20120107 Ver 1_Year 5 Monitoring Report - 2019_20200401

Alutrien-
FeeAinq the Future -
Federal Express
March 30, 2020
Mr. Tom Steffens
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Washington Regulatory Field Office
2407 West Sth Street
Washington, North Carolina 27889
Dear Mr. Steffens:
D
APR 0 11'��'.J
DENR - WATER RESOURCES
TRANSPORTATION PERMITTING UNIT
Enclosed is the P and U Lands mitigation site Phase 4 fifth annual monitoring report for the 2019
monitoring year. The entire report, including all text, tables, figures and appendices, as well as the 2019
well data tables, are located on the CD which accompanies the report. Planting in Phase 4 was complete
in March 2015. Since this is the Sth year of monitoring, I am requesting agency sign -off of this phase of the
project. If you have any questions, please call me at [phone], or Julia Berger of CZR Incorporated
at [phone].
Sincerely,
JelfFrey C. Vurness
Senior Scientist
Enclosures
PC: Mac Haupt, DWR - Raleigh w/encl.
Anthony Scarbraugh, DWR —Wash. w/ end.
S. Cooper, CZR w/o encl.
23-11-020 w/encl.
1530 NC Hwy 306 South, Auoxa, NC USA 27806
t Effective January 1, 2018, PC$ Phosphate Company, Inc. is an indirect subsidiary of Nutrien Ltd. PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
remains the legal operating entity and permittee.

FIFTH ANNUAL (2019) REPORT FOR THE
P AND U LANDS RESTORATION SITE PHASE 4
RICHLAND TOWNSHIP
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Prepared for:
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Prepared by:
CZR Incorporated
4709 College Acres Drive, Suite #2
Wilmington, NC 28403
March 2020

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0
PROJECT OVERVIEW....................................................................................................1
1.1
History .............................................................................................................................1
1.2
Location..........................................................................................................................1
1.3
Goals and Performance Criteria.....................................................................................
2
2.0
REQUIREMENTS............................................................................................................2
2.1
Normal Rainfall and Growing Season............................................................................2
2.2
Hydrology........................................................................................................................2
2.3
Vegetation.......................................................................................................................3
2.4
Photographic Documentation.........................................................................................3
2.5
Reporting........................................................................................................................3
3.0
2019 RESULTS...............................................................................................................
3
3.1
Rainfall............................................................................................................................3
3.2
Hydrology........................................................................................................................3
3.3
Vegetation.......................................................................................................................3
4.0
SUMMARY (2019 AND FIVE MONITORING YEARS)....................................................4
4.1
Hydrology........................................................................................................................4
4.2
Vegetation.......................................................................................................................4
LITERATURE CITED.......................................................................................................................6
Cover Photo: Aerial photo looking north over Phase 4 and sections of Phase 3. 15 February 2019.
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1
P and U Lands Phase 4 performance criteria, methods summary, and current
status...........................................................................................................................
T-1
Table 2
Hydroperiods of eight non -riparian monitoring wells at P and U Lands Phase 4
restoration site and three Rodman control wells during WETS normal and below
normal rainfall in 2019.................................................................................................T-2
Table 3
Hydroperiods of eight non -riparian monitoring wells at P and U Lands Phase 4
restoration site and three Rodman control wells independent of
WETS thresholds in 2019...........................................................................................T-3
Table 4
Fifth annual survival of trees and shrubs planted in eight 0.3-acre plots at P and U
LandsPhase 4...........................................................................................................T-4
Table 5
Volunteer woody stems in P and U Lands Phase 4 vegetation monitoring plots
during fifth annual survey in 2019...............................................................................T-5
Table6
Summary rainfall.........................................................................................................T-6
Table 7
Summary of all years hydroperiods during normal and below normal rainfall ............T-7
Table 8
Summary of all years hydroperiods during all rainfall conditions................................T-8
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 P and U Lands Mitigation Site - Phase 4 Vicinity Map
Figure 2 P and U Lands Mitigation Site - Phase 4 Monitoring Locations
Figure 3 P and U Lands Mitigation Site - Phase 4 Monitoring Locations on Soils
Figure 4 P and U Lands Mitigation Site - Phase 4 Monitoring Locations on As Built LiDAR
Figure 5 2019 Bay City and WETS -Aurora Rainfall
Figure 6 P and U Lands Mitigation Site - Phase 4 2019 Hydroperiods and Estimated Hydrologic
Zones
APPENDICES
Appendix A Stem Counts at Individual Plots at P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 4
Appendix B Selected Fifth Annual Restoration Photographs
NOTE: Copy of entire report and hydrology data included on accompanying CD.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 4 ii PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual Report March 2020

1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW
1.1 History. The approximately 3,667-acre P and U Lands restoration site is part of the PCS
Phosphate Company Inc.'s (PCS) compensatory mitigation to offset unavoidable impacts to wetlands and
waters authorized under United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Action ID: 200110096 and
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Water Quality Certification (WQC) #2008-0868 version
2.0. The P and U designation have no special meaning other than that was the historic label given to PCS
and Weyerhaeuser properties with similar ownership agreements.
The P and U Lands site is a key component which connects the PCS Parker Farm Mitigation Site,
Bay City Farm Mitigation Site, Gum Run Mitigation Site, and the South Creek Corridor into a large and
varied collection of restored wetland and preserved natural areas (South Creek Corridor Complex).
Unlike most other PCS mitigation sites, the P and U Lands are not prior -converted agricultural fields.
Other than the existing roads, most of the acreage in which earthwork occurred was in some stage of
silviculture, usually various -aged pine stands, and contained regularly spaced ditches (deeper than the
agricultural ditches on other restoration sites that were filled in as part of restoration work) and the
bedding common to pine plantations. The removal of all standing timber and stumps and post -harvest
debris presented particular challenges as the organic soils precluded safe burning of the timber slash on
site. Consequently, some of the debris was piled into somewhat evenly shaped and sized mounds
throughout the site, which provide additional wildlife habitat.
As described in the mitigation plan prepared for the pre -construction notification (PCN) to the
USACE (CZR 2012), the site was planned to be constructed in three phases as shown on Figure 1.
These three phases were completed during the following three years: Phase 1 construction was
completed in 2011 and planted in February 2012, Phase 2 construction began in 2012 and was planted in
2013; however, construction at the lower elevations took additional time due to excessive wetness. This
delay prevented the restoration of approximately 268 acres of the original Phase 2 which included Gum
Swamp Run. During the third year, these 268 acres and Gum Swamp Run were restored and included
with the Phase 3 work completed in 2013 (planted in February of 2014). Because Phase 3 was the
largest of the three phases, some of the Phase 3 work was not completed until later in 2014 and was not
planted until spring of 2015; the final 132 acres planted in 2015 for the P and U Lands mitigation site are
tracked as Phase 4. This report includes results of fifth annual hydrology and vegetation monitoring for
the 132 acres of P and U Lands Phase 4 conducted by CZR Incorporated (CZR) of Wilmington, NC. The
first two annual reports for Phase 4 referenced a total of 134 acres; final acreage calculations for the
entire P and U Lands project phases were corrected in 2017.
The design team consisted of Jonathan T. Ricketts, Inc. of Palm Beach Gardens, FL, the
restoration design engineer, PCS, and CZR. Earthwork was performed by Sawyer's Land Developing,
Inc. out of Belhaven, NC and supervised by the design team. Phase 1 and 2 restoration activities
occurred September 2011-March 2013. Phase 3 construction began in Gum Swamp Run on 9 May 2012
and on 22 June 2012 on the larger Phase 3 area. Phase 3 was constructed with a total of 14 NC Division
of Land Resources Erosion and Sediment Control (DLR) permits for land clearing which were
subsequently modified to allow for the construction of the interior ditch plugs and perimeter berms and
ditches. Phase 4 activities were included in three of the Phase 3 DLR permits (#s 22, 23, and 24).
Planting of Phase 4 occurred in mid -February 2015.
1.2 Location. The P and U Lands site is located east and west of Bay City Road (SR1002),
approximately 4.5 miles southeast of Aurora, Richland Township, North Carolina. Bay City Road runs
through the P Lands portion of the site, which is bounded on the east by SR 1918 (Peele Road is the
unpaved extension of SR 1918) and on the south by "County Line Road" (a gated gravel road along the
Beaufort/Pamlico County border). The U Lands portion of the site lies west and southwest of Bay City
Farm (the western portion of the P Lands site referred to as the "panhandle" separates Bay City Farm
from the U Lands). South Creek and the South Creek Canal form the northern and northwestern
boundaries, Bonner/Rodman Road forms the western boundary, and the Pamlico/Beaufort County line
forms the southern boundary of the U Lands (County Line Road itself is the southern boundary of only the
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 4 1 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual Report March 2020

