigan.
NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). 2013. Eureka climate information.
Website. http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/climate/yeardisp.php?wfo=eka&stn=KEKA&submit=Yearly+
Charts [Accessed 8 July 2013]. Prepared by NOAA, National Weather Service, Eureka, California.
NRCS Soil Survey Division. 2005. Official series description - Bayside Series. Natural Resource Conservation Service. http://ortho.ftw.nrcs.usda.gov/osd/dat/B/BAYSIDE.html NRCS. 2012. National list of hydric soils. Website. http://soils.usda.gov/use/hydric/ [Accessed 8 July 2013].
Stillwater Sciences. 2013. Intake and Discharge Canal Remediation Project habitat assessment.
Prepared by Stillwater Sciences, Arcata, California for Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Francisco, California.
July 2013 Stillwater Sciences 19
FINAL REPORT Prel/minaty Wet/and Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Proiect USACE (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual.
Technical Report Y-87-1. USACE, Environmental Laboratory, Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
USACE (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 2010. Regional supplement to the Corps of Engineers wetland delineation manual: western mountains, valleys, and coast region (Version 2.0). Prepared by USACE, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
USACE. 2012. Updated 2012 national wetland plant list, State of California. USACE Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory (CRREL). http://rsgisias.crrel.usace.army.mil/NWPL CRREL//docs/lists//State/CA.pdf USFWS (United States Fish and Wildlife Service). 2013. National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) wetlands and riparian polygon data. Geospatial wetlands data. Website.
http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/ [Accessed 8 July 2013]. USFWS, Arlington, Virginia.
July 2013 Stillwater Sciences 20
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wetland Delineat/on for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Proiect Appendices
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wetland Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Project Appendix A Wetland Delineation Datasheets
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region City/County: _YI
- Amal Sampling Date: I ý2_.i 20sa r'IuutwoneI~.
r I %,' II Applicant/Owner.
?C1,State:
CA Sampling Point Investigator(s):
E.C L
Section, Township, Range:
$9
-r 'IqN z I Wv Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):
tct
ý C
Local relief (concave, convex, none):
-ý",
Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR):
Lat:
Long:
Datum: *AA+/-*2 9 Soil Map Unit Name:
IT f i0uA%
NW classification:
- JA Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes Y
No _
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation NO..
Soil _____, or Hydrology WC.
significantly disturbed?
Are "Normal Circumstances* present? Yes No __
Are Vegetation _
Soil __
, or Hydrology _
naturally problematic?
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY
OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, Important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes_
Noo ___
Hydric Soil Present?
Yes__
No _
Is the Sampled Area Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes__
No ___
within a Wetland?
Yes _
No Remarks:~ W ~ *
- 742.--'/4 VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
% Cover Spec"?
Status Number of Dominant Species
- 1.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
I (A)
- 2.
Total Number of Dominant 31 Species Across All Strata:
k3 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
= Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Vo (A/B)
SaolinalShrub Stratum (Plot size:
2...JPeaec ne okhe Prevalence Index worlsheft:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
- 3.
OBL species x1
_=
4 FACW species x 2 W
- 5.
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species 100 x 4=
Herb Stratum (Plot size: _JL w UPL species x 5 =
De6.O V'
,n Ceu.VA 0'
40~ Y1ý Column Totals:
)140.... (A) 4qC' (8)
- 2.
LJ5 S3 VDPrevalence Index = B/A=
- 3.
t(Arir f I t 1'AJL Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
- 4.
4 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
- 5. A~ V'Y
'ni c*a*_'1AVW1 J
I FAC, 0 2-Dominance Test is >50%
S. \\\\P
~
A.,-)
to k4 FA 3 - Prevalence Index is:53.0'
- 7.
k' 1
1,r 5
S 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
- 8. Pts 3
(
.It) data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
- 9. ______
5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants'
- 10. __
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
- 11.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
____=Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
- 1.
Hydrophytic
- 2.
