20120107 Ver 1_Year 5 Monitoring Ph III_20190327

dutr%en-
Feeding the Future -
Federal Express
March 27, 2019
Mr. Tom Steffens
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Washington Regulatory Field Office
2407 West 5th Street
Washington, North Carolina 27889
Mr. Anthony Scarbraugh
NC Division of Water Resources
Department of Environmental Quality
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, North Carolina, 27889
Dear Mr. Steffens and Mr. Scarbraugh:
Enclosed is the P and U Lands mitigation site Phase 3 Fifth Annual and Summary Report for the 2018
monitoring year. The entire report, including all text, tables, figures and appendices, as well as the 2018
well data tables, Gum Swamp Run flow data and flow videos, are located on the DVD which accompanies
the report. Earthwork was initiated on Phase 3 in May 2012 and planting was complete in February 2014.
Since we have completed the required 5 -year monitoring period for Phase 3,1 am requesting project close-
out for those acres. We are currently scheduled for a site visit to this project on April 16.
If you have any questions, please call me at [phone], or Julia Berger of CZR Incorporated at (910)
392-9253.
Sincerely,
Iyya C I AMMM
Je ey C. Furness
Senior Scientist
Enclosure
PC: Mac Haupt, NCDWR - Raleigh w/encl.
Katie Merritt, NCDWR — Raleigh w/encl.
S. Cooper, CZR w/encl.
J. Ricketts w/encl.
23-11-020 w/encl.
1530 NC Hwy 306 South, Aurora, NC USA 27806
1 Effective January 1, 2018, PCs Phosphate Company, Inc. is an indirect subsidiary of Nutrien Ltd. PCs Phosphate Company, Inc.
remains the legal operating entity and permittee.
nutrien.corn

FIFTH ANNUAL (2018) AND SUMMARY 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
March 2019

FIFTH ANNUAL (2018) AND SUMMARY 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
March 2019

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 .......................................
2.6 Reports.........................................................................
3.0 2018 RESULTS...........................................................
3.1 Rainfall.........................................................................
3.2 Hydrology.....................................................................
3.3 Flow..............................................................................
3.4 Vegetation....................................................................
3.5 Photographic Documentation .......................................
4.0 SUMMARY (2018 AND FIVE MONITORING YEARS)
4.1 Hydrology and Flow .....................................................
4.2 Vegetation....................................................................
4.3 Restoration Goals and Functional Uplifts Described ..
..1
.1
.1
.2
..3
.3
.3
.3
.4
.5
.5
..5
.5
.5
.6
.6
.9
..9
.9
11
12
LITERATURE CITED.....................................................................................................................17
Cover Photos - Aerial photo looking north over the section of Phase 3 that contains the upper
headwater valley of Gum Swamp Run, 18 March 2018. Bottom Left: Aerial photo looking north
over the western section of Phase 3 with Gum Road in the middle, 18 March 2018. Bottom Right:
Aerial photo looking north over the section of Phase 3 that bordered by County Line Road and
SR1002.
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 normal and below normal
rainfallin 2018............................................................................................................
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 all rainfall conditions in
2018..........................................................................................................................
T-14
Table 4
Summary of 2018 flow events recorded at fixed flow camera stations and during
monthlysite visits......................................................................................................
T-32
Table 5
Fifth annual survival of trees and shrubs planted in 94 0.3 -acre plots at P and U
LandsPhase 3..........................................................................................................
T-33
Table 6
Fifth 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 R un at P and U Lands Phase 3 ...............
T-35
Table 7A
Volunteer woody stems in P and U Lands Phase 3 vegetation monitoring plots
during fifth annual survey in 2018.............................................................................
T-36
Table 7B
Volunteer woody stems in P and U Lands Phase 3 buffer monitoring plots during
fifth annual survey in 2018........................................................................................
T-37
Table8
Summary rainfall.......................................................................................................
T-38
Table 9
Summary of all years hydroperiods during normal and below normal rainfall..........
T-39
Table 10
Summary of all years hydroperiods during all rainfall conditions .............................
T-44
Table 11
Summary of documented flow events and/or evidence of flow in Gum Swamp
Run and its unnamed tributaries from Y1 through Y5 ..............................................
T-49
P and U Lands
Restoration Site Phase 3 iii PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual
and Summary Report March
2019

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 2018 Bay City and WETS -Aurora Rainfall
Figure 6 P and U Lands Mitigation Site - Phase 3 2018 Longest Hydroperiods and
Estimated Hydrologic Zones during All Rainfall Conditions
Figure 7 P and U Lands Mitigation Site - Phase 3 2018 Hydroperiods and Estimated
Hydrologic Zones during WETS Normal and Below Normal Rainfall
APPENDICES
Appendix A
Gum Swamp Run Dimensional Surveys
Appendix B
Stem Counts at Individual Plots at P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
Appendix C
Selected Fifth Annual Restoration Photographs
Appendix D
Soil Descriptions at Selected Well Locations
NOTE: Copy of entire report, hydrology, and flow data included on the DVD:
DVD - Fifth Annual (2018) and Summary Report for the P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
Report, Cover Letter, Hydrology Tables, Gum Swamp Run Daily Flow Observations in 2018, Gum
Swamp Run Stream Survey Videos, 2018 Monthly Flow Observation Videos, and Selected 2018
Mounted Game Camera Flow Videos
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 iv PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

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 of the plan. This report concerns fifth 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. Boundary and other
survey work were performed by Matrix East PLLC out of Kinston, NC. 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 (DLR) Erosion and Sediment Control permits for
land clearing which were subsequently modified for the construction of the interior ditch plugs and
perimeter berms and ditches. Planting of Phase 3 occurred February 2014.
The P and U Lands site is a key component linking PCS's 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
and longitude 76.775742. Portions of the site can be found on the USGS Aurora, Bayboro, South
Creek, and Vandemere quadrangles (Figures 1 and 2).
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 1 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

1.3 Goals and Performance Criteria. The primary goal of the entire project was to re-
establish a self-sustaining functional wetland and coastal plain headwater stream valley complex
to allow surface flow to move through vegetated wetlands before reaching any stream. It is
important to note that restoration of the upper valley low-energy portion of Gum Swamp Run was
among the first large scale headwater stream valley restoration projects constructed in the
coastal plain to deviate from the normal design and construction parameters of pattern, profile,
and dimension common to stream restoration projects constructed in landscapes with higher
slopes. 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 was expected to successfully re-establish approximately:
19 acres of riverine swamp forest (erroneously omitted in previous reports),
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,
30 acres of Tar -Pamlico riparian buffer of Gum Swamp
12 acres of existing non -wetland forest (at upper end of Gum Swamp Run),
9 wetland acres of non-specific forest,
4 acres (7,141 linear feet) of zero and first order stream including a low energy
headwater stream valley (Gum Swamp Run), and
33 acres of open water (plugged or unplugged ditches).
The work was also expected to successfully enhance/rehabilitate portions of the 271
acres of existing forested wetland north and east of the north end of Gum Road. At the end of
December 2013, there was a 9 acre unplanted area designated for equipment to complete
construction of the perimeter berm and parking lot post -Phase 3 planting. This area was a 25 -
foot wide corridor offset from the inside edge of the perimeter berm. Construction progress
allowed 2 acres of the offset to be planted during 2014 Phase 3 planting and the remaining 7
acres were planted in 2015 when Phase 4 was planted. The stems used for planting in the offset
were an assortment of stems from the unplanted debris pile footprints. The species mix in the
offset did not replicate the original planting zones; therefore, these 9 acres are not included in a
specific wetland planting zone in the list above but are included in the wetland restoration total.
The remaining 73 acres are comprised of existing roads, perimeter berms, and other
man -dominated areas. The —18,301 linear feet of jurisdictional waters in roadside ditches and
canals along Bay City Road 2 and County Line Road 2 will remain unplugged (these distances
are included in the 33 acres of 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 will also remain
unplugged. To increase surface water storage, the original plans showed installation of plugs in
these roadside ditches after the first year. However, data collected thus far indicates sufficient
surface water storage to meet the wetland hydrology criterion at almost every well location.
The acreage numbers listed in this year's report reflect corrections made in early 2018
(e.g., omissions and/or calculation errors noted during the final acres tally for the Phase 4 as -built
and first annual reports and rectification for the entire P and U Lands mitigation site). The wetland
acreages shown in the PCN represented the various wetland target types based on the
boundaries established in the field by the project surveyor. Minor changes which occurred during
site development, such as the placement of excess fill in some of the interior and roadside
ditches, required minor adjustments to the original distribution of acres proposed in the PCN.
These small differences are typical for a project which took over four years to complete and
included changes with each year's work as a result of weather delays or excessive wetness; the
cumulative effect of which was not apparent until final calculations of Phase 4 was begun.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 2 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

2.0 REQUIREMENTS
2.1 Normal Rainfall and Growing Season. A continuous electronic rain gauge on the
adjacent Bay City Mitigation Site was downloaded once a month and its data 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 current year 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 USACE's 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 wetland success.
2.2 Hydrology. Figure 2 depicts the locations of hydrology monitoring equipment,
Figure 3 shows these locations on Beaufort County soil polygons, and Figure 4 shows all
monitoring locations on the as -built LiDAR. To document surface storage and hydroperiods of
the site, 96 semi -continuous electronic In -Situ LeveITROLL water level monitoring wells
(manufactured by In -Situ) were deployed at a density of approximately 1 well/15 acres across all
planted areas of Phase 3, with the exception of two installed near the perimeter canal. These two
were used in conjunction with a nearby well to monitor the effectiveness of the keyway at the
bottom of the perimeter berm. The keyway was constructed to prevent potential lateral drainage
effects from the open canal. Exclosures constructed of barbed wire wrapped around metal fence
posts were built around each well to reduce likelihood of disturbance or equipment loss by black
bears which are common in the region.
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 restored Bay City Farm. These four locations also
represent Ponzer soils and LiDAR data indicate they are at lower elevations than the three
Rodman wells.
Electronic wells collect data every 1.5 hours, were downloaded once a month, and the
data evaluated to document wetland hydroperiods. Wetland hydroperiods were 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 (per WETS long term
data) and then under all rainfall conditions.
2.3 Flow. Within the Gum Swamp Run valley, a 2 -foot wide channel was constructed within
the first two field sections and in the western half of the third section east of Bay City Road
(SR1002), while in the eastern half of third section, no construction occurred. No construction
occurred in the fourth field section either, an area called the "bowl", where the historic stream
valley slope lessened and the valley widened; the ground surface was so close to the invert of
the stream valley any construction would have lowered the elevation. With no construction
performed in the bowl, 100 -feet on either side of the design centerline of the stream valley
retained the remnant silviculture beds (north -south axis perpendicular to flow) as well as the ruts
left from the pre -restoration timber harvest. In order to recapture over flow from a spillway from a
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 3 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

portion of the adjacent wetlands of the restored Parker Farm, an area which LiDAR indicated
historically was part of the Gum Swamp Run upper drainage basin, a shallow 40 -foot wide
meander belt was constructed in the upper valley beginning just upstream of the bowl, from the
fifth field section east of Bay City Road to the top of the valley intersection with the ditch that
separates Parker Farm from P Lands. The 40 -foot wide meander belt was constructed along the
bottom of the valley as indicated by LiDAR. All timber beds were removed in the belt footprint
and the area was smoothed to allow base flow to collect at the invert of the valley and form its
own path downstream. With the hydrologic connection restored between the Parker Farm and
Gum Swamp Run, it was anticipated that flow would form a preferred channel(s) of some
dimension(s) within the meander belt constructed in the historic valley. All construction in Gum
Swamp Run followed the valley signature indicated by LiDAR.
Stream surveys were conducted annually to document conditions in the restored Gum
Swamp Run, its headwater stream valley, the headwater valley to the south of Gum Swamp Run,
and to monitor achievement of restoration goals. The entire length of the valley was walked.
Active flow and features formed by previous flow were documented with GPS, photo and/or
video; each year only new features were added and persistence or absence of previous features
was noted. In the first few years, the surveys were performed usually twice annually (once in the
dry time of year and once in the wet); however, herbaceous vegetation colonization altered this
schedule as the site evolved. 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 were mounted on wooden posts at the edge of the 40 -foot meander belt constructed in
the valley. Also beginning in June 2015, at the monthly downloads, biologists downloaded these
cameras and made observations at these two locations and also walked 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, took additional video of flow, made note of other observations of evidence of past or
current flow (e.g., debris wrack, sediment scour or sorting), and water depth. The cameras were
programmed to record twice each day.
2.4 Vegetation. Annual surveys of the 94 0.3 -acre planted vegetation monitoring
plots occurred in the fall, usually between September - December. 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).
Live stakes of four species were planted every 3 feet along each outside edge of the 2 -
foot wide constructed lower stream channel and within the likely flowpath through the middle
"bowl" section indicated by LiDAR (no construction), and on a 5 x 5 -foot spacing across the entire
40 -foot wide belt constructed in the upper headwater valley. The live stakes included two species
of willow (Salix nigra and S. caroliniana), elderberry (Sambucus canadensis), and buttonbush
(Cephalanthus occidentalis). In addition to the live stakes, the 40 -foot belt in the upper headwater
valley was also planted with bald cypress (Taxodium distichum), green ash (Fraxinus
pennsylvanica), water tupelo (Nyssa aquatica), and swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii) on
a 9 x 9 -foot spacing. The intent was that faster growing live stake species would provide roots to
help anchor the constructed channel sides and sediments in the 40 -foot belt and provide some
shade sooner than the bare root hardwood seedlings. The bare root stems in the upper section
would also provide some structure and additional leaf litter. These live stakes and stems in the
40 -foot valley were neither actively monitored nor quantified but their condition was noted when
the stream valley was visited for other tasks.
Extra bare -root stems ("leftover" from 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
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 4 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

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
9 acres). These "25 -foot offset areas", were unplanted in 2014 in order to maintain an equipment
access corridor post -planting of the other portion of Phase 3 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). Annual photos were taken in
the fall.
2.6 Reports. Further details of construction and monitoring are included in the as -
built, first, second, third, and fourth annual reports (CZR 2015a, 2015b, 2016, 2017, and 2018).
3.0 2018 RESULTS
3.1 Rainfall. Total rainfall in 2018 at Bay City was 67.6 inches, 17.0 inches more
than 2017. The 30 -day rollingp total of 2018 Bay City rainfall shows the following periods as above
normal (above the WETS 70' percentile longer than several days): 26 May — June 27, 28 July —
23 August, 14 September — 14 October, and 2 November- 5 December (Figure 5). Wetland
hydroperiods were calculated for the entire year regardless of rainfall and also calculated with
above normal rainfall periods excluded.
The US Drought Monitor(http://drouclhtmonitor.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 2018, 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. The performance criterion for hydrology in the hardwood flat zones
(Z5 and Z6) is a wetland hydroperiod for 6 percent or more of the growing season, and 10
percent or more for the other zones (Table 1). All 10 wells in Z5 and Z6 had a 2018 wetland
hydroperiod for more than 6 percent of the growing season, even when periods of above normal
rainfall were excluded (Tables 2 and 3, Figures 6 and 7). Pre -construction LiDAR and field
reconnaissance indicated higher elevations in these two hardwood flat planting zones and they
were planted with species less tolerant of longer hydroperiods.
In the other zones, 98 percent of wells (84 of 86) had a wetland hydroperiod for more
than 10 percent of the growing season. When periods of above normal rainfall were excluded 79
wells met the 10 percent hydrology criterion; there were seven wells that did not. Of those seven
wells, one (PUM115) is located along the most downstream section of the Gum Swamp Run 2 -
foot valley where heavy equipment was used to move dirt and construct the channel and
perimeter berm. Another well, PUM113, is located near the toe of the constructed perimeter
berm. Soil compaction in these areas may have affected the hydrology for these two wells. For
PUM161 and PUM170, 2018 was the second year these wells did not record a wetland
hydroperiod for 10 percent or more of the growing season, although both recorded hydroperiods
just below 10 percent (8.2 and 9.6 percent respectively). Well PUM129 is located close to the
unplugged open section of the roadside ditch north of Bay City 4 Road and while its longest 2018
hydroperiod (8.5 percent) did not meet the 10 percent criteria, it may be affected by the open
canal or compaction from the construction haul road parallel to the roadside ditch. Well PUM175
had no 2018 hydroperiod even when the WETS 701h percentile was ignored; the area around
PUM 175 is densely vegetated with pines and sumac after Y5 and noticeably at higher elevation
than adjacent areas nearby which often have standing water and algal mats. The seventh well,
PUM195, also had no 2018 wetland hydroperiod and is also located in an area of noticeably
higher elevation (based on field observation and herbaceous volunteers).
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 5 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

During both rainfall conditions (with or without WETS above normal removed), the three
Rodman control wells recorded a wetland hydroperiod for 25-75 percent of the growing season.
The four Bay City control wells also had wetland hydroperiods, two wells for >12.5-25 percent,
one well for >25-75 percent, and one well for >75 percent of the growing season. Only one
control well was affected by removal of the above normal rainfall hydroperiod; BCRW44 changed
from >75 percent to >25-75 percent of the growing season.
3.3 Flow. No pedestrian stream survey was conducted in the Gum Swamp Run
valleys during 2018 since previous surveys had already documented flow events and features
necessary to satisfy the success criteria; however, monthly flow observations at the designated
locations continued to be collected and the two flow cameras remained in place (although their
function was less reliable after three years in the weather). Appendix A contains the 2018 flow
observations and videos collected in the two valleys in 2018 and two figures which document
evidence of flow collected by GPS over the years. All 2018 flow videos are included only on the
accompanying DVD in two folders: Selected Mounted Game Cameras and Monthly Observations.
Appendix A also contains the results of the final longitudinal and cross-section survey as well as
all previously collected geomorphic data to show the evolution of Gum Swamp Run at the
measurement locations Year 1 -Year 5 (Y1 — Y5) Within Appendix A, the re-establishment of
various important functions is also discussed.
Four representative flow videos were selected from each of the two mounted game
cameras; one video per quarter of the year recorded during a different week from the monthly
downloads. Daily flow videos from the game cameras are available upon request. Also included
on the DVD 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 five observed flow events
during both rainfall conditions (with and without periods of above normal rainfall) (Table 4). Flow
events were also inferred at observation locations based on instances of observed flow at
shallower depths at the same station. The downstream flow station near PUM127 along the
headwater valley to the south of Gum Swamp Run had three documented flow events during all
and normal rainfall; flow was observed two times in 2018 at the upstream flow station near
PUM126. The volunteer channel that formed downstream of the intervalley connector between
Gum Swamp Run and the secondary headwater valley (PUM115 South Feature), had eight
documented flow events during all rainfall and five during normal and below normal rainfall. The
two mounted cameras at the edge of the 40 -foot upper headwater valley captured numerous flow
events for 2018; GSR Camera 1 recorded 78 flow events (260 inferred) and GSR Camera 2
recorded 256 flow events (260 inferred).
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. Some stems appeared dead or questionable; but prior
experience indicates a stem needs to appear dead (or not be found) for two surveys before it can
be confidently deemed dead. Appendix B contains the number of stems by zone that were
unquestionably alive in each plot for the fall 2018 survey.
Overall survival of trees that were unquestionably alive in the 94 plots from the time of
planting to the Y5 fall survey was 70 percent, with a corresponding density of 284 trees per acre
(Table 5). Bald cypress (Taxodium distichum), pond cypress (T. ascendens), swamp titi (Cyrilla
racemif/ora), Atlantic white cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides), and cherrybark oak (Quercus
pagoda) had the highest survival of stems with 98, 95, 91, 84, and 84 percent of stems alive
respectively. Excluding unknown species, white oak (Q. alba), ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana),
and laurel oak (Q. laurifolia) had the lowest survival with 31, 42, and 56 percent of alive stems
respectively. If trees with uncertain survival status (stem appeared dead but could not be
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 6 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

