20080868 Ver 2_Monitoring Report_20091210

DRAFT PLAN OF STUDY
TO MONITOR POTENTIAL EFFECTS
OF REDUCTION IN HEADWATER WETLANDS
ON THE DOWNSTREAM AQUATIC FUNCTIONS
AND UTILIZATION OF TRIBUTARIES OF
SOUTH CREEK, PORTER CREEK, AND DURHAM CREEK
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Prepared for:
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Aurora, North Carolina
Prepared for preliminary review by:
NC Division of Water Quality, Raleigh, North Carolina
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
December 2009
DEC 1 0 2009
DENR - WATER QUAUTY
WETLANDS AND STORMAtER BRANCH
Prepared by:
CZR Incorporated, Wilmington, North Carolina
Dr. Wayne Skaggs, P.E.
DRAFT PLAN OF STUDY
TO MONITOR POTENTIAL EFFECTS
OF REDUCTION IN HEADWATER WETLANDS
ON THE DOWNSTREAM AQUATIC FUNCTIONS
AND UTILIZATION OF TRIBUTARIES OF
SOUTH CREEK, PORTER CREEK, AND DURHAM CREEK
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Prepared by:
CZR Incorporated, Wilmington, North Carolina
Dr. Wayne Skaggs, P.E.
Prepared for:
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Aurora, North Carolina
Prepared for preliminary review by:
NC Division of Water Quality, Raleigh, North Carolina
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
December 2009
DRAFT PLAN OF STUDY
TO MONITOR POTENTIAL EFFECTS
OF REDUCTION IN HEADWATER WETLANDS
ON THE DOWNSTREAM AQUATIC FUNCTIONS
AND UTILIZATION OF TRIBUTARIES OF
SOUTH CREEK, PORTER CREEK, AND DURHAM CREEK
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Prepared by:
CZR Incorporated, Wilmington, North Carolina
Dr. Wayne Skaggs, P.E.
Prepared for:
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Aurora, North Carolina
Prepared for preliminary review by:
NC Division of Water Quality, Raleigh, North Carolina
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
December 2009
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 HISTORY AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION ..............................................................
1.1 History .............................................................................................................................
1.2 Background information ..................................................................................................
1.3 Draft Plan of Study ..........................................................................................................
2.0 APPLICABLE 401 CERTIFICATION AND 404 PERMIT CONDITIONS ............................
3.0 HISTORIC AND CURRENT DRAINAGE BASIN REFINEMENTS ....................................
3.1 Light detection and ranging (LiDAR) refinements ...........................................................
4.0 LESSONS LEARNED FROM EXISTING FLOW MONITORING PROGRAM, CURRENT
CONSTRAINTS, AND A NEW APPROACH ......................................................................
5.0 TYPES OF MONITORING .................................................................................................
5.1 Pre-impact, post-impact, and post-reclamation monitoring thresholds ...........................
5.2 True baseline and original baseline monitoring ...............................................................
5.3 Modified baseline monitoring ...........................................................................................
5.4 Proposed extension of length of modified baseline monitoring .......................................
5.5 Post-reclamation monitoring ...........................................................................................
6.0 EXISTING AND EXPANDED MONITORING ....................................................................
6.1 Salinity, dissolved oxygen, and water level monitoring ....................................................
6.2 Water quality monitoring .................................................................................................
6.3 Sediment monitoring ......................................................................................................
6.4 Fish and benthos monitoring ..........................................................................................
6.5 Biomass size spectra (BSS) ...........................................................................................
6.6 Wetland vegetation monitoring .......................................................................................
6.7 Wetland hydrology monitoring ........................................................................................
7.0 REFERENCE OR CONTROL CREEK SYSTEMS ...........................................................
7.1 Existing reference or control creek system ....................................................................
7.2 Proposed new reference or control creek systems ........................................................
7.2.1 PA2 .........................................................................................................................
7.2.2 UT to Ross Creek ...................................................................................................
7.2.3 Duck Creek .............................................................................................................
7.2.4 Durham Creek tributary ..........................................................................................
7.2.5 South 33 Tract reference creeks ............................................................................
8.0 TIMELINE OF IMPACTS AND MONITORING .................................................................
8.1 Timeline of projected impacts and initiation of monitoring for all parameters ................
9.0 COORDINATION WITH SCIENCE PANEL AND ANNUAL REPORTING .......................
10.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL (QA/QA) PROGRAM AND SCIENCE
PANEL REVIEW ...............................................................................................................
10.1 QA/QC program approach .............................................................................................
10.2 Science Panel review .....................................................................................................
1
1
1
3
3
7
7
.8
.8
.8
.9
.9
.9
.9
.9
.9
10
10
11
11
12
12
12
12
12
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
14
14
14
14
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions ii
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1 Pre- and post-impact monitoring by parameter and by creek in NCPC creeks according to
the 1998 program ................................................................................................................2
2 Temporary drainage basin reductions since 1998 and percent reduction from historic
basin acreages following Modified Alternative L impacts to each potential creek proposed
for monitoring ...................................................................................................................... 7
3 Estimated creek monitoring years pre- and post-impact from Modified Alternative L and
post-reclamation completion (using 2 year impact schedule in 404/ROD and PCS
reclamation schedule dated 3.16.09.) ...............................................................................15
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions iii
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page

1 Vicinity Map ...................................................................................................................... ...1
2 Modified Alternative L Permitted Boundary with Biotic Community Impacts- NCPC Tract. 2
3 Modified Alternative L Permitted Boundary with Biotic Community Impacts-Bonnerton
Tract ................................................................................................................................. ... 3
4 Modified Alternative L Permitted Boundary with Biotic Community Impacts- S33 Tract .. ... 4
5 Modified Alternative L Boundary on 2007 Aerial- NCPC Tract ......................................... ... 5
6 Modified Alternative L Boundary on 2007 Aerial- Bonnerton Tract .................................. ... 6
7 Modified Alternative L Boundary on 2007 Aerial- S33 Tract ............................................ ... 7
8 Estimated Historic and Current Drainage Basins on LiDAR with Permitted Boundary-
NCPC Tract ...................................................................................................................... ... 8
9 Estimated Historic and Current Drainage Basins on LiDAR with Permitted Boundary-
Bonnerton Tract ............................................................................................................... ... 9
10 Estimated Historic and Current Drainage Basins on LiDAR with Permitted Boundary- S33
Tract ................................................................................................................................. .10
11 Original Monitoring Locations in Jacks Creek .................................................................. .11
12 Original Monitoring Locations in Tooley Creek ................................................................. .12
13 Original Monitoring Locations in Huddles Cut .................................................................. .13
14 Proposed Monitoring Locations for Drinkwater Creek ...................................................... .14
15 Proposed Monitoring Locations for Jacobs Creek ........................................................... .15
16 Proposed Monitoring Locations for Porter Creek ............................................................. .16
17 Proposed Monitoring Locations for Tributary to Durham Creek (DCUT 11) .................... .17
18 Durham Creek Proposed Monitoring Locations ............................................................... .18
19 Proposed Monitoring Locations for Broomfield Swamp ................................................... .19
20 Proposed Monitoring Locations for Cypress Run ............................................................. .20
21 South Creek Monitoring Location ..................................................................................... .21

22 Pamlico River Monitoring Location ................................................................................... .22
23 Muddy Creek Monitoring Location .................................................................................... . 23
24 PA2 Proposed Control Creek Monitoring Locations ......................................................... .24
25 UT to Ross Creek Proposed Control Creek Monitoring Locations ................................... . 25
26 Duck Creek Proposed Control Creek Monitoring Locations ............................................ .26
27 UT to Durham Creek Proposed Control Creek Monitoring Locations .............................. . 27
28 Estimated 2-Year Impact Schedule .................................................................................. .28
29 Estimated Reclamation Schedule .................................................................................... . 29
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions iv
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
LIST OF APPENDICES
AppendixA October 1998 NCPC Tract Stream Monitoring Program for PCS Phosphate, Inc.
(Alternative E)
Appendix B Executive Summaries from Annual Reports Submitted under the 1998 NCPC
Monitoring Program
Appendix C Determining Flows in Small Watersheds and Bays along South Creek
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions v
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
DRAFT PLAN OF STUDY TO MONITOR
POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF REDUCTION IN HEADWATER WETLANDS
ON THE DOWNSTREAM AQUATIC FUNCTIONS AND UTILIZATION OF TRIBUTARIES
OF SOUTH CREEK, PORTER CREEK, AND DURHAM CREEK
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
1.0 HISTORY AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION
1.1 History. In 1997, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) issued a Section 404
permit to PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. (PCS) for continued phosphate mining under Alternative E
on PCS property north of Aurora, Beaufort County, North Carolina (referto Figure 1 for vicinity map).
Because the 1997 permitted mine advance would temporarily reduce the drainage basin area for
several small estuarine tributaries of South Creek and the Pamlico River, the Corp's Section 404
permit (404) and the accompanying North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) Section 401
Water Quality Certification (401) contained conditions that required monitoring to detect any
deleterious effects on these tributaries. Accordingly, PCS, working through its consultants CZR
Incorporated (CZR), Dr. Wayne Skaggs of North Carolina State University, and Dr. Donald W. Stanley
of East Carolina University, developed an agency-approved plan to monitor flow, salinity, wetland
hydrology, water quality, vegetation, fish, and benthic macro invertebrates in Jacks Creek, Tooley
Creek, and Huddles Cut (CZR and Skaggs 1998). Forthe 1997 permit, NCDWQ selected the same
three NCPC tributaries to South Creek to be monitored. These three creeks have been monitored
and annual reports have been submitted since 1998 according to the approved monitoring plan.
1.2 Background information. Baseline (pre-Alternative E impact) data collection on
vegetation, fish, benthos, and groundwater began in 1998, while baseline data collection on the
remaining parameters began in 1999. Baseline monitoring continued on Tooley Creek and Huddles
Cut until 13 June 2002. Post-disturbance monitoring on Jacks Creek began when its drainage basin
was reduced in early 2000. In accordance with the monitoring plan, all baseline monitoring except
flow ceased on Tooley Creek and Huddles Cut 13 June 2002. Also at that time, the level of effort for
the post-disturbance monitoring on Jacks Creek was reduced as specified by the monitoring plan. In
April 2004, all pre-disturbance flow monitoring ceased at Huddles Cut and Tooley Creek, and in
December 2005 all post-disturbance flow monitoring ceased at Jacks Creek (NCDWQ authorized
cessation of post-impact monitoring on Jacks Creek by letter dated 12 January 2006).
Post-disturbance monitoring of Huddles Cut began in January 2007 and continues as of this
writing. Post-disturbance monitoring of Tooley Creek was also scheduled to begin in January 2007
but only five percent of the drainage basin was estimated to be impacted. PCS Phosphate did not
believe there would be any "significant measurable results" from that level of impact, requested that
monitoring not be conducted "until 10 percent or more of the basin was impacted", and NCDWQ
approved the request in a letter dated 4 December 2006. Table 1 summarizes by parameter and by
creek the pre- and post-impact monitoring conducted on the NCPC creeks according to the approved
1998 monitoring program.
In November 2000, PCS applied for authorization to continue its phosphate mining operations
on the Hickory Point peninsula (NCPC Tract) adjacent to the Pamlico River and South Creek once
phosphate reserves were depleted under the 1997 permitted area for Alternative E. In 2001, an EIS
process was begun for the continuation of mining. The Corps established that it would be appropriate
to consider holistic mine plans that included mining in more than one tract. PCS proposed
alternatives for mining in two additional tracts (Bonnerton and South of Route 33 [S33]). In January
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions 1
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
Table 1. Pre- and post-impact monitoring by parameter and by creek in NCPC creeks according to the 1998 program.
1999
AMJJASOND 1999
JFMAMJJASOND 2000
JFMAMJJASOND 2001
JFMAMJJASOND 2002
JFMAMJJASOND 2003
JFMAMJJASOND 2004
JFMAMJJASOND 2006
JFMAMJJAS0ND 0
°v 2007
JFMAMJJASOND 2008
JFMAMJJASOND 2009
JFMAMJJASOND
.lacks Creek'
rr
r r
Flow r
"
r
`
Salinity r
r
r
Wetland water level
f+ r ;r+` jr r
Water quality
Vegetation
Fish
Benthos
Sediment
Tnnle)4 Creek e
Flow rr; . +: ji:•++; r.+; , , '.;;j; rf , . ; fr:++'+r=;; r;.: +. ;rr r;'+ i; : /=r r ;r f r;+'

Salinity r; ,+
Wetland water level rt+r';ri; r' rf/fr:; ;r: /+rrf.fifi+ r/r :'rfi v
Water quality r+ r r r r f f

Vegetation
Fish

Benthos

Sediment
Hurirlles rnt

fflflA
pp??
ry

VJflff
??jyy
4f1 o

o
c
F
z

Flow

Salinity
+r
? j+'1
+
;i
:+,f rr
/
.
. r'
fr:
:f . r ` `+` ,• : !
,
!;•,;
Wetland water level , ,
,
.
;
. .
,
.
,
.
.
;
i;' ,.?:
;;,=r,; .r
,• r+r : r;r
.; !: rr
;jrr? r jr; j'r//
Water quality
{
r
r
.
Vegetation
Fish
Benthos
Sediment
; l1 Fl
r r
r '
' Total Jack's Creek basin reduction by end of 2009 is estimated at 346 acres or 54.7 percent.
n Total Tooley's Creek basin reduction by end of 2009 is estimated at 20.8 acres or 5 percent. pre-impact post-impact
` Total Huddles Cut basin reduction by end of 2009 is estimated at 159.19 acres or 43 percent.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions 2
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
2009 NCDWQ issued PCS a 401 Water Quality Certification and in June of 2009, the Corps issued
PCS a 404 permit for impacts associated with Modified Alternative L. In their 2009 permit conditions,
the Corps selected the addition of Jacobs and Drinkwater Creeks in the NCPC Tract and Porter
Creek in the Bonnerton Tract and in their certification conditions, NCDWQ selected the addition of
"representative number of streams in each tract" and "tributaries to South Creek, Porter Creek,
Durham Creek and the Pamlico River adjacent to the mine site" for monitoring. Figures 2, 3, and 4
depict the permitted Modified L Alternative on a biotic community map and Figures 5, 6, and 7 depict
the permitted boundary on a 2007 aerial photograph.
1.3 Draft Plan of Study. CZR has worked extensively on the three PCS tracts
beginning in NCPC in 1988, conducting a wide range of environmental studies including wetland
delineations, plant community mapping and descriptions, wildlife studies, water quality sampling,
aquatic sampling, and other related activities. PCS requested CZR to use this on-site experience to
evaluate and respond to the 2009 401 WQC Condition #13 and the Corps' 404 permit Conditions S
and T related to Modified Alternative L, re-enlist Skaggs in modeling and quantification of flow in these
creek systems, and to develop the draft Plan of Study.
The 401 and 404 conditions itemized in the next section require PCS to continue the existing
agency-approved NCPC stream monitoring program along with the addition of yet-to-be-determined
additional monitoring as suggested. Determination of this additional monitoring will be initiated by the
submittal of this new draft Plan of Study to NCDWQ by 10 December 2009 as required by WQC
Condition 13. This draft Plan of Study will be further developed over the subsequent months by the
NCDWQ, Corps, and an as yet unidentified Science Panel. The Plan must be submitted to the Corps
and NCDWQ for review within 1 year of the issuance of the permit, or 10 June 2010, per 404
Condition S.
Appendix A of this Plan of Study contains the October 1998 NCPC Tract Stream Monitoring
Program as approved by the agencies and which has been followed since 1998 (CZR and Skaggs
1998). On-site data, background literature review, and the monitoring methodologies used to date in
the NCPC stream monitoring program are contained in the October 1998 document. Appendix B of
this Plan of Study contains the executive summaries of each of the annual NCPC Tract stream
monitoring reports submitted to the agencies every spring during the course of the monitoring
program through 2008 (executive summaries were prepared forthis appendixforthe 1998, 1999, and
2000 reports which did not contain them in the original reports). Copies of any of the entire annual
reports will be available to the Panel members upon request.
2.0 APPLICABLE 401 CERTIFICATION AND 404 PERMIT CONDITIONS
Condition #13 of the 401 Water Quality Certification No. 3771 issued 15 January 2009 bythe
NCDWQ reads as follows:
13. Stream and watershed monitoring - The existing water
management and stream monitoring plan for water quality, water
quantity and biology (macrobenthos and fish) shall be continued for
the life of the Permit bythe applicant. Additional monitoring shall be
proposed by the applicant and approved by DWQ for tributaries in
the Bonnerton and South of 33 Tracts before land clearing or
impacts occur to those locations. This additional monitoring plan
shall collect data from a representative number of streams in each
tract and be designed to assure the protection of downstream water
quality standards including Primary and Secondary Nursery Area
functions in tributaries to South Creek, Porter Creek, Durham Creek
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions 3
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
and the Pamlico River adjacent to the mine site. Monitoring
locations shall include the upper end of Porter Creek in the "58A"
area of the Bonnerton Road Non-Riverine Wet Hardwood Forest in
order to ensure that hydrology of this wet hardwood forest is
maintained.
The plan shall identify any deleterious effects to riparian wetland
functions including by [sic] not limited to water storage, pollutant
removal, streambank stabilization, as well as resident wetland-
dependent aquatic life and resident wetland-dependent wildlife and
aquatic life in wetlands and streams tributaryto the Pamlico River in
the NCPC, Bonnerton and South of 33 Tracts. If necessary,
management activities to protect or restore these uses will be
required for all the tributaries of these three tracts.
PCS shall notify DWQ in writing at least one month in advance of
any biological sampling so DWQ biologists can accompany PCS
biologists as needed. Also a certified lab is required for the
identification of freshwater benthic macro invertebrate samples. For
estuarine samples, a knowledgeable lab shall be used until such
time as DWQ certifies laboratories for estuarine analysis and after
that time, only suitably certified labs shall be used. Finally a fish
monitoring plan shall be included in the final monitoring plan
submitted to DWQ for written approval.
This stream and watershed monitoring plan shall be submitted to
DWQ for written approval within six months of the issuance of the
404 Permit. Seven copies (two hard copies and five CD's [sic] of
the draft plan and annual reports shall be submitted to DWQ for
circulation and review by the public and other federal and state
agencies.
In addition, Conditions S, T, U, V, W, and X of the Corps' 404 Permit No. 200110096 issued
10 June 2009 state the following:
S. In concert with the monitoring requirements contained in the
Water Quality Certification, the Permittee shall develop a Plan of
Study to address the effects of reduction in headwater wetlands on
the utilization of Porters [sic] Creek, Tooley Creek, Jacobs Creek,
Drinkwater Creek, and Jacks Creek as nursery areas by resident
fish and appropriate invertebrate species. This plan shall be
submitted to the Corps and NCDWQ for approval within 1 year of
the issuance of this permit. At a minimum, the plan shall address
the following issues:
1) Has mining altered the amount or timing of water flows
within the creeks? Data collection may include:
i) Continuous water level recorders to
measure flow
ii) Rain gauges to measure local water input
iii) Groundwater wells to measure inputtothe
creeks
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions 4
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
iv) Semi-continuous salinity monitoring
v) Periodic DO monitoring (continuously
monitored for several days at strategic
times of year)
2) Has mining altered the geomorphic or vegetative character
of the creeks? Data collection may include:
i) Annual aerial photography to determine
creek position, length, width, sinuosity
ii) Annual cross sectional surveys of each
creek at established locations
iii) Annual sediment characterization
iv) Annual vegetation surveys along creeks
v) Spring and fall sediment surface
chlorophylls or organic content in
vegetation zone.
vi) Spring and fall location of flocculation
zones with each creek.
3) Has mining altered the forage base of the creeks? Data
collection may include:
i) Spring and fall benthic cores to sample
macroinfauna.
ii) Spring and fall benthic grabs focused on
bivalves, such as Rangia sp.
iii) Periodic sampling for pelagic species
such as grass shrimp, blue crabs, and
small forage fish. Sampling gears would
be chosen to reflect ontogenetic shifts in
creek usage.
4) Has mining altered the use of the creeks by managed fish?
Data collection may include periodic sampling for species
managed under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation Management Act. Sampling would occur
during appropriate times of the year and gears would be
chosen to reflect ontogenetic shifts in creek usage.
5) Has mining increased contaminate [sic] levels within creek
sediments to levels that could impact fish or invertebrates?
Data collection may include annual sediment and water
column sampling for metals, including cadmium, mercury,
silver, copper, and arsenic. If elevated levels are detected,
the availability and uptake by appropriate aquatic species
(e.g. Rangia sp., blue crabs) should [sic] measured using
appropriate bioassay techniques.
6) Has mining altered overall water quality within creeks?
Water quality parameters analyzed will include: Salinity,
Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen, pH, Secchi depth,
Turbidity, Chlorophyll a, Dissolved orthophosphate
phosphorus, Total dissolved phosphorus, Particulate
phosphorus, Nitrate nitrogen, Ammonia nitrogen,
particulate nitrogen, and Dissolved Kjeldahl nitrogen.
T. Monitoring under the Plan of Study referenced in condition "S"
above shall commence immediately upon the Plan's approval by
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions 5
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
the Corps and NCDWQ. Monitoring shall continue for 10 years
following the completion of all reclamation work within the
headwaters of the subject creeks unless the Corps, in consultation
with the appropriate resource agencies agrees that monitoring can
be discontinued.
U. The Permittee shall within 6 months of the issuance date of this
permit, work with the Corps and NCDWQ to establish an
independent multidisciplinary panel of researchers qualified in the
subject matter to be examined (Science Panel). In identifying
potential participants for this Panel, the Permittee shall seek input
from all interested and appropriate resource agencies including but
not limited to EPA, NMFS, USFWS, NCWRC, NCDMF, and the
appropriate permitting agencies including NCDCM, [sic] NCDLR.
The panel shall be comprised of between 2 and 5 members. The
members of this panel shall be given opportunity to provide input
and recommendations on the monitoring required by conditions X"
[pertains to monitoring of reclamation water quality and is not
addressed in this Plan of Study] and "S" above including research
design, reference site selection, sampling stations, schedules, and
methods; laboratory methods; data management and analysis; and
quality control and quality assurance. Any input supplied by
members of this panel will be presented to the Corps and NCDWQ
and will be incorporated as appropriate into the preparation of the
Plan of Study referenced in condition "S". Members of this panel
will also be given the opportunity to oversee all research conducted
toward fulfillment of conditions X" and "S".
V. The Permittee shall be responsible for fully implementing the
approved Plan of Study referenced in conditions "S", "T", and "U"
above. Annual summaries of all data collected in compliance with
r conditions X" and "S shall be presented to the Corps, NCDWQ
and all members of the Science Panel on or before May 1 of the
year following collection. The Perm itee and/or the Corps will make
these reports available in whole or in summary to any interested
party.
W. The Permittee shall coordinate and facilitate an annual meeting
of the Science Panel, the Corps, NCDWQ, and all other interested
state and federal agencies including but not limited to EPA, NMFS,
USFWS, NCWRC, NCDMF, NCDCM, [sic] NCDLR. This meeting
shall occur no later than July 30 of each year. The purpose of this
meeting will be to allow the members of the Science Panel to
provide input to the agencies on any observed trends in parameters
measured and general discussions on whether direct and indirect
impacts from mining and benefits from the compensatory mitigation
appear to be in accordance with expectations at the time of
permitting. Members of the Science Panel shall also be given the
opportunity to provide any recommendations for management or
further study. The proceedings of this meeting including data
summaries, reports, presentations and any conclusions of the
group will be made available in whole or in summary to any
interested party. The Corps will fully consider all information
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions 6
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
presented by the Science Panel as well as comments from state
and federal agencies and all other parties supplying input to
determine if corrective actions or permit modifications are needed.
If substantive changes to the mine plan, compensatory mitigation
plan or monitoring plan are made, the Corps will announce such
change by Public Notice and allow for public comment.
X. At appropriate intervals to be decided by the Corps after input
from the Science Panel (eg. [sic] 3 to 5 years) beginning from the
date of permit issuance, members of the panel shall be given the
opportunity to review monitoring methods, sampling locations,
parameters analyzed, and other elements of monitoring protocol to
determine if modifications to the plan are appropriate. All data
reviewed by the panel shall be made available to the public.
3.0 HISTORIC AND CURRENT DRAINAGE BASIN REFINEMENTS
3.1 Light detection and ranging (LiDAR) refinements. In an attempt to produce a
more accurate quantification of anthropomorphic changes to the drainage basins of these creek
systems through mining, silvicultural, and agricultural practices, historic and current drainage basin
calculations were revised in late 2009 using LiDAR (Figures 8, 9, and 10). The basins were also
expanded to include the entire Hickory Point peninsula in the NCPC Tract, not just the area of the
basins contained within the PCS boundaries. As would be expected, this revision produced some
basin totals different than those used in the 1996 and 2008 FEIS' and in the Corps' calculations of
drainage basin percent reductions for each creek in the Records of Decision. These graphics are
likely to be further refined. Table 2 shows the drainage basin acres for each creek from LiDAR-
estimated historic conditions up through Modified Alternative L and the overall percent reduction from
historic areas. The reductions include all past human activities, not just mine-related reductions.
Table 2. Temporary drainage basin reductions since 1998 and estimated percent reduction from
historic basin acreages following Modified Alternative L impacts.
Creek Historic
basin
(ac) Current
basin (ac) Modified
Alternative L
reduction (ac) Acres
remaining Reduction from
historic (%)
NCPC Tract
Huddles Cut 1,014 593 446 147 86
Huddy Gut 482 409 142 267 45
Tooley Creek 563 613 180 433 23
Drinkwater Creek 605 402 254 148 75
Jacobs Creek 751 527 221 306 59
Jacks Creek 645 316 183 133 79
Bonnerton Tract
Porter Creek 3,719 2,492 1,694 798 79
Durham Creek 37,550 36,415 2,445 33,970 10
Bailey Creek 4,069 3,217 1,254 1,963 52
South 33 Tract
Broomfield Swamp 2,843 3,129 1,966 1,163 59
Cypress Run 3,000 3,453 2,347 1,106 63
Note: Bailey Creek basin lies in both Bonnerton and South 33 Tracts and agricultural ditches have
enlarged some drainage basins in South 33 Tract beyond historic dimensions.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions 7
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
4.0 LESSONS LEARNED FROM EXISTING FLOW MONITORING PROGRAM, CURRENT
CONSTRAINTS, AND A NEW APPROACH
During the development of the 1998 NCPC stream monitoring plan, it was impossible to know
for certain where, or if, PCS would receive a future permit to continue mining beyond what was
authorized in 1997. As a result, the location of all flow monitoring equipment was determined based
on current conditions in the late 1990s and was placed where it would best function for the collection
of the required data (in areas of intermittent flow). Figures 11, 12, and 13 depict existing monitoring
locations from the 1998 plan for Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek, and Huddles Cut. Mining allowed in the
2009 permit will remove or has removed some of those flow stations as well as some of the hydrology
monitoring locations in place since 1998. The red circles on these three graphics indicate original
monitoring locations affected by the new permit. With the 2009 permit boundary now known, the
opportunity to deploy new monitoring equipment such that the locations will remain the same for the
pre-impact and post-impact/reclamation monitoring is important to consider.
In some cases, the locations of the weirs used to monitor flow in the NCPC creeks since 1998
will not be disturbed by the newly permitted mine advance but there will be no or very little upstream
drainage basin flow contribution to monitor after mining, e.g., Tooley Creek flow stations and Huddles
Cut flow stations at Ogletree Road and the upper main prong. In some cases the newly permitted
mine advance will actually eliminate the weir location, e.g., in the western prong of Huddles Cut.
Therefore, the four stations at the Huddles Cut weirs used to monitor flow in since 1998 have either
been removed in 2009 or will be removed in 2010. The Tooley Creek stations will be removed in
2010. None of the Huddles Cut or Tooley Creek weirs can be moved further downstream than their
previous locations because once the weir location is in perennial waters, it is difficult to separate those
flow events coming from the upstream basin from wind tide events, adding an unacceptable degree of
error to the calculations made from the weir equations.
As a replacement for weirs, the use of other flow monitoring equipment utilizing Doppler
technology designed to measure bi-directional flow in estuarine environments was explored in 2009
by CZR, PCS, and Skaggs. This equipment proved problematic as it does not function well in the
shallow waters found in the upper portions of these South Creek tributaries, nor does it function well in
waters containing aquatic vegetation, which all of these creeks contain in their upstream and
downstream segments. While Doppler technology does allow accurate measurement of bidirectional
flow, it would be extremely difficult to confidently separate and quantify that portion of flow that is
contributed only from the upstream basin.
In recognition of the challenge to collect adequate and accurate flow data contributed only
from the upstream drainage basin in the shallow and often vegetated perennial segments of these
creeks, Skaggs' team utilized 2003 flow data collected on the upper segments of Jacks Creek in
conjunction with LiDAR and DRAINMOD to devise a mass balance approach to predict flow using
tidal stage and storage area. With the collection of additional survey data within each basin,
especially in the water edge areas where the level fluctuates, this mass balance approach can be
further refined for each impacted creek. The mass balance approach proposed by Skaggs' team will
provide a method to estimate the effect of flows from small coastal watersheds on hydrology (water
balance) in the receiving bays and the impact of mining on flow conditions. Appendix C contains the
Skaggs team's proposed methodology in more detail.
5.0 TYPES OF MONITORING
5.1 Pre-impact. Post-impact, and post-reclamation monitoring thresholds. As
with the previous monitoring plan, impacts are presumed to begin from the point in time that the
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions 8
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
mine's perimeter depressurization canal is dug across a portion of a drainage basin; an activity that
interrupts the normal infiltration and sheet flow processes. Post-impact monitoring will begin when 10
percent or more of a drainage basin has been impacted. Reclamation is considered complete when a
capped area is planted which will initiate the 10 years of post-reclamation monitoring.
5.2 True baseline and original baseline monitoring. True baseline data for any of
the NCPC Tract creeks have not and cannot be obtained because of past disturbances, although their
historic drainage basins have been estimated as described earlier in this document. For the 1998
plan, the pre-impact data, or the "original baseline" before Alternative E activities, were collected for
Jacks Creek for one year, and for three years each in Huddles Cut and Tooley Creek. For the
Bonnerton and South 33 Tracts, the subject creeks have been affected by ditching and other human
activities, but their historic drainage basins have not been reduced by mining; therefore, baseline data
collected in these areas will be "true baseline".
5.3 Modified baseline monitoring. For the purposes of this Plan of Study, it is
presumed that a new "modified baseline" begins with monitoring activities described herein to track
impacts in NCPC creeks before Modified Alternative L but after Alternative E (new pre-impact).
Additional monitoring will track impacts after Modified Alternative L and Alternative E combined (new
post-impact). Since the expanded monitoring required under the new permit and described in
Section 6.0 also includes parameters not collected or analyzed as part of the 1998 plan, it is
necessary to collect new "modified baseline" data in as many of the creeks as possible to compare
with the new post-impact data.
5.4 Proposed extension of length of modified baseline monitoring. Five years
of true or modified baseline monitoring should provide a data set which has statistical significance
when compared to any post-impact monitoring. Unfortunately, the timing of the permit, continuation of
and/or initiation of mine impacts, and timing of the approval of the Plan of Study which will initiate
monitoring, will likely preclude the ability to collect five years of modified baseline or pre-impact data
for some of the NCPC creeks. In fact, in Huddles Cut, Modified Alternative L impacts immediately
followed Alternative E impacts, with no opportunity for collection of modified baseline data priorto new
impacts; and, depending on when the perimeter canal is dug, possibly only one additional year of
modified baseline data will be collected in Tooley Creek and only two years in Drinkwater Creek. Five
years of modified baseline or pre-impact data are expected to be collected for Jacobs Creek in NCPC
and true baseline data collected for the tributary creeks in Bonnerton (including Porter Creek) and for
the monitored creek in South 33 Tract.
5.5 Post-reclamation monitoring. The expanded monitoring described in Section
6.0 also contains new parameters not collected to date and will occur for as many as 10 years after
the completion of reclamation (post-reclamation).
6.0 EXISTING AND EXPANDED MONITORING
Many of the draft figures depicting the proposed monitoring locations do not yet depict the locations of
all equipment shown in the figure legends. PCS recognizes that locations of all monitoring activities
or equipment will be determined as the Plan of Study is revised and finalized and through more
thorough field reconnaissance of each specific creek or habitat of interest.
6.1 Salinity, dissolved oxygen, and water level monitoring. In addition to the
ongoing salinity and water level monitoring in Huddles Cut, Tooley Creek, and Jacks Creek conducted
since 1998, beginning in fall of 2010 (pending approval of this Plan), salinity and water level monitors
will be installed in Drinkwater Creek and Jacobs Creek for baseline data collection (approximately two
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions 9
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
years in Drinkwater and five years in Jacobs) (Figures 14 and 15). In response to Corps' Condition
S.1).v. all the salinity water level monitors will also collect semi-continuous dissolved oxygen data.
Five years before impacts are expected to occurto Porter Creek (- 2010) or Durham Creek (2013)
similar monitors will also be installed at similar landscape positions in the Porter Creek system (Figure
16) and a tributary to Durham Creek (DCUT 11) (Figure 17), and Durham Creek (Figure 18). The
impacted tributary to Durham Creek, DCUT 11, was selected because of the two largest Durham
Creek tributaries in the Bonnerton Tract to be impacted it is the only one with a feature remaining to
monitor post-impact.
Near the end of the life of mining in the Bonnerton Tract, PCS will determine if it is practicable
for the mine to expand into the S33 Tract. If the decision is made to open a mine pit in S33 (projected
for 2026), then PCS will initiate the collection of five years of baseline salinity and water level
monitoring in either Broomfield Swamp Creek or Cypress Run, whichever is deemed most
"representative" at the time, based on knowledge gained from the previous years of monitoring the
other tributary creeks and other applicable and current research (Figures 19 and 20).
Like the existing salinity and water level monitors, all the new equipment for these parameters
will be located near the mouths of the creeks and near the upper portion of perennial waters in the
smaller systems. Salinity data will be interpreted in light of the rainfall, mass balance and tidal stage
model, and water level data to allow evaluation of the effects of drainage basin input and wind tides
on salinity. When the Porter Creek monitoring begins, a new salinity station will be added at the
mouth of Durham Creek for the same purpose. Salinity, water level, and dissolved oxygen will be
monitored in PAII beginning in 2010 since this system, with almost no contributing drainage basin,
may also provide valuable comparative data. Once the effects of local drainage basin input on salinity
have been fully evaluated, predictions of the likely effects of drainage basin reduction can be made.
Salinity, water level, and dissolved oxygen monitoring will continue during the years of drainage basin
reduction to allow confirmation of the predictions.
Salinity, water level, and dissolved oxygen will continue to be monitored at control stations in
South Creek and the Pamlico River so that system-wide wind tide effects on salinity can be identified
(Figures 21 and 22). Where possible, these same types of monitoring stations will also be installed in
Muddy Creek (existing control) and the newly proposed controls presented in Section 7.0 below.
6.2 Water duality monitoring. Water quality data will continue to be collected per the
1998 approved monitoring plan for Huddles Cut, Jacks Creek, and Tooley Creek (Figures 11-13).
Additional water quality sampling locations have been identified for Drinkwater, Jacobs, and Porter
Creek, the tributary to Durham Creek (DCUT 11), Durham Creek, Broomfield Swamp, and Cypress
Run (Figures 14 - 20). In response to Corps Conditions S.2).iii. and S.2).v., in addition to the
parameters collected since 1998, PCS proposes to also collect dissolved and particulate organic
carbon (DOC and POC) in the water column. The water column will be sampled during the collection
of sediment samples at the same locations that sediment is sampled (July of every monitoring year).
It is presumed that the shallow well-mixed nature of these systems allows the collection of one 2-liter
sample at each monitoring location, rather than surface, middle, and bottom column samples at each
location. In response to Corps' Condition S.5, the same 2-liters of water column will also be analyzed
for the metals cadmium, silver, copper, and arsenic.
6.3 Sediment monitoring. Sediment samples will continue to betaken annually and
analyzed for chemical and elemental constituents as described in the 1998 plan for Huddles Cut,
Tooley Creek and Jacks Creek. Drinkwater Creek, Jacobs Creek, Porter Creek, the tributary to
Durham (DCUT11), the to-be-determined S33 creek, and the control creeks will be monitored with
similar methodology according the timeline of proposed monitoring. In response to Corps Conditions
S.2).iii. and S.2).v., all sediment samples will also be analyzed for DOC, POC, and sand, silt, clay
fractions in all the monitored creeks. Sediment sampling locations for each impacted creek are shown
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions 10
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
on Figures 11-20 and Figures 23 -27.
6.4 Fish and benthos monitoring. Data on the abundance and species composition
of fish and benthos in the creeks will continue to be collected per the 1998 approved plan for Huddles
Cut, Jacks Creek, and Tooley Creek. Drinkwater and Jacobs Creeks in NCPC will begin to be
monitored for these two parameters in 2010 or 2011, depending on the timing of the approval of this
Plan. In the Bonnerton Tract, a tributary to Durham (DCUT11) and Porter Creek will begin pre-impact
monitoring of these parameters in approximately 2011. In response to Corps' Conditions S.3.ii and
S.3.iii, any grass shrimp, bivalves, or small forage fish captured in either the benthic Ponar grabs or
timed sweeps will also be identified and enumerated. Fish and benthos locations for each impacted
creek are shown on Figures 11-20.
The methodology for spring sampling of the juvenile fish present will be unchanged with the
exception that grass shrimp and blue crabs brought up in the trawl will also be enumerated and
identified (per Corps' Condition S.3.iii.). Small forage fish are already enumerated and identified.
Also, the annual reporting of the fish data will now include a retrospective table listing any captured
species managed under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation Management Act (per Corps'
Condition SA.).
6.5 Biomass size spectra (BSS). As an additional method to help determine the
potential "effects of reduction in headwater wetlands on the utilization... as nursery areas by resident
fish and appropriate invertebrate species" (Corps' Condition S) and to provide a window into the
functioning of the monitored estuarine creeks, PCS proposes to expand the existing biotic monitoring
to include the collection of additional fish and zooplanktonic/ichthyoplanktonic data such that biomass
size relationships can be analyzed and integrated across trophic levels and compared within creeks,
among creeks, and to the control creeks. According to Jung and Houde (2005), BSS are one way to
simplify explanations of complex trophic interactions and also may have potential applications in
fisheries management. Jennings (2005) describes the size-based approach as a basis for describing
the wider impacts of human activities and one which places populations in an ecosystem context. As
a conserved property in all aquatic systems, the BSS method is broadly applicable as a depiction of
abundance and of distributions of organisms by size classes. When integrated across trophic levels
(fish to zooplankton), BSS can offer a broad evaluation of the state of an estuary from an analysis of
its combined trophic constituents. The integral spectrum (overarching relationship) between size and
abundance is expressed theoretically with a slope of -1 plotted on log2-transformed axes. Shifts,
trends, or anomalies in BSS metrics, whether within a trophic component or across trophic levels,
portray real changes in biological community structure and can be indicative of change in the state of
the estuary (Houde et al 2003). Size spectra at a steady state can be described as a function with a
linear slope, although dome like structures (Jung and Houde 2005, and others) and wave-like
structures oscillating around the steady state which depict predator-prey interaction at the heart of
size-spectrum dynamics are also possible (Law et al 2009).
Biomass size spectra have been used recently as indicators of ecosystem state, change, and
quality in the NOAA-supported Atlantic Coast Environmental Indicators Consortium (ACE INC) study
on the health of the Chesapeake Bay (http://cfrpub.epa.gov/ncer-abstracts/INCDEX.cfm) and
mentioned as well in the EPA's Office of Research and Development May 2005 update (EPA 2005).
ACE INC results demonstrate that BSS indicators are best used to detect multi-year ordecadal shifts
in community structure, although extreme environmental conditions (drought, wet years) can be
detected.
To capture zooplankton and ichthyoplankton for the BSS, PCS proposes to sample surface
waters in January, May, and September using daytime tows with a conical 30-cm diameter, 250-
micron mesh plankton net towed by boat from the headwaters to the mouth of the sampled creeks.
Samples will be preserved in the field with -5percent formalin solution until they are sorted, identified,
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions 11
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
and enumerated at the laboratory. This methodology will duplicate those described in CZR 1990 with
the exception of the locations and numbers of sample events. January, May, and September were
chosen because those were the months with the most ichthyoplankton diversity in the 1990 study and
would also include all the groups of ichthyoplankton in the 1990 study.
To capture larger sized fish for the BSS, in addition to the juveniles caught in the otter trawls,
PCS proposes to also utilize experimental gill nets (nets with sections of various mesh sizes) nearthe
mouths of the sampled creeks every other week during the weeks of the juvenile fish sampling with
the otter trawl (April, May, and June). Figures 11-20 show proposed monitoring locations for the
impacted creeks.
6.6 Wetland vegetation monitoring. Abundance, health, and species composition
of the bottomland hardwood vegetation just above perennial waters has been monitored since 1998 in
Huddles Cut, Jacks Creek, and Tooley Creek per the 1998 plan. Drinkwater Creek, Jacobs Creek,
Porter Creek, trib to Durham Creek, and the chosen S33 creek will be similarly monitored beginning at
the appropriate time as dictated by mine activities. In addition to the bottomland hardwood vegetation
monitoring plots described in the 1998 plan, PCS proposes to also annually record the most upstream
locations of the following three species: saw grass (Cladium jamiacense), black needlerush (Juncus
roemerianus), and smooth cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora). In conjunction with monitoring of the
bottomland hardwood vegetation plots, the most upstream individuals of these three species will be
located with GPS by biologists performing a walking survey of the ecotone between the most
upstream location of the existing marsh and the adjacent community. Similar ecotones in some of the
control creeks will also be surveyed for these three species although those control creeks may not
have bottomland hardwood vegetation monitoring plots. Vegetation monitoring plot locations for each
impacted creek are shown on Figures 11-20 (not yet depicted on graphics).
6.7 Wetland hydrology monitoring. Monitoring of the hydrology of the headwater or
bottomland hardwood wetlands will continue per the 1998 plan for all the monitored creeks to
determine the relative influences of wind tides and drainage basin input. Per Corps' Condition S.1). ii.
rain gauges will be installed in each creek's drainage basin to more accurately correlate wetland
hydrology to local rainfall. Water level data collected for the salinity monitoring and Skaggs' proposed
hydrography model can be used to assist in the wetland hydrology analysis. Hydrology monitoring well
and rain gauge locations for each impacted creek are shown on Figures 11-20 (not yet depicted on all
graphics).
7.0 REFERENCE OR CONTROL CREEK SYSTEMS
7.1 Existing reference or control creek system. Muddy Creek has been used as
the control creek for fish, benthos, and sediment sampling since 1998 although it is perceived by
some agency personnel to have limitations as a comparator because of its large drainage basin size
(2,200 acres; estimated from USGS topographic quadrangle) compared to the average of all the
impacted creeks (1,263 acres) or the average of all the impacted tributaries of NCPC (875 acres).
However, it does serve as a demonstration of regional external dynamics also experienced by the
impacted creeks (e.g., salinity and fisheries fluctuations, climate, sea level rise, large storms, or
droughts), allowing mine effects to be removed as causes of some potential phenomena captured in
the monitoring data. Figure 23 shows the current and proposed locations of monitoring in Muddy
Creek.
7.2 Proposed new reference or control creek systems. Google Earth, USGS
topographic quads, and LiDAR were used to measure the width of the mouths of the impacted creeks,
the length of their open waters, and to estimate drainage basin size. These parameters, in addition to
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions 12
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
proximity, were used to search for new candidate creek systems that may serve as additional control
creeks for the impacted creeks. Preliminary field reconnaissance was then conducted by CZR to
confirm the candidates. Based on inherent characteristics and ownership constraints, proposed
candidate creeks may be monitored for only some parameters. As examples, PA2 has little
headwater wetlands and no bottomland hardwood community for vegetation plots, or the bottomland
hardwood community of a candidate creek may be in private hands limiting monitoring to aquatic
activities such as fish and benthos sampling and plankton capture. For any aquatic monitoring
equipment that needs to be permanently mounted to a structure, PCS will seek CAMA permits forthe
construction of these small docks or piers, as was done for some of the 1998 monitoring locations, or
attempt to obtain permission from private landowners to mount equipment on their existing pier.
7.2.1 PA2. As part of the new monitoring program, PCS proposes to add PA2 as a
control site for fish, benthos, sediment, and water quality parameters since this area currently
functions as a created estuary with an extremely small drainage basin (22 acres). However, PA2 will
not be monitored for bottomland hardwood vegetation or the marsh plant species migration as it is
primarily a totally brackish marsh system and its basin is too confined for the marsh plant species to
migrate much further upstream. Figure 24 shows the proposed monitoring locations in PA2.
7.2.2 UT to Ross Creek. As another control system for the NCPC tributaries, PCS
proposes to use an unnamed tributary to Ross Creek. Ross Creek is a major tributary to North
Creek, located directly across the Pamlico River from South Creek, with an estimated drainage basin
size of -567 acres (estimated from USGS topographic quadrangle). The NC Division of Marine
Fisheries (NCDMF) has designated North Creek a permanent Secondary Nursery Area (SNA) and
Ross Creek and its tributaries as Primary Nursery Areas (PNAs). The land adjacent to this feature is
under private ownership. Figure 25 shows the proposed monitoring locations in the UT to Ross
Creek.
7.2.3 Duck Creek. In addition, PCS also proposes to sample Duck Creek (- 3,118-
acre basin) as the control creek system for Porter Creek (- 3,728-acre basin). Duck Creek is a
tributary to the Pamlico River, located on the north side of the river across from Durham Creek. Much
of the eastern portion of the Duck Creek drainage basin is under the ownership of PCS, which will
facilitate access for any land-based monitoring. The NC Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC)
has designated Duck Creek and its tributaries as PNAs. Figure 26 shows the proposed monitoring
locations in Duck Creek.
7.2.4 Durham Creek tributary. As a control creek for impacts to the selected
impacted tributary to Durham Creek (DCUT 11 with a -139-acre drainage basin), PCS proposes to
monitor xxxx Creek. Figure 27 shows the proposed monitoring locations in xxxx Creek. (Several
potential creeks have been investigated but rejected; the search for a suitable creek continues.)
7.2.5 South 33 Tract reference creeks. At the time PCS decides whether or not to
mine in the South 33 Tract, a search will be conducted for suitable reference or control creek for the
"representative" impacted creek selected to be monitored.
8.0 TIMELINE OF IMPACTS AND MONITORING
8.1 Timeline of projected impacts and initiation of monitoring for all parameters.
Using the expected two-year impact schedule and reclamation schedule that PCS prepared for
planning purposes (Figures 28 and 29) each creek is projected to be monitored as shown in Table 3.
Approval of this Plan of Study is expected to occur in mid-summer of 2010 which will be too late in the
year for some parameters to be collected. For this reason, the fact that approved stations already
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions 13
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
exist, and the projected initiation of impacts in 2011, PCS has elected to begin collection of as many
of the parameters proposed in this draft Plan of Study as possible on 1 January 2010 in Tooley Creek,
prior to approval of the Plan of Study. Post-Alternative E impact data are already being collected in
approved stations in Huddles Cut, which will also continue on 1 January 2010, with the addition of as
many of the newly proposed parameters as possible. Any monitoring parameters that are not begun
on 1 January 2010 will begin as soon as conditions are appropriate or equipment is deployed. For
the other creeks in NCPC (Drinkwater, Jacobs, and Jacks), 2011 is expected to be the first complete
monitoring year for all parameters described in this Plan, or for all parameters in the final approved
Plan.
9.0 COORDINATION WITH SCIENCE PANEL AND ANNUAL REPORTING
As required by Corps Condition U, the Corps, NCDWQ, and PCS have begun discussions
toward the formation of a Science Panel of multidisciplinary researchers who will provide input and
recommendations on the monitoring required by Conditions K and S of the Corps permit. Condition K
does not pertain to this Plan of Study. The Corps solicited suggestions of potential panel members
from other interested or appropriate resource and permitting agencies via email dated 30 November
2009.
As required by Corps Condition V, annual summaries of all data collected in compliance with
required conditions and the final approved Plan of Study will be submitted by PCS on or before 1 May
of the following yearto the Corps, NCDWQ, and the Science Panel members. These summaries will
also be made available in whole or part to any interested party.
10.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL (QA/QA) PROGRAM AND SCIENCE
PANEL REVIEW
10.1 QA/QC Program approach. The Science Panel, the Corps, NCDWQ, and PCS
will develop a QA/QC program approach that features an optimized study design which is cost-
effective and science based, yet acknowledges the uncertainty limits of inferences and conclusions
that can be drawn from environmental parameters (Gibson et al., 2000). It will also allow for adaptive
management if the group agrees through time that adjustments in the overall plan or approach are
necessary while ensuring that no other important items in the plan or QA/QC approach are
compromised. The accuracy and precision, representativeness, completeness, comparability, and
measurability are aspects of the data quality that need to be identified in the sampling details and
recognized when conclusions are drawn. Other items that the QA/QC program could address may
include: training and certifications, documentation and records, statistical power of the sampling
design, sampling details and protocols, sample handling (chains of custody if appropriate), replication
and cross checks of field crews, voucher collections, equipment testing and calibration, and data
management.
10.2 Science Panel review. As required by Corps Condition W, no laterthan 30 July of
each monitoring year, PCS will coordinate and facilitate an annual meeting of the Science Panel,
NCDWQ, the Corps, and all other interested state and federal agencies. The meeting will provide an
opportunity forthe Panel to review any trends shown bythe data, make adjustments to management
or suggest further study, and for the group to have general discussion. All proceedings of these
annual meetings will be made available to any interested party.

Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions 14
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
Table 3. Estimated creek monitoring years pre- and post-impact from Modified Alternative L and post-reclamation completion (using 2 year impact schedule in 404/ROD and PCS reclamation schedule dated 3.16.09).
MON ITORING Y EARS
2
0
1
0 2
0
1
1 2
0
1
2 2
0
1
3 2
0
1
4 2
0
1
5 2
0
1
6 2
0
1
7 2
0
1
8 2
0
1
9 2
0
2
0 2
0
2
1 2
0
2
2 2
0
2
3 2
0
2
4 2
0
2
5 2
0
2
6 2
0
2
7 2
0
2
8 2
0
2
9 2
0
3
0 2
0
3
1 2
0
3
2 2
0
3
3 2
0
3
4 2
0
3
5 2
0
3
6 2
0
3
7 2
0
3
8 2
0
3
9 2
0
4
0 2
0
4
1 2
0
4
2 2
0
4
3 2
0
4
4 2
0
4
5 2
0
4
6 2
0
4
7 2
0
4
8 2
0
4
9 2
0
5
0 2
0
5
1 2
0
5
2 2
0
5
3 2
0
5
4 2
0
5
5 2
0
5
6 2
0
5
7 2
0
5
8 2
0
5
9 2
0
6
0 2
0
6
1 2
0
6
2 2
0
6
3 2
0
6
4
Creeks
Huddles Cut
Tooley°
Drinkwater°
Jacobs
Jacks
Porter
DCUT 11
Broomfield Swampe
Muddy
Duck
UT to Durham
Durham
PA2
UT to Ross Creek
a some segments shown as post-impact may have begun their 10 year post reclamation monitoring
b reclamation shown at last year possible for 10 year count (basin segments may have lag effect before complete reclamation)
part of first year shown in pink (post-impact) may still be pre-impact
d likely will only have part of 2010 as pre-impact, depending on timing of digging of perimeter canal
e Broomfield Swamp Creek chosen arbitrarily; agencies may select Cypress Run instead which could push post reclamation monitoring into 2072.
Impacts assumed to begin with digging of perimeter canal- but impossible to know that year from the schedule. The 10-year post reclamation monitoring begins with first vegetation year (Figure 29).
Control creeks may have different suites of parameters and different years of cessation of monitoring e.g., UT to Ross Creek and PA2 would likely stop being monitored in 2039 when NCPC post-reclamation monitoring is complete.
6:,A
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions 15
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
REFERENCES
CZR Incorporated. 1990. Report on the 1988-1989 hydrography, sediment, benthic, fisheries, and
zooplankton/ichthyoplankton surveys in support of the Environmental Impact Statement for
the Texasgulf Inc. mine continuation. 78 pp.
CZR Incorporated and Wayne Skaggs. NCPC Tract stream monitoring program for PCS Phosphate
Company, Inc. October 1998. 23pp.
Gibson, G.R., M.L. Bowman, J. Gerritsen, and B.D.Snyder. 2000. Estuarine and coastal marine
waters: bioassessment and biocriteria technical guidance. EPA 822-B-00-024. US
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington DC.
Houde. Edward D. et al.2003. Final report: Trophic indicators of ecosystem health in Chesapeake
Bay. EAGLES-Atlantic Coast Environmental Indicators Consortium. EPA Grant Number:
R828677C002.
Jennings, Simon. 2005. Size-based analyses of aquatic food webs. Pp. 86-97 in Andrea Belgrano,
Ursula M. Scharler, Jennifer Dunne, and Robert E. Ulanowicz (eds.). Aquatic food webs, an
ecosystem approach. Oxford University Press, New York.
Jung, Sukgeun and Edward D. Houde. 2005. Fish biomass size spectra in Chesapeake Bay.
Estuaries. Vol.28, No. 2, p. 226-240. April.
Law, Richard et al. 2009. Size-spectra dynamics from stochastic predation and growth of individuals.
Ecology, 903(3). Pp. 802-811.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions 16
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
NCPC TRACT STREAM MONITORING PROGRAM FOR
PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC.
Prepared by:
CZR Incorporated, Wilmington, North Carolina
Dr. Wayne Skaggs, P.E.
Prepared for:
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Aurora, North Carolina
Prepared for review by:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Division of Land Resources
As revised per agency reviews
October 1998
Z R
INCORPORAT Ed_,
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
NCPC TRACT STREAM MONITORING PROGRAM FOR
PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC.
Prepared by:
CZR Incorporated, Wilmington, North Carolina
Dr. Wayne Skaggs, P.E.
Prepared for:
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Aurora, North Carolina
Prepared for review by:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Division of Land Resources
As revised per agency reviews
October 1998
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Paqe
COVER SHEET .................................................... i
TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................. ii
LIST OF FIGURES .................................................iii
INTRODUCTION ................................................ 1
REVIEW OF ON-SITE DATA AND APPLICABLE LITERATURE ............ 4
OBJECTIVES AND INFORMATION NEEDS ........................... 6
PROPOSED METHODOLOGY AND TIMING .......................... 8
1. SELECTION AND COORDINATION OF SPECIFIC SAMPLES SITES; DESCRIPTION
OF EXISTING CONDITIONS; ESTABLISHMENT OF MONITORING PROCEDURES,
AND PURCHASE, INSTALLATION, AND CALIBRATION OF EQUIPMENT ............ 8
A. In-depth Reconnaissance of Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek, and Huddles Cut Drainage
Areas and Selection of Specific Monitoring Sites ....................... 8
B. Description of Existing Conditions ................................ 8
C. Establishment of Monitoring Procedures, and Purchase, Installation, and
Calibration of Equipment ....................................... 8
1 . Installation of Shallow Monitoring Wells and Continuous Water
Level Recording Devices .................................. 9
2. Installation and Calibration of Flow Monitoring Stations ............. 9
3. Establishment of Vegetation Monitoring Plots .................... 9
4. Installation of Rain Gauges ............................... 14
5. Installation of Continuous Monitors at Salinity Monitoring Sites ...... 14
6. Establishment of Water Quality Monitoring Sites ................ 14
7. Establishment and Marking of Fish and Benthos Monitoring Sites ..... 16
D. Graphics Preparation ......................................... 16
E. Reporting ................................................. 16
IL BASELINE MONITORING PROTOCOL ................................... 16
A. Groundwater Monitoring ...................................... 16
B. Flow Monitoring and Modeling .................................. 18
C. Water Quality Monitoring ...................................... 18
D. Salinity Monitoring .......................................... 19
E. Vegetation Monitoring ........................................ 19
F. Fish and Benthos Monitoring ................................... 19
G. Photo Documentation of Monitoring Sites and Conditions ................ 20
H. Soil Property Measurements .................................... 20
1. Preparation of Annual Report ................................... 21
III. DURATION AND TIMING OF POST-DISTURBANCE MONITORING ................ 21
REFERENCES
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Paqe
1 Alternative E .................................................... 2
2 WL-80 and Shallow Monitoring Well Locations, Flow Monitoring Stations, and Water
Quality Monitoring Stations in the Jacks Creek Drainage ..................... 10
3 WL-80 and Shallow Monitoring Well Locations, Flow Monitoring Stations, and Water
Quality Monitoring Stations in the Tooley Creek Drainage .................... 11
4 WL-80 and Shallow Monitoring Well Locations, Flow Monitoring Stations, and Water
Quality Monitoring Stations in the Main Prong of Huddles Cut ................. 12
5 WL-80 and Shallow Monitoring Well Locations, Flow Monitoring Stations, and Water
Quality Monitoring Stations in the Western Prong of Huddles Cut ............... 13
6 Salinity Monitoring Sites ........................................... 15
7 Fish and Benthos Monitoring Sites .................................... 17
NCPC TRACT STREAM MONITORING PROGRAM FOR
PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC.
INTRODUCTION
CZR Incorporated (CZR), assisted by Dr. Wayne Skaggs and his group (Skaggs), have been
requested by PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. (PCS Phosphate) to prepare a stream monitoring plan to
respond to Section 404 permit conditions and to 401 Water Quality Certification conditions related to
Alternative E (Figure 1). Condition #6 of the 401 Water Quality Certification No. 3092 issued 6 May
1997 by the N.C. Division of Water Quality (DWQ) reads as follows:
6. A water management and stream monitoring plan for water quality, water quantity,
and biology (macrobenthos and fish) shall be developed by PCS Phosphate and
submitted to DWQ for written approval. This plan shall include monitoring for Huddles
Cut (which is a tributary of the Pamlico River) and Jacks Creek and Tooleys Creek
(which are tributaries of South Creek) or other streams with Primary Nursery Area
functions. This plan shall be designed to assure the protection of downstream water
quality standards, including downstream Primary Nursery Area functions, in all tributaries
to South Creek and Pamlico River adjacent to the mining site. This plan shall identify
any deleterious effect on riparian wetland function including but not limited to water
storage, pollutant removal, streambank stabilization, as well as resident wetland-
dependent aquatic life and resident wetland-dependent wildlife habitat and aquatic life
in streams tributary to the Pamlico River and South Creek on the Durham-South Creek
peninsula. This plan shall also provide mechanisms for written approval from DWQ to
remedy these effects if any are identified. If necessary, management activities to
protect these uses will be required for all of the tributaries to South Creek and Pamlico
River. This plan shall be submitted to DWQ within six months of the date of issuance
of the 404 Permit. Seven copies of the draft plan shall be submitted to DWQ for
circulation and review by the public and other agencies.
In addition, Conditions #3 and 5 of the 404 Permit No. 198800449 state the following:
3. The Permittee must perform appropriate studies developed in coordination with the
USACE and the State to assess whether there are water quality impacts or hydrologic
impacts on the tributaries of South Creek and the Pamlico River due to the removal of
drainage area from these tributaries. The NCDWQ condition addressing this issue should
satisfy this requirement. If adverse effects are identified within the tributaries identified
in the NCDWQ condition, the USACE may require that additional tributaries of the
Pamlico River and South Creek be included in the scope of the study. If unacceptable
impacts are identified, appropriate remedial action must be developed and implemented
by PCS to rectify the impact. This may include the addition of supplemental flows to
the tributaries by pumping water from the aquifer decompression canal into the drainage
of these systems.
5. The Permittee must comply with all 401 Water Quality Certification conditions
specified above and in Water Quality Certification #3092.
CZR has worked extensively on the NCPC Tract since 1988, conducting a wide range of
environmental studies including wetland delineations, plant community mapping and descriptions, wildlife
studies, water quality sampling, aquatic sampling, and other related activities. PCS Phosphate
requested CZR to use this on-site experience to evaluate and respond to the DWQ and USACE
conditions and to enlist Skaggs to assist in modeling and monitoring the water quantity for these stream
systems.
The DWQ selected three stream drainages (Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek, and Huddles Cut) to be
monitored (Figure 1). Huddles Cut is a tributary to the Pamlico River and has a drainage area of 872
acres. Jacks Creek, with a drainage area of 528 acres, and Tooley Creek, with a drainage area of 498
acres, are tributaries to South Creek. As shown in Table 5-3 of the Final Environmental Impact
Statement for the Texasgulf Inc. Mine Continuation (USACE 1996), the temporary drainage area
reductions to these three streams due to mining under Alternative E would be as follows:
Jacks Creek - 197 acres, or 37.3 percent, of the present 528 acres
Tooley Creek -- 67 acres, or 13.5 percent, of the present 498 acres
Huddles Cut -- 221 acres, or 25.3 percent, of the present 872 acres
From 1) on-site experience in the NCPC Tract over recent years, 2) literature dealing with the
NCPC creeks and similar systems, and 3) meetings between PCS Phosphate personnel, CZR Incorporated
biologists, and Skaggs, the study team determined that most of the monitoring will be directed at the
stream sections and forested riparian wetlands just above (upstream of) the CAMA markers on each
stream. These are the areas where freshwater flow from the drainages can be most readily measured
and is likely to have the greatest impact on plant and animal life. However, monitoring of the fish and
benthos in the estuarine portions of the creeks downstream from the CAMA markers will also be
accomplished as per agency suggestions. The time frame for the monitoring is set to begin in 1998,
with much of 1998 being used to finalize plans and purchase, install, and calibrate equipment. Fish and
benthos monitoring was conducted in May and June 1998. The vegetation monitoring was conducted
in August and September 1998. The flow monitors, groundwater wells, precipitation gauges, and
salinity monitors are projected to be installed and operational by December 1998.
The DWQ designated that the water management and stream monitoring plan be for 1) water
quality, 2) water quantity, and 3) biology (fish and benthos). CZR has proposed the tasks outlined
below to accomplish the required monitoring. The pre-mining monitoring results from each creek will
be compared with results from future similar sampling during the period that drainage basins are reduced
due to mining to determine any deleterious effects to riparian wetland functions.
3
REVIEW OF ON-SITE DATA AND APPLICABLE LITERATURE
Much information has been collected on the fisheries, salinity, and water quality of the creeks
in the PCS Phosphate vicinity. CZR collected extensive benthic, fisheries, and water quality data during
the 1988-89 EIS sampling work (CZR Incorporated 1990). The North Carolina Division of Marine
Fisheries (NCDMF) has collected extensive fisheries data and associated salinity data periodically since
the late 1970s. During the 1980s, East Carolina University scientists researched the fisheries and
salinity of the creeks near the Charles Tract clay ponds; on the NCPC Project Area II (a man-made creek
with essentially no drainage basin); and on Jacks, Jacobs, and Drinkwater Creeks (Lawson 1981,
Lawson 1982, West 1988, West 1990, Rulifson 1990). Additionally, North Carolina State University
researchers have conducted intensive studies of the salinity dynamics and fisheries of similar creeks near
the mouth of the Pamlico River and on the western shore of Pamlico Sound (Pietrafesa 1985, Moser
1987, Overton and Fisher 1988, Pietrafesa et al. 1988, Moser and Gerry 1989). Some limited data
have also been collected on salinity-induced changes in the bottomland hardwood wetlands in the
headwaters of these creeks (Brinson et al. 1985).
Salinity in the creeks near PCS Phosphate varies greatly, both on an annual and a short-term
basis. Salinity can range from fresh (0 ppt) to mesohaline (up to 17 ppt) (CZR Incorporated 1990).
Annual variability in salinity tends to follow the same pattern throughout the South Creek-Pamlico River
estuarine system. Control over this pattern has been attributed to freshwater input from the Tar River
(Stanley 1988, Nixon 1989). Available evidence suggests that short-term variation in salinity is
controlled largely by system-wide tidal fluctuations, which are controlled by changes in wind speed and
direction (CZR Incorporated 1994). For most of the small creeks near PCS Phosphate, the gradient in
surface salinity from the upper end of the estuarine portion of the creek to the mouth averages less than
2 ppt. This suggests that the influence of local freshwater input is minimal. However, local freshwater
input does seem to affect salinity near the upper end of tidal influence, especially for the creeks with
large drainage basins, such as Bailey, Whitehurst, and Porter Creeks. Unfortunately, the continuous
salinity, water level, and runoff data necessary to conclusively evaluate short-term salinity fluctuations
in these creeks do not exist. However, studies of continuous data on similar creeks near the mouth of
the Pamlico River and on the western shore of Pamlico Sound concluded that short-term salinity
fluctuations were caused primarily by wind tides, with local freshwater input being important only at the
uppermost ends of the creeks (Pietrafesa 1985, Pietrafesa et al. 1988, Overton and Fisher 1988). Thus
the available evidence suggests that any changes in salinity due to drainage basin reductions would be
minor and would be limited to the upper ends of the creeks.
Extensive trawl data collected over the years by various researchers show that these creeks are
nursery areas for juvenile finfish and crustaceans. The catch tends to be dominated by a few common
species, but numbers and species composition vary greatly from month to month, from year to year,
and from creek to creek (Lawson 1981, Lawson 1982, West 1988, CZR Incorporated 1990, Rulifson
1990, NCDMF unpublished data). Trawl samples are usually dominated by spot (Leiostomusxanthurus)
and/or bay anchovy (Anchoa mitchilli). Atlantic croaker (Micropogonias undulatus) is common in some
years, but nearly absent in others. Southern flounder (Paralichthys lethostigma), common blue crab
(Callinectes sapidus), and brown shrimp (Penaeus aztecus) are occasionally encountered in low numbers.
Trawl-to-trawl variability in numbers and species composition is so high that it is generally not possible
to make statistically meaningful comparisons based on standard monthly trawl samples. Evidence
suggests that the high variability in the catch is driven by recruitment pulses of the dominant fish (CZR
Incorporated 1990) and by erratic, system-wide hydrographic fluctuations that drive juvenile fish into
and out of the small nursery creeks (Miller et al. 1988).
Several laboratory and field studies have investigated the effects of short-term salinity
fluctuations on the metabolism and distribution of common estuarine fish such as spot, Atlantic croaker,
and Atlantic menhaden (Brevoortia tyrannus) (Hettler 1976, Engel et al. 1987, Moser 1987, Moser and
Gerry 1989, Moser and Miller 1994). The studies found that these common fish are highly tolerant of
4
rapid, large magnitude salinity changes. The fish in these studies were exposed to salinity changes that
were much larger and much more rapid than any that occur naturally in the area's tidal creeks. The
general conclusion reached in these studies is that the fish commonly encountered in the Pamlico
River/Pamlico Sound estuarine system can easily tolerate and adapt to short-term salinity fluctuations.
Based on the results of these studies, it seems unlikely that any salinity fluctuations caused by drainage
basin reductions would have an appreciable effect on the nursery functions of the creeks. Studies on
NCPC Project Area II by Rulifson (1990) and West (1990) support this conclusion. NCPC Project Area
II, which has essentially no drainage basin, was found to function as a nursery area for common finfish.
Brinson et al. (1985) studied the hydrology and vegetation of the bottomland hardwood forests
at the upper ends of Jacks and Jacobs Creeks. During a period of record high salinities in the Pamlico
River system, they found that high salinity groundwater intruded into the forests. There was evidence
that the intrusions stressed the trees in these forests. The hydrology aspect of the Brinson et al. (1985)
study investigated flood levels and hydroperiods and it documented wind tide influence on the hydrology
of Jacks Creek up to the S.R. 1942 crossing. However, the study did not fully evaluate the relative
effects of wind tide flooding and drainage basin input on the hydrology of these wetlands.
OBJECTIVES AND INFORMATION NEEDS
The existing data on the PCS Phosphate creeks and similar creeks in the region provide valuable
information on the potential effects of drainage basin reduction. However, the studies to date were not
specifically aimed at answering the drainage basin reduction question. Therefore, for Jacks Creek,
Tooley Creek, and Huddles Cut, several data gaps need to be filled to allow this question to be
answered.
Flow monitoring. Drainage or outflow from each watershed should be measured to determine
hydrology conditions of the watershed. Water table depths should also be measured in the drainage
basin to relate water table fluctuations to surface outflow. Because both drainage and water table
depths are dependent on rainfall, precipitation should be recorded on each site. Flow data and on-site
rainfall data should also be collected during the years of drainage basin reduction to both provide a direct
assessment of the effects and to provide verification of the prediction of the effects. Flow data and
modeling of drainage basin inputs (covered below) are essential pieces of information for evaluating the
effects of drainage basin reduction on salinity of the creeks and hydrology of the bottomland hardwood
wetlands.
Flow modeling. A simulation model will be used to describe the hydrology of each of the
watersheds. The model will be based on DRAINMOD (Skaggs 1978, 1991), with modifications to route
surface runoff to ditches and natural channels, and to route both surface and subsurface flows through
the drainage network. Except for a few site specific modifications, the model exists and has been
described by Konyha and Skaggs (1992) and Amatya et al. (1997). The model uses input data to
describe soil properties, site parameters (e.g., drain depths and locations, surface roughness, etc.),
vegetation, and channel characteristics, together with measured rainfall and other meteorological data
to predict subsurface drainage and surface runoff rates. Once the model has been tested and calibrated
using measured hydrologic data for each monitoring site, it can be used to conduct long term simulations
to quantify, in a statistically reliable fashion, the existing hydrology of the sites. Then the model can
be used to predict the probable effects of drainage basin reduction on outflow from the basin or
watershed. This could be done for any stage as the mining progresses. If necessary to mitigate water
quantity or water quality impacts, the model could be used, during and after mining, in a real time
application to determine the quantity and timing of pumped additions of water to represent existing
conditions.
Salinity and water level monitoring. To evaluate the effects of drainage basin input on salinity,
water level and salinity data must be collected from the estuarine portions of the creeks. Because
available evidence suggests that drainage basin effects on salinity are limited to the upper ends of the
creeks, salinity monitoring should be concentrated there. However, salinity should be monitored at a
station near the mouth of each creek to confirm that no local drainage basin effects are present near the
mouth. Salinity data should be interpreted in light of the rainfall, flow, and water level data to allow
evaluation of the effects of drainage basin input and wind tides on salinity. Salinity and water level
should also be monitored at control stations in South Creek and the Pamlico River so that system-wide
wind tide effects on salinity can be identified. Once the effects of local drainage basin input on salinity
have been fully evaluated, predictions of the likely effects of drainage basin reduction can be made.
Salinity and water level monitoring should continue during the years of drainage basin reduction to allow
confirmation of the predictions.
Water quality monitoring. Water quality data should be collected on the waters originating in the
drainage basins of the three creeks. These data can be compared to data collected during the mining
years to determine whether mining activities have any adverse impact on the quality of the drainage
basin runoff.
Fish and benthos monitoring. Data on the abundance and species composition of fish and
benthos in the creeks should be collected. These data can be compared to data collected during the
6
years of drainage basin reduction to identify changes in the fish and benthic communities. However,
caution must be exercised to avoid attributing natural variation in fish and benthic communities to
drainage basin reduction.
Wetland vegetation monitoring. Abundance, health, and species composition of the vegetation
should be monitored in the bottomland hardwood forests at the heads of these creeks. Data should be
collected before drainage basin reduction and compared to data collected after drainage basin reduction
to identify any vegetation changes due to changes in salinity or wetland hydrology. However, care must
be taken not to confuse natural vegetation changes with vegetation changes due to drainage basin
reduction.
Wetland hydrology monitoring. Monitoring of the hydrology of the bottomland hardwood
wetlands should be conducted to determine the relative influences of wind tides and drainage basin
input. Water level data collected for the salinity monitoring and flow data collected for the flow
modeling can be used to assist in the wetland hydrology analysis. The hydrology data can then be used
to make qualitative predictions of the potential effects of drainage basin reduction on the hydrology of
the bottomland hardwood wetlands. Hydrology data should also be collected during the years of
drainage basin reduction to confirm the predictions.
PROPOSED METHODOLOGY AND TIMING
The following section outlines and describes the proposed tasks. Monitoring on each creek will
begin in 1998 before any impacts to the drainage basins occur. This initial monitoring will allow
characterization of pre-mining conditions and will provide a basis for comparison with data collected
after the drainage basins have been reduced. The selection and coordination of specific sample sites,
description of existing conditions, and establishment of monitoring procedures will be done in early
1998. The flow, groundwater, rainfall, and salinity monitoring equipment will be purchased, installed,
and calibrated on all three creeks as soon as possible in 1998. Full-scale monitoring on all three creeks
will begin as soon as possible in 1998.
The monitoring steps established and carried out in the initial monitoring on each creek will be
repeated at the same locations in future years when the mine reaches portions of the Jacks Creek,
Tooley Creek, and Huddles Cut drainage basins. The purpose of future sampling in these drainages will
be to determine if any deleterious effects to riparian wetland functions have occurred due to mine
expansion into portions of the drainage basins. CZR will document the sampling in an end-of-year report
each sampling year.
1. SELECTION AND COORDINATION OF SPECIFIC SAMPLE SITES; DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING
CONDITIONS; ESTABLISHMENT OF MONITORING PROCEDURES, AND PURCHASE, INSTALLATION,
AND CALIBRATION OF EQUIPMENT
A. In-depth Reconnaissance of Jacks Creek Tooley Creek, and Huddles Cut Drainage Areas and
Selection of Specific Monitoring Sites.
Initial reconnaissance of the drainage areas was done by CZR, Skaggs, and PCS Phosphate
personnel in late 1997 and early 1998; and tentative monitoring sites were selected and proposed for
agency input and approval. Agency suggestions along with a more in-depth reconnaissance and the use
of the most recent aerial photo coverage and topographic information was used to complete specific on-
the-ground selection of the monitoring sites for flow measurements, water quality sampling, salinity
monitoring, wetlands monitoring, and sampling of fish and benthos in mid-1998. The final selection of
sites was coordinated with PCS Phosphate, the DWQ, and the USACE in conjunction with the revision
of this stream monitoring program outline.
B. Description of Existing Conditions.
CZR will describe existing conditions within the three stream drainages. Descriptions of stream
geometry and geomorphology shall be made for each monitored reach, before their watersheds are
impacted. The existing drainages and established monitoring sites will be identified on maps and/or
aerial photographs. Descriptions of the vegetation, soils, topography, natural and constructed drainage
channels, and other features will be included with photo documentation of the sites. Some fixed-point
photo stations will be established to document potential future vegetation changes or other potential
impacts in the riparian wetlands and stream monitoring zones.
C. Establishment of Monitoring Procedures and Purchase, Installation, and Calibration of
Equipment.
When the sampling sites and procedures have been approved by PCS Phosphate, DWQ, and the
USACE, CZR and Skaggs will obtain, install, and calibrate the required equipment. This will be done as
soon as possible in 1998.
8
Devices
1. Installation of Shallow Monitoring Wells and Continuous Water Level Recording
Groundwater and wetland hydrology will be monitored with a combination of shallow
monitoring wells and continuous water level recording devices. A total of 39 monitoring sites (21 WL-
80s and 18 shallow monitoring wells) have been installed in the bottomland hardwood wetlands in the
three creek drainages. The continuous monitoring devices are WL-80 well monitors from Remote Data
Systems, Inc. The units, which will record water levels over an 80-inch range, were installed with 60
inches in the ground to record groundwater and 20 inches above ground to record intermittent surface
waters. The continuous recorders are supplemented with shallow monitoring wells constructed of 1.25-
inch PVC well screen. Sixty inches of well screen were installed underground, and a 12-inch piece of
PVC pipe extends above-ground. Each well is capped, numbered, and marked for location and
identification. The WL-80s are bear-proofed with a system of larger PVC pipe and barbed wire. This
system has proven effective in nearby well monitoring on PCS Phosphate wetland mitigation lands.
The approximate locations of WL-80 and shallow monitoring wells in riparian wetlands
relative to flow monitoring stations are shown in Figures 2 through 5. Five WL-80s supplemented with
five shallow monitoring wells were installed in the Jacks Creek drainage (Figure 2). Four WL-80s and
two wells were installed in Tooley Creek (Figure 3). In Huddles Cut, seven WL-80s and five wells were
located on the main prong (Figure 4), and five WL-80s and six wells were installed on the western prong
(Figure 5). During the installation of each WL-80 or well, the soil horizon depths, textures, and colors
were recorded. In addition to the wells shown for the riparian wetlands on Figures 2 through 5, an
additional 14 WL-80s and 21 monitoring wells were located in areas of higher elevations upstream of
the flow measuring stations at locations determined by Skaggs. Data from these wells will be used to
describe the hydrology and calibrate the model for each drainage basin. The WL-80s and shallow
monitoring wells for all three stream drainages were installed in June, July, August, and September
1998. All WL-80 and shallow monitoring well locations will be surveyed by PCS Phosphate for location
and elevation relative to sea level.
2. Installation and Calibration of Flow Monitoring Stations.
The flow monitoring stations will include dual systems for measuring flow rates. Under
low and moderate flow conditions, flows will be determined by measuring the stage on the upstream
side of a triangular weir. Flow velocities in the outlet pipe system will also be continuously measured
with a recording Marsh McBirney flow meter. For high flow events and during very wet periods,
backwater conditions might submerge the weir for periods of time. During those periods, flow rates will
be determined from the Marsh McBirney flow meter alone. Where possible, flow stations will be located
at road crossings where the flow is concentrated and exits the watershed (or sub-watershed) through
a culvert. Flow stations not located at road crossings will need to have weirs and culverts installed to
facilitate flow measurement. A total of eight stations (two on Jacks Creek, two on Tooley Creek, and
four on Huddles Cut) will be located on the drainages which feed into the main creeks (Figures 2, 3, 4,
5). These intermittent drainages are dry much of the year. The proposed monitoring locations were
selected based on a combination of factors including accessibility for installation and monitoring, the
presence of a constriction (channel or culvert) to facilitate measurement, and location near the lower
end of the free-flowing portion of each stream. All flow stations will be installed and calibrated by late
1998.
3. Establishment of Vegetation Monitoring Plots.
In the lower portions of the intermittent drainages just above the CAMA markers on each
creek, riparian wetlands (normally narrow bands of bottomland hardwoods) occur. If there is any impact
by reducing the freshwater flow due to reduction of the creeks' drainage areas, these wetlands would
appear to be the ones most likely to be impacted. Vegetation monitoring sites were established in the
9
WL-80 AND SHALLOW MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS,
=LOW MONITORING STATIONS, AND WATER. QUALITY MONITORING STATIONS
IN THE JACKS CREEK DRAINAGE
PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC.,
NCPC TRACT STREAM MONITORING
:ALE: 1" = 200' APPROVED BY: FILE:
\TE: JANUARY 1998 DRAWN BY.
Photo Date:
1"e 2 APRIL 1989
CZR
INCORPORATED
4709 COLLEGE ACRES OR1VE, SUITE 2
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403
TEL [phone]
FAX [phone]
[e-mail]
yti
-. rat

? Ca!

y a•
L
y
, .
f

EGEND
WL-80 monitoring well
Shallow monitoring well
Flow monitoring station
Water quality monitoring station
Upper limits of CAMA jurisdiction
rl
'got -
a t ?
No-
LEGEND

WL-80 monitoring well
O Shallow monitoring well
Flow monitoring station
W
li
i
i
i
ater qua
tor
on
ty mon
ng stat
Upper limits of CAMA jurisdiction

T
:.1

WI: 80 AND SHALLOW MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS,
FLCW MONITORING STATIONS, AND WATER QUALITY IVIONITORING STATIONS
IN THE TOOLEY CREEK DHAIN,?GE
PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC.,
NCPC TRACT STREAM MONITORING
SCALE: 1" = 200' APPROVED 8Y: FILE:
DATE.' JANUARY 1998 DRAWN BY:
Photo Date',
' .
2APRIL 1989
470 COLLEGE ACRES DRIVE. SUIT 2
L WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA :'9107
TEL 9 10 i 9:'925
;- I NC OR P 02 A T E D
Eax 910 uI
NVIRONMENTALCONSULTANIS I '•,° - 'i FIGURE 3
LEGEND

* fit
WL-80 monitorin
ll
g we
Shallow monitoring well
® Flow monitoring station
Water quality monitoring station
Z. :.Z Upper limits of CAMA jurisdiction
p
P ?..

0
{.

0

% 'NIP
Yr !_.
it
<0
WL-80 AND SHALLOW MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS,
FLOW MONITORING STATIONS, AND WATER QUALITY MONITORING STATIONS
IN THE WESTERN PRONG OF HUDDLES CUT
PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC.,
NCPC TRACT STREAM MONITORING
SCALE: 1" = 200' APPROVED BY: FILE:
DATE: JANUARY 1998 DRAWN BY
Photo Date.
2 APRIL 1939
COLLEGE ACRES DANE, SUITE 2
4709
IL
MI
WILMINGTON
NORTH CAROLINA 260.03
R
,
TEL [phone]
INC 02PORATED FAX [phone]
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS mwilmo3ol.com FIGURE 5
vicinity of each of the 21 WL-80 continuous monitors located in the riparian wetlands. Thus, the 21
vegetation monitoring sites include five in Jacks Creek, four in Tooley Creek, and twelve in Huddles Cut
(see WL-80 locations in Figures 2 through 5).
Vegetation sampling will focus on the shrub and herb layer. Compared to trees, shrubs
and herbs respond more quickly to changes in salinity and hydrology and therefore will provide a better
way to monitor changes in the vegetation. At each site, ten permanent sample plots were established
along a 40-meter transect that proceeds on a random compass azimuth from the WL-80. Each sample
plot includes a 1-square meter herb plot and a 4-by-4 meter woody vegetation plot. These plots will
be used to measure density, coverage, and species composition of the herb and shrub layers.
Vegetation plots were established on the three creeks in August and early September 1998.
4. Installation of Rain Gauges.
Rain gauges will be installed in each of the three creek drainages (one each in the Jacks
Creek, Tooley Creek, and Huddles Cut drainages) in late 1998. The rain gauges will be the TE-125
TELOG Tipping Bucket Rain Gauge.
5. Installation of Continuous Monitors at Salinity Monitoring Sites.
Proposed salinity monitoring sites are shown in Figure 6. The precise salinity monitoring
sites will be established and marked, and continuous monitors will be installed. Two monitors will be
installed in Jacks Creek, one near the upper end of the CAMA jurisdiction in the permanent open water
of the creek and one at the mouth of the creek. Two monitors will be installed on Tooley Creek, one
near the junction of the two main prongs and one at the mouth of the creek. On Huddles Cut, three
monitors will be installed, one each near the CAMA marker on the main drainage and the CAMA marker
on the western prong, and one at the creek mouth. Two additional monitors, one in South Creek and
one in the Pamlico River (Figure 6) will provide comparison salinity values. The type of salinity monitor
used will be the YSI 600 XLM, which allows measurement of salinity and water level. The salinity
monitors will be installed in late 1998.
6. Establishment of Water Quality Monitoring Sites.
CZR will establish and mark water quality monitoring sites on each of the creek systems
as follows:
Jacks Creek (Figure 2):
At two locations, one just below the flow
monitoring station on the main prong, and one
at the salinity monitor near the junction of the
prongs of Jacks Creek.
Tooley Creek (Figure 3)
Huddles Cut (Figures 4 and 5)
At three locations, one each just above the
CAMA marker on the two main prongs, and one
at the salinity monitor near the junction of the
two main prongs.
At four locations, one each above the CAMA
marker on the main prong and on the western
prong, and one each at the salinity monitor just
below the CAMA marker on each prong.
14
4, f y
.A•,. y j H S
ro
?. it
?.?I H 2 d'1
^
t d^G
s ??
tn
t„rwr'i1 s
HUDDLES CUT PRS1
7
?"Y'
? ?
- ;?..C?
d 1
?
r ?? N ?-'` ?' ?.
?
1yx' n't'
AB
??--?+ a
.
c I(
? . . ? . . .... .. ?l -
4
?
fl H S l.:rf- S lr..:'^'4 ?. M
.a
..
•
A dS?" •.; M !dG>7'``_`?; , _.
? Y?'4 ? r! ???is" ? ,rs'[.n?„' ski. ir1 t r 9?? ??
M , h ' , 1 T ,F .q["? - ? ..,y• y4 J'?. }f 1 n. ,E >?F y?r r+
t ., y„ r ,.,wr y 7y7Ay? fF
° ?, ,r >} "'ti.F T. t'.v 1f1?, 7r sF1 k.{P,
,}, r•''.w1 # .r 1ri E?`t f {djtr'rd:7.
tf 7 9 't' n s ? H f F' N 7 +'?`a
GtY ,? e ? ??,.! ? ?•?' E ? ''f rr-x`11 rc ? , r??',r, ,, ?
Ur

SOUTH CREEK
TS1
TOOLEY CREEK
r?

T 4
.k t .;
f ITS2
T ?+
x Jr '?
-4
7
? A
t
w q
a a?
I ^?
'? \ E
a
JS2
SCSI
y -
t
J
?
1 SALINITY MONITORING SITES
S
- h
1
INC.
PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY
,
,
z
?' NCPC TRACT STREAM MONITORING
t M N

`7? SCALE: 1" = 2000' APPROVED BY: FILE:
{?-
DATE: JANUARY 1998 DRAWN BY:
?.?
'
ti
i Photo Date:
m 7
r!
r
b +t7 DECEMBER 1996
{ 7 ?, a709 COLLEGE ACRES DRIVE, SUITE 2