Vegetation
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
-"Total Cover Present?
YesN Remarks: w.)
1 US4 ArPCrso nier etmMutin.Vles n os eso
- 'to US Army Corps of Enaineers Western Mountains. Valleys. and Coast - Version 2.0
I P/
Sampling Point:
W__l______
SOIL Profile
Description:
(Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features finches)
Color (moist)
Color (moist) j TweI Loc2 Texture R
Q'2 it 1.Srff-311 Igo~L
=111017%*
~fl I.41.s.'. ~
Uafri.
~r4
,s. V'.s.4,4 ~.n,4 t~.l.,.
21 ~rs.s. Dl =0,..,. I.i.s,. UUMn,,
- ~M.
~MS~WI*SoUI,
~--WW..,..,
S. S ~
- Wb~~
S*I*~ U.----Sf5Sf55
'.WtSSSS.
Sf5S J.Ms Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydrlc Soils3:
U Histosol (Al)
E Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Q Stripped Matrix (S6)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3)
E] Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
V Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
El Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al1)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
El Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and U
Sandy Mucky Mineral ($1)
El Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, El Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
El Redox Depressions (FS) unless disturbed or problematic Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
.2*'Hydric Soil Present?
Yes No Remarks:
HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired: check all that aoolv)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more reauired)
U3 Surface Water (Al)
] Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except U
Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
] High Water Table (A2)
MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 48)
] Saturation (A3)
] Salt Crust (B11)
U Drainage Pattems (B10)
[
Water Marks (Bl)
J Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
U Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
U Sediment Deposits (B2)
[
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
[
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Z3 Drift Deposits (B3)
[
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) U3 Geomorphic Position (D2)
[
Algal Mat or Crust (64)
] Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
E3 Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5)
L3 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
C3 FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
[
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
E3 Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl) (LRR A)
U Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
[
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
U Other (Explain in Remarks)
[]
Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
[
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Yes _
No "L Depth (inches):
Water Table Present?
Yes _
No J Depth (inches):
Saturation Present?
Yes No4.
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No (includes capilary frince)
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
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Projectlsite:
cow '
City/County:
SrngDate:
-7 1, Applicant/Owner:
ski I
tate: CA Sampling Point: J
)
Investigator(s):
ff Uc Section, Township, Range:
Sys: TLA N V-I, Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): ___________Local relief (concave, convex, none):
1.
.1' Slope (%).
Subregion (LRR):
L__
_Let:
cit Long:
Datum:
AQJ2 2>
Soil Map Unit Name:
\\J117 NWI classification:
ý Are climatic I hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes.
No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation j_...., Soil *'.
, or Hydrology A.,
significantly disturbed? T s Are 'Normal Circumstances* present? Yes X
No__
Are Vegetation *.
Soil
, or Hydrology X
naturally problematic?
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY
OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes_
No Hydric Soil Present?
Yes__
No I.
is the Sampled Area Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes No within a Wetland?
Yes_____
No Remarks:
0"t*l- 01 o0 Q5u A
¶,S*
Wf4:L#
V.(Q
" S-VEGETATION - Use sclentifi names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet Tree Stratum (Plot size:
_ _-e Spcis Status Number of Dominant Species 1
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
2 (A)
- 2.
Total Number of Dominant
- 3.
Species Across All Strata:
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species Saolin=/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW. or FAC:
(A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
- 1.
Total % Cover of:
Multiopv by:
1 OBL species x 1 =
- 4.
FACW species
- 15 x 2 =
70
- 5.
FAC species 2+.
x3=
12-)
FACU species
- 5.0 x 4=
l Q
Q= Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size:
U VY1
)
PL species x5 =
- 1.
AiiA jy, i
O Column Totals:.I o 9 (A) 310 (B) 2.-
!o AWS VA Yei C~v4? P-aD S
k, Prevalence Index = BJA=
2.,___q5
- 3.
4A.
Wtfd(
a Hdrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
- 4.
p,,,
I
- AtwIA4, No. 5 A
I 1-Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
- 5.
