20120107 Ver 1_Year 2 Monitoring Report Ph III_2015_20160620

SECOND ANNUAL (2015) REPORT FOR THE
P AND U LANDS RESTORATION SITE PHASE 3
RICHLAND TOWNSHIP
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Bay City Restoration Site
'---I►
1
South Creek
Headwaters of Gum Swamp
4 Run in Phase 3
1
Phase 2
Headwaters of Gum Swamp
..RuEn Phare 3
4 1
E M, 4► , xY
Prepared for:
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Prepared by:
CZR Incorporated
June 2016

SECOND ANNUAL (2015) REPORT FOR THE
P AND U LANDS RESTORATION SITE PHASE 3
RICHLAND TOWNSHIP
BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Prepared for:
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Prepared by:
CZR Incorporated
June 2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0
PROJECT OVERVIEW ...........................
1.1
History .....................................................
1.2
Location ...................................................
1.3
Goals and Performance Criteria ..............
2.0
REQUIREMENTS ...................................
2.1
Normal Rainfall and Growing Season .....
2.2
Hydrology ................................................
2.3
Flow .........................................................
2.4
Vegetation ...............................................
2.5
Photographic Documentation ..................
3.0
2015 RESULTS ......................................
3.1
Rainfall ....................................................
3.2
Hydrology ................................................
3.3
Flow .........................................................
3.4
Vegetation ...............................................
3.5
Photographic Documentation ..................
4.0
SUMMARY .............................................
LITERATURE CITED
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
5
6
6
H
Cover Photos -Top: Aerial photo looking northeast over Phase 3, with Bay City in the background
17 March 2015.
Bottom: Aerial photo looking north over the section of Phase 3 that contains the upper headwater
valley of Gum Swamp Run 17 March 2015.
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 P and U Lands Phase 3 performance criteria, methods summary, and current
status.......................................................................................................................... T-1
Table 2 Hydroperiods of 96 non -riparian monitoring wells at P and U Lands Phase 3
restoration site and three Rodman control wells during all rainfall conditions in
2015............................................................................................................................ T-2
Table 3 Hydroperiods of 96 non -riparian monitoring wells at P and U Lands Phase 3
restoration site and three Rodman control wells during normal and below normal
rainfallin 2015.......................................................................................................... T-17
Table 4 Summary of flow events recorded at fixed flow camera stations and during
monthlysite visits...................................................................................................... T-28
Table 5 Second annual survival of trees and shrubs planted in 94 0.3 -acre plots at P and
ULands Phase 3...................................................................................................... T-29
Table 6 Second annual survival of trees and shrubs planted in four 0.11 -acre buffer plots
along Gum Swamp Run and two 0.11 -acre buffer plots along a low energy
headwater valley south of Gum Swamp Run at P and U Lands Phase 3 ................ T-31
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 P and U Lands Mitigation Site - Phase 3 Vicinity Map
Figure 2 P and U Lands Mitigation Site - Phase 3 Monitoring Locations
Figure 3 P and U Lands Mitigation Site - Phase 3 Soils
Figure 4 P and U Lands Mitigation Site - Phase 3 Monitoring Locations on As Built LiDAR
Figure 5 2015 Bay City and WETS -Aurora Rainfall
Figure 6 P and U Lands Mitigation Site - Phase 3 2015 Longest Hydroperiods and
Estimated Hydrologic Zones during All Rainfall Conditions
Figure 7 P and U Lands Mitigation Site - Phase 3 2015 Hydroperiods and Estimated
Hydrologic Zones during WETS Normal and Below Normal Rainfall
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 iii PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

APPENDICES
Appendix A Gum Swamp Run Stream 2015 Survey and Evidence of Flow
Appendix B Stem Counts at Individual Plots at P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
Appendix C Selected First Annual Restoration Photographs
NOTE: Copy of entire report and hydrology and flow data included on CDs:
CD1 - 2015 Report, Hydrology Tables, & Monthly Observations Flow Videos
CD2 - 2015 Stream Survey Flow Videos
CD3 - 2015 Mounted Camera 1 Flow Videos
CD4 - 2015 Mounted Camera 2 Flow Videos
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 iv PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW
1.1 History. The approximately 3,667 -acre P and U Lands restoration site is part of
the PCS Phosphate Company Inc.'s (PCS) compensatory mitigation to offset unavoidable
impacts to wetlands and waters authorized under United States Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) Action ID: 200110096 and North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Water
Quality Certification (WQC) #2008-0868 version 2.0. As described in the mitigation plan prepared
for the pre -construction notification (PCN) to the USACE (CZR 2012), the site was planned to be
constructed in three phases as shown on Figure 1. This report concerns second annual
monitoring of the 1,755 acres of Phase 3 conducted by CZR Incorporated (CZR) of Wilmington,
NC. (The P and U designation have no special meaning other than that was the historic label
given to PCS and Weyerhaeuser properties with similar ownership agreements).
The design team consisted of Jonathan T. Ricketts, Inc. of Palm Beach Gardens, FL, the
restoration design engineer, PCS, and CZR. Earthwork was performed by Sawyer's Land
Developing, Inc. out of Belhaven, NC and supervised by the design team. Phase 1 and 2
restoration activities occurred September 2011 -March 2013. Phase 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 all for the construction of the
interior ditch plugs and perimeter berms and ditches. Planting of Phase 3 occurred February
2014. Further details of construction and monitoring are included in the as built and first annual
reports (CZR 2015a, CZR 2015b).
The P and U Lands site is a key component linking PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.'s
(PCS) Parker Farm Mitigation Site, Bay City Farm Mitigation Site, Gum Run Mitigation Site, and
the South Creek Corridor into a large and varied collection of restored wetland and preserved
natural areas (South Creek Corridor Complex). Restoration of the headwaters and upper valley
of historic Gum Swamp Run, a tributary to South Creek, is one of the goals of Phase 3. 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.
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 eastern half of the U Lands as the
western limit of County Line Road terminates at the midpoint of the south property line). The
entire site is accessed via multiple gated roads along Bay City Road, Peele Road, County Line
Road, and/or Jaime/Executive Road. The site is located within the Pamlico Hydrologic Unit
03020104 of the Tar -Pamlico River basin within the South Creek subbasin at latitude 35.233831
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 1 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

and longitude 76.775742. Portions of the site can be found on the USGS Aurora, Bayboro, South
Creek, and Vandemere quadrangles (Figures 1 and 2).
1.3 Goals and Performance Criteria. The primary goal of the entire project is to re-
establish a self-sustaining functional wetland complex to allow surface flow to move through
vegetated wetlands before reaching any stream. Mitigation yields are estimated and performance
criteria are described for the project in detail in the Compensatory Mitigation Plan for P and U
Lands Restoration Site (CZR 2012). Performance criteria for Phase 3 are summarized in Table 1.
Over time the 1,755 -acre Phase 3 portion of the site is expected to successfully re-establish
approximately:
150 wetland acres of headwater forest
580 wetland acres of non-riverine swamp forest,
479 acres of pond -pine pocosin forest,
96 wetland acres of hardwood flat forest,
33 acres of Tar -Pamlico riparian buffer (under the new consolidated rules, the estimated
acres may increase),
7,141 linear feet of zero and first order stream including a low energy stream (Gum
Swamp Run), and
31 acres of open water in plugged ditches.
The work is also expected to successfully rehabilitate 271 acres of existing forested
wetland. This area would include the wooded area along the east property line south of Gum
Swamp Run and the wooded area north and east of the north end of Gum Road.
The remaining 57.84 acres are comprised of existing roads, perimeter berms, and other
man -dominated areas. Approximately 18,301 linear feet of jurisdictional waters in roadside
ditches and canals will be plugged in order to increase the hydroperiods within the adjacent
planted areas (these plugged jurisdictional ditches and canals are included in the 31 acres of
reestablished open water). Approximately 12,980 feet of roadside ditches parallel to Gum Road
and a 3,400 -foot roadside ditch north of Bay City 4 are unplugged.
2.0 REQUIREMENTS
2.1 Normal Rainfall and Growing Season. A continuous electronic rain gauge on the
adjacent Bay City Mitigation Site is downloaded once a month and its data are used in
conjunction with data from nearby automated weather stations (e.g., NRCS WETS data from
NOAA's site at Aurora and rain gauges at other nearby monitoring sites) to determine normal
rainfall during the monitoring period. Bay City data were compared to the WETS range of normal
precipitation to determine if Bay City rainfall was within the normal range. The range of normal
precipitation for this report refers to the 30th and 70th percentile thresholds of the probability of
having onsite rainfall amounts less than or higher than those thresholds. The range of normal
and the 30 -day rolling total data lines begin on the last day of each month and the 2015 Aurora
monthly precipitation total is plotted on the last day of each month.
Under the 2010 regional guidance from the Corps of Engineers for wetland hydroperiods,
the normal growing season for Beaufort County is 28 February to 6 December or 282 days
(WETS table for Beaufort County first/last freeze date 28 degrees F 50 percent probability) (US
Army Corps of Engineers 2010). At the suggestion of the Corps' Washington regulatory field
office, data collected between 1 February and 27 February provide important information related
to analyses of site hydrology during the early growing season, but are not part of the hydroperiod
calculation for success.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 2 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

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, 96 semi -continuous electronic LevelTroll water level monitoring wells
(manufactured by InSitu) are deployed at a density of approximately 1 well/15 acres across all
planted areas of Phase 3, with the exception of two wells that were installed near a ditch to be
used in conjunction with a nearby well to monitor lateral drainage effects from the open perimeter
ditches. Exclosures constructed of barbed wire wrapped around metal fence posts were built
around all wells to reduce likelihood of disturbance or equipment loss by black bears.
Three wells were installed 13 March 2013 in a recently timbered tract west of Rodman
Road in the Ponzer soil series as controls for the P and U Lands wells in the same soil type
(Figures 1-4). To serve as additional controls, in November of 2015, four wells were installed at
previous well locations within the adjacent Bay City Farm. According to the LiDAR data, these
four locations will also represent Ponzer soils but at lower elevations than the three Rodman
wells.
Electronic wells 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.
2.3 Flow. Stream surveys are conducted annually to document conditions in the
restored headwater stream valley of Gum Swamp Run and the valley to the south. The entire
length of the valley is walked. Active flow and features formed by previous flow are documented
with GPS, photo and/or video. In the first few years, the surveys will be performed usually twice
annually (once in the dry time of year and once in the wet); however, herbaceous vegetation
colonization may vary this schedule. As an experiment, in April 2015, two game/trail cameras (Ltl
Acorn HD Video MMS Wireless 12 mega pixels) were installed in the upper valley of Gum Swamp
Run to capture flow conditions in the valley on a daily basis via regularly programmed video.
These cameras are mounted on wooden posts at the edge of the 40 -foot valley; the locations of
the camera may be moved over the course of monitoring depending on their functionality and
valley conditions through time. Also beginning in June 2015, at the monthly downloads, biologists
download these cameras and make observations at these two locations and also walk to the Gum
Swamp Run valley/stream in the vicinity of eight nearby monitoring wells and at two locations
along the valley to the south, to take additional video of flow, make note of other observations of
evidence of past or current flow (e.g., debris wrack, sediment scour or sorting), and water depth.
The cameras are programmed to record twice each day.
Within the Gum Swamp Run valley, a 2 -foot wide channel was constructed within the first
two field sections east of Bay City Road (SRI 002) and in the lower half of the third section (in the
upper half of third section, no construction occurred). In order to recapture flow from a portion of
the adjacent Parker Farm which LiDAR indicated historically flowed to Gum Swamp Run, a
shallow 40 -foot wide valley was constructed from the fifth field section east of Bay City Road up
to the top of the valley. No construction occurred in the fourth field section, an area called the
bowl, where the slope flattened between the two constructed segments.
2.4 Vegetation. The second annual survey of the 94 0.3 -acre planted vegetation
monitoring plots occurred October to December 2015. The plots represent 2 percent of the
restoration area (Figure 2). Nuisance monitoring plots (1 meter square) were established in 2014
at the upper corner opposite the well (along the long axis of the plot) in all tree plots and all
woody stems taller than 1 foot were counted and identified. Six additional 0.11 -acre plots were
established and surveyed in December 2015 to monitor stem density in potential stream buffer
zones along the restored Gum Run headwaters (four plots) and the low-energy headwater valley
system south of Gum Swamp Run (Figure 2).
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 3 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

Extra stems (the unplanted footprint of the debris piles) from the Phase 4 2015 planting
were planted in Phase 3 in the 25 -foot wide area along the interior of the perimeter berm in some
locations (the bottom of the U Lands west of Gum Road, along Bay City Road, County Line Road,
and along Jamie Road at the top of Gum Road; a total of approximately 6 acres), These "25 -foot
offset areas", were unplanted in 2014 in order to maintain an equipment access corridor post -
planting in 2014. No additional vegetation monitoring plots were added.
2.5 Photographic Documentation. Fifteen permanent photo point locations were
established along the perimeter of the restoration area (Figure 2). The second annual photos
were taken December 2015.
3.0 2015 RESULTS
3.1 Rainfall. Total rainfall in 2015 at Bay City was 56.4 inches, 2.4 inches more than
2014. The 30 -day rolling total of 2015 Bay City rainfall was considered above normal WETS
rainfall 3 June - 5 July, 2 October - 1 November, and 18 November - 19 December (Figure 5).
Wetland hydroperiods were calculated for the entire year regardless of rainfall and with the three
above normal rainfall time 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 2015, all 41 weeks of the growing season were
considered normal with no drought status in the vicinity of the P and U Lands project area.
3.2 Hydrology. During all rainfall conditions, most wells recorded wetland
hydroperiods frequently during the year, but no wells had a continuous hydroperiod for the entire
growing season (Table 2, Figure 6). Approximately 95 percent of wells had a hydroperiod greater
than 12.5 percent of the growing season, with 42 wells falling between >12.5 to 25 percent, and
49 wells falling into the >25 to 75 percent hydrologic zone. Only two wells (PUM 175 and PUM
195) did not have a wetland hydroperiod, but both had 47 cumulative days of the growing season
when water levels were shallower than 12 inches below the surface. In 2014, these wells did not
have a wetland hydroperiod either. If the non -wetland areas persist, the amount of the site
represented by the wells is small and would add diversity to the site.
After excluding periods above normal rainfall periods, most wells still recorded wetland
hydroperiods frequently during the year (Table 3, Figure 7). Only two wells dropped down one
hydrologic zone. One well (PUM 178) moved out of the >12.5 to 25 percent zone with continuous
wetland hydroperiod for 6.7 percent of the growing season. The other well (PUM 192) did not
have a wetland hydroperiod during normal rainfall.
The three Rodman control wells recorded water levels similar to Phase 3 wells (Table 2,
Table 3). Tables depicting 2015 daily well readings and rainfall are included on a companion CD
with this report. The data for the four Bay City reference wells is not included in this report
because the wells were installed in November 2015 and the data were incomplete. The Bay City
reference well data will be included in future reports.
3.3 Flow. In 2015, two stream surveys occurred (25 March and 21 October) which
documented continuous moderate to low flow within the lower Gum Swamp Run 2 -foot valley
during both surveys where water depths varied from 5 to 8 inches. It was evident that flow had
been out of the banks prior to both surveys, but was confined to the 2 -foot channel during the
surveys. In the areas of lower flow, usually there were some vegetation, but the majority of the
channel was free of vegetation and contained frequent evidence of sorted sediment.
For the area known as the bowl (area of no construction between the 2 -foot channel and
the 40 -foot valley), the March survey documented flow along a continuous path throughout the
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 4 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

bowl down to where it crossed the third filled ditch east of Bay City Road; however, in the October
survey flow was more difficult to discern even though the flow path noted in March was evident in
places.
In the 40 -foot valley, low to moderate flow was documented for the entire length and the
valley contained bank to bank water in the upper half during the March survey; during the October
survey, water depths varied from 2 to 24 inches (average depth 8 inches) and flow was noted in
many places by the orientation of filamentous algae in the water. Low flow was more common in
the upper half of the valley in October and low to moderate flow was noted in the lower half.
Appendix A contains the 2015 flow information collected in Phase 3 stream valley surveys,
selected photographs and referenced videos, and a list of videos of flow captured in the two
valleys in 2015. All 2015 flow videos are included only on the accompanying CDs in three
folders: mounted camera, monthly observations, and stream survey. Also included on a CD is a
file containing data for each month with daily flow observations taken from the videos of the two
mounted cameras.
All Gum Swamp Run flow observation locations had at least two flow events during all
rainfall conditions (Table 4). When excluding above normal rainfall, all stations, with the
exception of the feature south of PUM 115, had at least one flow event for 2015. The valley to
the south only had one flow event during all rainfall conditions. The two mounted cameras
captured numerous flow events for the year; GSR Camera 1 recorded 29 flow events (54
inferred) and GSR Camera 2 recorded 33 flow events (46 inferred). Monthly flow observations
began June 2015, which is the start of the dry summer season. For future years with normal
rainfall conditions, the number of months with flow events is expected to increase because
typically wetter months (January through April) will be included.
3.4 Vegetation. Planting zones of Phase 3 were divided into several community
types: riverine swamp forest (Z1), headwater forest (Z2), non- riverine swamp forest (Z3), pond
pine pocosin forest (Z4), and two zones of hardwood flat (Z5 and Z6). Using only the number of
planted stems that were unquestionably alive in the monitoring plots, the most conservative
estimate of survival is presented. Many stems appeared dead or questionable, but based on
prior monitoring experience, a stem needs to appear dead (or not be found) for two sampling
events before it can be confidently counted as dead. At the year two 2015 survey, with the
exception of Z6, percent survival of most zones was similar: 83, 74, 737 74, 71, and 38,
respectively. Appendix B contains the number of stems that were alive in each plot for the fall
2015 survey.
Overall survival of trees that were unquestionably alive in the 94 plots from the time of
planting to the second annual fall survey was 82 percent, with a corresponding density of 328
trees per acre (Table 5). Deciduous holly (Ilex decidua), bald cypress (Taxodium distichum),
pond cypress (T. ascendens), and Atlantic white cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides) had with the
highest survival of stems with 100, 98, 97, and 96 percent of stems alive. Excluding unknown
species, ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana), white oak (Quercus alba), and American elm (Ulmus
americana) had the lowest survival with 53, 55, and 57 percent of alive stems respectively. 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 99 percent and a density of 395 trees
per acre. The percent survival of individual species also increases with none of the known
species having a survival of less than 94 percent.
Overall survival of shrubs that were unquestionably alive from the time of planting to the
first annual fall survey was 73 percent with a corresponding density of nine shrubs per acre
scattered among the 11 species planted (Table 5). Inkberry (Ilex glabra) and Virginia sweetspire
(Itea virginica) had 100 and 91 percent of unquestionably alive stems. Since the the two dusty
zenobia (Zenobia pulverulenta) stems were misidentified in 2014, the survival is now zero
percent. Spicebush (Lindera bezoin) has the lowest survival with zero percent, but when
uncertain survival status is included, the survival increases to 100 percent because there is only
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 5 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