eastern half of the U Lands as the western limit of County Line Road terminates at the midpoint of the
south property line). The entire site is accessed via multiple gated roads along Bay City Road, Peele
Road, County Line Road, Gum Road, and/or Jaime/Executive Road. The site is located within the
Pamlico Hydrologic Unit 03020104 of the Tar -Pamlico River basin within the South Creek sub -basin at
latitude 35.233831 and longitude 76.775742. Portions of the site can be found on the USGS Aurora,
Bayboro, South Creek, and Vandemere quadrangles (Figure 1).
1.3 Goals and Performance Criteria. The primary goal of the entire project is to re-establish a
self-sustaining functional wetland complex to allow surface water flow to move through vegetated
wetlands before reaching any stream. Mitigation yields are estimated and performance criteria are
described for the project in detail in the Compensatory Mitigation Plan for P and U Lands Restoration Site
(CZR 2012). Performance criteria for Phase 4 are summarized in Table 1. Over time the 132-acre Phase
4 planted portion of the site is expected to successfully re-establish approximately:
❖ 17 wetland acres of headwater forest and
❖ 115 wetland acres of non-riverine swamp forest.
2.0 REQUIREMENTS
2.1 Normal Rainfall and Growing Season. A continuous electronic rain gauge on the
adjacent Bay City Mitigation Site is downloaded once a month and its data are used in conjunction with
data from nearby automated weather stations (e.g., NRCS WETS data from NOAA's site at Aurora and
rain gauges at other nearby monitoring sites) to determine normal rainfall during the monitoring period.
Bay City data were compared to the WETS range of normal precipitation to determine if Bay City rainfall
was within the normal range. The range of normal precipitation for this report refers to the 301h and 70tn
percentile thresholds of the probability of having onsite rainfall amounts less than or higher than those
thresholds. The range of normal and the 30-day rolling total data lines begin on the last day of each
month and the WETS -Aurora monthly precipitation total is plotted on the last day of each month.
Under the 2010 regional guidance from the Corps of Engineers for wetland hydroperiods, the
normal growing season for Beaufort County is 28 February to 6 December or 282 days during non -leap
years (WETS table for Beaufort County first/last freeze date 28 degrees F 50 percent probability) (US
Army Corps of Engineers 2010). At the suggestion of the Corps' Washington regulatory field office, data
collected between 1 February and 27 February provide important information related to analyses of site
hydrology during the early growing season, but are not part of the hydroperiod calculation for success.
2.2 Hydrology. Figure 2 depicts the locations of hydrology monitoring equipment, Figure 3
shows these locations on Beaufort County soil polygons, and Figure 4 shows all monitoring locations on
the as -built LiDAR. To document surface storage and hydroperiods of all wetland types on the site, eight
semi -continuous electronic Level TROLL water level monitoring wells (manufactured by In -Situ) are
deployed at a density of approximately 1 well/15 acres across all planted areas of Phase 4. Exclosures
constructed of barbed wire wrapped around metal fence posts were built around each well to reduce the
likelihood of disturbance or equipment loss by black bears.
To serve as additional hydrology controls for the entire P and U Lands site, three Level TROLLs
were installed in the Rodman Tract in 2013 in an area mapped as Ponzer soil at elevations similar to
portions of Phase 4 (7 to 9 feet) and four Level TROLLs were installed at previous well locations within
the adjacent Bay City Farm in late 2015. According to the soils map and LiDAR data, these four locations
also are underlain by Ponzer soils, but two are at slightly higher elevations than the three Rodman wells
(9 to 11 feet) and two are slightly lower (4 to 6 feet).
Level TROLLs collect data every 1.5 hours, are downloaded once a month, and the data
evaluated to document wetland hydroperiods. Wetland hydroperiods are calculated by counting
consecutive days with water level no deeper than 12 inches below the soil surface during the growing
season under normal or below normal rainfall conditions and then for all rainfall conditions.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 4 2 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual Report March 2020

2.3 Vegetation. The first annual survey of the eight 0.3-acre planted vegetation monitoring
plots occurred August -October 2015, the second annual survey occurred October -November 2016, the
third annual survey occurred in October 2017, the fourth annual survey occurred in November 2018, and
the fifth annual survey occurred in October 2019. The plots represent approximately 2 percent of the
restoration area (Figure 2). Stem count data are included in Appendix A.
2.4 Photographic Documentation. Due to the small size and similarity to the surrounding areas
of Phase 3, no photo stations were established specifically for Phase 4. The view for Phase 3 photo
station PLPS 21 faces into Phase 4, so this station is included in Appendix B. The first annual photo was
taken December 2015, the second in October 2016, the third in November 2017, the fourth in October
2018, and the fifth in November 2019.
2.5 Reporting. The four prior annual reports on monitoring results were provided as required
in 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019. (CZR Incorporated 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019).
3.0 2019 RESULTS
3.1 Rainfall. Total rainfall in 2019 at Bay City was 54.99 inches, 12.61 inches less than 2018.
The 30-day rolling total of 2019 Bay City rainfall shows the following periods as above normal (above the
WETS 70th percentile longer than several days): 16 August - 17 September (Figure 5). Wetland
hydroperiods were calculated for the entire year regardless of rainfall as well as calculated with above
normal rainfall periods excluded.
The US Drought Monitor (http://droughtmonitor.unl.edu) provides a synthesis of multiple indices
and reflects the consensus of federal and academic scientists on regional conditions on a weekly basis
(updated each Thursday). In 2019, 10 weeks of the growing season were considered abnormally dry
drought status in the vicinity of the P and U Lands project area.
3.2 Hydrology. During all rainfall conditions and normal and below normal rainfall conditions,
all of the eight wells recorded a wetland hydroperiod (Table 2, Table 3, and Figure 6). Of the eight wells
in Phase 4, during all rainfall conditions, one well had a hydroperiod for >25-75 percent of the growing
season, and seven wells for >12.5-25 percent of the growing season (Table 3, Figure 6). After exclusion
of periods above WETS normal rainfall, no wells changed hydrologic zones (Table 2, Figure 6).
During all rainfall conditions, the three Rodman control wells recorded a wetland hydroperiod for
>12.5-25 percent of the growing season, which is the same as the majority (seven of eight) of the wells in
Phase 4. The four Bay City control wells also had wetland hydroperiods, one well for >6-12.5 percent,
one well for >12.5-25 percent, and two wells for >25-75 percent of the growing season. No hydrologic
zones changed due to above normal rainfall.
3.3 Vegetation. Planting zones of Phase 4 were divided into two zones or community types:
headwater forest (Z2) and non- riverine swamp forest (Z3). Using only the number of planted stems that
were unquestionably alive in the monitoring plots, the most conservative estimate of survival is presented.
Some stems may appear dead or questionable, but based on prior monitoring experience, a stem needs
to appear dead (or not be found) for two consecutive fall survey events before it can be confidently
counted as dead. After the fifth year (2019), percent survival of alive stems for Zone 2 (1 plot) and Zone 3
(7 plots) was 82 percent each, with a combined total of 18 identified species (12 trees and 6 shrubs).
Appendix A contains the number of stems that were alive in each plot for the fall 2019 survey.
Overall survival of trees that were unquestionably alive in the eight plots from baseline to the fifth
annual fall survey was 85 percent, with a corresponding density of 315 trees per acre, three trees per
acre less than last year (Table 4). Of the 12 species of large and small tree species tagged at baseline,
11 species had surviving stems. Individual percent survival ranged from 67 to 100 percent, with nine 70
percent or greater. The trees that could only be identified to genus (Nyssa or Quercus) had 0 percent
survival. If trees with uncertain survival status (stem appeared dead but could not be confirmed) are
included with trees that were definitely alive, survival increases to 87 percent and a density of 320 trees
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 4 3 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual Report March 2020