1It**A~
2-Dominance Test is >50%
- 6.
W t'.J0 F1 3-Prevalence Index iss-3.0'
- 7.
(,k C
R W>,
97 V
LC E 4-Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
- 8.
2x' w
(
N data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
- 9.
[F 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants'
- 10.
[__ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 11I __ndicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must STotal Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:.
- 1. _
Hydrophytic
- 2.
Vegetation
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
(
Total Cover Present?
Yea No_
Remarks:
(
\\,~
(,
P
.',¶(
I M' A-fl---
-6
%AA..#-
W.R.-
-4 r-0
%1-1..
-) F1
,I /
CAL Sampling Point: W 10 SOIL Profile
Description:
(Describe to the depth needed to document the Indic-tor or confirm the absence of Indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features finches)
Color (moist)
Color (moist)
Type Loc Texture Remarks W*.I 2
0oU i-0 (r. 5IA ____l-
- , 42 A M
t1¶ 1O 21_6_0 _
Hyrl SoiuW In dicatorJyyiuw,..
nhm-,
ewe o ahewis l.)
Inuicators r ProbeLb 1ydrc w--If i
Ilydric Soil Indicators- (Applicable to all LRfs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
B Histosol (Al)
Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Stripped Matrix (86)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3)
E Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
El Very Shallow Dark Surface (TFl2)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
El Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
El Thick Dark Surface (A12) 0 Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and E-Sandy Mucky Mineral (S$)
[3 Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, El Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
El Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic Resltritive Layer (If present):
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present?
Yes No Remarks:
HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired: check all that aoolv)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more reouired)
] Surface Water (Al)
U Water-Stained Leaves (Bg) (except
[
Water-Stained Leaves (89) (MLRA 1, 2,
] High Water Table (A2)
MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 45) 4A, and 48) 13 Saturation (A3) 13 Salt Crust (B11)
U Drainage Patterns (B10)
[
Water Marks (B1)
[
Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
[
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
U Sediment Deposits (82)
U Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
U3 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) 13 Drift Deposits (B3)
[
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) [
Geomorphic Position (D2) 0 Algal Mat or Crust (84)
J Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
El Shallow Aquitard (D3)
[j Iron Deposits (B5)
[
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
E3 FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
[]
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
[
Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl) (LRR A)
E3 Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Q Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
J Other (Explain in Remarks)
I]
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 4 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
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site:
ýA??I City/County:
umwvm1
/
Sampling Date:
2.0.
Applicant/Owner:
W
- State:
A Sampling Point:
3 I I Investigator(s):
UL YC
' V Section, Township, Range.;
ý Lk
'Aj V-1, \\A'ij.
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): ___=_,r56v_
__k_,1 Local relief (concave, convex, none):.or,.q vt Slope (%):
)
Subregion (LRR):
Lat: cz 5
Long: __Datum:
N.AW.
Soil Map Unit Name:
y [1 NWi classification:.
J 4A, Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No _
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology __
significantly disturbed? r t¶ Are 'Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No Are Vegetation Soil.
, or Hydrology.
naturally problematic? T- 0 (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY
OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, Important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes No Hydric Soil Present?
Yes
)*
NoI Is the Sampled Area Welland Hydrology Present?
Yes No within a Wetland?
Yes X*
No Remarks:
-f063
-r VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksbeet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
%)
%Cover Spies?
Status Number of Dominant Species
- 1.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A)
- 2.
Total Number of Dominant
- 3.
Species Across All Strata:
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
= Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:.
- L.L (AmB)
Sanlino/Shrub Stratum (Plot size;:
rvlneIne okhe
- 1.
Prevalence Index worksheet_
- 2.
Total % Cover of, Multiply by:
- 3.
OBLspecies x 1 -__
- 4.
FACW species x 2=
- 5.
FAC species x3 =
.=
Total Cover FACU species x4=
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
I UPL species x5 =
- 1.