one identified stem in all of the plots. If all shrubs with uncertain survival status (stem appeared
dead but could not be confirmed) are included with shrubs that were definitely alive, survival
increases to 99 percent and a density of 12 stems per acre.
After combining the trees, shrubs and unknown species that were definitely alive, density
increases to 338 stems per acre and if stems with uncertain survival are added, the density
increases to 426 stems per acre. At year two, different species of trees are surviving 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], sweet bay [Magnolia
virginiana]) will enhance the diversity and density of the site. The volunteers will be counted in
year five. Overall, the monitoring plots north of the Bay City No. 2 road have the lowest survival,
with 13 of the 18 plots in this area near or below the target of 260 trees per acre. A remedial
action plan will be discussed with agencies.
The six riparian buffer plots were established after many stems had already lost leaves
and it was suspected that some stems were hidden in herbaceous vegetation and untagged;
therefore, at an early spring 2015 visit before the herbaceous vegetation became green, 19 more
baseline stems were tagged and revisited in December 2015. A total of 261 stems among 12
large tree species and two small tree species were found in the buffer plots along with some alive
stems with uncertain identifications due to lack of leaves (Table 6). Most of the identified trees
were swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii), bald cypress (Taxodium disctichum), and green
ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica); no shrubs were tagged in any of the buffer plots. Based on the six
plots, the total density of stems alive in the buffer area is 394 stems per acre at year two survey
and 447 if the unsure stems are added. The results from the six buffer plots were not added to
the results from the other plots.
The Corps determined that three tree species have the possibility to outcompete young
planted trees at a mitigation site and need to be monitored as nuisance species to ensure they do
not take over a mitigation site. These species are loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), red maple (Acer
rubrum), and sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua). In 2015, a total of 289 stems were found in all
nuisance plots and only eight stems were of the three species mentioned (2.8 percent). Of the
eight stems, four were loblolly pine, three were red maple, and one was a sweetgum.
3.5 Photographic Documentation. A few photos representative of 2015 conditions
are included with this report (Appendix C). More are available upon request.
4.0 SUMMARY
According to WETS rainfall calculations, Bay City rainfall was normal or below normal
WETS rainfall except for 3 June - 5 July, 2 October - 1 November, and 18 November - 19
December. Post -restoration wetland hydrology monitoring for success officially began in 2014.
During all rainfall conditions, two wells did not record a wetland hydroperiod, and no wells
recorded a continuous wetland hydroperiod for the entire length of the growing season.
Approximately 95 percent of the wells (91 of 96) recorded wetland hydroperiods >12.5 percent to
75 percent of the growing season. Three wells had a wetland hydroperiod for >6 to 12.5 percent
of the growing season.
During periods of WETS normal or below normal rainfall, most wells still recorded
wetland hydroperiods frequently during the year. Only two wells dropped down one hydrologic
zone. One well moved out of the >12.5 to 25 percent zone with continuous wetland hydroperiod
for 6.7 percent of the growing season. The other well did not have a wetland hydroperiod during
normal rainfall, making a total of three wells without a wetland hydroperiod for 2015.
In 2015, two stream surveys occurred (25 March and 21 October) which documented
continuous moderate to low flow within the lower Gum Swamp Run 2 -foot valley during both
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 6 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

surveys where water depths varied from 5 to 8 inches. It was evident that flow had been out of
the banks prior to both surveys, but was confined to the 2 -foot channel during the surveys. In the
areas of lower flow, usually there were some vegetation, but the majority of the channel was free
of vegetation, there was frequent evidence of sorted sediment. For the area known as the bowl,
the March survey documented flow along a continuous path throughout the bowl down to where it
crossed the third filled ditch east of Bay City Road; however, in the October survey flow was more
difficult to discern even though the flow path noted in March was evident in places. In the 40 -foot
valley, low to moderate flow was documented for the entire length and the valley contained bank
to bank water in the upper half during the March survey; during the October survey, water depths
varied from 2 to 24 inches (average depth 8 inches) and flow was noted in many places by the
orientation of filamentous algae in the water. Low flow was more common in the upper half of the
valley in October and low to moderate flow was noted in the lower half.
All Gum Swamp Run flow observation locations had at least two flow events during all
rainfall conditions. When excluding above normal rainfall, all stations with the exception of the
feature south of PUM 115 had at least one flow event for 2015. The valley to the south only had
one flow event during all rainfall conditions. The two mounted cameras captured well over two
flow events for the year; GSR Camera 1 recorded 29 flow events (54 inferred) and GSR Camera
2 recorded 33 flow events (46 inferred). Monthly flow observations began June 2015, which is
the start of the dry summer season. For future years with normal rainfall conditions, the number
of months with flow events is expected to increase because typically wetter months (January
through April) will be included.
Overall survival of trees that were unquestionably alive in the 94 plots from the time of
planting to the second annual fall survey was 82 percent, with a corresponding density of 328
trees per acre. Overall survival of shrubs that were unquestionably alive from the time of planting
to the first annual fall survey was 73 percent with a corresponding density of nine shrubs per
acre. After combining the trees, shrubs and unknown species that were definitely alive, density
increases to 338 stems per acre. A total of 261 stems among 12 large tree species and two small
tree species were found in the buffer plots. Based on these six buffer plots, total density of stems
unquestionably alive was 394 stems per acre. Different species of trees and shrubs are surviving
well in the second 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]) will enhance the diversity and density of
the site. A remedial action plan will be discussed with agencies over the poor stem survival in
monitoring plots north of the Bay City No. 2 road.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 7 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

LITERATURE CITED
CZR Incorporated. 2012. Compensatory Mitigation Plan for P and U Lands Restoration Site.
CZR Incorporated. 2015a. As -Built Report for the P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3.
CZR Incorporated. 2015b. First Annual Report for the P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3.
Kirby, Robert M. 1995. The soil survey of Beaufort County, North Carolina. Natural Resources
Conservation Service, USDA.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2002. Regulatory guidance letter (RGL) 02-02. Guidance on
Compensatory mitigation projects for aquatic resource impacts under the Corps
regulatory program pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the
Rivers and Harbors Act.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2005. Technical Standard for Water -Table Monitoring of Potential
Wetland Sites. WRAP Technical Notes Collection (ERDC TN -WRAP -05-2). U.S. Army
Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2008. Regulatory Guidance Letter (RGL) 08-03. Minimum
monitoring requirements for compensatory mitigation projects involving the restoration,
establishment, and/or enhancement of aquatic resources.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2010. Regional supplement to the Corps of Engineers wetland
delineation manual: Atlantic and Gulf coastal plain region. Version 2.0. J.S. Wakeley,
R.W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble, eds. ERCD/EL TR -08-30, Vicksburg, MS.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 8 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

N
!n
0
O
(D
E
a)
U
a)
U
E
M
T
N C U C
Ow 0 'O
= 3 t6 C 0 0 N N C:O
m M 0)N 0 ^ to a) N
N m 0 O 0) >i N m wo Q
ami 3>° 0 r 0 0 3 0
L O 0 N N O CA 7
3 L6 (n L 0 E
:.i p O 2-0 X 0 :E- C6 X�
C 2 3 o L
c C:a -0 � U
T
00 (6 L (6
a) .> U -O L a)
�icoO L a) O
a) 7 N
o o c N c6 U
O C m N C6
>"Z a) O O N.> E
7 E c CO (D 0n- (D:
N
U) !n
O �, 0- y L YL) N
N C CO n> C 0)
C M > O O
M O
Nn
.� E 2 "0 41 D
C6 m
N
V fY E _T
7 L 0
a) o C C7 n 2 o c
C
9-' � o a) Q
C N C6 L a) M
> a 3 5 in °
C2 (6 0 C C
°' E 3 `n °
3:6 o Cn
CV c N O (On -0 0
0 2_
o a°i (n 0
E C 0 0 C O N p (6
O N C—
N of 3
0 Q U) L� C a) O
0� O L� UN O 00
a)
-0 L L E
-
0-E E'� a) 0_0'C
O W (D
0
C6 7N— C-
-c CO 0
C6 U .--. O O O O V
E M C6 0 U 0 -0
E C C d 0 e- O
>
M U)
O O E CO ._
O v
T Lu (i (6
m
°>° m`�
3 Q EEa' c@
E E o� m.
N Q '06
oC7N 3
LL U) N U j 0 O
o
X p N> N �-
N
C
CLOn
O
_
0 a) Q ca
N
° 3 0
c T
C
9-' � o a) Q
r- ao0 O
a0)3
3:6 o Cn
o
C) 00 0
U-0
O N C—
O
a)
¢ N E E
a)
-0 L L E
-
E°-°�
w a) - 0 N Q
E co
CZ6
od C°n 0� w
0
aa)j H .9 0
E C C d 0 e- O
C N 3 C
C
E
T Lu (i (6
a) o a)
tM
C •O ON U O m
N Q '06
N
(6 > a) E
o
L !6 i` NO
C) U (n
C
C q '� 0
� 'L p C
Sow
Qc
m0 o c
X N C00
O
>
.g ° 3
o
O�o n
N
o
0
(L mN
'0 °).0
N
0'
c T
c 0 a)
O O` �
a0)3
C (6 Cf)
>o?
o
C) 00 0
_
CD °
n
0
a)
-0 L L E
-
(D 0 0 0 0
E O
E 0
0
0 a) Cn
C C E (�
y E N
0 7 0 C
j C
O O O .0.
O
7 it
a) o a)
Q L E w
O O)
0 U C
N
O T
a) .O
O Cn �0 0 i
o
N
E 0 0 C O`
0
(6 (6
O
-
C 3C: M
a) L C
C �_
m O
E C O C
-0 w (6 E
5-
O
>
.g ° 3
o
c `m °
N
o
0
..
DCL
a) 3
(6
0 °�
U Cn
o
(1)(n
R C c V)
• O O •�
(n '0
E O CO
c
-0 0 C6 �.
c T
a) ' - Cn
it '.� L L
0 oonl�
.�
a0)3
C (6 Cf)
>o?
o
C) 00 0
N i C
E Nu no
(n i/1 E
O >' T N
_Z3o
E m C L
a)
-0 L L E
-
(D 0 0 0 0
O- 'O f6 E
OU
N CC) 'O E
° C O 0 0 O 0 M
in 0) N -U 0- ( C
R 'O U -0
>1 0n
O O O .0.
-0 E U (0j i 0) O
N
a) o a)
-6 -O Q V) 0 -0
O�In a)
C 3 .Oc
>
° 3 >, 2
o
3 c a°i aa))
c 3
Cn M
0 (6
CL n I L O
Cn Q Q
O N v
J 3 '� a)
0 0 0 .>
N U a C O CO
a)
E m
c T
•a
O—+ c
CU
rn 00
7 Q
>
o
C) 00 0
-3a
C
a) Q 7
w ?> L E L E
a)
-0 L L E
-
(6 N (6
(6 N
E c A o (6 i6 E
N
o 3@�
Q° n
O (L6 0
co .uTi
�
a) o a)
m Q
m (� (6
o
o
c 3
Z L
N Q
Qa)C
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-1 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

O
0) -0
O
�-0
� C
U O
CO
CU
O N
,r T
CU
O �
O
c >
m �
O N
N E
2
� a
2
� U
C d
O C
O
O N
- 000
C n
O 76
O >'
(n
a) N
CO a
0) CO
CO
L .U.
d C6
U
_ U
C -
Cc N
J
C Q
O N
d �
N CO
3~
CO
Z3
O L
'C N
O LL
E oo
C
N N
Q
U
O aD
C
a�
rn 3
O N
U U
O
�5 Ln
0-0
O N
-0 C
T .-
= U
C
N O
16
0
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-2 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016
0
Ln
A
0
N
N
�
C
O
o
N
Ln
U
N
a
LO
X
X
X
X
N
O
T
-
2
LO
N
X
X
AI
CO
v
N -0
0 0) 00
O .O
O
N
C C U al O-
00
V
d'
r-
N
f�
C-5
V'
V 2 0 C LO
O
N
N
N
�
O O � T
U �
OM
O
N
N
M N
Cfl Nr'
N
N N
U00
L
(U
00
N
O
C'7
LO
00
N
00
N
O' O
M
6
N
N
7
aO
N
00 O
N N
00�.
N
i
00
M
Co M
N
N
CO
N
Cn
O
N
CO
N
N
N
N
N
N
\
N
U
O >
0
O
M O
O
f-
N
I_
O
M
O
't
00
CD
6) Ln
•- •-
N
f-
V
(D
O
N
Ln
CO
M f,-
CO
i-
CO
LO r-
r
CO
M O
CO
U 0
Q O N LL
00
C N
U '�
fn
O (flLf)
>
00
Cl)
Lr)
74) N LL
E , 00
UU N
m O m
U-
7.
O N
ti
r-
�
Ln
I-
CD
U •-
L ._
N
N
N
N
N
N
> 4)
U)
U Q O
C>
CE
�
O
N
Cl)
LO
S
T
T
r
T
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-2 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-3 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016
0
A
0
LO
x
x
x
x
LO
N
N
A
C
O
o
N
LO
UN
Is
LO
x
x
O
N
O
'0O
T
2
-80
N
(6
Al
v
p 00
O O N .O
O05
00
LO
O
O
O
O O0 O'
0 0 0
N
6
N
Ln
N
Ln
N
V
N
N
M
CM -0 0
T
N
O
M
O
(O
O
M CO CO
N
M Co LO CO
N
M (O
Cfl 00 OD N -
N
N
N
L?
Ln
C9
N
T
L?
O
L?
T
r
N
O
N
i
O
i
N
ap
N
O M
N
M �
N N
M
N
�
O
M
Ln
N
�
CO
(O
M
i
N
N
N
N
CO
N
N
CO
O
N
CO
0')
N j
U
"0 0
N
O
0
CO
LO
d'
M
I-
N
LO
O M
M
M M
M
O
CO
O
O
N
I-
M
U 3
M
e-
M
CO
f�
O
r-
O t`
O
M
O
t`
O N LL
�
� N 00
O to N
U 3 '–
m
-0 0
CU
m o
C14
M
0
0
(6 3:= 0
N
N
7 a) N LL
E , oo
UU' N
(D
`o
m
L
3 - �
N
O I`
N
7.
O
CO
ti
I,-
I,-
I,-
I, -
V)
L ._
N
N
N
N
N
N
3 a>
N O
CO
M
w
T
I-
00
T
OC14
O
S
T
T
�
�
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-3 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-4 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016
LLO
rlA
0
LO
11
X
X
X
X
LO
N
N
A
C
O
o
N
LO
UN
0)
LO
X
X
O
CV
O
T
M
N
Al
(.
v
N -O
p ON
O ,O
O
N
30 >, O O
N
6
O
L6
Cl)
N
N
LO
O
M
M
LO
(Oj LO 0 O O
(N
N
N
N
N
N
V) �
�CO
C14
�CO
N
CO
LO
LflCO
M
CO
�
CO
U)
7
L9
�
L9
N
N
00
N
T
O M
N
N
T O M
N
N
M
N
N
O
N
N
M
N
Ob
N
T
M
�
N
(O
N
CO
N
N
N
N
N
N
CO
M MO N
L 0
O
O
0)
00 lzr
ti
00 �
M
M
LO
rl-
r-
LO
0)
LO
M
0)
O
U
O N LL
N
O N - 00
O L U N
-a 0
> O
O
M
O
00
N
O N N LL
E , 00
U3 U N
N �
C6 O N
LL
04
0) r-
N
7
N
U-
L ._
N
N
N
N
N
N
3: a)
N O O
(6
M
N
N
M
N
r
N
LO
N
(O
N
r -
N
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-4 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

Pak u Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 a5 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report 2m 2016
\
\
\
x
\11�-
2
\
/
x
x
x
x
x
x
w
2
\
w
7
0
O)OD 0
\
CO
\
\
\
Cl)
/
2
0 0= o
a
C14
a
r
I-0
m =
r=
U)
2
f
7
2~ 9C'
2
f«
r
f
w
w
f
e�D
a=
2
f
g
4\
a
a#
a\ 2
a
a
a
a/^
a
a
/
\
# \
k
\
\ \ ƒ
\
k
\
\
\
\
\ \
\
\
\
^
4 /
»
/ 2 /
^
/
»
^
\f/j
y J =
=y2
2
© \
2
$
- ©
3
&
2
2
$
$
$
+ E
7
- \
%
2 a =
3 2 j LL
00
\\\\
Co
Mk\
\\\\
\
/
/
\
/
\
/
]
% \oo
/\2^
ate=
# o =
LL
w
=
w
w
w
w
w
±�7\
.Ln
C\1
C14
C14
N
N
N
N
®_ ¢
CU
c °
Cl)
\
§
§
/
Cl)
/
/
Pak u Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 a5 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report 2m 2016