per acre, 3 stems fewer per acre than last year. The current density is higher than the density required at
the end of five years (260 stems).
Overall survival of shrubs that were unquestionably alive from the baseline to the fifth annual fall
survey was 86 percent with a corresponding density of 13 shrubs per acre, 1 stem fewer per acre than
last year (Table 4). Virginia sweetspire (Itea virginica) and fetterbush (Lyonia lucida) had 100 percent
survival. A shrub identified as swamp dogwood (Corpus foemina) since baseline, was changed to
possumhaw (Viburnum nudum). This correction resulted in 125 percent survival for possumhaw and 75
percent survival for swamp dogwood in Table 4.
When the trees and shrubs that were definitely alive are combined, density increases to 328
stems per acre, and if stems with uncertain survival are added, the density increases to 333 stems per
acre. This phase has a diverse assemblage of species with nine tree species and four shrub species with
a 70 percent or greater survival; four tree species and three shrub species have with a 90 percent or
greater survival.
Volunteer woody vegetation in the 8 plots was also counted in the 2019 survey. All volunteer
woody stems taller than 1 foot were counted, but those with upland status or considered a nuisance
species were excluded from density calculations. A total 1,151 stems of 15 tree and shrub species were
identified as woody volunteers, of those, the density of non -nuisance wetland trees was 135 stems per
acre, the density of non -nuisance wetland shrubs was 87 stems per acre, and the total density of non -
nuisance wetland stems was 221 stems per acre. After adding the volunteer tree stems to the planted
tree stems, the tree density is 450 stems per acre, which is above the required 260 stems per acre for
success (Table 5). Furthermore, after adding woody wetland volunteer tree and shrub stems to the
planted tree and shrub stems, density increases even more to a total of 549 wetland tree and shrub
stems per acre. The volunteer stems enhance the diversity of the site because some of the volunteer
species were not the same species that were planted.
4.0 SUMMARY (2019 AND FIVE MONITORING YEARS)
4.1 Hydrology. Total rainfall in 2019 at Bay City was 54.99 inches, 12.61 inches less
than 2018. The 30-day rolling total of 2019 Bay City rainfall shows the following periods as above normal
(above the WETS 70th percentile longer than several days): 16 August - 17 September. During all rainfall
and normal and below normal rainfall conditions, all of the eight wells recorded a wetland hydroperiod. Of
the eight wells in Phase 4, one well had a hydroperiod for >25-75 percent of the growing season and
sevens well for >12.5-25 percent of the growing season. After exclusion of the single period of above
WETS normal rainfall, hydrologic zones stayed the same with one well having a hydroperiod for >25-75
percent of the growing season and seven wells for >12.5-25 percent of the growing season.
Table 6 summarizes the rainfall recorded at the Bay City Farm rain gauge and PCS Aurora NOAA
station 6N over the five years of monitoring. 2017 had the least rainfall with three WETS exclusion
periods while 2018 had the highest annual total rainfall recorded for the P and U Lands with four periods
of exclusion above the WETS normal rainfall. Rainfall totals ran from 50.61 to 67.64 at the Bay City rain
gauge and 48.44 to 63.02 at the PCS Aurora rain gauge. Year 5, with 54.99 inches of total rainfall, had a
single WETS exclusion period compared to the first four years having 3-5 exclusion periods above WETS
normal rainfall.
Tables 7 and 8 depict the five-year summary of the hydroperiods for each well with above normal
rainfall hydroperiods removed (Table 7) and all rainfall hydroperiods included (Table 8). By the end of Y1
(2015), 1 of the 8 wells did not have a wetland hydroperiod, by Y2 all eight wells had hydroperiods
through Y5. Over the five monitoring years (2015-2019); 7 of the 8 wells recorded a wetland hydroperiod
for all monitoring years under normal and below normal rainfall conditions. All eight wells had a wetland
hydroperiod during all rainfall conditions for all five years.
4.2 Vegetation. Overall survival of trees that were unquestionably alive in the eight plots
from baseline to the fifth annual fall survey in 2019 was 85 percent with a corresponding density of 315
trees per acre. Overall survival of shrubs that were unquestionably alive from baseline to the fourth
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 4 4 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual Report March 2020

annual fall survey was 86 percent with a corresponding density of 13 shrubs per acre. When the trees
and shrubs that were definitely alive are combined, density increases to 328 stems per acre and if stems
with uncertain survival are added, the density increases to 333 stems per acre. The three most abundant
tree species comprise 70 percent of the tree species and the two most abundant shrub species comprise
78 percent of the shrub species. Different species of trees and shrubs are surviving well in the fifth year,
and there is a diverse assemblage of trees interspersed with a healthy shrub component. In many areas
of the site, volunteer woody wetland stems (e.g. red bay [Persea borbonia] and sweet bay [Magnolia
virginiana]) enhance the diversity and increase stem density of the site.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 4 5 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual Report March 2020