2-5, ACi.....__*
Column Totals:
(A)
(S)
- 2.
15 No Prevalence Index =B/A=
3 720 10 0 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
- 4.
(CA v, S
.Afr.
.(E S
D 1-Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5-.
-y
%"ýj-
~
C&QrS
.LkL ~
2 -Dominance Test is >50%
- 5.
S~
112_
3i -Prevalence Index is S3.0'
- 7.
[]
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
- 8.
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
- 9.
r-] 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants'
- 10. __
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
- 11.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
t, Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:.
).,..J
- 1.
Hydrophytic
- 2.
Vegetation
"() =Total Cover Present?
Yes..
No.-
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Toa I
Remarks:
I IS Army rt.nrni nf IFnninswra VVP-ttprn Uniinfainq Vallovs anti rnojqt - VArsinn 2 0
Sampling Point: W I ý0 SOIL SOIL Sampling Point Profile
Description:
(Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features (inchesL Color (moist)
Color (mois)
Yp Texture
- 'V*
- 19w *9 1Tvww jwumn$rotinn flflarilatlnn QM=~a~lauwI UnhiT C.~=(~srn~l t~r ~j~at.t1 ~uni ~rnIn~
21 iwn$inn-P1 Pnr. I in~nn M#.A~tny Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
,Histosol (Al)
Sandy Redox (S5) 2cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
U Black Histic (A3)
E Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1)
El Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) rl Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
H Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Redox Dark Surface (F6) 1Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (Sl)[L Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive, Layer (If present):i Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present?
Yes*
No Remarks:y C
lvi'o oA.
-1 (At~
ckA'r c ic 4, HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reouired: check all that aoolv)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more reauired)
El Surface Water (Al)
[Q Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except E] Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, El High Water Table (A2)
MLRA 1, 2 4A, and 49) 4A, and 49)
L3 Saturation (A3)
[
Salt Crust (Bl1)
[
Drainage Patterns (B10)
[
Water Marks (B1)
[
Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
Q Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
[]
Sediment Deposits (82)
E[ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Ql Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
E3 Drift Deposits (63)
,o Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Q] Geomorphic Position (D2)
C1 Algal Mat or Crust (64)
I Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
[3 Shallow Aquitard (D3)
C1 Iron Deposits (85)
El Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Q] FAC-Neutral Test (05)
L3 Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
E3 Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl) (LRR A)
EQ Raised Ant Mounds (06) (LRR A)
[
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
E3 Other (Explain in Remarks) 13 Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
[]
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Yes NoNo Y Depth (inches):
Water Table Present?
Yes _
No
?r Depth (inches):
Saturation Present?
Yes__
No -)'r Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes Z_
No fincludes capilary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
A
- SWOW, W
0 e)v tM
~V.
%n rJA~
VeA.
vyý US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site:
City/County: KvJA '1an i (flWdiU Sampling Date: III Applicant/Owner C*
I State:
A.A Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
'C,
£1(
- Section, Township, Range:
--I%
T'i J
q-Landform (hilslope, terrace, etc.):
Local relief (concave, convex, none):
- N A-C'rA,1 Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR):
Let:
Cjf*
Long:
Datum: WAV9 q Soil Map Unit Name:
0__
NWI classification V
Are climatic f hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes '2
. No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation 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.)
SUMMARY
OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, Important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes No X*
Hydric Soil Present?
Yes No J Is the Sampled Area Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes
/
No
- wti elnYs N
Remarks:
1*n
-%O7*0 74-01 VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet Tree Stratum (Plot size:
% Cover e
Status Number of Dominant Species
- 1.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A)
- 2.
Total Number of Dominant
- 3.
Species Across Ali Strata:
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species 0 S Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A/B)
Sanlinu/Shrub Stratumrn (Plot size.
-Prevalence Index worksheet
- 2.
Total % Cover of:
Multiolv by:
3 OBL species x I =
- 4.
FACW species x 2 =
- 5.