NORTH CAROLINA 26407
WI
MINGTON
- ZR
C
,
L
TEL [phone]
ti=INCOR?ORATED FAX [phone]
.; ,??y,i; 1 qR ENVIRONMENTAL :ONSUltAN15 /, czrwllm@aolc ??? FIGURE6
Water quality stations will be established on all creeks in late 1998. In addition, sediment
samples to be measured for cadmium and other heavy metals will betaken from near the mouth of each
of the three creeks in August of each year.
7. Establishment and Marking of Fish and Benthos Monitoring Sites.
In May of 1998, fish and benthos monitoring stations were established and sampled in the
estuarine portions of Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek, and a control creek (Muddy Creek). The stations
correspond to those used for the EIS baseline sampling 1988-89. The upper station in Muddy Creek is
a new station that was not sampled for the EIS baseline.
Fish and benthos stations were not established on Huddles Cut in May of 1998 because of
ongoing discussions with DWQ concerning the locations of the stations and the sampling methods to
be used. It has since been determined that benthos sampling on Huddles Cut will be conducted at the
benthos and sediment stations that were sampled during the 1988-89 EIS baseline. In addition, fish
sampling will be conducted at the downstream station. Initial sampling on Huddles Cut will occur in
1999. Figure 7 depicts the fish and benthos sampling stations on Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek, Huddles
Cut, and Muddy Creek.
D. Graphics Preparation.
Final graphics depicting sampling site locations, monitoring figures, and/or data presentation
figures will be prepared by CZR personnel. Some of the graphical presentations of hydrologic data and
modeling results will be supplied by Skaggs.
E. Reporting.
Detailed information on monitoring equipment and procedures will be included in the Year One
(1998) end-of-year report. Twenty copies of the report are to be provided to DWQ by 1 March 1999.
BASELINE MONITORING PROTOCOL
This section presents the monitoring protocol for the parameters to be monitored in Jacks Creek,
Tooley Creek, and Huddles Cut. Three years of baseline (predisturbance) data will be gathered on
Tooley Creek and Huddles Cut. However, due to construction timing constraints, this amount of time
will not be possible for Jacks Creek. The monitoring will get under way as soon as possible in 1998.
The protocol presented in this section describes the full range of monitoring. The early months of 1998
involved coordination of the creek monitoring study with State and Federal agencies and preparation for
monitoring. Fish trawl samples in Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek, and a control creek (Muddy Creek) were
initiated in May and conducted weekly in May and June 1998. Benthic samples were collected in Jacks
Creek, Tooley Creek, and Muddy Creek in May 1998. Vegetation sampling was conducted in August
and early September 1998 on Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek, and Huddles Cut. All wells and WL-80s were
installed; and rain gauges, flow meters, and salinity meters are projected to be installed such that flow,
groundwater, rainfall, and salinity monitoring on the creeks can begin around December 1998.
A. Groundwater Monitorina.
The well sites will be monitored every two weeks during the trips to download flow and salinity
data from the continuous monitors. The WL-80 data will be downloaded on a HP48GX calculator/data
recorder, and the water level in the wells will be read visually and recorded on well data sheets (or in
field notebooks to be transferred to well data sheets).
16
m V)
n
c ? c
LLJ
o o F_- O Ld z Sri
LLJ
o aci U) N V Z r m
Z E °° 0
g m °' p
U) o z O a ?.
O c0 E2 >. t J U
?ca ?o p a0
Z
W m in d
z >?o?M
W W < boo
p W> o?
F-
N -N d o or4
g ?? M L F a FZ
,• W N ? Q s
J m w O c 3
0 IL
v =?
z v L cn to
= Z a rn
o?
N =
w
LL a
:F
U Q
N O
D
c
O o
IL o
U
U r
0 U c
) V c
0- U
3 0
U ?
V W
U O
N 0 O Z
8 n J
U Q
m U
? J
W
Q c o
Ua ?
ao
U U Q
`m t is
°
LO C m
-m n. 3 e-
U :
E
tv
t
D
ry N
r
1 ?
17
Data from the wells and WL-80s in headwater areas above the flow monitoring stations will be
used by Skaggs for the drainage hydrology modeling. Data from the wells and WL-80s in the riparian
wetlands will be used primarily to construct a general characterization of the hydrology of the riparian
bottomland hardwood wetlands, but will also be used by Skaggs in the flow modeling. Groundwater
data will be presented in tabular and graphic format, and wetland hydroperiod durations will be
calculated. Standard well data will be correlated with WL-80 data to allow estimation of the water table
depth at the well locations between monitoring visits. Additionally, on-site flow data and estuarine
water level data will be displayed graphically with WL-80 water level data so that the relative effects
of flow and estuarine water level fluctuations on groundwater levels can be evaluated.
In addition to the on-site rainfall data collected to facilitate the flow modeling, rainfall data will
also be collected at the weather station on the PCS Phosphate plant site. There is a 28-year record of
rainfall data for the plant site, so current data from the plant site can be compared to historical data to
assess the relative wetness or dryness of a particular year.
B. Flow Monitoring and Modeling.
The data from the eight continuous flow monitors will be downloaded every two weeks. Copies
of the data will be supplied to Skaggs for subsequent analysis and for use in describing the hydrology
and modeling the flows in the three creek drainages. Beginning in 1999, Skaggs will analyze the flow
data and produce tabular and graphical flow rate and cumulative outflow graphs for each monitored
drainage area. Water balance calculations will be conducted and reported. These data, together with
water table data from the watersheds, will be used to test and calibrate the model. Using recorded
rainfall data, the model will predict flow rates and cumulative volumes on a day-by-day basis for the
period of monitoring. Once calibrated, the model will be used to simulate the hydrology for a long period
of hydrologic record at this location. This will enable us to define a statistically reliable baseline
condition for the drainage areas considered. Then the model can be applied to predict the effect of basin
reduction due to mining on the outflows to the creeks. This can be done for any stage of the mining
process. The predicted flows can then be used to assess potential impacts to the other parameters
being studied. In the event that it is necessary to supplement outflows during the mining process
because of reduction in the drainage area, the model could be run in "real time" to determine the amount
of drainage, and its distribution in time, that would have occurred under normal or undisturbed
conditions.
C. Water Quality Monitoring.
Every two weeks, during the trip to download data from the continuous flow monitors, salinity
monitors, and WL-80 groundwater monitors, physical water quality data and water samples for
chlorophyll a and nutrient analyses will be collected from all nine water quality locations. The
parameters measured will include:
• Temperature
• Dissolved oxygen
• Salinity
• pH
• Secchi depth
• Turbidity
• Chlorophyll a
• Phosphorus
- Dissolved orthophosphate phosphorus
- Total dissolved phosphorus
18
- Particulate phosphorus
• Nitrogen
- Nitrate nitrogen
- Ammonia nitrogen
- Particulate nitrogen
- Dissolved Kjeldahl nitrogen
The chlorophyll a and nutrient analyses will be done under Dr. Donald W. Stanley's direction at the
laboratories of East Carolina University. Dr. Stanley will assist CZR with water quality data analyses
and reporting.
In addition to the water quality monitoring above, a sediment sample will be collected from near
the mouths of Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek, and Huddles Cut in August of each baseline year. The
samples will be analyzed for cadmium and other metals.
D. Salinity Monitoring.
Data from the salinity monitors will be downloaded every two weeks in conjunction with the
downloading of data from the flow monitors. The data will be retrieved using YSI 610-DM handheld
computers. Maintenance (e.g., changing batteries, cleaning probes) will be performed on the salinity
monitors as needed during the data retrieval visits.
The salinity data will be displayed graphically with the flow data, estuarine water level data, and
USGS stream gauge data from the Tar River. This will allow analysis of the relative influence of these
factors on salinity in the creeks. This analysis will be used to make qualitative predictions of the effects
of drainage basin reduction on salinity.
E. Vegetation Monitoring.
Vegetation monitoring will be conducted during August of each monitoring year. Shrubs, defined
as woody plants greater than 3.2 feet in height but less than 3 inches in diameter at breast height
(DBH), will be inventoried in each of the ten 4-by-4 meter plots located in the vicinity of each WL-80
in the riparian wetlands. For each species, the number of stems present will be counted and percent
cover will be estimated. Herbs, defined as all herbaceous vascular plants regardless of height and
woody plants less than 3.2 feet in height, will be inventoried in each of the 1-square meter plots nested
within the 4-by-4 meter plots. For each species, the number of stems present will be counted and
percent cover will be estimated. Qualitative descriptions of the overstory will be made in the vicinity
of each WL-80. For shrubs and herbs, the cover data, density data, and importance values calculated
will be used to assess changes in vegetation structure and composition over time.
F. Fish and Benthos Monitoring.
Because of the timing of the beginning of the study, fish trawl sampling on Jacks Creek, Tooley
Creek, and a control creek (Muddy Creek) was limited to May and June in 1998. In other monitoring
years, fish trawl sampling will be conducted weekly on Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek, and Muddy Creek
during the months of April, May, and June.
Each fish trawl sample will be conducted with a two-seam 10.5-foot otter trawl. The trawl is
constructed with a 10.5-foot headrope, and 1/4-inch bar mesh wings and body, and an 1/8-inch bar
mesh cod end. The trawl will be towed at 3.6 feet/second for a distance of 75 yards. Trawling will
be conducted during daylight hours with a tow direction toward the creek mouth. This trawl and
technique is the same design and methodology used by the DMF. Data will be reported in catch-per-
unit-effort (CPUE) as number per minute trawl.
19
Because Huddles Cut is too shallow and narrow for trawling, an alternative methodology must
be used there. A fyke net will be set at the station in Huddles Cut for one night per week during April,
May, and June of each monitoring year, beginning in 1999. Data will be reported in CPUE as number
per trap-night.
Submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) provides habitat for fish and can reduce the capture
efficiency of the trawl. Therefore, the species of SAV present and the approximate percent coverage
of SAV at the surface of the water will be noted during each fish sampling visit.
Benthos will be collected at each station in May of each sampling year. Five replicate samples
will be collected at each station with a standard ponar grab. Collected sediments will be placed in one-
gallon plastic bags, and a full bag will constitute a replicate. Samples will be placed in coolers and
transported to the laboratory to be sieved through a 0.5 mm mesh screen. All organisms retained on
the screen will be preserved for sorting, enumeration, and identification (to the species level when
practical).
In addition to the mid-stream benthic sampling using the ponar, the shoreline and near-shore
habitats will be sampled using DWQ's estuarine sweep sample method. The timed sweep samples will
consist of 10-minute collections with a D-frame net in representative shoreline and near-shore habitats
near each of the grab sampling stations. Three replicate collections will be taken at each sample station.
Organisms obtained will be preserved and returned to the laboratory for sorting, enumeration, and
identification. One full replicate sample will be enumerated for each sampling station. A 25 percent
subsample of the other two replicates will be enumerated to check for any major variation in benthic
fauna among replicates. The data will be used to classify the sites according to DWQ's estuarine
biocriteria. The biocriteria produce a rating of a site based on three indices produced by the sweep
sample: Estuarine Biotic Index, Amphipoda and Caridian shrimp taxa, and total taxa. The estuarine
biocriteria rating will be used to track changes in benthic macro invertebrate diversity and abundance.
G. Photo Documentation of Monitoring Sites and Conditions.
During the vegetation sampling, two photographs will be taken at each WL-80 location in the
riparian wetlands. Each photograph will feature a 10-foot range pole located at a fixed distance from
the camera. The camera will be situated at the WL-80 location, and a picture will be taken facing
upstream and downstream. Camera and range pole locations will remain constant throughout the
duration of the monitoring program. The photographs will be included in the annual report, and will be
used to provide visual documentation of changes over time.
During the fish and benthos sampling, a representative photograph will be taken of each sample
station. The photograph locations will remain constant throughout the duration of the monitoring
program. The photographs will be included in the annual report, and will be used to provide visual
documentation of changes over time.
H. Soil Property Measurements.
Measurements of the soil properties, the soil water characteristics, and the saturated hydraulic
conductivity in each of the three study drainages will be done by Skaggs in 1998. These data will be
used in the hydrologic modeling of the three drainage areas. Measurements will be made at an
estimated 12 locations (with three depths and three replications at each location). Hydraulic
conductivity tests will be conducted at 75 to 100 locations. Soil property, site parameter, and
vegetation data will be assembled into data sets for modeling the hydrology of the watersheds.
Preliminary model simulations will be conducted in 1998 to make sure that all needed data are being
collected.
20
I. Preparation of Annual Report.
An annual report, which will include an analysis and discussion of the data collected in items A.
through H., will be submitted to PCS Phosphate in February of the year following each monitoring year.
Twenty copies of the report are to be provided to DWQ by PCS Phosphate by 1 March of each year.
DWQ will send reports to various agencies and groups for comments, with a one month review period.
Upon receipt of comments, DWQ will determine whether the comments warrant a meeting of all review
parties or other action.
III. DURATION AND TIMING OF POST-DISTURBANCE MONITORING
As each of the three stream drainages is impacted by mining-related activity, PCS shall
intensively monitor the impacted stream for two years as described in the baseline monitoring above.
This two-year period of monitoring of each stream will start when the outer mine utility corridor has cut
off portions of a particular drainage basin. For years three through five following the intensive two-year
post-disturbance monitoring on a stream, the monitoring and downloading frequency for groundwater,
salinity, and water quality be reduced to monthly. Vegetation sampling and the associated photographs
will be done annually. Flow monitoring, rainfall monitoring, and fish and benthos monitoring will
continue on the same schedule as in years one and two in order to yield useful data. At the end of year
five of post-disturbance monitoring on a stream, an assessment will be made by DWQ, USACE, DLR,
and PCS Phosphate to determine whether additional monitoring is necessary.
During the years of post-disturbance monitoring, the results of the post-disturbance monitoring
will be compared with the baseline monitoring data. Annual reports of the monitoring will be submitted
to the DWQ, the USACE, and the DLR in mid-March of the year following the sampling. If any
deleterious effects to riparian wetland functions are suggested by the data, PCS Phosphate and CZR will
report and discuss such effects in the annual report and will suggest a plan of remedial action. If no
deleterious effects are identified on a particular creek for a period of five years following drainage basin
reduction, monitoring on that creek may be discontinued based on an assessment by DWQ, USACE, and
DLR in conjunction with PCS Phosphate.
21
REFERENCES
Amatya, D.M., R.W. Skaggs, and J.D. Gregory. 1997. Evaluation of a watershed scale forest
hydrologic model. Ag Water Management, 32:239-258.
Brinson, M.M., H.D. Bradshaw, and M.N. Jones. 1985. Transitions in forested wetlands along
gradients of salinity and hydroperiod. J. Elisha Mitchell Sci. Soc. 101 :76-94.
CZR Incorporated. 1990. Report on 1988-1989 hydrography, sediment, benthic, fisheries, and
zooplankton/ichthyoplankton surveys in support of the Environmental Impact Statement for the
Texasgulf Inc. mine continuation. 78 pp.
CZR Incorporated. 1994. Compilation and analyses of drainage area, salinity, rainfall, and fisheries
data to address potential impacts to the tidal estuarine creeks in the NCPC Tract due to drainage
basin reductions involved with Texasgulf's proposed Alternative B.
Engel, D.W., W.F. Hettler, L. Coston-Clements, and D.E. Hoss. 1987. The effect of abrupt salinity
changes on the osmoregulatory abilities of the Atlantic menhaden Brevoortia tyrannus. Comp.
Biochem. Physiol. 86:723-727.
Hettler, W.F. 1976. Influence of temperature and salinity on routine metabolic rate and growth of
young Atlantic menhaden. J. Fish. Biol. 8:55-65.
Konyha, K.D. and Skaggs, R.W. 1992. A coupled field hydrology-open channel flow model:theory.
Trans of the ASAE, 35(5):1431-1440.
Lawson, T.J. 1981. Nursery area assessment of Bond, Long, and Short creeks, Beaufort County,
North Carolina. Annual report to Texasgulf Inc. 134 pp.
Lawson, T.J. 1982. Nursery area assessment of Bond, Long, and Short creeks, Beaufort County, North
Carolina. Annual report to Texasgulf Inc. 192 pp.
Miller, J.M., B.M. Currin, and M.L. Moser. 1988. Broad Creek report - faunal studies. Pp. 213-422
in Freshwater inflow and Broad Creek estuary, North Carolina. Special Report: UNC Sea Grant
College Program. Submitted to N.C. Div. of Soil and Water, Dept. of Nat. Resour. and Comm.
Devel. 422 pp.
Moser, M.L. 1987. Effects of salinity fluctuation on juvenile fish. Unpubl. Ph.D. thesis, N.C. State
Univ., Raleigh, N.C. 150 pp.
Moser, M.L. and L.R. Gerry. 1989. Differential effects of salinity changes on two estuarine fishes,
Leiostomus xanthurus and Micropogonias undulatus. Estuaries 12:35-41.
Moser, M.L. and J.M. Miller. 1994. Effects of salinity fluctuation on routine metabolism of juvenile
spot, Leiostomus xanthurus. J. Fish. Biol. 45:335-340.
Nixon, S.W. 1989. Water quality in the Pamlico River estuary -- with special attention to the possible
impact of nutrient discharges from Texasgulf Inc. A report prepared for Texasgulf Inc. 147 pp.
Overton, M.F. and J.S. Fisher. 1988. Broad Creek salinity study: Final Report. Pp. 1-61 in Freshwater
inflow and Broad Creek estuary, North Carolina. Special Report: UNC Sea Grant College
22
Program. Submitted to N.C. Div. of Soil and Water, Dept. of Nat. Resour. and Comm. Devel.
422 pp.
Pietrafesa, L.J. 1985. Response of Rose Bay to freshwater inputs. Pp. 21-61 in W. Gilliam, J.M.
Miller, L. Pietrafesa, and W. Skaggs (eds.). Water management and estuarine nurseries. UNC
Sea Grant Publ. UNC-SG-WP-85-2. 84 pp.
Pietrafesa, L.J., F. Askari, and C. Gabriel. 1988. On salinity fluctuations in Broad Creek. Pp. 62-212
in Freshwater inflow and Broad Creek estuary, North Carolina. Special Report: UNC Sea Grant
College Program. Submitted to N.C. Div. of Soil and Water, Dept. of Nat. Resour. and Comm.
Devel. 422 pp.
Rulifson, R.A. 1990. Finfish utilization of man-initiated and adjacent natural creeks of South Creek
estuary, North Carolina, 1984-1988. ICMR Technical Report No. 90-01. ICMR-ECU, Greenville,
N.C. 45 pp.
Skaggs, R.W. 1980. A water management model for shallow water table soils. Technical Bulletin No.
276, North Carolina Agricultural Research Service, N.C. State Unvieristy, Raleigh, 54 pages.
Skaggs, R.W. 1991. Drainage. In J. Hanks and J. Ritchie (eds), Modeling Plant and Soil Systems,
Agronomy Monograph No. 31, American Society of Agronomy, Madison, W1:205-243.
Stanley, D.W. 1988. Water quality in the Pamlico River estuary 1987. A report to Texasgulf
Chemicals, Inc. ICMR Technical Report No. 88-02. ICMR-ECU, Greenville, N.C. 82 pp.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1996. Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Texasgulf Inc.
mine continuation, Aurora, North Carolina.
West, T.L. 1988. Effects of claypond freshwater discharge on finfish and shellfish utilization of nursery
areas. Summary of preliminary findings. Submitted to Texasgulf, Inc. Dept. of Biology, East
Carolina University, Greenville, N.C. Pages unnumbered.
West, T.L. 1990. Growth and survival of Leiostomus xanthurus (spot) in man-made and natural
wetlands. Report to Texasgulf Chemicals, Incorporated. Dept. of Biology, East Carolina
University, Greenville, N.C. 30 pp.
23
YEAR ONE (1998) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc was granted a mine expansion permit issued by the Army Corps
of Engineers (USACE) on 27 August 1997 (No. 198899449). Special conditions imposed by the North
Carolina Division of Water Quality in their 401 certification pertained to overall water quality and potential
hydrologic impacts resulting from the mine continuation and the associated drainage basin reduction
potential effects on small estuarine creeks in the vicinity.
Three years of baseline (pre-disturbance) monitoring is to take place to provide a basis of
comparison for post-disturbance monitoring. This report is the first in a series that will include baseline
data on existing conditions and ecological functions associated with the riparian wetlands of Jacks Creek,
Tooley Creek, and Huddles Cut. Baseline monitoring included fish trawls, benthic sampling, vegetation
sampling, and groundwater well installation (WL-80s).
Existing Conditions
The drainage basins of Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek, and Huddles Cut were assessed in July 1998
by CZR biologists. Data was collected on channel width and depth, floodplain width, slope of the
adjacent upland, presence of absence of channelization, composition of sediments, and brief vegetation
descriptions.
Installation of Shallow Monitoring Wells
A total of 39 monitoring wells (21 WL-80s (Remote Data Systems semi-continuous recorders) and
18 shallow monitoring wells) were established in bottomland hardwood wetlands in the three creek
drainages. Five WL-80s and five shallow monitoring wells were installed in the Jacks Creek drainage.
Four WL-80s and two manual wells were installed in Tooley Creek. Seven WL-80s and five manual wells
were located in the main prong of Huddles Cut and five WL-80s and six manual wells were installed in the
western prong of Huddles Cut. An additional 14 WL-80s and 21 wells were installed in higher elevations,
upstream of flow monitoring stations that will be installed in 1999. During well installation soils were
characterized based on horizon depth, texture, and color. Data provided by these wells will be used to
characterize the hydrology of these wetlands pre-disturbance.
Installation of Flow Monitoring Stations
A total of eight flow stations will be installed in early 1999. Two stations will be located on Jacks
Creek, two stations on Tooley Creek, and four stations on Huddles Cut. Flow stations will be located at
culverts to facilitate flow concentration.
Establishment of Vegetation Monitoring and Baseline Vegetation Sampling
Vegetation monitoring focuses on the shrub and herb layer as these communities have the ability
to indicate changes in salinity and hydrology quicker than trees. A total of 21 monitoring sites were
located in the vicinity of WL-80 continuous monitors, five of which were located in Jacks Creek, four in
Tooley Creek, and 12 in Huddles Cut. Each monitoring station consists of a 40-meter transect along a
random azimuth from the WL-80. Ten 3-meter square sampling quadrats are arranged on alternating
sides of the transect. Shrubs and woody vines (defined as woody plants greater than 3.2 feet in height
but less than 3 inches in diameter at breast height) were identified and quantified for each quadrat.
Within each quadrat a 1-meter square herb plot was nested in the proximal corner. Both herb and shrub
plots are permanent and will be monitored annually during the months of August and September for
density, coverage, and species composition.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-1
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year One (1998)
Installation of Rain Gauges
Each creek (Jacks, Tooley, and Huddles) will have a TE-125 TELOG Tipping Bucket Rain Gauge
installed in the early spring of 1999.
Installation of Continuous Monitors at Salinity Monitoring Sites
Nine YSI 600 XLM salinity monitors will be installed in early spring 1999.
Establishment of Water Quality Monitoring Sites
Water quality monitoring sites were established in late 1998. Jacks Creek has two locations,
Tooley Creek has three locations, and Huddles Cut has four locations. In addition sediment samples
were collected from the mouths of each creek to provide first-year baseline data on heavy metal content.
Metals tested included aluminum, silver, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, iron, molybdenum,
selenium, and zinc. Concentrations of Al, Ag, As, Cr, Cu, Fe, and Zn were within average marine
sediment or crustal rock concentrations. Concentrations of Cd, Mo, and Se are slightly elevated above
average marine sediment concentrations.
Establishment of Fish and Benthos Monitoring Sites; Baseline Data Collection
Fish and benthos stations were established and sampled in May of 1998 for Jacks Creek, Tooley
Creek, and Muddy Creek. Because of ongoing discussions with DWQ concerning sampling method and
station location, Huddles Cut will begin baseline data collection in early 1999 following methodology
outlined in the final monitoring plan.
Fisheries
Fish trawl samples were collected using a two-seam 10.5-foot otter trawl. The trawl was towed
for approximately one minute, covering 75 yards. Both fresh and salt water species were captured. Fish
were identified and the first 30 of each species was measured for total length. Fish that were unable to
be identified were preserved for later identification. Atlantic croaker (Micropogonias undulatus) and spot
(Leiostomus xanthurus) were among the most commonly captured species. Submerged aquatic
vegetation (SAV) present was identified and total percent cover was visually estimated. Hydrographic
data were collected from near surface water as well as near bottom water during each trawl. Freshwater
conditions existed throughout most of the sampling.
Benthic Macroinvertebrates
Methods used for benthos sampling were based on the North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural resources (DENR), and Division of Water Quality (DWQ) standard operating
procedure (SOP) for ponar grab and timed sweep methods. Upstream and downstream locations in
Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek, and Muddy Creek were sampled for benthic macroinvertebrates on 27 and
28 May 1998. Basic hydrographic data were collected during benthic sampling.
Five ponar grabs were taken near mid-stream at both the upstream and downstream locations for
each creek. Organisms were identified to the lowest taxonomic level and abundance was calculated
using the average number of individuals per replicate. Amphipoda and Diptera taxa were the most
abundant in the three creeks.
Timed sweep samples were collected from both up and down stream locations for each creek.
Sweep samples consisted of 10-minute collections in representative shoreline and near shore habitats.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-2
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year One (1998)
Three replicates were taken at each station. One replicate sample was fully enumerated, 25 percent of
the other replicates were enumerated to confirm no major variation in benthic macroinvertebrates. The
Estuarine Biotic index (EBI) was calculated and will be used to compare subsequent year's benthic
sampling. Some of the most abundant taxa in Jacks Creek and Tooley Creek were Gammarus tigrinus,
and Campeloma limum. Hobsonia florida, and Chironomus sp. were dominant in Muddy Creek.
Heavy Metal Sediment Baseline
Baseline sediment samples were collected from the mouth of Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek, Muddy
Creek, and Huddles Cut. Sediment samples were sent to Dr. John Trefry at the Florida Institute of
Technology for anaylsis of the following heavy metals: aluminum (AI), silver (Ag), arsenic (As), cadmium
(Cd), chromium (Cr), copper (Cu), iron (Fe), molybdenum (Mo), selenium (Se), and zinc (Zn). Most
concentrations found were consistent with concentrations in average marine sediments or crustal rock.
Cadmium was the exception with concentrations between 0.76 and 1.36 lag/g easily exceeding crustal
rock (0.10pg/g) and average marine sediments (0.17pg/g).
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-3
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year One (1998)
YEAR TWO (1999) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In 1997, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) issued a permit to PCS Phosphate
Company, Inc. for continued phosphate mining on PCS Phosphate's property of Aurora, Beaufort County,
North Carolina. Because the permitted mine advance will temporarily reduce the drainage basin area for
several small estuarine tributaries of South Creek and the Pamlico River, the USACE permit and the
accompanying N.C. Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Water Quality Certification contained conditions that
require monitoring to detect any deleterious effects on these tributaries. Accordingly, PCS Phosphate,
working through its consultants CZR Incorporated (CZR), Dr. Wayne Skaggs, and Dr. Donald W. Stanley,
developed a plan to monitor flow, salinity, wetland hydrology, water quality, vegetation, fish, and
macroinvertebrates in Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek, and Huddles Cut. Baseline data was collected in 1998
for vegetation, fish, and benthic macroinvertebrates, baseline data for all other parameters was collected
in 1999. This monitoring report presents the results of the monitoring activities conducted during 1999,
with comparisons to 1998 baseline data where appropriate.
Baseline Instrument Installation
Baseline instrument installation included salinity monitor, flow station, and rain gauge installation.
Due to delays in the plan review process and permit requirements baseline instrument installation could
not be completed during the baseline year (1998). Most equipment was installed by May 1999, when
intensive monitoring began.
Nine YSI 600XLM multiparameter water quality monitors were installed to monitor salinity and
water level. One monitor each was installed at the mouth of Huddles Cut, Jacks Creek, and Tooley
Creek. Upstream monitors were installed in Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek, and the western prong of
Huddles Cut just downstream of CAMA markers. The upstream monitor on the main prong of Huddles cut
was installed at the CAMA marker. Two control/comparison sites were chosen, South Creek (southwest
of the NCPC barge slip) and the Pamlico River (PCS Phosphate Recreation Area at Long Point) where
one monitor each was installed. Salinity monitors were programmed to take readings every 1.5 hours for
16 readings per day. Monitoring of salinity and depth began in May of 1999.
Flow stations installed on the NCPC tract were designed by Skaggs and Robert M. Chiles, P.E.
Eight stations were installed; four are located in the Huddles Cut watershed, two in the Jacks Creek
watershed, and two in the Tooley Creek watershed. Flow stations were designed to measure outflow from
sub-drainage basins.
Three rain gauge stations were installed by Skaggs to accurately model the hydrology and stream
flow of Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek, and Huddles Cut. One gauge was installed in each creek's
watershed. Each rain gauge station consisted of two types of rain gauges. The first type is a direct
reading funnel type gauge with a resolution of 0.01 inch and a capacity of 11 inches. The second gauge is
a TE-125 TELOG data logging tipping bucket rain gauge. This unit records date, time, and amount of
each rain event with a resolution of 0.01 inch.
Flow Monitoring/Modeling
Flow monitoring and modeling began in 1999 at eight watershed outlets; two in Jacks Creek, two
in Tooley Creek, and four in Huddles Cut. After a dry summer the watersheds were struck by three
successive hurricanes producing flow rates greater than designed flow events; this resulted in damage
and data loss. DRAINMOD was used to model hydrology but with a limited data set the model needs to
be recalibrated to include seasonal and annual variations.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-4
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Two (1999)
Salinity
The nine sites monitored fluctuated in salinity from 0.0 ppt at the mouth of Huddles Cut (HS3) to
14.4 ppt in the Pamlico River, PCS recreation area (PS1). Long term salinity trends included: increasing
salinity May through August, decreasing September through November, and slightly increasing again in
December. Short term salinity fluctuations appeared to be controlled primarily by wind tides. Also large
rain events caused appreciable short-term effects in the upper parts of the creeks. Jacks and Tooley
Creeks continually had lower salinity levels at the upstream stations. Dramatic salinity changes were
seen after hurricane events as well as during summer drought periods.
Wetland Hydrology
Of the 39 wetland monitoring wells, 36 exhibited hydroperiods in excess of 5.0 percent of the
growing season. Wells that did not meet this criterion were short by only one day and were located in the
upper portion of Tooley Creek. Fluctuation in water levels was influenced primarily by precipitation and
evapotranspiration. Estuarine water level did have an effect on downstream WL-80 locations, this was
especially evident when estuarine water levels were high.
Water Quality
Nine water quality monitoring stations were established, two in Jacks Creek, three in Tooley
Creek, and four in Huddles Cut. Field measurements included water depth, temperature, salinity,
conductivity, Secchi disk depth, turbidity, dissolved oxygen, and pH. In addition to field measures water
samples were collected and transported to the Central Environmental Laboratory at East Carolina
University to quantify total dissolved phosphorous, particulate phosphorous, PO4-P, NH4-N, NO3-N,
dissolved Kjeldahl nitrogen, particulate nitrogen, chlorophyll a, and fluoride.
Two of the nine stations could not be sampled for three months due to low water conditions;
however, the late summer of 1999 was characterized by high precipitation which had noticeable effects
on some chemical parameters.
The nitrogen dynamics in the NCPC creeks are dominated by decomposition processes;
however, the chlorophyll a levels are consistent with levels found in South Creek. During the 1999
monitoring year no water quality parameters indicated levels of concern.
Vegetation
Vegetation sampling focused mainly on shrub and herb layers due to prompt expression of
salinity and hydrology changes seen in these groups when compared to trees. Twenty-one (21)
vegetation monitoring sites were established in the vicinity of WL-80 continuous monitors. These
monitoring sites consisted of 10 permanent sample quadrats along a 40 meter transect. Transect
direction was chosen using random compass azimuths from the WL-80.
Poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), palmetto (Saba) minor), and climbing hydrangea
(Decumaria barbara) were dominant shrubs/woody vines, while Nepal microstegium (Microstegium
vimineum) and whorled pennywort (Hydrocotyle verticillata) were dominant herbs in the Jacks Creek
sampling sites. Dominant canopy trees were red maple (Acer rubrum), green ash (Fraxinus
pennsylvanica), laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia), and swamp black gum (Nyssa biflora).
Greenbrier (Smilax rotundifolia) was the only dominant shrub/woody vine and cane (Arundinaria
gigantea) was the only dominant herb in the Tooley Creek sampling sites. Canopy dominants included
sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua), red maple, laurel oak, green ash, with black gum (Nyssa sylvatica)
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-5
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Two (1999)
and white oak (Quercus albs) near floodplain edges
On the main prong of Huddles Cut wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera) dominated the shrub/woody vine
layer. The herb layer was diverse but royal fern (Osmunda regalis), whorled pennywort, and poison ivy
dominated. The canopy layer was dominated by swamp black gum, red maple, green ash, and bald
cypress (Taxodium distichum). On the western prong of Huddles Cut wax myrtle and Carolina supplejack
(Berchemia scandens) dominated the shrub/woody vine layer and no clear dominant could be determined
for the herb layer. The canopy consisted mostly of red maple, green ash, bald cypress, and tulip poplar
(Liriodendron tulipifera) along the edge of the floodplain.
A comparison of 1998 and 1999 vegetation monitoring shows no major changes in dominant
species of the shrub and vine, herb, and canopy layers in any creek.
Fisheries
Trawl sampling for fish was conducted weekly during April, May, and June of 1999 at Jacks,
Tooley, and Muddy Creeks. A two-seam otter trawl was pulled for one minute or approximately 75 yards
toward the mouth of the three creeks. All fish were identified and counted, and the total length of the first
30 individuals of each species was measured to the nearest millimeter. Any submerged aquatic
vegetation (SAV) was identified and percent cover estimated.
Huddles Cut was too shallow for trawls so paired fyke nets were set end-to-end to capture fish
moving both upstream and downstream. The fyke nets were set overnight and fish were identified,
measured, and counted consistent with trawl protocols used in Jacks, Tooley, and Muddy Creeks.
When comparing 1998 and 1999 fish data show extreme natural variability in catch. However in
both years the most commonly caught fish species in Jacks, Tooley, and Muddy Creek were rainwater
killfish (Lucania parva), spot (Leiostomus xanthrurus), and Atlantic croaker (Micropogonias undulates).
No differences in fish abundance could be discerned when comparing 1998 to 1999.
Benthic Macroinvertebrates
Upstream and downstream locations in Jacks, Tooley, Muddy Creek, and Huddles Cut were
sampled for benthic macroinvertebrates in May of 1999. Protocol was based on the North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources (DEHNR), and the Division of Water Quality
(DWQ) standard operating procedure (SOP). Five replicate ponar grab samples were taken at each up
and downstream location. Timed sweeps were also done at each up and downstream location. One
minute sweeps were replicated 10 times at each site. Benthic data showed considerable variation
between 1998 and 1999. The only obvious pattern was the decline in total taxa encountered. This could
be due to the markedly higher salinity that existed in 1999, which could have eliminated salt-tolerant
species that may have been present during the 1998 sampling.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-6
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Two (1999)
YEAR THREE (2000) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In 1997, the Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) issued a permit to PCS Phosphate Company,
Inc. for continued phosphate mining on PCS Phosphate's property north of Aurora, Beaufort County,
North Carolina. Because the permitted mine advance will temporarily reduce the drainage basin area for
several small estuarine tributaries of South Creek and the Pamlico River, the USACE permit and the
accompanying N.C. Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Water Quality Certification contained conditions that
require monitoring to detect any deleterious effects on these tributaries. Accordingly, PCS Phosphate,
working through its consultants CZR Incorporated (CZR), Dr. Wayne Skaggs, and Dr. Donald W. Stanley,
developed a plan to monitor flow, salinity, wetland hydrology, water quality, vegetation, fish, and benthic
macroinvertebrates in Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek, and Huddles Cut (CZR Incorporated and Skaggs
1998). Baseline data collection on vegetation, fish, and benthic macro i nve rte brates began in 1998, while
baseline data collection on the remaining parameters began 1999. Post-impact monitoring on Jacks
Creek began when its drainage basin was reduced in early 2000; however, baseline data will continue to
be collected for Tooley and Huddles Cut through 2001. This annual report presents the results of the
monitoring activities conducted during 2000, with comparisons to previous years as appropriate.
Flow Monitoring/Modeling
During 2000, flow monitoring and modeling continued at the eight watershed outlets. Two stations
exist in Jacks Creek, two in Tooley Creek, and four in Huddles Cut. Water stage is measured up and
downstream to determine flow rates. Water table is measured continuously and rainfall is quantified by
recording and manual rain gauges.
Rainfall. Monthly distribution of rainfall in 2000 was similar to the long-term average, except for
the months of August and September which was almost double the long-term averages for the same
months in Plymouth, NC. On an annual basis, rainfall for 2000 at the study sites was near or somewhat
greater than the long-term. However, the annual rainfall of 49.67 inches at the PCS Phosphate site was
very close to the 30-year average rainfall of 50.87 inches measured in Plymouth, NC.
Weather and Potential Evapotranspiration. Monthly average air temperatures measured at the
PCS Phosphate weather station in 2000 were lower than the long-term average for eight of the 12
months. In 2000 total annual net radiation measured at PCS Phosphate was the equivalent energy
needed to evaporate 50.4 inches of water, two inches less than 1999. Both years are slightly higher than
the 10-year average of 47.7 inches
Flow
Stage elevations were measured both upstream and downstream of the V-notch weirs at all eight
watershed outlets through the end of 2000. Weir equations were used to estimate flow rates. Appendix
Al presents stage and velocity meter data for January 01 through December 31, 2000.
Huddles Cut. Flow estimates for Huddles Cut were recorded from four outflow stations. Flow
was highest at the Huddles 1 outflow station, which is assumed to have a drainage area of 13.1 acres.
Drainage areas of Huddles Cut outflow stations 2, 3, and 4 are substantially larger with areas of 100.7,
129, and 115 acres respectively. Drainage areas will be reassessed and verified by field observations.
Steadily declining outflow was measured for all stations from January to April. May to July showed little to
no flow for all stations then increased in August and peaked in September for outflow stations 2, 3, and 4.
Flow station 1 was also measuring high rates of flow in September; however, not as high as the earlier
parts of the year. Flow again dropped off for all stations during the months of October through December.
Tooley Creek. Two flow stations were positioned in Tooley Creek; both had significant
malfunctions in 2000. Tooley flow station1 recorded moderate outflow from January to March. Flow
declined in April and virtually ceased May through July. The upstream weir station malfunctioned in late
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-7
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Three (2000)
August through early September resulting in a significant under estimation of flow. Tooley flow station 2
had various malfunctions that ultimately resulted in a loss of data for the months of May to August. Data
seems otherwise consistent with outflow measures from Tooley flow station 1.
Jacks Creek.. Jacks Creek also had two flow stations with similar flow patterns as Huddles Cut
and Tooley Creek. Initially flow was sustained from January until April, and then dropped to little or no
flow during May through July. The months of August and September had high flow rates, contributing
more than half of the total annual flow. Jacks Creek flow station 2 had some sedimentation problems due
to new construction on Highway 306. The velocity meter was consequently buried and velocity and stage
data was lost from March until October.
Water Table Monitoring
Huddles Cut. Water table depths were measured at four locations; each location had both
manual and continuous recording wells. Huddles Cut watershed monitoring locations 2, 3, and 4 all had
similar water table patterns, with water close to the surface during the early months of the year. During
the middle of April into May the water table dropped dramatically and was not very responsive to rain
events till the later part of the year. During August and September the water table rose to surface levels
and above, and then receded until December when it hovered within eight inches of the surface. Water
table depths measured by WL-80 continuous recording wells and manual wells at Huddles Cut watershed
1 were similar but more sensitive to rain events during the summer months and generally had a shallower
water table throughout the year. Differences in soil profiles between Huddles Cut watershed 1 and
watershed locations 2, 3, and 4 may account for the difference in water table depths.
Tooley Creek. Tooley Creek has two watershed monitoring stations, each with two continuous
recorders and three manual groundwater wells. The two continuous groundwater recorders in Tooley
Creek watershed station 1 had similar drainable porosities. The continuous recorders in Tooley Creek
watershed station 2 exhibited very different drawdown rates due to a difference in elevation. The higher
well, T2CW1 had a much faster drawdown and the water table sank to 80 inches, while T2CW2 did not
measure the water table depth lower than 45 inches.
Jacks Creek. Jacks Creek had two water table monitoring locations. Station one had two
continuous recording groundwater wells and two manual groundwater wells. Station two had one
continuous recording well and three manual groundwater wells. Water table depths were consistently
shallower for J1 CW2 and J2MW3 which were located in the flood plain. Wells J1 MW2, J1 MW1, J2MW2,
J2CW1, and J2MW1 were located 3 to 4 feet higher than the wells located in the flood plain and exhibited
lower water table depths. Similar patterns were seen in annual water table depths as the previous
watersheds.
Hydrologic Analysis and Modeling
Estimated Water Budget. A monthly water balance was obtained as the difference of mean
monthly rainfall and PET (potential evapotranspiration) for a 30-year period. Excess soil water was
indicated for 9 out of 12 months. Outflow that occurred January through April and December was in
agreement with the proposed water budget.
Hydrologic Modeling (DRAINMOD). Baseline hydrology such as water table depths and outflows
were applied to DRAINMOD-based models. These models will be used to document long term hydrology
prior to phosphate mining, and assess the impacts of mining on the hydrology. Outflows have been
measured for 1.5 years beginning in May of 1999. To provide a strong baseline to calibrate the hydrology
model a total of three years of data is recommended.
Model Inputs and Parameters. Soil properties and drainage system parameters were used as
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-8
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Three (2000)
hydrology model inputs. The same soil properties were used as previous years with the addition of
saturated hydraulic conductivity in 2000. Rainfall data from gauges in each watershed was processed to
obtain hourly rainfall for input into the DRAINMOD model. The model also included evaporation values.
Daily pan evaporation values measured at the PCS Phosphate weather station (NOAH station, Aurora
6N) were corrected with monthly pan factors and further adjusted with coefficients calibrated from an
experimental pine forest in Carteret County, North Carolina. This method was tested because it is a
direct measure of evaporation. Two alternative methods were also tested in the model, the Thornthwaite
PET method and the Penman-Monteith method. Results using only the Penman-Monteith method are
discussed.
Results of Model Simulations
Huddles Cut Watersheds. The predicted water table depths and measured depths in Huddles
Cut watershed 1 were generally in agreement. Predicted depths were lower than actual depths in the
later months of 1999 and early months of 2000. These discrepancies were most likely due to
overestimation of PET. Flow predictions were both under and overestimated by the model for Huddles
Cut watershed 1 using adjusted pan evaporation data. Using the daily PET data from the Penman-
Monteith method predicted flows measuring 10.8 percent and 50 percent less than measured outflow for
1999 and 2000 respectively. This was expected because outflow from this watershed was much greater
than the other three Huddles Cut watersheds.
Predicted water table depths of Huddles Cut watershed 2 were generally in agreement with
measured depths in 1999. In 2000 the predicted water table depths were shallower than the measured
depths during the summer months and again through November. This may have resulted because of an
underestimation of PET. The model was able to predict all drainage events except a small event in May.
However the model over-predicted most of the large peak rates and under-predicted both peak rates and
duration for small events. Differences in flow predictions and measured flow may be a result of errors in
the surface storage parameter and hydraulic conductivity model inputs.
Huddles Cut watershed 3 had similar patterns of predicted and measured water table depths as
the previous watersheds. The predicted water table was shallower than the measured water table during
the summer months and November of 2000. These errors in modeling may be due to underestimations of
PET and/or errors in drainable porosity and hydraulic conductivity. Outflow was over-predicted for 1999
and 2000. Outflow was over predicted by 26 percent in 1999 and 35 percent in 2000. This over
prediction was expected because of a continuous leakage observed around the watershed outlet.
Improved model calibration will require adjustment of the surface storage parameter and prevention of
ongoing leakage at the watershed outlet.
The model predicted water table responses to almost all drainage and rainfall events in 1999 and
2000 in Huddles Cut watershed 4. Predicted water table depths were again shallower than measured
during the months of May through August and November for both years. Outflow measured during
hurricanes Dennis and Floyd was flawed; there was a lag time of about three days and the weir was
submerged and subsequent flow data was questionable. The model predicted outflow for these events at
double the measured rate. Apart from these problems, the model predicted flow for all events in which
there was measured flow, except one event in April.
Tooley Creek Watersheds. Model predictions for water table depths in both monitored
watersheds generally agreed with measured depths for 1999. In 2000 some discrepancies were seen;
the predicted water table in Tooley 1 exhibited deeper spikes in the early spring months than was
measured. The Tooley 2 watershed had consistently lower predicted water table depths than measured
throughout most of the year. Predicted water table depths agreed with measured depths during times of
saturation or shallower table. Timing of outflow events was accurately predicted for Tooley 1. Outflow
during large storm events was generally over-predicted but because of equipment malfunction the
measured outflow was under-predicted. As a result the true difference between predicted and measured
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-9
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Three (2000)
outflow is probably smaller than what the model presented. The difference in annual flows in Tooley 1
was entirely due to differences in predicted and measured results for the storms of late August and
September, when there were errors in the flow records. The model predicted four of the five flow events
in Tooley 2; however, two events were over-predicted causing cumulative predicted outflow to be greater
than measured.
Jacks Creek Watershed. The Jacks Creek watershed had wells in both the floodplain and high
ground. These two areas were modeled separately for water table depth. The high ground wells in Jacks
Creek watershed 1 agreed with water table predictions in 1999. In 2000 the predicted water table was
quite a bit deeper than the measured table in the spring months and shallower than measured table in the
summer months and November. The floodplain wells in Jacks 1 were closer in agreement between
measured and predicted table depths; however, in 2000 the predicted water table depth during July and
August was shallower than the measured table depth. The Jacks Creek watershed was reduced from 91
acres to 22 acres which had effects on annual cumulative flow. Outflow in the beginning of 2000 in Jacks
1 was overestimated and after the reduction in watershed flow was in good agreement, 12.3 inches
predicted compared to 13.6 inches observed. In Jacks Creek watershed 2 the high ground well water
table predictions deviated from measured mostly during the spring and summer months. In 1999 the
water table depth was lower than predicted from April to mid-June, after which both predicted and
measured depths seemed to agree. In 2000 the predicted water table was deeper than measured in the
spring and shallower than measured during the summer months and November. The floodplain wells are
manual so continuous measures could not be compared to the model's predictions. However, the manual
measures collected every other week do seem to agree with the predicted measures, with the exception
of a deeper predicted water table during the summer for both 1999 and 2000. The outflow during the
early part of 2000 was underestimated, then after the basin reduction mentioned earlier, outflows began
to agree for the later part of the year (mid-September through December).
Generally the models were able to predict flow events and timing but need input parameters to be
updated to improve accuracy.
Salinity
Salinity was recorded at nine stations continuously through 2000. Salinities varied from 0.0 ppt at
HS3 in January to 18.1 ppt at JS2 in November. Annual salinity trends consisted of low salinity January
through April, increasing May through June, and steady high salinity in July, then decreasing during
August and September, increasing again during October and November, and finally decreasing in
December. These long term trends appear to be related to the Tar River discharge. Shorter term salinity
fluctuations seem to be controlled by wind tides and local drainage basin input.
Wetland Hydrology
Hydroperiods during 2000 were longer than those in 1999; however, the 1999 hydroperiod was
calculated from a limited data set. Of the 39 wetland monitoring wells, 18 exhibited hydroperiods of 100
percent of the growing season. The shortest hydroperiod was 17 percent of the growing season exhibited
by JW1. Precipitation and evaporation appeared to be the primary factor contributing to water level
fluctuations. Large rainfall events indicate only short-term rises in water levels. Estuarine water levels did
seem to influence downstream WL-80 water level readings and was especially evident when estuarine
water levels were high.
Water Quality
Water quality monitoring consisted of a combination of field and laboratory measures.
Parameters measured in the field included water depth, temperature, salinity, conductivity, Secchi disk
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-10
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Three (2000)
depth, turbidity, dissolved oxygen, and pH. Parameters measured in the lab include: total dissolved
phosphorous, particulate phosphorus, dissolved orthophosphate, ammonia nitrogen, nitrate nitrogen,
dissolved Kjeldahl nitrogen, particulate nitrogen, Chlorophyll a, and fluoride. During 2000 there were no
stations with any of the measured water quality parameters at levels of concern; however, there are no
stations with exceptionally good water quality. Ammonium nitrogen and dissolved organic nitrogen
concentrations were relatively high when compared to concentrations farther down the creeks and in
South Creek and the Pamlico River. Nitrate levels were low at the monitoring stations. The combination
of high ammonium and low nitrate, along with low dissolved oxygen concentrations, suggest that the
nitrogen dynamics in the creeks are dominated by decomposition processes.
Metal Sampling
Mid-stream ponar grab samples were taken near the mouths of Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek,
Huddles Cut, and Muddy Creek (fish and benthos control creek). Samples were shipped to Dr. John H.
Trefry at the Florida Institute of Technology and analyzed for aluminum (AI), silver (Ag), arsenic (As),
cadmium (Cd), chromium (Cr), copper (Cu), iron (Fe), molybdenum (Mo), selenium (Se), and zinc (Zn).
Concentrations of Al, Ag, As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Fe, Mo, and Zn in sediments collected 28 August from Huddles
Cut, Jacks Creek, Muddy Creek, and Tooley Creek are within the range of observed values for average
marine sediment, continental crust and previously analyzed sediments from open areas of the Pamlico
River. Concentrations of cadmium (Cd) and selenium (Se) were higher than found in average marine
sediments or crustal rock. The Huddles Cut #2 sample had the highest Cd concentration at 2.6 lag/g,
and Jacks Creek had the lowest Cd concentration at 1.08 lag/g. The Huddles Cut Cd concentration for
2000 is three times higher than the 1998 concentration. Using guidelines developed by Long et.al. (1995)
to determine potentially harmful biological effects the high concentration found in Huddles Cut #2 falls
between ERL value (effects-range-low) and ERM value (effects-range-median). Concentrations of Cd
between these guidelines suggest sediments in Huddles Cut, may occasionally cause adverse biological
effects. Concentrations of Se were elevated above average marine sediments and crustal rock. The
Jacks Creek sample had the highest concentration at 1.57pg/g and Huddles Cut #1 had the lowest
concentration at 0.82 lag/g. However, the concentrations found in Huddles Cut are double that of the 1998
concentrations and also double that of average marine sediments (0.42 lag/g). There is no established
ERL or ERM for Se so biological effects are unclear. No discernable shift in Se is thought to have
occurred because sample levels are reasonably comparable to previous data outside the PCS Phosphate
property. Increases in Cd and Se in Huddles Cut can partially be explained by the doubling of Al and Fe
indicating a finer grained, more clay rich sample. This finer grained sample could be the result of recent
deposition or part of an overall patchy distribution on sediment.
Vegetation
Vegetation monitoring sites were located in the vicinity of a WL-80 continuous monitoring well.
Five monitoring sites were established in Jacks Creek, four in Tooley Creek, and 12 in Huddles Cut.
Each site consisted of a 40m transect, with alternating 3-meter square shrub quadrats along the axis of
the transect, and 1-meter square herb plots nested in the proximal corner of each shrub plot.
The shrub layer at Jacks Creek is dominated by poison ivy (Toxicodenderon radicans), and the
dominant herbs are lizard's tail (Saururus cernuus) and whorled pennywort (Hydrocotyle verticillata). The
dominant shrub and woody vines at Tooley Creek consisted of greenbrier (Smilax rotundifolia) and
Carolina supplejack (Berchemia scandens). The dominating herb was cane (Arundinaria gigantea). Wax
myrtle (Cerothamnus ceriferus) dominated the shrub layer on the main prong of Huddles Cut. The
dominant herb varied among transects but the most common was whorled pennywort. On the western
prong of Huddles Cut, Carolina supplejack, wax myrtle, and greenbrier dominated the shrub and woody
vine layer. The herb layer was variable with no species dominant at more than one transect.
No major changes in dominant species have been recorded from 1998 to 2000 in Huddles Cut,
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-11
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Three (2000)
Jacks Creek, or Tooley Creek.
Fisheries
Weekly otter trawl sampling was preformed during April, May, and June in Jacks, Tooley, and
Muddy Creeks. Muddy Creek is being used as a control for the fish and benthos parameters. Paired fyke
nets (positioned end to end, one fishes upstream and one fishes downstream) are used to sample
Huddles Cut because physical parameters prevent trawling. Spot (Leiostomus xanthurus), Atlantic
croaker (Micropogonias undulates), Atlantic menhaden (Brevoortia tyrannus), Bay anchovy (Anchoa
mitchill?), and pumpkinseed (Lepomis gibbosus) were the most commonly captured species in 2000 at
Jacks, Tooley, and Muddy Creeks. Mummichog (Fundulus heteroclitus), spot, striped mullet (Mugil
cephalus), pumpkinseed, and Atlantic croaker were the most commonly captured species in Huddles Cut.
The 1998, 1999, and 2000 fish data show extreme natural variability in fish catch in these creeks. This
variability makes it very difficult to discern any spatial patterns in fish abundance.
Benthic Macroinvertebrates
In May of 2000 upstream and downstream locations in Jacks, Tooley, Muddy Creek, and Huddles
Cut were sampled for benthic macro i nve rte brates. Methods were based on the North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources (DEHNR), DWQ standard operating
procedure for ponar grab and timed sweep methods (NCDEHNR 1997).
Diptera and Polychaeta were the most abundant taxa among the eight ponar grab sampling
locations. Chironomus spp. and Hobsonia florida were the most abundant species at most sampling
locations. Many sampling stations showed an increase in abundance of Chironomus spp. while
abundance of Gammarus tigrinus decreased at several sampling locations. Hobsonia florida abundances
seemed to increase, but were not statistically significant. Hydrographic data indicated temperatures were
1 to 2 °C higher than 1999 and salinities generally were a few ppt lower in 2000. This may have led to
slightly different recruitment of benthic macro i nve rte brates. From 1999 to 2000, total taxa increased at the
Jacks upstream, Muddy downstream, and Huddles downstream stations. Total taxa decreased at Jacks
downstream, Tooley downstream, and Huddles upstream stations.
The total number of taxa in the timed sweep samples increased from 1999 to 2000 at all sampling
stations in Jacks, Tooley, and Muddy Creeks. Total taxa declined at both stations in Huddles Cut. The
most abundant taxa in Jacks Creek were Gammarus tigrinus, Cysthura polita, Hobsonia florida, Corixidae
spp., Dicrotendipes nervosus, and Tanytarsus sp. The most abundant taxa in Tooley Creek were
Gammarus tigrinus, Corophium lacustre, and Littoridinops sp. Collections from Muddy Creek were
dominated by Littoridinops sp., Corophium lacustre, and Gammarus tigrinus. The most abundant taxa in
Huddles Cut consisted of Littoridinops sp. and Palaemonetes pungio.
Large amounts of submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) were seen in 1999 but were virtually
absent in 2000. This change in habitat may account for shifts in dominant taxa. Based on data collected
in 1998, 1999, and 2000, benthic macroinvertebrates show a lot of variability and patchy distribution. This
large range of variability documented during the baseline period should be carefully considered when
evaluating post-disturbance monitoring.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-12
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Three (2000)
YEAR FOUR (2001) END-OF-YEAR REPORT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In 1997, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) issued a permit to PCS Phosphate
Company, Inc. for continued phosphate mining on PCS Phosphate's property north of Aurora, Beaufort
County, North Carolina. Because the permitted mine advance will temporarily reduce the drainage basin
area for several small estuarine tributaries of South Creek and the Pamlico River, the USACE permit and
the accompanying N.C. Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Water Quality Certification contained conditions
that require monitoring to detect any deleterious effects on these tributaries. Accordingly, PCS
Phosphate, working through its consultants CZR Incorporated, Dr. Wayne Skaggs, and Dr. Donald W.
Stanley, developed a plan to monitor flow, salinity, wetland hydrology, water quality, vegetation, fish, and
benthic macro i nve rte brates in Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek, and Huddles Cut (CZR and Skaggs 1998).
Baseline data collection on vegetation, fish, and benthic macroinvertebrates began in 1998, while
baseline data collection on the remaining parameters began in 1999. Baseline monitoring has continued
on Tooley Creek and Huddles Cut until the present. Post-impact monitoring on Jacks Creek began when
its drainage basin was reduced in early 2000. In accordance with the monitoring plan, all baseline
monitoring except flow will cease on Tooley Creek and Huddles Cut at the end of May 2002. Also at that
time, the level of effort for the post-impact monitoring on Jacks Creek will be reduced as specified by the
monitoring plan. This annual report presents the results of the monitoring activities conducted during
2001, with comparisons to previous years as appropriate.
Flow Monitoring/Modeling
During 2001, flow monitoring and modeling continued at the eight watershed outlets monitored
during 1999 and 2000: Jacks Creek 1 and 2, Tooley Creek 1 and 2, and Huddles Cut 1, 2, 3, and 4. Due
to unusually dry conditions, no flow was recorded during September through December, and only one
large flow event occurred all year (in mid-June). Measured total annual outflow appeared to be around 5
inches, which was well below the outflow recorded in 2000. Leakage at the watershed outlet structures
led to underestimation of total annual outflow at Huddles Cut 3 and Tooley Creek 2. Uncertainty in the
watershed areas may have caused underestimation of total annual outflow at Huddles Cut 4 and Jacks
Creek 2, and overestimation at Jacks Creek 1.
Water table measurements in the watersheds generally were near the ground surface from
January through early April. Recession of the water table began in mid-April as evapotranspiration
demands increased. Water tables stayed well below the surface for most of the rest of the year, except
when summer storms caused water tables to rise to near the surface for brief periods. Relating the water
table data to the flow data revealed that flow at the watershed outlets was due to surface runoff and
shallow subsurface flow.
DRAINMOD was used to simulate the hydrology of the Huddles Cut watersheds for the 32-month
flow data period (May 1999 through December 2001). The objective was to calibrate DRAINMOD such
that it simulated actual flows accurately. Due to equipment problems, simulations for Jacks Creek and
Tooley Creek did not include 1999, and the Tooley Creek simulations did not include the last seven
months of 2000. Compared to other similar studies, the results of the simulations were considered
acceptable for the watersheds that did not experience leakage or errors in estimated watershed area
(Huddles Cut 1 and 2, Tooley Creek 2). Although simulated flow did not match actual flow for the Jacks
Creek watersheds individually, simulated flow for the two watersheds together matched the sum of the
measured flow from the two watersheds reasonably well. This indicates that the total Jacks Creek
watershed area likely is not apportioned accurately between the two sub-watersheds. In general, the
model calibration is considered acceptable for making monthly and annual predictions of flow for most of
the watersheds. The model could not be calibrated for Huddles Cut 3 and Tooley Creek 1 because of
extensive leakage. The leaks were repaired in October 2001 and an effort will be made during 2002 to
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-13
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Four (2001)
refine the watershed boundaries for those watersheds where errors in area are suspected. Data
collected during 2002 will be used to complete the calibration of Huddles Cut 3 and Tooley Creek 1 and to
validate the calibrated models for the other watersheds.
Salinity
During 2001, salinity monitoring continued at the nine locations that were monitored during 1999
and 2000. Salinity varied widely during 2001, from a low 0.0 ppt to a high of 18.9 ppt. At most stations,
average annual salinity was 2-4 ppt higher than in 2000. Salinity tended to be high and/or increasing
during periods of low Tar River flow (May, September through December), and low and/or decreasing
during periods of higher Tar River flow (February through April, June and July).
Wind tides and local drainage basin input appeared to be the primary factors controlling short-
term salinity fluctuations, particularly at the upstream locations. Local flow combined with a falling wind
tide seemed to cause the sharpest short-term declines in salinity. Local flow that occurred on a rising
wind appeared to correspond to little or no decline in salinity. The effects of both local flow and wind tides
were more subdued at the downstream stations, though both still could be clearly identified in several
instances.
It seems possible that any reductions in flow that might occur due to drainage basin reduction
could result in decreased frequency and magnitude of short-term salinity declines. It is not anticipated
that any such alteration of short-term salinity declines would have an appreciable effect on the annual
salinity pattern in these creeks. Post-drainage basin reduction on Jacks Creek has not detected any
obvious change in the pattern of flow-induced salinity declines, though a definitive conclusion cannot be
made because the baseline data for this creek covers less than a year.
Wetland Hydrology
During 2001, monitoring of hydrology in the bottomland hardwood wetlands on Jacks Creek,
Tooley Creek, and Huddles Cut continued at the same 39 shallow monitoring well locations that have
been monitored since 1999. Wetland hydroperiods recorded during 2001 generally were similar to or
shorter than hydroperiods recorded during 2000, though a few wells had longer hydroperiods. Most of
the wells that experienced shorter hydroperiods were on Jacks Creek and Tooley Creek. It is believed
that unusually dry weather during 2001 contributed to the shorter hydroperiods.
Water level fluctuations at the semi-continuous WL-80 monitoring wells appeared to be affected
by several factors. At least periodically, water levels at all WL-80s responded to direct precipitation in the
absence of significant local flow or rising wind tides. At the more upstream well locations along Jacks
Creek, Tooley Creek, and the western prong of Huddles Cut, direct precipitation and evapotranspiration
appeared to be the primary factors contributing to water level fluctuations. The data suggested that
estuarine water level (wind tides) contributed to many of the water level fluctuations at the downstream
WL-80s on all three creeks. Groundwater discharge from adjacent uplands, though not measured in this
study, could have contributed to high, steady wetland water levels at many well locations during winter
and early spring. Large local flow events appeared to contribute to infrequent, short-term flooding events
at most well locations. Therefore, it seems possible that any reductions in flow that might occur due to
drainage basin reductions could result in decreased frequency or magnitude of these flooding events.
However, because these flow-induced peaks are infrequent and short-lived, it is not anticipated that any
reduction in the frequency or magnitude of these peaks would have a major impact on the hydrology of
the wetlands. Post-drainage basin reduction monitoring on Jacks Creek has not detected any obvious
change in the pattern of flow-induced water level peaks, but a definitive conclusion cannot be made
because less than a year of baseline data exists for Jacks Creek.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-14
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Four (2001)
Water Quality
Water quality sampling continued during 2001 at the nine sites where water quality has been
sampled on a bi-weekly basis since 1999. Field measurements included water depth, temperature,
salinity, conductivity, Secchi disk depth, turbidity, dissolved oxygen, and pH. Grab samples were taken
back to the laboratory for analyses of total dissolved phosphorus (TDP), dissolved orthophosphate (P04-
P), ammonium nitrogen (NH4-N), nitrate nitrogen (NO3-N), dissolved Kjeldahl nitrogen (DKN), particulate
nitrogen (PN), particulate phosphorus (PP), and chlorophyll a, and total fluoride.
Overall, there have been no significant changes in water quality in the creeks during the three-
year (1999-2001) water quality sampling period. Seasonal patterns were generally the same for the three
years and sample station means have not varied greatly. One exception was that salinity and a few other
parameters (e.g., DKN) were influenced by several hurricanes during the 1999 fall, whereas there were
no such storms in 2000 and 2001.
Water quality in these creeks is about what would be expected for such ecosystems. There are
no stations with any of the measured water quality parameters that are at levels of concern. On the other
hand, there are no stations with exceptionally good water quality. Ammonium nitrogen and dissolved
organic nitrogen concentrations are relatively high, in comparison to previously measured concentrations
farther down the creeks and in South Creek and the Pamlico River (Stanley 1997). But concentrations of
the more oxidized inorganic nitrogen fraction, nitrate, are relatively low in the creeks. The high
ammonium and low nitrate, along with low dissolved oxygen concentrations, suggest that nitrogen
dynamics in the creeks are dominated by decomposition processes. Inorganic phosphorus levels are
also relatively high, as would be expected in such an environment. Despite the high nitrogen and
phosphorus levels in the creeks, chlorophyll a levels were usually not higher than previously measured
levels in South Creek or the Pamlico River (Stanley 1997). Shading and flushing may help keep the
phytoplankton biomass from becoming higher.
Vegetation
During the late summer of 2001, vegetation was sampled in permanent transects located at each
wetland WL-80, as has been done every year since vegetation monitoring began in 1998. Importance
values were calculated from cover, stem count, and frequency data, and dominant herbaceous and shrub
species were determined for each transect based on these importance values. The wetland indicator
status and tolerance to brackish conditions were evaluated for each dominant species.
Overall, the data do not appear to indicate any major changes in the vegetation communities in
Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek, or Huddles Cut. Although there have been some variations in the species
that compose the list of dominants from year to year, the variation seems most likely a result of natural
disturbances, and possibly the subjectivity associated with estimating percent cover. The virtual absence
from all transects of dominant species associated with dry habitats shows that there has not been a shift
towards non-wetland vegetation at any of the transects. The percentage of dominant species which are
brackish-intolerant also has fluctuated somewhat at many transects; however, the overall upstream-to-
downstream gradients within each drainage have remained constant throughout monitoring. The
fluctuation of these percentages is not uni-directional, and is also likely attributable to natural
disturbances or subjectivity associated with the sampling. The data do not suggest a shift towards
species that are more tolerant of brackish conditions.
Fisheries
Fisheries sampling was conducted weekly during April through June 2001, as has been done
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-15
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Four (2001)
every year since 1998. Trawl sampling was conducted on Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek, and the control
site at Muddy Creek, whereas fyke net sampling was conducted on Huddles Cut. Species diversity and
community similarity indices were used to make spatial and temporal comparisons.
Fish assemblages at Jacks Creek and Tooley Creek were dominated by spot, with pinfish, bay
anchovy, and rainwater killifish also common. Spot made up the greatest portion of the catch at Huddles
Cut as well. Also common at Huddles Cut were mummichog and striped mullet. For 2001, indices of
community similarity indicated that Tooley Creek and Jacks Creek had a community composition similar
to the Muddy Creek reference site. During 2001, species abundance, richness, and diversity at Jacks
Creek and Tooley Creek also were similar to or greater than that of Muddy Creek. The 1999 to 2001 data,
taken together, indicate that, year to year, community similarity was high both within creek sites and
between creeks. Yearly species diversity at Jacks Creek declined during 1999 to 2001, but diversity at
the reference site also declined during the same period. No other trends in species diversity were
present.
The 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001 fish data illustrate the extreme natural variability in fish catch in
these creeks. This variability makes it very difficult to discern any spatial patterns in fish abundance. The
data generally do not allow any determination of true differences in fish abundances among years.
However, the data have established baseline ranges of CPUE for the most common species. Data from
future years can be compared to these abundances. Though it is not likely that small differences in
abundance will be detected, it may be possible to discern large-scale changes in abundances of the
dominant fish. Likewise, species diversity and community similarity indices may be able to signal
changes in community structure if the index values begin to diverge greatly from baseline values.
Benthic Macroinvertebrates
Benthic macro i nve rte brates were sampled during May 2001 using the same methodology that
has been used annually since 1998. Samples were taken at upstream and downstream locations in
Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek, Huddles Cut, and a control site in Muddy Creek. At each station, ponar grab
samples were taken at a mid-stream location and timed sweep samples were taken near the shoreline.
Abundances from both types of samples and Estuarine Biotic Indices (EBIs) calculated from the sweep
samples were used in an attempt to discern spatial and temporal patterns.
The benthic data showed considerable variation between 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001. Between
May 2000 and May 2001, there was an increase in salinity. Higher salinity in 2001 may have resulted in
increases in numbers of Mediomastus ambiseta and Macoma balthica in the grab samples, both of which
prefer brackish water.
In 2000, submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) was virtually absent at all sampling stations.
However, in 2001, SAV was present at all of the sampling stations except for Huddles Cut. This may
explain an apparent decreased presence of Chironomus sp., which prefers hard sand bottoms, and an
increase in other Chironomidae (i.e. Goeldichironomus, Dicrotendipes, and Tanytarsus), which prefer the
presence of vegetation.
Despite the extremely variable nature of the benthic data collected between 1998 and 2001,
some patterns have emerged. The most common species encountered overall for ponar grabs and timed
sweeps were Gammarus tigrinus and Hobsonia florida. For the ponar grabs, the most common taxa
groups encountered for all years and all creeks were Polychaeta and Diptera. For the timed sweeps,
Littoridinops sp. has been among the most abundant species for all the creeks between 1998 and 2001.
The nature of a benthic community is patchy. Aquatic insect populations may produce single or
multiple generations in a year, or the generation time can be longer than a year. The life cycle completion
time can vary greatly across a species' range, and between populations of the same species in upper and
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-16
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Four (2001)
lower areas of the same stream. These and other factors may have contributed to the large year-to-year
variability that has been documented in this study. Such variability cannot easily be attributed to simple
changes in hydrographic parameters or habitat structure. The large range of variability documented
during the baseline period of this study reinforces the need for careful interpretation of any variation that
may occur during post-disturbance monitoring.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-17
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Four (2001)
YEAR FIVE (2002) END-OF-YEAR REPORT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In 1997, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) issued a permit to PCS Phosphate
Company, Inc. for continued phosphate mining on PCS Phosphate's property north of Aurora, Beaufort
County, North Carolina. Because the permitted mine advance will temporarily reduce the drainage basin
area for several small estuarine tributaries of South Creek and the Pamlico River, the USACE permit and
the accompanying N.C. Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Water Quality Certification contained conditions
that require monitoring to detect any deleterious effects on these tributaries. Accordingly, PCS
Phosphate, working through its consultants CZR Incorporated, Dr. Wayne Skaggs, and Dr. Donald W.
Stanley, developed a plan to monitor flow, salinity, wetland hydrology, water quality, vegetation, fish, and
benthic macro i nve rte brates in Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek, and Huddles Cut (CZR and Skaggs 1998).
Baseline data collection on vegetation, fish, and benthic macroinvertebrates began in 1998, while
baseline data collection on the remaining parameters began in 1999. Baseline monitoring continued on
Tooley Creek and Huddles Cut until 13 June 2002 to ensure that the required 3-year baseline period was
met for all parameters. Post-impact monitoring on Jacks Creek began when its drainage basin was
reduced in early 2000. In accordance with the monitoring plan, all baseline monitoring except flow has
ceased on Tooley Creek and Huddles Cut as of 13 June 2002. Also at that time, the level of effort for the
post-impact monitoring on Jacks Creek was reduced as specified by the monitoring plan. This annual
report presents the results of the monitoring activities conducted during 2002, with comparisons to
previous years as appropriate.
Flow Monitoring/Modeling
Flow monitoring and modeling continued on eight watersheds during 2002: Jacks Creek 1 and 2,
Tooley Creek 1 and 2, and Huddles Cut 1, 2, 3, and 4. Precipitation was recorded at centrally located
gauges on the Jacks, Tooley and Huddles sites. Annual rainfall varied somewhat from site to site but was
about 40 to 41 inches for 2002. While annual precipitation was about 19 percent lower than the long-term
average (51.2 inches) for this location, it was higher than the 35.7 inches recorded in 2001. Lower than
average precipitation, coupled with very dry soil conditions at the beginning of the year, caused annual
outflow in 2002 to be the smallest measured in the four years of monitoring. A long dry period at the end
of 2001 caused the water tables to be deep and the profile dry at the beginning of 2002. As a result
winter outflow from the watersheds, which normally would be expected in January and February, was
delayed until March on all eight watersheds. All of the flow in 2002 occurred in March and April with the
annual amount varying from 0.4 to about 2.8 inches, as compared to around 5 inches in 2001, which was
also well below normal. Leakage around the watershed outlet structure may have led to underestimation
of outflow at Huddles Cut 3 and uncertainty of watershed area may have caused overestimation of
outflow depth for Huddles 1.
The water table in most watersheds was 60 to 80 inches deep at the beginning of 2002. It rose in
response to rainfall such that it was close to the surface for much of March and April before receding, due
to drainage and evapotranspiration, to a depth of about 80 inches by the end of May, where it remained
for the remainder of the year. As in previous years, outflow occurred when the water table was at or
close to the soil surface, at least in some locations on the watershed. This indicates that most of the
outflow occurred as surface runoff or very shallow subsurface flow.
DRAINMOD was used to simulate the hydrology for the length of the flow record on each
watershed. This included 3.7 years (May 1999 through 2002) for the Huddles Cut watersheds and
somewhat shorter periods for the Jacks and Tooley watersheds due to delays in installation and
equipment problems. Results comparing predicted and measured water table depth, flow rates and
cumulative outflow volumes are presented in the report for the entire record on all eight watersheds. Our
objective was to use results for years 1999 through 2001 for calibration, and year 2002 for verifying the
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-18
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Five (2002)
use of DRAINMOD to describe the hydrology of these sites. Results indicate that the model can be used
to reliably predict both water table depths and drainage outflows from these watersheds. However, both
2001 and 2002 were very dry years, with less than 1 inch of outflow from most of the watersheds during
the verification year, 2002. Thus, data for 2002 provided only a weak test of the calibrated model. The
model will be further tested using data from winter and spring, 2003. In general DRAINMOD did an
excellent job of predicting the timing of flow events, and the magnitude of predicted outflows on a monthly
and annual basis were in very good agreement with measured values. Pending results of final testing
with data from the 2003 flow season, it appears that the model can be reliably used to quantify the
hydrology of these poorly drained coastal watersheds.
Salinity
From 1 January to 13 June 2002, salinity monitoring continued at the nine locations that were
monitored during 1999, 2000 and 2001. On 13 June 2002, salinity monitoring at the Huddles Cut and
Tooley Creek stations ceased. Salinity varied widely during 2002, from a low of 0.0 ppt to a high of 20.7
ppt. At all stations, average annual salinity was 1-4 ppt higher than in 2001. Salinity tended to be high
and/or increasing during periods of low Tar River flow (January, June through August), and low and/or
decreasing during periods of higher Tar River flow (February through April, September through
December).
Wind tides and local drainage basin input appeared to be the primary factors controlling short-
term salinity fluctuations, particularly at the upstream locations. Local flow combined with a falling wind
tide seemed to cause the sharpest short-term declines in salinity. Local flow that occurred on a rising
wind tide appeared to correspond to little or no decline in salinity. The effects of both local flow and wind
tides were more subdued at the downstream stations, though both still could be clearly identified in
several instances.
It seems possible that any reductions in flow that might occur due to drainage basin reduction
could result in decreased frequency and magnitude of short-term salinity declines. It is not anticipated
that any such alteration of short-term salinity declines would have an appreciable effect on the annual
salinity pattern in these creeks. Post-drainage basin reduction on Jacks Creek has not detected any
obvious change in the pattern of flow-induced salinity declines, though a definitive conclusion cannot be
made because the baseline data for this creek covers less than a year.
Wetland Hydrology
From 1 January to 13 June 2002, monitoring of hydrology in the bottomland hardwood wetlands
on Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek, and Huddles Cut continued at the same 39 shallow monitoring well
locations that have been monitored since 1999. On 13 June 2002, hydrology monitoring ended at Tooley
Creek and Huddles Cut. Wetland hydroperiods recorded during 2002 generally were similar to or shorter
than hydroperiods recorded during 2001, though a few wells had longer hydroperiods. Hydroperiods in
2002 on Tooley Creek and Huddles Cut are not fully comparable to hydroperiods from earlier years
because monitoring spanned only half the year in 2002. Most of the wells that experienced shorter
hydroperiods were on Jacks Creek and Tooley Creek. Unusually dry weather during 2002 may have
contributed to the shorter hydroperiods.
Water level fluctuations at the semi-continuous WL-80 monitoring wells appeared to be affected
by several factors. At least periodically, water levels at all WL-80s responded to direct precipitation in the
absence of significant local flow or rising wind tides. At the more upstream well locations along Jacks
Creek, Tooley Creek, and Huddles Cut, direct precipitation and evapotranspiration appeared to be the
primary factors contributing to water level fluctuations. The data suggested that estuarine water level
(wind tides) contributed to many of the water level fluctuations at the downstream WL-80s on Jacks Creek
and Tooley Creek. Groundwater discharge from adjacent uplands, though not measured in this study,
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-19
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Five (2002)
could have contributed to high, steady wetland water levels at many well locations during winter. Large
local flow events appeared to contribute to infrequent, short-term flooding events at most well locations.
Therefore, it seems possible that any reductions in flow that might occur due to drainage basin reductions
could result in decreased frequency or magnitude of these flooding events. However, because these
flow-induced peaks are infrequent and short-lived, it is not anticipated that any reduction in the frequency
or magnitude of these peaks would have a major impact on the hydrology of the wetlands. Post-drainage
basin reduction monitoring on Jacks Creek has not detected any obvious change in the pattern of flow-
induced water level peaks, but a definitive conclusion cannot be made because less than a year of
baseline data exist for Jacks Creek.
Water Quality
Water quality sampling continued from 1 January to 13 June 2002 at the nine sites where water
quality has been sampled on a bi-weekly basis since 1999. On 13 June 2002, water quality sampling
ceased at Huddles Cut and Tooley Creek. Water quality sampling at Jacks Creek has been reduced to a
monthly basis since 13 June 2002. Field measurements included water depth, temperature, salinity,
conductivity, Secchi disk depth, turbidity, dissolved oxygen, and pH. Grab samples were taken back to
the laboratory for analyses of total dissolved phosphorus (TDP), dissolved orthophosphate (PO4-P),
ammonium nitrogen (NH4-N), nitrate nitrogen (NO3-N), dissolved Kjeldahl nitrogen (DKN), particulate
nitrogen (PN), particulate phosphorus (PP), chlorophyll a, and total fluoride.
Overall, there have been no significant changes in water quality in the creeks during the three-
year period (June 1999- May 2002) when all three creeks were sampled. Seasonal patterns were
generally the same for the three years and sample station means have not varied greatly. One exception
was that salinity and a few other parameters (e.g., DKN) were influenced by several hurricanes during the
1999 fall, whereas there were no such storms in 2000, 2001, and 2002.
Water quality in these creeks is about what would be expected for such ecosystems. There are
no stations with any of the measured water quality parameters that are at levels of concern. On the other
hand, there are no stations with exceptionally good water quality. Ammonium nitrogen and dissolved
organic nitrogen concentrations are relatively high, in comparison to previously measured concentrations
farther down the creeks and in South Creek and the Pamlico River (Stanley 1997). But concentrations of
the more oxidized inorganic nitrogen fraction, nitrate, are relatively low in the creeks. The high
ammonium and low nitrate, along with low dissolved oxygen concentrations, suggest that nitrogen
dynamics in the creeks are dominated by decomposition processes. Inorganic phosphorus levels are
also relatively high, as would be expected in such an environment. Despite the high nitrogen and
phosphorus levels in the creeks, chlorophyll a levels were usually not higher than previously measured
levels in South Creek or the Pamlico River (Stanley 1997). Shading and flushing may help keep the
phytoplankton biomass from becoming higher.
Vegetation
During the late summer of 2002, vegetation was sampled in permanent transects located at each
wetland WL-80 on Jacks Creek, as has been done every year since vegetation monitoring began in 1998.
Vegetation was not sampled at Huddles Cut and Tooley Creek in 2002. Importance values were
calculated from cover, stem count, and frequency data, and dominant herbaceous and shrub species
were determined for each transect based on these importance values. The wetland indicator status and
tolerance to brackish conditions were evaluated for each dominant species.
Overall, the data do not appear to indicate any major changes in the vegetation communities in
Jacks Creek. Although there have been some variations in the species that compose the list of
dominants from year to year, the variation seems most likely a result of natural disturbances, and possibly
the subjectivity associated with estimating percent cover. The virtual absence from all transects of
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-20
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Five (2002)
dominant species associated with dry habitats shows that there has not been a shift towards non-wetland
vegetation at any of the transects. The percentage of dominant species which are brackish-intolerant
also has fluctuated somewhat at many transects; however, the overall upstream-to-downstream gradients
within each drainage have remained constant throughout monitoring. The fluctuation of these
percentages is not uni-directional, and is also likely attributable to natural disturbances or subjectivity
associated with the sampling. The data do not suggest a shift towards species that are more tolerant of
brackish conditions.
Fisheries
Fisheries sampling was conducted weekly during April through June 2002, as has been done
every year since 1998. Trawl sampling was conducted on Jacks Creek and the control site at Muddy
Creek. In accordance with the monitoring plan, trawl sampling was not conducted on Huddles Cut and
Tooley Creek in 2002. Species diversity and community similarity indices were used to make spatial and
temporal comparisons.
The 2002 sampling data indicate that fish assemblages at Jacks Creek and the Muddy Creek
reference site were dominated by spot and pinfish, with inland silversides, bay anchovy, and rainwater
killifish also common. CPUE was highest at Muddy Creek for 2002. Indices of community similarity
indicated Jacks Creek had a community composition similar to the Muddy Creek reference site. Species
richness and diversity at Jacks Creek was also similar to that of Muddy Creek during 2002. Species
richness and diversity at Jacks Creek declined during 1999 to 2002, but diversity at the reference site
also declined during much of the same period. Yearly trends in relative abundance do not suggest any
relationship to drainage basin reduction.
The 1998 to 2002 fish data illustrate the extreme natural variability in fish catch in these creeks.
This variability makes it very difficult to discern any spatial patterns in fish abundance. The data generally
do not allow any determination of true differences in fish abundances among years. However, the data
have established baseline ranges of CPUE for the most common species. Data from future years can be
compared to these abundances. Though it is not likely that small differences in abundance will be
detected, it may be possible to discern large-scale changes in abundances of the dominant fish.
Likewise, species diversity and community similarity indices may be able to signal changes in community
structure if the index values begin to diverge greatly from baseline values.
Benthic Macroinvertebrates
Benthic macro i nve rte brates were sampled during May 2002 using the same methodology that
has been used annually since 1998. Samples were taken at upstream and downstream locations in
Jacks Creek, and a control site in Muddy Creek. In accordance with the monitoring plan, benthic samples
were not taken at Huddles Cut and Tooley Creek in 2002. At each station, ponar grab samples were
taken at a mid-stream location and timed sweep samples were taken near the shoreline. Abundances
from both types of samples and Estuarine Biotic Indices (EBIs) calculated from the sweep samples were
used in an attempt to discern spatial and temporal patterns.
The benthic data showed considerable variation among years. Between May 2001 and May
2002, there was an increase in salinity. This trend in salinity increase was also observed from 2000 to
2001, with much higher concentrations recorded in 2001. Higher salinity in 2001 and 2002 may have
resulted in increases in numbers of Mediomastus ambiseta and Macoma balthica in the grab samples,
both of which prefer brackish water.
As in 2000, submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) was virtually absent at both sampling stations in
2002. However, in 2001, SAV was present at both of the sampling stations. This may explain an
apparent decreased presence of Chironomus sp., which prefers hard sand bottoms. Other Chironomidae
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-21
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Five (2002)
(i.e. Goeldichironomus, Dicrotendipes, and Tanytarsus), which prefer the presence of vegetation, have
experienced major fluctuations in abundance.
Despite the extremely variable nature of the benthic data collected between 1998 and 2002,
some patterns have emerged. The most common species encountered overall for ponar grabs and timed
sweeps from 1998 to 2001 were Gammarus tigrinus and Hobsonia florida, but both of these species
decreased considerably in 2002. For the ponar grabs, the most common taxa groups encountered for all
years and both creeks were Polychaeta and Diptera. For the timed sweeps, Littoridinops sp. has been
among the most abundant species for all the creeks in all years.
The nature of a benthic community is patchy. Aquatic insect populations may produce
single or multiple generations in a year, or the generation time can be longer than a year. The life cycle
completion time can vary greatly across a species' range, and between populations of the same species
in upper and lower areas of the same stream. These and other factors may have contributed to the large
year-to-year variability that has been documented in this study. Such variability cannot easily be
attributed to simple changes in hydrographic parameters or habitat structure. The large range of variability
documented during the baseline period of this study reinforces the need for careful interpretation of any
variation that may occur during post-disturbance monitoring
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-22
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Five (2002)
YEAR SIX (2003) END-OF-YEAR REPORT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In 1997, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) issued a permit to PCS Phosphate
Company, Inc. for continued phosphate mining on PCS Phosphate's property north of Aurora, Beaufort
County, North Carolina. Because the permitted mine advance will temporarily reduce the drainage basin
area for several small estuarine tributaries of South Creek and the Pamlico River, the USACE permit and
the accompanying N.C. Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Water Quality Certification contained conditions
that require monitoring to detect any deleterious effects on these tributaries. Accordingly, PCS
Phosphate, working through its consultants CZR Incorporated (CZR), Dr. Wayne Skaggs, and Dr. Donald
W. Stanley, developed a plan to monitor flow, salinity, wetland hydrology, water quality, vegetation, fish,
and benthic macroinvertebrates in Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek, and Huddles Cut (CZR Incorporated and
Skaggs 1998). Baseline data collection on vegetation, fish, and benthic macroinvertebrates began in
1998, while baseline data collection on the remaining parameters began in 1999. Baseline monitoring
has continued on Tooley Creek and Huddles Cut until 13 June 2002. Post-impact monitoring on Jacks
Creek began when its drainage basin was reduced in early 2000. In accordance with the monitoring plan,
all baseline monitoring except flow has ceased on Tooley Creek and Huddles Cut as of 13 June 2002.
Also at that time, the level of effort for the post-impact monitoring on Jacks Creek was reduced as
specified by the monitoring plan. In 2003, monitoring continued as has been done since 13 June 2002.
In 2004, post-disturbance monitoring on Jacks Creek will continue on the same schedule as 2003. It is
anticipated that flow monitoring on Huddles Cut and Tooley Creek will continue through March 2004.
This annual report presents the results of the monitoring activities conducted during 2003, with
comparisons to previous years as appropriate.
Flow Monitoring/Modeling
During 2003, flow monitoring and modeling continued at the eight watershed outlets monitored
during 1999 through 2002: Jacks Creek 1 and 2, Tooley Creek 1 and 2, and Huddles Cut 1, 2, 3, and 4.
Precipitation was recorded at both manual and automatic gauges on the Jacks, Tooley, and Huddles
sites. Since the automatic gauge at Jacks Creek appeared to be malfunctioning (consistently recording
lower rainfall than the manual gauge and other automatic gauges), only Tooley and Huddles automatic
gauges were used in water balance calculations and modeling. Annual rainfall varied somewhat from site
to site but was about 67 to 68 inches for 2003. Annual rainfall at all sites was at least 19% higher than
the long-term average of 51.2 inches, even when considering the malfunctioning automatic gauge at
Jacks Creek. Precipitation in 2003 was higher than any other year in this study; this unusually high
precipitation caused flow to occur throughout the entire year, and annual outflow was well above average.
A long dry period at the end of 2002 caused the water tables to be deep and the profile relatively
dry at the beginning of 2003. As a result winter outflow from the watersheds, which normally would be
expected in January, was not significant until February on all eight watersheds. Measured annual
outflows for 2003 were greater than predicted for the highest 10 percent of 53 years of simulations. In
contrast, measured annual outflows in 2002 were less than predicted for the lowest five percent of the 53
years. Leakage around the watershed outlet structure may have led to underestimation of outflow at
Huddles Cut 3 and Tooley 1, and uncertainty of watershed area may have caused overestimation of
outflow depth for Huddles 1. Also, Jacks 1 and 2 had problems with a submerged weir during two high
flow periods.
The water table in most watersheds was near the bottom of the wells (80 inches) at the beginning
of 2003. It rose in response to rainfall such that it was close to the surface for most of the year, with the
exception of June which was drier due to high evapotranspiration. As in previous years, outflow occurred
when the water table was at or close to the soil surface, at least in some locations on the watershed. This
indicates that most of the outflow occurred as surface runoff or very shallow subsurface flow.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-23
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Six (2003)
DRAINMOD was used to simulate the hydrology for the length of the flow record on each
watershed. This included 4.7 years (May 1999 through 2003) for the Huddles Cut watersheds and
somewhat shorter periods for the Jacks and Tooley watersheds due to delays in installation and
equipment problems. Results comparing predicted and measured water table depth, flow rates and
cumulative outflow volumes are presented in the report for the entire record on all eight watersheds. Our
objective was to use results for years 1999 through 2001 for calibration, and years 2002 and 2003 for
verifying the use of DRAINMOD to describe the hydrology of these sites. Results indicate that the model
can be used to reliably predict both water table depths and drainage outflows from these watersheds.
However, both 2001 and 2002 were very dry years, with less than 1 inch of outflow from most of the
watersheds during the verification year, 2002. Thus, data for 2002 provided only a weak test of the
calibrated model. The model was further tested using data from 2003, which was an exceptional year for
flow. In general DRAINMOD did an excellent job of predicting the timing of flow events and the
magnitude of predicted outflows on a monthly and annual basis were in very good agreement with
measured values. Pending results of final testing with data from the beginning of the 2004 flow season, it
appears that the model can be reliably used to quantify the hydrology of these poorly drained coastal
watersheds.
Salinity
During 2003, salinity monitoring continued at four locations: upstream Jacks Creek, downstream
Jacks Creek, Pamlico River, and South Creek. Salinity varied widely during 2003, from a low of 0.0 ppt to
a high of 18.7 ppt. At all stations, average annual salinity was 8.5-9 ppt lower than in 2002. Several long-
term salinity trends were evident: decreasing salinity January through May, increasing salinity during June
and August, and decreasing salinity in July and September through November. These long-term trends
appear to have been related to Tar River discharge, and perhaps also to frequent local flow events.
Wind tides and local drainage basin input appeared to be the primary factors controlling short-
term salinity fluctuations, particularly at the upstream locations. Local flow combined with a falling wind
tide seemed to cause the sharpest short-term declines in salinity. Local flow that occurred on a rising
wind tide appeared to correspond to little or no decline in salinity. The effects of both local flow and wind
tides were more subdued at the downstream stations, though both still could be clearly identified in
several instances.
It seems possible that any reductions in flow that might occur due to drainage basin reduction
could result in decreased frequency and magnitude of short-term salinity declines. It is not anticipated
that any such alteration of short-term salinity declines would have an appreciable effect on the annual
salinity pattern in these creeks. Post-drainage basin reduction on Jacks Creek has not detected any
obvious change in the pattern of flow-induced salinity declines, though a definitive conclusion cannot be
made because the baseline data for this creek covers less than a year.
Wetland Hydrology
During 2003, monitoring of hydrology in the bottomland hardwood wetlands on Jacks Creek
continued at the same ten shallow monitoring well locations that have been monitored since 1999. Most
wetland hydroperiods recorded during 2003 were longer than hydroperiods recorded during 2002. It is
believed that unusually wet weather during 2003 contributed to the longer hydroperiods.
Water level fluctuations at the semi-continuous WL-80 monitoring wells appeared to be affected
by several factors. At least periodically, water levels at all WL-80s responded to direct precipitation in the
absence of significant local flow or rising wind tides. At the more upstream well locations along Jacks
Creek, direct precipitation and evapotranspiration appeared to be the primary factors contributing to water
level fluctuations. The data suggested that estuarine water level (wind tides) contributed to many of the
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-24
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Six (2003)
water level fluctuations at the downstream WL-80s on Jacks Creek. Groundwater discharge from
adjacent uplands, though not measured in this study, could have contributed to high, steady wetland
water levels at many well locations during winter. Large local flow events appeared to contribute to
infrequent, short-term flooding events at most well locations. Therefore, it seems possible that any
reductions in flow that might occur due to drainage basin reductions could result in decreased frequency
or magnitude of these flooding events. Because these flow-induced peaks are infrequent and short-lived,
it is not anticipated that any reduction in the frequency or magnitude of these peaks would have a major
impact on the hydrology of the wetlands. However, based on 2003 data, when flow events were
unusually frequent, it is possible that the cumulative value of the constant flow could have contributed to
low and decreasing salinity in the long term. It is difficult to separate the long-term effects of local flow
from Tar River discharge. Overall, post-drainage basin monitoring on Jacks Creek has not detected any
obvious change in the pattern of flow-induced salinity troughs. Post-drainage basin reduction monitoring
on Jacks Creek has not detected any obvious change in the pattern of flow-induced water level peaks,
but a definitive conclusion cannot be made because less than a year of baseline data exists for Jacks
Creek.
Water Quality
Water quality sampling continued on a monthly basis in 2003 at the two sites in Jacks Creek
where water quality has been sampled since 1999. Water quality sampling at Jacks Creek has been
reduced to a monthly basis since 13 June 2002. Field measurements included water depth, temperature,
salinity, conductivity, Secchi disk depth, turbidity, dissolved oxygen, and pH. Grab samples were taken
back to the laboratory for analyses of total dissolved phosphorus (TDP), dissolved orthophosphate (P04-
P), ammonium nitrogen (NH4-N), nitrate nitrogen (NO3-N), dissolved Kjeldahl nitrogen (DKN), particulate
nitrogen (PN), particulate phosphorus (PP), chlorophyll a, and total fluoride.
Overall, there have been no significant changes in water quality in the creeks during the four-year
period (June 1999- May 2003) when all three creeks were sampled. Seasonal patterns were generally
the same for the three years and sample station means have not varied greatly. One exception was that
salinity and a few other parameters (e.g., DKN) were influenced by hurricanes during 1999 and 2003,
whereas there were no such storms in 2000, 2001, and 2002.
Water quality in these creeks is about what would be expected for such ecosystems. There are
no stations with any of the measured water quality parameters that are at levels of concern. On the other
hand, there are no stations with exceptionally good water quality. Ammonium nitrogen and dissolved
organic nitrogen concentrations are relatively high, in comparison to previously measured concentrations
farther down the creeks and in South Creek and the Pamlico River (Stanley 1997). But concentrations of
the more oxidized inorganic nitrogen fraction, nitrate, and are relatively low in the creeks. The high
ammonium and low nitrate, along with low dissolved oxygen concentrations, suggest that nitrogen
dynamics in the creeks are dominated by decomposition processes. Inorganic phosphorus levels are
also relatively high, as would be expected in such an environment. Despite the high nitrogen and
phosphorus levels in the creeks, chlorophyll a levels were usually not higher than previously measured
levels in South Creek or the Pamlico River (Stanley 1997). Shading and flushing may help keep the
phytoplankton biomass from becoming higher.
Vegetation
During the late summer of 2003, vegetation was sampled in permanent transects located at each
wetland WL-80 on Jacks Creek, as has been done every year since vegetation monitoring began in 1998.
Vegetation was not sampled at Huddles Cut and Tooley Creek in 2002 or 2003. Importance values were
calculated from cover, stem count, and frequency data, and dominant herbaceous and shrub species
were determined for each transect based on these importance values. The wetland indicator status and
tolerance to brackish conditions were evaluated for each dominant species.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-25
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Six (2003)
Overall, the data do not appear to indicate any major changes in the vegetation communities in
Jacks Creek. Although there have been some variations in the species that compose the list of
dominants from year to year, the variation seems most likely a result of natural disturbances, and possibly
the subjectivity associated with estimating percent cover. The absence from all transects of dominant
species associated with dry habitats shows that there has not been a shift towards non-wetland
vegetation at any of the transects. The percentage of dominant species which are brackish-intolerant
also has fluctuated somewhat at many transects; however, the overall upstream-to-downstream gradients
within each drainage have remained constant throughout monitoring. The fluctuation of these
percentages is not uni-directional and is also likely attributable to natural disturbances or subjectivity
associated with the sampling. The data do not suggest a shift towards species that are more tolerant of
brackish conditions.
Fisheries
Fisheries sampling was conducted weekly during April through June 2003, as has been done
every year since 1998. Trawl sampling was conducted on Jacks Creek and the control site at Muddy
Creek. In accordance with the monitoring plan, sampling was not conducted on Huddles Cut and Tooley
Creek in 2003. Species diversity and community similarity indices were used to make spatial and
temporal comparisons.
The 2003 sampling data indicate that spot dominated fish assemblages at Jacks Creek and the
Muddy Creek reference site, with Atlantic croaker, bay anchovy, and Atlantic menhaden also common.
CPUE was highest at Muddy Creek for 2003. Indices of community similarity indicated Jacks Creek had
a community composition similar to the Muddy Creek reference site. Species diversity, but not richness,
at Jacks Creek was higher than that of Muddy Creek during 2003. Yearly trends in abundance, richness
and other measures of community structure do not suggest any relationship to drainage basin reduction.
Species diversity did decline at Jacks Creek from 1999 to 2003, but diversity at the reference site also
declined during much of the same period.
The 1998 to 2003 fish data illustrate the extreme natural variability in fish catch in these creeks.
This variability makes it very difficult to discern any spatial patterns in fish abundance. The data generally
do not allow any determination of true differences in fish abundances among years. However, the data
have established baseline ranges of CPUE for the most common species. Data from future years can be
compared to these abundances. Though it is not likely that small differences in abundance will be
detected, it may be possible to discern large-scale changes in abundances of the dominant fish.
Likewise, species diversity and community similarity indices may be able to signal changes in community
structure if the index values begin to diverge greatly from baseline values.
Benthic Macroinvertebrates
Benthic macro i nve rte brates were sampled during May 2003 using the same methodology that
has been used annually since 1998. Samples were taken at upstream and downstream locations in
Jacks Creek and at a control site in Muddy Creek. In accordance with the monitoring plan, benthic
samples were not taken at Huddles Cut and Tooley Creek in 2003. At each station, ponar grab samples
were taken at a mid-stream location and timed sweep samples were taken near the shoreline.
Abundances from both types of samples and Estuarine Biotic Indices (EBIs) calculated from the sweep
samples were used in an attempt to discern spatial and temporal patterns.
The benthic data showed considerable variation among years. Higher salinity in 2001 and 2002
may have resulted in the increase in numbers of Mediomastus ambiseta and Macoma balthica in the grab
samples, both of which prefer brackish water. During the years 2001 and 2002, numbers of Gammarus
tigrinus and Hobsonia florida declined considerably at both the Jacks Creek and Muddy Creek sampling
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-26
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Six (2003)
stations. With salinity back at a lower level in 2003, Gammarus tigrinus increased slightly in numbers.
Littoridinops sp. still remains one of the consistently dominant species collected in the timed sweep
samples.
As in 2002, there was no submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) observed at the sampling stations
in 2003. However, in 2001, SAV was present at both of the sampling stations. Presence and degree of
SAV may also differ from one station to the next within the same creek. This may help explain the wide
variability in species occurrence and abundance throughout the sampling years. The high abundance of
Tubiticoides heterochaetus at the Jacks Creek downstream station and lack of abundance at any of the
other stations could be due to preferred habitat requirements. The occurrence of Chironomidae species
can be greatly affected by the presence or lack of SAV. Chironomus spp., which prefer hard sand
bottoms, peaked in numbers during the 2000 sampling, and also showed an increase in abundance at the
Jacks Creek upstream station in 2003. Other Chironomidae (i.e. Goeldichironomus, Dicrotendipes, and
Tanytarsus), which prefer the presence of vegetation, have experienced major fluctuations in abundance
over the years.
Despite the extremely variable nature of the benthic data collected between 1998 and 2003,
some patterns have emerged. The most common species encountered overall for ponar grabs and timed
sweeps from 1998 to 2001 were Gammarus tigrinus and Hobsonia florida, but both of these species
decreased considerably in 2002. In 2003, Gammarus tigrinus showed a small increase while Hobsonia
florida stayed at about the same level. For the ponar grabs, the most common taxa groups encountered
for all years and both creeks were Polychaeta and Diptera. Diptera was the most common taxa group
occurring in the timed sweeps. For the timed sweeps, Littoridinops sp. has been among the most
abundant species found in the creeks between 1998 and 2003.
The nature of a benthic community is patchy. Aquatic insect populations may produce single or
multiple generations in a year, or the generation time can be longer than a year. The life cycle completion
time can vary greatly across a species' range, and between populations of the same species in upper and
lower areas of the same stream. These and other factors may have contributed to the large year-to-year
variability that has been documented in this study. Such variability cannot easily be attributed to simple
changes in hydrographic parameters or habitat structure. The large range of variability documented
during the baseline period of this study reinforces the need for careful interpretation of any variation that
may occur during post-disturbance monitoring.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-27
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Six (2003)
YEAR SEVEN (2004) END-OF-YEAR REPORT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In 1997, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) issued a permit to PCS Phosphate
Company, Inc. for continued phosphate mining on PCS Phosphate's property north of Aurora, Beaufort
County, North Carolina. Because the permitted mine advance will temporarily reduce the drainage basin
area for several small estuarine tributaries of South Creek and the Pamlico River, the USACE permit and
the accompanying North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) Water Quality Certification
contained conditions that require monitoring to detect any deleterious effects on these tributaries.
Accordingly, PCS Phosphate, working through its consultants CZR Incorporated (CZR), Dr. Wayne
Skaggs, and Dr. Donald W. Stanley, developed a plan to monitor flow, salinity, wetland hydrology, water
quality, vegetation, fish, and benthic macro i nve rte brates in Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek, and Huddles Cut
(CZR and Skaggs 1998). Baseline data collection on vegetation, fish, and benthic macroinvertebrates
began in 1998, while baseline data collection on the remaining parameters began in 1999. Baseline
monitoring has continued on Tooley Creek and Huddles Cut until 13 June 2002. Post-impact monitoring
on Jacks Creek began when its drainage basin was reduced in early 2000. In accordance with the
monitoring plan, all baseline monitoring except flow has ceased on Tooley Creek and Huddles Cut as of
13 June 2002. Also at that time, the level of effort for the post-impact monitoring on Jacks Creek was
reduced as specified by the monitoring plan. In April 2004, all flow monitoring ceased at Huddles Cut and
Tooley Creek.
Flow Monitoring/Modeling
Flow monitoring and modeling continued on six watersheds during 2004: Jacks Creek 1 and 2,
Tooley Creek 2, and Huddles Cut 1, 2, and 4. Flow monitoring at Huddles Cut 1, 2, and 4, and Tooley
Creek 2 ended on 28 April 2004 according to the monitoring plan. Rainfall measured from 1 January to
28 April at centrally located gauges on the Jacks, Tooley, and Huddles sites ranged from 12.6 to 13.2
inches with the highest monthly rainfall (4.7 to 5.2 inches) occurring in February. Wet conditions at the
end of 2003 caused the water tables to be near the soil surface at the beginning of 2004 with flow
occurring at most watersheds. Outflow from the watersheds from 1 January to 28 April ranged from 5.8 to
7.6 inches. Outflow was measured at Jacks Creek sites for the entire year of 2004. Annual rainfall
measured at the three watersheds varied from 48.2 to 50.9 inches in 2004. Annual precipitation was 0.3
to 3.0 inches lower than the long-term average (51.2 inches) for this location. Total outflow from
combined Jacks 1 and 2 sites was 6.1 inches through 28 April. Additional outflow occurred from the
Jacks Creek watersheds in May, August, September, November, and December; however, these monthly
flows were all less than 0.7-inch and only 2.4 inches of outflow occurred after 28 April, resulting in a total
outflow of 8.5 inches for 2004.
Water tables in most watersheds were within 10 inches of the soil surface at the beginning of
2004. Water tables remained near the soil surface (within 20 inches) at most wells until water table
measurements were discontinued at Huddles Cut 1, 2, and 4, and Tooley Creek 2 on 11 May. Water
tables at the Jacks Creek sites, where measurements continued through the year, fell during May and
were usually between 40 and 80 inches deep through June and July until a wet period in late July and
August. The water tables rose to within 20 inches of the surface in August, and remained relatively high
until the end of September when they began to move deeper. Water tables fell to at least 50 inches deep
in October and then rose to near the soil surface by the end of the year. As in previous years, outflow
occurred when the water table was at or close to the soil surface, at least in some locations on the
watershed. This indicates that most outflows occurred as surface runoff or very shallow subsurface flow.
DRAINMOD was used to simulate the hydrology of each watershed for 5.7 years (May 1999
through 2004) using the measured weather record. Predicted flow rates were compared to measured
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-28
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Seven (2004)
data for five years at Jacks Creek watersheds and Huddles Cut 1, 2, and 4 watersheds. Comparisons of
flow rates for the remaining watersheds were over shorter periods (3.0 to 4.2 years) due to delays in
installation and equipment problems. Comparisons of predicted to measured water table depths were
conducted for 5.7 years at Jacks Creek sites and for 5 years at the other sites. Results comparing
predicted and measured water table depth, flow rates, and cumulative outflow volumes are presented in
this report and appendices for the entire record on all eight watersheds. Our objective was to use results
for years 1999 through 2001 for DRAINMOD calibration, and years 2002 through 2004 for verifying the
use of DRAINMOD to describe the hydrology of these sites. Results indicate that the model can be used
to reliably predict both water table depths and drainage outflows from these watersheds. While both 2001
and 2002 were very dry years resulting in less than 1 inch of outflow from most of the watersheds during
2002, the very wet year of 2003 resulted in large amounts of outflow and along with the nearly average
year of 2004 completed an excellent data set. Thus, the combined data set for years 2002 through 2004
provided a strong test of the calibrated model. In general, DRAINMOD accomplished the job of predicting
timing of flow events. The magnitudes of predicted outflows on a monthly and annual basis were also in
general agreement with measured values.
The Huddles Cut 2, Tooley Creek 2, and the combined Jacks Creek 1 and 2 watersheds were
used in a simulation study to determine the range and distribution of annual outflows that would likely
occur at the watersheds over a long period of time. Rainfall data used in the simulations was data
collected at Belhaven, NC from January 1951 to June 1999 and data collected at the study watersheds
from July 1999 to December 2003. Soil and site parameters used in the simulations were those
determined during the calibration and validation period (1999 to 2004) for each watershed. Predicted
annual outflows for the 53-year simulations ranged from 1.1 to 31.1 inches for Tooley 2, from 1.1 to 29.7
inches for Jacks 1 and 2, and from 0.0 to 29.2 inches for Huddles 2. Predicted average annual outflow
was 14.0 inches for Tooley 2, compared to 13.8 inches for Jacks 1 and 2, and 13.0 inches for Huddles 2.
It is notable that these differences in average annual outflow between the three watersheds were not very
large (about 1 inch). Predicted monthly outflows for the 53-year simulations were highly variable from
year to year and from month to month. For all watersheds, the median monthly flows for May, June, and
July were 0.0-inch. Flow occurred most frequently in January, February, and March. The greatest
variability of monthly flows occurred in September and October as a result of hurricanes and tropical
storms.
Salinity
During 2004, salinity monitoring continued at four locations: upstream Jacks Creek, downstream
Jacks Creek, Pamlico River, and South Creek. All four of the salinity monitoring sites experienced a wide
range of salinity values during 2004, from 0.0 ppt at JS2 and SS1 in March to 20.8 ppt at PS1 in
November. Several long-term salinity trends were evident: decreasing salinity January through May,
increasing salinity June through August, and decreasing salinity in September through November. These
long-term trends appear to have been related to Tar River discharge, and perhaps also to frequent local
flow events.
Wind tides and local drainage basin input during 2004 appeared to be the primary factors
controlling short-term salinity fluctuations in these systems, particularly at the upstream locations. Local
flow combined with a falling wind tide seemed to have the most obvious effect on short-term declines in
salinity. Local flow that occurred on a rising wind tide appeared to correspond to little or no decline in
salinity. The effects of both local flow and wind tides were more subdued at the downstream stations,
though both still could be clearly identified in several instances.
It seems possible that any reductions in flow that might occur due to drainage basin reduction
could result in decreased frequency and magnitude of short-term salinity declines. It is not anticipated
that any such alteration of short-term salinity declines would have an appreciable effect on the annual
salinity pattern in these creeks. Post-drainage basin reduction on Jacks Creek has not detected any
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-29
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Seven (2004)
obvious change in the pattern of flow-induced salinity declines, though a definitive conclusion cannot be
made because the baseline data for this creek covers less than a year.
Wetland Hydrology
During 2004, monitoring of hydrology in the bottomland hardwood wetlands on Jacks Creek
continued at the same ten shallow monitoring well locations that have been monitored since 1999. In
2004, four of the wetland wells on Jacks Creek exhibited hydroperiods that were longer than the
hydroperiods for the same wells reported for 2003. Four wells exhibited hydroperiods that were shorter
than those reported in 2003. The longest hydroperiods in 2004 tended to occur in the middle of the
growing season from July to November. However, most wells also exhibited wetland hydroperiods from
14 March through late May.
Water level fluctuations at the semi-continuous WL-80 monitoring wells appeared to be affected
by several factors. At least periodically, water levels at all WL-80s responded to direct precipitation in the
absence of significant local flow or rising wind tides. At the more upstream well locations along Jacks
Creek, direct precipitation and evapotranspiration appeared to be the primary factors contributing to water
level fluctuations. The data suggested that estuarine water level (wind tides) contributed to many of the
water level fluctuations at the downstream WL-80s on Jacks Creek. Groundwater discharge from
adjacent uplands, though not measured in this study, could have contributed to high, steady wetland
water levels at many well locations during winter. Large local flow events appeared to contribute to
infrequent, short-term flooding events at most well locations. Therefore, it seems possible that any
reductions in flow that might occur due to drainage basin reductions could result in decreased frequency
or magnitude of these flooding events. Because these flow-induced peaks are infrequent and short-lived,
it is not anticipated that any reduction in the frequency or magnitude of these peaks would have a major
impact on the hydrology of the wetlands. However, based on 2004 data, when flow events were
unusually frequent, it is possible that the cumulative value of the constant flow could have contributed to
low and decreasing salinity in the long term. It is difficult to separate the long-term effects of local flow
from Tar River discharge.
Overall, because of the rarity of wetland water level fluctuations that can be attributed
conclusively to flow, post-drainage basin reduction monitoring on Jacks Creek has not detected any
obvious change in the pattern of flow-induced water level peaks. A definitive conclusion cannot be made
because the pre-drainage basin reduction data set on Jacks Creek covers less than one year.
Water Quality
Water quality sampling continued on a monthly basis in 2004 at the two sites in Jacks Creek
where water quality has been sampled since 1999. Water quality sampling at Jacks Creek has been
reduced to a monthly basis since 13 June 2002. Field measurements included water depth, temperature,
salinity, conductivity, Secchi disk depth, turbidity, dissolved oxygen, and pH. Subsamples were taken
back to the laboratory for analyses of total dissolved phosphorus (TDP), dissolved orthophosphate (P04-
P), ammonium nitrogen (NH4-N), nitrate nitrogen (NO3-N), dissolved Kjeldahl nitrogen (DKN), particulate
nitrogen (PN), particulate phosphorus (PP), chlorophyll a, and total fluoride.
Overall, there have been no significant changes in water quality in Jacks Creek during the study
period (June 1999-December 2004). Seasonal patterns were generally the same for the study period and
sample station means have not varied greatly. One exception was that salinity and a few other
parameters (e.g., DKN) were influenced by hurricanes during 1999 and 2003, whereas there were no
such storms in 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2004.
Water quality in Jacks Creek is about what would be expected for such an ecosystem. There are
no stations where any of the measured water quality parameters are at levels of concern. On the other
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-30
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Seven (2004)
hand, there are no stations with exceptionally good water quality. Ammonium nitrogen and dissolved
organic nitrogen concentrations are relatively high, in comparison to concentrations farther down the
creeks and in South Creek and the Pamlico River (Stanley 1997). But concentrations of the more
oxidized inorganic nitrogen fraction, nitrate, are relatively low in the creek. The high ammonium and low
nitrate, along with low dissolved oxygen concentrations, suggest that nitrogen dynamics in the creek are
dominated by decomposition processes. Inorganic phosphorus levels are also relatively high, as would
be expected in such an environment. Despite the high nitrogen and phosphorus levels in the creeks,
chlorophyll a levels were usually not higher than previously measured levels in South Creek or the
Pamlico River (Stanley 1997). Shading and flushing probably limit phytoplankton growth in the creek.
Vegetation
During the late summer of 2004, vegetation was sampled in permanent transects located at each
wetland WL-80 on Jacks Creek, which has been done every year since vegetation monitoring began in
1998. Vegetation was not sampled at Huddles Cut and Tooley Creek in 2002 or 2003. Importance
values were calculated from cover, stem count, and frequency data, and dominant herbaceous and shrub
species were determined for each transect based on these importance values. The wetland indicator
status and tolerance to brackish conditions were evaluated for each dominant species.
Overall, the data do not appear to indicate any major changes in the vegetation communities in
Jacks Creek. Although there have been some variations in the species that compose the list of
dominants from year to year, the variation seems most likely a result of natural disturbances, and possibly
the subjectivity associated with estimating percent cover. The absence from all transects of dominant
species associated with dry habitats shows that there has not been a shift towards non-wetland
vegetation at any transect. The percentage of dominant species which are brackish-intolerant also has
fluctuated somewhat at many transects; however, the overall upstream-to-downstream gradients within
each drainage have remained constant throughout monitoring. The fluctuation of these percentages is
not uni-directional and is also likely attributable to natural disturbances or subjectivity associated with the
sampling. The data do not suggest a shift towards species that are more tolerant of brackish conditions.
Fisheries
Fisheries sampling was conducted weekly during April through June 2004, as has been done
every year since 1998. Trawl sampling was conducted on Jacks Creek and the control site at Muddy
Creek. In accordance with the monitoring plan, sampling was not conducted on Huddles Cut and Tooley
Creek in 2003 or 2004. Species diversity and community similarity indices were used to make spatial and
temporal comparisons.
The 2004 sampling data indicate that spot dominated fish assemblages at Jacks Creek and the
Muddy Creek reference site, with Atlantic croaker, bay anchovy, and Atlantic menhaden also common.
Indices of community similarity indicated Jacks Creek had a community composition similar to the Muddy
Creek reference site. Species diversity, but not richness, increased at both sites during 2004. Yearly
trends in abundance, richness and other measures of community structure do not suggest any
relationship to drainage basin reduction, as temporal trends in diversity, richness, and abundance were
similar at Jacks Creek and Muddy Creek.
The 1998 to 2004 fish data illustrate the extreme natural variability in fish catch in these creeks.
This variability makes it very difficult to discern any spatial patterns in fish abundance. However, the data
have established baseline ranges of CPUE for the most common species. Data from future years can be
compared to these abundances. Though it is not likely that small differences in abundance will be
detected, it may be possible to discern large-scale changes in abundances of the dominant fish.
Likewise, species diversity and community similarity indices may be able to signal changes in community
structure if the index values begin to diverge greatly from baseline values.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-31
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Seven (2004)
Benthic Macroinvertebrates
Benthic macro i nve rte brates were sampled during May 2004 using the same methodology that
has been used annually since 1998. Samples were taken at upstream and downstream locations in
Jacks Creek and at a control site in Muddy Creek. In accordance with the monitoring plan, benthic
samples were not taken at Huddles Cut and Tooley Creek in 2003 or 2004. At each station, ponar grab
samples were taken at a mid-stream location and timed sweep samples were taken near the shoreline.
Abundances from both types of samples and Estuarine Biotic Indices (EBIs) calculated from the sweep
samples were used in an attempt to discern spatial and temporal patterns.
The benthic data showed considerable variation among years. Higher salinity in 2001 and 2002
may have resulted in the increase in numbers of Mediomastus ambiseta and Macoma balthica in the grab
samples, both of which prefer brackish water. Also, during the years 2001 and 2002, numbers of
Gammarus tigrinus and Hobsonia florida declined considerably at both the Jacks Creek and Muddy Creek
sampling stations. With salinity back at a lower level in 2004, Gammarus tigrinus increased slightly in
numbers. Littoridinops sp. still remains one of the consistently dominant species collected in the timed
sweep samples.
As in 2003, there was no submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) observed at the sampling stations
in 2004. However, in 2001, SAV was present at both of the sampling stations. Presence and degree of
SAV may also differ from one station to the next within the same creek. This may help explain the wide
variability in species occurrence and abundance throughout the sampling years. The high abundance of
Tubiticoides heterochaetus at the Jacks Creek downstream station and lack of abundance at any of the
other stations could be due to preferred habitat requirements. The occurrence of Chironomidae species
can be greatly affected by the presence or lack of SAV. Chironomus spp., which prefers hard sand
bottoms, peaked in numbers during the 2000 sampling, and also showed an increase in abundance at the
Jacks Creek upstream station in 2004. Other Chironomidae (i.e. Goeldichironomus, Dicrotendipes, and
Tanytarsus), which prefer the presence of vegetation, have experienced major fluctuations in abundance
over the years.
Despite the extremely variable nature of the benthic data collected between 1998 and 2004,
some patterns have emerged. For the ponar grabs, the most common taxa groups encountered for all
years and both creeks were Polychaeta, Oligochaeta, and Diptera. Diptera was the most common taxa
group occurring in the timed sweeps. For the timed sweeps, Gammarus tigrinus, Hobsonia florida, and
Littoridinops sp. has been among the most abundant species found in the creeks between 1998 and
2004. The abundance, richness, diversity, and EBI data do not suggest that mining related drainage
basin reduction has had an impact on benthic communities in Jacks Creek.
The nature of a benthic community is patchy. Aquatic insect populations may produce single or
multiple generations in a year, or the generation time can be longer than a year. The life cycle completion
time can vary greatly across a species' range, and between populations of the same species in upper and
lower areas of the same stream. These and other factors may have contributed to the large year-to-year
variability that has been documented in this study. Such variability cannot easily be attributed to simple
changes in hydrographic parameters or habitat structure. The large range of variability documented
during the baseline period of this study reinforces the need for careful interpretation of any variation that
may occur during post-disturbance monitoring.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-32
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Seven (2004)
YEAR EIGHT (2005) END-OF-YEAR REPORT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In 1997, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) issued a Section 404 permit to PCS
Phosphate Company, Inc. for continued phosphate mining on PCS Phosphate's property north of Aurora,
Beaufort County, North Carolina. Because the permitted mine advance will temporarily reduce the
drainage basin area for several small estuarine tributaries of South Creek and the Pamlico River, the
USACE permit and the accompanying North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) 401 Water
Quality Certification contained conditions that require monitoring to detect any deleterious effects on
these tributaries. Accordingly, PCS Phosphate, working through its consultants CZR Incorporated (CZR),
Dr. Wayne Skaggs, and Dr. Donald W. Stanley, developed a plan approved by NCDWQ to monitor pre-
and post-impact flow, salinity, wetland hydrology, water quality, vegetation, fish, and benthic
macroinvertebrates in Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek, and Huddles Cut (CZR and Skaggs 1998). Baseline
data collection on vegetation, fish, and benthic macroinvertebrates began in 1998, while baseline data
collection on the remaining parameters began in 1999. Baseline monitoring continued on Tooley Creek
and Huddles Cut until 13 June 2002. Post-impact monitoring on Jacks Creek began when its drainage
basin was reduced in early 2000. In accordance with the monitoring plan, all baseline monitoring except
flow ceased on Tooley Creek and Huddles Cut as of 13 June 2002. Also at that time, the level of effort
for the post-impact monitoring on Jacks Creek was reduced as specified by the monitoring plan. In April
2004, all pre-impact flow monitoring ceased at Huddles Cut and Tooley Creek, and in December 2005 all
post-impact flow monitoring ceased at Jacks Creek.
Flow Monitoring/Modeling
Flow monitoring and modeling continued on Jacks Creek 1 and 2 watersheds during 2005.
Rainfall measured on the Jacks site was 61.5 inches for 2005, which was 10.3 inches higher than the
long-term average (51.2 inches) for this location. Monthly rainfall amounts at the stations were below
average for the months of January, February, March, August, and November. Monthly rainfall amounts
were above average in April, May, June, and October with the October rainfall (11.6 inches) more than
three times greater than average.
Flow monitoring at Jacks 1 was affected by tidal fluctuations more often in 2005 than in past
years. For three time periods, flow could not be determined from stage or velocity measurements and
had to be estimated by DRAINMOD simulations. As in past years, outflow from Jacks 1 was greater than
outflow from Jacks 2, due to uncertainty about the areas of these watersheds and the boundary between
them. We have suspected that some water moves from the Jacks 2 watershed to the Jacks 1 watershed.
When the flows from both watersheds are combined total outflows are more reasonable. Total outflow
from combined Jacks 1 and 2 sites (19.5 inches) was the second highest annual flow observed since
1999. Nearly half (9.3 inches) of the flow occurred in the first half of the year and only 1.1 inches
occurred from July through September. Over one third of the annual flow (7.4 inches of 19.5 inches)
occurred in the month of October.
Water tables in most of the wells were at or below the soil surface at the beginning of 2005.
Water tables rose in late January and remained near the soil surface (within 20 inches) at all wells until
the end of April. May through September water tables fluctuated in response to rainfall and high ET. The
greatest water table depths of the year occurred in July and August at most wells. Heavy rains in mid-
September and early October raised the water table at most of the wells, except those located on higher
ground in better drained soils. By the end of the year, water tables were near the soil surface at all wells
except JW2.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-33
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Eight (2005)
DRAINMOD was used to simulate the hydrology of the Jacks Creek watersheds for 2005. The
watersheds were simulated using the same techniques used in the calibration simulations reported in
previous years (Skaggs and Group 2005). Since the water table data vary between the floodplain and the
higher ground, both of these conditions were simulated and water draining from the higher ground was
used as input for the floodplain simulations. DRAINMOD predicted water table fluctuations similar to
those observed in the field, except DRAINMOD predicted higher water tables than those observed on the
high ground at Jacks 1. DRAINMOD predicted higher outflow than was observed at Jacks 2 and lower
outflow than was observed at Jacks 1. When the predicted outflows were combined for both Jacks 1 and
Jacks 2, the magnitudes of predicted outflows on a monthly and annual basis were in general agreement
with measured values for the combined watersheds. Predicted annual flow from the combined
watersheds was 22.8 inches compared to 19.5 inches observed.
Salinity
During 2005, salinity monitoring continued at four locations: upstream Jacks Creek, downstream
Jacks Creek, Pamlico River, and South Creek. All four of the salinity monitoring sites experienced a
range of salinity values during the year, from 0.0 ppt at JS2 in January and November to 13.2 ppt at PS1
in January. These two salinity sondes also had the lowest and highest salinities, respectively in 2004.
Several long-term salinity trends were evident based on mean data: decreasing salinity January through
August for JS1, lowest salinities late spring and summer for JS2 and SS1, and lowest salinities in summer
for PS1. These long-term trends appear to have been related to Tar River discharge, and perhaps also to
frequent local flow events.
Wind tides and local drainage basin input during 2005 appeared to be the primary factors
controlling short-term salinity fluctuations in these systems, particularly at the upstream locations. Local
flow combined with a falling wind tide seemed to have the most obvious effect on short-term declines in
salinity. Local flow that occurred on a rising wind tide appeared to correspond to little or no decline in
salinity. The effects of both local flow and wind tides were more subdued at the downstream stations.
It seems possible that any reductions in flow that might occur due to drainage basin reduction
could result in decreased frequency and magnitude of short-term salinity declines. It is not anticipated
that any such alteration of short-term salinity declines would have an appreciable effect on the annual
salinity pattern in these creeks. Post-drainage basin reduction on Jacks Creek has not detected any
obvious change in the pattern of flow-induced salinity declines, though a definitive conclusion cannot be
made because the baseline data for this creek covers less than a year.
Wetland Hydrology
During 2005, monitoring of hydrology in the bottomland hardwood wetlands on Jacks Creek
continued at the same ten shallow monitoring well locations that have been monitored since 1999. Five
(JW1, JW4, JW6, JW7, and JW8) of the wetland wells on Jacks Creek exhibited wetland hydroperiods
that were longer than the hydroperiods for the same wells reported for 2004. One well (JW3) exhibited a
hydroperiod that was shorter than those reported in 2004 and three wells (JW5, JW9 and JW10)
remained the same. One well (JW2) had only one measurement during the growing season that was
within 12 inches of the surface and therefore had no wetland hydroperiod. Other than the hydroperiods
that lasted the entire growing season, the longest hydroperiods in 2005 occurred from March to mid-
summer or early fall. A hurricane in August of 2005 caused an increase in water depth at the wells.
At least periodically, water levels at all WL-80s responded to direct precipitation in the absence of
significant local flow or rising wind tides. Groundwater discharge from adjacent uplands, though not
measured in this study, could have contributed to high, steady wetland water levels at many well
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-34
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Eight (2005)
locations. Rainfall appeared to affect water level and depth more so than flow events but neither factor
had a major influence often. Infrequent large local flow events appeared to contribute to short term
changes in water depth and salinity but discharge from Jacks Creek was not significantly correlated with
salinity at any of the wells and rainfall was only significantly correlated with salinity at one well.
Overall, because of the rarity of wetland water level fluctuations that can be attributed
conclusively to flow, post-drainage basin reduction monitoring on Jacks Creek has not detected any
obvious change in the pattern of flow-induced water level peaks. A definitive conclusion cannot be made
because the pre-drainage basin reduction data set on Jacks Creek covers less than one year.
Water Quality
Water quality sampling continued on a monthly basis in 2005 at the two sites in Jacks Creek
where water quality has been sampled since 1999. In accordance with the monitoring plan, water quality
sampling at Jacks Creek has been reduced to a monthly basis since 13 June 2002. Field measurements
included water depth, temperature, salinity, conductivity, Secchi disk depth, turbidity, dissolved oxygen,
and pH. Subsamples were taken back to the laboratory for analyses of total dissolved phosphorus (TDP),
dissolved orthophosphate (PO4-P), ammonium nitrogen (NH4-N), nitrate nitrogen (NO3-N), dissolved
Kjeldahl nitrogen (DKN), particulate nitrogen (PN), particulate phosphorus (PP), chlorophyll a, and total
fluoride.
Overall, there have been no significant changes in water quality in Jacks Creek during the study
period (June 1999-December 2005). Seasonal patterns were generally the same for the study period and
sample station means have not varied greatly. One exception was that salinity and a few other
parameters (e.g., DKN) were influenced by hurricanes during 1999 and 2003, whereas there were no
such storms in 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2004. The hurricane in August 2005 only seemed to substantially
affect salinity at one well.
Water quality in Jacks Creek is about what would be expected for such an ecosystem. There are
no stations where any of the measured water quality parameters are at levels of concern. On the other
hand, there are no stations with exceptionally good water quality. Ammonium nitrogen and dissolved
organic nitrogen concentrations are relatively high, in comparison to concentrations farther down the
creek and in South Creek and the Pamlico River. But concentrations of nitrate, the more oxidized
inorganic nitrogen fraction, are relatively low in the creek. The high ammonium and low nitrate, along with
low dissolved oxygen concentrations, suggest that nitrogen dynamics in the creek are dominated by
decomposition processes. Inorganic phosphorus levels are also relatively high, as would be expected in
such an environment. Despite the high nitrogen and phosphorus levels in the creek, chlorophyll a levels
were usually not higher than in South Creek or the Pamlico River. Shading and flushing probably limit
phytoplankton growth in the creek.
Vegetation
During the late summer of 2005, vegetation was sampled in permanent transects located at each
wetland WL-80 on Jacks Creek, which has been done every year since vegetation monitoring began in
1998. In accordance with the monitoring plan, vegetation was not sampled at Huddles Cut and Tooley
Creek in 2002, 2003, 2004, or 2005. Importance values were calculated from cover, stem count, and
frequency data, and dominant herbaceous and shrub species were determined for each transect based
on these importance values. The wetland indicator status and tolerance to brackish conditions were
evaluated for each dominant species.
Overall, the data do not appear to indicate any major changes in the vegetation communities in
Jacks Creek. The slight increase in die-back noticed in canopy trees is limited to the downstream ends of
the monitored stream reaches. The downstream areas are more prone to flooding from wind tides so it is
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-35
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Eight (2005)
likely that die-back here is attributable to these short-term inundations by brackish water. Although there
have been some variations in the species that compose the list of dominants from year to year, the
variation seems most likely a result of natural disturbances, and possibly the subjectivity associated with
estimating percent cover. The absence from all transects of dominant species associated with dry
habitats shows that there has not been a shift towards non-wetland vegetation at any transect. The
percentage of dominant species which are brackish-intolerant also has fluctuated somewhat at many
transects; however, the overall upstream-to-downstream gradients within each drainage have remained
constant throughout monitoring. The fluctuation of these percentages is not uni-directional and is also
likely attributable to natural disturbances or subjectivity associated with the sampling. The data do not
suggest a shift towards species that are more tolerant of brackish conditions.
Fisheries
Fisheries sampling was conducted weekly during April through June 2005, as has been done
every year since 1998. Trawl sampling was conducted on Jacks Creek and the control site at Muddy
Creek. In accordance with the monitoring plan, sampling was not conducted on Huddles Cut and Tooley
Creek in 2003, 2004 or 2005. Species diversity and community similarity indices were used to make
spatial and temporal comparisons.
The 2005 sampling data indicate that spot dominated fish assemblages at the Muddy Creek
reference site and Atlantic croaker at the Jacks Creek site, with bay anchovy, and Atlantic menhaden also
common. Indices of community similarity indicated Jacks Creek had a community composition dissimilar
to the Muddy Creek reference site. In 2005, species diversity and richness, were lower at both sites than
in 2004. Yearly trends in abundance, richness, and other measures of community structure do not
suggest any relationship to drainage basin reduction, as temporal trends in diversity, richness, and
abundance were similar at Jacks Creek and Muddy Creek.
The 1998 to 2005 fish data illustrate the extreme natural variability in fish catch in these creeks.
This variability makes it very difficult to discern any spatial patterns in fish abundance. However, the data
have established baseline ranges of CPUE for the most common species. Data from future years can be
compared to these abundances. Though it is not likely that small differences in abundance will be
detected, it may be possible to discern large-scale changes in abundances of the dominant fish.
Likewise, species diversity and community similarity indices may be able to signal changes in community
structure if the index values begin to diverge greatly from baseline values.
Benthic Macroinvertebrates
Benthic macro i nve rte brates were sampled during May 2005 using the same methodology that
has been used annually since 1998. Samples were taken at upstream and downstream locations in
Jacks Creek and at a control site in Muddy Creek. In accordance with the monitoring plan, benthic
samples were not taken at Huddles Cut and Tooley Creek in 2003, 2004 or 2005. At each station, ponar
grab samples were taken at a mid-stream location and timed sweep samples were taken near the
shoreline. Abundances from both types of samples and Biotic Indices (Bls) calculated from the sweep
samples were used in an attempt to discern spatial and temporal patterns. All tolerance values for taxa
encountered between 1998 and 2005 were verified and re-assigned in 2005 by Larry Eaton (NCDWQ) in
an effort to standardize and evaluate benthic data from past study years.
The benthic data showed considerable variation among years. Higher salinity in 2001 and 2002
may have resulted in the increase in numbers of Mediomastus ambiseta and Macoma balthica in the grab
samples, both of which prefer brackish water. Also, during the years 2001 and 2002, numbers of
Gammarus tigrinus and Hobsonia florida declined considerably at both the Jacks Creek and Muddy Creek
sampling stations. With salinity back at a lower level in 2004, Gammarus tigrinus increased slightly in
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-36
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Eight (2005)
numbers. Littoridinops sp. still remains one of the consistently dominant species collected in the timed
sweep samples.
As in 2003, there was no submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) observed at the sampling stations
in 2004. However, in 2001 and 2005, SAV was present at both of the sampling stations. Presence and
degree of SAV may also differ from one station to the next within the same creek. This may help explain
the wide variability in species occurrence and abundance throughout the sampling years. The high
abundance of Tubificoides heterochaetus at the Jacks Creek downstream station and lack of abundance
at any of the other stations could be due to preferred habitat requirements. The occurrence of
Chironomidae species can be greatly affected by the presence or lack of SAV. Chironomus sp., which
prefer hard sand bottoms, peaked in numbers during the 2000 sampling, and also showed an increase in
abundance at the Jacks Creek upstream station in 2004 and in all Jacks Creek stations in 2005. Other
Chironomidae (i.e. Goeldichironomus, Dicrotendipes, and Tanytarsus), which prefer the presence of
vegetation, have experienced major fluctuations in abundance over the years.
Despite the extremely variable nature of the benthic data collected between 1998 and 2005,
some patterns have emerged. For the ponar grabs, the most common taxa groups encountered for all
years and both creeks were Polychaeta, Oligochaeta, and Diptera. Diptera was the most common taxa
group occurring in the timed sweeps. For the timed sweeps, Gammarus tigrinus, Hobsonia florida, and
Littoridinops sp. have been among the most abundant species found in the creeks between 1998 and
2005. The abundance, richness, diversity, and BI data do not suggest that mining related drainage basin
reduction has had an impact on benthic communities in Jacks Creek.
The nature of a benthic community is variable. Aquatic insect populations may produce single or
multiple generations in a year, or the generation time can be longer than a year. The life cycle completion
time can vary greatly across a species' range, and between populations of the same species in upper and
lower areas of the same stream. These and other factors may have contributed to the large year-to-year
variability that has been documented in this study. Such variability cannot easily be attributed to simple
changes in hydrographic parameters or habitat structure. The large range of variability documented
during the baseline period of this study reinforces the need for careful interpretation of any variation that
may occur during post-disturbance monitoring.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-37
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Year Eight (2005)
POST ALTERNATIVE E DISTURBANCE YEAR ONE (2007) END-OF-YEAR REPORT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In 1997, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) issued a permit to PCS Phosphate
Company, Inc. for continued phosphate mining on PCS Phosphate's property north of Aurora, Beaufort
County, North Carolina. Because the permitted mine advance will temporarily reduce the drainage basin
area for several small estuarine tributaries of South Creek and the Pamlico River, the USACE permit and
the accompanying North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) Water Quality Certification
contained conditions that require monitoring to detect any deleterious effects on these tributaries.
Accordingly, PCS Phosphate, working through its consultants CZR Incorporated (CZR), Dr. Wayne
Skaggs, and Dr. Donald W. Stanley, developed a plan to monitor flow, salinity, wetland hydrology, water
quality, vegetation, fish, and benthic macro i nve rte brates in Jacks Creek, Tooley Creek, and Huddles Cut
(CZR and Skaggs 1998). Baseline data collection on vegetation, fish, and benthic macroinvertebrates
began in 1998, while baseline data collection on the remaining parameters began in 1999. Baseline
monitoring continued on Tooley Creek and Huddles Cut until 13 June 2002. Post-disturbance monitoring
on Jacks Creek began when its drainage basin was reduced in early 2000. In accordance with the
monitoring plan, all baseline monitoring except flow ceased on Tooley Creek and Huddles Cut 13 June
2002. Also at that time, the level of effort for the post-disturbance monitoring on Jacks Creek was
reduced as specified by the monitoring plan. In April 2004, all pre-disturbance flow monitoring ceased at
Huddles Cut and Tooley Creek, and in December 2005 all post-disturbance flow monitoring ceased at
Jacks Creek.
Post-disturbance monitoring of Huddles Cut began in January 2007. Post-disturbance monitoring
of Tooley Creek was also scheduled to begin in January 2007 but only five percent of the drainage basin
was estimated to be impacted. PCS Phosphate did not think there would be any "significant measurable
results" from the impact and asked of NCDWQ that monitoring not be conducted "until 10 percent or more
of the basin was impacted" and NCDWQ approved the request (Appendix A).
Flow Monitoring/Modeling
Flow monitoring and modeling were conducted on Huddles Cut 1, 2, 3, and 4 watersheds during
2007. The quality of the field data was very good in that the equipment performed well and no gaps of
missing data occurred. This resulted in a data set that showed very consistent hydrologic behavior
between the watersheds. Rainfall measured on the Huddles Cut site was 37.7 inches for 2007, which
was 13.5 inches lower than the long-term average (51.2 inches) for this location. Monthly rainfall amounts
for February, March, May, August, September, and November were more than one inch below normal for
the Huddles Cut station. Monthly rainfall amounts were above average only in January and April.
Total outflows from the Huddles Cut 1, 2, 3, and 4 watersheds were 5.5, 7.7, 4.0, and 5.1 inches
respectively. Flow measurement at Huddles Cut 3 were not valid until 18 January due to leakage from a
canal that occurred in the beginning of January; therefore, the flow amount reported for Huddles 3 does
not include flow that occurred in the first 17 days of the year. Flow during the first 17 days of the year at
the other three sites averaged 1.3 inches. Adding this average value to the 4.0 inches reported will give
an estimate of annual flow from Huddles 3 of 5.3 inches. Flow did not occur from any of the sites after
the end of May.
Water tables in most of the wells in the watershed were at the soil surface at the beginning of
2007. Water tables remained near the soil surface (within 20 inches) at most wells until the end of March.
The water table rose again to the soil surface in response to a rainfall event on 15 April. The water table
at most wells was deeper than 50 inches by the end of June and remained deeper than 50 inches until
the end of the year.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-38
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Post Alternative E Disturbance Year One (2007)
DRAINMOD was used to simulate the hydrology of the Huddles Cut watersheds for 2007. The
watersheds were simulated using the same techniques and input data used in the calibration simulations
reported in previous years (Skaggs and Group 2005). DRAINMOD predicted water table fluctuations
similar to those observed in the field, except DRAINMOD predicted a more rapid draw down of the water
table in late March and early April. This resulted in predicted water tables deeper than those observed on
14 April. DRAINMOD predicted the timing of flow events well for the first 3 months of the year; however,
the model did not predict the flow event that occurred on 15 April. The model did not predict flow from
this event because the predicted water table was deeper than the observed before the event occurred.
DRAINMOD predicted flows higher than observed during late January and all of February, which made up
for the flow missed in the 15 April event. Therefore, total annual flow predicted by DRAINMOD for the
Huddles Cut watersheds ranged from 5.3 to 5.5 inches, which was very close to the annual flows
observed at the Huddles Cut watersheds.
Salinity
Salinity monitoring began at five locations in January 2007: upstream on the main prong of
Huddles Cut, downstream on the western prong of Huddles Cut, just downstream of the confluence of the
two prongs of Huddles Cut (near the mouth of the creek), Pamlico River, and South Creek. Salinity levels
at all monitoring stations ranged from 0.0 ppt to 21.35 ppt. Monthly averages ranged from 0.78 ppt (HS1,
January) to 18.19 ppt (PS1, December). Salinity levels at most stations increased during the summer,
with levels at PS1 and SS1 increasing throughout the year. Salinity was affected by discharge from the
Tar River, flow, and rainfall. Salinity levels at all monitoring stations were significantly positively
correlated with each other; therefore, salinity at the stations is most likely an accurate representation of
salinity in the Huddles Cut watershed.
There was a significant negative correlation between salinity and discharge from the Tar River at
all five stations (p<0.05). In addition, there was a significant negative correlation between salinity and
flow at HS1, HS2, and HS3 (p<0.05). No flow stations are associated with PS1 and SS1; therefore, no
assessment of the effect of flow on salinity could be made. Although rainfall was significantly related to
salinity at only one site (HS3, r-0.130, p<0.02), increases in flow at Huddles Cut or the Tar River
generally caused a corresponding decrease in salinity at salinity monitoring stations. These spikes in flow
were caused by rain events.
The 6.7 years (May 1999 through December 2004 and all of 2007) of salinity monitoring suggest
that Tar River discharge is likely a factor influencing long-term salinity patterns in the creeks. Short-term
salinity changes appear to be controlled mostly by local freshwater input (rain/flow) and wind tides. Large
flow events generally appear to contribute to short-term drops in salinity at most salinity stations. The first
year of post-disturbance basin monitoring in Huddles Cut has not detected any obvious change in the
pattern of flow-induced salinity troughs.
Wetland Hydrology
In December 2006, twenty semi-continuous Ecotone monitoring wells were installed at the pre-
disturbance well sites in the Huddles Cut drainage basin. One additional well site used in pre-disturbance
monitoring was incorporated into mining activities and is no longer available to be monitored. The status
of nineteen shallow monitoring wells was confirmed at the same pre-disturbance shallow monitoring well
locations and replacement wells were installed if needed. Two additional well sites used in pre-
disturbance monitoring were incorporated into mining activities and are no longer available to be
monitored. All wells exhibited wetland hydroperiods and all hydroperiods started at the end of February
with the start of the growing season. Seven wells had a continuous wetland hydroperiod the entire length
of the growing season. In comparison, twelve wells in the last year of pre-disturbance monitoring (1999)
had a continuous wetland hydroperiod. Three of the wells that had continuous hydroperiods in 2001
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-39
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Post Alternative E Disturbance Year One (2007)
dropped drastically in 2007, down to percentages in the 60's. In total, 11 wells in 2007 had shorter
wetland hydroperiods than 2001 and five were slightly higher. Most of the wetland hydroperiods less than
100 percent ended in either August or October.
Single rain events greater than 2.5 inches or single rain events over a few days (and the resulting
runoff from immediately adjacent uplands) seemed to occasionally influence water levels at wetland wells.
Rain always accompanied flow in the creek channels, making it difficult to determine the extent of the
influence of flow. Water levels appeared to react differently after rain events not associated with flow,
allowing for the possibility of flow slightly affecting water levels. The fact that most wells continued to
respond to rain in the absence of significant flow suggests that flow was not the main factor controlling
water levels most of the time. Estuarine water level appeared to only influence water level fluctuations
slightly, but not often, at the more downstream well locations. Groundwater input from adjacent uplands,
though not directly measured in this study, also may have influenced water level at the wells. Flow and
estuarine water level did not appear to have as much interaction with water levels at wells in 2007 versus
the last year of monitoring, 2001. However, rainfall and length of flow were less this year than 2001 and
estuarine water level only slightly fluctuated.
The 4 years (May 1999 through May 2002 and all of 2007) of wetland hydrology monitoring
suggest that large amounts of direct precipitation and runoff from adjacent uplands and possibly
groundwater discharge from adjacent uplands during times of low evapotranspiration are factors affecting
water levels at the wetland well locations. Large flow events appear to contribute to short-term peaks in
well water levels. The first year of post-drainage basin reduction monitoring on Huddles Cut has not
detected any obvious change in the pattern of flow-induced water level peaks.
Water Quality
Bi-monthly water quality sampling began in January 2007 at the same sites where water quality
was sampled during pre-disturbance years 1999-2001. Field measurements included water depth,
temperature, salinity, conductivity, Secchi disk depth, turbidity, dissolved oxygen, and pH. Subsamples
were shipped on ice to East Carolina University for analyses of total dissolved phosphorus (TDP),
dissolved orthophosphate (P04-P), ammonium nitrogen (NH4-N), nitrate nitrogen (N03-N), dissolved
Kjeldahl nitrogen (DKN), particulate nitrogen (PN), particulate phosphorus (PP), chlorophyll a, and total
fluoride.
Overall, there have been no notable changes in water quality in Huddles Cut during the study
period (1999-2001 and 2007). Seasonal patterns were generally the same for the study period and
sample station means have not varied greatly. For a few of the variables such as water depth, salinity,
and dissolved nitrogen and phosphorus species, 2007 appeared to be more like 2001 than the other pre-
disturbance years.
Water quality in Huddles Cut is about what would be expected for such an ecosystem. There are
no stations where any of the measured water quality parameters are at levels of concern. On the other
hand, there are no stations with exceptionally good water quality. Ammonium nitrogen and dissolved
organic nitrogen concentrations are relatively high, in comparison to concentrations farther down the
creeks and in South Creek and the Pamlico River (Stanley 1997). But concentrations of the more
oxidized inorganic nitrogen fraction, nitrate, are relatively low in the creek. The high ammonium and low
nitrate, along with low dissolved oxygen concentrations, suggest that nitrogen dynamics in the creek are
dominated by decomposition processes. Inorganic phosphorus levels are also relatively high, as would
be expected in such an environment. Despite the high nitrogen and phosphorus levels in the creeks,
chlorophyll a levels were usually not higher than previously measured levels in South Creek or the
Pamlico River (Stanley 1997). Shading and flushing probably limit phytoplankton growth in the creek.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-40
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Post Alternative E Disturbance Year One (2007)
Vegetation
During the late summer of 2007, vegetation was sampled in permanent transects located at each
wetland Ecotone on Huddles Cut, which had previously been done every year 1998 through 2002.
Importance values were calculated from percent cover, stem count, and frequency data, and dominant
herbaceous and shrub species were determined for each transect based on these importance values.
The wetland indicator status and tolerance to brackish conditions were evaluated for each dominant
species.
Overall, the data do not appear to indicate any major changes in the vegetation communities in
Huddles Cut. Although there have been variations in the composition of dominant species from year to
year along both prongs of Huddles Cut, the variation seems most likely a result of natural disturbances,
and possibly the subjectivity associated with estimating percent cover. The percentage of dominant
species intolerant of brackish conditions at individual transects on the main prong fluctuates over the
years and this year, all transects had the highest or second highest number of species intolerant of
brackish conditions. Trends in percentage of dominant species intolerant of brackish conditions at
individual transects on the western prong did not vary from pre-disturbance years. Despite the year-to-
year variations at the individual transects, a transition from higher percentages of brackish intolerants at
the upstream transects to lower percentages at the downstream transects occurred in all years on both
prongs. Dominant species at all transects have continued to be species very commonly associated with
wetlands (FAC or wetter), meaning there has not been a shift towards non-wetland vegetation at any of
the transects.
Fisheries
Fisheries sampling was conducted weekly during April through June 2007, as was done every
year 1999 through 2001. Fyke nets were used in Huddles Cut and a trawl was used on the control site in
Muddy Creek. Catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE), abundance, species richness and diversity, and community
similarity indices were used to make spatial and temporal comparisons.
The 2007 sampling data indicate that spot and mummichog dominated fish assemblages at
Huddles Cut, whereas spot dominated the Muddy Creek reference site. Some common species captured
at both sites included Atlantic croaker, bay anchovy, and Atlantic menhaden. Indices of community
similarity and overlap indicated Huddles Cut had a community composition similar to the years before
drainage basin reduction. Yearly trends in abundance, richness, and other measures of community
structure also do not suggest any effects of drainage basin reduction, as temporal trends in diversity,
richness, and abundance were similar at Huddles Cut for all years sampled, both pre- and post-
disturbance.
The 1999 to 2001 and 2007 fish data illustrate the natural variability in fish catch in these creeks.
This variability makes it very difficult to discern any spatial or temporal patterns in fish abundance. Also,
this is the first year of post-disturbance monitoring, so sample size for a before and after comparison is
small. However, the data have established baseline ranges of CPUE for the most common species.
Data from future years can be compared to these abundances. Though it is not likely that small
differences in abundance will be detected, it may be possible to discern large-scale changes in
abundances of the dominant fish. Likewise, species diversity and community similarity indices may be
able to signal changes in community structure if the index values begin to diverge greatly from baseline
values.
Benthic Macroinvertebrates
Benthic macro i nve rte brates were sampled during May 2007 using the same methodology that
was used in previous pre- and post-disturbance sampling. Samples were taken at upstream and
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-41
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Post Alternative E Disturbance Year One (2007)
downstream locations in Huddles Cut and at a control site in Muddy Creek. At each station, ponar grab
samples were taken at a mid-stream location and timed sweep samples were taken near the shoreline.
Abundance, species diversity indices, and Estuarine Biotic Indices (EBIs) were used in an attempt to
discern spatial and temporal patterns.
The benthic data showed considerable variation between the 1999 through 2001 and 2007
sampling periods. Lower salinities experienced in 2000 may have resulted in the decrease in numbers of
Macoma balthica and Mediomastus ambiseta in the ponar grab samples, as both prefer brackish water
and increased in abundance with the increases in salinity in 1999, 2001, and 2007. Conversely,
abundance of Hobsonia florida increased considerably in 2000, and decreased in 1999, 2001, and 2007
at both the Huddles Cut and Muddy Creek sampling stations.
In addition to salinity and DO parameters, certain benthic species are adapted to habitats
containing aquatic vegetation. Therefore the variability in distribution and abundance of submerged
aquatic vegetation (SAV) each sampling year and season may explain some of the yearly variability in
benthic communities. SAV was not observed in either 2007 or 2000 for both Huddles Cut and Muddy
Creek. However, in 1999 and 2001, SAV was observed at the Muddy Creek sampling stations. The
appearance of SAV in 1999 and 2001 may aid in explaining the apparent decreased presence of
Chironomus sp., which prefers hard sand bottoms, and the increase in other Chironomidae (i.e.
Goeldichironomus, Dicrotendipes, and Tanytarsus), which prefer the presence of vegetation.
Despite the extremely variable nature of the benthic data collected from 1999 through 2001 and
2007, some patterns have emerged. For the ponar grabs, the most common taxa groups encountered for
all years and both creeks were Polychaeta, Insecta, and Malacostraca. For the timed sweeps,
Gammarus tigrinus, Hobsonia florida, and Littoridinops sp. have been among the most abundant species
found in the creeks from 1999 through 2001 and 2007. The abundance, richness, diversity, and EBI data
do not suggest that mining related drainage basin reduction has had an impact on benthic communities in
Huddles Cut, as the Muddy Creek reference site also experienced changes comparable to Huddles Cut.
The nature of a benthic community is variable. Aquatic insect populations may produce single or
multiple generations in a year, or the generation time can be longer than a year. The life cycle completion
time can vary greatly across a species' range, and between populations of the same species in upper and
lower areas of the same stream. These and other factors may have contributed to the large year-to-year
variability that has been documented in this study. Such variability cannot easily be attributed to simple
changes in hydrographic parameters or habitat structure. The large range of variability documented
during the baseline period of this study reinforces the need for careful interpretation of any variation that
may occur during post-disturbance monitoring.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-42
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Post Alternative E Disturbance Year One (2007)
POST ALTERNATIVE E DISTURBANCE YEAR TWO (2008) END-OF-YEAR REPORT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In 1997, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) issued a permit to PCS Phosphate
Company, Inc. for continued phosphate mining on PCS Phosphate's property north of Aurora, Beaufort
County, North Carolina. Because the permitted mine advance will temporarily reduce the drainage basin
area for several small estuarine tributaries of South Creek and the Pamlico River, the USACE permit and
the accompanying North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) Water Quality Certification
contained conditions that require monitoring to detect any deleterious effects on these tributaries.
Accordingly, PCS Phosphate, working through its consultants CZR Incorporated (CZR), Dr. Wayne
Skaggs, and Dr. Donald W. Stanley, developed an agency approved plan to monitor flow, salinity,
wetland hydrology, water quality, vegetation, fish, and benthic macro i nve rte brates in Jacks Creek, Tooley
Creek, and Huddles Cut (CZR and Skaggs 1998). Baseline data collection on vegetation began in 1998,
while baseline data collection on the remaining parameters began in 1999. Baseline monitoring
continued on Tooley Creek and Huddles Cut until 13 June 2002. Post-disturbance monitoring on Jacks
Creek began when its drainage basin was reduced in early 2000. In accordance with the monitoring plan,
all baseline monitoring except flow ceased on Tooley Creek and Huddles Cut 13 June 2002. Also at that
time, the level of effort for the post-disturbance monitoring on Jacks Creek was reduced as specified by
the monitoring plan. In April 2004, all pre-disturbance flow monitoring ceased at Huddles Cut and Tooley
Creek, and in December 2005 all post-disturbance flow monitoring ceased at Jacks Creek.
Post-disturbance monitoring of Huddles Cut began in January 2007 after mining activities July-
November 2006 reduced Huddles Cut sub-drainage basin 2 by 93 percent and Huddles Cut sub-drainage
basin 3 by 40 percent. Post-disturbance monitoring of Tooley Creek was also scheduled to begin in
January 2007 but only five percent of the drainage basin was estimated to be impacted. PCS Phosphate
did not think there would be any "significant measurable results" from that level of impact and asked of
NCDWQ that monitoring not be conducted "until 10 percent or more of the basin was impacted" and
NCDWQ approved the request. Additional mining activities in 2008, including the digging of a deep
perimeter canal, cut off Huddles Cut sub-drainage basin 1 from the rest of the watershed 1 November
2008. Five upland wells were removed and two flow stations will be removed in early spring 2009.
Flow Monitoring/Modeling
Flow monitoring and modeling were conducted on Huddles Cut 1, 2, 3, and 4 watersheds during
2008. The quality of the field data was very good in that the equipment performed well and no gaps of
missing data occurred. This resulted in a data set that showed very consistent hydrologic behavior
between the watersheds. Rainfall measured on the Huddles Cut site was 48.38 inches for 2008, which
was 2.46 inches lower than the long-term average (51.2 inches) for this location. Rainfall for the first third
of the year (January through April) was 4.1 inches above normal. The second third of the year (May
through August) was very dry with rainfall 9.5 inches below normal. Rainfall for the last third of the year
was 2.6 inches above normal. Monthly rainfall amounts for January, and May through August were more
than one inch per month below normal for the Huddles Cut stations. Monthly rainfall amounts were above
average in February, April, and September through December. The rainfall for the month of April was
more than twice the monthly historic average, but rainfall for the month of June was about one-tenth the
historic average.
Annual outflows from the Huddles Cut 1, 2, 3, and 4 watersheds for 2008 were very low: 3.9, 5.9,
2.1 and 1.5 inches respectively. The low outflows were the result of the very dry conditions observed in
2007 and 2008. Annual outflows from these watersheds were very similar for the dry period that occurred
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-43
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Post Alternative E Disturbance Year Two (2008)
during 2001 and 2002. According to past long-term DRAINMOD simulations these observed annual
outflows would be exceeded in more than 94 percent of the years at Huddles 1, 3, and 4, and in 84
percent of the years at Huddles 2. Flow did not occur from any of the sites until 18 February.
Intermittent flow occurred at the sites until the middle of May. After the middle of May, no flow occurred at
Huddles Cut 1 and 2 until 11 December when a small flow event was observed. No flow occurred at
Huddles Cut 3 and 4 from the middle of May until the end of the year. A tidal event occurred between 23
September to 26 September which caused minor flooding at the weirs on H3 and H4.
Changes in outflows were observed as a result of the watershed size reduction at Huddles Cut 2
in 2006. Annual outflow per unit area observed from Huddles 2 was 2 inches greater than that observed
at Huddles 1 for 2007 and 2008. During the previous dry period (2001 and 2002) annual outflow per unit
area observed at Huddles 1 was 0.4 inches greater than at Huddles 2. The smaller Huddles 2 watershed
is bounded on the southwest by the canal that removes the pumped water from the mining site. The
elevation of the water in this canal is usually greater than the land surface of the watershed; therefore, it
is possible that water is seeping from this canal to the watershed. This seepage into the Huddles 2
watershed may result in the higher outflow per unit area observed from this watershed since it has been
reduced in size. When the watershed areas are considered and total annual flow volumes are expressed
in terms of acre-feet, the total annual outflow volumes from the Huddles 2 watershed were greatly
reduced as a result of the reduction of watershed area. Total annual outflow volume measured in 2007
was 49 acre-feet and in 2008 it was 38 acre-feet. These volumes were much lower than those observed
during the dry period in 2001 and 2002 (465 acre-feet in 2001 and 121 acre-feet in 2002). The area of
the Huddles Cut 3 watershed was also reduced in 2006; however, a reduction in total flow volume from
Huddles 3 was not clearly evident. Detection of a flow reduction was confounded by suspected leakage
around the measuring structure at Huddles 3 during the first part of the study.
Water tables in the upper watersheds were very deep at the beginning of the year with no water
observed in any of the wells. Water table elevations measured in the wells at Huddles Cut 1 and 2 rose
to near the soil surface in response to a 2.73-inch rainfall event on 18 February and remained near the
surface until early May. At Huddles 3 and 4, water table elevations in most of the wells did not rise to
near the soil surface in response to the 18 February event and some wells showed no response of the
water table to this event. For most wells on Huddles Cut 3 and 4, water tables were not observed within
18 inches of the soil surface until the beginning of April. On all of the watersheds, water table elevations
began to fall rapidly by the middle of May and water was not observed in most wells by the end of June.
All wells remained dry on the Huddles 1 and 2 watersheds until water table monitoring stopped on 12
November. Most wells on the Huddles 3 and 4 watersheds remained dry until the end of the year. The
water table depths in the deeper wells on Huddles Cut 3 and 4 fluctuated between 45 to 80 inches deep
in the last quarter of the year.
DRAINMOD was used to simulate the hydrology of the Huddles Cut watersheds for 2008. The
watersheds were simulated using the same techniques and input data used in the calibration simulations
reported in previous years (Skaggs and Group 2005) except the root depth values for all of the
watersheds were increased to better simulate the dry conditions. DRAINMOD predicted water table
fluctuations similar to those observed in the field for the first five months of the year in that the initial rise
of the water table to the soil surface was accurately predicted as were the responses of the water table to
the events during the late winter and early spring. The model predicted a slower fall of water table in late
May and June than what was observed in the field; however, the deep water table from July to November
was predicted. DRAINMOD predicted that the water table rose abruptly to the soil surface at Huddles 1
and 2 in December, but water table monitoring stopped at these watersheds on 12 November. The
model predicted an abrupt rise of the water table in December at Huddles 3 and 4 which was not
observed in the measured water table. Annual outflows predicted by DRAINMOD were within 1 inch of
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-44
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Post Alternative E Disturbance Year Two (2008)
those measured at Huddles 1 and 2. Annual outflows predicted by DRAINMOD for Huddles 3 and 4
reflected the drier conditions observed on these sites, but overestimated outflows by 1.6 inches at each
site. The overall performance of the model was very good considering the dry conditions observed in the
last two years. Outflows predicted by DRAINMOD during the similar dry period in 2001 and 2002 were
very consistent with those predicted in 2007 and 2008.
Salinity
Post-disturbance salinity monitoring on Huddles Cut, Pamlico River, and South Creek began
January 2007, after mining utility corridor expansion activities July-November 2006 reduced Huddles Cut
sub-drainage basin 2 by 93 percent and sub-drainage basin 3 by 40 percent. Sub-drainage basin 1 was
completely cut off from its watershed in November 2008. Both HS2 and HS3 salinity monitor stations
receive flow from those sub-basins. Salinity monitor station HS1 still has not been directly affected by
any drainage basin reduction or any timber activities. The salinity monitors are located upstream on the
main prong of Huddles Cut, downstream on the western prong of Huddles Cut, just downstream of the
confluence of the two prongs of Huddles Cut (near the mouth of the creek), Pamlico River, and South
Creek.
All five of the salinity monitoring sites experienced a wide range of salinity values during 2008.
The station at PS1 had the highest monthly average salinities, except for January and August, when SS1
had the highest average, and the highest yearly average salinity. However, HS3 had the highest
maximum salinity, followed by PS1. Salinity levels ranged from 0.01 ppt to 23.35 ppt/psu across all sites.
The average for the year ranged from 9.27 ppt/psu at HS2 to 14.92 ppt/psu at PS1. Average salinity
levels at mall Huddles Cut stations generally increased throughout the year except for a short drop in
summer. Average salinity levels at PS1 and SS1 decreased late winter and early spring, increased
during the summer and fall and then began decreasing again.
Salinities at the Huddles Cut stations were significantly positively correlated with each other and
salinity at HS3 was significantly positively correlated with PS1 and SS1. Although there was no
significant correlation between salinities and Tar River discharge (except HS2) or rainfall at all stations,
graphical depictions show these factors influence salinity to some degree at all stations. There were
significant negative correlations between salinity at HS2 and HS3 and their respective flow stations.
Comparison with pre-disturbance monthly salinity averages and ranges from May 1999 to June or
November 2002 show higher salinity values in 2008, as well as the combined years of 2007 and 2008.
However, after combining the two years the difference is not as much for some months at some stations.
The higher salinities could be attributed to 2007 and 2008 having many months with low rainfall and
corresponding low flow. The trend of salinity in 2008 was generally similar to pre-disturbance salinity at
most stations and the combined 2007 and 2008 salinity was also generally similar to pre-disturbance
salinity at most stations. Combined post-disturbance salinity was significantly different from combined
pre-disturbance salinity at all stations. Further analysis and definitive conclusions cannot be made
because the post-disturbance data set for Huddles Cut covers only two years for two stations and no
years for the third station. Additional data is required to determine if any significant changes or trends are
occurring as a result of mining activities.
Wetland Hydrology
In December 2006, 20 semi-continuous Ecotone monitoring wells were installed at the pre-
disturbance well sites in the Huddles Cut drainage basin. One additional Ecotone well site used in pre-
disturbance monitoring was lost to mining activities. The status of 19 shallow monitoring manual wells
was confirmed at the same pre-disturbance shallow monitoring manual well locations and replacement
wells were installed if needed. Two shallow monitoring manual well sites used in pre-disturbance
monitoring were lost to mining activities. Five upland wells, two of which were Ecotones and three of
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-45
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Post Alternative E Disturbance Year Two (2008)
which were manual wells, were removed on 12 November 2008 due to expansion of mining activities.
All wells exhibited wetland hydroperiods and all hydroperiods started in mid March with the start
of the growing season. Twenty (20) of the 23 wells had shorter hydroperiods than 2007 and one stayed
the same. Hydroperiods at the other two wells were only slightly longer than in 2007. No well had a
continuous hydroperiod in 2008 whereas eight had a wetland hydroperiod the entire 2007 growing
season. Approximately half of the hydroperiods in 2007 also dropped from the previous complete
monitoring year (2001). There has been a decrease in length of hydroperiod over the past four complete
monitoring years. Baseline years 1999 and 2002 were not included in this comparison due to lack of data
for the majority of the growing season. The reduced hydroperiods in 2007 and 2008 occurred in
conjunction with regional drought conditions. However, the extent of the regional drought's impact on
Huddles Cut is uncertain because rainfall data collected at the PCS Aurora weather station indicates both
2007 and 2008 monthly rainfall was above or within the normal range for 21 of the 24 months. The
majority of the 2008 hydroperiods ended in mid to late June, while the ends of the other hydroperiods
were split among May, July, and August. Two wells exhibited two long hydroperiods that covered almost
the entire growing season except for six days between the two hydroperiods. Although most other 2008
hydroperiods were shorter than previous years, they were at least five times the length required for a
successful wetland hydroperiod.
Single rain events greater than 2 inches or rain events lasting several days (and the resulting
runoff from immediately adjacent uplands) seemed to occasionally influence water levels at wetland wells.
Rain always accompanied flow in the creek channels, making it difficult to determine the influence of flow
on hyrdroperiods. Water levels appeared to react differently after rain events not associated with flow,
allowing for the possibility of flow slightly affecting water levels. The fact that water level in most wells
continued to respond to rain in the absence of significant flow suggests that flow was not the main factor
controlling water levels most of the time. Estuarine water level appeared to only influence water level
fluctuations slightly, but not often, at the more downstream well locations. Groundwater input from
adjacent uplands and evapotranspiration, though not directly measured in this study, also may have
influenced water level at the wells.
The five years (May 1999 through June 2002, and all of 2007 and 2008) of wetland hydrology
monitoring suggest that large amounts of direct precipitation and runoff from adjacent uplands and
possibly groundwater discharge from adjacent uplands during times of low evapotranspiration increase
water levels at the wetland well locations. Large flow events appear to contribute to short-term peaks in
well water levels. Therefore, it seems possible that any reductions in flow that might occur due to
drainage basin reductions could result in decreased frequency or magnitude of these short-term surface
water peaks. However, because these flow-induced peaks are infrequent and short-lived, it is not
anticipated that any reduction in the frequency or magnitude of these peaks would have a major impact
on the hydrology of the wetlands. There remains no obvious change in the pattern of flow-induced water
level peaks during the second year of post-drainage basin reduction monitoring on Huddles Cut.
Water Quality
Bi-monthly water quality sampling began in January 2007 at the same sites where water quality
was sampled during pre-disturbance years 1999-2002. Specific locations of the four Huddles Cut
sampling areas are: One above the CAMA marker on the main prong, one on the western prong, and one
at each salinity monitor just below the CAMA marker on each prong.
Field measurements included water depth, temperature, salinity, conductivity, Secchi disk depth,
turbidity, dissolved oxygen, and pH. Subsamples were shipped on ice to East Carolina University for
analyses of total dissolved phosphorus (TDP), dissolved orthophosphate (PO4-P), ammonium nitrogen
(NH4-N), nitrate nitrogen (NO3-N), dissolved Kjeldahl nitrogen (DKN), particulate nitrogen (PN), particulate
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-46
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Post Alternative E Disturbance Year Two (2008)
phosphorus (PP), chlorophyll a, and total fluoride. In 2008, samples were collected at two-week intervals
beginning 9 January and ending 30 December. On 11 June, 9 July, 6 August and 19 August, field
measurements and water sample collections could not be completed at any of the four stations, due to
insufficient water depth. There were also occasional dates when some, but not all, stations were sampled,
also due to insufficient water depth.
Overall, there have been no major changes in water quality in the creeks when comparing the
three-year (1999-2002) pre-disturbance sampling period and the post-disturbance sampling period of
2007 and 2008. Pre-disturbance data were grouped starting from June through May of the following year.
For a few of the variables such as water depth and salinity, comparisons of the 95 percent confidence
limits about the monthly means indicate fall periods during 2007 and 2008 are different than the entire
pre-disturbance period, however a look at individual yearly means and ranges shows 2007 and 2008 are
very similar to 2001/2002, but not 1999 and 2000. The fact that 2001/2002 is different than 1999 and
2000 shows the creek system is naturally variable. The year 2008 was again a very dry year, with most
counties within the eastern part of North Carolina designated as being in severe drought. Additionally
there were no significant hurricane events this year, which contrasts with the several hurricanes that hit
during fall 1999. It is likely the precipitation regime drives any observed differences, not the impacts of
drainage, although the impacts to the different Huddles Cut subdrainage basins have occurred in phases
over three years (2006-2008). This has resulted in a range of impacts across the watershed, from no
impact at HWQ3 and HWQ4 to some basin reduction at HWQ1, making it difficult to assess the effect of
mining impacts with only one-to-two years of post-disturbance data at the two sites that have been
impacted so far.
Water quality in these creeks is as expected for such ecosystems. None of the measured water
quality parameters are at levels of concern. On the other hand, there are no stations with exceptionally
high water quality. Ammonium nitrogen and dissolved organic nitrogen concentrations are high in
comparison to previously measured concentrations farther down the creeks and in South Creek and the
Pamlico River (Stanley 1997). But concentrations of the more oxidized inorganic nitrogen fraction, nitrate,
are relatively low in the creeks. The high ammonium and low nitrate, along with low dissolved oxygen
concentrations, suggest that nitrogen dynamics in the creeks are dominated by decomposition processes
and/or that these creeks are the site of groundwater inflow. Inorganic phosphorus levels are also
relatively high, as would be expected in such an environment. Despite the high nitrogen and phosphorus
levels in the creeks, chlorophyll a levels were typically not higher than previously measured levels in
South Creek or the Pamlico River (Stanley 1997). Shading and flushing may help keep the phytoplankton
biomass from becoming higher.
Metals Sampling
All metals in Huddles Cut were well below concentrations of environmental concern in 2008. In
Muddy Creek, cadmium and selenium were the only metals present in 2008 slightly above background
levels for the area. The other metals in Muddy Creek were below background levels.
Vegetation
During the late summer of 2008, vegetation was sampled in permanent transects located at each
wetland Ecotone on Huddles Cut, as was every year 1998 through 2001 and 2007. Importance values
were calculated from percent cover, stem count, and frequency data, and dominant herbaceous and
shrub species were determined for each transect based on these importance values. The wetland
indicator status and tolerance to brackish conditions were evaluated for each dominant species.
Overall, the data do not appear to indicate any major changes in the vegetation communities in
Huddles Cut. Although there have been variations in the composition of dominant species from year to
year along both prongs of Huddles Cut, the variation seems most likely a result of natural disturbances
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-47
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Post Alternative E Disturbance Year Two (2008)
and rainfall, and possibly the subjectivity associated with estimating percent cover. The percentage of
dominant species intolerant of brackish conditions at individual transects fluctuates over the years and
this year, all transects had the highest or second highest (or shared that distinction with other years)
number of species intolerant of brackish conditions. Despite the year-to-year variations at the individual
transects, a transition from higher percentages of brackish intolerants at the upstream transects to lower
percentages at the downstream transects occurred in all years on both prongs. Dominant species at all
transects have continued to be species very commonly associated with wetlands (FAC or wetter),
meaning there has not been a shift towards non-wetland vegetation at any of the transects.
Fisheries
Fisheries sampling was conducted weekly during April through June 2008, as was done every
year 1999 through 2001 and 2007. Fyke nets were used in Huddles Cut and a trawl was used on the
control site in Muddy Creek. Catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE), abundance, species richness and diversity,
and community similarity indices were used to make spatial and temporal comparisons.
As with 2007, 2008 sampling data indicate that spot and mummichog dominated fish
assemblages at Huddles Cut, whereas spot and pinfish dominated the Muddy Creek reference site.
Some common species captured at both sites included American eel (Anguilla rostrata), bay anchovy
(Anchoa mitchill?), rainwater killifish (Lucania parva), and Atlantic menhaden (Brevoortia tyrannus). The
CPUE at Huddles Cut was higher than the Muddy Creek reference site. Indices of community similarity
and overlap indicated Huddles Cut had a community composition similar to the years before drainage
basin reduction. Yearly trends in abundance, richness, and other measures of community structure also
do not suggest any relationship to drainage basin reduction, as temporal trends in diversity, richness, and
abundance were similar at Huddles Cut for all years sampled, both pre- and post-disturbance.
The 1999 to 2001, 2007, and 2008 fish data illustrate the extreme natural variability in fish catch
in these creeks. This variability makes it very difficult to discern any spatial or temporal patterns in fish
abundance. However, the data have established baseline ranges of CPUE for the most common
species. Data from future years can be compared to these abundances. Though it is not likely that small
differences in abundance will be detected, it may be possible to discern large-scale changes in
abundances of the dominant fish. Likewise, species diversity and community similarity indices may be
able to signal changes in community structure if the index values begin to diverge greatly from baseline
values.
Benthic Macroinvertebrates
Benthic macro i nve rte brates were sampled during May 2008 using the same methodology that
was used in previous pre- and post-disturbance sampling. Samples were taken at upstream and
downstream locations in Huddles Cut and at a control site in Muddy Creek. At each station, ponar grab
samples were taken at a mid-stream location and timed sweep samples were taken near the shoreline.
Abundance, species diversity indices, and Estuarine Biotic Indices (EBIs) were used in an attempt to
discern spatial and temporal patterns.
The benthic data shows considerable variation among the 1999 through 2001, 2007, and 2008
sampling periods. Lower salinities experienced in 2000 may have resulted in the considerable increase in
numbers of Hobsonia florida in the ponar grab samples, as they prefer freshwater and decreased in
abundance with the increases in salinity in 1999, 2001, 2007, and 2008.
In addition to salinity and dissolved oxygen (DO) parameters, certain benthic species are adapted
to habitats containing aquatic vegetation. Therefore, the variability in distribution and abundance of
submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) each sampling year and season may explain some of the yearly
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-48
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Post Alternative E Disturbance Year Two (2008)
variability in benthic communities. No SAV was observed in either 2007 or 2000 for both Huddles Cut
and Muddy Creek. However, in 1999, 2001, and 2008, SAV was observed at the Muddy Creek sampling
stations. The appearance of SAV in 1999, 2001, and 2008 may aid in explaining the apparent decreased
presence of Chironomus sp., which prefers hard sand bottoms, and the increase in other Chironomidae
(i.e. Goeldichironomus, Dicrotendipes, and Tanytarsus), which prefer the presence of vegetation.
Despite the extremely variable nature of the benthic data collected from 1999 through 2001,
2007, and 2008, some patterns have emerged. For the ponar grabs, the most common species
encountered for most years and both creeks were Chironomus sp., Hobsonia florida, Macoma balthica,
and Gammarus tigrinus. For the timed sweeps, Gammarus tigrinus, Goeldichironomus devineyae,
Hobsonia florida, Littoridinops sp., and Palaemonetes pugio have been among the most abundant
species found in the creeks from 1999 through 2001, 2007, and 2008. The abundance, richness,
diversity, and EBI data do not suggest that mining related drainage basin reduction has had an impact on
benthic communities in Huddles Cut, as the Muddy Creek reference site also experienced changes
comparable to Huddles Cut. However, it should be noted that the Shannon-Wiener index for the Huddles
Cut downstream station and total abundance for the Muddy Creek downstream station were significantly
different between pre- (1999-2001) and post- (2007 and 2008) disturbance combined years.
The nature of a benthic community is variable. Aquatic insect populations may produce single or
multiple generations in a year, or the generation time can be longer than a year. The life cycle completion
time can vary greatly across a species' range, and between populations of the same species in upper and
lower areas of the same stream. These and other factors may have contributed to the large year-to-year
variability that has been documented in this study. Such variability cannot easily be attributed to simple
changes in hydrographic parameters or habitat structure. The large range of variability documented
during the baseline period of this study reinforces the need for careful interpretation of any variation that
may occur during post-disturbance monitoring.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions B-49
Appendix B- Executive Summaries NCPC Reports
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009 Post Alternative E Disturbance Year Two (2008)
Determining Flows in Small Watersheds and Bays on South Creek
Beaufort County North Carolina
Wayne Skaggs, G.M. Chescheir and Chad Poole
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. has recently been granted a permit to mine phosphate
ore on lands adjacent to South Creek. The new permit expands mining in the NCPC Tract
close to the PCS plant in Beaufort County, near Aurora, NC. During the mining process,
surface water from the site is redirected (pumped) and released at a location different than the
natural outlet. The effect of mining is to reduce the watershed area contributing to flow to
the small streams that feed into the creek (stream segments impacted by mining are mostly
intermittent). Our objective in the new project is to determine the impact of mining on flows
from the small watersheds immediately adjacent to South Creek and other similar systems
within the permit area.
We have collected data and intensively studied the hydrology of 8 subwatersheds
within 3 creeks on the NCPC Tract over the past 10 years. See reports by Skaggs and Group
(2000 to 2009). The subwatersheds varied in size from 19 to 129 acres. All had upstream
segments where flow was concentrated and of sufficient elevation such that triangular weirs
and flow meters could be installed to measure instantaneous now rates and cumulative flows.
In addition to analyzing continuous data on watershed outflow, water table depths, and
rainfall for each watershed, we tested and applied the simulation model DRAINMOD to
characterize the hydrology of the watersheds and predict effects of mining on daily and
cumulative outflows. The new permit allows mining closer to South Creek, such that the
watershed remaining after mining and prior to reclamation will be smaller, and as now, the
remaining creek segments or outlets may be subject to tides, both wind and lunar. The
outlets of interest are most often small bays where flow is not concentrated and now rates are
difficult to measure. Furthermore, hydrology and water quality in the bays, and the impact of
mining thereon, is of great environmental interest. Methods described herein are proposed to
estimate the effect of flows from small coastal watersheds on hydrology (water balance) in
the bays, and the impact of mining on flow conditions.
METHODS
A schematic of a small watershed draining directly into South Creek is shown in Figure 1.
The objective is to continuously measure flow rate at the mouth of the watershed, both before
and after mining. By comparing flows before and after mining, the effect of mining on the
hydrology can be determined. The problem in this case is that the outlet of the watershed
may be affected by wind and lunar tides. Furthermore, the outlet may be wide with velocities
that change in both magnitude and direction over the course of the day. Thus it does not
appear feasible to use either weirs or velocity meters, as we have used before, to measure
flow rates at the outlet. Rather we propose to use water level measurements in the bay, along
with detailed information on the topography of the bay, to determine flows into and out of
the bay by mass balance. One of the inputs to the mass balance is flow from the watershed
upslope of the bay. We propose to determine this flow by measurement at a position
unaffected by tide, such as point A in Figure 1.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions C-1
Appendix C - Determining Flows in Small Watersheds and Bays on South Creek
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
P,ivp- ,.
Figure 1. Schematic of small coastal watershed adjacent to river or creek affected by wind
and/or lunar tides.
Alternatively, it may be possible to predict the upstream flows using a calibrated model
(DRAINMOD).
A mass balance may be written as follows for the area denoted as Bay in Figure 1:
p4S = pQ1- pQo
(1)
Where AS is change in storage of water in the bay (ft) over a given time increment, p is
density (lbm/ft3), and Qi and Qo are flows into and out of the bay, respectively, during the
time increment. Assuming the density is the same for inflows, outflows and water in the bay
allows simplification of Eq. 1 to the following,
4S=Qi-Qo
(2)
The inflow is the sum of flow from the watershed, Q1w, and flow from the river or sound,
Qis,
Q1= Q1w + Qis
(3)
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions C-2
Appendix C - Determining Flows in Small Watersheds and Bays on South Creek
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
The outflow, Qo, is simply flow from the bay to the sound or river. Then
AS = Qjw + Qis - Qo (4)
If the stage (water level elevation in the bay) is measured and recorded on a continuous basis,
AS can be determined for any time increment. If flow from the watershed, Qjw, is also
measured, flow into or out of the bay for the same time increment can be determined as
follows.
1. For rising stage. If the stage is rising due to wind or lunar tide, the flow direction
will be from the sound or river to the bay, Qo = 0, AS > 0, and, from
Eq. 4, AS = Qjw + Qis. Then Qis = AS - Qj,.
2. For falling stage. Flow direction will be from bay to sound, AS < 0, Qis =0, and,
AS = Qjw - Qo. Or Qo = Qjw - AS.
Stage is steady. No change with time. AS = 0, and Qo - Qis = Qiw. That is, the net
flow out of the bay (Qo - Qis) during the time increment will be equal to flow in from
the watershed.
N
,
#? ,
Vi=Area(1)''Deptl7(1)
V2=Vl + A2"(D2-Dl )
A V3=V, +V2+A3A (D3-D2)
V4=Vl +V2+V3+A4"(. D4- D3 )
Figure 2. The relationship between storage in the bay and stage (or depth of water) at the
outlet of the bay can be determined from topographic data as shown schematically here. This
information will be developed from a detailed topographic survey; it is shown here for
demonstration purposes.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions C-3
Appendix C - Determining Flows in Small Watersheds and Bays on South Creek
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
In order to calculate flows using the above equations, we need to know the relationship
between storage, S, and elevation (stage) of the water surface in the bay, or depth of water at
bay outlet. A topo map of the bay near the outlet of Jacks Creek is shown in Figure 2, along
with calculations for storage given stages (or depth of water at the outlet) ranging from 1 to 4
feet. Results are tabulated in Table 1 and volume stored is plotted as a function of stage or
depth of water at the bay outlet in Figure 3. Once this relationship is defined, it is possible to
determine the change in storage in the bay due to a change in stage, or water surface
elevation. An exponential relationship was fitted to the data as shown in Figure 3 so that
storage volume, S can be calculated in terms of stage, or depth at the outlet, X, as,
S = 105899 X2'9»2 (5)
This relationship will clearly vary from site to site, and must be independently determined for
each bay.
Tide Depth
Or Sta
e (ft) Area (ac) Volume (ft^3)
g
1 2.1 93,000
2 23.3 1,110,000
3 35.3 2,647, 000
4 75.4 5,933,000
Table 1. Relationship between depth of water at outlet of bay, water surface area and storage
in the bay at outlet of Jacks Creek.
Example Calculations
Assuming No Flow From Watershed
The methods for determining flows in and out of tidal bays along South Creek will be
demonstrated for Jacks Creek. Water surface elevations (stage) in the Jacks Creek bay have
been recorded for some years. We used the methods described above to estimate flows due
to tidal fluctuations for year 2003. Stage was recorded at 1.5 hr (90 min) intervals. Stage is
plotted as a function of time for day 1 of 2003 in Figure 4. For purposes of this example we
will assume that flow from the watershed is zero. We will rerun the example later to include
effects of flows from the watershed. Assuming Qjw = 0, Eq. 4 may be written, Qis = AS
for a rising stage and Qo = - AS for a falling stage.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions C-4
Appendix C - Determining Flows in Small Watersheds and Bays on South Creek
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
Volume vs. Tide Depth
7000000
6000000
M
5000000
d
a?
4000000
0
co
c 3000000
W
= 2000000
0
1000000
Tide Depth at Outlet (ft)
Figure 3. Relationship between volume of water in the bay and stage or depth of water at bay
outlet for the bay at the point where Jacks Creek enters South Creek
Starting at time, T=O, on day 1, the stage, X, was 1.55 ft. Applying Eq. 5 gives a storage
volume in the bay of S = 390,434 ft3. At T=1:30, X=1.378 and S = 275,084 ft3. The stage is
falling and the change in storage has decreased by 115,350 ft3. That
is, AS = -115,350 ft3 and the outflow during the 1.5 hour period was Qo = - AS =115,350 ft3.
At T = 3:00, X=1.267 and S= 214229 ft3. Thus AS = 214229-275084 = -60854 ft3, the stage
is still falling, and Qo = - AS = 60854 ft3 for the period from 1:30 to 3:00 AM. At T=4:30,
X=1.329 (stage now rising) and S = 246974 ft3. For this time increment AS = 246974 -
214229 = 32744 ft3, and Qis = AS = 32744 ft3. Since the stage is rising, Qo = 0. These
simple mass balance calculations were repeated for the remainder of the day; the results are
summarized in Table 2. Total daily flow from South Creek to the bay (due to tide) was
calculated as 755,529 ft3 and flow from the bay to South Creek as 786,190 ft3. Total now in
both directions (which would ordinarily have to be measured using conventional methods)
was 1,541,720 ft3.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions C-5
Appendix C - Determining Flows in Small Watersheds and Bays on South Creek
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
Stage vs Time
2.5
00, 2.104
2 2.001 9:30, 1.988
.*113:30, 1.867 -? "*,?!:00, 1.847
1.715
22i3* 1.668
w 1.5q:oo, 1.55
00, 1.493
x ? 1.30, 1.378
0, 1.332
"-.sey 3rOd; 1.267
N 1
0.5
0'
0:00 3:00 6:00 9:00 12:00 15:00 18:00 21:00
Time
Figure 4. Recorded stage at outlet of Jacks Creek Bay for 1/1/2003.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions C-6
Appendix C - Determining Flows in Small Watersheds and Bays on South Creek
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
Table 2. Summary of water balance calculations for Jacks Creek Bay for day 1 (Jan. 1)
2003. Calculations to demonstrate the method; inflow from the watershed assumed zero.
Time Stage Volume Change in Inflow, Sound Inflow, Water- Outflow, Bay
Volume to Bay shed to Bay to Sound
hrs ft Cu ft Cu ft cu ft Cu ft cu ft
0 1.55 390434
1:30 1.378 275084 -115350 0 0 115350
3:00 1.267 214229 -60854 0 0 60854
4:30 1.329 246974 32744 32744 0 0
6:00 1.332 248637 1664 1664 0 0
7:30 1.464 329413 80776 80776 0 0
9:00 1.493 349223 19810 19810 0 0
10:30 1.651 471160 121937 121937 0 0
12:00 1.715 527646 56486 56486 0 0
13:30 1.867 679427 151780 151780 0 0
15:00 2.001 835150 155724 155724 0 0
16:30 2.094 956101 120950 120950 0 0
18:00 2.104 969759 13658 13658 0 0
19:30 1.988 819100 -150658 0 0 150658
21:00 1.847 657987 -161114 0 0 161114
22:30 1.668 485751 -172235 0 0 172235
0:00 1.508 359773 -125978 0 0 125978
Sum 755529 786190
Total Flow 1541720
Figure 5 shows the recorded stage for a 9-day period starting January 1, 2003. A smoothing
routine was used to take out effects of erratic data that usually are erroneous. The stage data
were smoothed for the entire year 2003 and the methods demonstrated above were applied to
determine inflows and outflows to the bay. Results are summarized in Tables 3 and 4. These
calculations show that total flow to and from the bay, mostly resulting from tidal influence,
was over 10,700 ac-ft. The area of the entire Jacks Creek watershed is about 228 acres.
Based on our measurements over a 10 year period and the application of simulation models
over a longer period, mean annual outflow from the watershed is expected to be about 1.17
ft, or 266 ac-ft from the 228 acres, or about 2.4% of the outflow resulting from tidal
fluctuations. Note that 266 ac-ft is about 2.4% of the total water flowing from the bay to
South Creek. But almost the same amount of water flows in from South Creek to the bay due
to wind tides. So the 266 ac-ft is about 1.2% of the total flow to and from the bay to South
Creek. The total flow to and from the bay to South Creek is relevant in that conventional
methods of determining the effect of mining on outflow would require measurement of flows
both to and from the bay.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions C-7
Appendix C - Determining Flows in Small Watersheds and Bays on South Creek
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
Table 3. Calculated annual flows for the Jacks Creek Bay for 2003. Runoff from the 228 ac.
watershed is ignored in these calculations.

