The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20120107 Ver 1_Year 1 Monitoring Report Ph II_2013_20140616FIRST ANNUAL (2013) REPORT FOR THE P AND U LANDS RESTORATION SITE PHASE 2 RICHLAND TOWNSHIP BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA Prepared for: PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Prepared by: CZR Incorporated June 2014 FIRST ANNUAL (2013) REPORT FOR THE P AND U LANDS RESTORATION SITE PHASE 2 RICHLAND TOWNSHIP BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA Prepared for: PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. Prepared by: CZR Incorporated June 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW...................................................................................................1 1.1 History............................................................................................................................1 1.2 Location..........................................................................................................................1 1.3 Goals and Performance Criteria..................................................................................... 2 2.0 REQUIREMENTS...........................................................................................................2 2.1 Normal Rainfall and Growing Season............................................................................ 2 2.2 Hydrology.......................................................................................................................2 2.3 Vegetation......................................................................................................................3 2.4 Photographic Documentation......................................................................................... 3 3.0 2013 RESULTS..............................................................................................................3 3.1 Rainfall...........................................................................................................................3 3.2 Hydrology....................................................................................................................... 3 3.3 Vegetation...................................................................................................................... 3 3.4 Photographic Documentation......................................................................................... 4 4.0 SUMMARY 4 LITERATURECITED.......................................................................................................................5 Cover Photo: Aerial photo looking west over Phase 2 and the northeast section of Phase 1, 15 September 2013. LIST OF TABLES Table 1 P and U Lands Phase 2 performance criteria, methods summary, and current status.......................................................................................................................... T-1 Table 2 Hydroperiods of 49 non -riparian monitoring wells at P and U Lands Phase 2 restoration site in 2013............................................................................................... T-2 Table 3 First annual (fall 2013) survival of trees and shrubs planted in 48 0.3 -acre plots at P and U Lands Phase 2 ................................................... .......................... ..T-9 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Vicinity Map P and U Lands Phase 2 Figure 2a Monitoring Locations P and U Lands Phase 2 Figure 2b Monitoring Locations of Control Wells -Parker Farm and Rodman Figure 3a Soils P and U Lands Phase 2 Figure 3b Soils Control Wells -Parker Farm and Rodman Figure 4a P and U Lands Phase 2 Monitoring Well Locations on As -Built LiDAR Figure 4b Parker Farm and Rodman Monitoring Well Locations on As -Built LiDAR Figure 5 2013 Bay City and WETS -Aurora Rainfall Figure 6a P and U Lands Phase 2 Longest 2013 Hydroperiods and Estimated Hydrologic Zones Figure 6b Parker Farm and Rodman Longest 2013 Hydroperiods and Estimated Hydrologic Zones APPENDICES Appendix A Stem Counts at Individual Plots at P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 2 Appendix B Selected First Annual Restoration Photographs NOTE: Copy of entire report and hydrology data from monitoring wells included on accompanying CD. P and U Lands Restoration Site - Phase 2 iii PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. First Annual Report June 2014 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW 1.1 History. The approximately 3,667 -acre P and U Lands restoration site is part of the PCS Phosphate Company Inc.'s (PCS) compensatory mitigation to offset unavoidable impacts to wetlands and waters authorized under United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Action ID: 200110096 and North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Water Quality Certification (WQC) #2008-0868 version 2.0. As described in the mitigation plan prepared for the pre -construction notification (PCN) to the USACE (CZR 2012), the site was planned to be constructed in three phases as shown on Figure 1. This annual report concerns first annual monitoring of the 796 acres of Phase 2 of the P Lands portion, conducted by CZR Incorporated (CZR) of Wilmington, NC. (The P and U designation have no special meaning other than that was the historic label given to PCS and Weyerhaeuser properties with similar ownership agreements.) The design team consisted of Jonathan T. Ricketts, Inc. of Palm Beach Gardens, FL, the restoration design engineer, PCS, and CZR. Earthwork was performed by Sawyer's Land Developing, Inc. out of Belhaven, NC and supervised by the design team. Phase 1 and 2 restoration activities occurred September 2011 -March 2013. Phase 2 construction was authorized by five NC Division of Land Resources Erosion and Sediment Control permits for land clearing which were subsequently modified for the construction of the interior ditch plugs and perimeter berms and ditches. Planting of Phase 2 occurred March 2013. Further details of construction are included in the As Built Report for P and U Lands Phase 2 (CZR 2014). The P and U Lands site is a key component linking PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.'s (PCS) Parker Farm Mitigation Site, Bay City Farm Mitigation Site, Gum Run Mitigation Site, and the South Creek Corridor into a large and varied collection of restored wetland and preserved natural areas (South Creek Corridor Complex). The headwaters and upper valley of historic Gum Swamp Run, a tributary to South Creek, will also be restored as part of the P and U Lands mitigation site, Phase 3. Unlike most other PCS mitigation sites, the P and U Lands are not prior - converted agricultural fields. Other than the existing roads, all of Phase 2 acreage in which earthwork occurred was in some stage of silvicultural activity, usually various -aged pine