P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-6 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016
0
LO
A
0
LO
11
x
x
x
x
x
LO
N
N
A
C
N
LO
X
X
O
N
O
T
2
0
N
Al
v
- N -0
p
O00 O .O
O N
CO
f,
O
LO
N
O
U3 0 T O
O
N
Cl)
N
N
M
Cl)
N
L6
N
M
Cl)
O O p
O -
M
O
N
(O
00
O O
N
O
N
O LO
CO
Cl) O
N N
N O CO N -
N N
MC"' (fl
M
N
(O
O
N
N
O T
Ln
i
N
N
"S
L?
N
Ln
_
LO
N
N
00
M
i
LO
00 Ln
N N
00
NLO
O
00
N
00
M
i
LO
N
i
Os
N
O
N
:b
M
i
LO
N
N
CO
N
N
N
Ln
O
N
N
O
N
N
Ln
N
NLC)
O
N
N
O
N
6)
Z
O ' O
'0 M 0
O O
N
O
M
M
-'T
r-- O
O
M
O
M
Lo
r--
O
O
O O
M
O
M
UO
O)
O
N
a7
N
O
O
N
a7
N
N O N LL
(CO: N -. 00
O s O N
U 3 '—
a>
m
0
rn
LO
0
CY)
r-
00
7 O N LL
i oo
m O m
3 - LL
CV
O r—
O ' N
ti
ti
V)
L ._
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
?' a >
� N 0
N
M
LO
Cl)
O
Cl)
r-
M
r
N
Cl)
0)
M
r
O
r
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-6 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-7 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016
0
A
0
LO
x
x
LO
N
N
A
C
O
o
N
LO
0)
LO
x
x
x
x
O
CV
O
T
-80
U?
N
(6
AI
v
N -O
p 00
O O N .O
O
N
(O
O
N
O
O
O O OL
O OL
N
N
M
N
L6
V
N
d'
N
M
Cl)
O -0 0
T
N
O
M
N
(O
-'T
O
O
M
O
N
(O
O
O N
N
(O
00
O
N
M
N
(O
to
O
4
4
\O
\O
L
\O
In
N
04
N
O
M
i
'
N
O
M
N
LC
M
i
N
O
N
i
N
O
N
N
O
M
i
N
N
M
N
N
N
N
V
M
N
N
NN
Ln
N
LO
N
O
M
N > U
"0 M 0
N
O
0
N
O
CO
O
O
M
O
O
N
V
00
O O
Cl)
O
� �
CO
CO
O
M
U 3
O N LL
�
O N - 00
O O N
-0 0
(6 O
(0
N
LO
M
M
O
0
7 0) N LL
E , O
UU' N
(D
`o
m
L
3 - �
N
O r-
O ' N
O
to
L ._
N
N
N
N
N
N
3 O O
N :E O
COCU -0
CO
M
N
M
SP1
(O
I-
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-7 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-8 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016
0
Ln
rlA
0
Ln
x
x
x
x
Ln
N
A
0
LO
N
Ln
x
x
N
A
UU
N
Al
CD
v
p
N -O
ON
O ,O
N
>, 0 C
00
LO
V
CO
N
(0
N
(.0
N
O
M
UO
LO O O O
r
N
Cl)
CO
M
Cl)
0 N -
(O
O
N�
0)
0 CO
O
O (O
L
N
7
N
OO
M
N
O
10
Ln
N 00
i
o
M
i
i
Co
�
M
i
i
�
M
N
M
N
N
N
7
L!')
M
C -4O
N
M
N
M
N
M
N
C')
N
N
O
N
01)N
O
00'7
-
-
Z
O N
L -0 0
N 0
O N
O
0
O
O
O
0
M
N
0
M
N
0
M
M
O
Ln
U
Na) N LL
C N - W
O L U) N
-a 0
> t6 O
0)
(0 0')
ap
O
(0 2, a)
.-
—
—
c-
N
O N LL
W
N �
C6 O
LLL
N 04 r-
N
7.
N
to
L ._
N
N
N
N
N
N
?' a >
N O O
M
N
>
'
0)
LO
LO
C14
r
CO
LO
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-8 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-9 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016
0
A
0
Ln
x
x
Ln
N
N
A
C
O
o
N
LO
0)
LO
x
x
x
x
O
N
O
T
-80
2
N
AI
Co
v
N -O
p
N O N .O
O
N
M
N
O
Cl)
Ln
M
OL UO >, O
4
N
Cn
N
M
N
N
V
N
Cfl
O
CM CU -0O %
N
W
N
N_
Cfl
W
M
N
M
N_
M
N
M
�
M N_
N
1
6)
m
L9
04
i?5
LO
Ob
N
T
co
N
Cb
N
N
os
N
7
7
N
N
N
Os
N
N
N Ob
CP
N
N
CO
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Lo N
N
�
N > U
"0 M 0
N
.2 T
O
O
CO
W
LO
O
O7
LO
CO
LO
O
-'T
Lo
07
07 CY)
Lo
N
O)
Lo
UM O N
r—
N
N
M
r—
r--
Cfl
N
M
Cfl
N
M
Cfl
N
M
�
—
r-
� O N LL
C N W
O O N
U 3 '–
m
-0 0
00
CS)
7 a) N LL
E , oo
UU N
(D
`o
m
L
3 - �
N
O r`
N
7.
O
ti
ti
O
L ._
N
N
N
N
N
N
3 a>
N :E O
COCU
(B
M
d
Lr)
r
LO
LO
CD
Ln
r
r-
LO
00
Ln
r
M
LO
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-9 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-10 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016
0
LO
A
e
LO
�
X
X
X
X
X
X
LO
N
A
0
LO
N
LO
x
x
N
A
0
LC)
N
(fl
Al
O
v
0
N -0
0) N
O ,O
O N
V
LO
Lr)
O
CO
Cl)
i
O 0 O
M
cli
O
O
M
M
LT6 p
(n �
O
LO
O
M LO
CO
O Cl) (O
't (O
O
N
O
❑
N
O CO
N
N
M
M
N
N
00
N
N
M
�
M
N
N
Ln G
N
N
M
N
N 0')
N M
N
N 6)
N
N 6)
N
(O
N
N
CO
N
-
❑
-2 N O
O
O 00
Ln
00
O
�
r M
r r`
CO
M
�
M
M
�
O
M
UM O N
(O
r N
CO
CO
N
M
L-
M
ti
ti
0)
•-
ti
M
N
ti
O N LL
N
CC)
In N
O _ 0 N
m
> > U
Co=° 0
> t" O
(6 O.
N
O
N
O
ti
M
M
O
M
CO
0p
00
M
00
(6 2: = O
N
N
N
0 O N LL
E i 00
N i �
io O L
4] CIJ r-
N
O '
ti
n
ti
ti
n
U r
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
O N
>
CU
>
O
O
r
T
N
cc
T
Cl)
CO
O
Uf)
O
(O
CO
f�
O
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-10 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-11 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016
0
LO
A
0
LO
�
x
x
x
x
x
X
LO
N
A
0
LO
N
LO
x
N
A
0
LO
N
c6
Al
v
p
N -O
O)N
O ,O
p
N
3
M
O
M
O
O
LO
O
U
O 0 T 0
M
M
M
L6
M
M
LO
N
LO
N
Lf)
N
CO
U O O
(n �
(O
M
M(O
r—
co O
N
Cfl
M (O
(O
M
M Cl) M (O
N
W O (O
N
O
N
N
N
N
p
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
❑
N
LO
00
LO
00
M
00
LO
O
O
Lf)
O
O
O
M
M
LO
N
(O
N
O)
N
N
N
O)
N
N
N
N
N
ON
Ln co
6)
21 0')N
Ln O
6)
>
CU U
'D M 0
❑
> 2 N O
U 3 O N
ti N
1:T
O
N
CO
r-
CO
O
O
.-
CO
N
N
N'
M
M
a7
M
ti
LO
O
O
N N
CO
ti
O
ti
O Co
N .-
N
ti
O
O
O O
�- �-
CO
ti
N N N LL
CO
c N
O _r cn N
U 3 --
T > U
70
z:0
j t (O
Cl)
Co
O
O
O
ti
O O N U-
E , co
CO N
N i �
io O O
O r -
N
O
ti
ti
U r
L ._
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
O N
> C
❑ N
>
M
M
O
M
O
ti
r
r-
N
r-
M
~
r
r-
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-11 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

0
(n
I`
A
0
Cn
1`
X
X
(n
N
A
0
Cn
N
LO
X
X
X
X
N
A
0
N
AI
(D
v
X
N -a
0 000
CM.O
0)
U 30 >, O
v
O
N
M
N
r--
M
N
O�
LO
M
T
O
L U o O -
CM
N
M
N
N
M
U
O
C'')
O
N
O
CO
N
O
�
(O
(D
M N
CO
N
N r—
�
CO
O
�
U7
T
'7
O
N
�
O
�
�
N
-
Lo 2f T
O
Z
N
Ln
N
N
CO
N
m
M
N
r --N
N
1,R M
N
00
4
Ln
N
N
N
N
6>
M
N
M
T
N
N
N
O
W
N
d. O
N
0)
0)
-
-
� > U
'0 0
0
O
N
�
L
M
O
O
V
CO
N
U)
00
O
CO
Itt
00 1` 1�t
1�t
Ln
U O 0
v
(0
Cl)
Cl)
(D
N
M
CO
a N N LL
C - 00
Os rnN
U 3 '—
CD
`0
,1:.
�
00
Il
cc2
2
7 N N U-
E i co
o � �
m o m
3 - U-
O CV 1`
4) ' N
O
1`
1`
CO
1-
ti
ti
U T
L ._
N
N
N
N
N
N
?' a >
0
LO
Il-
Cfl
�
h
1-
T
00
I—
T
0)
1-
r
O
00
r
CO
T
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-12 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-13 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016
0
^
0
LO
x
LO
N
N
^
C
O
o
N
LO
0)
LO
X
x
x
x
O
(V
O
a
^
2
-80
N
(6
^I
CO
v
p
O N O N .O
C
N
Cl)
CO
fl -
C OL
UO >, O
C
N
N
N
N
V5
N
N
N
N
N
O CU - O
a
N
LO
(0(0N
O
O
M
N O
N
O
O
N
N
O
O
N
U)LO
�
L?
r
N
O
�
LO
Q
N
O
T
'�
7i
I-
N
N
O
VM
M
N N
N
O O
M
N
O
ti
N
N
CO
N
C3)
O
N
CO
N
N 63
N
N
0')
N
LO
N
> U
"0 C
O
M
CO
�
O
O
O
�
O
V
lzt M
--
Cl)
� �
ItT
CO
O
Cn
U(z N
Cfl
r
r
M
"t
CO
N
r
N
M
Cfl I
(Dr
.-
M
CO
N
M
� N N LL
C N W
O rn N
-0 0
CU
j CflM
Ln
Cl)
r
OD
r
_ N
7 a) N LL
E , oo
UU' N
(D
`o
m
L
3 - �
N
a) r-
N
7.
O
ti
ti
�
P-
D) r
L ._
N
N
NN
N
3 N O
N :E O
C
CO (B
M
N
00
r
00
00
r
00
r
00
r
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-13 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

N_ �
MO
M co
LO 0')
M EM
CC
U .U)
.LnLn
E .E
LB L6
19
❑❑
N d
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-14 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016
0
Lf')
A
0
Lr)
�
X
X
L1)
N
A
0
LO
N
LO
X
X
X
N
A
0
Lq
N
X
M
Al
X
C°
v
p
N -p
CMN
O ,O
00
Lr)
d'
LO
O
LO
i
O 0 LT6 p O
N
N
M Co
-t
N
(O
19 CO
00
N
N
(O
M
co
CO
�
Q
❑
N
M
LO
N
N
Ln
N
N CO
N
C�
CO
M
Lf)
N
N
M_ LO
M
Z
N
N
N
N O)
N
N
6)
N
LC)
N
(V
N
6)
>Z
--
> U
'0 M 0
❑
! T
(O
(O 0-)
M
N
Ln
N L!)
6)
M
O
O
U-)
Ln
L9 -'T
-'T
0 3 0 0
M
M
M
N M
(O
N
M
M
(O
N
M
v
N O N LL
c Ly7cc)
O _r Ln N
U 3 —fn
a)
>' :5 > U
00 ° 0
3 O
0')00
00
v
ami
O N LL
a)
E i co
io O L
a) CIJ r -
O
Ln
L ._
N
N
N
N
N
N
� N
\
s
ti
00
T
00
T
T
N
T
Cl)
T
0)
T
LO
T
e -
N_ �
MO
M co
LO 0')
M EM
CC
U .U)
.LnLn
E .E
LB L6
19
❑❑
N d
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-14 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

> I � I � I CO�
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
Second Annual Report
N 11
I N I N I N I N I N
T-15 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
June 2016
0
LO
i`
A
0
LO
r`
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
LO
N
N
A
C
O
o
N
LO
U
N
0)
LO
X
O
CV
O
-`O
A
T
8
_
LLq
N
(6
Al
v
N -O
p ONO
O ,
.O
� p N
Cl)
(O
O
00
O
0')
M
U O
M
N
M
N
8CL
(n �
(O
Cl)
(O
t`
(O
Lo (O
Cl) (ON
(O
O (O
N (O
O rl- (O
O
N
N
O
~
M N00
M
N
N
N
N
N
N
M
N
N
N N
N
N N
i
00 i
T i
Ln
i
i
00
Ln
i
6
? O7
m (fl
i
(0
00
N
r—
N
O
N N
-,
00 M
N N
00
N
M
r�
N
00
N
O
N
N
O
O
N
00
N
N
N
N
O
Lr')
N
00 LO
N N
N
O)
i M
N M
N
O
N
0')N
Ln
CID
N
O O
N
LO O
6)
N 6)
'0 M 0
O
(O
U) O
M M
M
O
O
O
Co
O
M
6)
Ln
00
00 00
M
CO
U O N
N N N LL
7 co
C N
O _r U04
U 3 —m
m
(L°
> co
Lo
(0
ao
Lo
Lr)
�
r—
:3 O N LL
00
UCO N
N �
(6 O
3 _ LLL
N � �
N
7
N
L ._
T
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N O O
Co
CC Q N
> I � I � I CO�
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
Second Annual Report
N 11
I N I N I N I N I N
T-15 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
June 2016

@ R R
CO CO CO
* _
\
CO
o
CO
o
\
CO
/
\
+
\
+ \
\
\
\
+
\
/
E
}
®
x
x
\
@
^
B
/
-
k
/
x
0
w_
k
�
$
-
I
9
2
Al
2
a =
*c\%7 E
\ '3: CY)
7
/
\
U ° S t °
#
C14
Cl)
m&===@
� $ _
_
/ &
7
/
<
a
\
/
e
a
g
M
\ \
\
k
\
\
\
a a
a
/
7
&
»
a
M >
mo
a)
/ $ _
=\2
/a-
4 Cl)
2\
2/\
CO
m
e j 00
$
\\\\
�Cok\
Cc
\\
0
$%\LL
oo
/ \ .0 ^
# o L
�
§w
±T
w
a
w
a
® ® ¢
/\2
c Cz
\
\
\
04
@ R R
CO CO CO
* _
_
CO
o
CO
o
\
CO
/
\
+
\
+ \
\ \
\
\
+
\
/
$ % pl/ $ pl\ $ p
\ \ \
Pak u Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 a% PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report 2m 2016
\
\
\
CO
/
\
+
\
/
E
}
Pak u Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 a% PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report 2m 2016

O N
0 Q
M E
O >
U) O
Z
d
U
C O
J U
0
O N
C T
O
d �
N
— c
m �
M
O U
C �
O �
.r 7
O d
E
C LOCU
p
O
MC14 -0
O
LD- c c
C: —
O M
C: c
rn M ami
(0
CO E 7
O O —
O C >
Q O Q
O 75 L
>, E
_ � O
N � N
L C
H C N
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-17 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016
0
LO
r -
A
0
LO
LO
N
a)
A
C
N
-
LOo
0)
LO
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
O
N
O
A
LO
N
x
x
Co
Al
v
N O
p ON O
O �
Cw
N
UO-
Co
r
d.
Co
O
O
E OC
o> 0 0
4
N
N
N
N
T
T
M
T
N
T
N
T
M
N
M
N
U
00 \
O ' -
N
In N --
M
- 7
Cl) N
M N
T
L? T
"T 4 T
"T
"T T
L?T
I0L0i Ln �T-
O
N O N
T
N N
N0
�N
N M
CO
NN
M
M
N N
N0
T
N O
>, N
O N
� � D
O
.>-. "
O O T
O CO
r- N T
CO M O
O T T
"t CO
C4 T
M
M
r --U') LO
M T
LO
M
(DU')
M T
M � O
(fl T T
U') O CO
CO T T
0
Na) N u -
C O 7 M
N
U r 'U)
0
p
T
O
T
00
M
Il-
(.0
O
00
V
(.0
1:TO
r -
T
N
r
_N
O O N LL
EL I
a)
C/) N
U
3
io O a�
3- LL
(V
�
T
!�
rl-
In
CN
O
CO
N
04
r U
N
N N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
3 O N
N L
C>
0 ca
N
O
•-
T
N
T
M
T
e1'
T
1n
T
w
T
r-
T
00
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-17 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-18 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016
0
Lfj
A
0
LO
x
x
Ln
N
a)
n
C
N
L
U
N
LO
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
O
N
O
2
Lq
N
AI
(0
V
N -O
O
O ')N
p
00Q
Cl)
OO
O
O�
i 0 -M
N
N
N
M
N
M
N
N
N
M
N
M
N
L)M
N
d a) -
Cl)
O 00
OM—
Ln
Cl)
f)
N
L9
Lf
C14
L9 �
L\LN
LO
L—
r)
r
(
p
r
N
N
I
N
r
N N
N N
CL
N N
N N
N
N
N
N LO
N
r
N
N
N
r
to a)
>, >
M
a)
C' (L6 OLn
,>—.
O O
(O
CO r
CO O O
CO r r
N (O
O r
O CO (O
CO r r
ti OO O
CO r r
M O
(O
ti � (O
CO r r
LO O
(p r
M (4
r r
0 O N LL
C a) 7 Op
0 N
'
>,ca M j U
-0
� 0
N
~O
M
N
N
O
p
W
O
Ln
O7
7 O N LL
C L
C 00
UU)N
a) L
M O a)
3 - LL
(V
a) r'-
CV CV
V)
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
a)
>
Co
CU
N
a)
(VO
CN
N
N
Cl
N
N
cli
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-18 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-19 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016
0
Lr)
r
A
0
LO
x
x
x
LO
N
a)
n
C
N
L
U
N
LO
x
x
x
x
x
x
O
N
O
T
2
Lq
N
AI
Cfl
V
N -a
O
O iA N
p
. Cl
r
00
P
LO
r-
Cfl
Cfl
P-
i O 0C 0
O_0
r
r
N
N
N
M
rM
M
T
00
It
LO
r
ti
N OD ti
r-
�M
ti
N
4 N
N
Lo
N
\
117
N N
M
r N
N
_N
N N
N M
N N
CO N
N O N
N N
N N
N N
N N
N d.
N
N
N
N
N
N V
N
N
to a)
T >
a O
a)
C'
.>-.. C'
� LO CO
Cfl 0
(.0
C4 C4 C4
M CO (.0
LO Il- CO
't It CO
N CO
LO CO
W O N LL
C a57O
N
U r 'U)
5,ca j U
a � 0
> 15w O
_
M
O
O
LO
V
N
a0
(0 � _ 0)
r
r
r
r
7 O N LL
C L
C 00
UU) N
L
M O a>
3 - LL
(V
4) P.-
r
�
nCO
h
I�
N
n
n
�
N
N
N
N N
N
N
N
N
N N
>
Co
C6
00
w
O
r
N
CO
to
Cfl
N
r
N
r
M
r
M
r
M
r
M
r
M
r
Cl)
r
Cl)
r
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-19 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-20 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016
0
LO
r
A
0
LO
11
X
X
X
Lr)
N
a)
n
C
N
L
U
N
0)
LO
X
X
X
X
X
O
CV
O
T
2
Lq
N
AI
(0
V
N -O
O
O O)N
p
C Q
r
O
O
c0
O
(D
00
N
L O O 0
_0
N
N
M
Cl)
M
N
N
M
M
N
M
N
r
Lf)
r
d a)
N COf`
~
M ^
M
r
N
N
M
N
N
M
M
r M N
W
Ln L!)
Ln
Ln Lf)
L? In
Lf)
if)
In
0
N N
N N
N 6N
N_
N
N M
M
NLn
N
NLn
N LO
N
N
N
N V Ln
to a)
T >
a O
a)
C' (6
.>-.. L
O O
� I --W
CO r r
M CO
M r
Lf) Il- CO
(O
O C) (O
N r
M CO
07 r
N GO
07 r
CO Lf)
M r
M (O CO Lf)
r r r
-6
W O N LL
C a) 7 Op
N
U r 'U
a)
5,ca j U
-0 0
m
2 15
_
_
CD
00
LO
CY)
ru �: a)
r
r
r
r
r
r
7 O N LL
C L
C O I 00
UU) C14
L
Ms O a)
3 - LL
r
N
(0
r—
� V)
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
a)
>
Co
M -0
C
O
M
r
M
r
M
r
r
r
r
r
r
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-20 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-21 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016
0
LO
rin
0
LO
X
X
X
X
X
LO
N
a)
n
C
N
L
U
N
0)
LO
X
X
X
X
O
N
O
T
2
Lq
N
Al
(0
V
N -O
O
O iA N
O p
a) a)
C y Cl
00
O
00
LO
M
CO
t0
O
CL O LO o OL
N
N
M
M
N
N
N
M
N
Cl)
N
M
M
Cl)
d a) �
U �
N
P
00
_ r--�
ti
ti
OM
ti
OM
� N
ti
N
�_
N --
co �_
�_
�_
N �_
�_
W
LO
Ln
f)
Ln
L -)
r
rNN
CO
p
00 N r
O�
N
O
N
N
Nn
N
N LO
N
N
N
N LO
N
N
N —
N
T >
a O
a)
C' (6
.>—.. L
O O
CO O CO
CO
O ti (DM
CO
O r
C4 LO
M r
M O CO
CO N
CO
O
N CO
O r
N CO
O —
M O
O r
-6
W O N LL
C a) 7 O
U
0j
U
Tca
-0 0
> (BOE Cfl
O
O
CO
00
00
O
00
M
7 O N LL
C L
C O I a0
UU) C14
L
Ms O a)
3 - LL
(V
a) r t`
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
a)
>
Co
N
Ln
CO
ti
00
M
O
LO
LO
NM
Ln
LO
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-21 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