confirmed) were included with trees that were definitely alive, survival increased to 74 percent
and a density of 299 trees per acre.
Overall survival of shrubs that were unquestionably alive from the time of planting to the
Y5 fall survey was 75 percent with a corresponding density of nine shrubs per acre scattered
among the 11 species planted (Table 5). Possumhaw (Viburnum nudum), inkberry (Ilex glabra),
and Virginia sweetspire (Itea virginica) had the highest percent of unquestionably alive stems with
94, 79, and 79 respectively. If all shrubs with uncertain survival status (stem appeared dead but
could not be confirmed) were included with shrubs that were definitely alive, survival increased to
77 percent but the density remained at nine stems per acre.
When trees, shrubs and unknown planted species that were definitely alive were
combined, density increased to 293 stems per acre, and if stems with uncertain survival were
added, the density increased to 308 stems per acre. At Y5, volunteer woody stems were also
counted. Woody volunteer stems were comprised mostly of wax myrtle (Morella cerifera), swamp
titi (Cyrilla racemiflora), red bay (Persea borbonia), and pond pine (Pinus serotina). The annual
fall and woody volunteer surveys show there is a diverse assemblage of trees interspersed with a
healthy shrub component.
In the six buffer plots, a total of 244 alive stems among 12 large tree species, two small
tree species, and one shrub species were found in the 2018 survey (Table 6). Most of the
identified trees were swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii), bald cypress, and water tupelo
(Nyssa aquatica); one shrub, an American beautyberry (Callicarpa americana), was tagged in a
buffer plot. Based on the six plots, the total density of trees alive in the buffer area was 370
stems per acre at Y5 survey and 382 if the unsure stems are added. After combining the trees,
shrubs and unknown species that were definitely alive, stem density increases to 371 stems per
acre, and if stems with uncertain survival are added, the density within the riparian buffer
increases to 383 stems per acre. Even though the stem density criterion is the same for the
alternate riparian buffer restoration and non -riparian wetland restoration, the results from the six
buffer plots were not added to the results from the other plots because the buffer plots were
established within what was considered the riparian buffer footprint (see Table 6).
Volunteer woody vegetation in the 94 plots was also counted in the 2018 survey. All
volunteer woody stems taller than 1 foot were counted, but those with upland status or
considered a nuisance species were excluded from density calculations. A total 15,192 stems of
36 tree and shrub species were identified as woody volunteers, of those, the density of non -
nuisance wetland trees was 208 stems per acre, the density of non -nuisance wetland shrubs was
81 stems per acre, and the total density of non -nuisance wetland stems was 289 stems per acre.
After adding the volunteer tree stems to the planted tree stems, the tree density is 492 stems per
acre, which is above the required 260 stems per acre for success (Table 7). Furthermore, after
adding woody wetland volunteer tree and shrub stems to the planted tree and shrub stems,
density increases even more to a total of 581 wetland tree and shrub stems per acre. The
volunteer stems enhance the diversity of the site because some of the volunteer species were not
the same species that were planted.
Volunteer woody vegetation in the six buffer plots was also counted in the 2018 survey by
the same method as in the larger plots. A total of 354 stems of 12 tree and shrub species were
identified as woody volunteers. Of those, the density of non -nuisance wetland trees was 170
stems per acre, the density of non -nuisance wetland shrubs was eight stems per acre, and the
total density of non -nuisance wetland stems was 177 stems per acre. After adding the volunteer
tree stems to the planted tree stems, the tree density is 540 stems per acre, which is above the
required 260 stems per acre for success (Table 7). Furthermore, after adding volunteer tree and
shrub stems to the planted tree and shrub stems, density increases even more to a total of 548
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 7 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

wetland tree and shrub stems per acre. The volunteer stems enhance the diversity of the site
because some of the volunteer species were not the same species that were planted.
The USACE determined that three tree species have the potential to out -compete 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 2016, a total of 470 stems were found in all
nuisance plots and 50 stems were of the three species mentioned (10.6 percent). Of the 50
stems, 25 were pine, 21 were red maple, and four were sweetgum. Young loblolly pine and pond
pine are often difficult to distinguish from each other and so some of the pond pine counted in
nuisance plots might be loblolly pine. Of the 25 pines previously mentioned, 17 were identified as
pond pine. None of the three nuisance species exceeded 20 percent (either in aggregate or
separately) in either Y2 or Y3 survey, so per the nuisance monitoring plan, no remediation was
necessary.
Neither the live stakes planted anywhere within the Gum Swamp Run restoration nor the
hardwood stems planted in the 40 -foot wide belt constructed in the upper headwater valley were
monitored for survival nor were their stems included in the density counts for success. However,
in case future coastal plain projects may consider live stakes or bare root hardwood seedlings
planted in a similar situation (low -slope upper stream valley and organic soils of the coastal plain),
it is instructive to note that survival of these stems was much lower than expected and to suggest
potential causes for poor survival.
The entire distance of the Gum Swamp Run channel and valley was walked from top to
bottom at least twice a year for the first few years and conditions of the live stakes and hardwood
stems was observed during these surveys. While buttonbush and willow live stakes survived
along the edges of the lower stream channel better than any stems in the upper headwater valley
their survival is still estimated at less than 50 percent; elderberry was not specifically noted, but
some live stake stems of this species may have survived. Since the middle bowl underwent no
construction and no herbicide was used to control vegetation like in some other areas of this
portion of Phase 3, it was almost impossible to find the planted live stakes in the bowl during
stream surveys. In addition, among the herbaceous vegetation of the bowl, the pin flags which
marked the edges of the areas where the planters were to plant the live stakes were also difficult
to see. What's more, the flow paths that did develop through the bowl and were walked during
annual stream surveys were not necessarily where the planters put the live stakes. However, the
condition of the planted stems in the 40 -foot wide upper headwater valley area was quite obvious
during stream surveys.
In the upper portion, it is estimated that by Y3 the live stake survival was less than 5
percent (mostly willow) and the hardwood seedling survival was perhaps 15 percent (almost all
bald cypress with a few water tupelo). There are four main reasons suspected for poor survival of
these stems in the upper portion of the system to consider in future efforts:
• water for longer duration than anticipated across the entire 40 -foot wide upper
system for most of the year,
• deeper water than anticipated in the upper 1,200 feet of the system,
• high temperatures of the shallow water in the upper system open to the full effect
of the summer sun, and
• acidity of the water.
Tolerance for both wetness and low pH was part of the species selection process; however,
seedlings of even tolerant species are stressed when their stem is flooded for prolonged periods
before they have established a root system. Water in the upper 1,200 feet of the system often
submerged all but 2 to 4 inches of the top of the live stakes as was evident in the flow appendix
photos of annual reports. Perhaps the speed with which the system rehydrated and the amount of
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 8 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

base flow expressed were underestimated by those who promoted the live stakes and stems in
the upper system and perhaps any stems in the upper system was a flawed concept in this
situation. But if stems were a good idea in the constructed floor of the upper headwater valley,
perhaps some topographic diversity within the constructed footprint would have helped more
stems survive; the construction design called for basically a flat 40 -foot wide floor to enable water
to find its own path. Water temperature was not measured, but it was definitely noted as "hot"
during all summer surveys; pH of the water in the Gum Swamp Run system was not measured
post -restoration, but soil pH was measured prior to restoration and pH ranged from 3.4 in Dare
muck to 5.7 in Ponzer, the two soils shown in the county soil survey within the system. An
additional indicator of acidity may be that the glue and seams on biologist's field boots typically
last for about one year of tasks in the waters of the P and U Lands mitigation site and other
nearby creek systems.
Potential causes for mortality of the live stakes along the edges of the lower stream
channel are more difficult to determine as that environment and configuration is similar to a
typical use of live stakes for stabilization of side slopes next to a constructed channel. The
planting crew was experienced with installation of live stakes and the live stakes arrived in 4 -foot
lengths in the expected dormant condition. Initially, there was more competition from existing
herbaceous vegetation in the lower stream channel than was found across the upper system; that
competition may have been a factor, and the acidity of the water may have also contributed.
Temperature was a less likely factor as the narrow 2 -foot wide channel was more protected from
the sun by adjacency of the herbaceous cover.
3.5 Photographic Documentation. A few photos representative of 2018 conditions
are included with this report (Appendix C). More are available upon request.
4.0 SUMMARY (2018 AND FIVE MONITORING YEARS)
4.1 Hydrology and Flow. According to WETS rainfall calculations, 2018 rainfall
recorded at the Bay City gauge was normal or below normal WETS rainfall except for 26 May - 27
June, 28 July - 23 August, 14 September - 14 October and 02 November - 05 December (Table
8). The wells in the hardwood flat zones had a wetland hydroperiod for 6 percent or more of the
growing season during all rainfall conditions and during normal or below normal rainfall. In other
zones, 98 percent of wells (84 of 86) had a wetland hydroperiod for more than 10 percent of the
growing season. When periods of above normal rainfall were excluded, there were seven wells
that did not meet the hydrology criterion in 2018 (79 of 86).
Tables 9 and 10 depict the five-year summary of the hydroperiods for each well with
above normal rainfall hydroperiods removed (Table 9) and all rainfall hydroperiods included
(Table 10). By the end of Y1 (2014), 17 of the 96 wells did not have a wetland hydroperiod, by
Y2 only four wells did not, by Y3 and Y4 eight did not, and by Y5 seven did not. Over the five
monitoring years (2014-2018), 77 of the 96 wells recorded a wetland hydroperiod for all
monitoring years, nine wells had a wetland hydroperiod for four out of five monitoring years, and
two wells had a wetland hydroperiod for three of the monitoring years. Eight wells (PUM113, 115,
116, 129, 175, 187, 192, and 195) had a wetland hydroperiod for two years or less (below 50
percent of the monitoring years success criterion). Site conditions at eight wells with either no
hydroperiods or lower hydroperiods than expected were investigated in late 2017 and early 2018;
of those eight, one has since met the 50 percent criteria (PUM170) and one location was added
(PUM192). A description of that investigation is included in Appendix D and soil profiles taken
during the investigation are shown in Table D-1.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 9 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

The lower hydroperiods are likely due to either compaction from construction activity,
proximity to an open ditch/canal, or slightly higher elevation than surrounding areas. As -built
LiDAR shows two of the wells investigated (PUM175 and PUM195) as located in higher elevation
areas (9.5 to 10.5 feet) within the non -riparian portion of the site which ranges from 6.5 to 11 feet
(up to 12 feet at a few scattered locations); for PUM195 the higher area was estimated to be
about 60 feet in diameter; dimensions of the higher area observed at PUM175 was not described,
although, at the time the area was comparatively sparsely vegetated. The areas at PUM113 and
PUM115 are drier, likely due to small topographic differences or compaction/disturbances as a
result of construction; PUM115 may also experience some drawdown from proximity to the lower
Gum Swamp Run stream channel which has moderate perennial flowing water over the
monitored years. PUM120 and PUM192 are also drier due to construction impacts (both areas
were part of a haul road for construction equipment); and proximity to an open roadside ditch also
contributes to a lower hydroperiod at PUM129 (two of five years met the 10 percent non -riparian
threshold and a third year was at 8.5 percent). Additionally, PUM192 was just below 10 percent at
9.6 in 2017 and rounding would result in two years out of five; this well has displayed a steady
trend of wetter hydroperiods each year (5.7 percent in 2015, 7.4 percent in 2016, 9.6 percent in
2017, and 12.1 percent in 2018). It was difficult to confidently determine a cause for lower
hydroperiods at PUM116 and PUM187, although PUM116 may also experience some drawdown
from proximity to lower Gum Swamp Run channel. The investigation showed PUM187 in a small
75- x 50 -foot area slightly elevated above the surrounding ground; both wells met the 10 percent
criterion for two of the five years and their 2017 hydroperiods were just below 10 percent at 9.6
and 9.9. Obviously, those 2017 hydroperiods could be rounded to 10 percent which would cause
these two wells to meet the criterion.
Wetland hydroperiods during WETS normal and below normal rainfall periods and those
during the entire growing season regardless of rainfall were evaluated separately. Hydroperiods
for all monitoring years were also evaluated taking into account two drought indices: the Palmer
Drought Severity Index (PDSI) and the Palmer Hydrological Drought Index (PHDI) (Tables 9 and
10). Even though some of the years included a few weeks of drought status according to the US
Drought Monitor, no year from 2013 to 2016 was assigned a yearly drought status- all years were
either near normal or some level of above normal. The consecutively wet years might have
contributed to the low survival of stems at the site. According to the US Drought Monitor in 2017,
all weeks through June were considered normal in the vicinity of the P and U Lands project area.
In 2018, all 41 weeks of the growing seasons were considered normal with no drought status in
the vicinity of the P and U lands project area.
All Gum Swamp Run flow observation locations had at least five observed flow events
during both rainfall conditions in 2018 (with and without periods of above normal rainfall) .The
downstream flow station near PUM127 along the headwater valley to the south of Gum Swamp
Run had three documented flow events during all and normal rainfall; flow was observed two
times in 2018 at the upstream flow station near PUM126. Fill for the first ditch east of SR1002
and south of lower Gum Swamp Run was approximately 6 inches higher than surrounding ground
surface. This difference in elevation obstructed downstream flow in the shorter unnamed
headwater valley south of Gum Swamp Run. Historically, this smaller tributary headwater system
likely connected with Gum Swamp Run somewhere close to current SR1002 footprint and into the
SR1002 roadside canal after the road was built. However, the restoration of the perimeter berm
and the naturally higher elevations between the invert of Gum Swamp Run and the invert of the
smaller southern system may have caused southern valley flow waters to pile up along the toe of
the perimeter berm and potentially cause instability. Therefore, during restoration activities, the
"intervalley connector", a shallow straight narrow channel, was constructed to connect the two
valleys. In addition, two years later, an area approximately 130 feet long and 1 to 2 feet wide
was dug with hand shovels in March 2016 across the fill; the dug "channel' followed the course of
pin flags that marked a flowpath across the fill noted at high water condition. Subsequent field
observations up through April and December of 2018 showed that instead of being damned at the
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 10 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

eastern edge of the fill, water frequently flowed in this narrow channel across the fill, into the
intervalley connector, and then formed a short natural sinuous channel from the end of the
intervalley connector into Gum Swamp Run itself.
The volunteer channel that formed downstream of the intervalley connector between
Gum Swamp Run and the secondary headwater valley (PUM115 South Feature), had eight
documented flow events during all rainfall and five during normal and below normal rainfall. This
feature has developed a more defined bed and bank since formation and is approximately 80 to
100 feet long. The south valley and PUM115 South Feature are just some examples of multiple
naturally forming features in the Gum Swamp Run headwater system. As -built LiDAR indicate
potential locations for small flowpaths to form and annual aerials also capture some of these
features. The two mounted cameras in the 40 -foot headwater valley captured numerous flow
events for 2018; GSR Camera 1 recorded 78 flow events (260 inferred) and GSR Camera 2
recorded 256 flow events (260 inferred).
Table 11 is a summary table of year -by -year flow documentation collected during annual
stream surveys, monthly observations, and the videos from the stationary flow cameras. The
distance for the entire Gum Swamp Run headwater valley (40 -foot wide meander belt constructed
in the upper valley, the bowl, and 2 -foot constructed channel) has met the flow success criteria
described in Table 1.
Appendix A -Figure 1 shows the cross-section locations, observation locations, camera
locations, and evidence of flow features documented over the monitoring period (e.g., flow, bed
and bank formation, sediment sorting, wrack lines, oriented vegetation, and overbank flow) on
two sheets (one with aerial photo as background and the other zoomed in on the upper
headwater valley with no aerial in order to better distinguish the GPS data collected during the
stream surveys). During stream surveys, GPS data in the upper headwater valley and bowl were
collected only for segments with evidence of flow greater than 10 feet in length; therefore, the
headwater valley flow paths depicted on Figure 1 of Appendix A do not document every location
where flow occurred or was observed within the 40 -foot valley. After Year 1 (2014), new GPS
data were collected during the surveys only in areas where flow had not been previously captured
with GPS; at almost all GPS documented flow paths in the upper valley, once flow was
established and noted the first time, evidence of repeated flow events remained afterwards.
Sheet 2 of Figure 1 of Appendix A depicts the "new" GPS flow path data collected for each year in
the 40 -foot valley and shows that over time, some flow paths became joined.
Appendix A also contains a summary of functions restored within the Gum Swamp Run
headwater system and dimensions at designated cross-sections over the monitoring period by
year with the previous dimension data for comparison over time. The majority of the sections from
all three areas showed some signs of channel development. A small drop in the elevation of the
section, or the appearance of a braid or secondary channel, or even a new preferred channel in
the upper system, should be considered normal evolution for a low-energy headwater system in
the first years after restoration and for such streams in the coastal plain in general. The small
elevation drop below the as built elevation in this system does not indicate instability. During all of
the measurement periods, water was present and flowing within the system.
4.2 Vegetation. Overall survival of trees that were unquestionably alive in the 94
plots from the time of planting to the Year 5 fall survey was 70 percent, with a corresponding
density of 284 trees per acre. Overall survival of shrubs that were unquestionably alive from the
time of planting to the Year 5 fall survey was 75 percent with a corresponding density of nine
shrubs per acre. When trees, shrubs and unknown species which were definitely alive were
combined, density increased to 293 stems per acre. A total of 245 stems among 15 tree species
and one shrub stem were found unquestionably alive in the buffer plots. Based on these six buffer
plots, total density of tree and shrub stems unquestionably alive was 370 stems per acre (382
when the unsure stems are included). The buffer stem density was not added into the stem
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 11 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

density of the other planted acres because the plots were established within what was considered
the riparian buffer footprint. Different species of trees and shrubs are surviving well in the fifth
year, and there is a diverse assemblage of trees interspersed with a healthy shrub component. In
many areas of the site, volunteer woody wetland stems (e.g. red bay [Persea borbonia] and
sweet bay [Magnolia virginiana]) enhance the diversity and increase stem density of the site.
4.3 Restoration Goals and Functional Uplifts Described. Several goals and
functional uplifts anticipated from the restoration of the Phase 3 portion of the P and U Lands
were mentioned in the mitigation plan and are listed below:
• establishment of a diverse community of vegetation which reflects differences in
soil character, topography, and hydroperiod
• establishment of conditions which allow a wetland vegetation community to
naturally regenerate from the seed bank
• capture and store rainfall
• water storage and flood flow attenuation
• groundwater recharge
• capture and retain sediment and other pollutants
• serve as a wildlife corridor and provide wildlife habitat
• improve water quality and provide watershed protection
The following paragraphs describe how these goals have been met.
Vegetation Community Diversity
Prior to restoration activities, approximately 1,100 acres of the 1,595 acres of Phase 3 of
the P and U Lands were in various stages of silviculture dominated by loblolly pine, with a mixed
understory of five common shrubs (wax myrtle, inkberry, red bay, giant cane, and swamp titi) and
numerous herbs and forbs. No vegetation survey was performed prior to restoration for direct
comparison, but photographs and data forms prepared during the jurisdictional evaluations do
provide some insight. The diversity of the vegetation community was certainly expanded with the
planting of 27 species of wetland hardwood trees and 10 species of wetland shrubs. Annual
planted stem surveys and the volunteer woody vegetation survey indicate that of the planted
stems, 26 of the 27 tree species and all 10 of the shrubs have survived; 14 of those 36 species
were found as volunteer stems in addition to five other species which were not planted. These 19
species indicate that rehydration and changes in light cover during growth of the planted stems
has provided conditions favorable for release of the historic seed bank and/or that some planted
stems have had time to produce offspring. Numerous native grasses and forbs from the seed
bank are also evident across the site.
Hydrographic Diversity
As -built LiDAR shows that Phase 3 elevations of the planted areas range from 4.5 to 11
feet, with the majority of the site falling somewhere between 7.5 to 10 feet (non -riparian).
Hydroperiods from the 94 wells scattered across the site reflect the diversity of topography and
soil characteristics; hydroperiods range from less than 14 consecutive days (minimum for wetland
hydroperiod; only one well) to 282 consecutive days (or 100 percent of the growing season).
Rainfall Capture and Storage
For the three or four decades prior to restoration, rainfall was quickly transported off the
site by a system of ditches and canals. The site had north -south running field ditches which were
an average of 600 feet apart, with a maximum lateral distance of approximately 300 feet. The
depths of the pre -restoration field ditches were 2 to 3 feet deep. The north -south field ditches tied
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 12 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