stands, and contained regularly spaced ditches (deeper than the agricultural ditches on other restoration sites that were filled in as part of restoration work) and the bedding common to pine plantations. The removal of all standing timber and stumps and post-harvest debris presented particular challenges as the organic soils precluded safe burning of the timber slash on site. 1.2 Location. The P and U Lands site is located east and west of Bay City Road (SR1002), approximately 4.5 miles southeast of Aurora, Richland Township, North Carolina. Bay City Road runs through the P Lands portion of the site, which is bounded on the east by SR1918 (Peele Road is the unpaved extension of SR 1918) and on the south by "County Line Road" (a gated gravel road that functions as the Beaufort/Pamlico County border). The U Lands portion of the site lies west and southwest of Bay City Farm (the western portion of the P Lands site referred to as the "panhandle" separates Bay City Farm from the U Lands site). South Creek and the South Creek Canal form the northern and northwestern boundaries, Bonner/Rodman Road forms the western boundary, and the Pamlico/Beaufort County line forms the southern boundary of the U Lands (County Line Road itself is the southern boundary of only the eastern half of the U Lands as the western limit of County Line Road terminates at the midpoint of the south property line). The entire site is accessed via multiple gated roads along Bay City Road, Peele Road, County Line Road, and/or Jaime/Executive Road. The site is located within the Pamlico Hydrologic Unit 03020104 of the Tar -Pamlico River basin within the South Creek subbasin at latitude 35.233831 and longitude 76.775742. Portions of the site can be found on the USGS Aurora, Bayboro, South Creek, and Vandemere quadrangles (Figures 1 and 2). P and U Lands Restoration Site - Phase 2 1 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. First Annual Report June 2014 1.3 Goals and Performance Criteria. The primary goal of the entire project is to re- establish a self-sustaining functional wetland complex to allow surface flow to move through vegetated wetlands before reaching any stream. Mitigation yields are estimated and performance criteria are described for the project in detail in the Compensatory Mitigation Plan for P and U Lands Restoration Site (CZR 2012). Performance criteria for Phase 2 are summarized in Table 1. Over time the 796 -acre Phase 2 portion of the site is expected to successfully re-establish approximately: 40 wetland acres of headwater forest 562 wetland acres of non-riverine swamp forest, 135 wetland acres of hardwood flat forest, and 6 acres of open water in plugged ditches (interior field and along roads). The remaining 52 acres are comprised of existing roads, perimeter berm and ditch, roadside plugs, and parking lots. Approximately 9,062 linear feet of jurisdictional waters in roadside ditches (along Royal Road and the north side of Small Road) were plugged in order to increase the hydroperiods within the adjacent planted areas. 2.0 REQUIREMENTS 2.1 Normal Rainfall and Growing Season. A continuous electronic rain gauge on the adjacent Bay City Mitigation Site is downloaded once a month and its data are used in conjunction with data from nearby automated weather stations (e.g., NRCS WETS data from NOAA's site at Aurora and rain gauges at other nearby monitoring sites) to determine normal rainfall during the monitoring period. Bay City data were compared to the WETS range of normal precipitation to determine if Bay City rainfall was within the normal range. The range of normal precipitation for this report refers to the 30th and 70th percentile thresholds of the probability of having onsite rainfall amounts less than or higher than those thresholds. The range of normal and the 30 -day rolling total data lines begin on the last day of each month and the 2013 WETS - Aurora monthly precipitation total is plotted on the last day of each month. Under the 2010 regional guidance from the Corps of Engineers for wetland hydroperiods, the normal growing season for Beaufort County is 28 February to 6 December or 282 days (WETS table for Beaufort County first/last freeze date 28 degrees F 50 percent probability) (US Army Corps of Engineers 2010). At the suggestion of the Corps' Washington regulatory field office, data collected between 1 February and 27 February provide important information related to analyses of site hydrology during the early growing season, but are not part of the hydroperiod calculation for success. 2.2 Hydrology. Figure 2 depicts the locations of hydrology monitoring equipment, Figure 3 shows the locations on Beaufort County soil polygons, and Figure 4 shows monitoring locations on the as -built LiDAR. To document surface storage and hydroperiods of all wetland types on the site, 49 semi -continuous electronic LevelTroll water level monitoring wells (manufactured by InSitu) are deployed at a density of approximately 1 well/15 acres across all planted areas of Phase 2, with the exception of one well that was installed near a ditch to be used in conjunction with a nearby well to monitor lateral drainage effects from the open perimeter ditch. Exclosures constructed of barbed wire wrapped around metal fence posts were built around all wells to reduce likelihood of disturbance or equipment loss by black bears. Three wells were installed 13 March 2013 in a recently timbered tract west of Rodman Road in the Ponzer soil series as controls for the P and U Lands wells in the same soil type (Figures 1 and 3b). In late September 2013, an additional five wells were installed in Section I and J of the Parker Farm as controls for wells in the Wasda soil series (Figures 1 and 3b). P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 2 2 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. First Annual Report June 2014 Electronic wells collect data every 1.5 hours, are downloaded once a month, and the data evaluated on an annual basis to document wetland hydroperiods. Wetland hydroperiods are calculated by counting consecutive days with water level no deeper than 12 inches below the soil surface during the growing season under normal or below normal rainfall conditions and then for all rainfall conditions. 2.3 Vegetation. The first annual survey of the 48 0.3 -acre planted tree and shrub monitoring plots occurred July -September 2013. The plots represent a two percent sample of the restoration area (Figure 2). 2.4 Photographic Documentation. Seven permanent photo point locations were established along the perimeter of the restoration area (Figure 2). The first annual photos were taken October 2013. 