Pand uLands Restoration s6 Phase aD PCSPhosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report 2m 2016
\
\
\
\
®
_
A
(
/
'
/ x
x
x
x
x
x
\
�
z
g
R
2
%
f
0 ')Oo 0
\\=�\k
\
\
/
\
\
/
e o°= E
a
CN
N
&
04
Cl)
a
ƒ&§72_0
U) =
9
\
\
00§
\
Cl) \
\ \
®
\ \
a
c \
?
\ \
U)
=
r
r
�_
a
m
�_
a
#
a
s
a
�
a Q
/
\
k
\
\
� \
\ \
k
\
\
2
§
/�\u
-
=30
'�®
70\
o
w�—
o
e
o
w
c
e
r e
e
o e
e
c
e
c=
r
«
c e=
_
o=
\
$ e ±
/
§3
7 U)
0 �—
_
-
—
��/
3
$=k 2
2
/
w
0)
a
0)2
e
=
/
#
/
_ _ C14 LL
E » 2 =
==mom
# o =
LL
{}w
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
7 2
® ® ¢
>so
3U
�
\
/
Lf)
k
\
k
\
\
Pand uLands Restoration s6 Phase aD PCSPhosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report 2m 2016

P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-23 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016
0
LC)
A
0
LO
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
LO
N
a)
n
C
N
L
U
N
LO
x
O
N
O
7
T
2
8
Lq
N
Al
(0
V
N -a
O
O C) N
p
� Q
(C)
f-
Cl)
CO
Cl)
O
L O(n C 0
O70
-
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
T
U �
N
(\O
N
N `— \
N
N
`—
M
a)
�—
(O
(O O
(O
(O
(O
(O
(O
T
CO
0
N M
W
N N
� i
N N
0D
N N
C0
N N
W i
N N
W
N N
N N
N N
N
N
N
N
�
N
�
N
r
N
N
N
to a)
T >
a O
a)
� D
�
C' (L6
.>—..
O� O�
M LO
M r
LO CO
O r
LO (4
O M r
LO CO
O r
LO CO
O) r
� CO
O r
� CO
O r
� CO
O r
M CO
O r
-6
0a) N LL
C a) 7 M
0 N
'U)
a)
5,ca M j U
-0
D
O
N
Cl)
Cl)
W
O)
O
O-
�� a)
O
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
D O N LL
C L
C Co
UU) C14
a) L
Ms o a)
3 - LL
(V
a) �
r
V)
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
a)
>
Co
D a)
r
(D
r
N
(D
r
Cl)
CO
r
CO
r
LO
CO
r
(O
(O
r
I-
(O
r
N
(O
r
O)
CO
r
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-23 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-24 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016
0
Lfj
n
A
e
LO
n
X
X
LO
N
0)
n
C
N
L
U
N
LO
X
X
X
X
X
X
O
N
O
T
-
2
Lq
N
X
CO
AI
O
V
X
N -a
O
O ON
p
. Cl
O
O
O
00
LO
LO
O
M
n
M
L O c 0
O
M
N
N
N
V
N
M
O
N
70
d O 41 T
N n
n
M O n
00 O n
n M n
O n
n
O n
n
N
N
N0
M
Lf
N
L!
N
L!
N
Lf
M
N
LOO
M
NM
N NN
NN
iLI
N N
N N
6
O
N N
N r
r
N r
r
N r
r
N r
r
N r
r
N r
r
N r
r
M T
N r
r
to 41
T� >
a O
O
M O
j� 0
-t LO
r
M CO
O r
LO O M
CO N r
O O C4
n N r
O O CO
CO r r
V
N CO
CO r
CO
O r
O LO
r r
M CO
CO r
0 O N LL
C 0) 7 M
U
>>ca j U
-0
0
N
> 15 O
_
O
O
CO
00
n
O)
f6 N
M
r
r
r
CO
M
LO
M
7 O N LL
C L
C 00
U U N
L
Ms O a�
3 - LL
N
O �
r CV
r-
CO
n
V)
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
O N
>
- -0
(6 N
O
N
M
LO
CO
n
00
Q1
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-24 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-25 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016
0
LO
ti
n
0
In
11
X
LO
N
N
n
C
N
-
L
U
N
o>
LO
X
X
X
X
X
X
O
N
O
T
2
Lq
N
AI
Cfl
V
O
N -O
O
ZT N
O p
0)
0)O-
CO
Cl)
I--
P-
Cl)
r-
`
CL
O lO o OL
_0
N
L6
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
d
41
O
Lo t\O
N
N
Cfl
N
LO
N CO
N
W
Ln
M
l 5
N
Ln l-O
Ln
N
U')
N
L
N
Cn
:
�
L?
N
in �-
CO
0
00
N
OI
i
N
OI i
N
cO
N
OI i
N
CO
N
i
M
00
N N
00
N
O
N
00
N
OI
N
N
r
N
N
r
N
r
N
r
N T
N
LO
N
LO
-
U) O
> T, w
a O
0)
� O
.>-..
O O
CO
CO
N
CO
-
CO � C4
r
M
Cfl
C4 C4
It
CO
O
N
LO
� Cfl
CO
M
Cfl
I-
CO
�
CO
CO CO
W O N LL
C05 7 !b
N
U r 'U)
a�
>,ca j U
-0 0
j w
0
p-
M
N
O
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
O N
r
r
r
r
r
7 O N LL
C L
C O I 00
U U N
L
Ms O a�
3 - LL
(V
4) r-
r
D-
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
O 0)
>
Co
N
O
T
N
M
cp
119
w
00
T
00
T
00
T
00
r
00
T
00
T
00
T
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-25 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-26 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016
0
LO
ti
n
0
LO
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
LO
N
Q)
n
C
O
-
o
U_
N
0)
LO
x
x
x
O
N
O
7
8
2
Lq
N
Al
V
x
x
N -a
O
O ')N
p
C .0 M a)
y Cl
00
M
Cl)
�
�
O
Ln
M
M
M
O
M
U OC
U) OL
r
M
M
N
Cl)
V
M
M
Cl)
Cl)
M
Q) 70
U
d
N
N
Cl)
N
r -N
N --
N
tiNn
M
(D
(D
L r
L
QN
(
DO
C
(D
L
C rr
ON
W
N
00
N
NN
CO
N
N
N p N
N
N M
Z
006
N
NNNN
00
�
N
W
N N
N
N
N r
r
r
r
N Lf)
N r
r
N r
r
N
N
N r
r
N
U a)
> T, a)
M
O
a)
M O
j� 0
O
M
-'t CO
O r
-t O
O r
CO
r
O O O
CO r r
M LO
O r
V
CO
O r
O
O
O r
M LO
O r
-'t O
O r
W U N LL
C a) 7 M
0 N
'U)
>, z ca M > U
-0 0
> w
(D
M
O
r-
r-
r
O
O
LO
LO
r
00
O)
r
CO
Cl)
r
O-
M
r
a7
r
r
D U N LL
C L
C Ioo
U U N
a) L
M o a)
3 - LL
(V
4) r L`
N
�
Ln
�
r-
r-
O
r-
r-
U
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
m a)
Co
M -0
0 M
00
00
00
r
0)
N
O
Cl)
O>
LO
0)
(D
CD
O
00
M
r
O
(D
O
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
N
N
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-26 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

13� 1 O�
r r r
M M M
ti ^ 00 ^ Co
N N N
Co 00Co '
N N N N N N
N �I N �I N
O CO I O C4 IO CO
CO - O - O
(.0 1MICo
N
r r r
0
rl-
N
N
N
LC)
U)
O
C
A
U
E
N
CO
0
O
ry
LO
x
x
x
x
x
LO
N
a)
n
C
N
L
U
N
O)
LO
X
X
O
N
O
T
2
Lq
N
Al
O
V
N -O
O
O O7 N
p
C yQ
00
O
O
Cl)
Cl)
V'
O
M
L O(n O 0
_0
N
M
Ln
N
M
M
M
Cl)
M
N
M
M
d a)
U
LO
--r
r`
N
N
U
W
N \r
u7
M
) N
LO
M
L?
CpCO
0
O
N N
00 i
N N
W O' i
N N
CO i
N N
M i
N N
MO
N N
N N
r
r
r
N r
r
N r
r
N r
r
U a)
T >
a O
a)
� O
.>-..
O O
O CO CO
f-
M CO
O
CO CO CO
(0
�t M
O
�t C4
O
CO CO
CO
M CO
O r
W a) N LL
C a) 7 M
N
U r 'U)
5,ca j U
-0 0
0(
> 0
O
O ON
N
00
a7
N� 0)
r
r
r
r
7 a) N LL
C L
C 00
U U N
L
Ms O a)
3 - LL
(V
4) P.-
r
U-
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
a)
>
Co
CU
O
O
O
O
O
�_
T-
_M
�j
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
13� 1 O�
r r r
M M M
ti ^ 00 ^ Co
N N N
Co 00Co '
N N N N N N
N �I N �I N
O CO I O C4 IO CO
CO - O - O
(.0 1MICo
N
r r r
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-27 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016
rl-
N
N
N
U)
O
C
O
U
E
N
CO
O
ry
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-27 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

>-0 M
= e 2 £
Co k 0
L) = = o
(n P - Q-
»�=c
2 0 3 \
0
>
> o m _
=>z2
£ 7 e�
/� �/
\ /) 0
k/ -
\(
k\\
rna2
==®o
\ / \ \
\ E E a
_ $ / \
0
/ / } a
k/\k
$ 2 0 »
®@f$E
0 / { 3
\ 557
E\/_/\
z='
0
_ � n
§ 0 2 = o
= o = _
\/\U
m5==®
C m " = o
g = = o U)
\ -0% C 0
® := $2
C: = K I >
E cm
3 = o-_ E
0
\ 0
0 0 7 / /
3 = Cm
»2~=
76 0) 2
_ 0 M
a) U)
0 > ®c $
02E==
0
>�c�
f E - 2
} / 2 0
_
0 4 \ > /
= = S a
0mss==
/0 3:
g 0
n o E
(//1£
)
0 a E /
/&$=3
M = _ = e
e 0 o = _
AS
±
E
\
z
Co
\
E
\ §
LE5 a)
0 0
_
Pak u Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 aS PCS Phosphate Compg Inc.
Second Annual Report 2m 2016
CD
C14
_
\
000 0
o
o
U)
=
&
�
(3)
§
/
,,,,,,000CD C)
o
o
_
E
CU
/E
,,,//700/\\\�\%\
/
L
^
\
)
ooCD -Cl)
n�
E
_
_
O
C14
000 a�&a&aJ
\
/
E
m
g
kU)
7®007»44\\wf\
:!Et
to
„ '&$2
/g2
g
O
)
\
0
/
n
r
CO
_
§
%
E
a
\
C
o
_
,,,,,0000�\�\\\�\
/
2
0
E
>
§
/
7
/
\
�� " '0000���n
n
/
E
2
\
U)
LO
eQa(
0)
/#,,,,,oC)C)C)
novo/
_
iUU
\
LO
}
/ƒ\,,,,,oC:)0C)
n
n
%
=zz
I
=
/
%
�
CU
M
E
E
Eg
/
/
§
7
7
2 ¥
\
0
2{=
-0
LU
/ > *
E%
» a
=
£CU
�22E EzLU
0M0M
(�\}f\}\/23§
2n±�<���<m0z0e±z�.
AS
±
E
\
z
Co
\
E
\ §
LE5 a)
0 0
_
Pak u Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 aS PCS Phosphate Compg Inc.
Second Annual Report 2m 2016

M
M
V)
0
0
(n
M
0 (2 u)
o
N
N O O O V O O O O .- O O M r O O O O N O �- O O N O
O
U
m
d O >
CO
� M
m
> o
.L
O O O O O O O O O O O O� O CO O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 M�
o 0 0 0 0 o m o M rn o o 0) rn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o m rn
CO
of
U >
V M M O cc V CO I-- M (0 M r- O M � M O LO r 00 r- r O (.0 O LO N
N
O Q
a
M LO I- (0 O M a0 It O M 00 I- — Cn 00 r- I- I- O O M r- 00 00 00 r--
CO
70-
(O N O cc I� to N M 00 CO N p O N r V
I-
0)
O
V 00 - M N r- r N
Cl)
E
a) n
L200
U)
co V O cn (0 _ m M M O O N (c O O M
N N �- r V N 07 M �� M N a- N O (0 M N(0 N r CO r O M
I\
CO CO
ON
Ch
Z
m
LL
OM CO
N � M
N
Q
N M 00 O CO (0 M O N (0 OD M 00 (0
O M 00 O 00 �- U')Cfl 00 r--.- N
C\1
M
M(a
W M O_ (c N (O (0 M CO (O O r --N
M N
M N O O�
00
N M
p
V CO N (0 V 00 m cD_ co - N O 't Ln m't
`= Cl)
N
E
2.
in
N N
M O N Cf� O O N O (O V O O O O N M
OO f�
O
N
a)
En
M
00
w N O r ll O O r O O Cmc 000 (c m m l2 o
Ln
of
O
Q
M 00 O— M I- � N 0) � 00 N
a= M
a)
CO
c0 N O M � N OO M V N V I� (V 00 CO 0 0 co Or pmj t
CM p
p) U
�
V 00 M I� r N
H
� U
Q) N
CO
3
� N
a)
m
.CO
E
E
'm
m
O
(n Y U)
00
a)
U m0 Q
E
E
rn a 0m
U Y cn Y .�
I-
0 U
nO.
`0 +0+ m a) m CO N O N N E Q .0
Q
O L 3 0 O_ 7 C O O m O C' O0. O -Q O Q O_ m a) E O >.
a)
O `m `m c o m E o 0 �_ 2 E o `-' E
amiCU
O C i71 m N N m O U Y 7 0 m (D =_ C 0) a)
m' 3 m L o m E 3 »- m m 3 a)
<n Q C7 ? cn a cn -j O U) U a m¢ cn P a. o cn 0�
Q)) m
CU
s ° ami E 0 (0 m
E
.V O7 N G U y
y Q i to
wo
a m p a m
j i m Q)) CO co .mC m O CU
m �, .c a° y `�° •" `a) m a °c ami
cn�m�����i�z''zzaaaaaaaaao�v�i�8,
OL
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-29 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

//Q
\ 3
2 0 2 c r CO a o/,<
\)
%])
�®a
CO
/ / / / / / / / 7 / °
7
CO
j}
2 2 2/ G G c% CO 7 c&'�
CO
M
e m o r es= c== o%
2%
m
/
« » CO
m
<
-
E
)\
_ 2 0= m g m c\
m\
CO CO
0/
04
C _
I
/
R=@ 2 2% c w g$ c\
m\
CO
¥
/
� e o w = _
-'t- N o « a = a
� 0
g
2
<
[ ®
$
/
E
in
@ G
0 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0\
w
p
e)
—
\ §
J 2&'t\ 2—= R 2 a
7 2%
\ Q
#
�
©
_-
/
Q Q$/ Q r-- c 7$ c%
a
7
k§
-
2 ,
I
m
—
Q
e
(/
§�
#w
U) 4)
)\
0
5
2
E
t
®
2
2>
§
/
E \
e (D°
\
ƒ
o
0 a /
\
°
) 2 0 § § C
3
{
2 E\ ») : 2 2° E;
e\
cc f ® %) = c ƒ m /
C'
}
7 \ \ \ / / } 3
§
CO LL 2
}
4
2 E
] 3
)
2 E, f E\
k
7
! ( { }
[
§
§
\ f `
/_
{ \! E \
m a > C11-3 ®g t o
CO C')
CU_ _ o ®c § E
°
o
\
2 : °
«
/ \ / / } / \ f \ / )
Pak u Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 am PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report 2m 2016