into east -west running roadside canals every 2,400 feet; these canals were 4 to 6 feet deep. The
configuration of this network provided ample capacity to remove both surface water runoff quickly
and maintain ground water well below the ground surface. To capture rainfall and disrupt the
historic runoff, almost all interior ditches were filled, partially filled, or plugged and many perimeter
canals were also plugged or partially plugged (none were filled).
Surface Water Storage and Flood flow Attenuation
The majority of the tree stumps left in the ground after the forestry operations were
removed and stacked in consolidated piles during site preparation/construction. Stump removal
left 8 to 12 -foot diameter depressions that were 1 to 2 -foot deep although these areas were later
mostly filled as part of other site work. However, the as -built UDAR data show significant
portions of the site with local variations in elevation as much as 18 inches. The lowest areas of
this variation (bottom 6 inches) typically are isolated or have only very limited connections
through the higher elevations to the next equal elevation range or lower elevation range. These
localized depressions serve as significant distributed surface water storage basins and often are
the locations with the longest hydroperiods.
To increase water storage in the upper watershed and upper Gum Swamp Run stream
valley and to re-establish base flow in the restored stream itself, in the portion of Phase 3
between Small Road and Bay City 4 Road, all the interior field ditches (600 feet apart) were filled
and roadside canals were plugged. This restoration has returned a major portion of the surface
water within the watershed back to the historic channel of Gum Swamp Run (Level 1 function —
"A Function -based Framework for Stream Assessment and Restoration Projects" by Harman et
al., 2012). Additionally, several volunteer inflows to the channel have been observed; the most
significant one was measured at station (54+00 to 55+00). At this station a 200' +/- long sinuous
narrow channel from the north delivers water directly to the channel from the floodplain.
The limited connectivity throughout the site results in a very slow removal rate, a much
longer site residency time, and concomitant attenuation of flood flow that was historically routed
offsite through the ditch network.
Wildlife Corridor within the South Creek Corridor Complex
Numerous species of wildlife have been noted over the five years of monitoring including
many species which would have also been present prior to site restoration (deer, bear, otter,
multiple reptile and amphibian species, and many migratory birds). Rehydration has made the
site more preferable for some species (beaver, nutria, and waterfowl). However, the site will
eventually provide a mature suite of forest types and various aquatic habitats which have not
been present for many decades. These restored habitats currently do provide and will continue
to provide in perpetuity a corridor with more refugia, increased mast and forage selection, and a
wide diversity of den and nest opportunities through the connection to the larger South Creek
complex; the only interruption to this connectivity to the larger corridor complex is Bay City Road
(SR1002), a two lane highway.
Improve Water Quality and Provide Watershed Protection
The restoration of Gum Swamp Run removed or greatly reduced the majority of the
manmade drainage capacity and resulted in longer residency periods for each rainfall event.
Rainfall during the drier months will not discharge at all from the site but be stored in the
depressions. This water is either removed via evaporation, transpiration, seepage into the
groundwater table or, if within the watershed of Gum Swamp Run, becomes part of the its base
flow. Larger rainfalls or rainfall during wetter months would have all of the storage and removal
benefits mentioned above, plus reduced rapid surface water runoff into Gum Swamp Run. The
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 13 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

reduction of the surface water runoff (longer residency periods) increases the amount of nutrients
(phosphorus and nitrogen) available for uptake by the site's plants and animals.
Pre -restoration, the field ditches and the roadside ditches had steep side slopes, typically
in excess of a 1:1 (horizontal to vertical distance). Slopes steeper than 3:1 are significantly more
susceptible to soil erosion which would increase the turbidity of the downstream receiving waters.
The restoration of the Phase 3 portion of P and U Lands has eliminated all of the flow from
interior field ditches and over 90 percent of the flow in the roadside canals; therefore, steep
slopes adjacent to water flow were also eliminated which greatly reduces the likelihood of erosion
or delivery of sediments to receiving waters during storm events.
Provide Wildlife Habitat (Terrestrial and Aquatic)
While the existing pine plantation would have had disruptive human activities only
periodically (forestry operations with long periods of heavy vehicle presence during site
preparation, planting, thinning, and harvest activity), once the site is accepted into conservation
the human presence will be mostly limited to seasonal hunting by individuals. Prior to restoration,
manmade drainage systems may have limited the movement of many smaller mammals, reptiles,
and amphibians. Restoration of connectivity across the site (ditch/canal plugs and ditch/canal fill)
has improved the mobility for these smaller creatures. The increased diversity of flora increases
the habitat opportunities and as the forest canopy matures, it will provide attractive foraging,
resting, and nesting habitat for more diverse wildlife species, including more neo -tropical
migratory birds. Well data demonstrate a diverse range of hydroperiods distributed across the
site which provide multiple opportunities for colonization of plants and use by animals dependent
upon, or at least with a preference for, certain habitat conditions that were not present prior to
restoration (e.g., small depressions for waterfowl and amphibians).
Domec et al. (2015) showed that pine plantations operated very close to their critical leaf
water potentials (i.e. close to their permissible water potentials without total hydraulic failure),
suggesting that intensively managed plantations are more drought -sensitive and can withstand
less severe drought than natural forests. The more permanent habitat (absence of silviculture
activity) and more drought resistant habitat of the restored native hardwood wetland forest of the
P and U Lands provides a more resilient wildlife habitat than the previous pine plantation of the
site.
The following paragraphs describe the general functional uplifts as a result of the restoration.
Nutrient Removal/Transformation
The Gum Swamp Run watershed is comprised predominantly of muck soils (Dare
muck=18.2 percent; Ponzer muck=43.2 percent, and Wasda muck=35 percent). Water quality
research by the Department of Environmental Protection in Florida suggested that loading rates
for muck soils range in the order of magnitude of .0039 kg/acre-inch/year for total phosphorus
and .013 kg/acre-inch/year for total nitrogen. While studies of pine plantations in NC show that
there is not a great deal of difference between loadings of N or P in loblolly pine plantations
compared to other forest types (Amatya, Skaggs, and Gilliam, 2006), immobilization and slow
release of N and P in decomposing forest litter are more important from the standpoint of forest
productivity since they are most commonly the limiting nutrients for microbial processes of
decomposers (Piatek and Allen 2001). In the absence of the periodic disturbance of the forest
floor litter common to pine plantation operations (and even almost complete removal via shear V
blade preparation as was done in lower portions of the Gum Swamp Run watershed in its
conversion from hardwood to pine plantation by Weyerhaeuser), the long term storage,
transformation, and sequestration of nutrients will be improved by the restoration of Phase 3 of
the P and U Lands.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 14 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Organic Matter Production and Export
To better discuss this function, effort was spent to understand potential differences
between temperate deciduous forest and pine plantations on organic soils- which is not a simple
subject. However, there is much individual literature about silviculture and pine plantations as
well as the carbon cycle and forests. The carbon and nitrogen cycles are chemically complex
and dependent on numerous factors such as temperature, forest type, litter characteristics, and
soil type; additionally, the quality and quantity of bacterial or microbial mechanisms and pathways
for sequestration and or decomposition are not completely understood. Studies often dispel one
long -held concept with results that purport a new one.
Aqueous transport of organic matter through forested landscapes is known to provide
essential linkages between terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. Upland soils are often too sandy
to support overland flow, while movement of cation nutrients, metals, and other insoluble organic
components through wetland soils is well documented throughout the literature. Soils store at
least three times as much carbon as soil organic matter (SOM) as that found either in the
atmosphere or in living plants (Fischlin et al 2007), and root derived carbon in soils is retained
more efficiently than above ground inputs of leaves and needles (Rasse et al 2005).
Wang et al (2015) state that chemically complex plant -derived compounds are known to
be selectively preserved in the soil organic carbon (SOC) fractions in terrestrial ecosystems
(Mueller 2014 and Stark et al 2012). As reported in Wang et al (2015), Crow et al. (2009) showed
that needle -derived aliphatic compounds and root -derived lignin were preferentially preserved in
soils of coniferous forests, whereas root -derived aliphatic compounds were a source of SOC with
greater stability than leaf -derived C in soils of deciduous forests, indicating that the dominant
sources of SOC can differ substantially between forest types. Mueller et al. (2013) reported that
nearly 70 percent of the variation in individual soil lipid contents was explained by lipid contents in
tree leaves and roots, whereas biological compositions, including bacteria and fungi, of soils had
little impact on soil lipid contents. Other studies mentioned in Wang et al 2015 have shown that
while most SOC is initially derived from plant materials (Kugel-Knabner 2002), the key processes
which shape stable soil C stocks are microbial mediated decomposition and re -synthesis of plant
input (Prescott 2010, Cotrufo et al 2013, Schmidt 2011, and You et al 2014).
The ditch network drainage certainly oxidized some of the carbon stored in the muck soils
of Phase 3 and caused subsidence of 1 inch per year (USDA 1971) or up to several inches a year
(USGS 1999). Under pre -restoration drained aerobic conditions, oxidation converted the organic
carbon in the plant tissue within the soil to carbon dioxide gas and water much faster than the
carbon accumulated. Post -restoration, the rate of oxidation is substantially reduced and the type
of above ground litter and microbial biomass will be different. While not quantified either pre- or
post -restoration, it is assumed the site will both store more carbon in the soil and have more
available carbon for other ecosystem processes. Soil rehydration and the change of forest type
post -restoration will resume the more natural process of organic matter production, storage, and
export.
Capture and Retention of Sediment and Other Pollutants
Sediment or pollutants in the sediment or on the surface can be set in motion by two
different erosion mechanisms: when rainfall strikes a bare unvegetated ground surface, or when
the velocity force from runoff over unvegetated soil is greater than the forces holding the soil
particles or other pollutants in place. The restoration work has decreased the opportunities for
both of these two mechanisms to occur.
Prior to restoration, surface water runoff traveled only 300 feet to an interior field ditch
(half the distance of interior ditch spacing) and at the edge of the field, it flowed into a deeper
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 15 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

roadside canal with 1:1 or steeper side slopes. In the restored upper Gum Swamp Run
watershed, the surface water now travels 600 feet (average distance = one half of the valley
width) to the invert of the restored Gum Swamp Run. The side slopes of the channel vary from
as flat as 10:1 (upper headwater valley) to 3:1 (lower stream valley). The ground surface
throughout Gum Swamp Run watershed now has no interior ditches and the established
vegetation (planted and volunteer) attenuates the erosive force of surface runoff into the restored
channel; in fact, in much of the upper headwater valley, after the first season, the volunteer
herbaceous vegetation often directed where flow paths developed. In areas of Phase 3 not within
the Gum Swamp Run watershed, some of the interior field ditches were plugged and not
completely filled; most roadside canals were plugged every 600 feet (at the intersection of the
interior field ditches); the side slopes of the roadside canals and plugged interior ditches remain
unchanged from pre -restoration configurations. If any erosion occurs in the plugged interior
ditches or roadside canals, the sediment would settle to the bottom and would be retained in
between the plugs.
The longer flow paths, 600 feet versus 300 feet, plus the reduced and hence more stable
side slopes of the majority of the restored watershed make the overall site less susceptible to
erosion. The increased surface roughness and distributed surface storage described above traps
or retards the surface water runoff and captures any sediment or pollutants that may have been
generated elsewhere on the site. Since many of these distributed surface water storage areas
function as small isolated areas and have very little discharge, the nutrients and other pollutants
that exist on the site cannot leave the site at rates that existed prior to restoration.
Groundwater Recharge/Discharge
Groundwater elevations fluctuate throughout the year in both the pre -restored and the
restored site. Groundwater recharge is a function of elevation of the water table above the
aquifer and the length of time the water elevation stays above the aquifer. An increase of either
of these two parameters increases the groundwater recharge proportionately. The restoration
work increased groundwater recharge through an increase in the surface depressional storage
areas and the elimination of several discharge methods.
The restoration work provided an increase in the surface depressional areas by removal
of the harvested stumps which left small, distributed reservoirs with typical depths of at least 6
inches, which provide a significant increase in surface storage. The restoration work also
plugged the roadside canals and removed the field ditches. This eliminated the discharge of
nearly all of the surface water, which significantly increased the duration of time that surface
water is retained on site. Many of the site's monitoring wells show a hydroperiod in excess of 25
percent. The elevations of the water at many of the well locations also indicate that water is
stored above the ground surface. This surface storage produces a higher gradient or potential to
recharge the aquifer than existed previously. The removal of the existing timber stumps and the
elimination and/or reduction of discharge pathways significantly increased the average elevation
of the water table and the duration of water's presence, which significantly increased the
groundwater recharge.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 16 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