LITERATURE CITED
CZR Incorporated. 2012. Compensatory Mitigation Plan for P and U Lands Restoration Site.
CZR Incorporated. 2016. First Annual Report for the P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 4.
CZR Incorporated. 2017. Second Annual Report for the P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 4.
CZR Incorporated. 2018. Third Annual Report for the P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 4.
CZR Incorporated. 2019. Fourth Annual Report for the P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 4.
Kirby, Robert M. 1995. The soil survey of Beaufort County, North Carolina. Natural Resources
Conservation Service, USDA.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2002. Regulatory guidance letter (RGL) 02-02. Guidance on
Compensatory mitigation projects for aquatic resource impacts under the Corps regulatory
program pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and
Harbors Act.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2005. Technical Standard for Water -Table Monitoring of Potential Wetland
Sites. WRAP Technical Notes Collection (ERDC TN-WRAP-05-2). U.S. Army Engineer Research
and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2008. Regulatory Guidance Letter (RGL) 08-03. Minimum monitoring
requirements for compensatory mitigation projects involving the restoration, establishment, and/or
enhancement of aquatic resources.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2010. Regional supplement to the Corps of Engineers wetland delineation
manual: Atlantic and Gulf coastal plain region. Version 2.0. J.S. Wakeley, R.W. Lichvar, and C.V.
Noble, eds. ERCD/EL TR-08-30, Vicksburg, MS.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (2020). Historical Palmer Drought Indices. [online]
Available at: https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/temp-and-precip/drought/historical-palmers/psi/201901-
201912 [Accessed 7 Feb. 2020].
North Carolina Climate Office. (2020). nClimDiv Climate Division Data. [online] Available at:
https://climate.ncsu.edu/climate/climdiv [Accessed 7 Feb. 2020].
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 4 6 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual Report March 2020

Table 1. P and U Lands Phase 4 performance criteria,
methods summary, and current status (fifth annual, 2019).
Type of mitigation
Performance criteria
Documentation methods Dimension & controls Current status
In 2019, one well had a
hydroperiod for >25-75 percent
of the growing season, and
seven wells for >12.5-25
Semi -continuous monitoring
Growing season 28 Feb-
percent of the growing season.
o
/o >10 hydroperiod on
wells (1/15ac); nearby rain
6 Dec; Aurora NOAA
After removal of the one period
hydric soils
WETS data for normal
of above WETS normal rainfall,
gauge
rainfall
one well had a hydroperiod for
>25-75 percent of the growing
season and seven wells for
Non -riparian wetland re-
>12.5-25 percent of the growing
establishment
(restoration) of non-
season.
riverine swamp forest and
headwater forest
communities
2019 survival of planted tree
stems that were unquestionably
Survival of 260 stems
alive was 315 stems/acre and
per acre of 5-year old
Vegetation plots on
survivial of shrubs was 13
planted woody wetland
approximately 2% of the site
Annual monitoring
stems/acre. When trees and
stems
shrubs that could be identified
to species are added together,
survival becomes 328
stems/acre.
T-1

Table 2. Hydroperiods of eight non -riparian monitoring wells at P and U Lands Phase 4 restoration site, three Rodman, and four Bay City Farm
control wells during WETS normal and below normal rainfall in 2019 (excludes 16 August - 17 Septmber). The growing season was 282 days.
Hydroperiods of 14 consecutive days or more are listed by dates, and any hydroperiods shorter than 14 days are included in the cumulative days.
Wells shown in bold text changed hydrologic zone from last year.
Hydrologic zone
Percent of
Days where water
Cumulative days
Consecutive days
growing
Well
table is -12" or
where water table
where water table
Dates
season
<6%
>6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
is -12" or above
is -12" or above 28
(282 days)
—
above 1-27 Feb
28 Feb-6 Dec
Feb-6 Dec
of longest
hydroperiod
71
2/28-5/9
189
27
169
15
9/18-10/2
25.2
X
54
10/14-12/6
63
2/28-5/1
190
27
112
22.3
X
31
11 /6-12/6
59
2/28-4/27
199
27
97
20.9
X
31
11 /6-12/6
60
2/28-4/28
200
27
94
21.3
X
31
11 /6-12/6
59
2/28-4/27
202
27
97
20.9
X
31
11 /6-12/6
62
2/28-4/30
203
27
96
22.0
X
31
11 /6-12/6
69
2/28-5/7
204
27
135
24.5
X
48
10/20-12/6
65
2/28-5/3
205
27
115
23.0
X
23
11 /6-11 /28
T-2

Table 2. (concluded)
Hydrologic zone
Percent of
Days where water
Cumulative days
Consecutive days
growing
Well
table is -12" or
where water table
where water table
Dates
season
<6%
>6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
is -12" or above
is -12" or above 28
(282 days)
—
above 1-27 Feb
28 Feb-6 Dec
Feb-6 Dec
of longest
hydroperiod
Rodman Control Site
63
2/28-5/1
RCII
27
110
22.3
X
31
11 /6-12/6
65
2/28-5/3
RC2
27
120
23.0
X
31
11 /6-12/6
64
2/28-5/2
RC3
27
122
22.7
X
31
11 /6-12/6
Bay City Farm Control Site
58
2/28-4/26
BCRW 17
27
84
20.6
X
24
11 /13-12/6
76
2/28-5/14
BCRW29
27
150
48
9/18-10/2
27.0
X
54
10/14-12/6
19
2/28-3/18
BCRW33
27
60
12.4
X
35
3/21-4/24
90
2/28-5/28
17
6/8-6/24
BCRW44
27
217
31.9
X
15
7/12-7/26
80
9/18-12/6

Table 3. Hydroperiods of eight non -riparian monitoring wells at P and U Lands Phase 4 restoration site, three Rodman, and four Bay City Farm
control wells independent of WETS thresholds in 2019. Hydroperiods of 14 consecutive days or more are listed by dates, and any hydroperiods
shorter than 14 days are included in the cumulative days. Well numbers shown in bold changed hydrologic zone from last year.
Hydrologic zone
Percent of
Days where water
Cumulative days
Consecutive days
growing
Well
table is -12" or
where water table
where water table
Dates
season
<6%
>6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
is -12" or above
is -12" or above 28
(282 days)
—
above 1-27 Feb
28 Feb-6 Dec
Feb-6 Dec
of longest
hydroperiod
71
2/28-5/9
189
27
202
53
8/11-10/2
25.2
X
54
10/14-12/6
63
2/28-5/1
19
8/15-9/2
190
27
142
22.3
X
16
9/6-9/21
31
11 /6-12/6
59
2/28-4/27
199
27
123
14
8/16-8/29
20.9
X
31
11 /6-12/6
60
2/28-4/28
200
27
120
14
8/16-8/29
21.3
X
31
11 /6-12/6
59
2/28-4/27
202
27
118
20.9
X
31
11 /6-12/6
62
2/28-4/30
203
27
121
22.0
X
31
11 /6-12/6
T-3

Table 3. (continued)
Hydrologic zone
Percent of
Days where water
Cumulative days
Consecutive days
growing
Well
table is -12" or
where water table
where water table
Dates
season
<6%
>6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
is -12" or above
is -12" or above 28
(282 days)
—
above 1-27 Feb
28 Feb-6 Dec
Feb-6 Dec
of longest
hydroperiod
69
2/28-5/7
20
8/16-9/4
204
27
167
24.5
X
19
9/6-9/24
48
10/20-12/6
65
2/28-5/3
16
8/15-8/30
205
27
142
23.0
X
14
9/6-9/19
23
11 /6-11 /28
Rodman Control Site
63
2/28-5/1
16
8/16-8/31
RC1
27
139
22.3
X
15
9/6-9/20
31
11 /6-12/6
65
2/28-5/3
18
8/16-9/2
RC2
27
150
23.0
X
16
9/6-9/21
31
11 /6-12/6
64
2/28-5/2
16
8/16-8/31
RC3
27
151
22.7
X
15
9/6-9/20
31
11 /6-12/6