3.0 2013 RESULTS 3.1 Rainfall. Total rainfall in 2013 at Bay City was 43 inches, almost 6 inches less than last year. The 30 -day rolling total of 2013 Bay City rainfall was considered within WETS normal or below normal range for the entire year (Figure 5). There were a few brief periods of rainfall amounts greater than the 70th percentile but not long enough or high enough to be considered abnormal rainfall. The period of below normal rainfall from the end of March through April did not appear to affect very many wetland hydroperiod lengths, but the period from the end of May through part of June, might have caused water levels at several wells to drop below -12 inches, ending the continuous wetland hydroperiod. The US Drought Monitor (http://droughtmonitor.unl.edu) provides a synthesis of multiple indices and reflects the consensus of federal and academic scientists on regional conditions on a weekly basis (updated each Thursday). For North Carolina's Beaufort County in 2013, during the 41 -week long growing season, the monitor reported 13 weeks with drought status of abnormally dry (DO) for the vicinity of P Lands project area; the remainder of the growing season was normal. Eleven of those weeks included the last week of March through the first week of June and the last two weeks occurred during the first half of October. 3.2 Hydrology. The entire year was considered within WETS normal rainfall. Although short periods occurred either above or below the 30th or 70th percentiles, none were considered abnormal (Figure 5). All wells exhibited wetland hydroperiods (Table 2, Figure 6). Most wells recorded wetland hydroperiods frequently during the year and 11 wells recorded a continuous wetland hydroperiod for the entire growing season (Table 2). The two shortest wetland hydroperiods were 8 and 9 percent and the remainder were greater than 12.5 percent. One of those two is approximately 50 feet away from the toe of a berm surrounding a perimeter canal to monitor potential drainage effects. As evidenced by the cumulative days, many wells had water levels shallower than 12 inches below the surface in addition to the continuous hydroperiods (Table 2). Tables depicting 2013 daily well readings and rainfall are included on a companion CD with this report. Three wells were installed 13 March 2013 in a recently timbered tract west of Rodman Road in the Ponzer soil series as controls for the P and U Lands wells in the same soil. The wells recorded water levels similar to Phase 2 wells (Table 2). In late September 2013, an additional five wells were installed in Section I and J of the Parker Farm as controls for wells in the Wasda soil series (Figure x). Despite the exclosures, three of the wells were frequently destroyed by bears and so did not collect much data. The bear exclosures have been modified and reinforced to hopefully prevent further damage. 3.3 Vegetation. Using only the number of planted stems that were unquestionably alive in the monitoring plots, the most conservative estimate of survival is presented. Many stems P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 2 3 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. First Annual Report June 2014 appeared dead or questionable, but based on prior monitoring experience, a stem needs to appear dead (or not be found) for two sampling events before it can be confidently counted as dead. Appendix A contains the number of stems that were alive in each plot for the fall 2013 survey. Overall survival of trees that were unquestionably alive in the 48 plots from the time of planting to the first annual fall survey was 91 percent, with a corresponding density of 317 trees per acre (Table 3). If trees with uncertain survival status (stem appeared dead but could not be confirmed) are included with trees that were definitely alive, survival increases to 100 percent (because a stem could not be considered dead the first year of surveying) and a density of 350 trees per acre. Excluding unknown species/uncertain survivals (and those with only a few stems), laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia) had the lowest apparent survival (61 percent, Table 3). The 17 remaining known species had survivals of 85 percent and higher, with eight of them at 100 percent. Overall survival of shrubs that were unquestionably alive from the time of planting to the first annual fall survey was 98 percent with a corresponding density of 12 shrubs per acre (Table 3). If shrubs with uncertain survival status (stem appeared dead for the current sampling event but will not be confirmed until next fall) are included with shrubs that were definitely alive (less conservative estimate of survival), survival increases to 100 percent but due to the very few unsure stems that were added, density remains at 12 shrubs per acre. All eight species were surviving very well at the first annual survey (Table 3). Phase 2 is divided into three community types: headwater forest, non-riverine swamp forest, and hardwood flat. Survival of all zones was similar -78, 73, and 70 percent, respectively. After combining the trees, shrubs and unknown species that were definitely alive, density increases to 340 stems per acre and if stems with uncertain survival are added, the density increases to 460 stems per acre. The conservative current tree density is higher than the 260 stems required for success and with many different species of trees surviving well in the first year, there is a diverse assemblage of trees interspersed with a healthy shrub component. In many areas of the site, volunteer woody wetland stems (e.g. red bay [Persea borbonia], sweet bay [Magnolia virginiana]) are prolific and will enhance the diversity and density of the site. The volunteers will be counted in year five. 3.4 Photographic Documentation. A few photos representative of 2013 conditions are included with this report (Appendix B). More are available upon request. 4.0 SUMMARY According to WETS rainfall estimates, even though there were periods of drought and a few large rainfall events, 2013 rainfall was within normal range. All wells exhibited wetland hydroperiods regardless of rainfall conditions. Most wells recorded wetland hydroperiods frequently during the year. Overall survival of trees that were unquestionably alive in the 48 plots from the time of planting to the first annual fall survey was 91 percent, with a corresponding density of 317 trees per acre. Overall survival of shrubs that were unquestionably alive from the time of planting to the first annual fall survey was 98 percent with a corresponding density of 12 shrubs per acre. The current tree density is higher than the 260 stems required for success and with most tree species surviving well in the first year, there is a diverse assemblage of trees interspersed with a healthy shrub component. In many areas of the site, volunteer woody wetland stems (e.g. red bay, sweet bay [Magnolia virginiana], titi [Cyrilla racemiflora]) are prolific and will enhance the diversity and density of the site. P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 2 4 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. First Annual Report June 2014 LITERATURE CITED CZR Incorporated. 