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.
CZR Incorporated. 2016. Second Annual Report for the P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3.
CZR Incorporated. 2017. Third Annual Report for the P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3.
CZR Incorporated. 2018. Fourth Annual Report for the P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3.
Cotrufo, M. F., M.D.Wallenstein, C.M. Boot, K. Denef, and E. Paul. 2013. The Microbial
Efficiency -Matrix Stabilization (MEMS) framework integrates plant litter decomposition
with soil organic matter stabilization: do labile plant inputs form stable soil organic
matter? Global Change Biology 19, 988-995.
Crow, S. E., K. Lajtha, and T.R. Filley. 2009. Sources of plant -derived carbon and stability of
organic matter in soil: implications for global change. Global Change Biology 15, Wiley
Online Library 2003-2019.
D. M. Amatya, R. W. Skaggs, and J. W. Gilliam. 2006. Hydrology and Water Quality of a Drained
Loblolly Pine Plantation in Coastal North Carolina. In: Williams, Thomas, eds. Hydrology
and Management of Forested Wetlands: Proceedings of the International Conference, St.
Joseph, MI: American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers: 15-26.
Domec, Jean Christophe, John S. King, Eric Ward, A. Christopher Oishi, Sari Palmroth, Andrew
Radecki, Dave M. Bell, Guofang Miao, Michael Gavazzi, Daniel M. Johnson, Steve G.
McNulty, Ge Sun, and Oscar Noormets. 2015. Conversion of natural forest to managed
plantation decreases tree resistance to prolonged droughts. Forest Ecology and
Management. Volume 355. November pp.57 - 81.
Fischlin,A., Guy F. Midgely, J. Price, and Ric Leemans. 2007. in Climate Change 2007: Impacts,
Adaptation and Vulnerability (eds. Parry, M. L., Canziani, O. F., Palutikof, J. P., van der
Linden, P. J. & Hanson, C. E.) 211-272. Cambridge Univ. Press.
Harman, W., R. Starr, M. Carter, K. Tweedy, M. Clemmons, K. Suggs, C. Miller. 2012. A
Function -Based Framework for Stream Assessment and Restoration Projects. US
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds,
Washington, DC EPA 843 -K-12- 0 06.Kirby, Robert M. 1995. The soil survey of Beaufort
County, North Carolina. Natural Resources Conservation Service, USDA.
Kagel-Knabner, I. 2002. The macromolecular organic composition of plant and microbial
residues as inputs to soil organic matter. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 34, 139-162.
Mueller, K. E., D.M. Eissenstat, and C.W Muller. 2013. What controls the concentration of
various aliphatic lipids in soil? Soil Biology and Biochemistry 63, 14-17.
Piatek, Kathryn B., and Howard Lee Allen. 2001. Are forest floors in mid -rotation stands of
loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) a sink of nitrogen and phosphorus? Canadian Journal of
Forest Research. 31(7):1164-1174.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 17 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Prescott, C. E. 2010. Litter decomposition: what controls it and how can we alter it to sequester
more carbon in forest soils? Biogeochemistry 101, 133-149.
Rasse, D. P., Rumpel, C. & Dignac, M. F. 2005. Is soil carbon mostly root carbon? Mechanisms
for a specific stabilisation.PlantSoil269, 341-356.
Schmidt, M. W., M.S. Torn, S. Abiven, and T. Dittmar. 2011. Persistence of soil organic matter as
an ecosystem property. Nature 478, 49-56.
Stark, S., S. Hilli, S. Willfor, A.I. Smeds, M. Reunanen, M. Pentennin, and R. Hautajarvi. 2012.
Composition of lipophilic compounds and carbohydrates in the accumulated plant litter
and soil organic matter in boreal forests. European Journal of Soil Science 63, 65-74).
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.
USDA. 1971. Engineering Handbook. Section 16. Drainage of Agricultural Land. Chapter 8.
Drainage of Organic Soils
https://directives.sc.egov.usda.gov/0penNonWebContent.aspx?content=18369.wba
USGS. 1999. https://pubs.usgs.aov/circ/1999/circ1182/pdf/10Part2.pdf
Wang, Hui, Shi-Rong Liu, Jing-Xin Wang, Zuo-Min Shit, Jia Xu, Pi-Sheng Hong, An -Gang Ming,
Hao -Long Yu, Lin Chen, Li -Hua Lu, and Dao-Xiong Cai. 2016. Differential effects of
conifer and broadleaf litter inputs on soil organic carbon chemical composition through
altered soil microbial community composition. Scientific Reports. June.
https://www.nature.com/articles/srep27097#references
You, Y., J. Wang, X. Huang, Z. Tang, S. Liu, and O.J. Sun. 2014. Relating microbial community
structure to functioning in forest soil organic carbon transformation and turnover. Ecology
and evolution 4, 633-647 (2014).
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 18 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 1. P and U Lands Phase 3 performance criteria, methods summary, and current status fifth annual, 2018.
Type of mitigation
Current status
Performance criteria
Documentation methods
Dimension &controls
In 2018, all 10 wells in the hardwood flat
zones had a wetland hydroperiod for 6
percent or more of the growing season
>6% hydroperiod on
Semi -continuous monitoring
Growing season 28 Feb-
during all rainfall and when periods of
hydric soils for
wells (1/15ac); nearby rain
6 Dec; Aurora NOAA
above normal rainfall were excluded. In
hardwood flats; >10%
WETS data for normal
the remaining zones, 79 of 86 wells had
Non -riparian wetland re-
for other communities
gauge
rainfall
a hydroperiod for more than 10 percent
establishment
of the growing season, even when
(restoration) of non-
periods of above normal rainfall were
riverine swamp forest,
excluded.
hardwood flat, headwater
In 2018, survival of planted tree stems
forest communities
that were unquestionably alive was 284
Survival of 260 stems
stems/acre and survivial of shrubs was
per acre of 5 -year old
Vegetation plots on
Annual monitoring
9 stems/acre for a density of 293.
planted woody wetland
approximately 2% of the site
When trees, shrubs, and unknown
stems
species of both categories are added
together, survival becomes 308
stems/acre.
All Gum Swamp Run flow observation
locations had at least five observed flow
events during all rainfall and when
periods of above normal rainfall were
excluded. Flow events were also
inferred at observation locations based
on instances of observed flow at
shallower depths at the same station.
The downstream flow station near
PUM127 along the headwater valley to
Linear feet of credit
the south of Gum Swamp Run had
based on most
Documentation of flow
Calendar year; Aurora
three documented flow events during all
Zero to first order streamand
upstream location of
conditions (see text for list
NOAA WETS data for
normal rainfall; flow was observed
restoration within coastal
flow documented at
of conditions);
normal rainfall; flow
two times in 2018 at the upstream flow
plain riparian headwater
least twice per year in 3
semi -continuous monitoring
confined to times of
station near PUM126. The volunteer
system
years out of 5 (starting
well arrays; GPS
normal rainfall
channel that formed downstream of the
February 2013)
intervalley connector between Gum
Swamp Run and the secondary
headwater valley (PUM115 South
Feature), had eight documented flow
events during all rainfall and five during
normal and below normal rainfall. The
two mounted cameras in the 40 -foot
valley captured numerous flow events
for 2018. The stream survey conducted
in September 2017 noted flow along the
entire 2 -foot and 40 -foot channel
sections of Gum Swamp Run.
260 woody stems per
Flexible buffer mitigation
acre including 4 native
Planted stem plots within
as stated in modified 401
Six 0.11 -acre plots (2 in 40 -foot Gum
Alternate riparian buffer
species (trees/shrubs);
buffer area or buffer plots
certification dated 15
Swamp Run valley, 1 in the bowl, 2 in 2 -
restoration -coastal plain
no one species shall
that may be monitored
January 2009 (DWQ#
foot Gum Swamp Run valley, and 1 in
headwater stream valley
exceed 50 percent;
based on stream
2008-0868); per October
headwater stream valley to south)
native volunteer stems
development or new buffer
2014 new consolidated
showed 370 planted stems per acre
allowed in count
rule
buffer rule 15A NCAC
unquestionably alive in 2018.
026.0295
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-1 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 2. Hydroperiods of 96 non -riparian monitoring wells at P and U Lands Phase 3 restoration site, three Rodman, and four Bay City control wells during
WETS normal and below normal rainfall in 2018 (excludes 26 May - 27 June, 28 July - 23 August, 14 September - 14 October and 02 November - 05
December). Hydroperiods of 14 consecutive days or more are listed by dates, and any hydroperiods shorter than 14 days are included in the cumulative
days. Well malfunctions and missing data resulted in an estimation of exact hydroperiod length, therefore reported hydroperiod could possibly be shorter
than what occurred. Wells that changed hydrologic zones from previous years are in bold.
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-2 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Hydrologic zone
Cumulative days
Consecutive
Percent of
Days where
water table is -
where water
days where
growing season
Well
table is -12" or
water table is -
Dates
(282 days) of
<6
z6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
12" or above 1-
above 28 Feb -6
12" or above 28
longest
27 Feb
Dec
Feb -6 Dec
hydroperiod
PUM110
27
246
76
2/28-5/14
27.0
X
87
2/28-5/25
PU M 111
27
266
30.9
X
18
10/15-11/1
PUM112
27
253
66
2/28-5/4
23.4
X
PUM113
26
148
26
3/7-4/1
9.2
X
37
2/28-4/5
PUM114
27
192
13.1
X
15
4/7-4/21
PUM115
16
106
<14
N/A
0.0
X
PUM116
27
147
36
2/28-4/4
12.8
X
87
2/28-5/25
PUM117
27
264
30.9
X
18
10/15-11/1
87
2/28-5/25
PUM118
27
272
21
8/24-9/13
30.9
X
18
10/15-11/1
PUM119
27
242
75
2/28-5/13
26.6
X
PUM120
27
240
75
2/28-5/13
26.6
X
87
2/28-5/25
17
6/28-7/14
P U M 121
27
276
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-2 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 2. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-3 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Hydrologic zone
Cumulative days
Consecutive
Percent of
Days where
water table is -
where water
days where
growing season
Well
table is -12" or
water table is -
Dates (282 days) of
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
12" or above 1 -
above 28 Feb -6
12" or above 28
longest
27 Feb
Dec
Feb -6 Dec
hydroperiod
87
2/28-5/25
15
6/28-7/12
PU M 122
27
274
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
87
2/28-5/25
PUM123
27
265
30.9
X
18
10/15-11/1
PU M 124
27
223
65
2/28-5/3
23.0
X
87
2/28-5/25
PUM125
27
271
21
8/24-9/13
30.9
X
18
10/15-11/1
PUM126
27
194
63
2/28-5/1
22.3
X
78
2/28-5/16
PU M 127
27
268
27.7
X
21
8/24-9/13
PUM128
27
174
63
2/28-5/1
22.3
X
24
3/12-4/4
PUM129
25
157
8.5
X
16
4/7-4/22
PUM130
27
222
66
3/14-4/16
23.4
X
PUM131
27
267
87
2/28-5/25
30.9
X
87
2/28-5/25
PU M 132
27
267
30.9
X
18
10/15-11/1
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-3 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 2. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-4 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Hydrologic zone
Cumulative days
Consecutive
Percent of
Days where
water table is -
where water
days where
growing season
Well
table is -12" or
water table is -
Dates (282 days) of
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
12" or above 1 -
above 28 Feb -6
12" or above 28
longest
27 Feb
Dec
Feb -6 Dec
hydroperiod
87
2/28-5/25
30
6/28-7/27
PUM133
27
282
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
PUM134
27
229
78
2/28-5/16
27.7
X
87
2/28-5/25
30
6/28-7/27
PUM135
27
282
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
87
2/28-5/25
30
6/28-7/27
PUM136
27
282
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
PUM137
27
255
76
2/28-5/14
27.0
X
87
2/28-5/25
20
6/28-7/17
PUM138
27
279
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
87
2/28-5/25
PUM139
27
270
30.9
X
18
10/15-11/1
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-4 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 2. (continued)
aData missing 20 September to 29 October.
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-5 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Hydrologic zone
Percent of
Cumulative days
Consecutive days
Days where water
where water table
where water table
growing season
Well
table is -12" or
Dates (282 days) of
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
above 1-27 Feb
is -12" or above
is -12" or above
longest
28 Feb -6 Dec
28 Feb -6 Dec
hydroperiod
87
2/28-5/25
PUM140
27
271
30.9
X
18
10/15-11/1
87
2/28-5/25
18
6/28-7/15
P U M 141
27
277
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
PU M 142
27
253
87
2/28-5/25
30.9
X
36
2/28-4/4
PUM143a
26
170
12.8
X
25
4/7-5/1
PUM144
27
249
78
2/28-5/16
27.7
X
87
2/28-5/25
PUM145
27
271
30.9
X
18
10/15-11/1
PUM146
27
266
87
2/28-5/25
30.9
X
87
2/28-5/25
18
6/28-7/15
PUM147
27
277
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
36
2/28-4/4
PUM148
27
168
12.8
X
15
4/7-4/21
87
2/28-5/25
PUM149
27
271
30.9
X
18
10/15-11/1
aData missing 20 September to 29 October.
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-5 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 2. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-6 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Hydrologic zone
Percent of
Cumulative days
Consecutive days
Days where water
where water table
where water table
growing season
Well
table is -12" or
Dates (282 days) of
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
above 1-27 Feb
is -12" or above
is -12" or above
longest
28 Feb -6 Dec
28 Feb -6 Dec
hydroperiod
87
2/28-5/25
30
6/28-7/27
PUM150
27
282
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
87
2/28-5/25
30
6/28-7/27
P U M 151
27
282
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
87
2/28-5/25
30
6/28-7/27
P U M 152
27
282
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
87
2/28-5/25
30
6/28-7/27
P U M 153
27
282
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
PU M 154
27
233
65
2/28-5/3
23.0
X
87
2/28-5/25
PU M 155
27
270
30.9
X
18
10/15-11/1
PUM156
27
241
74
2/28-5/12
26.2
X
PUM157
27
197
63
2/28-5/1
22.3
X
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-6 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 2. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-7 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Hydrologic zone
Percent of
Cumulative days
Consecutive days
Days where water
where water table
where water table
growing season
Well
table is -12" or
Dates (282 days) of
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
above 1-27 Feb
is -12" or above
is -12" or above
longest
28 Feb -6 Dec
28 Feb -6 Dec
hydroperiod
87
2/28-5/25
14
6/28-7/11
P U M 158
27
273
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
87
2/28-5/25
22
6/28-7/19
P U M 159
27
281
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
PUM160
27
252
77
2/28-5/15
27.3
X
14
3/20-4/2
PUM161
18
147
8.2
X
23
4/18-4/30
87
2/28-5/25
30
6/28-7/27
PUM162
27
282
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
87
2/28-5/25
30
6/28-7/27
PUM163
27
282
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
87 2/28-5/25
30 6/28-7/27
PUM164
27
282
30.9
X
21 8/24-9/13
18 10/15-11/1
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-7 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 2. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-8 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Hydrologic zone
Percent of
Cumulative days
Consecutive days
Days where water
where water table
where water table
growing season
Well
table is -12" or
Dates (282 days) of
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
above 1-27 Feb
is -12" or above
is -12" or above
longest
28 Feb -6 Dec
28 Feb -6 Dec
hydroperiod
87
2/28-5/25
21
6/28-7/18
PUM165
27
280
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
87
2/28-5/25
20
6/28-7/17
P U M 166
27
279
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
87
2/28-5/25
21
6/28-7/18
P U M 167
27
280
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
87
2/28-5/25
18
6/28-7/15
PUM168
27
277
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
87
2/28-5/25
30
6/28-7/27
P U M 169
27
282
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
17
3/20-4/5
PUM170
20
177
9.6
X
27
4/7-5/3
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-8 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 2. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-9 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Hydrologic zone
Percent of
Cumulative days
Consecutive days
Days where water
where water table
where water table
growing season
Well
table is -12" or
Dates (282 days) of
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
above 1-27 Feb
is -12" or above
is -12" or above
longest
28 Feb -6 Dec
28 Feb -6 Dec
hydroperiod
87
2/28-5/25
22
6/28-7/19
P U M 171
27
281
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
87
2/28-5/25
19
6/28-7/16
P U M 172
27
276
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
78
2/28-5/16
PUM173
27
262
27.7
X
18
10/15-11/1
87
2/28-5/25
PUM174
27
272
15
6/28-7/12
30.9
X
18
10/15-11/1
PUM175
0
44
<14
N/A
<5
X
PUM176
27
242
77
2/28-5/15
27.3
X
87
2/28-5/25
PUM177
27
273
15
6/28-7/12
30.9
X
18
10/15-11/1
87
2/28-5/25
P U M 178
27
264
30.9
X
18
10/15-11/1
PUM179
27
239
77
2/28-5/15
27.3
X
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-9 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 2. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-10 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Hydrologic zone
Percent of
Cumulative days
Consecutive days
Days where water
where water table
where water table
growing season
Well
table is -12" or
Dates (282 days) of
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
above 1-27 Feb
is -12" or above
is -12" or above
longest
28 Feb -6 Dec
28 Feb -6 Dec
hydroperiod
87
2/28-5/25
PUM180
27
266
14
6/28-7/11
30.9
X
16
10/17-11/1
PUM181
27
242
77
2/28-5/15
27.3
X
87
2/28-5/25
PU M 182
27
264
30.9
X
18
10/15-11/1
PU M 183
27
207
65
2/28-5/3
23.1
X
87
2/28-5/25
18
6/28-7/15
P U M 184
27
277
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
PUM185
27
254
64
2/28-5/2
22.7
X
77
2/28-5/15
PUM186
27
254
27.3
X
16
10/17-11/1
PUM187
27
209
63
2/28-5/1
22.3
X
87
2/28-5/25
22
6/28-7/19
P U M 188
27
281
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
76
2/28-5/14
PUM191
27
267
21
8/24-9/13
27.0
X
18
10/15-11/1
PU M 192
27
160
34
2/28-4/2
12.1
X
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-10 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 2. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-11 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Hydrologic zone
Percent of
Cumulative days
Consecutive days
Days where water
where water table
where water table
growing season
Well
table is -12" or
Dates (282 days) of
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
above 1-27 Feb
is -12" or above
is -12" or above
longest
28 Feb -6 Dec
28 Feb -6 Dec
hydroperiod
75
2/28-5/13
PUM193
27
261
26.6
X
14
8/24-9/16
PU M 194
27
223
65
2/28-5/3
23.0
X
PUM195
8
73
N/A
N/A
<5
X
87
2/28-5/25
PUM196
27
271
21
8/24-9/13
30.9
X
18
10/15-11/1
87
2/28-5/25
19
6/28-7/16
PUM197
27
278
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
87
2/28-5/25
15
6/28-7/12
PUM198
27
274
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
PUM201
27
255
75
2/28-5/13
26.6
X
87
2/28-5/25
PUM206
27
270
15
8/24-9/7
30.9
X
18
10/15-11/1
87
2/28-5/25
PUM207
27
267
30.9
X
18
10/15-11/1
77
2/28-5/15
PUM208
27
262
27.3
X
18
10/15-11/1
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-11 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 2. (continued)
Rodman Control Site
RC1
Hydrologic zone
128
75
18
2/28-5/13
10/15-11/1
26.6
Percent of
X
Cumulative days
Consecutive days
RC2
Days where water
where water table
where water table
growing season
30.9
X
Well
table is -12" or
Dates (282 days) of
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
above 1-27 Feb
is -12" or above
is -12" or above
longest
87 2/28-5/25
28 Feb -6 Dec
28 Feb -6 Dec
147
30.9
X
hydroperiod
18 10/15-11/1
87
2/28-5/25
PUM209
27
267
30.9
X
18
10/15-11/1
87 2/28-5/25
PUM210
27
270
30.9
X
18 10/15-11/1
87 2/28-5/25
PU M211
27
260
30.9
X
18 10/15-11/1
74
2/28-5/12
PUM212
27
241
26.2
X
18
10/15-11/1
87
2/28-5/25
16
6/28-7/13
PUM213
27
274
30.9
X
16
8/24-9/8
18
10/15-11/1
Rodman Control Site
RC1
27
128
75
18
2/28-5/13
10/15-11/1
26.6
X
87
2/28-5/25
RC2
27
138
30.9
X
18
10/15-11/1
87 2/28-5/25
RC3
27
147
30.9
X
18 10/15-11/1
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-12 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 2. (concluded)
Bav Citv Control Site
BCRW17
Hydrologic zone
97
64
2/28-5/2
22.7
Percent of
X
Cumulative days
Consecutive days
Days where water
where water table
where water table
growing season
Well
table is -12" or
27
142
Dates (282 days) of
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
X
above 1-27 Feb
is -12" or above
is -12" or above
longest
21
8/24-9/13
28 Feb -6 Dec
28 Feb -6 Dec
18
10/15-11/1
hydroperiod
63 2/28-5/1
Bav Citv Control Site
BCRW17
27
97
64
2/28-5/2
22.7
X
87
2/28-5/25
15
6/28-7/12
BCRW29a
27
142
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
63 2/28-5/1
BCRW33
27
101
22.3
X
18 10/15-11/1
87
2/28-5/25
30
6/28-7/27
BCRW44
27
157
30.9
X
21
8/24-9/13
18
10/15-11/1
'Missing data from 20 Jul -31 Jul
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-13 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 3. Hydroperiods of 96 non -riparian monitoring wells at P and U Lands Phase 3 restoration site, three Rodman, and four Bay City control wells
independent of WETS thresholds in 2018. Hydroperiods of 14 consecutive days or more are listed by dates, and any hydroperiods shorter than 14 days are
included in the cumulative days. Well malfunctions and missing data resulted in an estimation of exact hydroperiod length at some wells, therefore reported
hydroperiod could possibly be shorter than what occurred. Wells that changed hydrologic zones from the previous year are in bold.
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-14 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Hydrologic zone
Cumulative days
Consecutive
Percent of
Days where
where water
days where water
growing season
water table is -
Well
table is -12" or
table is -12" or
Dates
(282 days)
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
12" or above 1-
above 28 Feb -6
above 28 Feb -6
of longest
27 Feb
Dec
Dec
hydroperiod
76
2/28-5/14
48
5/18-7/4
PUM110
27
246
37
7/23-8/28
27.0
X
41
9/14-10/24
42
10/26-12/6
129
2/28-7/6
PUM111
27
266
41
7/21-8/30
45.7
X
90
9/8-12/6
66
2/28-5/4
49
5/18-7/5
PUM112
27
253
38
7/28-8/27
23.4
X
52
9/1-10/22
41
10/27-12/6
26
3/7-4/1
P U M 113
26
148
17
7/24-8/9
12.4
X
35
11/2-12/6
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-14 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 3. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-15 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Hydrologic zone
Cumulative days
Consecutive
Percent of
Days where
where water
days where water
growing season
water table is -
Well
table is -12" or
table is -12" or Dates
(282 days)
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
12" or above 1-
above 28 Feb -6
above 28 Feb -6
of longest
27 Feb
Dec
Dec
hydroperiod
37
2/28-4/5
15
4/7-4/21
23
5/18-6/9
PUM114
27
192
13.1
X
18
6/12-6/29
25
7/24-8/17
35
11/2-12/6
14
7/24-8/6
PUM115
16
106
7.1
X
20
11/2-11/21
36
2/28-4/4
PUM116
27
147
17
7/24-8/29
12.8
X
35
11/2-12/6
128
2/28-7/5
PUM117
27
264
39
7/21-9/28
45.4
X
97
9/1-12/6
133
2/28-7/10
PUM118
27
272
49.3
X
139
7/21-12/6
75
2/28-5/13
48
5/18-7/4
PUM119
27
242
37
7/23-8/28
26.6
X
39
9/14-10/22
41
10/27-12/6
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-15 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 3. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-16 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Hydrologic zone
Cumulative days
Consecutive
Percent of
Days where
where water
days where water
growing season
water table is -
Well
table is -12" or
table is -12" or Dates
(282 days)
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
12" or above 1-
above 28 Feb -6
above 28 Feb -6
of longest
27 Feb
Dec
Dec
hydroperiod
75
2/28-5/13
46
5/18-7/2
PUM120
27
240
37
7/23-8/28
26.6
X
26
9/14-10/9
41
10/27-12/6
137
2/28-7/14
PUM121
27
276
49.3
X
139
7/21-12/6
135
2/28-7/2
PUM122
27
274
49.3
X
139
7/21-12/6
128
2/28-7/5
PUM123
27
265
40
7/21-8/29
45.4
X
97
9/1-12/6
65
2/28-5/3
22
5/18-6/8
19
6/12-6/30
PUM124
27
223
23.4
X
34
7/23-8/25
23
9/13-10/5
41
10/27-12/6
132
2/28-7/9
PUM125
27
271
49.3
X
139
7/21-12/6
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-16 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 3. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-17 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Hydrologic zone
Cumulative days
Consecutive
Percent of
Days where
where water
days where water
growing season
water table is -
Well
table is -12" or
table is -12" or Dates
(282 days)
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
12" or above 1-
above 28 Feb -6
above 28 Feb -6
of longest
27 Feb
Dec
Dec
hydroperiod
63
2/28-8/1
22
5/18-6/8
PUM126
27
194
17
6/13-6/29
22.3
X
25
7/24-8/17
35
11/2-12/6
78
2/28-5/16
52
5/18-7/8
PUM127
27
268
34.0
X
96
7/21-10/24
42
10/26-12/6
63
2/28-5/1
20
5/18-6/6
PUM128
27
174
22.3
X
17
7/24-8/9
35
11/2-12/6
24
3/12-4/4
16
4/7-4/22
PUM129
25
157
19
5/18-6/5
12.4
X
16
7/24-8/8
35
11/2-12/6
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-17 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 3. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-18 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Hydrologic zone
Cumulative days
Consecutive
Percent of
Days where
where water
days where water
growing season
water table is -
Well
table is -12" or
table is -12" or
Dates
(282 days)
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
12" or above 1-
above 28 Feb -6
above 28 Feb -6
of longest
27 Feb
Dec
Dec
hydroperiod
66
2/28-5/4
24
5/18-6/10
21
6/12-7/2
PUM130
27
222
23.4
X
33
7/24-8/25
25
9/14-10/8
41
10/27-12/6
130
2/28-7/7
41
7/21-8/30
P U M 131
27
267
46.1
X
54
9/1-10/24
42
10/26-12/6
129
2/28-7/6
PUM132
27
267
41
7/21-8/30
45.7
X
97
9/1-12/6
PUM133
27
282
282
2/28-12/6
100.0
X
75
2/28-5/6
22
5/18-6/8
PUM134
27
229
21
6/12-7/2
26.6
X
28
7/21-8/17
41
10/27-12/6
PUM135
27
282
282
2/28-12/6
100.0
X
PUM136
27
282
282
2/28-12/6
100.0
X
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-18 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 3. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-19 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Hydrologic zone
Cumulative days
Consecutive
Percent of
Days where
where water
days where water
growing season
water table is -
Well
table is -12" or
table is -12" or
Dates
(282 days)
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
12" or above 1-
above 28 Feb -6
above 28 Feb -6
of longest
27 Feb
Dec
Dec
hydroperiod
73
2/28-5/14
51
5/18-7/7
PU M 137
27
255
38
7/21-8/27
25.9
X
43
9/1-10/13
42
10/26-12/6
140
2/28-7/17
PUM138
27
279
49.6
X
139
7/21-12/6
133
2/28-7/10
PUM139
27
270
40
7/21-8/29
47.2
X
97
9/1-12/6
133
2/28-7/10
PUM140
27
271
41
7/21-8/30
47.2
X
97
9/1-12/6
138
2/28-7/15
P U M 141
27
277
49.3
X
139
7/21-12/6
131
2/28-7/8
38
7/21-8/27
PUM142
27
253
46.5
X
36
9/10-10/15
41
10/27-12/6
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-19 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 3. (continued)
'Data missing 20 September to 29 October.
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-20 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Hydrologic zone
Cumulative days
Consecutive
Percent of
Days where
where water
days where water
growing season
water table is -
Well
table is -12" or
table is -12" or
Dates
(282 days)
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
12" or above 1-
above 28 Feb -6
above 28 Feb -6
of longest
27 Feb
Dec
Dec
hydroperiod
36
2/28-4/4
25
4/7-5/1
PUM143a
26
170
19
5/18-6/5
12.8
X
16
7/24-8/8
35
11/2-12/6
78
2/28-5/16
49
5/18-7/5
PUM144
27
249
27
7/23-8/18
27.7
X
29
9/10-10/8
41
10/27-12/6
133
2/28-7/10
PUM145
27
271
41
7/21-8/30
47.2
X
97
9/1-12/6
133
2/28-7/10
39
7/21-8/28
PUM146
27
266
47.2
X
53
9/1-10/23
41
10/27-12/6
138
2/28-7/15
PUM147
27
277
49.3
X
139
7/21-12/6
'Data missing 20 September to 29 October.
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-20 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 3. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-21 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Hydrologic zone
Cumulative days
Consecutive
Percent of
Days where
where water
days where water
growing season
water table is -
Well
table is -12" or
table is -12" or
Dates
(282 days)
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
12" or above 1-
above 28 Feb -6
above 28 Feb -6
of longest
27 Feb
Dec
Dec
hydroperiod
36
2/28-4/4
15
4/7-4/21
PUM148
27
168
12.8
X
16
7/24-8/8
35
11/2-12/6
133
2/28-7/10
PU M 149
27
271
41
7/21-8/30
47.2
X
97
9/1-12/6
PUM150
27
282
282
2/28-12/6
100.0
X
PUM151
27
282
282
2/28-12/6
100.0
X
PUM152
27
282
282
2/28-12/6
100.0
X
PUM153
27
282
282
2/28-12/6
100.0
X
65
2/28-5/3
21
5/18-6/7
20
6/12-7/1
PUM154
27
233
23.0
X
24
7/24-8/16
36
9/1-10/6
42
10/26-12/6
133
2/28-7/10
P U M 155
27
270
40
7/21-8/9
47.2
X
97
9/1-12/6
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-21 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 3. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-22 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Hydrologic zone
Cumulative days
Consecutive
Percent of
Days where
where water
days where water
growing season
water table is -
Well
table is -12" or
table is -12" or
Dates
(282 days)
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
12" or above 1-
above 28 Feb -6
above 28 Feb -6
of longest
27 Feb
Dec
Dec
hydroperiod
74
2/28-5/12
22
5/18-6/8
21
6/12-7/2
PUM156
27
241
26.2
X
28
7/21-8/17
28
9/10-10/7
42
10/26-12/6
63
2/28-5/1
18
5/18-6/4
PUM157
27
197
22.3
X
17
7/23-8/8
42
10/26-12/6
134
2/28-7/11
PUM158
27
273
49.3
X
139
7/21-12/6
142
2/28-7/19
PUM159
27
281
50.4
X
139
7/21-12/6
77
2/28-5/15
52
5/18-7/8
PUM160
27
252
36
7/23-8/27
27.3
X
30
9/10-10/9
41
10/27-12/6
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-22 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 3. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-23 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Hydrologic zone
Cumulative days
Consecutive
Percent of
Days where
where water
days where water
growing season
water table is -
Well
table is -12" or
table is -12" or Dates
(282 days)
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
12" or above 1-
above 28 Feb -6
above 28 Feb -6
of longest
27 Feb
Dec
Dec
hydroperiod
14
3/20-4/2
23
4/8-4/30
20
6/12-7/1
PUM161
18
147
12.4
X
19
7/24-8/11
19
9/14-10/2
35
11/2-12/6
PUM162
27
282
282
2/28-12/6
100.0
X
PUM163
27
282
282
2/28-12/6
100.0
X
PUM164
27
282
282
2/28-12/6
100.0
X
141
2/28-7/18
PUM165
27
280
50.0
X
139
7/21-12/6
140
2/28-7/17
PUM166
27
279
49.6
X
139
7/21-12/6
141
2/28-7/18
PUM167
27
280
50.0
X
139
7/21-12/6
138
2/28-7/15
PUM168
27
277
49.3
X
139
7/21-12/6
PUM169
27
282
282
2/28-12/6
100.0
X
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-23 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 3. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-24 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Hydrologic zone
Cumulative days
Consecutive
Percent of
Days where
where water
days where water
growing season
water table is -
Well
table is -12" or
table is -12" or
Dates
(282 days)
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
12" or above 1-
above 28 Feb -6
above 28 Feb -6
of longest
27 Feb
Dec
Dec
hydroperiod
17
3/20-4/5
27
4/7-5/3
21
6/12-7/2
PUM170
20
177
12.4
X
21
7/24-8/13
22
9/14-10/5
35
11/2-12/6
142
2/28-7/19
PU M 171
27
281
50.4
X
139
7/21-12/6
139
2/28-7/16
PUM172
27
276
49.3
X
137
7/21-12/6
78
2/28-5/16
53
5/18-7/9
PUM173
27
262
31.2
X
29
7/21-8/18
88
9/10-12/6
135
2/28-7/12
P U M 174
27
272
41
7/21-8/30
47.9
X
88
9/10-12/6
PUM175
0
44
<14
N/A
0.0
X
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-24 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 3. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-25 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Hydrologic zone
Cumulative days
Consecutive
Percent of
Days where
where water
days where water
growing season
water table is -
Well
table is -12" or
table is -12" or
Dates
(282 days)
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
12" or above 1-
above 28 Feb -6
above 28 Feb -6
of longest
27 Feb
Dec
Dec
hydroperiod
77
2/28-5/15
53
5/18-7/9
PUM176
27
242
27
7/23-8/18
27.3
X
26
9/14-10/9
41
10/27-12/6
135
2/28-7/12
PUM177
27
273
41
7/21-8/30
47.9
X
97
9/1-12/6
133
2/28-7/10
PUM178
27
264
39
7/21-8/28
47.2
X
88
9/10-12/6
77
2/28-5/15
50
5/18-7/6
PUM179
27
239
27
7/21-8/16
27.3
X
27
9/10-10/6
41
10/27-12/6
134
2/28-7/11
38
7/21-8/27
PUM180
27
266
47.5
X
36
9/10-10/15
51
10/17-12/6
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-25 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 3. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-26 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Hydrologic zone
Cumulative days
Consecutive
Percent of
Days where
where water
days where water
growing season
water table is -
Well
table is -12" or
table is -12" or
Dates
(282 days)
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
12" or above 1-
above 28 Feb -6
above 28 Feb -6
of longest
27 Feb
Dec
Dec
hydroperiod
77
2/28-5/15
51
5/17-7/6
PUM181
27
242
29
7/21-8/18
27.3
X
16
9/10-9/25
41
10/27-12/6
131
2/28-7/8
P U M 182
27
264
39
7/21-8/28
46.5
X
88
9/10-12/6
65
2/28-5/3
22
5/18-6/8
20
6/12-7/1
PUM183
27
207
23.0
X
23
7/24-8/15
22
9/14-10/5
41
10/27-12/6
138
2/28-7/15
PUM184
27
277
49.3
X
139
7/21-12/6
64
2/28-5/2
21
5/18-6/7
PUM185
27
205
22.7
X
24
7/23-8/15
41
10/27-12/6
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-26 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 3. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-27 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Hydrologic zone
Cumulative days
Consecutive
Percent of
Days where
where water
days where water
growing season
water table is -
Well
table is -12" or
table is -12" or
Dates
(282 days)
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
12" or above 1-
above 28 Feb -6
above 28 Feb -6
of longest
27 Feb
Dec
Dec
hydroperiod
77
2/28-5/15
46
5/18-7/2
PUM186
27
254
38
7/21-8/27
27.3
X
35
9/1-10/5
51
10/17-12/6
63
2/28-5/1
21
5/18-6/7
PUM187
27
209
22.3
X
27
7/21-8/6
41
10/27-12/6
142
2/28-7/19
PUM188
27
281
50.4
X
139
7/21-12/6
76
2/28-5/14
PUM191
27
267
52
5/18-7/8
49.3
X
139
7/21-12/6
34
2/28-4/2
P U M 192
27
160
16
7/24-8/8
12.4
X
35
11/2-12/6
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-27 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 3. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-28 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Hydrologic zone
Cumulative days
Consecutive
Percent of
Days where
where water
days where water
growing season
water table is -
Well
table is -12" or
table is -12" or
Dates
(282 days)
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
12" or above 1-
above 28 Feb -6
above 28 Feb -6
of longest
27 Feb
Dec
Dec
hydroperiod
75
2/28-5/13
52
5/18-7/8
P U M 193
27
261
48
7/21-9/6
26.6
X
41
9/14-10/24
42
10/26-12/6
65
2/28-5/3
23
5/18-6/9
21
6/12-7/2
PUM194
27
223
23.0
X
26
7/24-8/18
25
9/14-10/8
41
10/27-12/6
PUM195
8
73
<14
N/A
0.0
X
132
2/28-7/9
PUM196
27
271
49.3
X
139
7/21-12/6
139
2/28-7/6
PUM197
27
278
49.3
X
139
7/21-12/6
135
2/28-7/12
PUM198
27
274
49.3
X
139
7/21-12/6
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-28 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 3. (concluded)
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-29 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Hydrologic zone
Cumulative days
Consecutive
Percent of
Days where
where water
days where water
growing season
water table is -
Well
table is -12" or
table is -12" or
Dates
(282 days)
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
12" or above 1-
above 28 Feb -6
above 28 Feb -6
of longest
27 Feb
Dec
Dec
hydroperiod
75
2/28-5/13
49
5/18-7/5
PUM201
27
255
37
7/23-8/28
26.6
X
36
9/10-10/15
42
10/26-12/6
133
2/28-7/10
PUM206
27
270
49
7/21-9/7
47.2
X
88
9/10-12/6
132
2/28-7/9
PUM207
27
267
40
7/21-8/29
46.8
X
88
9/10-12/6
77
2/28-5/15
53
5/18-7/9
PUM208
27
262
27.3
X
40
7/21-8/29
88
9/10-12/6
132
2/28-7/9
PUM209
27
267
40
7/21-8/29
46.8
X
88
9/10-12/6
133
2/28-7/10
PUM210
27
270
41
7/21-8/30
47.2
X
88
9/10-12/6
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-29 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 3. (continued)
Rodman Control Site
Hydrologic zone
75
Cumulative days
Consecutive
Percent of
Days where
5/18-6/10
RC1
27
251
25
where water
days where water
growing season
X
water table is -
7/24-8/18
Well
88
table is -12" or
table is -12" or
Dates
(282 days)
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
12" or above 1-
2/28-7/8
RC2
27
263
39
above 28 Feb -6
above 28 Feb -6
of longest
X
27 Feb
9/10-12/6
Dec
Dec
hydroperiod
77
2/28-5/15
54
5/18-7/10
PUM211
27
260
31.2
X
29
7/21-8/18
88
9/10-12/6
74
2/28-5/12
23
5/18-6/9
PUM212
27
241
26
6/11-7/6
31.2
X
23
7/24-8/15
88
9/10-12/6
136
2/28-7/13
PUM213
27
274
50
7/21-9/8
48.2
X
88
9/10-12/6
Rodman Control Site
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-30 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
75
2/28-5/13
24
5/18-6/10
RC1
27
251
25
6/12-7/6
31.2
X
26
7/24-8/18
88
9/10-12/6
131
2/28-7/8
RC2
27
263
39
7/21-8/28
46.5
X
88
9/10-12/6
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-30 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 3. (concluded)
Bay City Control Site
Hydrologic zone
64
Cumulative days
Consecutive
Percent of
Days where
5/18-6/5
BCRW17
27
195
water table is -
where water
days where water
growing season
X
Well
17
table is -12" or
table is -12" or
Dates
(282 days)
<6
>_6-12.5%
>12.5-25%
>25-75%
>75%
12" or above 1-
10/27-12/6
135
above 28 Feb -6
above 28 Feb -6
of longest
BCRW29a
27
263
27 Feb
47.9
X
128
Dec
Dec
hydroperiod
63
2/28-5/1
77
2/28-5/15
BCRW33
27
171
19
5/18-6/5
52
5/18-7/8
X
RC3
27
262
31.2
X
35
11/2-12/6
39
7/21-8/28
BCRW44
27
282
282
2/28-12/6
88
9/10-12/6
X
Bay City Control Site
a Missing data from 20 Jul -31 Jul
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-31 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
64
2/28-5/2
19
5/18-6/5
BCRW17
27
195
16
6/13-6/28
22.7
X
17
7/24-8/9
41
10/27-12/6
135
2/28-7/12
BCRW29a
27
263
47.9
X
128
8/1-12/6
63
2/28-5/1
BCRW33
27
171
19
5/18-6/5
22.3
X
17
7/24-8/9
35
11/2-12/6
BCRW44
27
282
282
2/28-12/6
100.0
X
a Missing data from 20 Jul -31 Jul
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-31 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 4. Summary of 2018 flow events recorded at fixed flow camera stations and during monthly site visits. (The second number in some
cells is additional events that were inferred but not recorded.) Herbaceous colonization of the valleys can prevent easy observation of flow.
Since valley slopes do not change and baseflow continues downslope, flow events inferred to have likely occurred based on observed flow at
shallower depths are shown to the right of the 'T' and represent the total number of events. A "-" indicates no data and a "0" indicates no flow
events. The DVDs with this report contain data for each month with daily flow observations taken from the videos of the two mounted
cameras.
*Missing data due to equipment issues. More flow events may have occurred than are presented in the table.
'Events that occurred during all rainfall conditions.
2Excludes events that occurred during above normal rainfall (26 May - 27 June, 28 July - 23 August, 14 September - 14 October and 2
November- 5 December).
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-32 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Gum Swamp Run Flow Observation Locations and Fixed Flow Cameras
Valley to South
PUM115
GSR
GSR
PUM115
Month
South
PUM116
PUM125
PUM123
Camera
PUM122
PUM121
Camera
PUM127
PUM126
GSR
Feature
2
1
January
1
1
1
1
1
22*
1
1
5*/22*
1
0
February
1
1
1
1
1
28
1
1
8*/28*
0
0
March
1
1
1
1
1
28*
1
0/1
11 */28*
0
0
April
1
1
1
1
1
30
1
1
7*/30*
1
1
May
0
1
0/1
1
1
28*
0/1
0/1
13*/28*
0
0
June
0
1
1
1
1
30
0/1
0/1
3*/30*
0
0
July
0
0/1
0/1
0/1
0/1
12*
0/1
0/1
5*/12*
0
0
August
1
1
1
1
1
8*
1
1
7*/8*
0
0
September
1
1
-
0/1
1
17
1
0/1
10*/17*
0
0
October
0
1
1
1
1
20*/24*
1
1
8*/24*
0
0
November
1
1
-
1
-
2*
0/1
-
-/2*
0
0
December
1
1
1
1
1
31
1
1
1 */31 *
1
1
Total # of Flow
All'
8
11/12
10/12
10/12
10/12
256/260
8/12
6/12
78/260
3
2
Events:
Norma 12
5
7
7
7
7
173
6
5
49
3
2
# of Months with
All'
8
11/12
10/12
10/12
10/12
12
8/12
6/12
11*/12*
3
2
Flow Events:
Norma 12
5
7
7
7
7
9*
6
5
8*
3
2
*Missing data due to equipment issues. More flow events may have occurred than are presented in the table.
'Events that occurred during all rainfall conditions.
2Excludes events that occurred during above normal rainfall (26 May - 27 June, 28 July - 23 August, 14 September - 14 October and 2
November- 5 December).
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-32 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 5. Survival of trees and shrubs planted in 94 0.3 -acre plots at P and U Lands Phase 3 from baseline (2014) and fall 2018.
Scientific name
Common name
Tagged at
baseline'
Baseline stems
Alive Unsure Tota13
Fall 2018 stems
Alive Unsure Tota13
Percent survival
Alive Tota13
Percent of
total stems
alive in 2018
Large tree species
Betula nigra
River birch
167
167
1
168
125
9
134
75
80
1.56
Carpinus caroliniana
Ironwood
59
44
0
44
25
5
30
42
51
0.31
Carya aquatica
Water hickory
61
51
0
51
45
5
50
74
82
0.56
Celtis laevigata
Sugarberry
24
27
0
27
14
1
15
58
63
0.17
Chamaecyparis thyoides
Atlantic white cedar
1,041
1,030
4
1,034
875
42
917
84
88
10.93
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green ash
477
467
2
469
320
22
342
67
72
4.00
Morus rubra
Mulberry
2
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0.00
Nyssa spp.
tupelo or black gum
13
39
2
41
0
0
0
0
0
0.00
N. aquatica
Water tupelo
921
876
0
876
684
77
761
74
83
8.54
N. biflora
Swamp tupelo
1,112
1,123
3
1,126
711
61
772
64
69
8.88
Pinus serotina
Pond pine
1,006
954
41
995
775
12
787
77
78
9.68
Platanus occidentalis
Sycamore
109
106
0
106
73
1
74
67
68
0.91
Quercus spp.
unknown oak species
339
309
94
403
0
1
1
0
0
0.00
Q. alba
White oak
16
15
0
15
5
1
6
31
38
0.06
Q. laurifolia
Laurel oak
812
748
20
768
455
38
493
56
61
5.68
Q. lyrata
Overcup oak
765
711
5
716
549
33
582
72
76
6.85
Q. michauxii
Swamp chestnut oak
1,177
1,132
17
1,149
663
41
704
56
60
8.28
Q. nigra
Water oak
22
20
0
20
16
0
16
73
73
0.20
Q. pagoda
Cherrybark oak
37
14
0
14
31
1
32
84
86
0.39
Q.phellos
Willow oak
1,054
1,040
2
1,042
632
48
680
60
65
7.89
Taxodium ascendens
Pond cypress
200
193
0
193
189
1
190
95
95
2.36
Taxodium distichum
Bald cypress
1,423
1,407
10
1,417
1,391
0
1,391
98
98
17.37
Ulmus americana
American elm
23
21
0
21
13
1
14
57
61
0.16
Small tree species
Clethra alnifolia
Sweet pepperbush
176
161
0
161
108
8
116
61
66
1.35
Cyn1la racemiflora
Titi
94
83
0
83
86
0
86
91
91
1.07
Diospyros virginiana
Persimmon
7
4
0
4
5
0
5
71
71
0.06
Ilex decidua
Deciduous holly; possumhaw
2
3
0
3
2
0
2
100
100
0.02
Magnolia virginiana
Sweetbay
227
215
2
217
179
3
182
79
80
2.23
Persea borbonia
Red bay
55
56
3
59
38
0
38
69
69
0.47
Total tree stems
11,421
11,018
206
11,224
8,009
411
8,420
70
74
100
Trees per acre stems=28.2ac)
405
391
7
398
284
15
299
-
-
-
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-33 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 5. (concluded)
'The number tagged at baseline has been adjusted to reflect the proper identification of species and more planted stems found in the plots in the fall sampling event. The baseline survival columns were not
adjusted for this.
2Survival was considered unsure if the stem appeared dead (brittle, no green, broken, etc.) at the current sampling event
3Total includes alive + unsure.
4Percent survival was calculated as: (2018 stems/tagged at baseline) X 100
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-34 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Baseline stems
Fall 2018 stems
Percent survival
Percent of
Scientific name
Common name
Tagged at
total stems
baseline'
Alive Unsure Tota13
Alive Unsure Tota13
Alive Tota13
alive in 2018
Shrubs
Cephalanthus occidentalis
Buttonbush
39
44
0 44
29 1
30
74
77
12.03
Cornus amomum
Silky dogwood
7
15
0 15
5 0
5
71
71
2.07
Cornus foemina
Swamp dogwood
44
46
0 46
26 1
27
59
61
10.79
Ilex glabra
Inkberry
14
4
0 4
11 1
12
79
86
4.56
Ilex verticillata
Winterberry
22
27
0 27
7 0
7
32
32
2.90
Itea virginica
Virginia sweetspire
72
58
0 58
57 3
60
79
83
23.65
Lindera benzoin
Spicebush
2
1
0 1
2 0
2
100
100
0.83
Lyonia lucida
Fetterbush
10
9
0 9
6 0
6
60
60
2.49
Vaccinium corymbosum
High bush blueberry
49
43
0 43
38 1
39
78
80
15.77
Viburnum nudum
Possumhaw
64
47
0 47
60 2
62
94
97
24.90
Total shrub stems
323
294
0 294
241 9250
75
77
100
Shrubs per acre (stems-,28.2ac)
11
10
0 10
9 0
9
-
Unknown species
Unknown species
1,406
570
983 1,553
0 2
2
0
0
0
Total stems
13,150
11,882
1,189 13,071
8,250 422
8,672
Total density stems/acre
466
421
42 464
293 15
308
'The number tagged at baseline has been adjusted to reflect the proper identification of species and more planted stems found in the plots in the fall sampling event. The baseline survival columns were not
adjusted for this.
2Survival was considered unsure if the stem appeared dead (brittle, no green, broken, etc.) at the current sampling event
3Total includes alive + unsure.
4Percent survival was calculated as: (2018 stems/tagged at baseline) X 100
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-34 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 6. Baseline (2014) and fall 2018 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.
'The number tagged at baseline has been adjusted to reflect the proper identification of species and more planted stems found in the plots in the fall sampling event. The baseline survival columns were not
adjusted for this.
2Survival was considered unsure if the stem appeared dead (brittle, no green, broken, etc.) at the current sampling event
'Total includes alive + unsure.
4Percent survival was calculated as: (2018 stems/tagged at baseline) X 100.
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-35 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Baseline stems
Fall 2018 stems
Percent survival
Percent of
Scientific name
Common name
Tagged at
total stems
baseline'
Alive Unsure Tota 13
Alive Unsure Tota 13
Alive Tota 13
alive in 2018
Large tree species
Betula nigra
River birch
7
5
0
5
7
0
7
100
100
2.9
Carpinus caroliniana
Ironwood
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
100
100
0.4
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green ash
42
34
0
34
26
4
30
62
71
10.7
Nyssa sp.
tupelo or black gum
2
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0.0
N. aquatica
Water tupelo
46
27
0
27
36
4
40
78
87
14.8
N. biflora
Swamp tupelo
8
4
0
4
8
0
8
100
100
3.3
Platanus occidentalis
Sycamore
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
100
100
0.4
Quercus laurifolia
Laurel oak
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
-
-
0.0
Q. lyrata
Overcup oak
3
2
0
2
3
0
3
100
100
1.2
Q. michauxii
Swamp chestnut oak
111
106
1
107
92
0
92
83
83
37.7
Q. pagoda
Cherrybark oak
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
-
-
100.0
Q. phellos
Willow oak
4
0
0
0
4
0
4
100
100
1.6
Taxodium ascendens
Pond cypress
6
0
0
0
6
0
6
100
100
1.6
T. distichum
Bald cypress
53
59
0
59
53
0
53
100
100
21.7
Small tree species
Clethra alnifolia
Sweet pepperbush
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
-
-
0.0
Magnolia virginiana
Sweetbay
5
5
0
5
5
0
5
100
100
2.0
Persea borbonia
Red bay
1
0
1 0
0
1
1 0
1
1 100
100
0.4
Total tree stems
290
248
1
249
244
8
252
84
87
199
Trees peracre stems=0.66 ac
439
376
2
377
370
12
382
-
-
-
Shrubs
Callicar a americana
American beautyberry
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
100
100
100
Total shrub stems
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
100
100
100
Shrubs per acre stems+0.66 ac
2
0
0
0
2
0
2
-
I -
I -
Unknown species
Unknown species
22
42
0
42
0
0
0
0
0
14
Total stems
313
290
1
291
245
8
253
Total density stems/acre
474
439
2
441
371
12
383
'The number tagged at baseline has been adjusted to reflect the proper identification of species and more planted stems found in the plots in the fall sampling event. The baseline survival columns were not
adjusted for this.
2Survival was considered unsure if the stem appeared dead (brittle, no green, broken, etc.) at the current sampling event
'Total includes alive + unsure.
4Percent survival was calculated as: (2018 stems/tagged at baseline) X 100.
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-35 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 7A. Volunteer woody stems in P and U Lands Phase 3 vegetation monitoring plots during fifth annual survey in 2018. Success criteria for volunteer woody stems can count only non -
nuisance species with wetland status. Percentages rounded two decimal places to show totals with smaller proportions.
NON -NUISANCE, WETLAND WOODY VOLUNTEERS IN ALL 0.3 ACRE PLOTS NUISANCE OR UPLAND WOODY VOLUNTEERS IN ALL 0.3 ACRE PLOTS
19d PI OTS) 1QA PI OTSI1
Scientific name Common name WetlandI Count Percent of
status total2
Acer rubrum red maple
FAC
Wetland
7.58
Percent of
Scientific name
Common name
2.04
Count
FAC
471
3.10
status
UPL
total
Large tree species
Pinus taeda loblolly pine
FAC
403
2.65
Carpinus caroliniana
ironwood
FAC
4
0.07
Chamaecyparis thyoides
atlantic white cedar
OBL
4
0.07
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
FACW
1
0.02
Nyssa aqautica
water tupelo
OBL
2
0.03
N. biflora
swamp tupelo
OBL
2
0.03
Pinus serotina
pond pine
FACW
804
13.69
Pinus sp.
pine
240
4.09
Quercus lyrata
overcup oak
OBL
1
0.02
Q. laurifolia
laurel oak
FACW
2
0.03
Q. phellos
willow oak
FACW
3
1.44
Salix nigra
black willow
OBL
294
5.01
Small tree species
Clethra alinifolia
sweet pepperbush
FACW
99
1.69
Cynlla racemiflora
titi
FACW
1273
21.68
Gordonia lasianthus
loblolly bay
FACW
36
0.61
Ilex decidua
deciduous holly
FACW
23
0.39
Ilex opaca
american holly
FAC
6
0.10
Magnolia virginiana
sweet bay
FACW
99
1.69
Morella cerifera
wax myrtle
FAC
1741
29.65
Persea borbonia
red bay
FACW
1235
21.04
Persea palustris
swamp bay
FACW
2
0.96
TOTAL NON -NUISANCE VOLUNTEER WETLAND TREE STEMS
5,871
DENSITY NON -NUISANCE VOLUNTEER WETLAND TREE STEMS
208
Shrubs
Aralia spinosa devil's walking stick FAC
11
0.48
Baccharis halmifolia groundsel tree FAC
385
16.95
Ilex glabra ink berry FACW
1300
57.24
Itea virginica Virginia sweetspire FACW
51
2.25
Lyonia lucida shinyleaf FACW
6
0.26
Sambucus canadensis black elderberry FACW
3
0.13
Vaccinium corymbosum highbush blueberry FACW
514
22.63
Viburnum nudum 1possumhaw I FACW
1
0.04
TOTAL NON -NUISANCE VOLUNTEER WETLAND SHRUB STEMS
2,271
DENSITY NON -NUISANCE VOLUNTEER WETLAND SHRUB STEMS
81
TOTAL NON -NUISANCE WETLAND STEMS
8,142
TOTAL VOLUNTEER WETLAND STEM DENSITY (stems-.28.2ac)
289
Scientific name Common name WetlandI Count Percent of
status total2
Acer rubrum red maple
FAC
1,151
7.58
Aralia spinosa devil's-walkingstick
FAC
11
2.04
Liquidambarstyraciflua sweetgum
FAC
471
3.10
Liriodendron tulipfera tulip poplar
UPL
2
0.01
Pinus taeda loblolly pine
FAC
403
2.65
Rhus copallinum winged sumac
UPL
5,009
32.97
Quercus alba northern white oak
FACU
1
0.19
Sassafras albidum sassafras
FACU
2
0.03
TOTAL NUISANCE AND UPLAND STEMS
7,050
DENSITY NUISANCE AND UPLAND STEMS
250
'Not used in calculations for success criteria, including final totals because of non -
wetland status and/or considered a nuisance by the USACE
2Percent of total wetland, non -wetland, nuisance tree and shrub stems
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-36 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 7B. Volunteer woody stems in P and U Lands Phase 3 vegetation monitoring plots during fifth annual survey in 2018. Success criteria for volunteer woody stems can count only
non -nuisance species with wetland status. Percentages rounded two decimal places to show totals with smaller proportions.
NON -NUISANCE, WETLAND WOODY VOLUNTEERS IN ALL 0.11 ACRE PLOTS NUISANCE OR UPLAND WOODY VOLUNTEERS IN ALL 0.11 ACRE PLOTS
(6 PLOTS) (6 PLOTS)'
Scientific name Common name Wetland Count Percent of
status total
Large tree species
Pinus serotina
Quercus michauxii
Small tree species
pond pine
swamp chestnut oak
FACW 1 12 1 10.71
FACW 1 0.89
Ilex opaca
american holly
FAC
1
0.89
Magnolia virginiana
sweet bay
FACW
3
2.68
Morella cerifera
wax myrtle
FAC
92
82.14
Persea borbonia
red bay
FACW
3
2.68
TOTAL NON -NUISANCE VOLUNTEER WETLAND TREE STEMS
112
I UPL
DENSITY NON -NUISANCE VOLUNTEER WETLAND TREE STEMS
170
TOTAL NUISANCE AND UPLAND STEMS
Shrubs
Baccharis halmifolia groundsel tree FAC 5 100.00
TOTAL NON -NUISANCE VOLUNTEER WETLAND SHRUB STEMS 5
DENSITY NON -NUISANCE VOLUNTEER WETLAND SHRUB STEMS 8
TOTAL NON -NUISANCE WETLAND STEMS 117
TOTAL VOLUNTEER WETLAND STEM DENSITY (stems-0.66acll 177
Scientific name
Common name
Wetland
status
Count
Percent of
tota12
Acer rubrum red maple
FAC
85
24.01
Aralia spinosa devil's walkingstick
FAC
53
9.88
Liquidambar styraciflua sweetgum
FAC
2
0.56
Pinus taeda loblolly pine
FAC
5
1.41
Rhus copallinum winged sumac
I UPL
1 92
1 25.99
TOTAL NUISANCE AND UPLAND STEMS
237
DENSITY NUISANCE AND UPLAND STEMS
359
'Not used in calculations for success criteria, including final totals because of non -
wetland status and/or considered a nuisance by the USACE
2Percent of total wetland, non -wetland, nuisance tree and shrub stems
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-37 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 8. Summary of rainfall recorded at the Bay City Farm rain gauge and PCS Aurora NOAA station 6N
over the five years monitored and periods of each year considered above WETS normal rainfall. Periods
of above normal WETS rainfall were not included in hydroperiods used for restoration success criteria.
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-38 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Annual totalAnnual
total
Entire year
inches rainfall
inches rainfall
considered
Above WETS normal
Year
recorded at Bay
recorded at PCS
within or below
periods
City rain gauge
Aurora NOAA
normal WETS
6N
rainfall
2014
54.00
58.16
No
19 June — 20 July
3 August — 30 August
7 June — 5 July
2015
52.40
63.02
No
2 October — 1 November
18 November — 6 December
4 February — 4 March
7 June — 28 June
2016
60.60
59.92
No
2 July — 5 August
12 September — 2 October
7 October — 5 November
26 April -23 May
2017
50.61
48.44
No
1-24 July
24 August — 22 September
26 May — 27 June
2018
67.64
62.03
No
28 July — 23 August
14 September — 14 October
2 November — 5 December
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-38 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 9. Summary of occurrence of hydroperiods and drought status from 2014 to 2018 for wells at P & U Lands Restoration Site
Phase 3, Rodman Control Site, and Bay City Control Site during normal rainfall conditions. (WH=wetland hydroperiod).
Note: The longest hydroperiod at each well is depicted as a percentage of the 282 -day (or 283 -day for leap years) growing season
when the water table was recorded as -12" or above (blue highlights indicate wetness of hydrologic zone). Also shown are the Palmer
Drought Severity Index (PDSI) and the Palmer Hydrological Drought Index (PHDI) drought rankings for the NOAA Central Coastal
Plain region of North Carolina by year. (Rankings for 2018 were not available at the time of this report.) Drought rankings reflect the
rankings given at the most recent year shown in the table; drought status may change as years of climatic data are added (NN= nearly
normal, BN= below normal, MBN= much below normal, AN= above normal, and MAN= much above normal).
Well
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
# of
Years
with WH
% of Years
with WH for
All Years
PDSI
% of Years with
WH with NN and
BN Ranking*
PHDI
% of Years with
WH with NN and
BN Ranking*
PU M 110
13.1
24.8
19.1
27.0
27.0
5
100
40
40
PUM111
16.0
24.1
18.7
27.3
30.9
5
100
40
40
PUM112
12.4
22.7
15.5
12.1
23.4
5
100
40
40
0.0
11.7
5.7
9.2
9.2
1
20
0
0
PUM114
<10
13.1
12.7
10.6
13.1
4
80
40
40
0.0
12.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
1
20
0
0
0.0
12.8
7.1
9.6
12.8
2
40
20
20
PUM117
30.9
23.0
29.7
27.3
30.9
5
100
40
40
PUM118
13.1
23.0
33.2
19.2
30.9
5
100
40
40
PUM119
26.2
23.0
18.4
18.4
26.6
5
100
40
40
PUM120
13.1
24.1
18.7
18.8
26.6
5
100
40
40
PUM121
32.3
32.6
33.2
28.4
30.9
5
100
40
40
PUM122
26.2
24.5
33.2
28.0
30.9
5
100
40
40
PUM123
15.6
23.8
33.2
27.3
30.9
5
100
40
40
PUM124
15.2
22.3
15.5
14.2
23.0
5
100
40
40
PUM125
26.2
23.8
29.3_
18.8
30.9
5
100
40
40
PUM126
13.1
23.0
15.2
10.6
22.3
5
100
40
40
PUM127
34.8
25.9
19.1IN
27.7
5
100
40
40
PUM128
12.4
13.1
13.1
11.0
22.3
5
100
40
40
PDSI
AN
MAN
MAN
NN
NN
PHDI
AN
MAN
MAN
NN
NN
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-39 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 9. (continued)
# of % of Years PDSI PHDI
Well 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Years with WH for % of Years with % of Years with
with WH All Years WH with NN and WH with NN and
BN Ranking* BN Ranking*
12.8
5.3
PUM130
14.9
PUM131
34.8
PUM132
34.8
PUM133
39.4
PUM134
12.4
PUM135
29.8
PUM136
39.4
PUM137
12.1
PUM138
29.8
PUM139
30.5
PUM140
14.9
PUM141
29.8
PUM142
13.1
PUM143
<10
PUM144
12.4
PUM145
29.8
PUM146
30.1
PUM147
34.8
PUM148
13.1
PUM149
30.9
PUM150
30.5
PUM151
29.8
PUM152
34.8
PUM153
39.4
PUM154
33.0
PUM155
33.0
PDSI
AN
PHDI
AN
P and U Lands Restoration
Site
Fifth Annual and Summary Report
12.8
4.9
10.3
8.5
2
40
20
20
22.7
16.3
12.1
23.4
5
100
40
40
23.4
18.7
18.8
30.9
5
100
40
40
24.5
29.0
28.0
30.9
5
100
40
40
33.7
33.2
43.6
30.9
5
100
40
40
15.6
15.2
18.1
27.7
5
100
40
40
32.6
33.2
38.3
30.9
5
100
40
40
33.7
33.2
39.4
30.9
5
100
40
40
22.7
33.2
13.8
27.0
5
100
40
40
33.0
33.2
36.9
30.9
5
100
40
40
23.0
29.0
27.3
30.9
5
100
40
40
24.8
33.2
28.0
30.9
5
100
40
40
33.0
33.2
37.2
30.9
5
100
40
40
32.6
33.2
28.0
30.9
5
100
40
40
12.8
15.5
11.0
12.8
4
80
40
40
15.2
33.2
27.7
27.7
5
100
40
40
24.1
29.7
28.4
30.9
5
100
40
40
24.8
16.6
23.1
30.9
5
100
40
40
33.0
33.2
28.7
30.9
5
100
40
40
12.8
16.3
11.0
12.8
5
100
40
40
24.5
33.2
27.N
30.9
5
100
40
40
32.3
33.2
37.6
30.9
5
100
40
40
32.6
33.2
36.9
30.9
5
100
40
40
32.6
33.2
36.9
30.9
5
100
40
40
33.0
33.2
37.6
30.9
5
100
40
40
24.8
29.3
22.7
23.0
5
100
40
40
24.8
33.2
28.0
30.9
5
100
40
40
MAN MAN NN NN
MAN MAN NN NN
T-40
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
March 2019