Annual Flow
W ac-ft
utflow 468,622,069
F 10,758
Inflow -468,904,276 -10,765
Flow -282,207
Net -7
tal Flow 937,526,345 21,523
Table 4. Summary of calculated annual flows for the Jacks Creek Bay for 2003 assuming
total flow from the 228 ac watershed is eaual to the lon4 term average of 1.17 ft (14 in).
Watershed Area
228 ac
Mean Watershed Outflow 1.17 ft
Mean Watershed Outflow 266 ac-ft
Total Flow in Bay
21,523 ac-ft
Watershed Input to Bay as % of Total Flow 1.2%
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions C-8
Appendix C - Determining Flows in Small Watersheds and Bays on South Creek
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
Measured and Smoothed Water Elevations
3.0
2.5
2.0
C
1.5
m
W 1.0
0.5
0.0
111103 112103 113103 114103 115103 116103 117103 118103 119103
Date
Stage Smooth
Figure 5. Recorded water surface elevation or stage at outlet of Jacks Creek bay for first 9
days of 2003. Data were smoothed to remove effects of erratic spikes in records
Considering Flow (Runoff) From Watershed.
The calculations in the above example did not include the effect of daily runoff from the watershed
on the water balance in the bay. The purpose of that example was to demonstrate methods
for determining inflows and outflows to or from the bay, and to evaluate the magnitude of
those flows in comparison to flows (runoff) from the watershed. The following example
includes the effects of runoff from the watershed on day-to-day and annual flows to and from
the bay.
Our group measured outflow from an upstream sub-watershed on Jacks Creek for 2003.
These measurements (inches per hour) were multiplied by the area of the whole Jacks Creek
watershed (228 ac) to determine outflow (ft) for each 1.5 hour interval for the entire year.
These values were then combined with the change in volume stored in the bay for each time
interval, as described in the above example, to determine inflow (from South Creek to the
bay) and outflow (from the bay to South Creek) for each 1.5 hr time interval. Results are
given in Table 5 for one day, June 10, 2003. Rainfall of 1.5 inches occurred on June 10 and
resulted in 1.33 in of runoff (1,104,000 ft) from the 228 ac watershed to the bay. Wind tide
caused over 693,000 ft3 to flow into the bay from South Creek, and a total of 1,556,000 ft3
(including over 1.1 million cu ft of runoff) flowed from the bay to South creek. For this day
runoff from the watershed exceeded that flowing into the bay due to wind tide, but this is not
usually the case.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions C-9
Appendix C - Determining Flows in Small Watersheds and Bays on South Creek
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
Table 5. Summary of water balance calculations for Jacks Creek Bay for June 10, 2003.
Calculations to demonstrate the method; inflow from the watershed is included.
Change in Inflow, Sound Inflow, Water- Outflow, Bay
Time Stage Volume Volume to Bay shed to Bay to Sound
ft Cu ft Cu ft Cu ft Cu ft Cu ft
0:00 1.744 2138731
1:30 1.629 1880929 -257802 0 15566 273368
3:00 1.594 1807373 -73556 0 143211 216767
4:30 1.633 1891429 84056 0 194757 110701
6:00 1.753 2157811 266381 91637 174745 0
7:30 1.887 2485644 327833 188924 138909 0
9:00 1.954 2662015 176371 70582 105789 0
10:30 1.999 2784095 122080 43365 78715 0
12:00 1.977 2724090 -60005 0 57458 117463
13:30 1.900 2519429 -204661 0 45616 250278
15:00 1.824 2327928 -191501 0 36767 228268
16:30 1.762 2180856 -147072 0 29740 176812
18:00 1.774 2209243 28387 4751 23636 0
19:30 1.842 2373843 164600 145851 18750 0
21:00 1.875 2456330 82487 66985 15501 0
22:30 1.912 2550665 94335 81145 13190 0
0:00 1.844 2379284 -171381 0 11193 182574
Sum 240554 693241 1103543 1556231
Total Flow 2249471
Figure 6 shows the measured water surface elevation in the bay, measured flow from the
watershed to the bay, and calculated flow rates into and out of the bay for the 7-day period,
June 6-13, 2003. The flow rates in ft3/hr (cu ft/hr) were determined by dividing the
calculated flows for a 1.5 hour period (Table 5) by 1.5, so they represent the average flow
rate over the 1.5 hour period. While the water surface elevation in the bay was highest during
the heavy rainfall period, it was nearly as high June 6-7 when flow from the watershed was
very small. Flows are summarized on a daily basis in Table 6. Flows in and out of the bay
during June 6-7 were primarily driven by wind tides, but were of about the same magnitude
as during the period of heavy runoff from the watershed. Note that "Net Flow" in Table 6 is
the total flow into the bay (flow into the bay from South Creek caused by wind tide plus
inflow as runoff from the watershed) minus the flow from the bay to South Creek. A
negative Net Flow means there was more flow out during the day than in. Total Net Flow for
the 7 day period was -17.6 ac ft. This negative Net Flow results from the fact that the stage
(water surface elevation) at the end of the 7-day period (1.16 ft) was lower than at the
beginning (1.55 ft.), so storage in the bay was 17.6 ac ft. less at the end of the 7-day period
than at the beginning. Total flow in and out of the bay during the week was calculated to be
304 ac-ft, compared to 33 ac-ft of runoff from the watershed.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions C-10
Appendix C - Determining Flows in Small Watersheds and Bays on South Creek
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
500000
400000
300000
t
w
0
O
LL 200000
100000
0
V
VIO
2
1.6
r-
1.2 ,
O
R
N
W
0.8 >,
R
CO
0.4
0
616103 617103 618103 619103 6110103 6111103 6112103 6113103
Date
-Inflow from Watershed -Inflow from South Creek Outflow to South Creek Bay Elevation
Figure 6. Inflow to (Blue curve) and outflow from (Red curve) the Jacks Creek bay at the bay
outlet for 7 days from June 6, 2003 to June 13, 2003. Also shown are the inflow to the Jacks Creek
bay from the watershed (Black curve) and the measured elevation of the bay (Green curve).
Table 6. Calculated daily flows for the Jacks Creek Bay from June 6, 2003 to June 13, 2003.
Daily Flow
ac-ft
6/6 6/7 6/8 6/9 6/10 6/11 6/12 Total
Outflow to
37
7 39
7 13
9 8
3 35
7 31
3 10
8 177
3
South Creek . . . . . . . .
Inflow from
42
0 9
9 13
8 36
3 15
9 4
1 5
1 127
0
South Creek . . . . . . . .
Inflow from
0
1 0
7 2
7 1
9 25
3 1
6 4
1 32
7
Watershed . . . . . . . .
Net Flow 4.5 -29.2 2.6 29.9 5.5 -25.7 -5.3 -17.6
Total Flow 79.7 49.6 27.6 44.5 51.6 35.4 15.9 304.3
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions C-11
Appendix C - Determining Flows in Small Watersheds and Bays on South Creek
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
Table 7. Calculated annual flows for the Jacks Creek Bay for 2003.