FAC species x3=
Total Cover FACU species x4
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
I tr UPL species x 5=
- 1. A&Au c kQ N*
to
_*_0 Column Totals:
(A)
(B) 2
,t'=dwW 0oA0!
6 15 If C-S F-C U Prevalence Index = B/A =
- 3.
vC',
ctýV1Mk: )
bi J..2..O To0 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
- 4.
C*0,0*vm (jA0 (A
t%
"A 1
_.20 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
- 5. ____2
- Dominance Test is >50%
- 6.
3 - Prevalence Index is s3.01
- 7.
4 - Morp"ological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
- 8.
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
- 9.
5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants'
- 10. __
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
- 11.
Ilndicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
.2L...= Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
- 1.
Hydrophytic
- 2.
Vegetation
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0
2".= Total Cover IPresent?
Yes -
No Remarks:
US Armv CorDs of Enaineers Wastarn Mauntaine Vallavo and naam - vpntinn 7 n
Sampling Point: V.
(-IF SOIL Profile
Description:
(Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features M
Color (moistl Color (moist)
Tvoa.I 'L LLc.
Texture r%
10Ai
-7" -Y(#-
AIL I LL.
1I'Ft,
_L____
aill nI
- ~ ~
~
~
~
ai DM.UIESaIE WJ=0I.£.f-
"..A UIA.S ta w
m S.FAA c
.4 2tm m6-01~tt n
m1mt~
ima Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
U Histosol (Al)
Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
O Histic Epipedon (A2)
U Stripped Matrix (S6)[]
Red Parent Material (TF2)
S Black Histic (A3)
[
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
[l Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)H Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) 0l Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
IJ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
"lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and El Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
El Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present,
[l Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
El Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (K present):
Typt(ie:
)
1,1 jycv EHydrdc Soil Present?
Yes -
No Remarks:
HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reouired: check all that aDolyl Secondary Indicators (2 or more reouired)
Ql Surface Water (Al)
U Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except U Water-Stained Leaves (139) (MLRA 1, 2, Z3 High Water Table (A2)
MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
El Saturation (A3)
E] Salt Crust (B11)
E3 Drainage Patterns (810)
El Water Marks (81)
C3 Aquatic Invertebrates (813)
Ql Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
E3 Sediment Deposits (B2)
E] Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Ql Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) 13 Drift Deposits (B3)
E] Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) El Geomorphic Position (D2)
El Algal Mat or Crust (E4)l Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
El Shallow Aquitard (D3)
El Iron Deposits (85)
El Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
El FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
U Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
El Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl) (LRR A)
U Raised Ant Mounds (136) (LRR A)
] Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87)
El Other (Explain in Remarks)
[
Frost-I-leave Hummocks (D7)
El Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88)
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
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region ProjectSit.:,
\\
City/County:
t,i&
, v Sampling Date:9 7 Applicant/Owner. __
_tae:_,_
Sampling Point: £4. WpI22.
Investigator(s):
kýQC Section, Township, Range:
S0K' "L' N
I-t I
Landform (hilslaope, terrace. etc.):
- I
- i Local relief (concave, convex, none):
CVAV Slope (%)J Subregion (LRR):
e t L
at: **
Long:
Datum:
DJTv Soil Map Unit Name:
01 NW! classification:
m IA Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes _
No _
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation
- -, Soil 2w., or Hydrology significantly disturbed? T, 11 Are 'Normal Circumstances" present? Yes,.
No_
Are Vegetation
..- TSoil
, or Hydrology __-_naturally problematic?
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY
OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes No_
Hydric Soil Present?
Yes_
No_*N Is the Sampled Area Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes_
No within a Wetland?
Yes_
No Remarks:
VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test workshest Tree Stratum (Plot size:
% Cover Speci? S Number of Dominant Species
- 1.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A)
- 2.
Total Number of Dominant
- 3.
Species Across All Strata:
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species Saulin=/Shrub Stratum (Plot size Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet
- 2.
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
- 3.
OBL species x I =
3.FACW species
______x 2 = _____
- 4.