Table 9. (continued)
Well 2014 2015
# of % of Years PDSI PHDI
2016 2017 2018 Years with WH for % of Years with % of Years with
with WH All Years WH with NN and WH with NN and
BN Ranking* BN Ranking*
PUM156
30.9
23.0
29.3
27.0
26.2
5
100
40
40
PUM157
15.6
21.3
29.3
17.4
22.3
5
100
40
40
PUM158
31.9
24.5
33.2
28.0
30.9
5
100
40
40
PUM159
30.9
33.7
33.2
39.0
30.9
5
100
40
40
PUM160
13.1
23.4
18.4
22.3
27.3
5
100
40
40
PUM161
12.1
13.5
15.2
0.0
8.2
3
60
0
0
PUM162
12.1
33.7
33.2
38.3
30.9
5
100
40
40
PUM163
39.4
33.7
33.2
43.6
30.9
5
100
40
40
PUM164
34.8
33.7
33.2
39.4
30.9
5
100
40
40
PUM165
39.4
33.7
33.2
28.4
30.9
5
100
40
40
P U M 166
39.4
33.3
33.2
37.2
30.9
5
100
40
40
P U M 167
34.8
33.3
33.2
36.9
30.9
5
100
40
40
P U M 168
34.8
33.3
33.2
28.4
30.9
5
100
40
40
P U M 169
34.8
33.0
33.2
37.2
30.9
5
100
40
40
PUM170
10.3
15.6
5.3
10.6
9.6
4
80
20
20
P U M 171
34.8
33.0
33.2
37.2
30.9
5
100
40
40
PU M 172
30.9
23.0
33.2
37.9
30.9
5
100
40
40
PU M 173
12.4
24.8
29.3
27.7
27.7
5
100
40
40
PUM174
28.4
24.5
33.2
31.9
30.9
5
100
40
40
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0
0
0
0
PU M 176
12.8
22.0
29.7
28.0
27.3
5
100
40
40
PUM177
13.5
32.3
33.2
36.9
30.9
5
100
40
40
PUM178
<10
<10
17.0
43.6
30.9
3
60
40
40
PUM179
27.3
22.3
19.8
28.4
27.3
5
100
40
40
PUM180
28.0
24.1
33.2
37.2
30.9
5
100
40
40
PUM181
12.4
15.6
29.7
23.1
27.3
5
100
40
40
PUM182
12.4
22.3
29.0
37.2
30.9
5
100
40
40
PDSI AN
PHDI AN
P and U Lands Restoration Site
Fifth Annual and Summary Report
MAN MAN NN
MAN MAN NN
NN
NN
T-41
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
March 2019