O
C
7
Of
C
a)
C
M
d
N M
i N
L M
N L
�a
c �
M �
n J
a)
O O
M
�a
en c
MnOf
a
o E
N M
m 3
a E
c �
m O
d O
Q L
N 7
O U
c a)
M >
m �
to 3
a)
Z
M L
oMn LO
E
(D o
NN
O N O O N O N
O
U
(D Oa)
d O >
m
v M
m m
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
0
> 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
0
!n
C
U >
M o V) o r- O o 0 o N o 0 0 o
M
M O M O O M O O O O O O O O
O
d,
n. Q
w M CO to r r CO O N t0
tCO p LO
M
01
O
H
N M
N a
E
a)
N
- O to 0 - 0 0 0 (mo o 00
N
M
LO
M M
O c
N Z)
M
LL
a)
>
to N Cl) N '7 M O N � to
"t O�
O
too M
Q
N Cl)
N M
C2+O-'
tnM N N 't N O O O to
d- 00 �
C
Cl)
O
N M
N
CnH
E
a) N
N �
O
a) N
C
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O
- N
o
-N
O
a) Z)
m
m
>
U') CO N N� N 0 0 LO O to
O�0 M
Q
N Cl)
N a
N �M
O) a)
M M CO S to M N
O LO
M
LO v
0) (n
N M
N'�T
6 Co
L
�
CO
N a_
C
CO t0
N d
Q) O
Mn
O r
E
~ 0
�a aEi
c
E m
O Lj
m
E
O
O) 7
Q
U
N
O
O
w° O
o Y w m
N
a)
U
M
L L L a) d U Y p L i O_
CO
N
M Q O
L O
O E 7
3 m E E a) m
c
> c M U >
m
0-
3 t 3 3
-�aicnJOcnc)m
c
(0(0
r..l
Fo
U
h
d
E
CL
Ma
0
h a M ti ° oZ3 °°
3
kN N l °
Y
a)
t ? Q k
£i
cn�m�2z'zzaaoCiCQ
U�
C
N
3
C
E
0
U
M
c
N
N
t
H
(U
a>)
m
Q
E
M
U
(0
ID
L_
c
rn
O
a
a)
t
a
O
V1
E ac)
m >
n a)
a °)
(Dc
� a
ME
O_ M
N rn
E
a 7
M U
M M
U
L
U 0
C
w U
N
O N
C c
O Y
p 2
U �`
C �
m N
a �
O O`a
CL
o
U X
a �
a) C
M
a N
M d
N N
a �
� � N
a p U)
m a)
M
CL
a M C
M E
c N y
Mll h M
� m m
M w
M
_c M
� � a
M
W U
U
M m } rn
a N 3d ti >
m c
m O N
� M a
0 3 L m
C N > C N
c Mn 2 M U
L ) O N
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 T-31 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

Al1RORA •E r, } ;I rr
a. IyI Olt)
di y
SOUTH CREEK
- -- 'xCORRIDOR ., i S -• E.. �---. I
,
,
-
j-
P LANDS
SOUTH CREEK `q ,fig
CORRIDOR E po
.. -
.. ewuL— PHASE2
PH
-------- --
PHASE 2
TRACT
P LANDS
HOLLOWELL
pppSE
-
BAY CITY,[�iF,RM m PHASE 3
PHASE
PHASE 4PARKER
U LANDS - P LANDS
FARM
SECTIONS A -J
- 4., 35'14'15.04"
RODMAN
CONTROL
.., LONG: 76'46'19.20"
_ / ` _
-----
SITE
U LANDS
P LANDS 2 ➢
_ .
CASEY TRACT
- ` �/
U LANDS
V
{,
I ,
.....
-.'-
.+
LEGEND
P and U LANDS BOUNDARY
P and U LANDS PHASE 3
0 6,000 12,000
SOUTH CREEK CORRIDOR AND
PARKER FARM BOUNDARY
SCALE IN FEET
VICINITY MAP
NORTH CAROLINA
P AND U LANDS PHASE 3 AND RODMAN
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: 05/06/16
FILE: PLANDS_VIC_PH3_
AND 02/02/2010 AND BEAUFORT COUNTY GIS DATA WEBSITE
2015
NAD 1983E UFORT.NC.US, BEAUFORT COUNTY PARCEL DATA SHAPEFILES,
CP#1745.59.32.3
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP IMAGES, NC STATEPLANE,
EIV2
�^ ^ 4709 COLLEGE ACRES DRIVE
lV_ K
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403
INCORPORATED TEL [phone]
FIGURE 1
NAD83, FEET, 1:24000 -SCALE, WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSULTANTS FAX [phone]

PHASE 3 — AREAS PLANTED (1,357.28 ACRES): PHASE 2
ZONE 1 RIVERINE SWAMP FOREST P LANDS
0 ZONE 1A TAR—PAMLICO RIPARIAN BUFFER
0 ZONE 2 HEADWATER FOREST
ZONE 2A TAR—PAMLICO RIPARIAN BUFFER PULPS 8 SMALL ROAD
ZONE 2A TAR—PAMLICO RIPARIAN BUFFER ALSO PHASE 2 PULPS 14
PLANTED WITH LIVE STAKES 5 X 5 SPACING PHASE 113 2 ► ���
(SEE DETAIL AREA 2) 0 BUFFER PLOT B
0 ZONE 3 NON—RIVERINE SWAMP FOREST BUFFER PLOT A HAN7 11s
W 2' CNEL
� W `\i,\ BUFFER PLOT C
115
0 118
ZONE 4 POND PINE POCOSIN FOREST y "1125 123 40' CHANNEL 121
Q
0 ZONE 5 HARDWOOD FLAT 1 V W y W y W p tz4 ` `�`,`\ i
W a TRANSRION AREA
0 ZONE 6 HARDWOOD FLAT 2 W 127 126131 BUFFER
+ OF ER PLOT F O PLOT D
• EDGES OF CHANNEL PLANTED WITH LIVE STAKESO 122
EVERY 3 FEET (SEE DETAIL AREA 1) 03 130 132
.Y W W W JY t28 12900 _ -
N 4 PULPS V
W W W W W W PHASE3 'yQ Y.BAY CITY O•
JWyWy .W Wy PHASE (7
WWWWWWWWWW WW BAY CITY FARM PULPS 5
W W W N W i W T
WWWWWWWWWW W PHASE 4 O
o PHASE 1
SOUTH CREEK CANAL W W W W W W W W W y U LANDS P LANDS
EXECUTIVE ROAD <I « J" 4 L1 PULPS 22 W W W
W
JAIME ROAD 193
PULPS 23 •194 191 y y
• O PULPS 21
,s5
PULPS 24 _ — ,a7 ,aa y W " . N BAY CITY No. 3
197 � 8 `137 x 135
RODMAN 186 W W ®�' x `x • • 134•
CONTROL 198 ITE--_ % ,at x tao° x 1390 6
= 201 x � ® `
142
r— C)
---- z O
RC -1 - 147 ` `51
RC -2
184 MC 0 150 • PULPS 16
RC -3 1O W 149, -PH 9-(' 144
146 •
U LANDS ,a, W \ 152
0 i� W WIwW 143 BAY CITY 156 2 p® 15°,
C 182 . 158am ° 155 N O
w 1ao • BAY CITY
Z
179 R ®1so PULPS 19
120
to
SMALL ROAD
PHASE 1
P LANDS
u
LEGEND — PHASE 3 (1.755.10 ACRES
P & U LANDS BOUNDARY
— ROADS
® BERMS AND PARKING AREAS
0 FORESTED WETLAND
0 FORESTED NON—WETLAND
— OPENWATER
0 UN—PLANTED 2 FOOT CHANNEL
UN—PLANTED 25' OFF—SET
0 PHASE 4 NOT PLANTED IN 2014
• PHASE 3 WELL LOCATION
TREE SAMPLING PLOT
PHOTO STATION NUMBER AND LOCATION
PLPS 6
O CONTROL WELL
BUFFER PLOT LOCATION
Z 207 O u AW• 157 154 169
(TI 20 0 D 1 NOTE:
p
:U • ;
®
I los 7B' 177 •176 15s % _ s P & U LANDS BOUNDARY (3,666.92 ACRES)
P AND 16 PULPS 15 (TOTAL ACREAGE INCLUDES 12.52 ACRES OF
O 208 p PULPS 18 167 168 RIGHT—OF—WAY ALONG STATE ROADS NOT
D
U LANDS °� �°
p PLANTED)
174
•73 _ 000
175• 161 162 163•' E ROAD
o ®®2" Q 210 •` • COUNTY LIN ? MONITORING LOCATIONS
171
172 •170 m m P AND U LANDS PHASE 3 AND RODMAN
v W >
Z •212 213 �•
PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC.
O PULPS 17
PULPS 25 0 PULPS 20 SCALE: AS SHOWN APPROVED BY: DRAWN BY: TLJ
DATE: 05/23/16 FILE- PLANDS-PLANT-MON-
SOURCE:
P 3 2015
SOURCE: 0 1 ,400 2,800 �^�4
PORTIONS OF THE BOUNDARY PROVIDED BY: ROBERT M. CHILES, C,uCP#1745.59.32.3
NEW BERN, NORTH CAROLINA, JOB #2009096, DATED: 11/19/2009 �� 4709 COLLEGE ACRESDRIVE
AND 02/02/2010 AND BEAUFORT COUNTY GIS DATA WEBSITE
WWW.CO. BEAUFORT. NC. US, BEAUFORT COUNTY PARCEL DATA SHAPEFILES, SCALE IN FEET I Z RR_PO RAT ED WILMINGTON, NORTHLCAROLINA
9403 FIGURE 2
NAD 1983 FEET. - /
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTMM FAX [phone]

Do
Pt
SOUTH CREEK CANAL Da Po
EXECUTIVE ROAD/ 192 To
JAIME ROAD 193
194 191
Pt 196
195 188
RODN9 187
CON OL 97
198 Po 186 185
SITE Po 201
RC -1
To RC -2 184
RC -3 PHASE 4
U 183 Da 61
LANDS 0
C 182
0 180
OTJ 179
Z 207 0
IT 206 D
A O
:O 209 178 177
206 U LANDS 174
Po
173
0 1 210
171
D 172
z 212 Po 213
SOURCE:
PORTIONS OF THE BOUNDARY PROVIDED BY: ROBERT M. CHILES,
NEW BERN, NORTH CAROLINA, JOB #2009096, DATED: 11/19/2009
AND 02/02/2010 AND BEAUFORT COUNTY GIS DATA WEBSITE
WWW.CO.BEAUFORT.NC.US, BEAUFORT COUNTY PARCEL DATA SHAPEFILES,
NAD 1983 FEET.
2012 AERIALS DOWNLOAD FROM FROM NC ONE MAP
WEBSITE: http://data.nconemap
SOIL SURVEY OF BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, US DEPARTMENT
OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONVERSATION SERVICE,
ISSUED: SEPTEMBER 1995
5GJ o
D
cG� �
S� cn
-1411
41& 0
0
Po PHASE 2 N
Pt
Po BAY CITY FARM
PHASE 4
U LANDS
ROYAL
SMALL ROAD
10
0113 , 112 111
11
116 119
\ 117
� _ 120
118 _
125 12
124 Da' 21
127
Wd 126 131 Po
122
130 132 13
128 129
4
BAY CITY NO.
` 1 %I
14
it
P LANDS
BAY CIT°���� *,
142 141 140 / / 136 135 134
139
147 151
150
14F162----",,
149
152
153
5 Po
0
154 169
1166167 168
161 _ , , ",, RO AI
r -n
O
mc: 143
Z
O {
N 16
Da
176
175
170
1
BAY CITY No.
I�
LEGEND
PERENNIAL
P AND U LANDS BOUNDARY
•
WELL LOCATION AND TREE MONITORING PLOT
Da
(WELLS TO MONITOR LATERAL DRAINAGE EFFECT
—
MAY NOT HAVE A TREE PLOT. LOCATIONS ARE
PO
APPROXIMATE.)
Pt
CONTROL WELL
.�7
f� SOILS
TARBORO SAND
�I SYMBOL
SOIL NAME
PERENNIAL
INTERMITTENT
Ap
ARAPAHOE (MINERAL)
Da
DARE (ORGANIC)
Do
DOROVAN (ORGANIC)
PO
PONZER (ORGANIC)
Pt
PORTSMOUTH (MINERAL)
TaB
TARBORO SAND
To
TOMOTLEY (MINERAL)
Wd
WASDA (ORGANIC)
0
HYDRIC SOILS
NOTE:
APPROVED BY:
ONLY HYDRIC SOILS ARE DESIGNATED MINERAL
OR ORGANIC.
SOILS
P AND
U LANDS PHASE 3 AND
RODMAN
PCS PHOSPHATE
COMPANY,
INC.
SCALE: AS SHOWN
APPROVED BY:
DRAWN BY: TLJ
DATE: 05/06/16
FILE: P_LANDS_SOILS_PH3_
2015
CP#1745.59.32.3
0 1,200 2,400
SCALE IN FEET
7
L
01,NCORPORATED
ENv1RONNENUL CONSULTANTS
4709 COLLEGE ACRES DRIVE
SUITE 2
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403
TEL [phone]
FAX [phone]
FIGURE 3

• SMALL ROAD P LANDS
PHASE 2
4W - t, P. SE 3 114.113 12 0 11, 10 PHASE 1
a -dm AM
116• •117 - •119 qA -
• 2 CHANN fil 4� 120
115 118
•
•
b 125 •123 0
PHASE
0
� -' - 40' CHANNEL
�- � .M - - 1240 121• _ PHASE 1
W _
_ - 127 0 rrsANsmoN AREA
- 126 -
. � - 1310
- - - •122
■ , �0130 1320 1330•128 1290 4
/ #CITY N°'
PHASE 3 � g p,Y
PHASE 1 n
row
BAY CITY FARM
PHASE 4*d.mdw
- PHASE 1
SOUTH CREEK CANAL U LANDS_
� �� ■' � N P LANDS
EXECUTIVE ROAD192/
JAIME ROAD93
0
1
0 ,s1• ■ , ■
s4W
y O LEGEND
O 196 w► ■ 0` ■ i _• - O
195 1 � - ■ ■ iJ
•167 No. 3 PHASE 3 PLANTING AREA
R O D M A N
097 • Og � 135 7 BAY CITY OPEN WATER OR PLUGGED/FILLED DITCH
CONTROL o 1,34
SITE 198 ' 80 185 141 139 136
ROADS
2010 O • 1400 0 •
r 142 ® PERIMETER BERM AND PARKING AREAS
RC -1 Z O 147
0 151
184 FE,C 150 • 0 FORESTED WETLAND
RC -2 1
Z
•144 149 -� 0 FORESTED NON—WETLAND
RC -3 PHASE 4 0183 O 0 • 146 1480 • 0
U LANDS 181 145 • 152 • WELL LOCATION
N 0143 N O • 2 153
C 182 BP`( CITY ,s® • • ❑� CONTROL WELL
155
O 179 ®80 •160 158 • Y Legend
70 ,s BP CITY
154 Elevation in Feet
Z 207 O -- • es7 No.
Z _-_-- — Value
70 � 206 0 D
® • 177 1176 159 • =2-4
7 •209 178 O 166 =4-5
O : OS • 1 7 168 =5-6
O 164 165 O =6-7
174
.Z7 •73 0 1751 161 162 163• 0 7-s
OO 0211 0 210 171 • o AUNTY LINE ROAD s = 9-90
C 2 y 10-11
172 0 0170 - N m Q 11 -12
12-13
D 1 1 • / W _
Z 212 213 13-14
H 14-15
Q 15-16
Q 16-21
X21-46
SOURCE:
PORTIONS OF THE BOUNDARY PROVIDED BY: ROBERT M. CHILES,
NEW BERN, NORTH CAROLINA, JOB #2009096, DATED: 11/19/2009
AND02/02/2010 AND BEAUFORT COUNTY GIS DATA WEBSITE
WWW .CO.BEAUFORT.NC.US, BEAUFORT COUNTY PARCEL DATA SHAPEFILES,
NAD 1983 FEET.
NORTH CAROLINA FLOODPLAIN MAPPING PROGRAM, BEAUFORT AND
PAMLICO COUNTIES, LIDAR, NC STATEPLANE, NAD 1983, FEET,
WWW.NCFLOODMAPS.COM
MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS ON LIDAR
P AND U LANDS PHASE 3 AND RODMAN
PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC.
SCALE: AS SHOWN APPROVED BY: DRAWN BY: TLJ
DATE: 05/16/16 FILE; PLAN DS_WELL_LIDAR_
PH3-2015
0 1,400 2,800 "1 CP#1745.59.32.3
"� 4709 COLLEGE ACRES
SUTEV
2
SCALE IN FEET INCORPORATED WILMINGTON, NORTH
TELC910/392-9253 FIGURE 4
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS FAX [phone]

16
NOTE: Rainfall source from 2-6 June 2015 and 20 June 2015 comes from the PA2 rain gauge due the Bay City rain gauge being clogged.
Rainfall source from 10 Aug 2015 to 8 Oct 2015 from the PA2 rain gauge due to an animal attack on the Bay City rain gauge.
14 "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 1971-2000). WETS Data subject to periodic revision. Data shown are latest available from
http://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/climate/navigate_wets.htm.
12 11Aurora Monthly Rainfall Total" refers to monthly totals from the PCS -Aurora 6 N NOAA Station.
Periods of above normal rainfall include 3 June -5 July, 2 October -1 November, and 18 November -6 December 2015.
c
4-
10
4-
2-
>- 8
L
C
O
et
6
c�
T •
4 -
•
2
0
ti� ti� ti� tih tih tih ti� ti� ti� tih tih
eQotia 0
Q) 0ti tiP tis y�
0 0 0 0 0 0
2015 Bay City Daily Rainfall — Bay City 30 -day Rolling Total • 2015 Aurora Monthly Rainfall Total
30% Less Chance 30% More Chance 2015 Bay City Monthly Rainfall
Figure 5. 2015 BAY CITY and WETS -AURORA RAINFALL