Annual Flow
W ac-ft
o South Creek 485,044,086 11,135
FInflow
m South Creek 457,011,082 10,492
om Watershed 27,759,797 637
et Flow -282,207 -7
tal Flow 942,055,168 21,627
An nual results for the Jacks Creek Bay in 2003 are summarized in Figure 7 and in Tables 7
and 8. Annual flows from the bay to South Creek were 11,135 ac-ft, compared to 637 ac-ft
of runoff. That is, runoff from the watershed was only 5.7% of the total flow from the bay to
South Creek. The annual inflow to the bay from South Creek was 10,492 ac-ft which is
about 16 times the annual inflow to the bay from the watershed. The total flow to and from
the bay resulting from tidal fluctuations is over 30 times greater than the runoff to the bay
from the watershed.
Table 8. Summary of the calculated annual flows for the Jacks Creek Bay for 2003.
Annual Flow
Watershed Area 228 ac
Watershed Outflow (depth) 2.79 ft
Watershed Outflow (volume) 637 ac-ft
Total Outflow from Bay to South Creek 11,135 ac-ft
Watershed Outflow as % of Total 5.7%
Outflow to South Creek
Total Flow from Bay to/from South 21,627 ac-ft
Creek
Watershed Outflow as % of Total Flow 2.9%
to/from South Creek
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions C-12
Appendix C - Determining Flows in Small Watersheds and Bays on South Creek
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
ILUUU
11000
10000 ----------------------------------------------
9000 ---------------------------------------------
8000 ----------------------------------------- -
3 7000 -------------------------------------
W 6000
is 5000 ----------------------
E 4000 ------- ----------------------
-----------------
0
U
3000 ----------- -----------------------------------
2000 --------- - ------------
1000 -
0
1 /1 /03 1 /31 /03 3/3/03 4/2/03 5/3/03 6/2/03 7/3/03 8/2/03 9/2/03 10/2/03 11/2/03 12/2/03 1/2/04
Date
Inflow from Watershed -Inflow from South Creek Outflow to South Creek
Figure 7. Cumulative inflow to (Blue curve) and outflow from (Red curve) the Jacks Creek
bay at the bay outlet for the year 2003. Also shown is the inflow to the Jacks Creek bay from the
watershed (Black curve).
Jacks Creek 1 & 2, PCS Phosphate, 1951-2003 Simulation
35
2003
30
25
20
4-
0
15
Q 10
5
0
2000
2001
2002
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percent of Years Flow Equaled or Exceeded
Figure 8. Frequency distribution of predicted annual outflow (runoff + shallow subsurface
flow) for a 53 year (1951-2003) simulation at Jacks Creek. Measured annual flows for four
years of observations are shown on the graph.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions C-13
Appendix C - Determining Flows in Small Watersheds and Bays on South Creek
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
Results for a long term simulation for the Jacks Creek watershed are shown in Figure 8.
These results indicate that the measured outflow (runoff + subsurface flow) from the
Jacks Creek watershed in 2003 was the largest in 53 years. Predicted outflow for 2003 was
31 inches, which was 2 inches less than measured for that year. The main point, however, is
that, even when the annual watershed outflow was the greatest of the last 53 years, flow from
the watershed was only 5.7% of the total outflow from the bay to South Creek. If we were
measuring flows using conventional metering methods, we would have to measure both
inflow to the bay from South Creek, as well as, outflow from the bay to South Creek. The
flow from the watershed would be the difference between these measured outflows and the
inflows. On that basis, flow from the watershed would be only 2.9% of the total flow that
would need to be measured.
Summary
The data and analysis presented herein support the following conclusions:
• Flows in and out of the stream/bay systems, due primarily to wind and lunar tides, are
large compared to flows from the small watersheds. This means that conventional
methods of measuring flow rates at the watershed outlet (where, in this case, the
outlet is affected by tides) to determine effect of mining on the hydrology, is not
practical. Determining the outflow from the watershed would require measuring total
outflow and inflow from the bay (two large values), and taking the difference to get
watershed outflow. Errors in measurements of inflow and outflow from the bay
would likely be of equal or larger magnitude than outflow from the watershed.
Methods presented and demonstrated herein appear to be a better alternative.
• Flow from small coastal watersheds to and through the stream/bay systems such as
Jacks Creek is a small percentage of the total flow to and from the bay and South
Creek.
• This implies that significant reductions in the watershed area due to mining would not
have a great impact on the flow and associated conditions in the bay.
• Flow between bays and South Creek depends on wind and lunar tides, orientation of
the bay with respect to South Creek and prevailing winds, as well as the shape of the
bay and its topography. Thus additional measurements and analyses are needed for a
range of watershed-bay systems before final conclusions can be drawn.
• The analysis presented herein did not consider flow dynamics within the bay and the
effect of runoff from the watershed and the effect of watershed reduction on factors
such as salinity distributions therein.
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions C-14
Appendix C - Determining Flows in Small Watersheds and Bays on South Creek
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
NORTH CAROLINA
KEY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
DUCK'
CREEK
BATH CREE
ROSS
CREEK
A (D n
0 U)
o (D
B -0
3
V ((D 0
v N 0
O
O F
(O (D
n
0
B
v
0
C
PCs
PHOSPHATE
PLANT
SITE
? D
U
BONNERTiON
?r
vC,
DURHAM
CRK
RSV
E R
UP1
HUDDLES
CUT HUDDY
GUT
NCPC
\1 SR 1945
/ ANDY LANDING RD
/ TOOLEY GFZ??`?
CRK
DRINK- o
P 2 CRTE
LONG
CREEK
SHORT
CREEK
?
G?)
NORTH
CREEK
' - ` CRK LITTLE
REE
??' CREEK RD
so
/
GT ?
Q?
AI LEY
ti
Ei C R
\ SOi
R
\\
WpY
F
?
p
-
N.C. HWY 33
33 BAIL AU R 0 R A
CRK
WY
u) SR 1939 0
N ?. H
D
V) r
D
_ w BROOMFIELD A
SWAMP p
CA
W
n ?