Table 9. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-42 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
PDSI
PHDI
# of
% of Years
Well
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
Years
with WH for
% of Years with
% of Years with
with WH
All Years
WH with NN and
WH with NN and
BN Ranking*
BN Ranking*
PUM183
13.1
22.7
16.3
23.1
23.1
5
100
40
40
PUM184
<10
22.7
33.2
37.9
30.9
4
80
40
40
PUM185
<6
22.3
16.3
17.7
22.7
4
80
40
40
PUM186
<10
22.7
15.5
17.7
27.3
4
80
40
40
0.0
12.8
0.0
9.9
22.3
2
40
20
20
PUM188
31.9
33.3
33.2
39.0
30.9
5
100
40
40
PUM191
14.9
33.3
31.1
28.0
27.0
5
100
40
40
0.0
5.7
7.4
9.6
12.1
1
20
20
20
PUM193
<10
24.5
16.3
27.3
26.6
4
80
40
40
PUM194
<10
23.0
15.9
18.4
23.0
4
80
40
40
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0
0
0
0
PUM196
14.9
33.3
33.2
37.2
30.9
5
100
40
40
PUM197
34.8
33.3
33.2
37.9
30.9
5
100
40
40
PUM198
21.6
33.3
28.6
37.9
30.9
5
100
40
40
PUM201
11.7
33.0
16.6
27.3
26.6
5
100
40
40
PUM206
31.9
33.3
28.6
37.2
30.9
5
100
40
40
PUM207
15.2
24.8
29.7
28.4
30.9
5
100
40
40
PUM208
18.1
33.0
18.7
28.4
27.3
5
100
40
40
PUM209
13.1
25.9
33.2
28.0
30.9
5
100
40
40
PUM210
22.3
33.3
33.2
28.0
30.9
5
100
40
40
PUM211 1
31.9
33.3
29.0
28.4
30.9
5
100
40
40
PUM212
<10
23.4
18.4
27.3
26.2
4
80
40
40
PUM213
31.9
33.0
33.2
28.7
30.9
5
100
40
40
PDSI
AN
MAN
MAN
NN
NN
PHDI
AN
MAN
MAN
NN
NN
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-42 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 9. (concluded)
PDSI PHDI
# of % of Years
Well 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Years with WH for % of Years with % of Years with
with WH All Years WH with NN and WH with NN and
BN Ranking* BN Ranking*
RC1a
23.4
25.4
27.3
26.6
5
100
40
40
RC2a730..99
31.9
29.0
28.0
30.9
5
100
40
40
RC3a
31.9
29.0
28.0
30.9
5
100
40
40
BCRW17b
25.2
- 8.1
11.0
22.7
4
80
40
40
BCRW29b
-
- 28.6
36.5
30.9
3
60
40
40
BCRW33b
15.6
- 15.5
11.0
22.3
4
80
40
40
BCRW44b
-
- 33.2
43.6
30.9
3
60
40
40
PDSI
AN
MAN MAN
NN
NN
PHDI
AN
MAN MAN
NN
NN
aWells were installed 13 March 2013.
Italicized= Well malfunction resulted in an estimation of exact hydroperiod length; reported hydroperiod could possibly be shorter than
what occurred.
Bold text wells require 6 percent or more of growing season for success (in 50 percent of the years); others require 10 percent.
Red cells indicate eight wells that have not strictly met the success criteria; two of which would meet the criteria if rounded.
Note: PUM189, 190, 199, 200, 202, 203, 204, 205 are located in the Phase 4 acres of P and U Lands mitigation site.
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-43 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 10. Summary of occurrence of hydroperiods and drought status from 2014 to 2018 for wells at P & U Lands Restoration Site
Phase 3, Rodman Control Site, and Bay City Control site during all rainfall conditions. (WH=wetland hydroperiod).
Note: The longest hydroperiod at each well is depicted as a percentage of the 282 -day (or 283 -day for leap years) growing season when
the water table was recorded as -12" or above (blue highlights indicate wetness of hydrologic zone). Also shown are the Palmer Drought
Severity Index (PDSI) and the Palmer Hydrological Drought Index (PHDI) drought rankings for the NOAA Central Coastal Plain region of
North Carolina by year. (Rankings for 2018 were not available at the time of this report.) Drought rankings reflect the rankings given at
the most recent year shown in the table; drought status may change as years of climatic data are added (NN= nearly normal, BN= below
normal, MBN= much below normal, AN= above normal, and MAN= much above normal).
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-44 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
# of
% of Years
PDSI
PHDI
% of Years with
% of Years with
Well
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
Years
with WH for
WH with NN and
WH with NN and
with WH
All Years
BN Ranking*
BN Ranking*
PUM110
13.1
24.8
23.3
27.0
27.0
5
100
40
40
PUM111
16.0
24.1
23.7
27.3
45.7
5
100
40
40
PUM112
12.4
22.7
18.7
14.2
23.4
5
100
40
40
PUM113
<10
11.7
<10
<10
12.4
2
40
20
20
PUM114
<10
13.1
14.8
10.6
13.1
4
80
40
40
PUM115
<10
12.4
<10
<10
<10
2
40
0
0
PUM116
<10
12.8
<10
<10
12.8
2
40
20
20
PUM117
43.3
25.5
31.8
27.3
45.4
5
100
40
40
PUM118
13.1
25.9
62.5
35.1
49.3
5
100
40
40
PUM119
26.2
25.9
23.7
18.4
26.6
5
100
40
40
PUM120
13.1
24.1
20.8
18.8
26.6
5
100
40
40
PUM121
32.3
32.6
39.0
49.3
5
100
40
40
PUM122
26.2
25.2
64.0
35.5
49.3
5
100
40
40
PUM123
15.6
25.9
60.8
27.3
45.4
5
100
40
40
PUM124
15.2
22.3
17.7
14.2
23.4
5
100
40
40
PUM125
26.2
25.2
31.4
35.5
49.3
5
100
40
40
PUM126
13.1
23.0
17.3
11.0
22.3
5
100
40
40
PUM127
62.8
25.9
23.3
27.7
34.0
5
100
40
40
PUM128
12.4
13.1
15.2
11.0
22.3
5
100
40
40
PDSI
AN
MAN
MAN
NN
NN
PHDI
AN
MAN
MAN
NN
NN
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-44 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 10. (continued)
# of % of Years PDSI PHDI
Well 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Years with WH for % of Years with % of Years with
with WH All Years WH with NN and WH with NN and
BN Ranking* BN Ranking*
PUM129
PUM130
PUM131
PUM132
PUM133
PUM134
PUM135
PUM136
PUM137
PUM138
PUM139
PUM140
PUM141
PUM142
PUM143
PUM144
PUM145
PUM146
PUM147
PUM148
PUM149
PUM150
PUM151
PUM152
PUM153
PUM154
PUM155
PDSI
PHDI
<10 12.8 <10 10.3 12.4 3 60 40 40
14.9 22.7 18.4 13.5 23.4 5 100 40 40
65.2 24.5 30.4 18.8 46.1 5 100 40 40
63.8 24.5 31.1 28.0 45.7 5 100 40 40
55.3 100.0 100.0 100.0 5 100 40 40
12.4 15.6 17.3 18.1 26.6 5 100 40 40
53.5 32.6 40.1W11 5 100 40 40
M41.1 60.0 5 100 40 40
12.1 22.7 60.4 16.3 25.9 5 100 40 40
53.5 33.0 38.7 49.6 5 100 40 40
30.5 24.5 31.1 27.3 47.2 5 100 40 40
15.6 25.2 91.2 28.0 47.2 5 100 40 40
53.5 33.0 IL 100.0 37.2 49.3 5 100 40 40
15.2 32.6 89.8 28.0 46.5 5 100 40 40
<10 12.8 17.7 11.0 12.8 4 80 40 40
12.4 15.2 42.0 27.7 27.7 5 100 40 40
29.8 24.1 31.8 28.4 47.2 5 100 40 40
42.9 24.8 23.0 23.1 47.2 5 100 40 40
63.8 33.0 28.7 49.3 5 100 40 40
13.1 12.8 18.4 11.0 12.8 5 100 40 40
31.6 24.5 64.3 27.7 47.2 5 100 40 40
55.3 32.3 100.0 42.9 100.0 5 100 40 40
53.2 32.6 100.0 40.1 100.0 5 100 40 40
65.2 32.6 100.0 41.8 100.0 5 100 40 40
l l MI 33.0 100.0 41.5 100.0 5 100 40 40
57.4 24.8 31.4 22.7 23.0 5 100 40 40
55.0 25.2 64.0 28.0 47.2 5 100 40 40
AN
AN
P and U Lands Restoration Site
Fifth Annual and Summary Report
MAN MAN NN NN
MAN MAN NN NN
T-45
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
March 2019