Table 3. (concluded)
Hydrologic zone
Percent of
Days where water
Cumulative days
Consecutive days
growing
Well
table is -12" or
where water table
where water table
Dates
season
<6%
>6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
is -12" or above
is -12" or above 28
(282 days)
—
above 1-27 Feb
28 Feb-6 Dec
Feb-6 Dec
of longest
hydroperiod
Bay City Farm Control Site
58
2/28-4/26
BCRW 17
27
108
20.6
X
24
11 /13-12/6
76
2/28-5/14
BCRW29
27
183
48
8/16-10/2
27.0
X
54
10/14-12/6
19
2/28-3/18
BCRW33
27
79
12.4
X
35
3/21-4/24
90
2/28-5/28
17
6/8-6/24
BCRW44
27
250
43.6
X
15
7/12-7/26
123
8/6-12/6

Table 4. Fifth annual (fall 2019) survival of trees and shrubs planted in eight 0.3-acre plots at P and U Lands Phase 4.
Tagged at
Baseline stems
Fall 2019 stems
Percent su3rvival
Percent of
baseline
2019
total stems
Scientific name
Common name
Alive Unsure' Tota12
Alive Unsure' Tota12
Alive Tota12
alive in 2019
Large tree species
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green ash
69
67
0
67
50
2
52
72
75
6.6
Nyssa spp.
unknown gum species
4
6
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0.0
N. aquatica
Water tupelo
194
204
0
204
143
6
149
74
77
18.9
N. biflora
Swamp tupelo
101
95
0
95
79
1
80
78
79
10.5
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
8
8
0
8
6
0
6
75
75
0.8
Quercus spp,
unknown oak species
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0.0
Q. laurifolia
Laurel oak
79
76
0
76
53
2
55
67
70
7.0
Q. lyrata
Overcup oak
133
130
0
130
133
0
133
100
100
17.6
Q. michauxii
Swamp chestnut oak
3
3
0
3
2
0
2
67
67
0.3
Q. phellos
Willow oak
0
4
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0.0
Taxodium distichum
Bald cypress
259
257
1
258
254
1
255
98
98
33.6
Small tree species
Clethra alnifolia
Sweet pepperbush
9
10
0
10
9
0
9
100
100
1.2
Cyrilla racemiflora
Titi
21
15
0
15
18
0
18
86
86
2.4
Magnolia vir iniana
Sweetbay
8
7
0
7
8
0
8
100
100
1.1
Total tree stems
889
883
1
884
755
12
767
85
86
100
Trees per acre stems+2.4 ac
370
358
0
368
315
5
320
-
-
-
Shrubs
Corpus amomum
Silky dogwood
2
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0.0
C. foemina
Swamp dogwood
12
12
0
12
9
1
10
75
83
28.1
Itea virginica
Virginia sweetspire
16
12
0
12
16
0
16
100
100
50.0
Lyonia lucida
Fetterbush
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
100
100
3.1
Vaccinium corymbosum
High bush blueberry
2
3
0
3
1
0
1
50
50
3.1
Viburnum nudum
Possumhaw
4
4
0
4
5
0
5
125
125
15.6
Total shrub stems
37
34
0
34
32
1
33
86
89
100
Shrubs per acre (stems+2.4 ac)
15
14
0
14
13
0.42
14
-
-
-
Unknown species
Unknown species
38
10
32
42
0
0
0
0
0
0.0
Total
Total stems
964
927
33
960
787
13
800
-
-
-
Total density
402
386
14
400
328
5
333
-
-
-
'Survival was considered unsure if the stem appeared dead (brittle, no green, broken, etc.) at the current sampling event
2Total includes alive + unsure.
3Percent survival was calculated as: (2019 stems/tagged at baseline X 100).
T-4

Table 5. Volunteer woody stems in P and U Lands Phase 4 vegetation monitoring plots during fifth annual survey in 2019. Success criteria for volunteer woody stems can count only non -
nuisance species with wetland status. Percentages rounded two decimal places to show totals with smaller proportions.
NON -NUISANCE, WETLAND WOODY VOLUNTEERS IN ALL 0.3 ACRE PLOTS NUISANCE OR UPLAND WOODY VOLUNTEERS IN ALL 0.3 ACRE PLOTS
(8 PLOTS) (8 PLOTS)'
Scientific name Common name Wetland Count Percent of Scientific name Common name Wetland Count Percent of
status I I total I status I tota12
Large tree species
Carpinuscaroliniana ironwood
FAC
3
0.93
Acerrubrum red maple FAC
9
0.78
Pinus serotina pond pine
FACW
2
0.62
Liquidambar styraciflua sweetgum FAC
62
5.39
Platanus occidentalis american sycamore
FACW
1
0.31
Pinus taeda loblolly pine FAC
53
4.60
Salix nigra black willow
OBL
24
7.43
Rhus copallinum winged sumac UPL
495
43.01
Small tree species
Sassafras albidum sassafras FACU
1
0.16
3.41
TOTAL NUISANCE AND UPLAND STEMS
620
Magnolia virginiana sweet bay
FACW
11
Morelia cerifera wax myrtle
FAC
165
51.08
DENSITY NUISANCE AND UPLAND STEMS
258
Persea borbonia I red bay
I FACW
117
36.22
Not used in calculations for success criteria, including final totals
wetland status and/or considered a nuisance by the ACOE
because
of non -
TOTAL NON -NUISANCE VOLUNTEER WETLAND TREE STEMS
323
DENSITY NON -NUISANCE VOLUNTEER WETLAND TREE STEMS
135
2Percent of total wetland, non -wetland, nuisance tree and shrub stems
Shrubs
Baccharis halmifolia groundsel tree FAC
161
77.40
Vaccinium corymbosum highbush blueberry FACW
41
19.71
Viburnum nudum possumhaw FACW
6
2.88
TOTAL NON -NUISANCE VOLUNTEER WETLAND SHRUB STEMS
208
DENSITY NON -NUISANCE VOLUNTEER WETLAND SHRUB STEMS
87
TOTAL NON -NUISANCE WETLAND STEMS
531
TOTAL VOLUNTEER WETLAND STEM DENSITY (stems-2.4ac)
221
T-5

Table 6. Summary of rainfall recorded at the Bay City Farm rain gauge and PCS Aurora NOAA station 6N
over the five monitoring years and periods of each year considered above WETS normal rainfall. Periods
of above normal WETS rainfall were not included in hydroperiods used for restoration success criteria.
Annual total
Annual total
Entire year
Monitoring
inches rainfall
inches rainfall
considered within
Above WETS normal
year
recorded at Bay
recorded at PCS
or below normal
periods
City rain gauge
Aurora NOAA 6N
WETS rainfall
7 June — 5 July
2015
52.4
63.02
No
2 October — 1 November
18 November — 6 December
4 February — 4 March
7 June — 28 June
2016
60.60
59.92
No
2 July — 5 August
12 September — 2 October
7 October — 5 November
26 April-23 May
2017
50.61
48.44
No
1-24 July
24 August — 22 September
26 May — 27 June
2018
67.64
62.03
No
28 July — 23 August
14 September —14 October
2 November — 5 December
2019
54.99
42.18
No
16 August - 17 September