FACW speies x23 =
- 5.
FAC species x3=
If
Total Cover FACUspecies x4
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
- h. w' UPL species x 5 =
1, PA I1H,>*jp-Yf _
Column Totais:
(A)
(B) 2, J14" r kM+1flft1h j I
ý
)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
- 3.
" e'. arpI. A,
e f*
4')vvkl(c,.
NOD r drophytic Vegetation Indicators:
- 4.
At" U
k *,
fyNi u
__I I -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
- 5.
IW*A v
r 2-Dominance Test is >50%
- 6.
o.iv
(~~C fhIJe WL A2 3 3-Prevalence Index is:53.0'
- 7.
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
- 8.
(___
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
- g.
5' 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants'
- 10.
[]
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
- 11.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
I
= Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
1.~1 Q1______________
Hydrophytic
- 2.
10 VS E C.J VANV vegetation 06
= Total Cover Present?
Yes No
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Remarks:
US Armv Coms of Enaineers Western Mountains. Vallevs. and Coast - Version 2.0
S/
Sampling Point:./.BL.*P SOIL Profile
Description:
(Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches)
Color (moist)
Color (moist)
Type' Lo?-
Texture R
7"~ ~~~~~
00 2
- 31.
~
oA
- Vf11,04" OIi.~Dm,6,,,,a,4 Ih.fn., ~
a,.. r,.~i
~.n,4 t~rninc
~I na~.*vn 01 Onm I in.nn M.Mmii.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric SoilsW:
H Histosol (Al)
Sandy Redox ($5) 0 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2)[]
Stripped Matrix ($6)
El Red Parent Material (TF2)
El Black Histic (A3) r-Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1) 0 Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
H Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
' Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
H Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (SI)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, rl Sandy Gleyed Matrix ($4)
E-Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Retioii Layer (if preen Depth (inches):
- 'Hydric Soil Present?
Yes No Remarks:
HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired: check all that aoolvD)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more reauired)
El Surface Water (Al) ll Water-Stained Leaves (69) (except E3 Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, El High Water Table (A2)
MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
C3 Saturation (A3)
El Salt Crust (B61)
[] Drainage Patterns (B10)
[] Water Marks (B1)
Jl Aquatic Invertebrates (613)
El Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
El Sediment Deposits (B2)
El Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
El Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
El Drift Deposits (63)
El Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) El Geomorphic Position (D2)
[
Algal Mat or Crust (64)
El Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
[] Shallow Aquitard (D3)
E I Iron Deposits (B5)
El Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
El FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
El Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
El Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl) (LRR A)
[]
Raised Ant Mounds (136) (LRR A)
[
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
El Other (Explain in Remarks)
[]
Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
[
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
Fleld Observatlons:
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 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
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Westem Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Shte:
Lkt-v P
City/County:_V'.
x týa~wIA1K~AiM Sampling Date:-91A Qg Applicant/Owner:
V("1
__4_
State: C Sampling Point:
V4 WT22 Investigator(s):
Section, Towship, Range:
S2 TIY Al V-t W Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):
cts I"
t WrSS',M Local relief (concave, convex, none):
cri*virat Slope(%)
0 Subregion (LRR):
IL -t Lat:
Czk AV5 Long:
Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name:
Q
____NWI classification:
AJ
- A-Are climatic I hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes %
No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation
, Soil
, or Hydrology significantly disturbed?
Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes VC No Are Vegetation Soil d
, or Hydrology_
naturally problematic?
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY
OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, Important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes N0 No_
Hydric Soil Present?
Yes O
No Is the Sampled Area Wetiland Hydrology Present?
Yes =
No__
within a Wetland?
Yes.
)
No Remarks VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test workshest Tree Stratum (Plot size:
%Cor Spcies Status Number of Dominant Species
- 1.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A)
- 2.
Total Number of Dominant
- 3.