2012. Compensatory Mitigation Plan for P and U Lands Restoration Site. CZR Incorporated. 2014. As -Built Report for the P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 2. Kirby, Robert M. 1995. The soil survey of Beaufort County, North Carolina. Natural Resources Conservation Service, USDA. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2002. Regulatory guidance letter (RGL) 02-02. Guidance on Compensatory mitigation projects for aquatic resource impacts under the Corps regulatory program pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2005. Technical Standard for Water -Table Monitoring of Potential Wetland Sites. WRAP Technical Notes Collection (ERDC TN -WRAP -05-2.) U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2008. Regulatory Guidance Letter (RGL) 08-03. Minimum monitoring requirements for compensatory mitigation projects involving the restoration, establishment, and/or enhancement of aquatic resources. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2010. Regional supplement to the Corps of Engineers wetland delineation manual: Atlantic and Gulf coastal plain region. Version 2.0. J.S. Wakeley, R.W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble, eds. ERCD/EL TR -08-30, Vicksburg, MS. P and U Lands Restoration Site - Phase 2 5 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. First Annual Report June 2014 D Z3 C v Z] 0 0 to, v Z3 Q C r v a En ZJ Cn m 0 v 0 Z3 v 0 0 N ZT 0 Cn ZT M M 0 0 c— 3 C -0 0 O _ C A n Table 1. P and U Lands Phase 2 performance criteria, methods summary, and current status (first annual, 2013). Type of mitigation Performance criteria Documentation methods Dimension & controls Current status >6 % hydroperiod on Growing season 28 Feb -6 In 2013, all wells recorded a hydric soils for Semi -continuous monitoring Dec; Aurora NOAA hydroperiod; the two shortest hardwood flats; >10% wells (1/15ac); nearby rain WETS data for normal wetland hydroperiods were for other communities gauge rainfall 8%&9%; the remainder were greater than 12.5% Non -riparian wetland re- establishment (restoration) of non- riverine swamp forest, 2013 survival of planted tree hardwood flat, headwater stems that were forest communities unquestionably alive was 317 Survival of 260 stems stems/acre and survivial of per acre of 5 -year old Vegetation plots on Annual monitoring shrubs was 12 stems/acre. planted woody wetland approximately 2% of the site When trees, shrubs, and stems unknown species of both categories are added together, survival becomes 340 stems/acre. 0 3 U) m v m N n U) zT 0 cn v m 0 0 c- 3 c -6 � v m M N O_ - Table 2. Hydroperiods of 49 non -riparian monitoring wells at P and U Lands Phase 2 restoration site and three Rodman control wells in 2013. Wells 61-86 were installed 6-7 February. Hydrologic zone Cumulative days Consecutive days Percent of Days where water Well table is -12" or where water table where water table Dates growing <6 >6-12.5% >12.5-25% >25-75% >75% above 1-27 Feb is -12" or above is -12" or above season 28 Feb -6 Dec 28 Feb -6 Dec (282 days) 79 2/28-7/27 28.0 50 6/3-7/22 17.7 PUM61 21 238 27 8/3-8/29 9.6 X 20 10/8-10/27 7.1 24 11/1-11/24 8.5 150 2/28-7/27 53.2 PUM62 21 274 48 8/1-9/17 17.0 X 76 9/22-12/6 27.0 149 2/28-7/26 52.8 PUM63 21 275 49 8/1-9/18 17.4 X 76 9/22-12/6 27.0 77 2/28-5/15 27.3 48 6/4-7/21 17.0 PUM64 21 241 X 44 8/3-9/15 15.6 60 10/8-12/6 21.3 79 2/28-5/17 28.0 49 6/3-7/21 17.4 PUM65 21 189 X 27 8/3-8/29 9.6 59 10/9-12/6 20.9 PUM66 19 90 26 6/24-7/18 9.2 X m� D Q - Z5 C c r v v (D 0 m 5n 0 W 0 3 U) m L w n U) -D ZT 0 cn v 0 0 0 c-3 c -6 � v CD M N O_ - Table 2. (continued) Hydrologic zone Cumulative days Consecutive days Percent of Days where water Well table is -12" or where water table where water table Dates growing <6 >6-12.5% >12.5-25% >25-75% >75% is -12" or above is -12" or above season above 1-27 Feb 28 Feb -6 Dec 28 Feb -6 Dec (282 days) 30 2/28-3/29 10.6 43 3/31-5/12 15.2 PUM67 21 180 17 6/4-6/20 6.0 X 26 6/22-7/17 9.2 59 10/9-12/6 20.9 77 2/28-5/15 27.3 17 6/3-6/20 6.0 PUM68 21 214 X 26 6/22-7/18 9.2 60 10/8-12/6 21.3 151 2/28-7/28 53.5 PUM69 21 280 X 128 8/1-12/6 45.4 PUM70 21 282 282 2/28-12/6 100.0 X PUM71 21 282 282 2/28-12/6 100.0 X 149 2/28-7/26 52.8 PUM72 21 259 48 8/1-9/17 17.0 X 60 6/8-12/6 21.3 151 2/28-7/28 53.5 PUM73 21 274 50 7/30-9/17 17.7 X 61 10/7-12/6 21.6 PUM74 21 255 282 2/28-12/6 100.0 X m� D Q - Z5 C c r v v (D 0 m 5n 0 W 0 3 U) m L n U) -D ZT 0 cn v 0 0 0 c- 3 c -6 � v CD M N o - Table 2. (continued) Hydrologic zone Cumulative days Consecutive days Percent of Days where water Well table is -12" or where water table where water table Dates growing <6 >6-12.5% >12.5-25% >25-75% >75% above 1-27 Feb is -12" or above is -12" or above season 28 Feb -6 Dec 28 Feb -6 Dec (282 days) 26 2/28-3/25 9.2 41 4/9-5/19 14.5 PUM75 21 243 X 19 6/3-6/21 6.7 167 6/23-12/6 59.2 PUM76 21 282 282 2/28-12/6 100.0 X 27 2/28-3/26 9.6 20 4/19-5/9 7.1 PUM77 21 251 X 56 6/3-7/28 19.9 128 8/1-12/6 45.4 90 2/28-5/28 31.9 51 6/3-7/23 18.1 PUM78 21 230 X 45 8/1-9/14 16.0 60 10/8-12/6 21.3 147 2/28-7/24 52.1 PUM79 21 266 47 8/1-9/16 16.7 X 60 10/8-12/6 21.3 74 2/28-5/12 26.2 70 5/15-7/23 24.8 PUM80 21 258 X 44 8/2-9/14 15.6 60 10/8-12/6 21.3 91 2/28-5/29 32.3 PUM81 21 278 X 187 6/3-12/6 66.3 m� D Q - Z5 C c r v v (D 0 m 5n 0 W 0 3 U) m L n U) -D ZT 0 cn v 0 0 0 c- 3 c -6 � v CD M N O_ - Table 2. (continued) Hydrologic zone Cumulative days Consecutive days Percent of Days where water Well table is -12" or where water table where water table Dates growing <6 >6-12.5% >12.5-25% >25-75% >75% above 1-27 Feb is -12" or above is -12" or above season 28 Feb -6 Dec 28 Feb -6 Dec (282 days) PUM82 21 282 282 2/28-12/6 100.0 X PUM83 21 282 282 2/28-12/6 100.0 X 148 2/28-7/25 52.5 PUM84 21 263 45 8/1-9/14 16.0 X 60 10/8-12/6 21.3 147 2/28-7/24 52.1 PUM85 21 267 48 8/1-9/17 17.0 X 60 10/8-12/6 21.3 PUM86 21 282 282 2/28-12/6 100.0 X 77 2/28-5/15 27.3 50 6/3-7/22 17.7 PUM87 27 241 X 29 8/3-8/30 10.3 60 10/8-12/6 21.3 146 2/28-7/23 51.8 PUM88 27 259 45 8/1-9/14 16.0 X 60 10/8-12/6 21.3 81 2/28-5/19 28.7 53 6/3-7/25 18.8 PUM89 21 266 X 66 8/1-10/5 23.4 61 10/7-12/6 21.6 m� D Q - Z5 C c r v v (D 0 m 5n 0 W 0 3 U) m L n U) -D ZT 0 cn v 0 0 0 c- 3 c -6 � v CD M N O_ - Table 2. (continued) Hydrologic zone Cumulative days Consecutive days Percent of Days where water Well table is -12" or where water table where water table Dates growing <6 >6-12.5% >12.5-25% >25-75% >75% above 1-27 Feb is -12" or above is -12" or above season 28 Feb -6 Dec 28 Feb -6 Dec (282 days) 29 2/28-3/28 10.3 43 4/1-5/13 15.2 PUM90 27 191 X 18 6/3-6/20 6.4 27 6/22-7/18 9.6 146 2/28-7/23 51.8 PUM91 27 261 43 8/3-9/14 15.2 X 60 10/8-12/6 21.3 145 2/28-7/22 51.4 PUM92 27 261 29 8/3-8/31 10.3 X 60 10/8-12/6 