Table 7. Summary of occurrence of hydroperiods and drought indices from 2015 to 2019 for wells at P & U Lands Restoration Site
Phase 4, Rodman Control Site, and Bay City Control Site during normal rainfall conditions. (WH=wetland hydroperiod).
Note: The longest hydroperiod at each well is depicted as a percentage of the 282-day (or 283-day for leap years) growing season when
the water table was recorded as -12" or above. Also shown are the Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI) and the Palmer Hydrological
Drought Index (PHDI) drought rankings for the NOAA (2015-2019) and NCSU Climate (2019) Central Coastal Plain region of North
Carolina by year. Drought rankings reflect the rankings given at the most recent year shown in the table; drought status may change as
years of climatic data are added. PDSI and PHDI categories: ED= extreme drought, SD= severe drought, MD= moderate drought, MR=
mid -range, MM= moderately moist, VM= very moist, EM= extremely moist.
<6% >6-12.5% >12.5-25% >25-75% >75%
PDSI
PHDI
# of
% of Years
% of Years with
% of Years with
Well
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
Years
with WH for
WH with MR and
WH with MR and
with WH
All Years
MD Ranking
MD Ranking
PUM189
22.7
33.2
43.6
30.9
25.2
5
100
80
80
PUM190
5.7
29.3
27.7
26.6
22.3
4
80
60
60
PUM199
22.7
16.3
18.8
23.4
20.9
5
100
80
80
PUM200
22.3
29.7
28.6
27.0
21.3
5
100
80
80
PUM202
13.5
14.5
27.2
26.2
20.9
5
100
80
80
PUM203
15.6
14.8
27.2
26.6
22.0
5
100
80
80
PUM204
15.2
28.6
37.1
27.3
24.5
5
100
80
80
PUM205
15.6
15.2
28.6
30.7
23.0
5
100
80
80
PDSI
MR
MM
MR
MR
MR
PHDI
MR
VM
MR
MR
MR
T-7

Table 7. (concluded)
PDSI
PHDI
# of
% of Years
Well
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
Years
with WH for
% of Years with
% of Years with
with WH
All Years
WH with MR and
WH with MR and
MD Ranking
MD Ranking
RC1a
31.6
25.4
27.3
26.6
22.3
5
100
80
80
RC2a
31.9
29.0
28.0
30.9
23.0
5
100
80
80
RC3a
31.9
29.0
28.0
30.9
22.7
5
100
80
80
BCRW 17b
-
8.1
11.0
22.7
20.6
3
60
60
60
BCRW29 b
-
28.6
36.5
30.9
27.0
4
80
80
80
BCRW33b
-
15.5
11.0
22.3
12.4
4
80
80
80
BCRW44b
-
33.2
43.6
30.9
31.9
4
80
80
80
PDSI
MR
MM
MR
MR
MR
PHDI
MR
VM
MR
MR
MR
aWells were installed 13 March 2013.
bEcotone wells were used to monitor the Bay City Mitigation Site from 2009 to 2014. Some wells were removed before the end of the
2014 growing season and hydroperiods were not calculated. Level trolls were installed at the end of 2015 to be used as reference wells
for the P and U Lands Restoration Sites. A cell with "-" means there was no well installed long enough to calculate an accurate
hydroperiod.
Italicized= Well malfunction resulted in an estimation of exact hydroperiod length and so reported hydroperiod could possibly be shorter
than what occurred.
Wells require 10% or more of growing season

Table 8. Summary of occurrence of hydroperiods and drought indices from 2015 to 2019 for wells at P & U Lands Restoration Site
Phase 4, Rodman Control Site, and Bay City Control site during all rainfall conditions. (WH=wetland hydroperiod).
Note: The longest hydroperiod at each well is depicted as a percentage of the 282-day (or 283-day for leap years) growing season when
the water table was recorded as -12" or above. Also shown are the Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI) and the Palmer Hydrological
Drought Index (PHDI) drought rankings for the NOAA (2015-2018) and NCSU Climate (2019) Central Coastal Plain region of North
Carolina by year. Drought rankings reflect the rankings given at the most recent year shown in the table; drought status may change as
years of climatic data are added. PDSI and PHDI categories: ED= extreme drought, SD= severe drought, MD= moderate drought, MR=
mid -range, MM= moderately moist, VM= very moist, EM= extremely moist.
<6%
>6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
PDSI
PHDI
# of
% of Years
% of Years with
% of Years with
Well
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
Years
with WH for
WH with MR and
WH with MR and
with WH
All Years
MD Ranking
MD Ranking
PUM189
25.5
25.2
5
100
80
80
PUM190
23.4
31.4
27.7
26.6
22.3
5
100
80
80
PUM199
22.7
19.1
18.8
23.4
20.9
5
100
80
80
PUM200
23.4
31.8
28.7
30.1
21.3
5
100
80
80
PUM202
13.5
16.6
27.3
26.2
20.9
5
100
80
80
PUM203
15.6
19.4
27.3
30.1
22.0
5
100
80
80
PUM204
23.4
33.9
37.2
31.2
24.5
5
100
80
80
PUM205
24.5
30.0
28.7
47.2
23.0
5
100
80
80
PDSI
MR
MM
MR
MR
MR
PHDI
MR
VM
MR
MR
MR
M

Table 8. (concluded)
PDSI PHDI
# of % of Years
Well 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Years with WH for % of Years with % of Years with
with WH All Years WH with MR and WH with MR and
MD Ranking MD Ranking
RC1a
31.6
35.3
27.3
31.2
22.3
5
100
80
80
RC2a
31.9
17.7
28.0
46.5
23.0
5
100
80
80
RC3a
31.9
0901 1
28.0
31.2
22.7
5
100
80
80
BCRW 17b
-
8.1
11.0
22.7
20.6
4
80
60
80
BCRW29 b
-
28.6
36.5
47.9
27.0
4
80
80
80
BCRW33b
-
15.5
11.0
22.3
12.4
4
80
80
80
BCRW44b
-
33.2
# 1 1
M 0
43.6
4
80
80
80
PDSI
MR
MM
MR
MR
MR
PHDI
MR
VM
MR
MR
MR
'Wells were installed 13 March 2013.
bEcotone wells were used to monitor the Bay City Mitigation Site from 2009 to 2014. Some wells were removed before the end of the
2014 growing season and hydroperiods were not calculated. Level trolls were installed at the end of 2015 to be used as reference wells
for the P and U Lands Restoration Sites. A cell with "-" means there was no well installed long enough to calculate an accurate
hydroperiod
Italicized= Well malfunction resulted in an estimation of exact hydroperiod length and so reported hydroperiod could possibly be shorter
than what occurred.
Wells require 10% or more of growing season

AURORA
i L
,SOUTH CREEK
#CORRIDOR
j j
_ . � ice- '•— �' _ i......... • �f � `f!
+� -- — . ........., ...................I,„..._....
Ro.�� aoAo .......
t
SO oRRI CREEK P LANDS b -
PHASE 2
_Ao PHASE 2 P LFINDS
1 Houoweu TRACT PHASE 3
BAY CITY
CONTROL SITE \
PHASE; e� - •a' t ,,.
z PHASE
i�, PARKER FARM nA-
U LANDS - P LANDS secoNS
PHASE 4 �
o,,AME Z,/T 35'14'18.04" .� -
., LONG: 76'46'19.20" .•i - J' -'
RODMAN CONTROL PHASE 4 _ - --- -
SITE U LANDS CASEY TRACT
_am
0 P LANDS
Y N
m
U LANDS
wr
LEGEND
P and U LANDS BOUNDARY
P and U LANDS PHASE 4
0 6,000 12,000
SOUTH CREEK CORRIDOR AND
PARKER FARM BOUNDARY
SCALE IN FEET
NORTH CAROLINA VICINITY MAP
P AND U LANDS PHASE 4 AND TWO CONTROL SITES
SITE LOCATION PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC.
P and U LANDS
SOURCE: SCALE: AS SHOWN APPROVED BY: DRAWN BY: TLJ
PORTIONS OF THE BOUNDARY PROVIDED BY: ROBERT M. CHILES,
NEW BERN, NORTH CAROLINA, JOB #2009096, DATED: 11/19/2009 DATE: 02/06/20 FILE; PLANDS_VIC_PH4_
AND 02/02/2010 AND BEAUFORT COUNTY GIS DATA WEBSITE 2019
NAERT.NC.US, BEAUFORT COUNTY PARCEL DATA SHAPEFILES,
D 1983FEETF--CZ K� CP#1 745.59.32.4
IV_ 4709 COLLEGE ACRES DRIVE
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP IMAGES, NC STATEPLANE, ENVIRONN ENTAL CONSULTANTS SUITE 2
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLNA 28403
NAD83, FEET, 1:24000-SCALE, WEBSITE: WWWACDOT.ORG � � TEL [phone] FIGURE 1
FAX [phone]