Species Across All Strata:
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species S /
S Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
L 0
.0 (A/B)
SarM/ShbStratum (Plot size:
Prevalence Index worksheet Total % Cover of:
Multioly by:
- 3.
OBL species x I =
FACW species x2=
FAC species x3= :
FACU species x4= :
... -. = TOtal Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1, l
UPL species x5=
- 1.
S 1
S
'0 S* iL Column Totals: _(A)
(B)
- 2.
J'4LA1i5v*
4 PA 4 W
-J)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
- 3.
15 d'v1W4i b
4 Ž.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
- 4.
vv.-
,hILf N 0 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
- 5.
VISC * *
- p.
- n.f....
- D 2-Dominance Test is >50%
7 UPiý)
- oe0 A r Pde C6-,
0 El 4-Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
- 8.
D=t" 4
4 D
_data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
- 9.
.,kc-44y"*
u_
0"]
5-Wetland Non-Vascular Plants'
- 10.
y,,,
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
- 11.
'lindicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
- 1. _
Hydrophytic
- 2.
Vegetation 0
=TtlCer Present?
Yesl No
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
'Total CoverY Remarks:
I MQ A-,t f-0e M~ P~rn.n~r Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0
ýt /
Sampling Point: WFT 2.2-SOIL SOIL Sampling Point: 2(i~Lik.
Profile
Description:
(Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches)
Color tmoist)
Color (moistl TJype7 L-c Texture Remarks 1Tro-I'nlj.nr~nmtfrn rflinnlifinn RU~l,,=R*I~l**
Maid, riy*=nulrat nr Cnaltall
- lnn, (irlin*
2!,,tinn-Pl =Pnm l ininn RM=Mtrfr Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
H Histosol (Al)
El Sandy Redox (85)
E3 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) r-Stripped Matrix (S6)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
R Black Histlc (A3)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TFl2)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)H Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
[3 Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
H Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (SI)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, El Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
El Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (H present):
Dph(inches):
- "Hydric Soil Present?
Yes
- /
No__
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one rewuired: check all that aoalv)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more reauired)
] Surface Water (Al)
El Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except El Water-Stained Leaves (69) (MLRA 1, 2, J
High Water Tpble (A2)
MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 48) 4A, and 48) j Saturation (A3)
[
Sael Crust (a11)
[
Drainage Patterns (610)
[
Water Marks (61)
[]
Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
El Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
] Sediment Deposits (B2)
El Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
E3 Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
[]
Drift Deposits (B3)
] Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) E3 Geomorphic Position (D2)
[
Algal Mat or Crust (64)
[]
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
E3 Shallow Aquitard (D3)
E3 Iron Deposits (B5)
E3 Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
[]
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
[]
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
El Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl) (LRR A)
[
Raised Ant Mounds (136) (LRR A)
[
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
[]
Other (Explain in Remarks)
[
Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
[
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Yes No No _,
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present?
Yes _
No '
Depth (inches):
Saturation Pre.enlt Yes.
No _
Depth (inches):
L Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes No (Indudes<gpiUary fr)_________________
Describe 1OCOnedr 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
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region ProjecktlSte:
City/County:.
4C-i J~AWJ / H VPuVf Sampling Date: -7t 2of Applicanttowner. ________________________
ate: CAL Sampling Point:
WprA~JZ Investigator(s):
- (*
Section, Township, Range:
$ 5? TL-J 1 \\
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):
t 1,.
Local relief (concave, convex, none):
Slope (%):
Ci Subregion (LRR):
\\,.
Lat:
NV, Long:
Datum: k+/-..Y.,
Soil Map Unit Name:
U (11 NWIclassification:
A/ ýV Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 4
No _
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation
, Soil
, or Hydrology significantly disturbed?No Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes
)d No__
Are Vegetation _
, Soil _
, or Hydrology naturally problematic? IJO (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY
OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, Important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes No.
Hydric Soil Present?
Yes_
_ No **
Is the Sampled Area Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes_
No witin a Wetland?
Yes No_-_3 Remarks:
VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size,
% Cover Sp s? Status Number of Dominant Species
- 1.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC; (A)
- 2.