LEGEND —
PHASE 3
HYDROLOGIC
2
ZONES
P & U LANDS BOUNDARY
WETLAND HYDROPERIODS
—
ROADS
O • _ <6% OF THE GROWING SEASON
y0
P AND U LANDS MITIGATION SITE PH3 (13.45 ACRES)
®
BERMS AND PARKING AREAS
ROYAL ROAD
EXECUTIVE ROAD/ IrroOrrri _
D O = >6 — 12.5 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON
y W W
FORESTED WETLAND
P AND U LANDS MITIGATION SITE PH3(7.96 ACRES)
®
FORESTED NON—WETLAND
D 0 = >12.5 — 25 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON
ROYAL ROAD
• 196
P AND U LANDS MITIGATION SITE PH3 (570.56 ACRES)
PHASE 2
—
OPENWATER
O O _ >25 — 75 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON
P LANDS AFF
0
UN—PLANTED 2 FOOT CHANNEL
P AND U LANDS MITIGATION SITE PH3 (769.12 ACRES)
`�"-p
—
CONTROL 0
166
RODMAN CONTROL SITE (23.49 ACRES)
0
PHASE 3 WELL LOCATION
85
90
O
CONTROL WELL LOCATION
NOTE:
CD
WELL MALFUNCTION RESULTED IN AN
HYDROLOGIC ZONES ARE A VISUAL APPROXIMATION OF TOTAL ACRES
SMALL ROAD
RC -2
ESTIMATION OF EXACT HYDROPERIOD
REPRESENTED BY WELL HYDROPERIOD CATEGORIES BASED ON ONE
m;
RC -3
LENGTH; REPORTED HYDROPERIOD COULD
WELL PER 15 ACRES, KNOWLEDGE OF SITE CONDITIONS, AND LIDAR
. 0:
PHASE 4
POSSIBLY BE SHORTER THAN WHAT
CONTOURS. THE ZONES DO NOT REPRESENT ACTUAL HYDROPERIOD
PHASE 1
U LANDS
ACTUALLY OCCURRED
BOUNDARIES.
cUAII ROAD P LANDS
PHASE2 113
PHASE 3 10
° 111
1140
1160 °117 0
119
1200
115 y9
s
0 123 1180 �d
�y �,yN,p PHASE 3
0 1 7 avx 7240 nw 25 O 1210 / PHASE 1
127 0126
1310
0122
0130 1320 1 0
to
0128 i
PHASE3 BAY CITY No.
PHASE 1
BAY CITY FARM <
0
PHASE 4 PHASE 1
U LANDS A P LANDS
0
N
BAY CITY No. 3
38
0 0 135
0 0 137 0 134
141 139 136
1400 O
147° 151
/ 0 O
150
0.44 148 0149
O O
01u 1480 152
43 BAY CITY No. 2 153
158 1560 0 O
0 155 1
'Teo BAY CITY No.
0157 154 169
0
159
P LANDS66 °
1
° ,66
4 ,65 ° F
183
01 , 02 ° _m COUNTY LINE ROAD T
0 1,800 3,600
SCALE IN FEET
2
U
y0
SOUTH CREEK CANAL
EXECUTIVE ROAD/ IrroOrrri _
JAIME ROAD
0 194 193 0191
• 196
195
166
RODMAN 197
U
—
CONTROL 0
166
SITE 196
O
85
20;
RC -1
. r�
RC -2
184
O
m;
RC -3
0
,63
. 0:
PHASE 4
U LANDS
1,2
W
00 3
Z
--
160
O
207 y
179
..
m
A 206 0 0
AO O
178
0176
.2
0
1770
-.
0208
o U LANDS
0
0
1740
•
173
-
Z 0211 0210
0172
171
O
0170
0 212O
0 2130
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.
PHASE2 113
PHASE 3 10
° 111
1140
1160 °117 0
119
1200
115 y9
s
0 123 1180 �d
�y �,yN,p PHASE 3
0 1 7 avx 7240 nw 25 O 1210 / PHASE 1
127 0126
1310
0122
0130 1320 1 0
to
0128 i
PHASE3 BAY CITY No.
PHASE 1
BAY CITY FARM <
0
PHASE 4 PHASE 1
U LANDS A P LANDS
0
N
BAY CITY No. 3
38
0 0 135
0 0 137 0 134
141 139 136
1400 O
147° 151
/ 0 O
150
0.44 148 0149
O O
01u 1480 152
43 BAY CITY No. 2 153
158 1560 0 O
0 155 1
'Teo BAY CITY No.
0157 154 169
0
159
P LANDS66 °
1
° ,66
4 ,65 ° F
183
01 , 02 ° _m COUNTY LINE ROAD T
0 1,800 3,600
SCALE IN FEET

BEN
LEGEND —
PHASE 3
HYDROLOGIC
ZONES
-<
P & U LANDS BOUNDARY
WETLAND HYDROPERIODS
—
ROADS
O O = <6% OF THE GROWING SEASON
P AND U LANDS MITIGATION SITE PH3 (13.45 ACRES)
®
BERMS AND PARKING AREAS
ROYAL ROAD
D O = >6 — 12.5 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON
PHASE 4
�W
FORESTED WETLAND
P AND U LANDS MITIGATION SITE PH3 (10.97 ACRES)
PHASE 1
®
FORESTED NON—WETLAND
0 OF THE GROWINGSEASON
12.5AND 2ANDSPERCENT
ROYAL ROAD
P U SITE 3 ACRES)
PHASE 2
—
OPENWATER
P LANDS
P LANDS °<
EXECUTIVE ROAD/ -
O O = >25 — 75 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON
<�
`np090
0
UN—PLANTED 2 FOOT CHANNEL
AND ULANDS MITIGATION ACRES)
ACRES)(571.24
RODMANP CONTRO (23.49SITE
191
0194 O
C
PHASE 3 WELL LOCATION
D
CONTROL WELL
NOTE:
FZMAIL
O
WELL MALFUNCTION RESULTED IN AN
HYDROLOGIC ZONES ARE A VISUAL APPROXIMATION OF TOTAL ACRES
SMALL ROAD
1✓p
ESTIMATION OF EXACT HYDROPERIOD
REPRESENTED BY WELL HYDROPERIOD CATEGORIES BASED ON ONE
LENGTH; REPORTED HYDROPERIOD COULD
WELL PER 15 ACRES, KNOWLEDGE OF SITE CONDITIONS, AND LIDAR
RODMAN
POSSIBLY BE SHORTER THAN WHAT
CONTOURS.
. THE ZONES DO NOT REPRESENT ACTUAL HYDROPERIOD
PHASE 1
ACTUALLY OCCURRED
O
13-11CITY
ROAD P LANDS
„z 111
1140 O
L
0117 O1240twsnpw wct13100130 1320 CITY NO' 4
0119
1200
0118
otVNL t�t�
0
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. BEAU FORT.NC.US, BEAUFORT COUNTY PARCEL DATA SHAPEFILES,
NAD 1983 FEET.
r�
BAY CITY FARM
-<
0
PHASE 4
PHASE 1
SOUTH CREEK CANAL
U LANDS
A
P LANDS
EXECUTIVE ROAD/ -
o
JAIME ROAD..193
191
0194 O
0
N
O
O 196
195
1✓p
No. 3
RODMAN
- °
0187
13-11CITY
CONTROL O
1970
188
737
135
0 134'SITE
198
°
0
05
141°
14001399
O
201
142
RC -1
ZO
1470
151
° °
RC -2
1940
mc
<
®144
0 49
150
0 1,800 3,600
RC
-3
PHASE 4
0
183
0
181
0
N
0�
ow145
148
1489 •..
No. 2
0
152
U LANDS
13 156 9
153
O
SCALE IN FEET
c
3
az
0 ---
180
y
°160 1555
° 155
1.95 acBAY
CITY No. 1
z
zo7 0
179
157
t 0 O
P AND U LANDS PHASE 3 AND RODMAN
Z„
206 • o
-
0
0
169
LONGEST 2015 HYDROPERIODS AND ESTIMATED HYDROLO(
A
°
0 2
78 i3 < a
0
P LANDS 166
DURING WETS NORMAL AND BELOW NORMAL RAINF,
0
0�
1067 169
(EXCLUDES JUNE 3RD — JULY 5TH,
U LANDS
17°
82pp
164 �85
°
OCTOBER 2ND — NOVEMBER 1ST AND
0
•
173
•175
162
163,-,
ROAD
NOVEMBER 18TH — DECEMBER 6TH)
D
211 210
0 °
01
COUNTY
LINE
172 0171
•170
PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY INC.
a
w
D®
O
212 2130
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. BEAU FORT.NC.US, BEAUFORT COUNTY PARCEL DATA SHAPEFILES,
NAD 1983 FEET.

APPENDIX A
2015 Evidence of Flow and Stream Survey Results
in Gum Swamp Run
1) March 2015 and October 2015 Stream Survey Report (text, photos)
2) Figure A-1

Phase 3 Headwater Valley and Gum Swamp Run Flow Documentation
in March and October 2015
Low to moderate flow was visible and documented for entire length of 40 -foot valley, the bowl, and the 2 -
foot channel in the March survey; however, in October paths through filamentous algae in portions of the
upper most 40 -foot valley showed evidence of past flow although difficult to discern at the time. During
the October survey, herbaceous vegetation in portions of the 40 -foot resulted in lower flow velocity
(except at flow constricted locations or areas free of vegetation); flow velocity was also reduced due to
vegetation in the 2 -foot channel in some locations. Water depths varied from 3 to 12.5 inches in the 40 -
foot valley in March and 2 to 24 inches in October; the 2 -foot channel contained 5 to 8 inches in both
surveys. There was evidence of past overbank flow events during both surveys in segments of the 2 -foot
channel although flow was confined to the channel at the time of the surveys. All flow videos are on the
CDs which accompanies this report.
Figure 1 shows the Gum Swamp Run stream construction stationing plan over a 2012 aerial that also
identifies the eight filled ditches to show their relationship both to the stations and photos or videos
referenced in this document. Also depicted are flow features within the Gum Swamp Run system
collected by GPS during the surveys.
e�lliT&ATJk\ k to t11]l
40 -foot Valley
Video 1 - 25 Mar15 PF flow to GSR -0470 shows moderate flow through constriction just downstream
from Parker Farm spill way into adjacent Phase 1 perimeter ditch.
Video 2 - 25 Mar15 flow top 40ft 0471 shows three paths visible through filamentous algae with low to
moderate flow in the upper end of the 40 -foot valley and Video 3-25 Mar15 flow top 40ft 0473 shows low
flow around the first corner of the 40 -foot valley.
Photos 1 and 2: 25 March 2015 upper 40 -foot valley. Left photo view upstream from northwest corner
of preserved woods in vicinity of station 10+00; right photo downstream from same location. Water
depths varied from 3 to 5 inches with low to moderate flow, depending on constriction.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-1 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

Photos 3 and 4: 21 October 2015 upper 40 -ft valley. Left photo view upstream and right photo view
downstream of the upper 40 -foot valley of Gum Swamp Run, about midway along the northern edge of
the preserved woods; note extent of herbaceous vegetation compared to March 2015 or to 2014.
Photos 4 and 5: 21 October 2015. Left photo shows typical flow path through vegetation and right photo
shows typical low flow with filamentous algae oriented in direction of flow and fewer seeds collected along
flow path, north side of preserved woods, 21 October 2015.
Video 4 - 25 mar15 flow 40 ft GSR just west of woods_0478 and Video 5-25mar15 flow at SORT1 40ft
GSR_0481 shows the upstream end of the longest line feature collected in November 2014, slightly
downstream of well 121. Compare to photo 6 below, taken in October in same vicinity- flow path on west
side of valley still visible through vegetation, but much more congested with grasses; water was shallower
here and fewer sedges than upstream along the north side of the preserved woods.
Video 6 - 25mar15 flow at SORT2 40ft GSR_0482 and Video 7-25mar15 flow 40ft GSR at bufplotD_0486
show sorting and low to moderate flow about midway down the 40 -foot valley; compare to photo 7 below
which was taken in October --100 feet upstream of the March Video 7.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-2 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

Photo 6 and 7: 21 October 2015. Left photo flow path through vegetation, vicinity of well 121 and Videos
4 & 5; right photo flow path through vegetation about 30 feet downstream of XS 22, 21 October 2015.
Photo 8: 25 March 2015 and Photo 9: 21 October 2015. Views upstream of 40 -ft valley from same
vicinity near well 122 and shows herbaceous colonization over a six month period.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-3 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

Photos 10 and 11: Left photo view upstream and right photo view downstream below monitoring well
123, 3 to 5 inches water, low flow, 21 October 2015.
Video 8 - 25Mar15 flow 40ft GSR bet XS19 & 20_0487 documents flow downstream of eventual location
of second video camera (NOTE: audio incorrectly refers to XS 18 & 19), 29 March 2015. Video 9 -video
1762 documents low flow at the downstream video camera location with staff gage in October.
--I
Photo 12 and Photo 13: 21 October 2015. Left photo upstream view about 40 feet upstream from second
video camera and staff gage, reflection on water shows curved flow path through vegetation and right
photo shows staff gage at the camera and view downstream; low flow in 2 to 3 inches of water.
Video 10 - video 1763 documents low flow through the vegetation between XS22 and XS21 where
biologist captured fish by hand (pumpkinseed that didn't manage to escape in Photo 14).
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-4 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

Photo 14: small pumpkinseed captured in lower 40 -foot valley in 6 to 8 inches of water with low flow
(mentioned in Video 10).
Video 11 - 25mar15 flow 40ft GSR at SORT4_0488 shows flow across filled ditch 4 and sediment sorting
in areas of flow constriction across the areas
Photo 15 and Photo 16: near the lower end of the 40 -ft valley at filled ditch 4: left photo 25 March 2015 in
vicinity of Video 11 view downstream and right photo 21 October 2015- is same vicinity (biologist standing
in flow path through vegetation shown in Photo 18).
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-5 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

Photo 17: close up of flow path through filimentous algae and herbaceous vegetation where biologist is
standing in Photo 16, 21 October 2015.
The Bowl (rutted area of no construction between the 2 -foot and the 40 -foot Gum Swamp Run
constructed segments)
In December 2014, green pin flags were used to mark flow points through the rutted topography of the
bowl. Two distinct flow paths were flagged- one to the north and one to the south. March 2015 survey
GPSd only the north path as it had deeper water and higher flow velocity and appeared to be the main
path. Video 11-25march2015 Test8_ top of the bowlJulia & green flags downstream documented flow
with test camera at the bottom of 40 -foot valley and top of the bowl (note: audio incorrectly identifies
location as bottom of the bowl).
No still photos taken in bowl during either survey.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-6 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

7-fnnf (`.hnnnal
Video 12 - 25mar15 GSR betXS12 & XS11_1312 documents flow in the upper portion of the 2 ft channel
a few feet downstream of where the constructed channel began. The first —200 feet downstream of filled
ditch 3, there was no 2 -ft channel construction; water from the bowl and 40 -ft valley finds it way across a
low rutted area before the area where construction began in downstream vicinity of XS11.
low
r
Photo 18 and Photo19: near top of constructed 2 -ft channel: left photo view upstream near XS11 and
right photo view downstream with biologist hand on center XS pole mentioned in Video 12.
i
Video 13 - 25mar15 GSR near well 125 US_1313 and Video 14-25mar15 GSR near well 125 DS_1314
shows moderate flow, 8 inches of water, sorting evident in vicinity of well 125.
Photos 20 and 21: 25 March 2015; vicinity of XS5, left photo view upstream and right photo view
downstream, moderate flow in 8 inches of water.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-7 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

Photo 22 and Photo 23: vicinity of XS5: left photo view downstream and right photo view upstream; water
depths 8 inches and low to moderate flow, 21 October 2015.
Video 15 - 25mar15 GSR US bet ditches 1 & 2_1317 and Video 16-25mar15 GSR DS bet ditches 1 &
2_1316 show moderate flow in 8 inches of water during the March survey about halfway between the first
and second filled ditches east of SR1002.
S
Photos 24 and 25 - between XS3 and XS2: left photo view downstream, channel opens up from
vegetated congestion shown in the right photo taken from same location, water 8 inches and low flow.
Video 17 - 25mar15 flow GSR feature from IVC connector_1320 shows the small feature which naturally
formed from flow through the intervalley connector (IVC) into Gum Swamp Run about 30-40 feet from the
end of the 2 -foot channel.
Video 18 - 25mar15 from berm feat from IVC and culvert 1321 panoramic sweep showing relationship of
the IVC and the small volunteer feature, its junction with Gum Swamp Run, the Newberry riffle, Gum
Swamp Run culvert under SR1002.
Video 19 - video 1790 shows flow at the end of the 2 foot channel and its connection with the Newberry
riffle on 21 October 2015.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-8 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

HEADWATER VALLEY SOUTH OF GUM SWAMP RUN
During the March survey, shallow low flow was documented downstream of filled ditch 1 and in vicninty of
vegetation plot 127 but upstream of the plot was not walked due to the low water depths. Water was
presumed to be lower than the ditch fill which caused flow to ebb downstream of the fill.
During the October survey, flow was almost imperceptible near well 127 and water was 3 to 6 inches
deep at the low end of the valley. No videos were taken and there was less water upstream from the
vegetation plot, although several puddles remained where larger areas of previously ponded water were
evident. These areas of ponded water were separated by constricted flow paths at the upstream and
downstream ends and the flow paths usually had pin flags as previous flow markers. These constrictions
denote inlets and outlets for the ponded areas, depending on water depth, slope, and position relative to
the ditch fill. The flow paths and ponded areas were saturated.
Video 20-25mar15 lidar valley to S above IVC -1323 view upstream of low flow along the perimeter berm
where flow joins the upper end of the IVC, pin flags in the distance where lidar valley turns to east.
I
Photo 26 and Photo 27: valley near vegetation plot 127, 25 March 2015: left photo view upstream to east
with pin flags in near distance at previously flagged flow points and right photo view downstream to WNW
into upper end of vegetation plot 127- several pin flags at flow points in middle distance; low flow
throughout this portion of the valley.
Photo 28: upper end of vegetation plot 127 (poles visible beyond biologist), view downstream showing
recent flow path, no flow during survey and Photo 29- downstream view of previous flow path through
herbaceous vegetation east of filled ditch 1, well 126 behind biologist --50 feet (to right in photo).
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-9 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

OJ I
P LAN DSAlf.
ry
—I 11I °i -PHASE 2 SMALL ROAD
PHASE 3 5 � 7
71+41.78
o
[2� [3]
[4]
PARKER FARM
o xslxs2 xs3 SPILLWAY
N 116
BUFFER PLOT B
o0 64+88± XS8
1 15 �� goo° XS10 /BUFFER PLOT C
e 00 o XS4 XS7 XS11
o XS13 XS16
XSS XS6 XS9 XS12 XS15 X517
XS18
+4e+p0 4%00 GSR CAMERA 1 i
4+03 60,00 56�00 *00 N o-ry 0+00 XS19
8
BUFFER PLOT A ° + h° a$°° 38,00 Gyro 34,00 123
xs2o
1 25 oXS14 6+87± GSR CAMERA 2 BUFFER PLOT E
xsz4 xs2s
+ �
32+00 121 0°
127 / BUFFER PLOT F 4 +03± 30 00 XS21 a+p0 a+00
cp
28,0 i2+00
t 8+00
XS23 °o
126 xs2z a 3+60±
+ 3± 0+45±
9� o
° c'x 20+00�
o"�J ttl�o 2+70± -
\\\\���711888 000555+
BUFFER PLOT D /122
—'&�i
SOURCE:
PORTIONS OF THE BOUNDARY PROVIDED BY: ROBERT M. CHILES,
NEW BERN, NORTH CAROLINA, JOB #2009096, DATED: 11/19/2009
AND02/02/2010 AND BEAUFORT COUNTY GIS DATA WEBSITE
WWW. CO.BEAUFORT.NC.US, BEAUFORT COUNTY PARCEL DATA SHAPEFILES,
NAD 1983 FEET.
MINOR STREAM HISTORICAL TRIBUTARY LOCATION PROVIDED BY: MATRIX
EAST, LLC, 906 NORTH QUEEN STREET, SUITE A, KINSTON, NC 28501,
[phone]
AS BUILT LIDAR FOR DIGITIZING RESTORED HEADWATER VALLEY
PROVIDED BY:
JONATHAN RICKETTS ENGINEERING,
3450 NORTHLAKE BLVD., PALM BEACH
GARDENS, FLORIDA, PHONE 561_630_6700
2012 AERIALS DOWNLOAD FROM FROM NC ONE MAP
WEBSITE: http://data. nconemap
N0. 4
s'j,..
4
PL
0 500 11000
SCALE IN FEET
LEGEND
P AND U LANDS
DESIGN CENTERLINE OF GUM SWAMP RUN
40—FOOT VALLEY FLOW PATH (11-20-14)
MONTHLY FLOW OBSERVATION IN
CHANNEL OPPOSITE MONITORING
WELL LOCATION
BUFFER PLOT LOCATIONS
FLOW VIDEO CAMERA LOCATIONS
CROSS SECTION NUMBER AND LOCATION
MINOR STREAM HISTORICAL TRIBUTARY
RESTORED HEADWATER VALLEY WITH NO
VALLEY CONSTRUCTION (DIGITIZED FROM
AS BUILT LIDAR)
DITCH NUMBER
P AND U LANDS MITIGATION SITE — PHASE 3
GUM SWAMP RUN
PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC.
SCALE: AS SHOWN APPROVED BY: DRAWN BY: TLJ
DATE: 05/23/16 FILE: P_ LANDS_GUMRUN_
PH3 APP, 2015
AIS CP#1 745.59.32.3
7 4709 COLLEGE ACRES DRIVE
L SUITE 2
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403 APPENDIX A
INCORPORATED TEL [phone]F-
umRORMOTAL CMSULTMM FAX [phone] FIGURE 1