21.3 PUM93 27 282 282 2/28-12/6 100.0 X 151 2/28-7/28 53.5 PUM94 27 280 X 128 8/1-12/6 45.4 PUM95 27 282 282 2/28-12/6 100.0 X PUM96 27 282 282 2/28-12/6 100.0 X PUM97 27 282 282 2/28-12/6 100.0 X 27 2/28-3/26 9.6 19 4/20-5/9 6.7 PUM98 27 194 X 25 6/28-7/22 8.9 126 8/3-12/6 44.7 76 2/28-5/14 27.0 PUM99 27 157 51 6/7-7/27 18.1 X 128 8/1-12/6 45.4 m -D 0 3 U) M L Table 2. (continued) Hydrologic zone Cumulative days Consecutive days Percent of Days where water Well table is -12" or where water table where water table Dates growing <6 >6-12.5% >12.5-25% >25-75% >75% above 1-27 Feb is -12" or above is -12" or above season 28 Feb -6 Dec 28 Feb -6 Dec (282 days) 81 2/28-5/19 28.7 PUM100 27 270 X 187 6/3-12/6 66.3 22 2/28-3/21 7.8 PUM101 27 153 22 6/26-7/17 7.8 X 60 10/8-12/6 21.3 74 2/28-5/12 26.2 30 6/24-7/23 10.6 P U M 102 27 248 X 66 8/1-10/5 23.4 61 10/7-12/6 21.6 77 2/28-5/15 27.3 50 6/4-7/23 17.7 PUM103 27 254 X 63 8/1-10/5 22.3 61 10/7-12/6 21.6 23 6/26-7/18 8.2 PUM104 27 171 37 8/11-9/16 13.1 X 60 10/8-12/6 21.3 20 2/28-3/19 7.1 26 6/26-7/21 9.2 PUM105 25 210 X 64 8/3-10/4 22.7 61 10/7-12/6 21.6 20 10/8-10/27 7.1 PUM106 20 117 X 23 11/1-11/23 8.2 m� D Q - Z5 C c r v v (D 0 m 5n 0 W 0 Z) U) m L 00 n U) -D ZT 0 cn v 0 0 0 c-3 c -6 � v CD M N O_ - Table 2. (concluded) Hydrologic zone Cumulative days Consecutive days Percent of Days where water Well table is -12" or where water table where water table Dates growing <6 >6-12.5% >12.5-25% >25-75% >75% is -12" or above is -12" or above season above 1-27 Feb 28 Feb -6 Dec 28 Feb -6 Dec (282 days) 29 2/28-3/28 10.3 PUM107 27 219 24 6/26-7/19 8.5 X 126 8/3-12/6 44.7 49 2/28-4/17 17.4 21 4/19-5/10 7.4 PUM108 27 245 X 32 6/24-7/25 11.3 126 8/3-12/6 44.7 78 2/28-5/16 27.7 48 6/3-7/19 17.0 PUM109 27 247 X 44 8/1-9/13 15.6 60 10/8-12/6 21.3 Rodman Control Site (Wells were installed 13 March 2013 and so growing season began on that date and includes 269 days instead of 282.) 137 3/13-7/27 RC1 258 48 8/1-9/17 50.9 X 60 10/8-12/6 80 3/13-5/31 RC2 206 52 6/3-7/24 29.7 X Wells not installed 17 8/12-8/29 during February. 20 10/8-10/27 80 3/13-5/31 17 6/3-6/20 RC3 200 31 6/22-7/23 29.7 X 18 8/12-8/29 17 10/8-10/25 -n-o D 0 �c � r v � Q - CD -0 ;a o m �(n 0 v 0 D C7 0 m v io 0 0 �3 �-0 CD M O - -P�, 0 Table 3. Survival of trees and shrubs planted in 48 0.3 -acre plots at P and U Lands Phase 2 from baseline (2012) to fall 2013. Scientific name Common name Tagged at baseline Baseline stems Alive Unsure' Tota12 Percent surviva13 Alive Tota12 Percent of total stems alive in 2013 Large tree species Betula nigra River birch 17 17 0 17 100 100 0 Carpinus caroliniana Ironwood 41 40 1 41 98 100 1 Carya aquatica Water hickory 17 17 0 17 100 100 0 Celtis laevigata Sugarberry 1 1 0 1 100 100 0 Chamaecyparis thyoides Atlantic white cedar 531 508 23 531 96 100 11 Fraxinus pennsylvanica Green ash 124 123 1 124 99 100 3 Nyssa sp. tupelo or black gum 4 3 1 4 75 100 0 N. aquatica Water tupelo 644 643 1 644 100 100 14 Nyssa biflora Swamp tupelo 356 356 0 356 100 100 8 Platanus occidentalis Sycamore 9 6 3 9 67 100 0 Quercus spp. unknown oak species 185 101 84 185 55 100 2 Q. laurifolia Laurel oak 420 258 162 420 61 100 6 Q. lyrata Overcup oak 503 471 32 503 94 100 10 Q. michauxii Swamp chestnut oak 630 538 92 630 85 100 12 Q. phellos Willow oak 465 400 65 465 86 100 9 Taxodium ascendens Pond cypress 68 68 0 68 100 100 21 Taxodium distichum Bald cypress 744 735 9 744 99 100 16 Small tree species Clethra alnifolia Sweet pepperbush 54 54 0 54 100 100 1 Cyrilla racemiflora Titi 49 48 1 49 98 100 1 Magnolia virginiana Sweetbay 169 168 1 169 99 100 4 Persea borbonia Red bay 4 4 0 4 100 100 0 Total tree stems 5,035 4,559 476 5,035 91 100 120 Trees per acre stems+ 1± 4acL 350 317 33 350 - - - -n-u �' v D Q - =c C r v v CC CD Cn -0 ;a o m �Cn 0 v 0 CD Cnv CD N n 0 U) v CD n 0 c-3 c _0 :3 v CD N O — �, 0 Table 3. (concluded) 'Survival was considered unsure if the stem appeared dead (brittle, no green, broken, etc.) at the current sampling event 2Total includes alive + unsure. 3Percent survival was calculated as: (Baseline/tagged at baseline) X 100. Percent of Tagged at Baseline stems Percent survival total stems Scientific name Common name baseline Alive Unsure' Total2 Alive Total2 alive in 2013 Shrubs Aronia arbutifolia Red chokeberry 18 18 0 18 100 100 10 Cornus amomum Silky dogwood 42 40 2 42 95 100 23 Ilex verticillata Winterberry 7 7 0 7 100 100 4 Itea virginica Virginia sweetspire 51 51 0 51 100 100 29 Lindera benzoin Spicebush 12 11 1 12 92 100 6 Lyonia lucida Fetterbush 6 6 0 6 100 100 3 Vaccinium corymbosum High bush blueberry 30 30 0 30 100 100 17 Viburnum nudum Possumhaw 10 10 0 10 100 100 6 Total shrub stems 176 173 3 176 98 100 100 Shrubs per acre (stems .14.4ac) 12 12 0 12 - - - Unknown species junknown species 1 1,408 1 166 1 1242 11,408.00 1 12 1 100 1 3 Total Total stems 6,619 4,898 1,721 6,619 Total density 460 340 120 460 'Survival was considered unsure if the stem appeared dead (brittle, no green, broken, etc.) at the current sampling event 2Total includes alive + unsure. 3Percent survival was calculated as: (Baseline/tagged at baseline) X 100. r; l AURORA r ]� y, )UTH REEK-. - ! 1 - -- ------ `�,-- R . rnL Roao ... - _ ..... I souTHCREEK P LANDS �s l CORRIDOR sMAo R PHASEE2--- _—"'� no PHASE 2 P LlNDS HOLLOWELL TRACT PHASE . PHASE3 wcml _-- 6AY CIT Y`7CRM -7 PHASE I x - PARKER FARM P LANDS zxE.. o_nME koro Z,_T 5'14'15.04" - .. LONG: 76"46'19.20" :�, . •�,. / RODIVAN CONTROL SITE CASEY TRACT -- U LANDS - ---- P LANDS _ - PARKER FARM _ ➢ xf+,1yoin �'c..-�-` _ - SECTION I PARKER FARM ( -- - -" - --- - I •� PARKER FARM - •• SECTION J I ( LEGEND P AND U LANDS BOUNDARY SOUTH CREEK CORRIDOR AND 0 5,000 10,000 PARKER FARM BOUNDARY SCALE IN FEET NORTH CAROLINA VICINITY M A P P AND U LANDS PHASE 2 SITE LOCATION PLANDS PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC. SOURCE: SCALE: AS SHOWN APPROVED BY: DRAWN BY: BFG/TLJ PORTIONS OF THE BOUNDARY PROVIDED BY: ROBERT M. CHILES, P LANDS_VIC_ NEW BERN, NORTH CAROLINA, JOB #2009096, DATED: 11/19/2009 DATE: 05/06/14 FILE' AND 02/02/2010 AND BEAUFORT COUNTY GIS DATA WEBSITE PH2 2013 WWW.CO. BEAU FORTAC. US, BEAUFORT COUNTY PARCEL DATA SHAPEFILES, »E NAD 1983 FEET. IM CP#1745.59.32.2 J 4709 COLLEGE ACRESUITEIV2 USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP IMAGES, NC STATEPLANE, L NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403 NAD83, FEET, 1:24000—SCALE, WEBSITE: WWWACDOT.ORG INCORPORATED TEL 910/392-9253 FIGURE 1 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS FAX 910/392-9139 PLPS 59 67 PIPS 12 BENFEWELL ROAD PLPS 13 • 109 X107 108 106 l% 10 103 10 O 102 PLPS 11 ROYAL ROA 97 99 PLPS 10 i96 '140 O 0 ROYAL ROAD o98 100 _ 89 s7 P L N D S y 850 % 83 O 92 011111b"94 ® � 88 � �� X91 90 86 84 95 \ 93 1 1 I I -- 74 0 007 W. IIS Og5 66 64 SMALL ROAD\ o IPLPS 58 0 8 0 N BAY CITY NO. 4 076 75 O 070 