LEGEND
P & U LANDS BOUNDARY
m
PHASE 4 PLANTING AREA D�
® ROADS
® BERMS AND PARKING AREAS D
v
0 FORESTED WETLAND
N
A
0 OPENWATER
0
0 PHASE 4 WELL LOCATION �� N
TREE SAMPLING PLOT pBCRW-44n PHASEI
PHOTO STATION NUMBER AND LOCATION hr 101 BCRW-33
PLPS 6 0 BCRW-29
El CONTROL WELL ` ` BAY CITY
SOUTH CREEK CANAL FARM
EXECUTIVE ROAD/ CONTROL -.1
JAIME ROAD PULPS 21 �w SITE BCRW-17
AREAS PLANTED IN PHASE 4 190 V 189
O ZONE 2 HEADWATER FOREST (17.0 ACRES)
0 ZONE 3 NON-RIVERINE SWAMP FOREST -
(115 ACRES)
Do c
O Z
NOTE: Z
Zrn
A o P LANDS
P AND U LANDS (3,666.92 ACRES) RC �a �u p O PHASE 3
(TOTAL ACREAGE INCLUDES 12.52 ACRES OF o v 99 200
RIGHT-OF-WAY ALONG STATE ROADS NOT RC-2 v v
PLANTED.) RC-3 0 203 2024 BAY CITY No. 2
LJ LJ
O 205
O n
ROD AN 204 c
50 ETROL z
SOURCE:
PORTIONS OF THE BOUNDARY PROVIDED BY: ROBERT M. CHILES,
NEW BERN, NORTH CAROLINA. JOB #2009096, DATED: 11/19/2009
AND 02/02/2010 AND BEAUFORT COUNTY GIS DATA WEBSTTE
WWW.CO.BEAUFORT.NC.US, BEAUFORT COUNTY PARCEL DATA SHAPEFILES,
HAD 1983 FEET.
U LANDS I m
PHASE 3 Z
0
N
PLANTING PLAN AND MONITORING LOCATIONS
P AND U LANDS PHASE 4 AND TWO CONTROL SITES
PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC.
SCALE: AS SHOWN JAPPROVED BY: DRAWN BY: TLJ
DATE: 03/17/20 FILE: P-U-MONLANDELLS-PLANT-
2019
D 1,800 3,600 rCZR=
4709 COLLEGE ACRES DRIVE CP#1745.59.32.4
SUITE 2
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS WILMINGTON. NORTH CAROLINA 28403
SCALE IN FEET J FAX 910%392-9139 FIGURE 2

LE Ni `
P AND U LANDS BOUNDARY,;
PHASE 4 PLANTING AREA
Do WdD
• WELL LOCATION AND TREE MONITORING PLOT
(WELLS TO MONITOR LATERAL DRAINAGE EFFECT
MAY NOT HAVE A TREE PLOT. LOCATIONS ARE Pt
APPROXIMATE.) Ao
0
C CONTROL WELLS N
To
SOILS
SYMBOL SOIL NAME N
Da DARE (ORGANIC)(72.0 ACRES) UQ BCRW-44 PH'E
PO PONZER (ORGANIC)(57.0 ACRES) -
Pt PORTSMOUTH (MINERAL)(3.0 ACRES) BCRW-33
J BCRW-29
HYDRIC SOILS TO h� Pt
BAY
NOTE: Pt SOUTH CREEK CANAL FARMCITY
— ONLY HYDRIC SOILS ARE DESIGNATED EXECUTIVE ROAD es PO CONTROL
MINERAL OR ORGANIC. JAIME ROAD SITE BCRW-17
190
- SOILS SERIES ACREAGES SHOWN ARE
FOR THE PHASE PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION
PO 0
az 3
irn A 0 P LANDS
RC-1 A np PHASE3
TO 00 199 200
RC-2 Dv o
3 203 202 Da BAY CITY NO' 2
205 PO
0
RODMAN 204 0
CONTROL
SITE
U LANDS m
PHASE 3 Z
SOILS
P AND U LANDS PHASE 4 AND TWO CONTROL SITES
PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC.
SOURCE: SCALE: AS SHOWN APPROVED BY: DRAWN BY: TLJ
PORTIONS OF THE BOUNDARY PROVIDED 09 ROBERT M. CHILES,
NEW 02/0BERNNORTH AND
BEAU JOB OUNT096, DATED: 11/19/2009 P—LANDS—SOILS—PH4—
AND 02/IEAUFO0 AND BEBEAUFO T CON GIS DATA WEBSITE DATE: 03/17/20 FILE'
WWW.CO.BEAUFORT.NC.US, BEAUFORT COUNTY PARCEL DATA SHAPEFILES, •
HAD 1AER FEET. 0 1,soo 3,soo CP#1745.59.32.4
WE12 AERIALS DOWNLOAD FROM FROM NC ONE MAP =CZR� 4709 COLLEGE ACRES DRIVE
WEBSITE: http://data.nconemap SUITE 2
SOIL SURVEY OF BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, US DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS WILMINGTON. NORTH CAROLINA 28403
OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONVERSATION SERVICE, SCALE IN FEET TEL [phone]
ISSUED: SEPTEMBER 1995 11_ � FAX [phone] FIGURE 3

LEGEND
PHASE 4 PLANTING AREA
OPEN WATER OR PLUGGED/FILLED DITCH
® ROADS
® PERIMETER BERM AND PARKING AREAS
0 FORESTED WETLAND
• WELL LOCATION
10 CONTROL WELL
Iit
jW
a
Legend
Elevation in Feet
Value
0 0-2 p
I� 2-4 �1
= 4-5
0 5-6 SOUTH CREEK CANAL
0 B EXECUTIVE ROAD/
JAIME ROAD
0 8-9
_ 9-10
- 10-11 •
11-12 190
12-13
13 4 c
_14-15 _ U LANDS
15-16 PHASE 3
Q 16-21 O
0 21-4B D
7 X-A
I Dm
SOURCE:
PORTIONS OF THE BOUNDARY PROVIDED BY: ROBERT M. CHILES,
NEW BERN, NORTH CAROLINA, JOB #2009096, DATED: 11/19/2009
AND 02/02/2010 AND BEAUFORT COUNTY GIS DATA WEBSITE
WWW.CO.BEAUFORT.NC.US, BEAUFORT COUNTY PARCEL DATA SHAPEFILES,
NAD 1983 FEET.
NORTH CAROUNA FLOODPLAIN MAPPING PROGRAM, BEAUFORT AND PAMLICO COUNTIES,
LIDAR, NC STATEPLANE, NAD 1983, FEET, WWW.NCFLOODMAPS.COM
199 200
•
• 202
203
204
. A
U LANDS
189
a
km
fi
Ir
■
7
r
n
a BCRW-33
VTR L
SITE
P LANDS -
PHASE 3 =
2
BAY CITY
0
C
z
-G
r
z
rrl
z
O
BCRW-17
Its
IN
72
MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS ON LIDAR
P AND U LANDS PHASE 4 AND TWO CONTROL SITES
PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC.
SCALE: AS SHOWN APPROVED BY: DRAWN BY: TLJ
DATE: 02/06/20 FILE: P_U_LANDS_PLANT_
MON WELL PH4 019
o 1,000 2,000 =CZR
4709 COLLEGE ACRES DRIVE CP# 1745.59.32.4
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS SUITE 2
SCALE IN FEET VALMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403
FAX [phone] FIGURE 4