Total Number of Dominant
- 3.
Species Across All Strata:
(B) 4, Percent of Dominant Species AL = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW. or FAC:
7 (A/B)
Saplino/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
~
Prevalence Index worksheet 1
Total % Cover of:
Multiopv by:
- 3.
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x2=
5, FAC species x3=
5 FACU species x 4-0
=Total cover Herb Stratum (Plotsize:
1ý7
)
UPL species x5=
1,
&JOWL441ylI
ý-CG
- ,()
Column Totals:
(A)
(B)
- 2.
,y Prevalence Index = B/A=
- 3.
A
,IVx I ff JyJ N Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicatom:
- 4.
Vb Lk 1f S
No_
I - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5-
- DACb, Cky...
1z H 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
- 6.
gjsq
(), '.61k Q kA.,
3-Prevalence Index is<53.0'
- 7.
'C4 YI-IV O(W &4VU
- I t4 4__
4-Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
- 8.
u data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
- 9.
"5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants'
- 10. -_
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
- 11.
_Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
JIL.= Total Cover Woedv Vine Stratum (Plot Wie:
'i W,-*
Y 1,-**
f
'iL
- i.
Hydrophytic
- 2.
Vegetation
.=
Total Cover Present?
Yes No
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Remarks-11.0, Arrnv Cams of Enaineers Western Mountains, Vafleys, and Coast - Version 2.0 1
Sampling Point: w ý11 'Tý SOIL SOIL Sampling Paint: v~
~'
Profile Oescription: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches color (moist)
Color (moist)
Twye' LocW Texture Remarks
'Type: CwConcentration, DfDepletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS-Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore ining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
H Histosol (Al)
Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3)
U Loamy Mucky Mineral (Fl) (except MLRA 1)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
U Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
U Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
U Redox Dark Surface (F6)
'lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and Sandy Mucky Mineral (Sl)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, U
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
[]
Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic Reiticie Layer (If present):l Type:
'V tL V
?- 0C( i*".
Depth (inches):
'*"Hydric Soil Present?
Yes No **
Remarks:
y HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one reouired: check all that awclv)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more reauired)
El Surface Water (Al)
U Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except U Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, El High Water Table (A2)
MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 48) 4A, end 4B)
El Saturation (A3)
E] Salt Crust (B 11)
U Drainage Patterns (B10)
El Water Marks (81)
[] Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
E3 Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
El Sediment Deposits (82)
[] Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
C] Saturation Visible on Aerial imagery (C9)
]
Drift Deposits (83)
[]
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) El Geomorphic Position (D2)
[
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
[] Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
El Shallow Aquitard (D3)
E] Iron Deposits (B5)
[] Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
El FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
[]
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
El Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
U Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
[
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
[]
Other (Explain in Remarks)
U Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
[
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Yes No V Depth (inches):
Water Table Present?
Yes__
No 'F 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:
I US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wetland Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Project Appendix B Photographs of Wetland Delineation Sample Points
FINAL REPORT Prelminary Wet/and Delineat/on for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Project Figure B-1. Wetland sample point 1.
July 2013 St/ilwater Sciences B-1
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wet/and Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Project Figure B-2. Wetland sample point 2.
July 2013 Stillwater Sciences B-2
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wetland Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Project Figure B-3. Wetland sample point 3.
July 2013 Stillwater Sciences B-3
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wet/and Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Project Figure B-4. Wetland sample point 4.
July 2013 Stillwater Sciences B-4
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wet/and Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Project Figure B-5. Wetland sample point 5.
July 2013 Stillwater Sciences B-5
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wetland Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remediation Project Figure B-6. Wetland sample point 6.
July 2013 Stillwater Scences B-6
FINAL REPORT Preliminary Wetland Delineation for the PG&E Humboldt Bay Power Plant Canal Remed/ation Project Figure B-7. WetLand sample point 7.
July 2013 Stillwater Sciences B-7