APPENDIX B
Stem Counts at Individual Plots at
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3

Appendix B. Individual tree/shrub plot counts from P and U Lands Phase 3 first (2014) and second (2015) fall monitoring. Numbers in each column indicate trees unquestionably alive at sampling. Plot size is 0.3 acre.
Zone 2
112
Zone 1
117
118
115
116
191
196
Total
Common name
Scientific name
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
Unknown
?
4
1
8
5
1
1
Serviceberry
Amelanchier canadensis
18
21
21
21
9
4
10
8
14
13
Red chokeberry
Aronia arbutifolia
23
24
6
Paw paw
Asima triloba
1
River birch
Betula nigra
14
14
12
10
2
2
2
2
American beautyberry
Callicarpa americana
13
7
10
6
2
Ironwood
Carpinus caroliniana
1
1
1
1
2
2
Water hickory
Carya aquatica
1
2
1
Sugarberry
Celtis laevigata
1
1
1
1
1
1
Buttonbush*
Cephalanthus occidentalis
10
11
37
1
23
18
30
1
Atlantic white cedar
Chamaecyparis thyoides
16
16
10
9
2
2
Sweet pepperbush
Clethra alnifolia
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
Silky dogwood
Cornus amomum
3
2
1
1
Swamp dogwood
Cornus foemina
1
Titi
Cyrilla racemiflora
3
3
6
4
5
3
2
2
2
2
Persimmon
Diospora virginiana
1
4
4
6
4
3
3
13
10
Strawberry bush
Euonymous americana
12
11
6
4
13
13
Green ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
17
15
34
33
5
4
27
24
83
43
Deciduous holly
I. decidua
1
Inkberry
1. glabra
2
1
Winterberry
Ilex verticillata
1
Virginia sweetspire
Itea virginica
19
17
13
16
14
10
19
14
7
5
Swamp doghobble
Leucothoe (Eubotrys) racemosa
15
17
3
3
7
7
22
21
12
12
Spicebush
Lindera benzoin
5
5
1
1
Fetterbush
Lyonia lucida
1
1
64
1 63
109
103
76
56
Sweetbay
Magnolia virginiana
3
3
115
101
2
78
5
3
Mulberry
Morus rubra
Unknown gum/tupelo
Nyssa spp.
1
1
3
1
4
1
Water tupelo
N. aquatica
20
21
17
16
11
7
15
14
63
42
Swamp tupelo
Nyssa biflora
28
27
14
12
11
7
1
1
54
35
Red bay
Persea borbonia
Pond pine
Pinus serotina
Sycamore
Platanus occidentalis
9
9
9
9
Oak
Quercus spp.
White oak
Q. alba
Laurel oak
Q. laurifolia
1
1
1
Overcup oak
Q. lyrata
2
2
2
1
10
10
17
16
31
28
Swamp chestnut oak
Q. michauxii
48
45
19
20
27
20
11
9
105
74
Water oak
Q. nigra
Willow oak
Q. phellos
1
1
21
21
22
22
Cherrybark oak
Quercus pagodaefolia
Dwarf azalea
Rhododendron atlanticum
Swamp azalea
Rhododendron viscosum
Swamp rose
Rosa palustris
Pond cypress
Taxodium ascendens
4
4
4
4
Bald cypress
Taxodium distichum
6
6
13
14
7
7
12
12
38
25
American elm
Ulmus americana
1
1
6
6
5
5
12
11
High bush blueberry
Vaccinium corymbosum
2
2
2
2
Possumhaw
Viburnum nudum
1
1
1
1
2
2
Dusty zenobia
Zenobia pulverulenta
TOTALI
124
119
102
99
102
82 11
115
106 11
443
307
Zone 2
112
114
117
118
193
194
195
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
4
1
8
5
1
2
1
18
21
21
21
9
4
10
8
14
13
4
7
23
24
6
1
1
14
14
12
10
13
7
10
6
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
10
11
37
37
23
18
30
16
13
13
16
16
10
9
2
2
1
1
1
1
3
2
3
2
1
5
6
3
3
6
4
5
3
2
1
7
7
10
11
1
4
4
6
4
3
3
13
10
14
10
12
11
6
4
13
13
5
5
10
10
19
14
1
2
1
1
7
3
19
17
13
16
14
10
19
14
7
5
4
3
15
17
3
3
7
7
22
21
12
12
26
26
5
5
1
1
1
1
64
1 63
109
103
76
56
97
65
112
92
115
101
89
78
P and U Lands Phase 3 Second Annual Report B-1

Appendix B. (continued)
Zone 2A
Zone 2
122
197
198
Total
Common name Scientific name
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
Unknown
?
5
1st
1
1st
27
1
Serviceberry
Amelanchier canadensis
2
4
5
5
Red chokeberry
Aronia arbutifolia
9
2
11
5
21
Paw paw
Asima triloba
1
4
4
3
11
River birch
Betula nigra
14
9
18
12
131
119
American beautyberry
Callicarpa americana
3
3
7
1
6
6
Ironwood
Carpinus caroliniana
14
10
16
12
6
6
Water hickory
Carya aquatica
6
1
6
3
39
29
Sugarberry
Celtis laevigata
3
2
25
13
Buttonbush*
Cephalanthus occidentalis
1
1
1
4
5
Atlantic white cedar
Chamaecyparis thyoides
1
Sweet pepperbush
Clethra alnifolia
1
1
1
1
5
3
Silky dogwood
Cornus amomum
1
1
17
4
4
Swamp dogwood
Cornus foemina
18
5
4
Titi
Cyrilla racemiflora
5
Persimmon
Diospora virginiana
3
3
Strawberry bush
Euonymous americana
3
3
Green ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
13
13
31
29
183
162
Deciduous holly
I. decidua
2
2
2
43
33
24
Inkberry
1. glabra
11
24
22
1
1
22
Winterberry
Ilex verticillata
108
1
1
1
1
Virginia sweetspire
Itea virginica
1
1
1
1
6
6
Swamp doghobble
Leucothoe (Eubotrys) racemosa
2
2
1
Spicebush
Lindera benzoin
1
4
4
81
Fetterbush
Lyonia lucida
3
17
15
39
38
2
Sweetbay
Magnolia virginiana
12
156
149
6
4
Mulberry
Morus rubra
10
1
1
6
Unknown gum/tupelo
Nyssa spp.
18
1
1
Water tupelo
N. aquatica
4
3
2
2
44
40
Swamp tupelo
Nyssa biflora
10
8
9
8
72
58
Red bay
Persea borbonia
1
6
2
Pond pine
Pinus serotina
Sycamore
Platanus occidentalis
12
7
19
19
84
72
Oak
Quercus spp.
5
1
White oak
Q. alba
5
62
33
28
26
13
Laurel oak
Q. laurifolia
32
12
1
12
4
163
Overcup oak
Q. lyrata
1
Swamp chestnut oak
Q. michauxii
14
14
9
9
106
91
Water oak
Q. nigra
9
14
14
Willow oak
Q. phellos
10
32
33
32
32
13
Cherrybark oak
Quercus pagodaefolia
6
8
8
26
23
Dwarf azalea
Rhododendron atlanticum
82
1
1
Swamp azalea
Rhododendron viscosum
1
Swamp rose
Rosa palustris
179
102
86
91
78
109
Pond cypress
Taxodium ascendens
18
16
22
20
130
127
Bald cypress
Taxodium distichum
2
2
American elm
Ulmus americana
High bush blueberry
Vaccinium corymbosum
Possumhaw
Viburnum nudum
Dusty zenobia
Zenobia pulverulenta
TOTAILI
99
74 11
121
1 105 11
882
1 737
Zone 2A
121
122
123
125
126
127
Total
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
2
4
5
5
18
14
9
2
11
5
21
1
2
1
4
4
3
11
11
4
3
21
19
1
1
3
3
7
1
6
6
2
14
10
16
12
6
6
4
2
1
1
16
16
1
1
3
2
102
96
72
45
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
3
3
3
3
17
15
20
18
5
4
5
4
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
43
33
24
20
19
11
24
22
1
1
22
21
133
108
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
1
4
4
81
79
4
3
17
15
39
38
2
2
13
12
156
149
12
10
1
1
6
7
19
18
1
4
3
5
3
5
2
1
6
2
1
1
5
5
5
5
62
33
28
26
13
12
36
32
12
11
12
12
163
126
8
7
8
7
9
9
14
14
9
10
32
33
32
32
13
13
7
6
8
8
26
23
86
82
1
1
1
1
223
179
102
86
91
78
109
102
86
78
78
73
689
596
Zone 3
111
119
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
2
12
1
3
3
4
4
10
10
2
2
18
14
9
9
22
21
1
1
5
7
4
3
1
1
3
1
3
3
7
6
6
6
14
10
16
12
6
6
4
2
1
1
16
16
1
1
3
2
102
96
72
45
P and U Lands Phase 3 Second Annual Report B-2

Appendix B. (continued)
P and U Lands Phase 3 Second Annual Report B-3
Zone 3
120
124
128
129
130
131
132
133
135
136
137
138
139
Common name Scientific name
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
Unknown
?
1
2
9
1
9
9
3
2
1
2
6
39
2
1
15
8
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
1
1
Buttonbush*
Cephalanthus occidentalis
1
1
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
Atlantic white cedar
Chamaecyparis thyoides
5
5
21
21
12
12
15
15
20
15
11
11
14
14
6
6
6
6
3
3
9
8
2
1
Sweet pepperbush
Clethra alnifolia
1
9
6
9
7
5
4
4
1
1
1
5
4
2
2
5
5
Silky dogwood
Cornus amomum
Swamp dogwood
Cornus foemina
4
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
3
Titi
Cyrilla racemiflora
6
8
6
5
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
31
30
2
2
1
1
Persimmon
Diospora virginiana
Strawberry bush
Euonymous americana
Green ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
1
1
1
1
6
6
Deciduous holly
I. decidua
1
Inkberry
1. glabra
1
Winterberry
Ilex verticillata
1
Virginia sweetspire
Itea virginica
2
3
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
Swamp doghobble
Leucothoe (Eubotrys) racemosa
Spicebush
Lindera benzoin
Fetterbush
Lyonia lucida
Sweetbay
Magnolia virginiana
5
5
5
4
3
3
1
16
12
8
6
1
1
1
1
3
3
Mulberry
Morus rubra
Unknown gum/tupelo
Nyssa spp.
3
2
3
1
1
2
2
3
1
5
1
1
5
1
2
Water tupelo
N. aquatica
13
13
12
13
22
23
8
10
4
5
9
8
14
14
5
7
25
22
12
8
10
15
22
20
21
20
Swamp tupelo
Nyssa biflora
37
27
16
13
12
9
6
5
20
16
8
4
12
7
2
3
29
22
16
12
12
8
18
17
6
6
Red bay
Persea borbonia
2
1
1
2
2
1
3
2
Pond pine
Pinus serotina
Sycamore
Platanus occidentalis
Oak
Quercus spp.
4
4
1
9
2
2
10
5
7
1
20
2
7
1
6
3
16
White oak
Q. alba
Laurel oak
Q. laurifolia
17
13
16
7
10
7
11
11
10
14
6
1
14
4
8
8
7
1
6
3
7
5
2
2
6
5
Overcup oak
Q. lyrata
18
19
6
6
26
24
31
30
15
15
21
14
13
12
17
17
1
7
4
4
4
9
7
8
7
Swamp chestnut oak
Q. michauxii
18
16
8
7
19
17
36
29
37
38
31
11
17
10
14
9
7
2
24
9
33
12
22
15
20
7
Water oak
Q. nigra
Willow oak
Q. phellos
20
13
5
6
24
24
37
27
15
13
5
2
10
7
11
8
7
5
1
1
3
3
14
15
7
5
Cherrybark oak
Quercus pagodaefolia
1
1
Dwarf azalea
Rhododendron atlanticum
Swamp azalea
Rhododendron viscosum
Swamp rose
Rosa palustris
Pond cypress
Taxodium ascendens
Bald cypress
Taxodium distichum
28
28
5
5
17
17
27
27
7
7
14
12
18
17
21
20
15
15
25
23
20
20
16
16
11
11
American elm
ulmus americana
High bush blueberry
Vaccinium corymbosum
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
Possumhaw
Viburnum nudum
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
3
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
Dusty zenobia
Zenobia pulverulenta
TOTALI
171
1 145
120
1 96
186
156
205
173
166
137
133
77
136
97
147
116
123
83
140
71
120
81
136
1 105 11
113
68
P and U Lands Phase 3 Second Annual Report B-3

Appendix B. (continued)
P and U Lands Phase 3 Second Annual Report B-4
Zone 3
140
141
142
147
149
150
151
178
179
182
183
184
186
Common name Scientific name
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
Unknown ?
23
48
13
2
3
3
1
12
1
2
1
2
6
3
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
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
Atlantic white cedar Chamaecyparis thyoides
29
29
6
6
26
25
7
7
5
5
15
15
24
23
63
62
17
15
24
24
33
32
21
20
21
21
Sweet pepperbush Clethra alnifolia
4
4
1
1
3
6
1
1
4
2
Silky dogwood Cornus amomum
Swamp dogwood Cornus foemina
1
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
Titi Cyrilla racemiflora
1
1
1
6
5
2
2
Persimmon Diospora virginiana
Strawberry bush Euonymous americana
Green ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica
1
Deciduous holly I. decidua
Inkberry 1. glabra
Winterberry Ilex verticillata
Virginia sweetspire Itea virginica
1
2
1
1
2
2
Swamp doghobble Leucothoe (Eubotrys) racemosa
Spicebush Lindera benzoin
Fetterbush Lyonia lucida
9
Sweetbay Magnolia virginiana
7
5
1
1
2
1
7
1
1
2
2
Mulberry Morus rubra
Unknown gum/tupelo Nyssa spp.
1
2
1
1
Water tupelo N. aquatica
12
9
16
13
14
13
16
16
5
6
6
7
4
4
17
17
26
26
16
16
15
15
14
12
20
20
Swamp tupelo Nyssa biflora
12
11
13
11
20
16
6
4
2
1
9
5
7
3
1
3
3
6
6
5
4
10
9
Red bay Persea borbonia
2
4
4
5
4
2
1
Pond pine Pinus serotina
1
Sycamore Platanus occidentalis
Oak Quercus spp.
1
3
12
1
6
3
1
7
4
7
1
4
1
8
3
White oak Q. alba
Laurel oak Q. laurifolia
4
2
1
3
7
6
1
2
2
4
2
2
1
5
5
9
7
17
10
11
9
30
21
12
14
Overcup oak Q. lyrata
7
5
7
1
13
8
2
8
9
8
4
9
5
34
33
21
18
19
19
52
49
15
14
10
9
Swamp chestnut oak Q. michauxii
19
10
16
5
16
9
9
5
9
7
19
6
13
6
12
12
8
6
41
25
21
23
24
21
28
28
Water oak Q. nigra
Willow oak Q. phellos
17
10
4
3
13
8
6
2
9
6
4
2
12
5
2
2
6
5
32
21
20
16
19
20
12
12
Cherrybark oak Quercus pagodaefolia
Dwarf azalea Rhododendron atlanticum
Swamp azalea Rhododendron viscosum
Swamp rose Rosa palustris
Pond cypress Taxodium ascendens
Bald cypress Taxodium distichum
10
10
19
19
23
23
18
18
34
32
8
8
18
18
16
16
22
23
16
15
23
23
20
20
23
24
American elm Ulmus americana
High bush blueberry Vaccinium corymbosum
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Possumhaw Viburnum nudum
�Zenobia
1
1
2
3
11
3
2
1
1
ia pulverulenta
PDusty
TOTALI
148
100
138
63
161
114
81
1 64
92
81 1
82
57
130
82
151
1 148 11
119
101
182
1 134
186
1 175
160
1 135
149
143
P and U Lands Phase 3 Second Annual Report B-4