SR 1923 C
U ?
SOUTH OF
N
33 °° Q
SR 1926
SR
1924 \
SR 1927 RF
SS
?Gti Cif ?
n
G
SR 1926 D
o
\?
o
?
lic
<'?j
o
C N 0&,

O
?

SOUTH CREEK CANAL _
-

ly
G
Tr f
M
? COUNTY
BEAUFORT _ _
_ - PAM CIL 0 COUNTY
U
Z
LEGEND Vicinity Map
MODIFIED ALT L BOUNDARIES PCS PHOSPHATE MINE CONTINUATION
7,500 0 7,500 Feet Scale: As shown Drawn b : BFG TLJ
DRAFT 2'000 0 2,000 Meters Date: 12/03/09 File: 17456224/2009 N9 SAMPLING/AUTOCAD/
Approved by: Figure 1
0
<
a m \ 0
a

` °J
m o 0 ?d

w yf X0

N 3
c??
m CN DF
z
0

m cn z

? r,

m

m aN1?
.m '
F
m ? N
. m
O
?
m
N m

N ?m P
m

D
m
m

?? m ? N m

?
m m

m m

m a
N m m m
r n

\?
m
^ a N- r
? f N
m m
"N
n rV

( m

a r
' m N
N,
m,
a t ? 9 N N N r 6
N N
m m r N ?
m
_

a m

m m
N "s
??
A
m _
(
om
" ;

ti m

w'

o?

\
N

`? {N

Nm

m
m
m N
N
J

m

` 6l?m Fl

m I m
.m ? /?

J m
m

?
m m
.
m
f m
a m
r fem.
m
`
l y

m
= r

N m

a
m m U a
y' r
m
o
C)
"N
m
r `m N m
m
Q !' m a
N N
?
a m min
S -A s
? m
m
m
a

m m
m m
n ? ?y. ., f7
?,?
N
i? Y

r
w ` ? ? m
C7 m m a
? N?

m N
a'?
O m N
W ? `

UN I
Z°
a
o m
m
a

i
f
n
? r U
0 m ?'` a

11m tm ? Y. r ?m
N ?
r M U
n ?

m
fY
N V) (3 N
0 Y K C
Z Q < < <
Mnon m m v7Nma o
U N q7 n oo a o? moon. n vooo m
M 0000 O O-Noono n O 00-0
J N
[C W
< U) J <
Q V W m ~ W O 0 (a K
N Of CL W < N < O <
M x Ow ?o ° 0Q00 O o Z Ow 0
LLJ a W 0 w 0JW z o z 0 Q
i
U
p o o Z 1-2 3O3 g °o m WO z a o °O z
O F < U 0 = m oN3 a i° o<
< m U U< (? W Of Q00E 0 W (Y
U Z =Z7 = VI < <Z\ _ < 0
U o Q ?j U QO m7go (3 Q z° 10¢
V) Z
U 0 i ¢wQw
m N?HW z 7Fw7I<? z< v<
0 =zz Ozz_N WmU .U.. ZZFU
Z W
0 0 Of o aYaa yaw a> J? J aag>
W Of U 0 m 0m 7 Of 0(L
0_ m N<mzx ¢ wzXz°?z < 'n < zx_Wz
a?Z
D M F000 0 cooV1EQ 0< W 00
UJ 0 "f x" f 0 J O O
U z z z W ZZ Z Z Z0Z 11 Z E ZZC)Z
0 3 0??L-j f w?wdaaa w LLiiaa
U) :2 z 0
F U x333 U 3337777 U a U 3 3 77
U z
o- a-
Q
U n .0 N U m rD N
U NNm Z atom--NN Z - Z)1 ON?N
g z
F
9
0
0
5
V1 oo n M 00? OEM O r, ? N f000? 000 fONAM 007(0 O m r (0
Lj 0° oo 'q- N V ?NK)M0 d) d n 0 NK) N - I-(0 M - Ln
d) LC)
Q MN
w -i w
JJJ
00?0-
Z
O7 Y
U co M F W W w
< I-- F w U) of ?
w < ( U) z 07
ago fn w u 0 °
:2 J0 O O w Q ? z ? ~~w co
? ?z? x° g o o z m z z3o N m
C/) U0N J?C9 g O F W1m C) < U Q IKa m N L. N
a s>M°o5w? 3 W gW z So ° o
<'11 0 Cf) fY M < gZ zF w w p
ooOf zll °owa °m ?Q ° ??\ vO as w?v~ a °° p
<a?aw fn :=0?m n< w w ?- m of _
w m w w?wm<n?zw= >? wnm w= ?zo Q? ?? <zJ a N
aa?a a YQCLCC=<?°-FO ma rcQ?occ 0 < ?o o? zOW O
Fzozoz oFDeV)?zzN?Ww?Iw ?< Of NC)<L, wQW <Z Fo naa0 a
U \w FU7(nF=golz0?z o w? z?wwO?w ?0 3g i C) o° a?Jw??cw gC) Z° OZrc?F> M of Zz? m
°JOJ?o 3?<?UommD L, do? o? ?Qma3aO??i =J Qom <5wa a LLJ L, w
a_ LO 0 Q JQOJQO? a?W?0f Owz?¢xz0< ¢?=z?xz??0 F? ofz0 W zwmw m fy_ o m wmm=v a- a- a- n ?w=_< <o wa <- 3w- 0 0
=n==?L(n<Z o > < g\>F
momoa? ?aaz????????o? ? QQ QQ QQ ? ?u,m W?az ?
w a?a?=U W M F F F F F F F F F F z ??JzJzzzJz Ho Fa= 0dW? 0
00 0- 00w m wwwwwwwwwwowa=aa=daa= QO w?0 d r- of 0 tr
o Z:2 :2 mm ° 3333333333 a 377» » » > 3? 3?m ? QU a
O
Nm N ?
Z O?NM?N(0r0J p70? N \ O
NM?In (O I?0001N NN \ O N
m J \
mm m?? ? I h
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions PCS Phosphate Company, In
December 2009
<<2 of 29»
A -0
A (D n
W 0 U)
O (D
3
(D (( 3
D 0
v N
O ?
0
(O (D
n
0
B
,v
0
18 18 22
22 18 21 ' /22
8 8 7
\ g
18 9 21 18
is 8
f c 18 16
7 8
8 5
8 •. ? 6
6
18 7 22 21
i6 - -
22 9 16 8
7 18
18 8 9 22 22 / 21
17 8 8 17
16 7 3 9 9 7 18 /
7
6 r'• , 7 8 9 7
16
21 7 9 6 9 - 3 21 2
8
18 8 8 1., 15 8 2 ?i 7
. 8 7 7 8 9 8 18 16 6 V, 1P 7
8 7 9 21 15_ 2 1 22 7 i,. 44 1 22
6 21 6 8 7 17 .' 18 \ g
22 Cln(t
6 4 7 9 7 18 8 18 15
7 17 18 22
7
_ 9 9 t8 LJ` t7
6 t 7 8 1 17 ?3 7? 3 7 PORTER CREEK
8 6 7 g
17 7 9 7
18 ???-??11f
5 3 9
8 7 ? r 22
...,?C?9 , 27 i8 21 18
18 ? \ \} // `s, 4 8 9 8
g ?16
7 U 9 222 7 16 '2 18
9 > ..."
15 7 8 17 19 1B
I 3 15
7 ,
3
8 f\ 3 7 17 7 15
8 9
8 v 22 22
8 18 22 21? 19 17
5 8
18,
5 9
15 5 21
22, 81 9 LEGEND ACRES
15
g BONNERTON BASE PROJECT AREA 2,806
MODIFIED ALT L - BONNERTON PROPOSED 2,526
15<?5 B 7 7 7 6 IMPACT BOUNDARY 5/13/09
MODIFIED ALT L - BONNERTON PROPOSED IMPACT 1,698
B 8 BOUNDARY 5/13/09 - EXCAVATION LIMITS
11 9 1,4 RECOVERABLE CONCENTRATE = 33,478,000 TONS*
2 7
$> kf 9 6 1 CREEKSP/OEN WATER
C RUST AREAS 0 LF 0
B s 1B PERENNIAL STREAM 2,533 LF <1
22 INTERMITTENT STREAM 4,786 LF 4
PV1 2° 20 6 16 17 2 WETLAND BRACKISH MARSH COMPLEX 0
,t 22 3 WETLAND BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD FOREST 51
18, 8 9 0 19 20 6 4 WETLAND HERBACEOUS ASSEMBLAGE 45
18 9 6 16 5 WETLAND SHRUB - SCRUB ASSEMBLAGE 274
8 7 11 11 6 WETLAND PINE PLANTATION 206
181 9 1 8 6 5 7 WETLAND HARDWOOD FOREST 369
919 ° 1 8 7 17 t 8 WETLAND MIXED PINE - HARDWOOD FOREST 463
9 WETLAND PINE FOREST 208
19\ 9 1t 18 0 tt 1 5 10 WETLAND POCOSIN - BAY FOREST 264
1av 8 11 1s 8 41 111 2 POND ND SAND RIDGE FOREST 22
9 10 13 WETLAND MAINTAINED AREA 0
9 9 14 15
14 UPLAND HERBACEOUS ASSEMBLAGE 5
8 8 19 6 15 UPLAND SHRUB - SCRUB ASSEMBLAGE 64
8 20 20 4 5 16 UPLAND PINE PLANTATION 58
7 11 9 17 UPLAND HARDWOOD FOREST 39
8 10 18 18 UPLAND MIXED PINE - HARDWOOD FOREST 117
,'5 15 5 5 18 19 UPLAND PINE FOREST 13
15 3 -22 20 UPLAND SAND RIDGE FOREST 42
17 7 417 7 s 5 ub 21 UPLAND AGRICULTURAL LAND 243
4- 22 UPLAND NON - VEGETATED/MAINTAINED AREA 39
TO 15 22
DURHAM CREEK 15 3 5 4
3 n 15 WATERS OF THE US AREAS 1,906
5 5
4, 3 35 4 15 4 c-aJ
1
SC=~ 15 3 5 15 5 14 20 10
6 5 e' WETLAND AREAS (WITHOUT PONDS AND CREEKS) 1,902
22_ 15 1111`
UPLAND AREAS 620
4 3 5 3 10 18 11
14, 15 18 2 0
8 ='
5 15 10 8 14 -6 *PROVIDED BY PCS PHOSPHATE 5/13/09
15 10 4 7
20 10 7 NOTE: BOUNDARY AS SHOWN INCLUDES DCM/CAMA AVOIDANCE
3 5 11 1 10 2 2
10
;!-10 11 18 11 7 r -22
20 4 \7
8 2 272 18 9
18 iq 7 ., \18
19 18
DRAFT
Modified Alternative L Permitted Boundary with
Biotic Community Impacts
Bonnerton Tract
1,600 0 1,600 Feet PCS PHOSPHATE MINE CONTINUATION
Scale: As shown Drawn b : BFG TLJ
500 0 500 Meters Date: 12/03/09 FIIe:1 7 45 6224/2 0 0 9_BENTHIC_SAMPLING/MON
GRAPHICS/BON_MODALTL051309(BON BC 030206)-BIOTIC
Revision:
Approved bY: JPS 5-13-09 Figure 3
A p -0
A (D
0 U)
O (D
3
3
. (D ( 0
v N 0
O
Ort
m m
n
0
B
,v
CREEK
Y
2217 BA\\,E
1B 2z ?B zz

i9

15
21 5 21 1 B
2 22 18
14 21 18 1 17 14
] 5 21
1]
21 8 21
1B 22
1 1]\18 211 i8 18

1
5
1]14 17 8
3
1C 21
] 17' B 1
B 9
18 9
] 15
21 18
19

1B 14
6 16 1B

16
21 4 14
9 8
1B

21

22 X22

21 .,is
21 .
19 16 9
-1
18 16 6 6
B B

9 16 6 9 6 7 5
18 6 8 6

19 B 7
1" 17 14

16
14

7
21

8
15
19 17
2
1
19 19
191 1 i6

a
19 19 19 1 9 18

17 '° 1 7 17
8 1 U U
7 n I y
4 1s '
BROOMFIELD SWAMP
1
22 19 7
9 1 16 17 y
19 14 21 I tA? 1] 1 x l??]
/
rl

]
9g ))))))
21 18 11 I
l 19 177
I ?16? ?1
18 17 6
I
1 3 9 6,. iB

19 9 ] 8
7 7 1A-
A
1]
17
22
' 1 1u /
` 16 -) 18 21
9 l .1C
2
18

7 B 6
22 g l

5

.
8 4 6 '7 16
18, 'J
8 4 9 % 17.,
19 9 8 ? 1 E
7
1 6 21 6
18 21
14 1
22 18 15
9

1

16 21 2
1 21 15 B
21 21 18
22 22 8
2 17 5 2
8 21
1] 16 22
21 18 7 19
1
7 19 21
15 6
5
5

15, 6 9 7

19 6 8
19 g 8%
18
22
?
3 16 21

6

18

18
18 21
21 1B 21 14
21

24

18

21
9 1 21
8
19
22 8
19 18
6 21 19 8
17 ]
8 16

2 18
21 21
17 3 7^,.
19 g

6
19 n. 1B 18 1'
16 17 (j 1 17 _
8
21 7
1B 17 16
21 17

7 17 22 16
`
1
9 8 8:
7 7
17 1
17 17
18
21 19 19 21_
19 2 1911 ?_ "22
514
171A/ 16
19
9 7
17
1B
21 7
7
17 18 19
I1 16 1]
B 15

26 9
6

19 g
A

a 16 '
21
1 6 16 17 18 17
7
s 1A/ CYPRESS RUN

18
'j
.
9 4

19 19 19
20 14
4
414
14
19
8 2

1
18
l 7 1]

18 ]

,7
21
21

4
8

18 19 18
B
12
19 16
18 11
20 11
9 4
6
] ]
21

1 8
19
17
8
22
15 15 15

21

2
1
19
6
19 9 J
20 5
0 .8
19 7
17
r, 18 21
22 18 21

8
17 LEGEND

CRES
19 18 5
to t t9 21
SOUTH OF 33 BASE PROJECT AREA
8,686
] 1
1' 22 " MODIFIED ALT L - SOUTH OF 33 PROPOSED 6,730
11
B 20 9 8 17 IMPACT BOUNDARY 5/13/09

7
10
10
MODIFIED ALT L - SOUTH OF 33 PROPOSED
5,169
zo
1e 2 IMPACT BOUNDARY 5/13/09 - EXCAVATION
2011 20 20 LIMITS RECOVERABLE CONCENTRATE = 104,717,000 TONS-
8 e
20 7
® [
SOUTH CREEK CANAL
I'9
7 1 CREEKS/OPEN WATER
1
1 16 _ PUBLIC RUST AREAS 0 LF 0
2 17 8 B 17 22 1B PERENNIAL STREAM 7,799 LF 1
18
16 7 INTERMITTENT STREAM 3,336 LF <1
1
9 7 6 18 17 2 WETLAND BRACKISH MARSH COMPLEX 0
:?B
17 3 WETLAND BOTTOMLAND HARDWOOD FOREST <1
20 19 1B
17 4 WETLAND HERBACEOUS ASSEMBLAGE 71
9 8 5 WETLAND SHRUB - SCRUB ASSEMBLAGE 31
7 7 6 WETLAND PINE PLANTATION 111
19 17 7 WETLAND HARDWOOD FOREST 159
7 18
6 8 WETLAND MIXED PINE - HARDWOOD FOREST 64
3
1c 10 4 7 9 WETLAND PINE FOREST 46
1 9 4 7 10 WETLAND POCOSIN - BAY FOREST 0
36 11 1 e 17 11 WETLAND SAND RIDGE FOREST 0
(1 2 POND 0
12 20 11 7 13 WETLAND MAINTAINED AREA 0
9 14 UPLAND HERBACEOUS ASSEMBLAGE 224
to 6 15 UPLAND SHRUB - SCRUB ASSEMBLAGE 62
i6 UPLAND PINE PLANTATION 569
17 UPLAND HARDWOOD FOREST 171
19 19 18 UPLAND MIXED PINE - HARDWOOD FOREST 358
19 UPLAND PINE FOREST 139
19 20 UPLAND SAND RIDGE FOREST 4
2 21 UPLAND AGRICULTURAL LAND 4535
22 UPLAND NON - VEGETATED/MAINTAINED AREA 185
WATERS OF THE US AREAS 484
WETLAND AREAS (WITHOUT PONDS AND CREEKS) 483
UPLAND AREAS 6,246
-PROVIDED BY PCS PHOSPHATE 5/13/09
NOTE: BOUNDARY AS SHOWN INCLUDES DCM/CAMA AVOIDANCE
Modified Alternative L Permitted Boundary with
Biotic Community Impacts
S33 Tract
2,200 0 2,200 Feet PCS PHOSPHATE MINE CONTINUATION
Scale: As shown Drawn b : BFG TLJ
500 0 500 Meters File:17456224/2009-BEN-SAMPLING-MON-GRAPHICS
Date: 12/03/09
DRAFT S33-MODALTL-051309(S33 BC 0205)-BIOTICS

:
Approved by Revtsl°,:
Figure 4
JPS 5-13-os
Aov
A CD cn 0 U)
O CD
3
N 0 3
v lD N
V
V N 3
O N
O
(O (D
0
O
3
7
01
7
O
C)
A (D
a) 0
a 3
S
(D (D 0
V cn
V N 0
C)
0
(a (D
n
0
3
v
`x "11
R
r
• °.° }fir.; rj G . , : ? ?±?
r r ? ..te,t c. j •• j
ur
,sn # - ; ,+ k .:e r drrr<y ` `?;[ r. _. ry?n,.s 4t 't ., '• ,
}
,
17
41
3
V.V
,
µ
v 2 raj kN^f?' U
T F? - - -
r Two; '" ? - - r" •-?'
N • . } '7
..} ? ? .may L °?.?x 1+r . ?
j
G' -
lvirt
TM?
51
Wy 0'.
Modified Alternative L Boundary on 2007 Aerial
DRAFT Bonnerton Tract
PCS PHOSPHATE MINE CONTINUATION
1,800 0 1,800 Feet
SOURCE: Scale: As shown Drawn b : BFG TLJ
File: 17456224/2009_BENTHIC_SAMPLING/
NC ONE MAP, NORTH CAROLINA, LOCAL ORTHOPHOTOGRAPHY, 500 0 500 Meters Date: 12/03/09 MON-GRAPHICS/BON_MODALTL2007-,ER
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NC, 2007 COLOR AERIALS, Revision:
NC STATEPLANE, NAD 1983, FEET, WWW.NCONEMAP.COM Approved by: JPS 5-13-09 Figure 6
1 r` ., ? r
n '
a
R.
. ? 1 T -.rte
r
1 - a-ac. L' _ ?y` X61 . ?4 L Pf?R
out
4, f
nr
ell 70"'
'' -
e
n F
C
?:.
(n
+ ? I
? a
3 ?
:4 k+ +
1 ?
.F 1 3 5, E ?A
X66 as
`-
J.'. 1
''rr ? V L i
r 7
A C) -0
O
(D U)
K) or
-3 (D (D O
C)
m m DRAFT Modified Alternative L Boundary on 2007 Aerial -
n S33 Tract
O
3
PCS PHOSPHATE MINE CONTINUATION
v
SOURCE: 2,200 0 2,200 Feet Scale: As shown Drawn b : BFG TLJ
m6mm???El 1-
FIIe: -M2ATL-20SAMPLING/AUTOCAD/
n NC ONE MAP, NORTH CAROLINA, LOCAL ORTHOPHOTOGRAPHY, Date: 12/03/09 S33
Revi 33OOALT?zoo??ER
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NC, 2007 COLOR AERIALS, 500 0 500 Meters
NC STATEPLANE, NAD 1983, FEET, WWW.NCONEMAP.COM Approved by sion:
JPS 5-13-09 Figure 7
..?
? i
UPI BASIN PAMLICO
O
RIVER
RIVER
RIVER
BAST
BASIN
' HUDDLES CUT
BASIN
PAMLICO RIVER BASIN, PORTION RUDDY GUT
OF LEE CREEK BASIN AND CURRENT MINE BASIN
UT4 BASIN
SOUTH
CREEK
- UT5 BASIN Bp N
_ TOOLEY CREEK - 'a
BASIN
i
UT3 x,
BASIN .
4r' '
DRINKWATER CREEK UT2
. BASIN BASIN
JACOBS CREEK SOUTH CREEK
BASIN BAS T BASIN
WHITEHURST
CREEK BASIN
AND CURRENT
MINE
WHITEHURST
CREEK BASIN
N
JACKS CREEK
BASIN
%-I ?
TH CREEK
BASIN
,.
r`'s ?
t
4
i
Alk pmcq

Legend
LIDAR
ELEVATIONS/FEET
- -50 - -1
--1-0
0-1
1-3
3-5
=5-6
6-7
7-8
8-9
=9-10
® 10-11
®11-12
12 -13
® 13-15
O 15-18
018-23
0 23 - 27
?27-30
A p
A m n ?30-31
00 N C/) ?31-32
N 3 32 - 33
(V 33 - 34
V ?p z 34 - 36
c0 cD 36- 39
p 39 - 42
3
42 - 44
O 44 - 45
O 45 - 46
n 46 - 47
® 47 - 48
ACREAGES FOR NCPC ESTIMATED HISTORIC
DRAINAGE BASINS OF MONITORED CREEKS
DRINKWATER CREEK
HUDDLES CUT
HUDDY GUT
JACKS CREEK
JACOBS CREEK
TOOLEY CREEK
ACRES
604.68
1014.19
482.00
644.91
751.29
563.46
ACREAGES FOR NCPC ESTIMATED CURRENT
DRAINAGE BASINS OF MONITORED CREEKS
ACRES
DRINKWATER CREEK 401.94
HUDDLES CUT 592.60
HUDDY GUT 408.51
JACKS CREEK 316.29
JACOBS CREEK 526.82
PA2 21.88
TOOLEY CREEK 612.74
Legend
NCPC MODIFIED ALT L PERMITTED BOUNDARY
NCPC ESTIMATED CURRENT BASINS
NCPC ESTIMATED HISTORIC BASINS
a-
0
0 1,750 3,500 7,000
I I I I
Scale in Feet
SOURCE: NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
LIDAR CONTOURS AND ELEVATION DATA, DATA GENERATED FROM
LIDAR IN MARCH 2005, NC STATEPLANE, NAD83 FEET, ELEV_BEAUFORT.ZIP
DRAFT
0
Estimated Historic and Current Drainage Drainage Basins on LiDAR
with Permitted Boundary - NCPC Tract
PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC.
SCALE: AS SHOWN APPROVED BY. DRAWN BY BFG/TLJ
FILE:LIDAR_NCPC_DRAIN_
DATE: 12/08/09 MONRPT.MXD
4709 COLLEGE ACRES DRIVE
T ..-^ SUITE 2 CP#1745.62.24
{;+ WILMINGTON, NC 28403
TEL: [phone] Figure 8
BnaxrMkcq?axium FAX: [phone]

DURHAM
CREEK
BASIN
PORTER CREEK BASIN
PAMLICO RIVER BASIN,
PORTION OF LEE CREEK
BASIN AND CURRENT MINE

A (D n
0
o m
3
3
V
V N) 0
O
O F
(O (D
n
0
3
v
7
(1
"%a
r -!
Ann
W" ?'

r

IR

WHITEHURST CREEK BASIN ?. ° ..tee
AND CURRENT MINE LIDAR
ELEVATION IN FEET
BAILEY
CREEK
-50 - -1
BASIN M-1 -0
?0-1
?1-3
=3-5
=5-6
=6-7
=7-8
DURHAM CREEK
BASIN =8-9
Mr f, e ?9-10
X10-11
X11-12

-?
X12-13
©13-15
®15-18
018-23
023-27

027-30
030-31
Q31 -32
032-33
BAILEY - Q 33 - 34
CREEK
Q 34 - 36
BASIN ACREAGES FOR BONNERTON ESTIMATED HISTORIC
0 36 - 39
DRAINAGE BASINS OF MONITORED CREEKS 039-42
PORTER CREEK 3719.33 ACRES Q 42 - 44
044-45
0 45 - 46
ACREAGES FOR BONNERTON ESTIMATED CURRENT D 46 - 47
DRAINAGE BASINS OF MONITORED CREEKS
®47-48
PORTER CREEK 2491.91 ACRES 48 - 52
X52-138

Legend Estimated Historic and Current Drainage Basins on LiDAR
with Permitted Boundary - Bonnerton Tract
BONNERTON MODIFIED ALT L PERMITTED BOUNDARY
BONNERTON ESTIMATED CURRENT BASINS PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC.
BONNERTON ESTIMATED HISTORIC BASINS
APPROVED BY

0 1,000 2,000 4,000 SCALE: AS SHOWN : DRAWN BY BFG

DATE: 12/08/09 FILE: LIDAR-
MONRPT.MXD BON-DRAIN-

Scale in Feet 4709 COLLEGE ACRES D
SUITEZ RIVE
CP#1745.62.24
SOURCE: NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION LIDAR CONTOURS

AND ELEVATION DATA, DATA GENERATED FROM LIDAR IN MARCH 2005, NC STATEPLANE, DRAFT
C Z R WILMINGTON, NC 28403
TEL: [phone]

Figure 9
NAD83 FEET, ELEV BEAUFORT.ZIP
-
FAX: [phone]

PORTER CREEK BASIN
AND CURRENT MINE

WHITEHURST CREEK
BASIN AND
CURRENT MINE r
s .
BAILEY CREEK BASIN
CYPRESS RUN BASIN
A p
;(D
n
o ((D
or ZT
N) (D 0
V N) -0
v o Z
0
(O (D
n
0
3
N
7

BROOMFIELD SWAMP BASIN
LEGEND
LIDAR
ELEVATION IN FEE-
-50 - 1
?1 -3
=3-5
=5-7
=7-9
=9-11
®11 - 13
X13-16
FM 16-23
M23 - 29
=129 - 32
32-34
®34-37
M37 - 42
X42-45
M-145 - 47
L?347 - 49
=49 - 139
bt.

i
SOUTH CREEK BASIN
S33 MODIFIED ALT L PERMITTED BOUNDARY
S33 ESTIMATED CURRENT DRAINAGE BASINS
S33 ESTIMATED HISTORIC DRAINAGE BASINS
0 1,500 3,000 6,000
? I I I
Scale in Feet
SOURCE: NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
LIDAR CONTOURS AND ELEVATION DATA, DATA GENERATED FROM
LIDAR IN APRIL 2007, NC STATEPLANE, NAD83 FEET, ELEV_BEAUFORT.ZIP
DRAFT
4
r
SOUTH CREEK BASIN

E
k
ACREAGES FOR S33 ESTIMATED HISTORIC
DRAINAGE BASIN OF MONITORED CREEKS
ACRES
BAILEY CREEK 4068.61
BROOMFIELD SWAMP 2843.06
CYPRESS RUN 3000.16
ACREAGES FOR S33 ESTIMATED CURRENT
DRAINAGE BASIN OF MONITORED CREEKS
ACRES
BAILEY CREEK 3216.53
BROOMFIELD SWAMP 3128.78
CYPRESS RUN 3453.26
Estimated Historic and Current Drainage Basins on
LiDAR with Permitted Boundary - S33 Tract
PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC.
SCALE: AS SHOWN APPROVED BY DRAWN BY BFG

DATE: 12/08/09 ILI 1111 11 IA-1 III
_IVIEw,=DRAIN BASNSSaa+
LIDAR S33 DRAIN BASE MONRPTNIXD
- 4709 COLLEGE ACRES DRIVE
SUITE 2 CP#1745.62.24
'
_:;?2 R WILMINGTON, NC 28403
C
-
TEL: [phone] Figure 10
FAX: [phone]
A C) A 0 n
C) U)
??
tT 3
IQ (D 0
In
V IV -0
V O
O
(O (D
n
0
3
,v
,, t
?'?,?` .. ?? ? it , ? ? ^-k! '; ya . ?. °`
;j4 1

'fir •
.i
* + t
4
'T q
A7 ?IPT 4 111
.
4xv
w r _ r?
417
3 .,r? ?n • ? 1.
u?
r
r,
K.
F `? 't1 Ys a a .! L f+ w'. F n?
r
. i
i
VV
}
14 i
~ti? $ ?, hk?,. ? fir, t? ?? ;a ,• x ?? •r ,4 ?'
N. t-
+r .r J; .s."T._,.r. "S` i t rr•'a r I ,It 4"I,? {?1
•
g? L R ? i, Y S F '?V S, ? •1 ^?
er y4"? ',??, ?,t?',??', ! ? J? ? ?a.'? ? +?q? .+1` rzY.?jr ? ?Jr ? ??•?'i#
t '-?+'s ??:. ^? , ? t ??v'.7I ' 1 iE,~J?' °r4' ? ?"?`?,.'.? ???h? ? '.?;? '?l? „+ti•' a ~? ;,$ ,?_- 'RI
',i.,` c? f `* ; • sJ iJC?¢y *?a? ^ir. yg} 1?r}v.d r ;??y% ¢?t ! vi r? , t:
,ti ?? ? r• z C i,?`ti_y ,'> { ? :';? '?f ,.i?r??'?,''?+r? ?7,'?p???r-,??? ryyi.-*X?r.?. ? / "? ."
f F. "- ?F -,.•} ;}sue}+, l?jr ?f?^'i- .J'"_.•.
1 •yT _,. it r-`rq,. i-
Y 4 r `k 1 1 .or s t i,?,i E v `.
I, -V I r
? t.`. { 4#.*?'? d" 'r' g? "S "f •? ?'r ?. iGr ??' ? y'O•f 3i' ?-r. ? N{ ^y ry '?r.. ? s .fy T ?.r ?4' 1r'ry`?• ?'! f ?Fr.e.
' .l yM •. I, .r? (i{ d+';• ?:r i? 4 ? -Ry. 8.L '?. x. r??, ?.?, ?. ?w
jyr r ?. S a. JE= ? ' r.
r
##? # .,:
A 64
51k, ,
Jc"
a
?z ;'f]?. „?$ >?R. `sr to 1•`#^ a? t`
kv ?? y({°' ?.yS i 'S?7- fJS* r- e r y r,1 ,
4"'i . A ?N-k w . # it
*r ?? ?( ?. `p? ri"°i'. ii•? ti, r?,# e- a
r" {
e '' F
4, ih
_? ?'?•.•.? ys'1:, r ?! a *• {R?y?Y/ •vtie a yc- -t?' r?? 1 '?»y t -
} t r
R
? •,? ?a ' , ? '??'?: ., [. -?.? - 1 ??? '? ?? 11``/:x ? '? ,+c ? ????w?r # r'? `i,;,?' i?,r ?, t ,'"?2• ^a`?u,,?"?"?xii '? ;a
? ??:Y ? e . ?'#? k?4' + ,? .? 1?"`S°r?+??r?? ? ;,? `` `-"? 'Vi'a ?'"^''? '*!'?'?', ,i-?• ?,.,..{?? '` ,:?'? t,? :'fTti t•
y {?? °7? ?.3 :r .-? . yt '7?'?.fir. *Fr a - •?. > t 7-rrr ??- J'
y ? V !
f 3 `
A JACKS
0, q
y ?k Jt ??
'7 A
!jwv
oil
V y
y?