71 SMALL 73 ROAD ' 7 kd-- P LANDS 11111111111111111116 810 80 PLPS 7 LEGEND P LANDS PLANTING AREA OPEN WATER OR PLUGGED/FILLED DITCH ROADS ® PERIMETER BERM AND PARKING AREAS TREE SAMPLING PLOT O WELL LOCATION AND TREE MONITORING PLOT (WELLS TO MONITOR LATERAL DRAINAGE EFFECT MAY NOT HAVE A TREE PLOT. LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE.) -0 PHOTO STATION NUMBER AND LOCATION PLPS 1 AREAS PLANTED IN PHASE 2: 0 ZONE 2 HEADWATER FOREST 0 ZONE 3 NON-RIVERINE SWAMP FOREST 0 ZONE 5 HARDWOOD FLAT 1 PHASE 2 PHASE 1 MITIGATION SITE MONITORING LOCATIONS P LANDS PHASE 2 PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC. SCALE: AS SHOWN APPROVED BY: DRAWN BY: TLJ/BFG DATE: 05/05/14 FILE: LAN S— LL— PH2-2013 SOURCE: PORTIONS OF THE BOUNDARY PROVIDED BY: ROBERT M. CHILES, O 1, 400200 2, �en�f CP#1745.59.32.2 NEW BERN, NORTH CAROLINA, JOB #2009096, DATED: 11/19/2009�� AND 02/02/2010 AND BEAUFORT COUNTY GIS DATA WEBSITE 4709 COLLEGE ACRESUTEIVE FIGURE 2a WWW.CO.BEAUFORT.NC.US, BEAUFORT COUNTY PARCEL DATA SHAPEFILES, SCALE IN FEET WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403 INCORPORATED TEL 910/392-9253 NAD 1983 FEET. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS FAX 910/392-9139 BENFEWELL ROAD ROYAL ROAD ROYAL ROAD P LANDS A� F� PHASE 2��9° m SMALL ROAD PHASE 1 j PHASE 2 SMALL ROAD g PHASE 3 N 8 N PHASE 3 o' BAY CITY ,Z, A J1 �G BAY CITY FARM pHAS PARKER FARM P LANDS SECTIONS A—H SOUTH CREEK CANAL EXECUTIVE ROAD/ JAIME ROAD BAY GITY No. 3 RC -1 / RC -2 RODMAN CONTROL / RC -3 SITE mZ Z' O c N BAy GITY NO. 2 13 -O PARKER FARM SECTION I No. 1 ABAY CITY mm ° P LANDS 0 U LANDS w o COUNTY LINE ROAD PARKER FARM CONTROL SITE A LEGEND AFc O P AND U LANDS PO J-3 / PARKER FARM CONTROL SITE AND / J-2 RODMAN CONTROL SITE 1-2 J-1 ROADS 1-1 O CONTROL WELLS PARKER FARM 0 2,600 3,200 SECTION J SCALE IN FEET MONITORING LOCATIONS OF CONTROL WELLS PARKER FARM AND RODMAN PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC. SCALE: AS SHOWN APPROVED BY: DRAWN BY: TLJ/BFG DATE: 05/08/14 FILE: PARKER—RODMAN—WELL SOURCE: PORTIONS OF THE BOUNDARY PROVIDED BY: ROBERT M. CHILES, ;� CP#1 745.59.32 NEW BERN, NORTH CAROLINA, JOB #2009096, DATED: 11/19/2009 �� 4709 COLLEGE ACRES DRIVE AND 02/02/2010 AND BEAUFORT COUNTY GIS DATA WEBSITE � Z R SUITE 2 NAD 1O.B FEEfRT.NC.US, BEAUFORT COUNTY PARCEL DATA SHAPEFILES, LAR INCORPORATED WILMINGTON, NORTEL ROLIN 228403 FIGURE 2b ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS FAX 910/392-9139 'i! 95 TO AP 67 68 106 pt— ROYAL ROAD Pt 2 g 93 Wd 69 71 70 Pt 65 D�4 63 62 66 1 SMALL ROAD BAY C1 -TY N0. 4 SOURCE: PORTIONS OF THE BOUNDARY PROVIDED BY: ROBERT M. CHILES, NEW BERN, NORTH CAROLINA, JOB #2009096, DATED: 11/19/2009 AND 02/02/2010 AND BEAUFORT COUNTY GIS DATA WEBSITE WWW.CO.BEAUFORT.NC.US, BEAUFORT COUNTY PARCEL DATA SHAPEFILES, NAD 1983 FEET. 2012 AERIALS DOWNLOAD FROM FROM NC ONE MAP WEBSITE: http://dato.nconemop SOIL SURVEY OF BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, US DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONVERSATION SERVICE, ISSUED: SEPTEMBER 1995 61 BENFEWELL ROAD Pt 108 109 107 103 102 101 05 104 ROYAL ROAD 96 97 '87 9 88 86 74 72 I LEGEND P AND U LANDS PH2 (796.43 ACRES) • WELL LOCATION AND TREE MONITORING PLOT (WELLS TO MONITOR LATERAL DRAINAGE EFFECT MAY NOT HAVE A TREE PLOT. LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE.) SOILS SYMBOL SOIL NAME Ap ARAPAHOE (MINERAL) (12.70 ACRES) Do DARE (ORGANIC) (0.07 ACRES) Po PONZER (ORGANIC) (488.55 ACRES) Pt PORTSMOUTH (MINERAL) (74.04 ACRES) To TOMOTLEY (MINERAL) (1.87 ACRES) Wd WASDA (ORGANIC) (219.21 ACRES) 0 HYDRIC SOILS NOTE: ONLY HYDRIC SOILS ARE DESIGNATED MINERAL �0 OR ORGANIC. �o 73 75 77 78" 80 81! SMALL ROAD - -•• .1. a,��4 • t i� TVA- �•'w'4.� 0 1,200 2,400 SCALE IN FEET P SOILS P AND U LANDS PHASE 2 PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC. SCALE: AS SHOWN APPROVED BY: DRAWN BY: TLJ/BFG DATE: 05/06/14 FILE: PLANDS_SOILS_PH2_ 2013 CP# 1 745.59.32.2 4709 COLLEGE ACRES DRIVE cZR SUITE 2 WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403 INCORPORATED TEL 910/392-9253 FIGURE 3a MYROM■ENdL CCNSOLuxrs FAX 910/392-9139 D -c 0 D 0 0 PHASE 2 O PHASES 'i! 95 TO AP 67 68 106 pt— ROYAL ROAD Pt 2 g 93 Wd 69 71 70 Pt 65 D�4 63 62 66 1 SMALL ROAD BAY C1 -TY N0. 4 SOURCE: PORTIONS OF THE BOUNDARY PROVIDED BY: ROBERT M. CHILES, NEW BERN, NORTH CAROLINA, JOB #2009096, DATED: 11/19/2009 AND 02/02/2010 AND BEAUFORT COUNTY GIS DATA WEBSITE WWW.CO.BEAUFORT.NC.US, BEAUFORT COUNTY PARCEL DATA SHAPEFILES, NAD 1983 FEET. 2012 AERIALS DOWNLOAD FROM FROM NC ONE MAP WEBSITE: http://dato.nconemop SOIL SURVEY OF BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, US DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONVERSATION SERVICE, ISSUED: SEPTEMBER 1995 61 BENFEWELL ROAD Pt 108 109 107 103 102 101 05 104 ROYAL ROAD 96 97 '87 9 88 86 74 72 I LEGEND P AND U LANDS PH2 (796.43 ACRES) • WELL LOCATION AND TREE MONITORING PLOT (WELLS TO MONITOR LATERAL DRAINAGE EFFECT MAY NOT HAVE A TREE PLOT. LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE.) SOILS SYMBOL SOIL NAME Ap ARAPAHOE (MINERAL) (12.70 ACRES) Do DARE (ORGANIC) (0.07 ACRES) Po PONZER (ORGANIC) (488.55 ACRES) Pt PORTSMOUTH (MINERAL) (74.04 ACRES) To TOMOTLEY (MINERAL) (1.87 ACRES) Wd WASDA (ORGANIC) (219.21 ACRES) 0 HYDRIC SOILS NOTE: ONLY HYDRIC SOILS ARE DESIGNATED MINERAL �0 OR ORGANIC. �o 73 75 77 78" 80 81! SMALL ROAD - -•• .1. a,��4 • t i� TVA- �•'w'4.� 0 1,200 2,400 SCALE IN FEET P SOILS P AND U LANDS PHASE 2 PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC. SCALE: AS SHOWN APPROVED BY: DRAWN BY: TLJ/BFG DATE: 05/06/14 FILE: PLANDS_SOILS_PH2_ 2013 CP# 1 745.59.32.2 4709 COLLEGE ACRES DRIVE cZR SUITE 2 WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403 INCORPORATED TEL 910/392-9253 FIGURE 3a MYROM■ENdL CCNSOLuxrs FAX 910/392-9139 SOUTH To RC— i ARAPAHOE LOAMY FINE SAND Ba BALLAHACK FINE SAND BH i RODMAN CONTROL SITE c 0 0 U LANDS L r0 mO C z zj 0 N SOURCE: PORTIONS OF THE BOUNDARY PROVIDED BY: ROBERT M. CHILES, NEW BERN, NORTH CAROLINA, JOB #2009096, DATED: 11/19/2009 AND 02/02/2010 AND BEAUFORT COUNTY GIS DATA WEBSITE WWW.CO.BEAUFORT.NC.US, BEAUFORT COUNTY PARCEL DATA SHAPEFILES, NAD 1983 FEET. 2012 AERIALS DOWNLOAD FROM FROM NC ONE MAP WEBSITE: http://data.nconemap SOIL SURVEY OF BEAUFORT COUNTY AND PAMLICO COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA, US DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONVERSATION SERVICE, ISSUED: SEPTEMBER 1995 ROYAL ROAD J r� ROYAL ROAD P LANDS .os FP O 01-'1f p SMALL ROAD PHASE 2 PHASE 1 ROPHASE 2 N o SMALL ROAD N PHASE 3 Wd Da PHASE 3 BAY CITY FARM BAY CITY No. Da / P�-{ASE 1 IPARKER FARM PO P LANDS SECTION A—H Po BAY CITY No. 3 CASEY TRACT PARKE BAY CITY No. 2 -0 FARM _ = 1 SECTII NO. BAY CITY � m m sH As w P LANDS F COUNTY LINE ROAD 'AO BH 9� LEGEND P AND U LANDS • I-2 PARKER FARM CONTROL