Table 10. (continued)
Well
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
# of
Years
with WH
% of Years
with WH for
All Years
PDSI
% of Years with
WH with NN and
BN Ranking*
PHDI
% of Years with
WH with NN and
BN Ranking*
PUM156
30.9
23.0
31.4
27.0
26.2
5
100
40
40
PUM157
15.6
21.3
31.4
17.4
22.3
5
100
40
40
PUM158
43.6
24.5
64.3
28.0
49.3
5
100
40
40
PUM159
51.8
46.8
39.0
50.4
5
100
40
40
PUM160
13.1
23.4
20.5
22.3
27.3
5
100
40
40
PUM161
12.1
13.5
17.3
<10
12.4
4
80
20
20
PUM162
12.1
41.5
39.0
5
100
40
40
PUM163
45.0
5
100
40
40
PUM164
63.8
41.1
42.9
5
100
40
40
PUM165
40.4
36.2
50.0
5
100
40
40
PUM166
go 1
33.3
37.2
49.6
5
100
40
40
PUM167
65.2
33.3
36.9
50.0
5
100
40
40
PUM168
65.2
33.328.4
49.3
5
100
40
40
PUM169
65.2
33.0isr
41.8
5
100
40
40
PUM170
10.3
15.6
11.0
10.6
12.4
5
100
40
40
PUM171
55.3
33.0
37.2
50.4
5
100
40
40
PUM172
30.9
25.9
38.0
49.3
5
100
40
40
PUM173
12.4
25.5
31.4
27.7
31.2
5
100
40
40
PUM174
49.6
25.9
_ 42.0 _
31.9
47.9
5
100
40
40
PUM175
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
0
0
0
0
PUM176
15.6
22.0
28.0
27.3
5
100
40
40
PUM177
16.0
32.3
J31.8
36.9
47.9
5
100
40
40
PUM178
<10
17.4
25.4
47.2
4
80
40
40
PUM179
27.3
22.3
18.7
28.4
27.3
5
100
40
40
PUM180
56.7
25.9
64.0
37.2
47.5
5
100
40
40
PUM181
15.2
15.6
31.8
23.1
27.3
5
100
40
40
PUM182
14.9
22.3
31.1
40.1
46.5
5
100
40
40
PDSI
AN
MAN
MAN
NN
NN
PHDI
AN
MAN
MAN
NN
NN
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-46 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 10. (continued)
Well
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
# of
Years
with WH
% of Years
with WH for
All Years
PDSI
% of Years with
WH with NN and
BN Ranking*
PHDI
% of Years with
WH with NN and
BN Ranking*
PUM183
13.1
22.7
18.4
23.1
23.0
5
100
40
40
PUM184
<10
25.9
64.3
37.9
49.3
4
80
40
40
PUM185
<6
22.3
18.4
17.7
22.7
4
80
40
40
PUM186
<10
22.7
17.7
17.7
27.3
4
80
40
40
PUM187
<10
12.8
<10
<10
22.3
2
40
20
20
PUM188
31.9
41.1
39.0
50.4
5
100
40
40
PUM191
14.9
41.5
31.1
j�
49.3
5
100
40
40
PUM192
<10
12.4
<10
<10
12.4
2
40
20
20
PUM193
<10
24.5
19.4�
26.6
4
80
40
40
PUM194
<10
23.0
18.0
18.
23.0
4
80
40
40
PUM195
<10
<10
<10
<10
<10
0
0
0
0
PUM196
24.8
41.1
42.4
37.2
49.3
5
100
40
40
PUM197
68.1
44.3
37.9
49.3
5
100
40
40
PUM198
21.6
43.6
30.7
37.9
49.3
5
100
40
40
PUM201
11.7
33.0
21.2
27.3
26.6
5
100
40
40
PUM206
31.9
41.1
35.3
37.2
47.2
5
100
40
40
PUM207
26.6
24.8
31.8
28.4
46.8
5
100
40
40
PUM208
18.1
33.0
29.3
28.4
27.3
5
100
40
40
PUM209
13.1
25.9
60.8
28.0
46.8
5
100
40
40
PUM210
22.3
41.8
42.8
28.0
47.2
5
100
40
40
PUM211
31.9
45.4
35.3
28.4
31.2
5
100
40
40
PUM212
<10
23.4
20.5
27.3
31.2
4
80
40
40
PUM213
31.9
33.0
28.7
48.2
5
100
40
40
PDSI
AN
MAN
MAN
NN
NN
PHDI
AN
MAN
MAN
NN
NN
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-47 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 10. (concluded)
bEcotone wells were used to monitor the Bay City Mitigation Site from 2009 to 2014. Some wells were removed before the end of the
2014 growing season and hydroperiods were not calculated. Level trolls were installed at the end of 2015 to be used as reference wells
for the P and U Lands Restoration Sites. A cell with "-" means there was no well installed long enough to calculate an accurate
hydroperiod
Italicized= Well malfunction resulted in an estimation of exact hydroperiod length; reported hydroperiod could possibly be shorter than
what occurred.
Bold text wells require 6 percent or more of growing season for success (in 50 percent of the years); others require 10 percent.
Red cells indicate eight wells that have not strictly met the success criteria; two of which would meet the criteria if rounded.
Note: PUM189, 190, 199, 200, 202, 203, 204, 205 are located in the Phase 4 acres of P and U Lands mitigation site.
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-48 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
PDSI
PHDI
# of
% of Years
% of Years with
% of Years with
Well
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
Years
with WH for
WH with NN and
WH with NN and
with WH
All Years
BN Ranking*
BN Ranking*
RC1a
31.9
31.6
25.4
27.3
31.2
5
100
40
40
RC2a
30.9
31.9
29.0
28.0
46.5
5
100
40
40
RC3a
32.3
31.9
29.0
28.0
31.2
5
100
40
40
BCRW17b
25.2
-
8.1
11.0
22.7
4
80
40
40
BCR W29 b
-
-
28.6
36.5
47.9
3
60
40
40
BCRW33b
15.6
-
15.5
11.0
22.3
4
80
40
40
BCRW44b
-
-
33.2
11 1
3
60
40
40
PDSI
AN
MAN
MAN
NN
NN
PHDI
AN
MAN
MAN
NN
NN
'Wells were installed
13 March 2013.
bEcotone wells were used to monitor the Bay City Mitigation Site from 2009 to 2014. Some wells were removed before the end of the
2014 growing season and hydroperiods were not calculated. Level trolls were installed at the end of 2015 to be used as reference wells
for the P and U Lands Restoration Sites. A cell with "-" means there was no well installed long enough to calculate an accurate
hydroperiod
Italicized= Well malfunction resulted in an estimation of exact hydroperiod length; reported hydroperiod could possibly be shorter than
what occurred.
Bold text wells require 6 percent or more of growing season for success (in 50 percent of the years); others require 10 percent.
Red cells indicate eight wells that have not strictly met the success criteria; two of which would meet the criteria if rounded.
Note: PUM189, 190, 199, 200, 202, 203, 204, 205 are located in the Phase 4 acres of P and U Lands mitigation site.
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-48 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table 11. Summary of walking stream survey documented flow information by year and game camera normal rainfall results.
Survey #
(or data
2014 Y1
2015 Y2
2016 Y3
2017 Y4
2018 Y5
month)
L flow at PF constriction
M at PF constriction
M at PF constriction
L to M entire 40 and 2ft
no walking survey
1
L flow at top of 40ft
L to M entire 40ft and 2ft
M at Camera 1
L to M bowl; new middle path
flow all the way to bowl in 40 ft
3 paths evident in 40ft
L to M entire 40ft, bowl, and 2ft
flow entire 2ft
Apr
flow entire 2ft
flow at top and bottom of bowl
July
flow entire 2ft
evidence of flow path entire 40ft
evidence or L entire 40ft
0 at PF constriction
no walking survey
no walking survey
2
GPS flow paths
L in 2ft but entire
L at station 2+75
2 flow paths through bowl
flow in north path through bowl
mostly L entire 40 and 2ft; some M
L to M in bowl but only in north path
Camera 1: 4/6 months Y2
Camera 1: 8/11 months Y3
Camera 1: 7/11 months of Y4
Camera 1: 8` months of Y5
Camera 2: 4/6 months of Y2
Camera 2: 10 months of Y3
Camera 2: all 12 months of Y4
Camera 2: 9` months of Y5
Other
Camera field test in March also
documented flow in 40ft in several
locations
Note: cameras installed in April 2015; this table does not include the results from observation well locations, or the valley to south, or the feature formed from the intervalley
connector into Gum Swamp Run (some additional linear feet in these features may be possible)
'Missing data due to equipment issues. More flow events may have occurred than are presented in the table.
P and U Lands Restoration Site T-49 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Nx' _
AURORA` r•. I - ` .� - .
.SOUTH CREEK
CORRIDOR
- ! ''}- I/
_ r
JP LANDS
SOUTH CREEK
CORRIDOR 9.9df
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Figures -1 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
s
- -
_ --_ -
-
- -- PHASE 1
PHASE 2 P L NDS
~PHA
PHASE ti
T---
£ 4
coBo
COAY NTROL I SYHAS/
i U LA DS
PA
I:-
PHASE 1
\ f
\
,
PARKER FARM
P LANDS - SECTIONS A -J 11
...- -
�
-
LAT: 35'14'15.04" _. �•'� � _
, LONG: 76'46'19.20"
R DM AN
CONTROL
SITE -
-
TRACT r - •�
P LANDS -0 s
CASEY
I --
DS
-
HASE 4
LANDS
-
- -- -
- I� - - ~I.
-
it -_� _-'__' '_'*,�,_..'- Yr•.. -
------"
7.1
_.l _-_
{�i
€ -
? -7 .
- 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 TWO CONTROL SITES
SITE LOCATION
PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC.
P and U LANDS
SOURCE:
SCALE: AS SHOWN
APPROVED BY:
DRAWN BY: TLJ
PORTIONS OF THE BOUNDARY PROVIDED BY: ROBERT M. CHILES,
NEW BERN, NORTH CAROLINA, JOB #2009096, DATED: 11/19/2009
DATE: 02/22/19
DS_V IC_PH3_
FILE:
AND 02/02/2010 AND BEAUFORT COUNTY GIS DATA WEBSITE
2oPLAN
ia FI_V
EART.NC.US, BEAUFORT COUNTY PARCEL DATA SHAPEFILES,
NAFO
D 1983
R
CP#1 745.59.32.3
=CZ `= 4709 COLLEGE ACRES DRIVE
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP IMAGES, NC STATEPLANE,
EN\MONN ENTAL CONSULTANTS SUITE 2
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403
TEL [phone]
FIGURE 1
NA083, FEET, 1:24000 -SCALE, WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG
FAX [phone]
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Figures -1 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

PHASE 3 - AREAS PLANTED:
- ZONE 1 RIVERINE SWAMP FOREST
0 ZONE 1A TAR-PAMLICO RIPARIAN BUFFER
0 ZONE 2 HEADWATER FOREST
- ZONE 2A TAR-PAMLICO RIPARIAN BUFFER
0 ZONE 3 NON-RIVERINE SWAMP FOREST
0 ZONE 4 POND PINE POCOSIN FOREST
0 ZONE 5 HARDWOOD FLAT 1
0 ZONE 6 HARDWOOD FLAT 2
J
SOUTH CREEK CANAL
EXECUTIVE ROAD/ y PLPS 22
J� W �Y
JAIME ROAD / 1193'
PLPS 23 0194
_• PLPS 21
195 _ 188
PLPS 24 1
�• 187
PHASE 2
P LANDS
PLPS 8
PLPS 14 SMALL ROAD
PHASE 2
10
113 0 2 111 0
BUFFER PLOT B
BUFFER PLOT A "' 7 � 119
115 \ 2' CHANNEL BUFFER PLOT C 120
118
/ v ` 123 Q BUFFER
V 125 PLOT E
O 124 4V CHANNEL 121
TRANSITION AREA =: r
BAY CITY FARM 127 � 131 BUFFER
CONTROL SITE OF ER PLOT F O PLOT D
122
130 132° 13 •
D128 129 OO
BCRW-44 ❑e Np, 4 PLPS 6
PHASES � BAY CITY
PHASE
e BCRW-33
BCRW-29
70
PHASE 4 Q
o PHASE 1
U LANDS P LANDS
BCRW-17 to
I
0
tJ BAY CITY No.
3
197 • X137 x 135
RODMAN 166 �• x `x �i • 134•
CONTROL 198 • 165• , 141 x 140• x 139• 136
201 x '
142
RC -1 ZO 147 ` `• =151
RC -2 Fr1C 150 • PLPS 16
• Z
RC -30 4 •183 , • W , •14a �45 146• 1480 49 152
•
U LANDS 161 W W
C W y N •143 CITY 15O.
5:; 2 153
BAY
•00 155
WCITY No• 1
O _ 'fio 17 , '• Iso 6 LPS 1 . BAY
Z 207 Q A�l ,157 154 169
SMALL ROAD
PHASE 1
P LANDS
PHASE 1
LEGEND
0,
,176
•
P & U LANDS BOUNDARY
NOTE:
ROADS
-
®
BERMS AND PARKING AREAS
0
FORESTED WETLAND
0
FORESTED NON -WETLAND
P AND
OPENWATER
0
UN -PLANTED 2 FOOT CHANNEL
208
D
UN -PLANTED 25' OFF -SET
1st
PHASE 4 NOT PLANTED IN 2014
•
PHASE 3 WELL LOCATION (PUM#)
Q U LANDS
TREE SAMPLING PLOT
~�
PHOTO STATION NUMBER AND LOCATION
PLPS 6
O
CONTROL WELL
163 •' `
BUFFER PLOT LOCATION
1n00. y
_x O
0,
,176
•
NOTE:
• 177
159
_•
P & U LANDS BOUNDARY (3,666.92 ACRES)
O O9 79 •
PLPS 1
P AND
166
PLPS 15
INCLUDES OF
RIGHT-
208
D
1
1st
167 168
is •�
OF-OFSTATE2ROADS NOT
Q U LANDS
17a
PLANTED)
70 73
•— 175 • 161
163 •' `
ROAD
0 0 211 ®• 210
162
• •
COUNTY LINE
=
MONITORING LOCATIONS
171
y 172
•170 10 `
=
m m
P AND U LANDS PHASE 3 AND TWO CONTROL SITES
2,2 2, 3I 0
Lo
0
'`
O
PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC.
O .
PLPS 17
PLPS 25 PLPS 20
SCALE: AS SHOWN APPROVED BY: DRAWN BY: TLJ
DATE: 02/22/19 FILE: PLAN DS_PLANT_MCN-
WELL PH3 2018
SOURCE:
PORTIONS OF THE BOUNDARY PROVIDED BY: ROBERT M. CHILES,
0
1,400
2,800 �1 �K� CP#1745.59.32.3
V
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,
SCALE IN FEET
4709 COLLEGE ACRES DRIVE
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS SUITE 2
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403
FIGURE 2
NAD 1983 FEET.
FAX 910%392-9139
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
Fiqures-2
PCS Phosohate
Comoanv. Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Do
Pt
W
D
C)0; n
O
D
CG'tl N
Po �tiio
0
Po �G,V PHA 2 ^'
Pt Pt
BAY CITY FARM
CONTROL SITE
BCRW-44
Po
PHASE 4
SOUTH CREEK CANAL Da Po U LANDS
EXECUTIVE ROAD/ 192 To
JAIME ROAD 193 Po
194 191
Pt 196
195 188
RODMAN 187
197
CONTR L
Pt
SMALL ROAD
113 112 ,,, Po 10
1169
117
1
1s\ - \\118 - 120
125 12 ` \
124 r% 121 PHASE,
127
Wd 126 PO
131
TO 122
130 132 133
SF
128 129
BAY CITY No. 4
A
BCRW-29 BCRW-33
37
BCRW-17
SITE 198
Po Po 186 185
142
141 140 136 135 134
INTERMITTENT
201
DARE (ORGANIC)(723.4 ACRES)
139
RC -1
RC -2
To
PHASE 4 184
PONZER (ORGANIC)(816.0 ACRES)
147 51
150
RC -3
U LANDS 183
Da ,s,
r n
zo
144 148 149
46
,as 152
2
WASDA (ORGANIC)(103.7 ACRES)
Zz,43
BAY CITY56 NO' 153
Po
a1
O
C 182
180
0 -<
160
155
158
Z
Z
rrl
179
207 O
206 D
N
Da
157 154 169
O
0
177
176
159
P LANDS
�1
O
D
209 178
206
U LANDS
166
167 168
165
(]
Po ,7
0
174
173
1 210
175 161
164
62 163 E ROAI
7i� _.: LIN
m
170
OUNTY
D 172
Z 212 Po 213
;U
O
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.
SOIL SURVEY OF BEAUFORT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, US DEPARTMENT
OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONVERSATION SERVICE,
ISSUED: SEPTEMBER 1995
AERIAL IMAGE FROM: NC ONE MAP GEOGRAPHIC DATA,
2016, NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE, NAD1983 FEET,
WEBSITE: WWW.NCMAPONE.COM
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
P LANDS
BAY CITY No. 3
BAY CITY No. 1
LEGEND
P AND U LANDS BOUNDARY
• WELL LOCATION (PUM#) AND TREE MONITORING PLOT
(WELLS TO MONITOR LATERAL DRAINAGE EFFECT
MAY NOT HAVE A TREE PLOT. LOCATIONS ARE
APPROXIMATE.)
101 CONTROL WELL
SOILS
SYMBOL SOIL NAME
NOTE:
ONLY HYDRIC SOILS ARE DESIGNATED MINERAL
OR ORGANIC.
SOILS
P AND U LANDS PHASE 3 AND TWO CONTROL SITES
PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC.
SCALE: AS SHOWN APPROVED BY: DRAWN BY: TLJ
DATE 02/22/19 FILE: P-LANDS-SOILS-PH3-
2018
0 1,200 2,400CP#1745.59.32.3
=C" 7R ` 4709 COLLEGE ACRES DRIVE
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS SUITE 2
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403
SCALE IN FEET ,� TEL [phone] FIGURE 3
FAX [phone]
PCS PhOSDhate Comoanv. Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
PERENNIAL
INTERMITTENT
Do
DARE (ORGANIC)(723.4 ACRES)
Do
DOROVAN (ORGANIC)(1.2 ACRES)
Po
PONZER (ORGANIC)(816.0 ACRES)
Pt
PORTSMOUTH (MINERAL)(94.8 ACRES)
To
TOMOTLEY (MINERAL)(16.8 ACRES)
Wd
WASDA (ORGANIC)(103.7 ACRES)
NOTE:
ONLY HYDRIC SOILS ARE DESIGNATED MINERAL
OR ORGANIC.
SOILS
P AND U LANDS PHASE 3 AND TWO CONTROL SITES
PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC.
SCALE: AS SHOWN APPROVED BY: DRAWN BY: TLJ
DATE 02/22/19 FILE: P-LANDS-SOILS-PH3-
2018
0 1,200 2,400CP#1745.59.32.3
=C" 7R ` 4709 COLLEGE ACRES DRIVE
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS SUITE 2
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403
SCALE IN FEET ,� TEL [phone] FIGURE 3
FAX [phone]
PCS PhOSDhate Comoanv. Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