SOURCE:
NC ONE MAP, NORTH CAROLINA, LOCAL ORTHOPHOTOGRAPHY,
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NC, 2007 COLOR AERIALS,
NC STATEPLANE, NAD 1983, FEET, WWW.NCONEMAP.COM
500 0 500 Meters
Original Monitoring Locations in
Jacks Creek
PCS PHOSPHATE MINE CONTINUATION
Scale: As shown Drawn b : BFG TLJ
: JPS 5-13-09 DRAFT (:k
Date: 1 2/03/09 File: JACKSZCREEKDW ?MPLING/AUTOCAD/
Approved by Revision: Figure 11
300 0 300
..:, . 51 : y A,, F r •'•i' 'ZS °. '{} rt?'-.` fy : < { {.-a +?. ?{ .•? >? l t., n
Z r?7?e?,?:'}?` a Eta t r gry, 1 t V# r a e' r 'r Ott
?. .,, ° r Y'T .+"{t'. r3 s'.sF +t' A - 7lf ti i ? i a 1L.M1'`' , r^ x
'\ r '. G r« lea 's,lya.??'" }. •;- +d' nr r t ! t? !.1 4. M,+
ti " , , Y.- - K _ f ?,f{5- . •? i +°1... e•:" ?*..y,.r .' ' 1 F ka S,
A p -0
m n
N ((D U)
or 3
N) N 0
V N_0
V O z
O
(O (D
0
0
3
Z,
v
p
$ ,
t I .1
.
-r
i .r..
r }?
??
a.
a F'
W k .??*
.` _ {
00,
. \ .. y d ,, s i;j it { A ', t ,l^ ?C l a
. ;rte 4 , 3f. ?*- ' -
.YF ' r •g s:4 , r .?` J , ?'S'` ?S ~?, s I, -. N
\ ''. ?; st k t r r t Ser;nS 4« f r A' Y' ...: r rF.:
. t
i t 11 J? • a_ay f • ,p! ?h k S f f }f it .? a?` n t Fl {, }"j?i.' . '" ?' F 4 -- t - 1¢r ,f r'. y ! , "y .
\ t. ? " 'I I - . it - rt.Y -?#` r L •-'" 1• 1+V i n " t a{? 'L ?Lr'. Y M.?'kr%?` x-- * ?'' 7Y s
\ "' .; , , i: - . ,?, . , " '4? ,,,, . ... . ^?.t •* Y r t i y; rr.. { Yr1$r kt ct ?.F^ f
f'
A, I 1Y.. Y .t, " , Fs rT, a , #r ref s-t. iu ', t?k . , ?, I
"+ r. r s r 3 t t' It ?`}r 1 ?e • 4 a 1{ h . .. r
? i F r f ttiYY;?? F t P ¢ rw .i # '# . r? 5 s A r: c F s y.+
s? • 4 =,f s1 r j- + r 7,
+• x r - - ,V } r r(? t - +`? R k --a IY',• t'F . tr 1 tii' { ^' a , ^ , ". ri
y s , f { Ffir-`? r sA•... a A y i. ,,* `4 +,y µ r N. f JJFF++Y
i 7 ..r.y « ar 1 , t
z .^ k ;w'i . r i e t r F?, .rts {?,?,.;,aF; i
- - - - I . I . . ? , , . /
. ! ,. I 1.
,e rr-{ # . r, .. .aT>,_4.e '1 ? + Ii. . i ", et 6 y off , i 1 I ?* ,,J. r x? .? 'k r?Lk.r.r? ;? "i b. fir,#- I
r r ;.. ,4 is ;fir. Yoh rY ' F
, - /. I . /# f -
e t trr C . " r ?? .tip 1` ,.' fir `' p t
( . . -, , ? , . I - ,: ? _? i_11 1. r - . . , . r- , , - W, i?
,. r . ,,?, i
s . .r ``a,
r r? F l"'. .L f, - - 4; , f ? " + - f t , ,,^ .rlrFt - 1 :a f'Y r r
r d r .{ v z # ftd 1
t r t ?' P R f 'f 4 f' it%t h? ?!' 're j r',' ! Z?i?. .'-) L F 1 r
I
s f . r , r" '- ' s *.
r;
- ; .
, " R , i 1,
- ?. , . ?z G., , I - , ? .1 , .?? - . , , -,* 1? ?, ',
. - - - , _), -? . . . - . - . . .. I - - ? . . ?': _ . ., ? ., ? ?a _ rrf??•G ,i 1rr{ - _i- a. ?7`I?_. x :^'- ,! y, N qrY - Fr r f• .
S r r}I• / s , f `?• rr 1 j f, 14, t
Y i '- f! !. r j .- Y 7 F'
_r :, ,
r
P '. r r a e ? ?. .- if
?t ?' iJ.. +` r +f" •i`l:i .° A l: y . C° .•f' '' r. F "? ,. f?.}? ?. Se'_? ,t 'h ,=L ..:? f ,? .il' P i? ? k ..
* YTI-r l 9' E t ?" k Y-r Y' +,pt ?, ?# F. 4 R:5
? . r 3,Y , 1S # r 1 t't 1 r i . ? A w A' A ? sk4 ?? r{ r'. it, • i 7 r t "14 r If ; y 9 .- r } { « +M y ,: c A`%• .4 y I :{r1 G' . k i- rF? i Yr i . .'+PS? y.
1?:; 1,t anti ?sn W +, cs` r u.f {x t ) M 4"j" 7 *3 ,- ?`"er,, .A' ?. ?
I y * '?? Z.? .'V il;, r `M4 I 'i'.h a `` t 4'
a 4 r , Y?' , r „? F i; y. J'q? E k r ?ar3 n
k,? ? Y
?TTTT s r ?1.
ti. «.4? ` *4r,ir . •'yif r
??: - "
?rj {fr • 'tr?r.; :y 1 >'?rJ`.?..r
T a, 'i 4(,+`+ "•., s Lid t a;? : ``- + 1, ;:.++ .*r r. !jj, +P.,,'} ? s .. Mf . • F
Ta.c Y I "P T, Y J ; A .• ; x, f a R 4 4" C .g? i ` k ...
r,,.? jy, .. F .s r }° x 3 *,. ,r r its `r ` ";: { , '', #'a {; a l.• a k L '
-4 ' N,!
S op?r • L ?,* yr' r" t 7? rt i}T#; r? y AyMr •§.
. I .1 ? I , - ? t
r}
rp,. l:d"r t r 1''S .y, sr T- '%.?,r 1w 1 a f {x4-6.,s.
`'erg`.. `;"p% ?Y 'tyLA'+ °iy +.,.a.tp'Cr` 55_ f?`:. 3

I _ ,4'fi
?
t,,
LOW' ?,*+' f
^?' ,f' .. :+' 'r J :r : i? #; : 1. 14' - -
• r
4' $'r it. Y( t i y; _ ,? rti . P i ? },?L _ -. r ? "^? a err
/'
' " ;: A:1.; - , :, ' x r ',? V_,V'+ ti?A . *I
k w' % tA -?- is ,., ,: , . . 4 j
' ' .i - "L ie ,fit"- „ ,'F F , IL I
mac. ? i. "? ,._ ya S;wAw 1•frr4 ,''aF
a r A .R'' ? .7' . k ?' f ;. R a Lt w}, C l a.'? • y . 7,r' b •'t v., 1,+?. « ',I'.- "Jor,
}- s'{ g .., {- r.,a 'x ? R I.. d• `., ~.r `*' P•_ y?f y_,Y, t ?r Ar, i #'A. ,.- , •,.,k s
p 1,' .e } 'I r a } e y G
"1`? ., ,, - it •} ::, ? ¦"" '....{ " l {3 3 rr °} r .
•r r a +k ' e < ?. r s <
.'j ' rid F" ,,.) , , r: tea. r..? . iw.h R r ,x 4 i. - ?`'.t, r tv r ; - . ?1 k?' .,, '
^ r, , T . a, yL; _,.r 11ff: a ? ? . wr ! ' `? ` ? ..+" ?..d?' r '-A*r.T !' . ? ?, -° ;. „e?^
} 5.., + S5 ,':F+ ti ?.sl' *11 - }t y e ' r i. r;s"r?},r1
?s ??" +. i R &j`v x ,p tr .qtr°_fh'
•j , ``, ar • •y n '. `• {r- R : y r. fy • iY' `.1 ? •M/F
?# ,y,„ W '` yµ ,r a '?` . . 4' "N P' { ..•?. x- '• .i e{' ? r ?M'* i .'. 0:r, R.: .
11
, . ". ; liv I I ,? , - , , ? ,I; ?:
`: it . 't-> : ". 'o' 1 4r? , 41* :? w#
r i. ±.?n h 4 r,=,R . f , 1a•. '.yy,.' ,r F , +S 1 , e. ¢ r , ' ?' "?jr'*, .,
3- r"sk 4-- d i F ?. ?4ti ?R.s .r i` ?,?< 1r S A1.
I _ ,fe;.3.,.t,._..u..._.1c..a° Fox'-'` ! yi J: t, ,.}atr ].*«- X'+`-al
.".1
at c, ', r it. %:
. L ?'A o
+ r a.
W.
F??4*
W,: xqr 3? q ,,
¢? e t 'r
fi :S r ,
,.? ,?:
`?`' "
r? r,.;if -?.?,_
Yc
\t ,
. it .1
? W J f,`
?Y' n? ,,4
Sri 4?i
/'" 6. f.,?..1.4 V"",%,irk - ? ;0)
3?. 'S r i', , ,' -% A L- k
;t C ; Y".
rl ..'4 w \i } 5,
} _ j R 4 d s
; .- ?? I --*? ,,? 6 I -x* 4 , ,,4
,r }?y yr 3,' d t rr ?w,?r 7 ; R
- *k t 3dr.a.; . SwF #' t? ?F h,
Yi.
?NLV 1 ,1 .
? •V ..
i
,r k
c r ? ,.',' "r 7
d ,y j
. .} a ? f
F r,
?.'`tF w`"laei`
. # s.
?•. r. if t r L, .1 1 i ?` yi a .?• d "+ - F a wL t {fir4
rsy rl? ra, 4 a?. tir r L , •r' a ,' a 'ti &a r ? ` "+i? 4 t et y it ? I !? "t
F . ? , .- +,iF 4 . K .1 r "I'll I
1-1
' find ? ? r "} yr, - F .1.. _ .. +? Y` .k .7< r i' - q.I '?:' ?-' fi 'r i• fi!•
51?Y. U .'j 3 4 .y P ` y Air , ?y A .
,, 1 • , 0' r{ M, -,?.. i X .1 •i, - N .! -.yam , _ .7R+ .F ? .Y
# • `'
?• ', 7 gyp IN w y Ft y k ,* {+??' r , I w '
ri
I I } . a 4 7?. _ _ '; -,tsnsba' L? r,r - V "yam r "
-1. % ir. 0011K , . . -, I __?g ,
.x - ° ' c ''+ L,I t ti y.. _; '!" .' •aC` 0 tT 3 {1:=F1".? 4 .' f'
y } t r _- r. 47 40i 4ti .?F." a",•?+r0!?!' ?.n tl?t !IA?K,AkAk.
.." 4 { x aa4r T i? ? r
.wr <'s a s p • •?r1.rr,,,l ,. , 4 4 V "' ?. ,'.'fi'r ' " r4? r+R ?' t.
1 `r rh , -c{ 'k , , ? 4 ?F " y+'Aer 4* 34 #?'' -. . ?.? j 6 " , J ;r4 r 4 ? - , I 1? f
??I}wi V. -,y- .rr"r 11« r.l; :?.. .,'LiLiii .l• fi ,4?f..'
4k - T
7 !
!! r A
't : a •r:,?'
ix{' , A !' .
tA ?
' _ L
IV , I "o 111,13 !"
IV= T0C
CRI
•
Original Monitoring Locations in
DRAFT Tooley Creek
PCS PHOSPHATE MINE CONTINUATION
500 0 500
SOURCE: Scale: As shown Drawn b : BFG TLJ
NC ONE MAP, NORTH CAROLINA, LOCAL ORTHOPHOTOGRAPHY, File: 7456224/2009_SAMPLING/AUTOCAD/
Date: 1
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NC, 2007 COLOR AERIALS, 500 0 500 Meters 2/03/09 TOOLEY_CREEK.DWG
NC STATEPLANE, NAD 1983, FEET, WWW.NCONEMAP.COM Revision:
Approved by: JPS 5-13-os Figure 12
0 q ,.-`v, ?rL?• P t K'} « ;r? 2101... :I c..° r
N r l r I . ??. ?+ r. .,1 '" ,Sr 1 ^,i, -,% ,,F , 4 ek C `}t Y .
4
Cx . ,r -?`s , f ?N?P A, 4
1
- r ;: ', #% ' ai t , r.
O 1 s `I- , ,, p„ y, f' s Y r k r '? f 6 ' i s,
f. ,1? r , .-t :.
O ^V r ir r ,' i
Z3 et?'ya x'.. ,- r{r ,+. I- {;•+4 -?4-S, ,• ?, °?` ' --
.' 4T 'fi'r it ' ^ ;I .!:.a -J"+i.} : '-.' y r .'4+°' '° ?` -^? ? " " •
,.!"" r
g 1.fti f rt.yc'`' r d14 s. * ?t r? ; f'r Ir _:ry ?' k?.' ..y ?, el
?yr? _ r rF5
?. - ? '?.t ,4 -4 'sh 3 !f 'L, '? .,? r ,J ? ., ka• Y. s r y ?+ t
11
n e Y "-? •. ?[ .4 YM '?'?' `„-,J T 'k' f''r tF's f ?'R
O V r -'? 6 . ; •t f , w. ' -f'' J ° Yx r -_ ' .. r ,/°'• r .' ?f`[? R ???fff f C f#'y 4 # : • ,.r
_17 - n t t ¦ r 4p" .r t+r ". .., = r r., S f
I r :? <? r r' r . ?., 1 4 t;'
o ? - ? a.
• ,yrr r i ,, • ',
m 1 w , + fir' +' 4 `
a1 -+. r 4 . h x+ rr
C2 t r $?1.f•.r '{ r?., 1 r +..• t !' i 'st !a ,r ,?.l, +V,• ..
- ?. ?111 1, ?, ?-. ?': , ? r7 _ r..t s L 5 ? rr _ rf. C5 E + `. + L s? r r 1 1 i C
11
O ,,4 - t. 4 ? y w;. t" 4 e, ,«t.^.i gh" +- ,M ? r d t 4A .
C2 f , , t , - 447,.6 A? v ! 1. - t'' ,. 7i . l., r..r a rot C /. ;b
E3
,O a, ZEa.. '?. r x> r`.r Y.rt + tt? v, t 1. r , y •`pa ??
.
1
. ` 1, 1 1 FS L its K? !''r t • ,4 Y 'r , K ' ^N
W? . r- t`, f rR s
`= 4y r f y A ;215 T' "°" " 1 ? ??' _ s ' '? ?:. g,
7 .?{ ' Fh • r? k - +.'`r f? c r
t j r .. f ,,. ? !' y j` M n 1 sl^
yti 5A
O ra 4 I T '+ "r.14';? N' '+, / '+ r j r : Z " - , I Rv ?k xr "
* C) 1 . o . - - " *.. -; ?. 6? , ,_- ,3,?,', -_ '. , , .,-,., - rt
Z3 '. {;r x r V r ' { a ? 1' r` d, ?? rr tr, fi - gIl1 5
3 4 y y , T t r art .. ,fir ' .. 5 ;,r ?" :
I" I
D f: \,, r A r } i x'- i_ jk- w _' ?° ?!, a a"{i-- . r r T F r !L y - ?
1`: r r J t k i Si,` +.f d', s. Fr N ?- r s' i.? s 1111 .- n1 -w j ;4 c s } , . sg F } t . Y r >fs .k t ! y f . . 11
() , . .? "" - >; i 46 r, r r ,•f6? 4 r 4 1 - r . s ix 4 } *r>
c cr ?; ,fir {r{r pis, r r ?! 4'r 6=1 i?r
c -J, s may. ;w w t' a 1 « ? r 1? ii,..`.tt Y 3,'+ g,'?k
,a
O ' ?'. a'?,, •! M' ` 'Fy 4 ;' ( `A. r ?M r i3', F?• 'n?,r ?fi i i6 .? •? j _
s : w r r.. ! r
+ it y a
}. 1... 1 , S ~ r e' j r - ? L ,F.' r+ r ` _. A ` ni x ` k I. !:. , `K ??r i°Yzr 'V". a
` a1T 1 ; ti . } M r..;# r t r ,x n. 5 # I. £? ? . / {r i s s," r? w
- ..;:,7. `-;. ?_: )_1 ?- , . .:? tt t:? iy`'E.it r r. x,+ ' r , dr, ." ,i':r t ,^ " y ? r` qe <i ° F 1 s*Y" `t { .: - , `t 1
. r •
>: y ;1k1.wr „.?_. ',t€ i _k fq - r t.r rY aft -s.. r, 4b'as: i ,:'r :..,? ? ,- 5
?, 6" f , ; 0t i sr a q , r q: f 46 ??.a ? yrc, ,; r. t
5A, y! ,.r x; r i cr, a ,r r f. r" + 6 y- y r i r
p r r
.• r ,n:{'y w; k ,Y ? .h,. a Y. , r ?, E +: + r."• t !
F. ?? c:; n _ _ v i y ?) i; 'i :. „ ':» ? 4 r?s` "` .r Y f . i y
?. ."'? ka..i .}, _ ,' y; rr Y. -4, 4^ti`t F'' sj.,. r•&!: $ // h. .: :,, ,ir { -?i?1. r n.,r?h ?'. } r F.'.
'.^'.. .,j :.ter + e a 1 5 ?•.a .r i ,c1e, r . X. R C:,. '}y, R? tr. j' i,r.,r- , .; iF
r n+; T1 'I r 1, :4, + + {,Yr r r?r , r ?? is E nom=
_ •ir+- 4Y %,-. ty•`'y+lF' p. rr r. .,:Y?. ?.'' f,•t,.r ,`°521 r/`+r: ?"' .1` ... r ?,"''? "'?-;y It , " s ,Ii rift 13 i ?i" 1 . ? p: a i € ' ' , m .. r / r'rr:.`' S t +c 7?..i r f .. ,, .
:'t #."l1 c ` r , f y, ?aFr . !?e .y . , +? F r t j . s 1e _ 4 r r y !p rV' # , f A k
1 .. sy .eta .?'.? ;, r e k . t. ` 444 ,,4 tr . +r. yr •+' f .r •?' " + -h "%x i
. to e iF ''. rl Y .[° (^, ".."'+, }'", k r.. r -'„ h n 's 2.... s ,? ;: `,.g? * +. r s ;<.o ?.." s .-J` ty `. . A
", - 5 L! !it,.Y '€ 1*i., i'r+1 "r f, ,f , x r:. 4 "t } '` S f.•rj .+k'T? .1's' '.r' k +i
.y w r r , l %C?i + r a ,. r, i "4? -„'' - i 4 a ; t EtF ¢ .'? 1,s^ .a, s ? f '`'4y - - r " a . , _ . ?" }i?t ? ? ?w ?? s. % r -?, e
f// ?" . ,?
J p 'AF • { r '?f a t : 'r ?+ ;, "?¢' R. k, , `i 9r, 4 #Y,,? *zir} 4 try yy r ' % r,,,y? i
/ P " k.
*, i !•` , .•F,f ? ft '} r"' 'r '" i ,?.,a i , ?n f. ?,
?h = ' tsi t. `? s5h* ,,r ' =
k s zr "r x F x c?'" rd It '.y , ti. ,i"•'?i 7a+< r. s r< ' T + r ; i b. 5!/ a *- P ?% .c. :., i5w ?. Sid"! A" kYY r s- .
7}tir x Pw 't ar4bzyy 'r ,! r-s a' z!} .?'ti b..•
}. q.1-i },!+R 1 ? = t r' + *, ` ' c I `r
' fr rr r v a 't, i .b ht e ;a ? ., I t
,;.,_ :"'? ,L, l d r' ?_ y.•f ?rV '. iF '7i tY' n;`ti 1 ..4 Y L L. :"'n i r w\:' •1 :, r bt Yf I '• ? {. - ,ti "
y ,. i ,.? * ?
.0.t ;".:.. ' s. ':ti 7:: '_,t 't, I t -,'.- .4 Ti *'"a _, ,'r _ i r
F C - a i. r1r a m ' 1-1 0 "I" 3 ¦
-? mty • `. ' .. ` Irv, y f'. -s ? .>,: 4 e ; 3 T.l £ . ,- ,, -+.,r?
..
* .54 •, :l, r j. 1: I + r n_. tj ?•rr ,A ?; 1"Y
- fl +. y . S ?` r a x Y ?`t ;4',A' k •. ' ? i° r e ry3.r l}i i,r ?s{ 4 t r .;
r : r; , r +
1"-9? i, G } ?' ,'- AA.p 1 ` 7 I,^ R tit
,?. +?,. 4 ,?y 4 7 ,- ?,.'`,. '+? fi t C f ,? # ., :. 0. r ; l?",,, ` _ 1 1 yLt !•.
p A ,. .! x 6 L 1` .r1R ?'.
` ? t r,x a .'.'; i M. :- a y e '! Fs ,,, , i ".: w .,gy +
':R r Li q o x K '. s Ty ,v. T \?ar s.i Tr+i. is rE rlY
{ • • 4 e w 'nk y fit ,i ? t + ."i a ;
. `
}- ' a '421 r_ 1 '/1 y s ,r a ` k r I4' r ,i1f.
sr « ti {? r'r. x gr -, .it s '10 " ?4 . '1- 4 'r i
1 t s ? ? k ??wr, t y y "4 ]I , , 7f. Q, ,/ . ? ?L_., : ; N, ?1. I Mr ' - o b' ah ' ' r
.. . .•8'<. "'. _. w_. -
, .. w
-I _. I ,,??"Ir I .. t r r fi. ,,'*.: • w?.,ty`41 -{... ; " s. r ,t!'..-r ?`?r T ?+. - r''1 r'.
r.\ a }®o '#i . _ t rY:f } * pr s. M'A1 ik-S r ?•s? F;.Faa r*'? .?C,. '?? - inr '"' l,a ?r.,'?4 ?? . . Y?'
?. \ 'k - I r ,-? ° r «-' 'i ri ,. e, 7 J ..;!• ''-?C•iA 5 YF A'-? .., 4 ;r ; ' ?+ ,se '.y,A ?T t ,.r,,
.
J m r r ,R ,a.I .i. f,.
• r ., "+ .a;. ri ?, i +rw rt t a A - ` r <
_? t7 ` -iLM `Ttf t .?. x A; y i° Y .r * ?. ?'f; r ,?rRC } ;Ss:. r?.! a`a•` y'•:. •'1'
Yi rw" t' ' "+ "r-,?'
,.?; r r
..s a aw .? +5 1 - '? x rY ~'A`.,r rr+ ? .'r` -t '• k 11 +, 4,
Y x.
. }, .
't r•
t it r Y
r e ..e' •` r +, -' 3 ' : t?1 r?..'r, 4;(6 <!_. ° r? R4r+, - .t e _ ,? M,•
by` k F- l Y,? 4. Y r F a r iy. +tx :. r, r? -11
kRr
t q, c% F ? fir, ' ! - - r 6 ; ,,, +f t ., ' ' r r 3,. " t?.
,.3 '
.vy t . ' v+ x r ? 1 y • +t X. , 4r e:,• 4rIr.
,% i amt r„.p yy i?'.,y { h.", _
t? ,. ?
'z . a 'r t r! ,t;f?? ty..
.'A 4 P1{ k YPy' r
i1 _ J Y •, ` LI?TI , - Y'sr T S'
ex I -?,, ? - -: : . , . . , . . 1:? 41 . :-4-fl-i - ,? 1 ?,,
?r. .r?y
`r ?, rr ?' b [ r d iet y. `- rs y F'$ yt ) r• f kk '11-11 .
1 r+r _ ,? •:.y - Iri +' , j M ,qr ? ff /,rI 1' •+ .G'' , y r7
r, Ir.. !, l r :' < r E r }f 1 r ;, J 1 J M r r 1- " I 2' -' ?
` r ; Y; " , r ' a r?
r } t ? y r %r i r mac ;
¦ r
{T. r "y 4, s" f r r r.t -' . N - '` - wc '( ..
- ",., rte} 1 dl ylr r" 4 .. , n
11f - ? . I ".f "' F -- I? T f f t r r ti'r I rr' d Y^i 1 4 '?? .f' ; T: r.J n" CAr"'S a Y , r 1 at ` •"-'If ,< . • '7+ " ?. 6 A"?f.,ly?}'h -IL I
7 r
¢ ,"" r • • 1 l-, ,j. , s .a• `c.,r
d,?. ! . '. •{K, x y? F M a
i f .!%; ?n+_ - r y,.. r r a.+sC -or -or " iy "?+
N C7 .?r ?_: :? r;? C- - refs ,r ?' • ?a+ 4, 3 t V.-.?I '4",..f,-, , %
I _v W N r .?" 2+^ +hF,'' !s .arr .? .a i *`',,,?' 7` .a"., : ,+ k ! ; pFF r 'i rL.1' ,1.
3 x f K Ir'? r s r '' -' 4y? } ?ti,s• y 4 i?o to t L
'„p,+G..
- I
N CD . 4.,,i''". r:'"?' r, : p k.`L??t G ,
cVO NO 3 f -I i r; ;1 { r _ r _ i t, °r t"•-gr F, F i t T` i rt'.
0 Original Monitoring Locations in
DRAFT
Huddles Cut
O
?< (A)
PCS PHOSPHATE MINE CONTINUATION
soo o soo
P SOURCE: Scale: As shown Drawn b : BFG TLJ
NC ONE MAP, NORTH CAROLINA, LOCAL ORTHOPHOTOGRAPHY, File: 17456224/2009_SAMPLING/AUTOCAD/
Date: 1
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NC, 2007 COLOR AERIALS, 500 0 500 Meters 2/03/09 HUDDLES_CUT.DWG
NC STATEPLANE, NAD 1983, FEET, WWW.NCONEMAP.COM Approved ij Revision:
y: JPS 5-13-09 Fiqure 13
;°n
(O C/)
D '
or 3
(9 (D 0
V N_0
V O
O F
(O (D
n
O
3
N
7
7
O
SOURCE: JGulu. H5 snuwn uruwn u y. ors ILJ
File: 17456224/2009_SAMPLING/AUTOCAD/
NC ONE MAP, NORTH CAROLINA, LOCAL ORTHOPHOTOGRAPHY, 500 0 500 Meters Date: 1 1 /23/09 DRINKWATER_CREEK.DWG
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NC, 2007 COLOR AERIALS, by Revision:
NC STATEPLANE, NAD 1983, FEET, WWW.NCONEMAP.COM Approved : JPS 5-13-o9 Figure 14
C-51 1 4'kbr• a 5 - ,p?,!f Y e` ,? '• T n. k:x °} `ryi} tf" TM F• *' i
51t "terC a 4 R
,.Ft.: .
g' ?,. ?' +ifa4?t. • •F 47. ?, .'a ,:??,D•aY ,rw `?!" ?? _?. >y? ` ?' - 5?,.',\• ,?Y ? F:? ? , si•e , r;s-''?
O
t ) ;dttr?'a%•?"•i '!"?i ,'?` ?, err ?' +. ,,,,?? '?'
°r, as a s^ } ?. ?."a. `? ., _ rr` ?5?', ..? ` ' •}. ; i:M1S'h+rai1' v ,y ' i „ ?;,' ',°r'1!!!
t! "! =.e ?t tiYl 0'i P" 1 Sj•. :, s. 4Y' 1 fi
" ,'i1?`f 1. , z ?'-? ? ? `,%?'? w ,+',},a qti r 0.Y?i? ?., ?Yf. ?1.a'.. ?•.. - F ?' r'-r'er lA :. {, ai ?. P ',?'fr?i + R?,y'1..: ,? ?y??
,
' '.,. ? ";,?'-;".. ? ?,rva 4, q. .?f1, ;1. "r. ?«.,: 1? 1+':'? ''iR""'?r ,'t - •? H';iw.. Y, nd! t 3tt,.
w ,
u•; EE
? R• .. ?, . „,'' , . q 1 , 'rva ? ik 41 *4 ? ?E;?;?',a;,;. ? ' • ?'' . ?,, .r , r ?', P -d.•', i u. . ? . ?:. ?' S ?j . ?' ? ?:., ,t.,
?r\? '•.?. ..?:l,n'.. •y :1l T .? Y?, ?"?1•_, .I?rt r..;'s.; .`. ,-.y., ?Tf. r ??`.? j. 4.'; ?,a; ! `,?y ,{ y: r: i..f' 1?ySk f'Ylr ?..
•'l?a>.• 'Y,.. Yr t r S ;^1e .e,°?'tl+ _.y x..l?+s'?1s ?.} ?`,'ij? L?j 77z?'}y. 'r f,.kt •;,fry. /?IA'5,?,r t may;
-vim
,
171
?.;q{''. rat .%? ??. J t??'?,"h ''xf! r.??< <` '?Y•1#1' ,+w,8??4? t .yt '?, r•n ?.i .Y ?r, ??N'+ .h ?''? 1?
.i _ S•'6y. ?'d}.-•" 1 i>* 1r 34 _ 'la} •i a `Y''; # +Jt" .r P.. ! r } %lXq
DI g a '.. :yd y .a ; a
3 ?i1M. S• etI - 'j, CSr .q A ?r1
m? t ay A F T
n"i} .K. AAcR td t.F ,r!? Y t ., e,'r { , y ?'r' •;{ ?4 ,
!? ?;f, i F l {•?A ii a"u } ! Y rl•' I^if q.-,, ?, L r, R'IL'E •-N
1117
P 16
_ qY' ? "r `fy [l, i r .? ?:`; ;? 1 ?:'1 , aid, 'fA . i?,?! +, J?ti a ?M?"°??4 • ;• Y, . ? ` ? ), ? ` p '. ? `!
• t w, X + t
Ab,
24
"?. A' , t.b _.t 444 f.4Y r•? "`ti, r.-,, ,,-t ?:; , .?1''. "?' ?.. r
!'a
fir
.?•'.N -Y r.?y+ [ 1 r 5; ? rl t ?'f x..I' `. •• A,?q t
Y .i4't
%er
,
'T'r? v 5 y. rf,. "lf ,?' ?'{yj? -.h „r? •,? Ini
??a a1 a .?? /? +', ?k,? -4 ? T*e?1° ?IF f?..?•Y "?' -l
?: n,??n7? •? ? ? .' i 1 , IN'?6 r"'? ? _ ? f r AT' ! ? ._?A S, ?'?'? f ?S I.
•
... .,Awl! h •?? ( ti'"". 1 „ ' ?,-.:., ,:'
W' 'r
}
sl #
,r
t
i
y ?;iy•1: kA Y i . 'b
%'A
OW 4•' ' 4 h .•t, Y y'?': ?• .fy M ?Ji .
jitt Y fi r : I l j,? i apt rl +[v
?? :.*,? ?I?4`'°s `?. ,q,' ;?• ? ? 4?!!A"yv5?s? ??Ni f? ? ???{ A? ??_ ;'
y ?x ? g(y
_jt
SFr !? s r two y
y i +r k
.54
e s ; '!«r y
S5.;. y,il+ f ?''i? k1
PP /t.!f r{RR, y:. y r t'r x',1 t +?;+ Iv.i? A"t•¢,?ay'
S•1 !t tr J' Yr tL?i'?'.Aafw,.F.I?4 ff$f h R 11
14
,? rY? z ?' + W+ t? yt??r FA
ell • {. I',? ?? ^ ?4
?f
! r ry?4.. IX ,.r ,y?*
jl? 4; 4? g
? t y
Y^ ? a
ri`" ?xy ' F11?y S
>,PP, y }/t?' p yy(7y??5 r r '
,rAJ fr . '1Ai' ' DI.S
Proposed Monitoring Locations for
DRAFT Jacobs Preek
300 0 300 PCS PHOSPHATE MINE CONTINUATION
SOURCE: Scale: As shown Drawn b : BFG TLJ
NC ONE MAP, NORTH CAROLINA, LOCAL ORTHOPHOTOGRAPHY, 500 0 500 Meters File: 17456224/2009_sANPLNC/AOTOCAD/
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NC, 2007 COLOR AERIALS, Date: 1 1 /23/09 JACOes_CREek.DWG
NC STATEPLANE, NAD 1983, FEET, WWW.NCONEMAP.COM Revision
Approved by: JPS 5-13-09 Figure 15
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
«15 of 29»
%

•? ? ? }?e ??a"
€ :. ' ?i
.
r`f,?,.u „y,!
? _ r -.?-C
`•t -r
' :- '? q
J ?ar.
,' ` _
t
Y
f
?
,I
?
i?S?-?%? d-'Y ;3' >1'N"'??"r-•'Y SS w __f.f fF .'rte Yr +k_

..Y.g L lr ? f
t r/.- I .'Ertl J

.vi aw t 7 • T.;' ?' •y

A ? C7
0 U)
o 3 s
U)
V N_0
V O N
(
(O N
0
0
3
v

r ( 'Le
t r C?. ? :1y,'-?+a 'z',*! R# wvr y? +s' _ d'fflrr. ? • A .
r .?
i^ I'rr a rr:Y
OFF
x n t .., .4 ?:F a ,Yy.tf. r e•
kl?
-T
•r'-, •'.?'!.
? t•. ?y '!i• '+t{4 a ;" ,I .tS i i ?'ti tiA µ
,
a r"^ ., i a ? F * r ? ? ? c ,, ., r '•'"' ?t rr is ?
-t'rlr-•'
f ti. i. . ?} ;.p"?+? p f '. .u i ! '? 41W
'?r? p '?j^•x ? ;?.? .. ?? 31ry¢:: 9 I -. .?pi *{ {.?', a+ p]r. `. ?,? ? 1,`r}'1`.*?f;:'°?,' ?, .? s y
a 1 aq tY ?',y x r_ p t f"r R 1
, a to ' rµ r r ? ¦ ? r ,.h"„' ? .; a S ? • _ tix ,,. ? R
a 4t n 7h !'w i!y 1 "fp M +M - t s7 r rd? '?
1$ s
r#.• ,rl-r 3p."r `?f`,' a ;. r tp•. Ir ,+rf r f $r.
ell
r
FI?? id . aj+ y •'r C rt .,f r, 1 C. 9,
,?rr rr ?4l x x P' ..t t !: s S,3 rrtr ?`
}•1 k r?Y C a x ?'°?iK 1 q- "`'iA
•y y } y.. zr r r r x.,I: r 1 i. ??r` r f<.,'N ?,.
c w?i f'." +, ? S .. 3 ,;A. Lt • < r r . E .r.p r, .'` ? ?•"j = - 'rp ?1r-1
F °
t t=t s i 1 r S ] r ^• ! r ° a r i 1
r Y 4 f a.o wA;? +T' ^Y f •' ? n t
yC E / Y ? r f C1M . tr ?}
l # . s { r '?' : . `y : ti. ? ?' ?•.' r `^'` ?*neww -. n '"sue d t ?`'?.•s t+ . ` r - t ? ?` ?' z ' ' ? R
t r"1; C„' r; 1t ? ..,! c y f-, f „? .df. .- •;j'r+ t ;.,y..w ? r r ' ?r x ? .r
- + i ?' l ,p rY rtw?rrarlr/or,r"::' 7,t1'°' t t,y 1. k :T p r { r? s r n f r t r.
r';F r f r ?+ 1 ?Y" °. r +w .-` f 1 ,tk r..` ` 5 rtr "? y? r yplfi
r l
' r a ' rx c ?! 5xf 919
s?.: siKnt 4 a •'?`'? r? tg F'.. .-*t1 .t?rr? .'Hl" ? ?'i +y?_t?*f'.. I'i.

DRAFT
SOURCE:
NC ONE MAP, NORTH CAROLINA, LOCAL ORTHOPHOTOGRAPHY,
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NC, 2007 COLOR AERIALS,
NC STATEPLANE, NAD 1983, FEET, WWW.NCONEMAP.COM
1,000 0 1,000
500 0 500 Meters

!
p 1'
P (t -1f
Proposed Monitoring Locations for
Porter Creek
PCS PHOSPHATE MINE CONTINUATION
Scale: As shown Drawn b : BFG TLJ
Date: 1 1 /23/09 File: PORTER2CREEK.DWGMPLING/AUTOCAD/
Revision:
Approved by: JPS s-,s-os Figure 16
l
._.j
5
}Vv I
A. . i. Y
r
? P
M1 1 i *1` ar Y ^ t ,fR i y. ;' •'. [ `? r: t i w . q ?,-' , -•} _]. J.. te %R7 ?4 ?••4 .e.t .?0,
1`a?L k . ,Y`? :e[ ?- 1 t fie' ?,? a A e}!? a a E? e _ .'?
n: .. {1{?e ar I'd x }: '?* .?r' i*?" r`?t r?y?. ? •:?? :?.,? 1 •t.,y: r ? '?.,.
? ?F1 ,... ti+,t?.y. r? Y?% ,,,?s. 7?i,'? rr"-•P''?-`•+' ???,.,.?+v i ^ ? ^? t ;r ?;., ?'p ? ' e`?;?, -? ?:r'.
?4t..: 1 Y d? .+ ? 3 f ?' .+..4r }?. . 5?. ?r At C•-.. ?,. tit 4 ., ?,. ? ,M1 -.5 y} .. T ? - lti'
.r ?d ??L c?;, { .. .?y? •f •y. ~;.?"7'i yj '?....
v'• e a k i ; ' t t'? ?:#• 471
`} ^T' s ,. ,; - rr. Y - +.. l`' A 1 iyyya Vr s? _I'!?"k r.: - wt++ 'A
A 0 n
?I N
or 3
(9 N
n
V IV 0
V O
0
(fl N
n
0
3
v

'. ... r-Y
j?-
DURHAM CREEK
-
D . f `y .
€ ,? r!, ?z.tv w itil atL r s ?. r.
s . ,
X ?,a y Vol
r•:
rrs
4k' •.R ° }'z F«"r ! i ' , wj rt`'is# rf F
_ i
4JF
r 1i ,M1, ` f t i r ,
1 'W
n' ?' ?!`,+, ?" 1 ;?.. ? . Mkt . r ??` ? ? _, _. '°w"g`? rt ?•AF ?'?; i?V
#
'. r x isi " x3 fy r y"`' t , .' s k. ' :?F. k f.?•..'S... tF-Y a 14-x;`+', d. .,. 1.
#
{ r? r ?t e r ?r
box.,
#^ 1 +; yam- 4 ?? ,1 ti ar r
I Al
y t F '??5yg? ?'., y*`'??. ?• .?',? Sr?K 'l ? ?('?L?l4 l'1i, C=... .K 5?? 1 •y Y.'?•' .t? 4??F-? !'?
i ! ` ^1J+'S T' .k '? Y'AV?` r'4 _ ?`'t 4',111 j ?k a r 1 r'• '?' \. `.ct lM1',
_ ?' ;; 4 ,? ,?? ?? .,?+, s [?? `? ? ` f k'. ?" ? ?'?` ?, _ ,? ' ?• ? ,'? ? ?? ?,? X14• ?
• "'r '. ' \ f f 3
44 S 31^'
.i r
w r S`
F
??c ? r? •? ? s~ r ? ,? . 'ri' ? *??x-? ? ? y? ?+4: `;
.. i , . L. t•hc. _•,? ."{ # F• '?+?' 1? ++ [`,4 , } r * '.;, '? ? .?;j, " i.:,?..?f r :" ; .r .t ?1tf L `jw'1• li
`i Yr•?+" ,t , ?JF- ?y•-i 'H, , "fix+ `7f , 'h?` } [ i ` -- r }S r -r + • .1"rv'Y,ri°' ??.'ti;,L 5',
? ? ?? 4r " 14? ?? . '? ?s{ r : ; ? r, ;?, ?' ?"!? fSry,. ,'.,? ,'?t+ 1p r ?'? k -yle 5: «t?•'? i HJ ' ? _? r.
r _.
F l,Pt s 1 $" a`i}Rf •.y.y:, - ?i?k , 1.ii... n.e
. ? f r r ,r aR k _Ak 4 : ^y ij#. 1 ? ? ,y t 1 Tr Y ?ye . " ..•r L?4 ? .Fy+RAr ?'+5 ,Y '
kk?
rnS.•.; .,,#- f , ??r-' , '6!_•i r ° ' *r s.i 1 ' S%,' "'4 ''? 3r? .,?,=?T } } "" 'r' °•,s 4s,Vk.4 .l, t.,r+ir y
r
%
r ?' S G y ' t /? .?„^y` r Y ; • # w ' `'? a• •t +` yM1` ; Y. fYl. .10 `" a -`' ,?i ' ,-?• 'a 1k° #- My,... 1l s• -- ry:d,l..
r !'. ri 'r
.•.f? y d'. l ,I" 'i/ • ._? h..s - } ?*i M1N Yt._ YyF, ' , _ i y `•*r? L h. ti. Na,
i -? r 1 . ` P r + " " ? r ,fx } F ?r d as. ^ ? ?r°t %, ?s?„ ? ' " ? K'' ° ? iut ! : ?, ' ? ? ? ?4
tf^? r z n n. x ?'y 4 e? _ d.y??. " y? e 1r? t o i"r? ` C
r.t *i*R? M 4
4jk
j&u
.F't,, ?S?'nF'T Y. '4- 1?¢ ?? '?, k .C ?y.. !."[•%'is ..,'-y[i !,?y..r.`a ?' t.r.. •?,.,, .1.t1 YS.
S { s. fiJ,' ?!? r Jy G"` a ?,`
y?yi, .Sb * .* 7" .£ ?, s. 1 .y ?.? •r 5.. * ?y}f"?4°N
[ $ ??( ..r C4. {.M1 , i . .! _ ? y ~'y V Li ,: -•,?r' ?, 4.i... .?y ``?A 1`7 ?,g R sM.A.4 A
4
' # 'r; 8s?•'?'yk rRids`tl +ki #?';T GEC .>. ¢,°?F ,A?t'f?f ?RxT r, a}? ?.G'4•`'y?r.
a }, l+
,
4 r y?.,y;# .. t. '-R i „"r",;?': s 4.. at`/5. `T`•' 4 .' .?'.• ,. ,$ ?' 4r*; r'..' «? ,•#. ':a'n• • , 4:,r ;.y..r'.r t i *,,k .re : ?s?' +'? ?? •''?'vl
°
..i •,: '? "'j?;?, `Y ? 1 ? ? 4 r'4'p .t ; x , '?1Hyr' , ?% `! >; i" ? ?i'., - y YKa
+t ; - ? ?4' 1i?' e" y C e ,'>rV? R • fi :. r K4 `' • .* .
r4 t Y ?. ?• ? i. ?t ?•.
.5.9•' ,•;'? b" ii}-lts r +9.y -.>7 t.. $$
AT T, wr `. '- e w# a y?x ;., X ,.} app
. ? "?,?.• ?..?+ ??"'. S r? , ? ?-? •.?c c .M ?? x.Y,.. ?? -d ' n?`• T,y ;'•.-- "?'? `4r, d i M? - ??. t"k: ?:? ? ? r ?,,?-! •. ? -}?. it ? `A
,
3 ';:lr, .TF ,+€ y-',`1'. k` 7 ?1.:: *t. ?'ti ` G?.. 1•i_`.?? e.M ar y.. ^f. ° ?'' ?M' `' u4..•t'_• f . 6 „!j. x -?1. F'*' ?ri }„
r" ?'"" .p ,rr ?s '?1R i ,? A hr. ?y , t•'.r?, 4
e ;.?. 4. i i4 t ,i " I
1 1. xy?,,1.
.} ;? t ? ,[•.?}?,i ^ s? +?b"r ?s,?'! ti ???". ..•?: Vr'; ??F'. s "F-x . .t 1 '?. .q?? '?, ? ?? r?, .?±'..t S `? a• ,?. ,-?• •`•:?-}.!3"? ('?. s4", -j"`•
s ,, ]?. '" at:,,?t' t,; 7.. t. ;. "' ?",., r? 44 t ?..:r R. _ i#, r w i .:.°+?'k t '?+• ?• ,7r
1 ° 4 x } "A; r4-
s
u*
''?"?. ?..?? ? ???? .) a a'ri.?! r? ?' ? ? _ ? 4•L? .*••k
Q} .. x
"`€ tl
t ' a,y: ?#°;, ? '? q,L K;r! . j ? . ? .'?a?y1 ti ,:?'.f ,' t.:,? ? -.;,. ±??•?" ?•, •? 1 ` ?tX i? }?4? .. ?? . , -?' `? ? ??` :'SC?`?ryt? ? $ *'£ i ? Y >?
.. 4 i 47"? y .ti A3..`' Sy' r N rey 1; '4 ??? •f ,k
{
•r ,
?xl 'M1`? q _i##, 4! P ?."` i 4 , e? x,.3:lal' -', ?,.• n +h1Y '..
?.+'P• 'i'k 1« a? _ ?',,??r'fa d 1 - f w,?i. X71
,} ?- } z1.. al r (mot r
f Y°s' ?• a Rt e 4 e t
rah _r' - , . , 4' -.?{...} #• N,-+ k•1 J \. t ,:y. - " 1 .4 ?-t .?,; ,L'y a
' S yr-
,.c
4.?' ?., ? ?n. •,?.: ? `?°'"??:. :{_ary ? 'ti. ? 1?'1 x +?+? «'?? . ? 5 t .1G ir• i.' `? ? ' ? ?7 ? «,"? Z' • M'P..la _ ?' %..r.? • •?1:. .?, %4 :r i
-..?' i? .? ,.. 'k " # ?f•_ ?'.. ... , 1., <sy. •?,. `? . ,A3.. _ .._ ., . ?"?w .i • 14 ",,..-. :a :c„ s v ,. '"° ..
DRAFT
Proposed Monitoring Locations for
Tributary to Durham Creek(DCUT 1 1 )
400 0 400 PCS PHOSPHATE MINE CONTINUATION
SOURCE: Scale: As shown Drawn b : BFG TLJ
NC ONE MAP, NORTH CAROLINA, LOCAL ORTHOPHOTOGRAPHY, 500 0 500 Meters File: 17456224/2009_SAMPLING/AUTOCAD/
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NC, 2007 COLOR AERIALS, Date: 1 1 /23/09 DCUT_11.DWG
NC STATEPLANE, NAD 1983, FEET, WWW.NCONEMAP.COM Revision:
Approved by: JPS 5-13-os Figure 17
y
',bJ 4`. r r s} ?....., /'yam,
w f r
.fi y'
?r...'A'.,` C r, .. d. K.
F to ' _*0011..II ' F v `"
! 'I
+
Y ,V .
t
.y,
/ I , . - , , I h ij ?, , , - ;,. ?` r r
?.
L,I
;rf f 1;." - .i ,' '? ! '?' ?- fir' r /° T a!-r• f7
'~ 3 '? 'r'w ?` f r
r",
/ Y ..G € 7' fi r :rte ,
r
i t r
YF_ `d' f ' `t ,f S
f fS, .sr.,,,, ry.,r,,Mw,., h. F ( F+. . f .L ?. ?I -' ` v • r .`g `r:.
?
r ? ?I +
ti a 1
e r
rf f , . , , 1 A p AN ? ' s ? . h{y
f '"' fi - rr ''^ -?l
I
t a k r>.r rF1 ti '';4 :, x+i ? - .. - i 4gin:. ..
( ? , t F ,R Fier` ._?L _ L ! ?2 ?''
174 , E r r s N , sA , ,x , •.y, ti. AV , ,,, ? , I ?? ??
3
,
,?,;el"" I I . I - ? . . I ; ? - . ", - I . '41 _ , , L-.
' r. n
. +- f -,. - -'1
f
F -
y
.. .
'. ..
- -
.?'. '
11
c rv.
r
'r. r,, E °
7s, 7., { t i a
( "y' - ,
r r ?''.fi .r r r- Y
c / t
? + r s ,%
r ???? ?v mJ •'
r. n. :ea .
` - ,
- ,1
?. _ 101' t'
X 1
;A
. ..
? ?. I - ?- . , ,y, ? " ,,,,,,.z-;,. ?,- ?, :11 44"-.;,. .,
w. -
} r ,1.??
J' 'i? .. F: 'L0. 4 - ._ . .
f. y ti yY w. lft?
.11 . -,, , ? , All .,I-- . . ?Ij. ? -7.f?A- - , - . , , , , . ? I!tt? I . , ? . ., - ?
` -! 't ,, ! •t t - f'IS? a i x 1? f d ?) "+ 1G R+ t ,! '
} F w a 4°1 o f ,
. . LFf•; eti 9., k^ ; ? ? ° , a f 'r ' .+ .{^? ° w s `a `? F e r?r . . K ?d
4 1 r 4Y4k S ti' '' ". w Jr* ?,v..,,,.r '"-'v, r F ,* *G
.A4r,yTf • i Y t. ?} f ..t .FK.? 'n b ` T., ,,fib! 11
,41 f r r ` ;. ?*
s f i 'X 3'F :' ?5 y' t y x: ° ; 4 #' r +'r: it f 0 ? ??'? '?
C ] i J¢Y
C rr . ''ti p, :t Y,1,{? 4 .rr .f p r;.- ° !.L'} .~ fi
f 3` ! P i i' i+r
V.L ? 1. f Y - .i = h r '`.lr ?f y r .i' ,
Ty.,fi f u
I .. ? q ?, .. ?;,??,g .!. .,: . . . - /.'?, - ?.,'. ?,, ,,? ? 1. ? ?, ,I L - - .'. . , , _ , ? , . ??_ . , I , . ? - _; - . .. . .) .
?_' ~ P? ?• : + ? 1, •:, '`,.. A? r •• ,
rrd ,1 > ?
.z 4" ?,? ik
f x_ r
A p -0
(D n
00( (D
o tT 3 -0
3
IV (D 0
(fl IV
V
o 3
?
°(D
(D (D
n
O
3
v
7
1<
7
P
J b R / L . , '
IF, ." , , . "? ; , W. . , , ). .' f r L W ^" l /. TF rt r 2R F 1 '? .. r r
M1 <'* ` yI .' + f k. k J."? ,y am ,i. ,,,rq '?-?•7
:1-ft.
t } !. a Rr f ,,J" ifi +!`d 4 , r- ,Rk" I, Y.F a ?'.>?. .
ed,:. r '' r.... • _.,`.rU}r1 t2- ,?`k, ! „ ralx.: "M1,?t.. ,+??, .. t'
I " '.