SITE AND RODMAN CONTROL SITE-1� ROADS D PARKER FARM CONTROL WELLS LOCATIONS- SECTION J SOILS L SYMBOL SOIL NAME Ap ARAPAHOE LOAMY FINE SAND Ba BALLAHACK FINE SAND BH BELHAVEN MUCK Da DARE (ORGANIC) LF LAFITTE MUCK PO PONZER (ORGANIC) To TOMOTLEY FINE SAND Wd WASDA (ORGANIC) Yo YONGES LOAMY FINE SAND NOTE: ONLY HYDRIC SOILS ARE DESIGNATED MINERAL OR ORGANIC. PARKER FARM CONTROL SITE J-3 J-2 —1 AP Yo Ba LF O 2,600 3,200 SCALE IN FEET SOILS CONTROL WELLS PARKER FARM AND RODMAN PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC. SCALE: AS SHOWN JAPPROVED BY: DRAWN BY: TLJ DATE: 05/08/14 FILE: PARKER-RODMAN-SOILS '14, 4709 COLLEGE ACRES DRIVE SUITE 2 ZR WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403 ` INCORPORATED TEL 910/392-9253 EWIRONMENUL CONSULTANTS FAX 910/392-9139 CP#1745.59.32 FIGURE 3b t Mks y � � 610 — y i t b 4 i t � X L t i w # Gahm f ■ 14 i SOURCE: PORTIONS OF THE BOUNDARY PROVIDED BY: ROBERT M. CHILES, NEW BERN, NORTH CAROLINA, JOB #2009096, DATED: 11/19/2009 AND 02/02/2010 AND BEAUFORT COUNTY GIS DATA WEBSITE WWW.CO. BEAUFORT. NC. US, BEAUFORT COUNTY PARCEL DATA SHAPEFILES, NAD 1983 FEET. NORTH CAROLINA FLOODPLAIN MAPPING PROGRAM, BEAUFORT AND PAMLICO COUNTIES, LIDAR, NC STATEPLANE, NAD 1983, FEET, WWW.NCFLOODMAPS.COM FEWELL ROAD Z'�� q_p 0 1,400 2,800 SCALE IN FEET LEGEND PHASE 2 PLANTING AREA OPEN WATER OR PLUGGED/FILLED DITCH ROADS + PERIMETER BERM AND PARKING AREAS O WELL LOCATION HYDROLOGIC ZONES WETLAND HYDROPERIODS D 0 = <67. OF THE GROWING SEASON (0 ACRES) D O = >6 - 12.5 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON (14.69 ACRES) D O = >12.5 - 25 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON (68.06 ACRES) D Q = >25 - 75 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON (495.56 ACRES) _ >75 - 100 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON (159.34 ACRES) Legend Elevation In Feet Value 00-2 O 2-4 =4-5 =5-6 =6-7 =7-8 =8-9 =9-10 _ 10-11 011-12 012-13 13-14 _ 14-15 _ 15-16 Q 16-21 Q 21-48 MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS ON AS -BUILT LIDAR P AND U LANDS PHASE 2 PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC. SCALE: AS SHOWN APPROVED BY: DRAWN BY: TLJ/BFG DATE: 05/06/14 FILE: PLANDS_WELL_LIDAR_ PH2_2013.DWG 7 CP#1745.59.32.2 L 4709 COLLEGE ACRES ITE 2 SUITE 2 �n WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403 ENVIRONMENTAL NTTALL INCORPORATED ONSUL ANTS FAX 910%392-9139 FIGURE 4a O 1 1 - I 1 ■ IN 1 0 1■ r�J - 1 .= � .■ 1 ; r : �• 1 1L w NO a IN IN ■ IN _ ,� 1 Ir'r'- IN 1 ■ ELL R D � 1 ti-� 1 L IN LE j I ■ _ _ i 1 ■ ■ IN IN I.1 1 1 _ Ir 1 . ■ 1 1 1 Inc'1�■ ■ 0 ONO ON11 1 .t■ ■ 1■ 1 1 ■ X11 ti - 1 IN ' I • '-1 I ■ ' ' ROYAL ROAD ' NOIrm I r r ■ Jl+ l 1 1 5 1 1_ ti r _ 1 ■I 1 1 ' = ' YAL I 1�IN 1 -Ir ■_ k 1 _, L n - 1■ ■ r - III I5IN _ 1 • 1 1. ■ -L-- 1 • ' 1 •■ 1 hr 1 7 - ■ '■ • '_ HASE 2 - ,1- 11 EL AD fi.■ •-i7�� ti� ■ 1. 1 1 1 1 TF LCL r _ 1 1 INN IN I I "moi ■• L �-� ■, � � Z '_ HASE 1 ' ' IN L SMALL ROAD ' ' _ _ P_ HASE 3 - ■ ■ I,� • 'ti - _ o r 1 1 ■ o ■ ■ r. 1 � L � .1116 1 L IN L ASE 3 ti '_ . _ 1_ . 1 1 . . ti 1 � ■ 1 _ ti 1 ■ I L f � � �� ■ � � BAY CITY �, . � � 1 ■ � � 1 i :NN 1 7 1 r � _ � ■ ' y0 '- ' �� p�ASE ti��■!1_.. FARM' �� -~ j i f ■ i ■J �7G' A -H ■ �-- l 1 i 1 r - . �. '. ANDS ` . _;)i 11 ■�_: " ■ ■■. L * ■ r .- -• SOUTH [K CANAL ■• �' ' � r % 1 _ ■■ EXECUTIVE ROAD - 1 _ L - 1 L • 1■ 2pmpAL.L _ y 1 1' JAIME ROAD Y ' • ' 1 - • r ' � ' ■ BAY CITY No. ■ - ; L , L - ■ • 1 , - •� ;� RC -1 '. - _ �- 1 rr-� RdDMAN I f ; RC RC - � r 1 ■ ■ 11 ' ■ ■1 ?' ' I RC -3 L' IN SITE 0 1 1 r1 ' 1 ■ 1' ■ ti 1 Z rL r _ NO BAY '0 _ ■ 1 1 i r 3=c1TY NO. r r _ 1 1 r rI >o BPY '■ ■ '- J I I z o ti� 1■ �- i 1 1• •~ r o V P LANDSI! 1i L w L ■„ f■t�� 1 ' 144r 1 _ -4 . I o NDS IN ■ COUNTY LINE ROAD _ . '■ - . ■ 1 r • ' - c E PARKER FAR �■ ■'• �. ■ - i 1 I TRO �- Z _ 1 �- - ti 1 _ ti 1 .•1 1 '. L r ■ I 1 1 r r r J LEGEND f � IN`'_� _� ..e 1 -r // - �iirr; ' ' J-2 P AND U LANDS 'i 1 ti' 1 1-2 - / _ 1 } 1 1 _ J-1 _ wL L ' - ' 1 •- Y I-1 _ 1 - PARKER FARM CONTROL SITE AND 5 r . _ L- 1 r � ■ I _r' _ - _ RODMAN CONTROL SITE i 1 _ ROADS Legend r r■ r1■� PARKER FARM , �1 SECTION J IN ■■ • IINN�� 1 �' ..� C CONTROL WELLS Elevation in Feet 1■ Value =0-2 NOTE: 8 2-4 111111111111114-5 DUE TO REPEATED DESTRUCTION OF WELLS AND LOSS = MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS ON AS—BUILT LIDAR OF DATA, HYDROPERIODS WERE NOT ABLE TO BE ACCURATELY COUNTED FOR PARKER FARM WELLS IN s-6 PARKER FARM AND RODMAN 2013. =7-8 =6-9 PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY INC. =9-10 7 - 10-11 SOURCE: Q 11-12 SCALE: AS SHOWN APPROVED BY: DRAWN BY: TLJ/BFG PORTIONS OF THE BOUNDARY PROVIDED BY: ROBERT M. CHILES, � 12-13 NEW BERN, NORTH CAROLINA, JOB #2009096, DATED: 11/19/2009 DATE: 05/08/14 FILE: PARKER_RODMAN_WELL_ AND 02/02/2010 AND BEAUFORT COUNTY GIS DATA WEBSITE Q 13-14 LIDAR.DWG WWW.CO.BEAUFORT.NC.US, BEAUFORT COUNTY PARCEL DATA SHAPEFILES,14-15 NAD 1983 FEET. Q 21600 31200 CP#1745.59.32 NORTH CAROLINA FLOODPLAIN MAPPING PROGRAM, BEAUFORT AND _15-16�� _ 16-21 4709 COLLEGE ACRES DRIVE ZR SUITE 2 PAMLICO COUNTIES, LIDAR, NC STATEPLANE, NAD 1983, FEET, WWW.NCFLOODMAPS.COM SCALE IN FEET _21-46 WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403 INCORPORATED TEL 910/392-9253 FIGURE 4b ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS FAX 910/392-9139 Figure 5. 2013 BAY CITY and WETS -AURORA RAINFALL 10.00 NOTE: "Range of Normal" and "WETS Monthly Rainfall Total" plotted on last day of each month. • "Range of Normal" refers to the 30th and 70th percentile thresholds of the probability of onsite rainfall amounts outside of the normal range (based on historical averages from 1971-2000). WETS Data subject to periodic revision. Data shown are latest available from Portland, OR office of Water &Climate Services National Water &Climate Center. 8.00 v t V C ,� 6.00 C: . t • c 0 4.00 • c c� . sun 2.00 0.00 bac �Q`p at' fit' aJ J� �J� Sao QQ G� e� 0 � �ti tis O oy Oti oyOSP oy`S otic 6� O o�Q o o 2013 Bay City Daily Rainfall - Bay City 30 -day Rolling Total • 2013 WETS -Aurora Monthly Rainfall Total 30% Less Chance 30% More Chance 2013 Bay City Monthly Rainfall Figure 5. 2013 BAY CITY and WETS -AURORA RAINFALL • Figure 5. 