v
s
U
C
16
14
12
10
C
CC
:- 8
t
C
C
O
c
6
T
4
2
NOTE: "Range of Normal" and "Aurora Monthly Rainfall Total" plotted on last day
of each month. "Range of Normal" refers to the 30th and 70th percentile
thresholds of the probability of onsite rainfall amounts outside of the normal range
(based on historical averages from 1981-2010). WETS Data subject to periodic
revision. Data shown are latest available from http://agacis.rcc-
acis.org/?fips=37013
"Aurora Monthly Rainfall Total" refers to monthly totals from the PCS-Aurora 6 N
tiC ti0)
Q` oti otiP oti
�2019 Bay City Daily Rainfall
T 30% Less Chance
•
•
tiC5
�zQ
oti oti oti oti oti
�0 Oe`
Bay City 30-day Rolling Total • 2019 Aurora Monthly Rainfall Total
—30% More Chance 2019 Bay City Monthly Rainfall
Figure 5. 2019 Bay City rainfall vs. WETS -Aurora rainfall

LEGEND
P & U LANDS BOUNDARY
PHASE 4 PLANTING AREA
® ROADS
® BERMS AND PARKING AREAS
0 FORESTED WETLAND
I FORESTED NON -WETLAND
0 OPENWATER
O PHASE 4 WELL LOCATION
n CONTROL WELL
HYDROLOGIC
ZONES WETLAND HYDROPERIODS
0 O = >6 - 12.5 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON
0 O = >12.5 - 25 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON
(12.9 ACRES)
0 O = >25 - 75 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON
(103.8 ACRES)
NOTE:
HYDROLOGIC ZONES ARE A VISUAL APPROXIMATION OF TOTAL ACRES
REPRESENTED BY WELL HYDROPERIOD CATEGORIES BASED ON ONE
WELL PER 15 ACRES, KNOWLEDGE OF SITE CONDITIONS, AND LIDAR
CONTOURS. THE ZONES DO NOT REPRESENT ACTUAL HYDROPERIOD
BOUNDARIES.
0 1,200 2,400
SCALE IN FEET
SOURCE:
PORTIONS OF THE BOUNDARY PROVIDED BY: ROBERT M. CHILES,
NEW BERN, NORTH CAROLINA, JOB #2009096, DATED: 11/19/2009
AND 02/02/2010 AND BEAUFORT COUNTY GIS DATA WEBSITE
WWW.CO.BEAUFORT.NC.US, BEAUFORT COUNTY PARCEL DATA SHAPEFILES,
NAD 1983 FEET.

Appendix A. Individual tree/shrub plot counts from P and U Lands Phase 4 first (2015) and fifth (2019) annual fall monitoring. Numbers in each column indicate stems unquestionably alive at sampling. Plot size is 0.3 acre.
Zone 2
190
Total
Common name
Scientific name
1st
5th
1st
5th
Unknown
?
1
1
Serviceberry
Amelanchier canadensis
Red chokeberry
Aronia arbutifolia
Paw paw
Asima triloba
River birch
Betula nigra
American beautyberry
Callicarpa americana
Ironwood
Carpinus caroliniana
Water hickory
Carya aquatica
Sugarberry
Celtis laevigata
Buttonbush"
Cephalanthus occidentalis
Atlantic white cedar
Chamaecyparis thyoides
Sweet pepperbush
Clethra alnifolia
1
1
1
1
Silky dogwood
Corpus amomum
2
2
Swamp dogwood
C. foemina
Titi
Cyrilla racemiflora
Persimmon
Diospora virginiana
Strawberry bush
Euonymous americana
Green ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Deciduous holly
Ilex decidua
Inkberry
I. glabra
Winterberry
Ilex verticillata
Virginia sweetspire
Itea virginica
2
2
2
2
Swamp doghobble
Leucothoe (Eubotrys) racemosa
Spicebush
Lindera benzoin
Fetterbush
Lyonia lucida
Sweetbay
Magnolia virginiana
Mulberry
Morus rubra
Unknown gum/tupelo
Nyssa spp.
Water tupelo
N. aquatica
52
33
52
33
Swamp tupelo
Nyssa biflora
10
10
10
10
Red bay
Persea borbonia
Pond pine
Pinus serotina
Sycamore
Platanus occidentalis
Oak
Quercus spp.
White oak
Q. alba
Laurel oak
Q. laurifolia
4
4
Overcup oak
Q. lyrata
Swamp chestnut oak
Q. michauxii
Water oak
Q. nigra
Willow oak
Q. phellos
Cherrybark oak
Quercus pagodaefolia
Dwarf azalea
Rhododendron atlanticum
Swamp azalea
Rhododendron viscosum
Swamp rose
Rosa palustris
Bald cypress
Taxodium distichum
59
59
59
59
American elm
Ulmus americana
High bush blueberry
Vaccinium corymbosum
Possumhaw
Viburnum nudum
Dusty zenobia
Zenobia pulverulenta
ALIVE STEMS1
127
1 109
127
109
TOTAL STEMS
127
132
127
132
Zone 3
189
199
200
202
203
204
205
Total
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
2
7
9
4
3
1
1
2
2
2
2
9
9
2
2
1
3
3
2
1
4
3
12
9
1
1
2
2
3
4
10
1
1
3
3
1
1
15
18
10
5
16
17
6
4
10
10
5
5
4
5
16
4
67
50
1
5
1
1
5
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
10
16
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
7
8
2
4
6
24
16
20
12
22
15
29
24
22
15
20
18
15
10
152
143
1
5
24
17
23
16
8
6
6
7
11
8
12
10
85
79
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
8
6
1
1
7
8
7
18
16
10
9
18
6
5
3
10
8
76
53
25
28
15
14
15
15
16
15
23
25
17
17
19
19
130
133
2
1
1
1
3
2
1
2
1
4
27
27
15
14
16
15
18
18
35
36
58
57
29
28
198
254
3
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
4
5
107
87
119
95
112
85
113
108
115
99
126
118
108
86
800
787
110
111
125
125
116
116
117
117
120
120
131
131
114
114
834
834
P and U Lands Phase 4 Fifth Annual Report A-1

NOTE: A 10-foot pole marked in one -foot increments held by a biologist about 25 feet from the
camera is visible in all photos. The photo is identified with the station number (see Figure 2) and
direction of view, and date taken.
PLPS 21: southeast, top photo 6 November 2019, bottom photo 10 December 2015.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 4 B-1 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual Report March 2020