DRAFT
(:k

I
r.- -
Durham Creek Proposed
Control Creek Monitoring Locations
PCS PHOSPHATE MINE CONTINUATION
1,600 0 1,600
SOURCE:
NC ONE MAP, NORTH CAROLINA, LOCAL ORTHOPHOTOGRAPHY, 500
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NC, 2007 COLOR AERIALS, I
NC STATEPLANE, NAD 1953, FEET, WWW.NCONEMAP.COM
Scale: As shown
0 500 Meters
? Date: 1 2/03/09
Approved by: Revision:
JPS 5-13-09
Drawn by: BFG/TLJ
File: 17456224/2009_SAMPLING/AUTOCAD/
JACKS_CRK_MON.DWG
Figure 18
r'.
y R D i -'"
' ,eF? ? .
1'. `. 4.y.Y'
?? k i
t ii,.
P '
^ y
i. ?'?. -

BSS3
BSWQ1
( .,T" 17
r to `? k,A •..
y `-
i ?.
r
?JW dWAg'
I

-1
51? ., rXy? 5?, i4!1?? ,^,? N? ? ? 'V.+I, f y ? ••µX ,Y r It
5 ? .. '• - -
-vu I i-1
77
Y Ft'f ?R ? _ ryr
14,
f ri
dry.,
41
?} jrµ#r r ?? ?.?
,_t?. 1I a5 r??
?r f.f'nv rr *rR "?
DRAFT
SOURCE:
NC ONE MAP, NORTH CAROLINA, LOCAL ORTHOPHOTOGRAPHY,
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NC, 2007 COLOR AERIALS,
NC STATEPLANE, NAO 1983, FEET, WWW.NCONEMAP.COM
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions

t,
.Y _ _ ?f?Y.y ? yal? r rte,,. ,d `}x4
2t I f??+ }, ? .f
n
Ssi' S?.. -
1??,,+.z+? ?,,,,''"rn • ??fl i.{ r ,. D' 1,.?'r':er • .. r .?4.?W':.i?TA`"?.
Proposed Monitoring Locations in
Broomfield Swamp
500 0 500 PCS PHOSPHATE MINE CONTINUATION
Scale: As shown Drawn b : BFG TLJ
500 0 500 Meters File: 1745e224/200e_SAMPLING/AUTOCAD/
Date: 12/03/09 BROOMFIELD_SWAMP.DWG
Approved by Revision:
JPS 5-13-09 Figure 19
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
«19 of 29»
a.a
L1?' :F•+1?' ?y. ?y^ ,. ?i..,? AF' =??y,w.. ??_. .,r: A. _ .+.. - ? ? .ijt?Yf,y? .?`. .?. rF;;,, gy+y xtv}.I?(fa.?;
jY a?y}'yy •4a 'e,'\'n Fti'F. ?d' ,'r ~•v y ;t:,?yt!r 4 ?,1{"?? t?? i,...
?1 vS„ , t" 1;4JF'a I:^!"•yy, r•, ?,? i?`^ d w .Yt; ,v5• i` y' l,?ti?t 'y}a ti"? +','`?,' ,7_:? j rlr ?}4 ?.1
?7'7A 1 y <'4 ", 1. Jr t r,' ?.4? f f, r k r b !.
'I ?•J .?kl?..' ?. ?. ?•'' '. ?.`'• ?'? P + r '1L ?"? , r/. '.?5. ?.jY'k. ,.f I M
$ , J';
a, E1 ,i 7 -,n`: e.iv > a 1 ?, r t f' l+ k, e Y T r
r
sir' F ?} 'ter . t a6
rr +aw v '? ?• i ?, t, i : a : I P ; ` 6 ?! I r rt? .
P ? Y ?c ?:"M?S +F?.1,1. dh. ww i?t a
?? +F -1 .?fTf ?d- ?? ? ,,? ?? s A , ?' Y L - .'lt v ?? ?'? ?; r t ?,t •
t ?r
L s" 1MP + k . Ijf1 is, Mp
kh,
E T M,T W` it ?. ' uS ;F Y.i}.4 ?.1r' 16•.':. '.'
??? ,' ;?,?? ? r ir?"??Ei• n ? k+ A;, ?fa 1??? r?L' ?i? ? ? ?r?3a„? ? •:?? '`.? r >r?'x ?w??ll''
'L ? ? :'U+•? ,??Y???a ??7ruY s r r+ly ? L '1, ???, 5 r. 1 ` yy. i
I I'7 d L ,° 1 -: "M 4 .? Y. 3 I 36 t tG % v: +yl'1
voig
'A. W
''1 =)? ?V d.??V? r ? p,. - ?- ,i •'.... '• }.?? ;r f n :+. r a ,? : ?f?'n' r r: f ?" i ?? y1; ,? ?b ,,. ?,?;.. krS'_
r
?, n} i i V " • ?'pt" z 1? rR .??j fi FYI' liydr?'??. ?i ?.???r t?`;?` ? ? ?? jsz,?jr r'y
If? s ??,P' w •.1 J!?,>?H ,.; -?" r.$ ?*; +? ? ? ,? it. ?'v ?' ?7 ' v
10: j
tY ' f
1 ."r
..??-?' ? `? ? ? •s r i - +v ?,'u Y? + ? +? . { r s? r' ?Ir? ? ? ? ? ?.v*?i'd? ? r t.??+ r ? .r .: $ ,,,, I ? its ?,-.
r ?r V .._ t '?• ?- ?' h _ S 3y? Y?S, ,k '
j ?? 4 }N '"14t i r,a A.
t a ?qk ? . y?
I r % ti '? ti AR I t r,?. r • n.. 4? y ,. ti S
I r ? ? rr ?,??. '?y '7 ? w; "^? i ? ? .,fr' ,a ?r ..?,r. ? .?.,r? ?+ , i ,y?' ? . ? rt? ` ?+?! ?... r.•,f
.: _.. '
? ,? ! ~'wx;r ?,?r. '..; a .: ,ti ,..?,._. r •. "?5?? ^
DRAFT Proposed Monitoring Locations for
Cypress Run
400 0 400 PCS PHOSPHATE MINE CONTINUATION
SOURCE: Scale: As shown Drawn b : BFG TLJ
NC ONE MAP, NORTH CAROLINA, LOCAL ORTHOPHOTOGRAPHY, 500 0 500 Meters File: 1746224/20a9_sANPLNC/AOTOCAD/
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NC, 2007 COLOR AERIALS, Date: 12/03/09 crPeess_euN,mvc
Revision:
NC STATEPLANE, NAD 1983, FEET, WWW.NCONEMAP.COM Approved by: JPS 5-13-09 Figure 20
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
«20 of 29»

A 0 -0
MONITOR •
A (D SALINITY 0 ?
(D
t 3
IQ N 0
V N_0
0
° ° DRAFT
0 South Creek Monitoring Location
3
v
300 0 300 PCS PHOSPHATE MINE CONTINUATION
P SOURCE: Scale: As shown Drawn b : BFG TLJ
500 0 500 Meters File: 17456224/2009_SAMPLING/AUTOCAD/
NC ONE MAP, NORTH CAROLINA, LOCAL ORTHOPHOTOGRAPHY, Date: 12/07/09 SOUTH_CREEK.DWG
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NC, 2007 COLOR AERIALS,
NC STATEPLANE, NAD 1983, FEET, WWW.NCONEMAP.COM Approved by Revision:
: JPS s-,s-os Fiqure 21
Q
f 4'
%
rt 1 1 •. ?+; art Y
0 At
4,71
1A Al-
SM Syr J ?, AC ft ? x
n _TJ
A ..
pip
'.1 a,F .'?>'i 4'.j,a T £ ]' S•1r.?IT -I• y•''? ', r 1 .
4.0
A?'
XOP,AO
_?^
T A"
if.
k f'?. r r
4,4: .4 fl
ya`- ' -? ! ,#?.4 y. -I?' +'?+l ?r, ,?• " ?W:: ?, k• ,? - +t"r{?,r. rM1 r?.. ?} ?r 75 ,?1r "? +(F'
?yt pi'$?,14' i. ? 1'-+,•y??:/ j?}X,?, ?r/!N ',?'.?. ? RR , r'` rr ?' Ly,?
J ?' 'r,f?s,? ??gFi ??'+.is"??.r `F "?'?1?t.. ? _ .i, 4r?d r. ri'?'? k , ? i,{ ?Y` -
s
r{ P' Y s
S vi M65 f?[.L?f?'" .y.. +IY'- ?+,_` {T..r jfyR,-13d •?..
4 , 4
.." rS ..« k t- _ ry"A i "k `LYv., i>• ,s . M. 4''st q
411
r }
.?.
"? ? ? . I? >K T'r. _ • . `t."- ? .Y „1,? r 1' ?t' ..' !"f,'n 'w? y`a°i: ?r I? 1.. 6_ - ? -- `e`.?,,,? +.
c", ra r ?.?: j, ?? 'F *: "frr Jr? ttn } i ?z t. Fay >>c, '
r•wa ?'`
IV n C7 ''?r'?+e ?':. ,A...'. .rt _+K..., i ,:?, •'•>. •c .i•. wrr;{' „` %"Fs-`,r, i,p?.e'"'
N m o yr' _ ._ - _ '..1t ..are . °-1 .r?`,?[. • x,r''.;r-?.,. A .?. ,; r1r' .SY. tf.4. P*,?.:,C '-
co Z
V _0
0
° ° DRAFT
Pamlico River Monitoring Location
3
Z3
200 0 200 PCS PHOSPHATE MINE CONTINUATION
P SOURCE: Scale: As shown Drawn b : BFG TLJ
NC ONE MAP, NORTH CAROLINA, LOCAL ORTHOPHOTOGRAPHY, 500 0 500 Meters File: 17456224/2009_SAMPLING/AUTOCAD/
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NC, 2007 COLOR AERIALS, Date: 2/03/09 PAMLICO_RIVER.DWG
NC STATEPLANE, NAD 1983, FEET, WWW.NCONEMAP.COM Revision:
Approved ijy: JPS 5-13-09 Fiaure 22
A p -0
m
n
W ((D
tT 3
IQ N 0
V N_0
V O
Ort
(O (D
n
0
3
v
Original and Proposed
Muddy Creek Monitoring Locations
800 0 800 PCS PHOSPHATE MINE CONTINUATION
SOURCE: Scale: As shown Drawn b : BFG TLJ
NC ONE MAP, NORTH CAROLINA, LOCAL ORTHOPHOTOGRAPHY, 500 0 500 Meters File: 17456224/2009_SAMPLING/AUTOCAD/
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NC, 2007 COLOR AERIALS, Date: 12/03/09 MUDDY_CREEK.DWG
NC STATEPLANE, NAD 1953, FEET, WWW.NCONEMAP.COM Revision:
Approved ijy: JPS 5-13-09 Figure 23
low,
r r' ra. r,
L +'F fir, r t,
o w
rr;.# 6 t _,? r •J .• , _,4°?t, My..,.ro" ?? r. 5
.
s.t. f y+ tom,. . `
r _
(D j,
'ti y r } 1"
' • 1 ,yam
?, `soh
o ., . ro a' 1 t' r i.. 1
f? .. Y t*.5
A C)
A m
A N
o 3
V 0
0
m •",`" `? • s , `r s
w
to s + '
.7
.n. •' /a1j? f, °? a?.F? C i yr" y r N r C., r i
- ! A* aF+1?'??*'- r ?fhltl 8 • ?.? - 'rY ? ?
?: - - ?` ._ ? ??•: '?L. t •,,y?. ,y ?,- ?, xf"'Y?r.- .,1.
i A,
U)
?
. ? 1
,I
Ni?
-, *-T
, r
or
2
ga, ,
° , `' ? r •, rr" ? ? ? s'` '':y. i ?' ? ? is .. ? "
?"r R51. #fC'. -(# '? ?)/?•y •t??? r { i ` ? ?4 1?.1 ar m? ?j ? ¢ ?!
T f din f: .r Y.-1 1 _ 4 'q?' ?9 r" •y? ? r'- y???i
+ . - , ?( 11
?t
.c t #t
• i,
r "
f
A a ? q °
l:'1*"?ti k El f
"r IP
w* qa
N
o
PA2 Proposed Control Creek
3 DRAFT Monitoring Locations
a
PCS PHOSPHATE MINE CONTINUATION
200 0 200
9 SOURCE: Scale: As shown Drawn b : BFG TLJ
NC ONE MAP, NORTH CAROLINA, LOCAL ORTHOPHOTOGRAPHY, File: 17456224/20O9_SAMPLING/AUTOCAD/
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NC, 2007 COLOR AERIALS, 500 0 500 Meters Date: 12/03/09 PA2_CREEK.DWG
NC STATEPLANE, NAD 1983, FEET, WWW.NCONEMAP.COM Revision:
Approved ijy: JPS 5-13-09 Figure 24
A0
n
Cyl ((D c'
or 3
(9 N 0
V IV n
V O z
ort
(fl N
n
0
3
v
DRAFT
UT to Ross Creek Proposed
Control Creek Monitoring Locations
350 0 350 PCS PHOSPHATE MINE CONTINUATION
SOURCE:
Scale: As shown Drawn b : BFG TLJ
NC ONE MAP, NORTH CAROLINA, LOCAL ORTHOPHOTOGRAPHY, 500 0 500 Meters File: 17456224/2009_SAMPLING/AUTOCAD/
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NC, 2007 COLOR AERIALS, 23: 12/03/09 ROSS_CREEK.DWG
NC STATEPLANE, NAD 1983, FEET, WWW.NCONEMAP.COM
Approved b Revision:
App y: JPS s-,s-os Figure 25
, ! , , +,. . 'k. ,Y .t4;' fij ?. 1" ]:. ,?.{. ([ It .::i (. 'Ytjsji.:
,?. 5 Ya .}. ,•,. i' . ,.. :? r . ., ?
r n'C e ;,.• rN r ?" '`' lw.v r rt{ a '
-l r:c .. - ,, .+., r, 5. . `•w - .. ..+, ,.,.... r . 10!j"., l,". ,.:,. '. :. '? # It - '+, . ,, •. 'r `tl. ,.... ;`an. , ` ",I.ie, +5' w l k er. '.i, I . 1 Yh.... r '•,r.. <l,,
. ?.., «, :+. ..x,. , .....::, I . ,,. . ,k AR x:,, ,. . 't` '. , 4,77`1 r' -y ?'Fi, ?" -?? Q. i y r;,., . l v i. ^i j'
5 .
at .vf:s, ?! a 7 _Vc 44-- „ ,.7d}. _ .,¢{ti, a.,r 1 t - r'r r'. r??
' ! r - ..;!. t p,'.a:. aC PN 1'•., 9 t .p 7 j, S x4,51., 1z
,..,...:. ... , ., ,., r, ,, , . i..... <. ?'(. ? f.+:. .. ! . 3 'r. t • n+! , ..r r @'^ 'if' . 4 . ,? .x
.. v '._ "N... ,.f +, 1 r „ ?. ," ,., F r4" Yy?,? r ,i, ••f+°?Wi,, ., t.. 1. pY42, + a ,# '. j.. ::a"' V,. .r?
?' r. P^-. h+lh , f. „l,(. AY ,:,C. a ,d,
r..... .' •: _. •:. '•:.,n. r
5 j ..,,., • -,. "', :a= 'l'r+,.. h, -4-
t C K, r ? +1 : ;N, !., °d if h 1- ,7 F .+ 2 y.
„d r . ; i,4, tirr " .. h' r r t,b ',: * F fist-< : day. t er
! .. r',. ?_„ "a :w ...: - '..x rt "!x ?:' t ,.i" t i" ,j{E4",'' ,wF ',;in« ! "?.. s ,f2.a
+, _....,,i. v. ,. tc„ r. rrt •'?'.:'t. '#r!r r,4;'.• S." a {i. .,wr t:. "3'''1 -r,x 'r<e.Ar. y.?:,.•,? 7?r. .!',&11' ?,+.
r ,' „ , , - 1 . s f e +, .,r?, a' ,+, " .r 3m .. .fie sri_ + ...
k4,r «f i
;i a}., 'l : i" 4 T .,a J S4°'? h° ^,' 'p h. ,^1 i r , .'?' 7r J. `,?..1 1' "?`r j(.;•?{ ..i I ''?'::'2j t.. •t.' ,F
t'v.w t r h rr 4:' art M. I. A}y. _2? 7_+ , 1,:' %1! F.;)k 'iY' r •2r'
y C "' r . 9 k ?.. t . y - t'. r rruY * a^ C $ , k :17 ].e P (° J.4r .e J A'F' r,'
d ,r" 1'• •r.pl.,l A
2•h t ?'' r.4,. ''"? . •a - Mf . n li # i. 1 'I Y. m.?G.,?ty^F,. ,++i'M,`Tr. `p,. .,14 ,. it _<
i1 4t "r h1 r;s.. r.s. '..h.. x , r'. 'F': ,,v,•t? n - ar.i. rF`2.R r ' f K... t •d6 - aN
V,, t. ?. 7 .f'"t' f 92 ?. ,?. 1r r .s ?. r.. .. ;'r•. :ti. . Fm1 -. rtF7>., :r.
',
.'4 ^,. r.. L 5y V`•. .''.} .A. kt'r J:' rrEin ,-? ,y1, .;± r_' , - '4 y7. `r:ht .r. rr„ .?' ...a ij[:.
,? i". •+e t .. .At h 4. ' , ,tt yyuu y,r i • i' s .r`sf {' . T N., .? f. x,!!> , ! 'r+rn „a 1 #i,., i . i :. t' .' F':." r,? ia}dr
` S s Y..-, V Y l .C' , P'i .4, :,.t , 4,.t: c:•?t",,. Jr ' 1
, Yr.
=? . :?.'' 3: 'A .?, ?':' •.r,Y ^'i`i+ i,1n'':•". , . :rfh'?i't .. J:. ? ', ,:nil ;. :,1.: r ..,,.r.,,Y;.a 1.7; _? 11 ,:? - i , c.h,? {t t , a .,,n" tr ;?kv °7- .,. r.. r "f:+<` M ( . - , ?.
?'i° .I? k, ,k n f -1 .!;SrG'' J 1ri, a.p„ f {x:: . " a ,4. ., y. z_' {.
{ 04,.
s J% d e,; ti $ tt ( n. r "
..,, t?3? ;iu. •i_ 'r,. r _.?ryr f,3 ?1 # tr w;. : r#.. .Yr j `7'•' ! ?.:k?.; t, 1?, Fi,,t„?`rraiiitiM' +r :'r+r:' 'F, l:', t.:y rr „,?
11 ?. s' W i, k& 4, .,,r1 . Y.S .w jryi vn%?i1..+{q ?.rhrh" i ax,:rJ. tit r 9.: }, .rr4 ,"?"` l .9.:..:. y.... ti
s'f -; :.:ib :" •Y`r ati: ,tr'x 4 . ,.t ``` . J„ a, ? r,y.;{ slf ar• , } .,yd.d } r x 3 c
k
s
d v- ^r ,, T
'-- , ..y, : y r .: - ' ,^ '1'. ,d 1 r,r. ., , r??r' t Y -'I r, „ ,.ri :..'.. "
? t t *,.x k. 1. f Fir" .w, i ,7" I J r`r
M ':Y+,r ??.- -.?•...'"s; r., e," 'j,JV';Ti k"ah. a' + 2r.;,r'... +r,„ •';r.: ia„ x; 7;rM? _.r, 7+ Y !i. 7 f.. ...i r
. 4 .+.;-
c a ,gnE„t .; -, ?„? ,.t'. ^•„?., '?•,.:::,w-'4 ,t'4,.: 'C1" }tP. 1 ,Ir7! r t.'t' .rv .,, .AFB., a r
7- a'4 N. y . f t r ; f r: r 1. + A'f 1 . 4, !,
a. r. , ?- ? o ?, l,S'.. }2,.,.a. 1 ?w t ,iA 3"rti tr 'h ., 5v k K , t f 4:-:;'r 'i- '' '. a•fM '7I r F „f r ° 1
9
Y` W ?•'t y?• -ro-' s1 W- - . t : ,x Y' - ," r, +' N? r?, 4 f 4,: e , -', ? •i ?,y+r:•> r'w, f'1i 't{ „N? r p :,,,1 •r f 1 - ii :a l 'S " ¢+ ,-=4 1 ,
.. t 'v .. j•a \ \ waZ r 2 .,>A vlr:.. J. i ?;!? P n y. x" ( f Y 1 •.> 7r
k i
';^ .. ''• d• r f' FY... '?' ? 'fy :{,ti a a,, ti' .t ,r," y : er..I -i '11,tt et 1 .?,?' t. r ?' t?f?3,,>.i k n 0 F of f - ,its:f 1.^ r n .,1 I 1,1 r ,:,t ' ' f:s a,+, > ,;
;:: j C? " s s'-. y+ r ?::.t, s S, r , i S yy s Yr "', a{. v { L.,-- I r r . - %,?-41 a 3 a ..
r - `Fm, --•r ?r4,.A -:d+4? V",-1?.y si:,.?:A:e:ti ar .+.'?'. tr *k. rt +if",.•.t , ar?I ,i':br 1 % ?,r;+ti rY qn T. X'Y;r,r + ' 5; tr r , A ;.:,% ;:Ufa ? .: L•,` if.W
y.' - , e P n-t^ 1,
t - -?. l?M ".}rta yh? ,? ,,` ;.•it; 1r r 5 , .: .11, r k `v :? r 7xrr !, i{,'rrs 'r 25 1 ,1 i.j.4+• , re1.._ ir?5 s N, P sti. ,, a,.. ,?,, .y.;
-1 a .'
I 11 I ri ai ., i " 1, 1 YF i`>a? 'Y F,1
" \ ' ?'1 p;i:ry ,o.r r. '!4. :; t r #. F 7r+ "z >(? ,, 4 M,.,T ,r f? i.,7+? - + h• f I""N r ;Y: ti-f ,.
' f . r, v'T 11,/ +±., k,'. `.a :, H4•Ii" 4 9 lr FW +fl,,ri? o , r #!. ?_ +;, ry,. •js•?; t j i, #„ 9 " i i.+., 'e u# x
',5, }
.r' .. s,1 4 k" k'i "' a rb r r4 r a s "-1; 2i 1 ; ?, ? t " l M1t Fy .
? id .l"}We y; r .k ?r,yr+ F, 5... t,n i r 'J ?•r'•Y i "1?i4..?J'??:n" 'fi't r.u. a. r. r'a, y'•}'i
v ,5. ;a"a.'. ,t.: ,f,I.T•.? ` rk'1" ,r ', Nt. of ,ha., `? .T , P, I, , r l? ,,y ?r r P .r N +, "R 'x.14 } 1.2 l r. ,, fir ' •' F'j S , ,
,' s •r, r1•' aEf,J?{. ". •A,.'), ,,y.4 ; {.. f'°i• ri: Pli?tr'.. (}r•. 7' 'S-s•,., .L, M!!.'E:'..', d. 1t.,' M? 'k.
# "t ?' v y ti ,
r It r`! ::1 A - ' ? tt w,., arr r c',+': 4 y".?} r s?J y, r rP1? 1 f 'ri ?ir '4'i '+ri Ftf ....y'S?.l ?.+k?=I ;?I Fr 1 f.i. 1 1,r?' {{ ?t r1 't z
' A
! , i r. .-F '"/' ri •' .,•! t.:: " : S f .s, r Y r i'' F
.' r 1 •R' • A r ,.1l ;V. f r ,1 f r _ 1 't?j J.'. a 1,, r -;?- f .J?,o. , ,, -
'd! i V - 1 k. r2r , n'>; l
f.. 2,F r Ik t ',y?'?'. -c'.,t, k"1rw 1`, ':;'r,, rl `r,r'r. it v,.Fe: i?,,'S+ t:;J'r?+?` •a l
-',`". c r . }}
?.?.rter• '. " W !" si.., ?'Ay *'fi 1 J\? r y..{+f1..a`,ir' ?';..Kr p, #f:lx f h.. !. }J, .R,.."'M1M f * 'al
..?: 1' la , f \\\ \ te a ',,. 9. ,, !M I - t??• 'ti a'. ! yt . .? r r"?! ,.zl?'y 9 d + f t; r ?' i.., ,} ? ka E,,+,I!'-.11 .M ffi.:. r 4 1, , rs r ,r f i. F.
{y
' :r? •e7; $ 2' F!'i' r. ..M1'.`,r ..'' .._
,: _,1,._..-,:?.i? :5 a A, , N ... ,? .:r,A.,y1, ".i. J .', ,'`. ,,. ns,.r •6 .,.r, -1
y u' '_ 1 : Y't• x ' 74i T',+ { "", tl"a Y'r ?t ,`?'f. ?F, ' P .+fr. '.? .7 'L, 5??21
' r:; _; r 'ia N R f" r i t, fr.. t` i : x :. +y f r+i trr 1'
`t. z-^±::{'..5 - a In t _, s
`i ? , t; k, :j' t/:r., r. >r"'. •?ffrM1 r' r c r". ,r7
J ?,. _
a. > ''fir ,- -, _ c. r lv ?rffa{t. %J ? n 1 , tr..r x rxr v
+" ,e,_. $ ??d:+yA' - • S e yy ?, y,?.. .1 5 r:,' o r it f rr' 1rj 4 ,r?• 4
r>r• Rte, r t l ,^y, ., , r.. ,„'.9,1f?ikr" s- . fd, 2 + Ct t' S f J. .,o 1, I I -k,;.• t.. ?; ., .?w }'. 8: .. • `?, ',dt) +Et,rr',1r .ti .,f-: ,,,. 'r x . M1r..: r'S' ;?. J:r v.?. i": f., +: rr +!'. ';F"F [{'!. a,r•r., y., .: •1 J , '.:
d'• - £-,?. \ Yirvty .,gl,s" :.;t "'? S..• sue, ,ti.'.:,•.,t , " j'., r .r_ Jrr , 1.•;P' t ?2 r .1,.
.+.f-+}.r 'i.r. a. , .r. •,N ,: •... i4' :,a +s, .Y 7x'1 f r. ..{ •4'. ,. }^?. ' t ?! n . i.1 4: 4': Nl l3,{ , P;. ':hi :?,k r'.,..
/','. ., , r.' ,. ., : ,L'x, ,... .. ,?. ,4.,?I. ..f y • P: r+. :: h. .t. r. t .n;},+r„- •w le, «Iff'f,s ,? .ry 7.y 1t ,aS..,- 1 { _a2 i.t,.?' ?. t ,?i' -i,+
r ttr` tt ,!r Gf
9, r'• t*',?. s 1 ¢' ',ti y A fi . l fk ''' yf J h r" '.h r i'. r c f F s fP rr r 77'!, t
s. 4 f. R w: R< k. !d { x qT{ d, rr } r t• f r .,
'k'' i ?'"'w. r ;rr ,.,+.+•. t. .?Y..i t•'.^: k 2 .1.,, i ,2.' (• -, A f, y .?yF !.
f 1 y tr f, Er t
:,} ,? 7t` ,.' . _ - .r•, "ti .. 7. k y ,., . .",rr• r j f ,. 'f"`r..tr f ?? + i +•{ r5' 7 , f= 'w J, .
y
.,' ,!,, 1'l'; ...? _ 1'^ /",>L. ?, '4Y p' „A xr" x. h:r,.r .r?,. ., Sr. wi f
? Tr.i ;jrr -7. ,t' w.t
•' ,1. F
41. ,
a..: .1/w,t• - .rv .°Y sGi.s >•,r,...,i, ^ r. r;t i,.F....F, ..,,r . /:;,J. ks ¢` 7„r•.sC .{., ,.
!. 1r #,' '. ?' fi. ' . x x' ?`; i r* t, irk r . ,.- X °Y {.
„ R
r '.!-
4'.' '(y{ K,..r•,7 ''r. "yl..r 1 5 h^ .N• ."t, :k.. C .v,i, r G r? " 4•,, 1<
I -
` -1# +Y .`r t.,,.3. ,s.,) t , ..1 .I#?.+ {:. 1, .fr F.1;,? f
t. r n ",1
x: ist ' ' .#? 1, ?.,.? ? rry. +, +?wr ..-- f x e:a.r. Y' w; ..,/,7 r h,. .z: r y .
„
a, r,,{.''^;r2''f. „, f-r -t ,. f`ir? "k4. ?."e.'. ,,t<,! r s•r 'I'.'T lr"C,.R,??( •:s1 .t # kr,
d , "r . «,'.,..' 't S'''?•'''.;.. , '..i- #'t?yi ri"v :: 'ri' Rr "G .. ;'64, .", ,a 421 , . r ,.?,, F „1•-., r. :h , y. (. e {•+.
/.,C',:., F ,... r' .. , ;. .? v ', 2t 1, ??. t.!Jr'hN `,''i_. '' (,'?v ? '. , f .•-Y Y 4
.' '?f t4 E'.: :.r.
" !1S$p{l l: ;q "?i . ik'.-a P.:' 1r ..'lrfr<'GT ..,. 5 f'.", S x, ,t'2•r ,5,4 r S;';: • AA,ri? a, vc t'":.,..r il?:;,IF•J; 1.. x'!,•k'.
?r,:"1' ;.!. ?. 1. 'ra '•r 'r«;<r r. "'% e-, , , - '.,2,•,k rj i?'•` r ,)(;. FA •A?'. I., 1'.:u +r' .X' r
k r t - :. TT„A.i+S . u:v;dt .t :- ,. ti ." ? t' :i ?i? rw Jra o, ,?; { xi , .: a "'. dl ,it fkd ?.,
. y,.. i
? o-r' r,? `.;q." --,,. 3'1':. ?'rG, '7/,*;?. '?•r. i.'? - a..,,, {4 .,4 r • r 1571: # ,
:t M A K°?'' R. `. ,t. J_, , ,,i ,tii *., -,•..,
r
q. J:..' :#'r 1? . ., .,? _ , ':,. ?? r ". r.'rA A ? .,. ,?? i .? S:ti, '
' n +t:J?;. r1,. 1. -,nh,r r?,; .A' fit' r : - t,'f•r!. . ?, ``}s `'rr r r J?:.,
1'far J x r.
'S 1 e r rt t++ :.rf + k .
r .Y. h y„ _,,: :, ?.yr' ..,.. •r. ack 2'-.. .x.,, j''? -... ,>„r+.i y y..:.','`r.",1'$, ?,.• ,r ?: ,c».,. j ,..k
4, O Yeti _ rr l -r ,
.y.:' w'•"' : + 4r• l;. ! r `'M 'r yl. </ ') S'!- ?'' '. t ,? y :.s 9, { ;F, +' ?,, ?, ," a. „y?,"Yxr v. T t . Mr.Y ,? e : 7? t
`? ?, „
d J . ti -a? "' . # ,.. d,:' ;F „) ?. :ek1 F, h ?.,: 5 # Yid P < 4 r ; , ; P ' {y [ F ,
---a., `'. W l" y ,.7.. x,9 '„i -kt . y .a y r i4 '.t" .' { n _ ,t ? .' ,,. 1? r$ ' s r
a' s F r r b _ U ,, 8> xy 4. w ;t ai, r „y's r a.:.. 2 r
r?,..:Jr .y. x*'+f+-.` 2 .M 1,. i,. t ,i ,.Li.. + i. - ll •ir C
}
t'. 'e : , k. ,.t.. .'z„ ' ?" _ , r r 1 ^?'?J 9 s s¢;+h 'a,..,..J ,S, r-./,..}a,:. 1,,?5,,:.. r,.. jn7 4 . -. J. :f, iy d 27 ,.t: `. 1 t(l.. Wn? , `f,) 4 J•e. , J,- ... ?`,. r ''; .. 4. Si.ee"? " ., n. r a ..,L ..,t err.
? A' :Y A}•, Yy,. .{ ,'> : ,tV`. 8 is1 ':"?".'1' .1 ,..,., t,. 1. '?. bl A ,'','
7 4i. ,` 2 ?. w 2',t? i ,3r. ? ' Y7 ti,.. tr a ,'' t`'t^ rrr a,A
?., ,.. ' q }
,{ rte; f ,s , } ; ', f y.. •.,,. X•.'" S $...x:: r': •'Z1: " , d. w . +i a`.''. , , P Y. .-,
f pu , y .. 1 , rf U k. t u N ;d r f q xt , S > S' ? . N ., , rt
a tt x a
-w w• .r._ z"r A4v a1i {11 + f e km?? ?Ir v'?t? r s' r_.: t1,, $
a } "4 . 6
rr r.
r - 1=< a ''?'p3. I "' t .-.4 'Y "rr.: ", 2. «fr1 °J' ..'?, >'k3i?"?j;c J t, i•' ?. : "}'f{ ktr..- 'Vi'i'.'-fed
A ¢
rrr {-'se 'tC -rirt "t'- i ','=N 9. "Y r ,k" '. W. r:v .,T, t .M .''t',7 }
,' ':.s f r ,-
k.:<;.'::: r.., .? ', "_:`? --+?; rr ,r"';r;ri. , r' •: r,Dv, ""' a !` .' w ` :' •.r y .4. ti.? x Y' ?r,,.,r?d'.. " +? ^:7k .,,. M,.. r+f i M ?' fidt t .hc+r J 'y .Fem. .rr.{ „'{?,• *
,r.T'.,: .'"+1•'?,- ?r.r.+•. ' ?, r.... n' .? w? *rrr" r''T ._:;-. }rGR ,.e, J, r,.,.y sy.d "<< ?,;,.?,... r .. ,*, IN I h .
. r-. ':,. r . f' ; .', r . ',,• ,. •m ?yy_ a.: i" ',Y hi.. h,' ;h R r' y,. re•1, .>; r. r x „'h?'"'yrkt `'`Ih ?;{{,' '.7 .?...i
' .' ;:.', ,; , ' a 6 i- - ` G "+i rf .. G, A "S .1 y ^ I #; tiri ' ^ 1 . ° ?
S' ,. _ . ' fA',' r. C f : N
., ., , ,;','y ,+. ..?, r-' :s r' . .. ., f. ?,`'? " .r ji ,'A, r ;, +r :? fiy"lCr kr °-r.Y.? . ,)
A: ,?'AA. .IM
j-:. ,j. . , -;; ;,. „1.., @ ! 1l 5 rj,., r{^J'lt "r ° . ? Cr ,4 1 n tiv: • rki'A r *`: . , '? lr.r.,, Fit, .4 l.. . !? - r xr ' 'r? r': ,. , w .
n;
f;, 3.. i- - ir r ,+ 7,i';i t." ?...•. ; , ,;, . . ,?t< ^r : •.:;Sr` ?M , = 5h`.r ^f'?.
w i`
Y .
,,5„ f ,?,;x': ,,. '4 4.. ,r, ,r ? ", ;7s 5.:. '? :.ts,f . .'tY `? + ,x.+'? :,' 1?"^, s? ,r. .f. ';`_' t .j},,.. '7a". v:..
"'
?i 'i x.. t.,,, fA.: fir', t .;r„ ,r : i;- 1, i -"'"#r.lit.. P,P .,F #:: r
S i:?.s , :t. ? R1A.. ,rj.. -`1c t'• ,,y..: +.wr' ,w,i i:l : ,S ! + ..Yr. 1r
.
.2 ?1 + t , ' .a
t . r 1, `' « ia .,• 't' ", ; " S r It •,a f 1Y' Jr Rc ,» iy,.', "t?rs J , l t,
f 7 k w, -{. e ?: ,SJr t. •? .L .. .1. s , ? 4 ,
.: 1F. .. r." 17 7#. ,?. ,5 ,+i . ..` "'+t
I ,r ?r" x r`•' >u;,3.. ,. :o-rA •SY f?:-. c -". aa . y ., r2e.,. '7 {r•K.r, ,•r,... : t+ r:.
11
. ':f . r ; , o
4 '1°' .I - ..;1" '.:: :+rr 1. 7 '+ .T?. .r<1 1,.,V }} .>'.:
•ry 'r"'
: -ks.. •'.> ..,. .:...'. :..' ;:-t .;J.r; - t ?•'!?`- .. t?'.,. - yi.:; .j i "rs;rh' :'r., p
.,N, „ .,:.. ..7. .+.Y. a.';r. :, ., . -*s "?'.,,,,, p y.•g14 Fwk 'Y',r,Y; rr. '{rte ?('? 1 `Y;V',.^ ?,+'?, ?.. i. 1. ,+,:? + 1 lf; A,.'
:.,,: . { .-J.. r,.,. 1. ?.?. r r .. ,,y, t, '^.. ,, .},; . :`j°y"?,•x:' ,4r i..::LLr' ,, h•., .,5 r':ti' ?:>u[ ,4 K'.?,.1 •, 4k
_.•i. r: t .., •'i'. •. y, :Y °` Ct• jl.., ! '.. ..1 r>1 . ' J . 'f y? ,i r:7 Mn
.:. t. ?..: y t r t, Y • t+.`I 17,7 _ h', 'l 1 i
;.14 rv r3.. u - r'?s'w 4frr? ...'( ' •,^ r.. a, a4 .... 72".: ti t7 t,yk, v. w .?fra :' r-4 "S",-s-. ,+1, . P r.• . 4, .y F...
,. ,, .. SS
w.4:R. ,,S.A r.,.7•-.,1 e'' .,,. re s? a.,rF :;1sf,
' +..:': ,,,. f r x' •1"'''t' 'h, .r'.• :;:'` r nr.T :s" _\ ^?. :0 I
:• :-a^!n.r'.v .x, 4 :,.!„+. ar \ ., ? c,.` ;r y} F ,;d: .; ??"rt
,:..k ,?, ..a 1 ... : y !- :; .: . :S Y.. ,,,i s. / „a• "7, k •y r c .5w. if , II " 5.. i t. a:,?r, {''
., ", " .., .,.:,{. -2 - .,, .3 :e, hr r-4 e;: ny. ».#:; )f ,;,r ne } T,;{. ,7
1.7 ?ta
.?. .+ .r. _ ,C., .3'` `Inr M<,.,;t ,4 lw A, r:i?i,j "'-r4,•7r:ry{• °'.n. }, .r! „ri..
?`4 :,t. r. r r r
p:. r , h,. a;. .: `'> i *? _ <' _ ? ,Y
ra?k'k' ,e' s? `., ..-`±'v ?.`" ;L,:ti „ ;t'S`k.E. rF•,, , .r;t rr F'f ^:_*. .: r., w r.: ,;,f:,•;"
p
4' "? e?:.. ..F. _ . r ?y!E4 7? Y?, ? •: ?E''?'+ , "....@.r' + } .7,?.-.. a + 7.t-5"' a i iV' r 'ti
" , ?'t r? +I1 1 r.; P:," I ! t +3' `.'.. ,y ,1 y @. .i: [,: r :,' wJ? • , [+„ M .C 4 <"U A
F ^. +.k r... .h:, , r r { ,.Y ," .' w „` 4 'v a}TY. t :` y, 1 N 1 "?. ".'i... .'P?,h .,"Y ,? ... f / y''.
:'r' • J." r C , ? ,r , i?'•" : ''',s .c •..3:; ?_d :rk, p W: t .. ?;s:,?+ . J ..,?+,. ,. s 'Mfr ?'rr
f /yam '
4. rff ;r; de"•. :..r,. ... ..- ° a> >:4•:: , w. -.+. L.. r,,i-' ?Xv 7',t '•'7" 4•rr,:.,. ,F.+,.rv r 4.w
;-? ,! F :! Y.Yf. .:+, 4,. v"T nV , . dfl +, ,y. .,r •.kf._ fi,' '',, r'.:' rry:4ii,F ,'r'}
ti . k '{, rY. 9 +?,. `? >-7 „`' r, ti . 1.; a ?-t •?t'4 a,• ,•r ?1y«::s,. ,, r FL,j,, } ".: sl?. :.M -. J
s v" f t r,rr.. :,1 - 4q;'.. ,?.?, a...^Tts?,: t.. ^.1 r' T. Q, '.i;;1:;,.?^.'c .~ ,' y;T + rv'` r,y?' jJa:' :.n•;a•f"rw , .."`r "` '.?_
r, . .- ,.? o. }`2'h.rf" ?; `v r Y tv_,,; P w a„ .,,' sra ' ,-?{? .,.ha ?. *-. ryr
rr l :,, , ,e4. '1• . i1rh `+ :{ r .T !',. kv ?F 7 ? "1, t. .'" .y ^.+'- ?*`_.'.? •r i . ' !,.. r. a. •..C {y.,4! ';i.r.?•5X' ..A" `: .':fl' t fi`}K; hr.`:
'1R1, ,' L. t ;. cr ?rrv A:f .Ar dr?,y,h'. ,. ;
ilhyz , , "'^r . d i. .' s a p4 ` 4 ?g ?; a, • ,r " , , r ?
!?N : « - - ' ? ' ,ay+ k..
?r
J - .' S" r 'r + n .'? A "+'".,z •. yam,.,. 'k r.. .,s«r Via.} . . ?. ?'?r.., ,.; ,.' i k. ':,
.C 'xe
x 1 !?
a. v fi f + r 9 a'^4 h"y? ;"; Mnx";nt; i ?31t: Ery13j F? ,Yn!nr'
_,:? :r tix, ,g+:. r :'n.y + J4 r 7 y? <.r '•' ,r
7. ;' L+ - t} r I.( ,Ix'Y 4.
: to ^`" t k. t ?"r r•'nG`S Z, ?- 1k x jtls, 1.,. ?1t i' k
M r" yyyy e q t t y i k '^ ,,,, x .'?? ` Sit 4 s?,,j'r??fr" r
r 1 7^. ., x"r n y? { , .,' i'S+-} ^, '„? kk a L T ?l., h" , i "•r'"a ,,p i
.,: sfa m S" '.: 4 a 7 x F ti/4,9?w r % i r #", ?..fr' :'? +"" 's'ue?` r :. y R ^' •I hX - " ' s . ]
" + - 1 A r r x y -': k3h' y ' y?11 '¢+a' •4>?+r' >,*?. ?? tNt yk : `*; : r1 " ' • .. c i 1'' Y? i A 1 r; t `' ` -
'Ai 1? a?ih?Y X'I ''r ,. ` ,?dC rt 2 4 kk" rt.,'I '"' k`b, x '4`• >, , , ^ ` i +•r 4 t; ' k} `?, `• ?, yAS i 4,
:. ...l +p{`% .'*i ^ /"^ k r - iA' S ,, }
r : fi? a to fiJ +, Z Y`) ? a 4 r t +'4
w ? 1 '." f d y?r I' r ; + . ??y? a •
?d?r iM1 `.? 4 - l y ?{ `Y4 j f ?, Y
E E
?' X,i , . 'F 1 EYa {" ?.w`}' ?' a k ,..t f.".? ?3'* h i l',. .? }; 1" t7[1k 74'.14. r " `1-- y71 ,1t: , ? ° ` y, rrr1F'?,7>' -r#',- iY
n r?'"VIf'. a ?+I"`.1 1-1.1 .11 IT114 .a iv'?S 2h a `'^ -U. - rw k iy?"+ :r _ ra"ji,ifr 1 1w -L,, . tj ?+tor„',,A . `'i )
, l r i 3 t
y'' .. ?+ a ' a r * a ?' if`af- y • I it i? , +. `? i 717 °. wr }+, n+ r` .r y '
{w" , r. Vm n* j 4 ` , 4, r ? '•t l i f t s 2 "", i y ) 17'P.i ,
. tee ' ., ;` ""',d'i'v'a'; 5t.`f}'r?! a i:ti+i. rtxk. ii-!I,?2 ryry +A,r r+V{F ?r?" '
?y? C' r t1 ` r t V Zip .,w y+,2+i tt": e2 N
:.. ? RP. ",j r {r:i5y /sNV r %- r , .r yL-' I Y .i . ? rl J 1.3y,"r? +r ! 711 'h•?.>v r,.S" 1 .., ?y .! 1. ".v lt'Sl -i: >,? Y7F ry .:k,?."A.4 ?" ? o ?•`' 'Af
't.+r+t"+1. F7 i. 4•Is w1' n p.. -1 ,y s :.r, Z"IJ? Ms,'r?I57,fJ3t '??"' 1*} AalrJfkt?i }6ai -lJt! 1 la:- ' a
t X ??.t 1t r" t + Sr f?'I; Sr , f ay
pp y
a'j * y r SR. - 1 f j 'i, '? SrL j .Y 7 E r Y l?F rl 7.k .,I 9i !Y y?/- r +
ti
r t ft' 9 u' [ L k, i Z L 7 } G } . ?" 1,
S
,? - .1 ,l I I t ta, ;J'+ f r s,"I M 5?,rs v 'h"?atS° sl ,-l am ? ?
,y,• yr: i:F? i tr e i
l a y n • ,, ''i^MR14 r i>• L r 1 1
, t•
?,,rw? ' •r ( r 1, 1 ,. ya f !; .4r ,..t i rt , r J J ,. - - X
ll- r.` '. ?x A t F d "?? # .- 8 1 o?y l+t .: .? .,,,}`s1, X 5 4 + .. S} S 4f , w+ fit`' ,.
2 r^.?i _ . 1'r••..,, t o ,'j 7r},'}',1r 'IaANrp`rifl frr+ , }rfi,;n y rAd -iY ,% r
s+f{,p,_ ''''M'e i `f f `!,':,T',Lj„ 1 ..ylr fM d y r ,
r7'Ar ? ,? £ a .l I µr, 1- `"" F xt ? 1 I. ' r7 d ,4 •/? 2t
4 l
a +
r d ,r? a R " F 1 t1 r ?^!t' , " -.1k K'd : ?" ki !• x
I 'P
"L 4 I L, x s 1 "xr s?j? a l:!pr r r"•u r 44 , 1 , p t ,t s*, 4.a r
lp.r"?r " r.. J f
x i 11tii
+' a in' ., r ,t'""'t v +P " - t - 40. rrr a R yr r1 F} 2f,4r qq
' I a fit r f ° s , ! ' " u I?t ... i+ ??, t,t ? < ' ' r r f l ,rt,, rh Y
11 I.q x. }„4A"f? 1 irr 7 kr ,+, r i a x + Mt"
e ', +} ,.
DRAFT Duck Creek Prop osed
(A) Control Creek Monitoring Locations
PCS PHOSPHATE MINE CONTINUATION
SOURCE: 800 0 800
Scale: As shown Drawn b : BFG TLJ
NC ONE MAP, NORTH CAROLINA, LOCAL ORTHOPHOTOGRAPHY, File: 17456224/2009_SANPONC/AUTOCAD/
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NC, 2007 COLOR AERIALS, 500 0 500 Meters Date: 12/03/09 DUCN_DREEN.owO
NC STATEPLANE, NAD 1983, FEET, WWW.NCONEMAP.COM Revision:
Approved by: 3PS 5-,3-a9 Figure 26
Draft Plan of Study for Potential Effects of Headwater Wetland Reduction on Downstream Aquatic Functions PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
December 2009
«26 of 29»
TMS GE LEFT 0NTENT0 LPL Y BLS NK;
SEARCH CONTMUES FOR SUET BL E CONTROL CREEK
A C)
A N
N o
'I N
o 3
? S
N (D
V N
V O
O
DRAFT (:k
0 0 0
500 0 500 Meters
A p
A m
N o
00 CD
o 3
? S
N (D
V N
V O
O
v
0
C
Q
0
D
n
v

DRAFT
o? LANDING
Rc aoe Reloeunm FERRY
015-20
PLANT s?°o
Cap 2018-2021
Veg 2021-2023
/or
r 1.'
a
ROgD
Cap 2034-2039
Veg 2039-2041
J?
MINE DMIN.
0 ICES-NCPC
30
ap 202j-2
Veg 203
2037-2042
2042-2044
6
F4
?.J
Cap 2016-2019 " o
Veg 2019-2021 0%?' yo?'
`y cc
ti
Qo ?o
Cap 2013-2016
Veg 2016-2018
West
East Prong
14t I
AURORA
1
A (D
? (OD
3
or
K) (D to
V N-0
V O
O F
t9 (D
n
O
3
N
Cap 2044-2049
Veg 2049-2051
k1k 213'k 2
Gap 206,
Nj e9
204$2 055
Gap 20532
v e9
Sw i2058 056 Cap 2024-2027
0?,?eO
00
Veg 2027-2029
52060 Cypres
Gap 200, 062 Un
ve9 Qj GUM RUn
Cap 2057-2062
Veg 2062-2064 v
205 206 2
? v 9 206 206
O
CaP 20 jr04
Ve92
J.P. Schmid Modified Alternative L Reclamation Schedule O?AURORA
PCs 3-16-09 1D I V I S I O N
1" = 4,000' Location:
12-6-09 Dwg. No. Figure 29