2013 BAY CITY and WETS -AURORA RAINFALL LEGEND BENFEWELL ROAD SOURCE: PORTIONS OF THE BOUNDARY PROVIDED BY: ROBERT M. CHILES, NEW BERN, NORTH CAROLINA, JOB #2009096, DATED: 11/19/2009 AND 02/02/2010 AND BEAUFORT COUNTY GIS DATA WEBSITE WWW.CO.BEAUFORT.NC.US, BEAUFORT COUNTY PARCEL DATA SHAPEFILES, NAD 1983 FEET. 0 1,200 2,400 SCALE IN FEET PHASE 2 PLANTING AREA OPEN WATER OR PLUGGED/FILLED DITCH ® ROADS + PERIMETER BERM AND PARKING AREAS O WELL LOCATION WETLAND HYDROPERIODS 0 = <6% OF THE GROWING SEASON (0 ACRES) O = >6 - 12.5 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON (14.69 ACRES) O = >12.5 - 25 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON (68.06 ACRES) O = >25 - 75 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON (495.56 ACRES) • _ >75 - 100 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON (159.34 ACRES) ARE A VISUAL APPROXIMATION OF TOTAL ACRES VELL HYDROPERIOD CATEGORIES BASED ON ONE =S, KNOWLEDGE OF SITE CONDITIONS, AND LIDAR 'ONES DO NOT REPRESENT ACTUAL HYDROPERIOD RC RC - SOURCE: PORTIONS OF THE BOUNDARY PROVIDED BY: ROBERT M. CHILES, NEW BERN, NORTH CAROLINA, JOB #2009096, DATED: 11/19/2009 AND 02/02/2010 AND BEAUFORT COUNTY GIS DATA WEBSITE WWW.CO.BEAUFORT.NC.US, BEAUFORT COUNTY PARCEL DATA SHAPEFILES, NAD 1983 FEET. 0 = >25 - 75 PERCENT OF THE SCALE IN FEET GROWING SEASON (678.22 ACRES) NOTE: HYDROLOGIC ZONES ARE A VISUAL APPROXIMATION OF TOTAL ACRES REPRESENTED BY WELL HYDROPERIOD CATEGORIES BASED ON KNOWLEDGE OF SITE CONDITIONS, AND LIDAR CONTOURS. THE ZONES DO NOT REPRESENT ACTUAL HYDROPERIOD BOUNDARIES. DUE TO REPEATED DESTRUCTION OF WELLS AND LOSS OF DATA, HYDROPERIODS WERE NOT ABLE TO BE ACCURATELY COUNTED FOR PARKER FARM WELLS IN 2013. APPENDIX A Stem Counts at Individual Plots at P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 2 Appendix A. Individual tree/shrub plot counts from P and U Lands Phase 2 first annual (2013) fall monitoring. Numbers in each column indicate trees unquestionably alive at sampling. Plot size is 0.3 acre. Zone 3 63 64 1 65 1 66 1 69 70 1 71 1 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 1 83 84 85 Zone 2 104 105 107 108 Total Common name Scientific name 1 st Unknown ? 12 3 12 Red chokeberry Aronia arbutifolia 3 4 25 5 1 River birch Betula nigra 1 5 11 17 Ironwood Carpinus caroliniana 5 4 17 26 Water hickory Carya aquatica 3 3 Sugarberry Celtis laevigata 1 1 Buttonbush' Cephalanthus occidentalis 4 Atlantic white cedar Chamaecyparis thyoides 39 Sweet pepperbush Clethra alnifolia 7 40 6 7 Silky dogwood Cornus amomum 1 39 4 5 Titi Cyrilla racemiflora 1 2 3 Green ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica 23 57 37 6 123 Winterberry Ilex verticillata 1 1 1 1 4 Virginia sweetspire Itea virginica 2 4 6 10 22 Spicebush Lindera benzoin 1 1 Fetterbush Lyonia lucida 2 1 Sweetbay Magnolia virginiana 8 5 6 2 21 Unknown gum/tupelo Nyssa spp. Water tupelo N. aquatica 1 17 15 33 Swamp tupelo Nyssa biflora 6 23 23 3 55 Red bay Persea borbonia 1 Sycamore Platanus occidentalis 2 4 6 Oak Quercus spp. 1 1 Laurel oak Q. laurifolia Overcup oak Q. lyrata 3 Swamp chestnut oak Q. michauxii 11 8 9 36 64 Willow oak Q. phellos 1 3 1 3 Pond cypress Taxodium ascendens 34 27 7 7 68 Bald cypress Taxodium distichum 16 11 11 13 High bush blueberry Vaccinium corymbosum 17 2 13 20 Possumhaw Viburnum nudum 4 3 4 TOTALI 98 1 162 1 117 1 99 1 476 Zone 3 63 64 1 65 1 66 1 69 70 1 71 1 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 1 83 84 85 1 st 1 1 8 3 1 3 4 25 5 1 1 8 2 4 39 26 22 18 40 6 6 8 5 35 39 9 4 9 10 22 7 12 1 4 2 3 1 1 3 1 1 2 1 4 13 2 3 4 2 1 2 1 1 1 3 6 8 2 1 2 4 1 3 1 3 1 9 2 5 7 10 9 7 12 14 20 16 11 11 13 18 11 17 2 13 20 11 15 22 9 25 1 1 3 2 2 1 3 5 33 15 2 10 3 22 13 5 14 5 1 6 1 2 4 4 1 2 1 1 18 6 18 5 7 3 2 6 4 8 2 2 2 3 9 8 3 3 3 7 15 33 19 31 13 4 6 22 26 2 6 5 5 12 3 23 3 12 4 15 5 4 10 24 14 9 19 22 14 4 25 10 8 1 8 3 11 6 8 9 6 7 13 11 21 13 10 4 8 5 3 12 1 4 5 8 5 14 5 6 4 16 19 17 3 21 10 10 15 25 17 19 23 29 10 3 26 30 14 15 24 24 20 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 61 116 130 166 113 79 106 100 99 65 112 122 106 27 96 84 113 80 133 79 118 P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 2 First Annual Report A-1 Appendix A. (concluded) *Planted but in such a low density, did not show up in plots Zone 5 61 62 67 1 68 1 90 91 92 Total Zone 3 86 1 87 1 88 1 89 1 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 109 Total 1st Common name Scientific name Unknown ? 9 1 2 1 6 20 11 3 2 1 1 17 15 137 Red chokeberry Aronia arbutifolia 1 5 1 1 6 5 3 4 3 8 26 1 18 River birch Betula nigra 3 1 15 2 1 3 Ironwood Carpinus caroliniana 2 2 1 1 2 1 4 Water hickory Carya aquatica 1 6 5 9 3 4 2 30 8 12 14 26 5 11 5 81 Sugarberry Celtis laevigata 2 3 11 7 12 36 1 2 3 Buttonbush* Cephalanthus occidentalis 5 5 4 4 10 6 1 13 7 45 6 6 19 11 Atlantic white cedar Chamaecyparis thyoides 2 27 21 22 6 7 1 3 26 68 2 13 6 502 Sweet pepperbush Clethra alnifolia 1 10 1 1 1 12 12 8 73 2 4 3 1 1 21 Silky dogwood Cornus amomum 108 114 1 73 73 1 2 3 3 20 Titi Cyrilla racemiflora 1 1 2 5 2 12 45 Green ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica Winterberry Ilex verticillata Virginia sweetspire Itea virginica 1 1 1 2 2 3 4 3 27 Spicebush Lindera benzoin 2 1 4 9 Fetterbush Lyonia lucida 2 2 Sweetbay Magnolia virginiana 9 5 6 6 7 2 1 2 2 5 3 6 1 1 3 117 Unknown gum/tupelo Nyssa spp. 3 3 Water tupelo N. aquatica 14 6 4 15 15 10 15 13 19 27 12 11 15 27 27 13 529 Swamp tupelo Nyssa biflora 9 10 5 9 1 4 8 7 3 31 2 14 14 6 2 265 Red bay Persea borbonia 1 Sycamore Platanus occidentalis Oak Quercus spp. 13 5 4 18 6 9 4 1 9 3 1 95 Laurel oak Q. laurifolia 3 2 2 1 10 6 3 1 8 14 13 6 5 10 9 1 213 Overcup oak Q. lyrata 3 6 9 10 7 12 10 33 20 2 9 10 6 11 407 Swamp chestnut oak Q. michauxii 5 1 4 12 13 18 26 6 9 34 18 19 31 20 24 8 468 Willow oak Q. phellos 5 2 1 18 13 22 8 4 1 26 8 4 19 8 7 13 334 Pond cypress Taxodium ascendens Bald cypress Taxodium distichum 17 11 19 16 9 26 24 51 25 5 22 19 18 17 1 8 662 High bush blueberry Vaccinium corymbosum 1 1 1 1 2 1 20 Possumhaw Viburnum nudum 1 5 6 TOTAL 86 68 71 113 78 127 127 113 92 174 108 115 190 122 111 105 3905 *Planted but in such a low density, did not show up in plots Zone 5 61 62 67 1 68 1 90 91 92 Total 1st 2 5 3 7 17 6 3 1 10 11 1 1 1 14 1 5 6 6 5 3 4 8 26 1 10 3 1 15 2 1 3 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 4 1 6 5 9 3 4 2 30 8 12 14 26 5 11 5 81 1 2 3 11 7 12 36 1 2 3 5 5 4 4 10 6 1 13 7 45 6 6 19 11 10 7 5 64 6 6 3 3 20 13 3 15 9 66 1 10 8 22 12 12 8 73 2 3 3 1 1 10 517 32 56 108 114 61 73 73 P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 2 First Annual Report A-2 APPENDIX B Selected First Annual (2013) Restoration Photographs NOTE: A 10 -foot pole marked in one -foot increments held by a biologist about 25 feet from the camera is visible in all photos. The photos are identified with the station number (see figure included with this appendix) and direction of view. Photos were taken 24 October 2013. PLPS 7: northwest PLPS S: northeast P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 2 B-1 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. First Annual Report June 2014 F- ELL,, � PLPS 9: southeast PLPS 10: southwest P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 2 B-2 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. First Annual Report June 2014 PLPS 11: east PLPS 12: southeast P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 2 B-3 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. First Annual Report June 2014 p!' OV:_-