Appendix B. (continued)
P and U Lands Phase 3 Second Annual Report B-5
Zone 3
187
188
201
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
Total
Common name Scientific name
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
Unknown
?
6
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
9
259
11
Serviceberry
Amelanchier canadensis
Red chokeberry
Aronia arbutifolia
Paw paw
Asima triloba
River birch
Betula nigra
7
7
10
10
American beautyberry
Callicarpa americana
Ironwood
Carpinus caroliniana
Water hickory
Carya aquatica
Sugarberry
Celtis laevigata
1
1
Buttonbush*
Cephalanthus occidentalis
4
19
20
Atlantic white cedar
Chamaecyparis thyoides
1
1
4
5
4
31
30
7
6
14
13
14
13
24
23
31
28
20
20
576
549
Sweet pepperbush
Clethra alnifolia
2
2
1
1
57
47
Silky dogwood
Cornus amomum
Swamp dogwood
Cornus foemina
6
4
2
1
1
1
2
2
4
3
2
1
12
7
45
30
Titi
Cyrilla racemiflora
4
5
5
5
2
2
73
72
Persimmon
Diospora virginiana
Strawberry bush
Euonymous americana
Green ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
11
8
38
30
Deciduous holly
I. decidua
1
Inkberry
I. glabra
1
Winterberry
Ilex verticillata
1
Virginia sweetspire
Itea virginica
1
1
1
1
14
12
Swamp doghobble
Leucothoe (Eubotrys) racemosa
Spicebush
Lindera benzoin
Fetterbush
Lyonia lucida
9
Sweetbay
Magnolia virginiana
2
1
2
2
68
65
Mulberry
Morus rubra
Unknown gum/tupelo
Nyssa spp.
1
33
6
Water tupelo
N. aquatica
4
4
5
5
24
20
10
8
7
6
10
7
34
33
22
23
1
19
15
16
14
533
509
Swamp tupelo
Nyssa biflora
10
6
2
3
12
11
8
6
17
17
12
11
28
23
5
5
13
9
20
19
424
342
Red bay
Persea borbonia
20
18
Pond pine
Pinus serotina
1
Sycamore
Platanus occidentalis
5
2
8
2
Oak
Quercus spp.
2
7
8
5
4
4
1
3
188
9
White oak
Q. alba
Laurel oak
Q. laurifolia
2
2
15
13
28
15
15
6
22
16
18
16
28
21
21
12
37
33
48
25
20
16
486
350
Overcup oak
Q. lyrata
6
6
18
13
5
6
24
25
37
34
30
30
7
8
29
27
23
20
9
24
17
15
591
548
Swamp chestnut oak
Q. michauxii
18
17
10
8
14
9
28
21
20
15
29
25
16
14
17
8
11
9
22
19
16
13
752
525
Water oak
Q. nigra
Willow oak
Q. phellos
6
7
18
11
21
19
61
53
13
11
20
20
29
26
23
18
18
12
50
50
54
34
638
510
Cherrybark oak
Quercus pagodaefolia
1
1
Dwarf azalea
Rhododendron atlanticum
Swamp azalea
Rhododendron viscosum
Swamp rose
Rosa palustris
Pond cypress
Taxodium ascendens
9
8
10
9
Bald cypress
Taxodium distichum
7
7
24
24
14
15
10
10
15
15
26
26
24
23
21
21
38
38
26
25
34
34
730
722
American elm
Ulmus americana
High bush blueberry
Vaccinium corymbosum
2
17
9
Possumhaw
Viburnum nudum
29
28
Dusty zenobia
Zenobia pulverulenta
TOTALI
108
88
106
84
134
102
164
135
156
132
157
147
166
150
187
147
175
149
220
195
209
165
5,631
4,437
P and U Lands Phase 3 Second Annual Report B-5

Appendix B. (continued)
P and U Lands Phase 3 Second Annual Report B-6
Zone 4
143
144
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
Common name Scientific name
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
Unknown
?
5
1
3
12
16
1
12
1
8
21
35
5
3
16
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
1
1
3
2
1
1
1
Atlantic white cedar
Chamaecyparis thyoides
7
7
5
5
17
14
8
7
15
13
6
6
16
16
6
5
9
9
11
13
16
17
Sweet pepperbush
Clethra alnifolia
5
4
3
3
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
9
7
5
3
Silky dogwood
Cornus amomum
Swamp dogwood
Cornus foemina
1
1
Titi
Cyrilla racemiflora
1
1
Persimmon
Diospora virginiana
Strawberry bush
Euonymous americana
Green ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Deciduous holly
I. decidua
2
Inkberry
I. glabra
1
1
4
Winterberry
Ilex verticillata
6
6
1
1
4
2
3
Virginia sweetspire
Itea virginica
3
3
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
1
2
1
3
6
6
Swamp doghobble
Leucothoe (Eubotrys) racemosa
Spicebush
Lindera benzoin
1
Fetterbush
Lyonia lucida
1
1
7
6
Sweetbay
Magnolia virginiana
1
1
2
4
8
4
23
15
1
1
4
5
8
9
2
2
2
2
4
4
6
6
Mulberry
Morus rubra
Unknown gum/tupelo
Nyssa spp.
1
Water tupelo
N. aquatica
1
1
1
Swamp tupelo
Nyssa biflora
22
23
12
11
11
9
46
44
25
21
41
37
17
16
20
15
20
14
13
11
37
33
13
14
15
15
Red bay
Persea borbonia
1
1
4
2
1
1
1
Pond pine
Pinus serotina
56
53
50
48
3
2
24
19
38
33
54
39
46
39
31
19
28
24
55
51
35
30
24
27
Sycamore
Platanus occidentalis
Oak
Quercus spp.
5
1
13
3
1
2
3
4
1
White oak
Q. alba
Laurel oak
Q. laurifolia
3
1
9
8
7
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
3
1
13
9
9
7
11
11
Overcup oak
Q. lyrata
3
2
1
1
1
2
Swamp chestnut oak
Q. michauxii
4
2
Water oak
Q. nigra
Willow oak
Q. phellos
8
2
18
15
1
3
2
2
5
2
8
6
8
5
4
2
10
6
19
15
7
5
Cherrybark oak
Quercus pagodaefolia
1
1
Dwarf azalea
Rhododendron atlanticum
Swamp azalea
Rhododendron viscosum
Swamp rose
Rosa palustris
Pond cypress
Taxodium ascendens
11
11
3
3
Bald cypress
Taxodium distichum
8
8
24
24
15
15
4
5
2
2
15
14
10
10
20
20
20
19
35
32
41
40
42
40
16
16
American elm
ulmus americana
High bush blueberry
Vaccinium corymbosum
4
3
2
2
1
1
Possumhaw
Viburnum nudum
1
1
Dusty zenobia
Zenobia pulverulenta
TOTALI
139
1 115
135
126
83
47
108
86
75
61
120
94
122
88
114
93
122
79
124
76
168
145
158
1 140
140
116
P and U Lands Phase 3 Second Annual Report B-6

Appendix B. (continued)
P and U Lands Phase 3 Second Annual Report B-7
Zone 4
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
174
175
176
180
Common name Scientific name
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
Unknown
?
3
16
1
15
1
3
5
12
2
1
7
17
4
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
1
1
3
3
1
1
2
1
Atlantic white cedar
Chamaecyparis thyoides
27
27
15
13
14
14
17
17
5
5
20
17
50
42
22
22
18
18
13
13
25
24
31
31
43
43
Sweet pepperbush
Clethra alnifolia
1
5
4
1
1
3
3
5
3
5
3
1
1
4
3
2
2
2
2
Silky dogwood
Cornus amomum
Swamp dogwood
Cornus foemina
Titi
Cyrilla racemiflora
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
Persimmon
Diospora virginiana
Strawberry bush
Euonymous americana
Green ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Deciduous holly
I. decidua
1
Inkberry
1. glabra
2
3
1
1
Winterberry
Ilex verticillata
4
2
5
3
2
Virginia sweetspire
Itea virginica
2
2
1
8
8
5
4
3
3
2
2
Swamp doghobble
Leucothoe (Eubotrys) racemosa
Spicebush
Lindera benzoin
Fetterbush
Lyonia lucida
1
Sweetbay
Magnolia virginiana
7
7
2
7
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
8
8
3
3
5
4
3
3
4
1
5
5
Mulberry
Morus rubra
Unknown gum/tupelo
Nyssa spp.
Water tupelo
N. aquatica
5
5
1
1
1
Swamp tupelo
Nyssa biflora
16
14
11
10
27
26
16
16
13
12
20
16
11
11
16
16
15
14
19
20
6
7
21
20
Red bay
Persea borbonia
5
2
5
2
2
1
4
5
1
1
1
1
3
2
1
1
Pond pine
Pinus serotina
27
20
66
46
34
28
38
33
56
46
10
8
46
46
62
55
42
42
35
33
29
29
48
47
Sycamore
Platanus occidentalis
Oak
Quercus spp.
2
1
8
1
3
1
1
5
2
2
3
2
8
1
White oak
Q. alba
Laurel oak
Q. laurifolia
2
1
2
9
5
3
3
3
1
3
15
15
4
4
27
18
16
13
9
2
12
12
Overcup oak
Q. lyrata
Swamp chestnut oak
Q. michauxii
Water oak
Q. nigra
1
Willow oak
Q. phellos
6
3
3
3
4
2
5
4
6
4
2
3
4
2
17
15
32
31
11
11
10
4
18
17
Cherrybark oak
Quercus pagodaefolia
Dwarf azalea
Rhododendron atlanticum
Swamp azalea
Rhododendron viscosum
Swamp rose
Rosa palustris
Pond cypress
Taxodium ascendens
3
3
Bald cypress
Taxodium distichum
30
30
18
17
17
18
9
9
4
4
23
22
25
25
11
11
7
8
18
18
25
25
20
20
American elm
Ulmus americana
High bush blueberry
Vaccinium corymbosum
1
6
6
1
1
2
2
Possumhaw
Viburnum nudum
Dusty zenobia
Zenobia pulverulenta
TOTALI
124
108
147
101
114
98
107
87
100
77
73
54
105
79
166
155
145
132
152
131
140
128
148
107
175
167
P and U Lands Phase 3 Second Annual Report B-7

Appendix B. (continued)
*Planted but in such a low density, did not show up in plots
Zone 5
Zone 4
172
Total
Common name Scientific name
1st
2nd
Unknown
?
220
6
Serviceberry
Amelanchier canadensis
2nd
1st
Red chokeberry
Aronia arbutifolia
2nd
1st
Paw paw
Asima triloba
2nd
9
River birch
Betula nigra
1
2
American beautyberry
Callicarpa americana
2
5
Ironwood
Carpinus caroliniana
1
42
Water hickory
Carya aquatica
2
Sugarberry
Celtis laevigata
Buttonbush
Cephalanthus occidentalis
13
10
Atlantic white cedar
Chamaecyparis thyoides
416
398
Sweet pepperbush
Clethra alnifolia
57
46
Silky dogwood
Cornus amomum
1
2
Swamp dogwood
Cornus foemina
1
1
Titi
Cyrilla racemiflora
4
6
Persimmon
Diospora virginiana
2
Strawberry bush
Euonymous americana
3
1
Green ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
8
3
Deciduous holly
I. decidua
3
1
Inkberry
I. glabra
4
9
Winterberry
Ilex verticillata
25
14
Virginia sweetspire
Itea virginica
36
41
Swamp doghobble
Leucothoe (Eubotrys) racemosa
3
Spicebush
Lindera benzoin
1
1
Fetterbush
Lyonia lucida
9
7
Sweetbay
Magnolia virginiana
102
97
Mulberry
Morus rubra
6
4
Unknown gum/tupelo
Nyssa spp.
1
32
Water tupelo
N. aquatica
9
7
Swamp tupelo
Nyssa biflora
483
445
Red bay
Persea borbonia
31
17
Pond pine
Pinus serotina
937
817
Sycamore
Platanus occidentalis
2
Oak
Quercus spp.
69
4
White oak
Q. alba
1
1
Laurel oak
Q. laurifolia
166
114
Overcup oak
Q. lyrata
5
5
Swamp chestnut oak
Q. michauxii
4
2
Water oak
Q. nigra
1
3
Willow oak
Q. phellos
211
159
Cherrybark oak
Quercus pagodaefolia
1
1
Dwarf azalea
Rhododendron atlanticum
10
17
Swamp azalea
Rhododendron viscosum
9
17
Swamp rose
Rosa palustris
12
16
Pond cypress
Taxodium ascendens
17
17
Bald cypress
Taxodium distichum
459
452
American elm
Ulmus americana
3
20
High bush blueberry
Vaccinium corymbosum
17
15
Possumhaw
Viburnum nudum
2
69
Dusty zenobia
Zenobia pulverulenta
3
TOTAL
3,304
2,690
*Planted but in such a low density, did not show up in plots
Zone 5
110
172
173
177
181
185
Total
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
9
1
3
1
2
10
2
5
1
13
1
42
4
2
3
2
2
20
14
2
2
2
2
1
2
1
1
26
18
3
3
3
2
3
3
1
10
8
3
1
1
1
1
2
2
3
3
15
2
2
3
1
4
4
1
4
4
8
7
11
8
2
2
7
6
4
4
1
32
27
1
4
2
1
2
2
1
1
1
3
4
2
1
6
1
2
1
3
6
2
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
3
3
3
2
7
6
4
4
1
10
17
15
9
9
17
17
12
12
16
15
4
4
12
10
70
67
7
5
3
3
20
20
9
8
26
24
4
3
69
63
3
3
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
89
50
36
5
3
11
11
40
16
14
4
9
1
6
1
5
3
1
5
32
3
17
13
9
4
13
8
24
20
16
14
10
11
89
70
12
12
25
20
17
13
11
13
11
8
76
66
11
8
17
7
23
21
29
17
12
9
30
23
122
85
4
4
12
12
17
17
8
8
8
8
40
40
89
89
1
1
2
2
1
2
3
1
1
7
1
3
3
8
8
1
1
1
1
13
13
112
83
128
91
120
100
136
105
115
97
115
87
726
563
Zone 6
134
145
146
148
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
12
4
3
6
1
1
10
3
1
1
3
2
14
15
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
2
3
1
1
1
1
1
5
3
3
15
11
5
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
3
2
7
1
6
1
4
3
6
2
1
4
2
1
1
2
2
2
1
10
10
2
1
7
4
20
14
7
4
6
5
6
3
12
9
3
3
3
2
2
1
2
1
89
50
36
10
38
25
59
40
P and U Lands Phase 3 Second Annual Report B-8

Appendix B. (concluded)
*Planted but in such a low density, did not show up in plots
Gum Swamp Run Buffer Plot
A
Zone 6
C
D
Total
Common name
Scientific name
1st
2nd
Unknown
?
25
1
Serviceberry
Amelanchier canadensis
1st
2nd
Red chokeberry
Aronia arbutifolia
1st
2nd
Paw paw
Asima triloba
4
3
River birch
Betula nigra
1
1
American beautyberry
Callicarpa americana
6
1
Ironwood
Carpinus caroliniana
12
3
Water hickory
Carya aquatica
Sugarberry
Celtis laevigata
Buttonbush
Cephalanthus occidentalis
3
2
Atlantic white cedar
Chamaecyparis thyoides
14
15
Sweet pepperbush
Clethra alnifolia
3
3
Silky dogwood
Cornus amomum
3
Swamp dogwood
Cornus foemina
1
Titi
Cyrilla racemiflora
1
Persimmon
Diospora virginiana
4
6
Strawberry bush
Euonymous americana
1
Green ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
28
14
Deciduous holly
I. decidua
3
2
Inkberry
1. glabra
3
3
Winterberry
Ilex verticillata
Virginia sweetspire
Itea virginica
Swamp doghobble
Leucothoe (Eubotrys) racemosa
1
1
Spicebush
Lindera benzoin
5
5
Fetterbush
Lyonia lucida
1
Sweetbay
Magnolia virginiana
4
Mulberry
Morus rubra
2
1
Unknown gum/tupelo
Nyssa spp.
Water tupelo
N. aquatica
1
1
Swamp tupelo
Nyssa biflora
2
3
Red bay
Persea borbonia
4
8
Pond pine
Pinus serotina
Sycamore
Platanus occidentalis
Oak
Quercus spp.
13
2
White oak
Q. alba
15
7
Laurel oak
Q. laurifolia
1
1
Overcup oak
Q. lyrata
2
2
Swamp chestnut oak
Q. michauxii
2
1
Water oak
Q. nigra
19
15
Willow oak
Q. phellos
39
26
Cherrybark oak
Quercus pagodaefolia
12
9
Dwarf azalea
Rhododendron atlanticum
1
1
Swamp azalea
Rhododendron viscosum
Swamp rose
Rosa palustris
Pond cypress
Taxodium ascendens
1
1
Bald cypress
Taxodium distichum
3
3
American elm
Ulmus americana
9
1
High bush blueberry
Vaccinium corymbosum
1
Possumhaw
Viburnum nudum
7
1
Dusty zenobia
Zenobia pulverulenta
24
22
TOTALI
222
1 125
*Planted but in such a low density, did not show up in plots
Gum Swamp Run Buffer Plot
A
B
C
D
E
F
Total
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
1st
2nd
2
3
4
3
11
8
3
1
7
6
1
33
16
5
5
5
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
11
11
1
1
3
2
11
7
3
3
30
29
3
3
1
1
1
1
5
5
1
2
1
1
2
3
2
1
1
10
9
16
17
27
29
1
2
3
2
4
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
3
7
7
25
24
24
22
21
21
20
19
6
8
103
101
2
2
2
2
1
3
7
7
10
11
12
12
23
23
3
3
56
59
16
26
53
52
47
44
51
47
81
69
24
22
272
260
P and U Lands Phase 3 Second Annual Report B-9

APPENDIX C
Selected Second Annual (2015) P and U Lands Phase 3 Restoration
Photographs

NOTE: A 10 -foot pole marked in one -foot increments held by a biologist about 25 feet from the
camera is visible in all photos. The photos are identified with the station number (see Figure 2),
direction of view, and date taken.
PLPS 5: northeast, top photo 10 December 2015, bottom photo 23 October 2014.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix C-1 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

PLPS 6: northwest, top photo 10 December 2015, bottom photo 23 October 2014.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix C-2 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

PLPS 14: southeast, top photo 9 December 2015, bottom photo 22 October 2014.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix C-3 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

PLPS 15: northwest, top photo 10 December 2015, bottom photo 22 October 2014.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix C-4 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

PLPS 16: northwest, top photo 10 December 2015, bottom photo 22 October 2014.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix C-5 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

PLPS 16: southwest, top photo 10 December 2015, bottom photo 22 October 2014.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix C-6 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

MA
-141, to*
` V
Al
II
V1,
� PH
tt
J
i ti„
�x �
���
`Idh
1 Itfl1
1 :, /s � ,- M s lam•.'- t
MA
-141, to*

PLPS 18: southwest, top photo 10 December 2015, bottom photo 22 October 2014.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix C-10 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

PLPS 19: northeast, top photo 10 December 2015, bottom photo 23 October 2014.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix C-11 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

yS' ;�pp�'���ly'�
fel �i .Jfh"'`S.. ...�5-4, n! ` ���

- WN
4.
:w k
---„s � ,_sSiat-sfw $4Y_-_ �r�—...t :uA-ms �7�A��z[a�°�..Z4 a'' �:''��4�•+p[e �i a'. s..
PLPS 20: northeast, top photo 10 December 2015, bottom photo 22 October 2014.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix C-13 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

PLPS 20: northwest, top photo 10 December 2015, bottom photo 22 October 2014.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix C-14 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016

.may-+��= •�f �� �, Ips v �. +i`��{i ` L� : • _ 4. TE __ ..
r

PLPS 25: northeast, top photo 10 December 2015, bottom photo 22 October 2014.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix C-16 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Second Annual Report June 2016