4r I
�T +ML
. PHASE2 ' SMALL ROAD P LANDS
� i � - -- - - -- �
PHASE 3 10 PHASE 1
r 113 12 0 111
i 114•
�' , ' ■ + T 1160 •117 f I •119 A
# 410 � T CFMNE j 4 12C Ay9y9
118
• s
0 S �F
' 4 to + 126 0123 PHASE 3
7■! F 0 1240 a' 210 PHASE 1 1
+ + } BAY CITY FARM 127 i 6 TRANMON AREA ' ■
■ _ CONTROL SITE 1310 •
1zz
; - ■ Fco 12 130 132
4 0
0jL-_ 13 •
No.
BCRW-44 pHASE3 gAy CITY �
� PHASE
` ■ 1 z
29 BCRW-33 -A
PHASE 4 � PHASE 1
SOUTH CREEK CANAL, U LANDS - P LANDS
XM I EXECUTIVE ROAD/ 1 , BCRW-17 to
JAIME ROAD 1ss• 1910■
"RNLEGEND
0194
196 r ' _ moo�` PHASE 3 PLANTING AREA
195 _ 188 N
-;
R O D M A N � #1 f O 3 OPEN WATER OR PLUGGED/FILLED DITCH
CONTROL •97 •a7 ilLl 08 137 - 135 gAY CITY ® ROADS
■ . •
SITE 141 ® PERIMETER BERM AND PARKING AREAS
1 8 180 185 136 13
201® O • 1400 O •
142 0 FORESTED WETLAND
RC -1 Z O 1 0151
184 fr1 C _ 150 O ® FORESTED NON—WETLAND
RC -2
RC -3 ® Z •144 -4148 •149 ® • PHASE 3 WELL LOCATION (PUM#)
H A S E 4 •
183 0 O • 146 •
U LAND 181 0 145 • 2 152 153 C CONTROL WELL
143 gA CITY No.
•
C 182 Y 150 •
155
180 0160 158 Le
CITY
O Zm 917
207 Q _r 0 1•57 1 • 1s•s g AoY•
Elevation in Feet
2 0D
Value
�.176 159 •
0' , O 177 0 0 0 0-4
209 178 0 166 =4-5
O 200 16
7 168 =5-6
C 174 164 165 • =6-7
• • Q 7-8
O 173 175 ® 01 02 1630 Y LIN
E
ROA 08-0
0 • z10 171 COUNT i ➢ x,0101
172 0 0170 �n m Q 11-12
12-13
D • • • _ w O13 -W
z 212 213
_ 70
14-15
Q 15-16
16.21
Q # 0 21-48
SOURCE:
PORTIONS OF THE BOUNDARY PROVIDED BY: ROBERT M. CHILES,
NEW BERN, NORTH CAROLINA, JOB #2009096, DATED: 11/19/2009
AND 02/02/2010 AND BEAUFORT COUNTY GIS DATA WEBSITE
WWW.CO. BEAUFORT. NC. US, BEAUFORT COUNTY PARCEL DATA SHAPEFILES,
NAD 1983 FEET.
NORTH CAROLINA FLOODPLAIN MAPPING PROGRAM, BEAUFORT AND
PAMLICO COUNTIES, LIDAR, NC STATEPLANE, NAD 1983, FEET,
WWW.NCFLOODMAPS.COM
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS ON LIDAR
P AND U LANDS PHASE 3 AND TWO CONTROL SITES
PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC.
SCALE: AS SHOWN APPROVED BY: DRAWN BY: TLJ
DATE: 02/22/19 FILE: PLAN DS_WELL_LIDAR-
PI-13201 8
AR_PH32018
0 1,400 2,800 CP#1745.59.32.3
rCZ R 4709 COLLEGE ACRES DRIVE
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS SUITE 2
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403
SCALE IN FEET --J TEL [phone] FIGURE 4
FAX [phone]
PCS Phosohate Comoanv. Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

16
NOTE: "Range of Normal" and "Aurora Monthly Rainfall Total" plotted on last day of each
month. "Range of Normal" refers to the 30th and 70th percentile thresholds of the probability
14 of onsite rainfall amounts outside of the normal range (based on historical averages from 1981-
2010). WETS Data subject to periodic revision. Data shown are latest available from
http://agacis.rcc-acis.org/?fips=37013
-- 12 "Aurora Monthly Rainfall Total" refers to monthly totals from the PCS -Aurora 6 N NOAA
v Station.
t
U
c�
10
ro
CC
2- 8
t
o •
2t
-o 6 • •
rho •
>- • •
4
•
2
�Irj -4 10
LL. JILL i
"or
O� O, Oti py Oti Oti Oti Oy Oti Oti Oy Oti
2018 Bay City Daily Rainfall - Bay City 30 -day Rolling Total • 2018 Aurora Monthly Rainfall Total
30% Less Chance 30% More Chance 2018 Bay City Monthly Rainfall
Figure 5. 2018 Bay City rainfall vs. WETS -Aurora rainfall
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Figures -5 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

LEGEND —
PHASE 3
HYDROLOGIC
ZONES WETLAND HYDROPERIODS
P & U LANDS BOUNDARY
0 e = <6% OF THE GROWING SEASON (17.25 ACRES)
ROADS
O O = >6 — 12.5 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON (42.54 ACRES)
BERMS AND PARKING AREAS
D
FORESTED WETLAND
0 O = >12.5 — 25 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON (124.86 ACRES)
®
FORESTED NON—WETLAND
O Q = >25 — 75 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON (1,176.54 ACRES)
OPENWATER
O
PHASE 4 WELL LOCATION
❑o
CONTROL WELL
NOTE:
OWELL
MALFUNCTION RESULTED IN AN
HYDROLOGIC ZONES ARE A VISUAL APPROXIMATION OF TOTAL ACRES
ESTIMATION OF EXACT HYDROPERIOD
LENGTH; REPORTED COULD
CHAT
REPRESENTED BY WELL HYDROPERIOD CATEGORIES BASED ON ONE
POSSIBLY BE SHORTEERR THAN WHAT
WELL PER 15 ACRES, KNOWLEDGE OF SITE CONDITIONS, AND LIDAR
ACTUALLY OCCURRED
CONTOURS. THE ZONES DO NOT REPRESENT ACTUAL HYDROPERIOD
BOUNDARIES.
PHASE 2 113
PHASE 3
0 111
1140
1160 0117
115 r
U
O
125 1240
O ° mrana .Mu
BAY CITY FARM 127 0126 1310
CONTROL SITE
0130 13P
O 0128 129
�S
BCRW44 PHASE 3 0 O BAY CITY No- 4
J
O
PHASEI
o
RODMAN -
CONTROL
SITE
RC -1
RC -2,
0119
120
0118
n 121°
°122
o RW_29 BCRW 33
PHASE 4 PHASE 1
SOUTH CREEK CANAL - U LANDS P LANDS
VE ROAD/ - BCRW 17
OAD 193 191
094 °
O
O 196
195 188No.
o BAY CITY
p 0187 138
197 0 O ® 135
°
O 186
198 0 O 1085 141 140 1390 137 e6 134
201 142
W ZO 14700
1551
184 me 150
O Z
HASE 4 °te g� °144 148® 49
°
�0 1460
0 152
U LAND 16' ^'
0 143 BA CITY 1156 o. Z 153 0
C 182 - , , 0 0 °155
K 180 0180 158
O A 179 °
z 2070 =57 154
m 206 0 O 0
° — 0176 59
p0209 178 p P LA DS 166
n zoe to ° 0 167 16e
A U LANDS 174 °
,64 ,65
O 0 O •175
0 173 161 162 '�0 LINE RO
y 0211 210 0 0 COUNTY
Z 0 171
AO O 2 ° 0770
0 0/212 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.BEAUFORT.NC.US, BEAUFORT COUNTY PARCEL DATA SHAPEFILES,
NAD 1983 FEET.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
Fifth Annual and Summary Report
BAY CITY NO' '
O
169
ROYAL ROAD
PHASE 1
BE
ROYAL ROAD
PHASE 2
P LANDS
90
PHASE 1
P LANDS
Z"�� I I
0 1,800 3,600
SCALE IN FEET
392-9253 I h I li U K t
392-9139
PCS Phosohate Comoanv. Inc
March 2019

LEGEND - PHASE 3
HYDROLOGIC
ZONES WETLAND HYDROPERIODS
P & U LANDS BOUNDARY
ROADS 0 0 = <6% OF THE GROWING SEASON (13.46 ACRES)
BERMS AND PARKING AREAS 0 0 = >6 - 12.5 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON (42.54 ACRE) ROYAL ROAD
D FORESTED WETLAND 0 0 = >12.5 - 25 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON (124.86 ACRES)
1, XX>, FORESTED NON -WETLAND O 0 = >25 - 75 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON (1,010.04 ACRES) ROYAL ROAD
OPENWATER ® 0
>75 - 100 PERCENT OF THE GROWING SEASON (155.43 ACRES) PHASE 2
P LANDS
0 PHASE 4 WELL LOCATION AFF
F
❑o CONTROL WELL NOTE: 90
O HYDROLOGIC ZONES ARE A VISUAL APPROXIMATION OF TOTAL ACRES
WELL MALFUNCTION RESULTED IN AN REPRESENTED BY WELL HYDROPERIOD CATEGORIES BASED ON ONE
ESTIMATION OF EXACT HYDROPERIOD WELL PER 15 ACRES, KNOWLEDGE OF SITE CONDITIONS, AND LIDAR
LENGTH; REPORTED HYDROPERIOD COULD CONTOURS. THE ZONES DO NOT REPRESENT ACTUAL HYDROPERIOD SMALL ROAD
POSSIBLY BE SHORTER THAN WHAT BOUNDARIES.
ACTUALLY OCCURRED
PHASE 1
,.ot ac „3 SMALL ROAD P LANDS
PHASE 2 -
PHASE 3 10
1140 17.21 a
0111
1160
Y D 3.79 0117 120.35 ce 0119 1204y
!u 0 115 O 9S
2 74 0 123 1180 �+
U PHASE 3
AO 0 23.36 - 125 240 , �d ocx¢ 1210 _ PHASE 1
BAY CITY FARM 127 0126 0 4471 ac /
CONTROL SITE 47.70 ca 131 0122 4,44 ac
0130 1320
'0 0128 -
129 -
h? BCRW PH SE N BAY CITY No.
4 `
4.13 ac
O
� PHASE 1
01
GRW-29" BCRW 33
PHASE 4 PHASE 1
SOUTH CREEK CANAL U LANDS P LANDS
2.89 ac
BCRW 17
EXECUTIVE ROAD W
JAIME ROAD o
2.30 ac 0 194 193 0191 Y W
511 - 75.32 - 196
195 O• s
12.19 ac 188 BAY CITY N
R O D M A N 197 X187 48.89 ac 8 3.83 a 14.58 cc
CONTROL p 7.,, cu0 6.72 ac 5.41 ao 4.9221 O5 p
SITE 198 ' O 5, ,&70 ce 141 139 137 136 134
201 1 140 13.25 0 oc 0 21.58 c
7 c W . 142 20.32 ac 23.90 cc
RC -1 W rn 1470 20.29 ac 151
,z0 21.53 cc O p
20.42 a 5.85 ce
RC -2 184 mC 150
RC -3 5.. °26.87 ac . •O { 13.9 ac 0144 1 17.76 ac 0149
ASE 4 0,8 O 0 148 ° 0
145 0 152
U LAND 31.79 ac 181 . N 043 CITY No. 2 14.42 oe 153
O BA 156 p 0
c 162 15o 0 155 1 0 1,800 3,600
U3 K „ . 0160 34.64 ac CITY No.
Z A 179 . W W W. 18.x6 ae 21.70 cc BAY
m 207 D 32.26 ae 28.38 ae 157 36.21 ac 38.75 ee 154 169
70 206 ° 0 14,49 ae O SCALE IN FEET
0 27.93 m
O o 0 178 31.37 ac 0178 1� p 24.05 ae 13.93 cc
no 208 0209 1770 23.02 ca P DS 166 166 2018 LONGEST HYDROPERIODS AND ESTIMATED HYDROLOG
o ° U LANDS 7.67a 165 °7 ° INDEPENDENT OF WETS THRESHOLDS
7.22
31.31 a 1740
0 ae *17 163 19.38 x
D 13 151 0 C LINE ROAD
z P AND U LANDS PHASE 3 and TWO CONTROL SIT
021166.96 - 210 0 10.14 ac COUNTY -0
° 172 19500° mm PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC.
12
76p w-
2130 ° CrAI F• AS CIa(1WN 1APPPovvn RY• I nPAWN RY• T
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.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
Fifth Annual and Summary Report
PCS Phosohate Comoanv. Inc
March 2019

an \ 9 .
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
Gum Swamp Run Dimensional Surveys

D<
� 71+41.78 1
< XS1 XS3
o �XS2
D
0
116
BUFFER PLOT B SE
64+88± XS8
1 15 °� 6� xs10
N
[640+
o XS4 XS11
o �
XS12
XS9
03 60") j4+32±
oUBUFFER PLOT A 125 + ±
XS13
127 / BUFFER PLOT F
MGM
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.
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
AERIAL IMAGE FROM: NC ONE MAP GEOGRAPHIC DATA,
2016, NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE, NAD1983 FEET,
WEBSITE: WWW.NCMAPONE.COM
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
P LANDS
PHASE 2
SMALL ROAD � �
PHASE 3 4Kiw : a 7 8 Ay
PARKER FARM
SPILLWAY
DETAIL „A„
"BOWL" BUFFER PLOT C#t A
X$15'
XS16
s A
3a+00 6
XS14 �o BUFFER PLOT E \ XS25
8+8 + 123 X$17 XS24
3z+Oc X$21
00
30.00 s,00 121 p.p 6 4+00 ti
'.z+oo 8`0 VALLEY
o
GL ° XS22 XS23
+ 3± �Lio 18+05± 1 +45± n
o� "x dip+OU\�JYpO 16
+70±
122
/BUFFER PLOT D
PHASE
{
BAY CITY NO' ' 1'i • ` �t .4.
"BOWL"
0 100 200
SCALE IN FEET
A.,r,or
� .r e► t
t � -
DETAIL "A'
LEGEND
121
XS1
0
P AND U LANDS
DESIGN CENTERLINE OF GUM SWAMP RUN
40 FOOT VALLEY
MONITORING WELL CLOSEST TO MONTHLY
FLOW OBSERVATION
BUFFER PLOT LOCATIONS
CROSS SECTION NUMBER AND LOCATION
RESTORED HEADWATER VALLEY WITH NO
VALLEY CONSTRUCTION (DIGITIZED FROM
AS BUILT LIDAR)
DITCH NUMBER
FLOW PATH OBSERVED/FEATURE 2014
FLOW PATH OBSERVED/FEATURE 2015
FLOW PATH OBSERVED/FEATURE 2016
FLOW PATH OBSERVED/FEATURE 2017
SORTING/SCOUR/BED/BANK FEATURES LESS
THAN 10 FEET
0 500 1,000
SCALE IN FEET
D%392-9139 1 SHEET 1 C
PCS PhoSDhate Comoanv. Inc
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

SMALL ROAD
UPPE
PHASE 3
"BOWL"
LEGEND
P AND U LANDS
40 FOOT VALLEY
FLOW PATH OBSERVED/FEATURE 2014
".� FLOW PATH OBSERVED/FEATURE 2015
`r FLOW PATH OBSERVED/FEATURE 2016
FLOW PATH OBSERVED/FEATURE 2017
p SORTING/SCOUR/BED/BANK FEATURES LESS
THAN 10 FEET
UIr1LN F'UKIIUINJ Ur ViiLLLT HLJU r1/AL) LUVV, MLUIUM, UK r711,r7 rLUVV UCfJLKVLU.
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.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
VALLEY
D
-C
P AND U LANDS MITIGATION SITE - PHASE 3
UPPER GUM SWAMP RUN
THE BOWL AND 40 FOOT VALLEY
PCS PHOSPHATE COMPANY, INC.
SCALE: AS SHOWN APPROVED BY: DRAWN BY: TLJ
DATE: 02/26/19 FILE: PLANDS_GSR_PH3
STRM BY YEAR
0 250 500 l/1, R
v Z ` 4709 COLLEGE ACRES DRIVE CP#1745.59.32.3
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS SUITE 2
SCALE IN FEET WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403
4ftw TEL FAX 910%392-9139 392-9253 FIGURE 1
SHEET 2 OF 2
PCS Phosohate Comoanv. Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GEOMORPHIC MEASUREMENTS UPPER GUM SWAMP RUN RESTORATION
To document the Gum Swamp Run headwater stream restoration and evolution of the system, 22 cross-
sections were established after construction in February of 2014. The restoration consisted of three
distinct areas within the upper Gum Swamp Run watershed: the upper headwater valley, the middle or
bowl, and the lower stream channel. In accordance with the Compensatory Mitigation Plan for the P
Lands and U Lands Restoration Site (CZR 2012), three permanent cross-sections were established per
1,000 -foot reach of the stream and headwater valley restoration. The permanent cross-sections were
used to monitor geomorphic changes in the constructed portions of the lower stream channel and stream
formation in the upper headwater valley. A longitudinal survey of the entire system was performed for the
as -built report.
The upper headwater valley section of the system (riparian headwater system with no defined
constructed channel) consisted of a shallow 40 -foot wide flat area along the centerline of the valley shown
on LiDAR at the invert indicated by LiDAR. All of the silviculture beds were removed and the 40 -foot wide
belt within the upper valley was smoothed or scraped 20 feet either side of the centerline; flow paths were
expected to naturally form and meander across the 40 -foot wide belt as the re -introduced base flow
accumulated and moved downstream. The 40 -foot wide meander belt begins at station 0+00 and ends at
station 40+12. For the upper headwater valley, the cross-sections were measured for the as -built and Y
3 and Y5 if channel features formed.
The bowl occupied the middle area of the system from station 40+12 to station 44+68. Post-harvest of
timber, no other construction equipment was used in the 456 -foot bowl section of the watershed;
therefore, silviculture beds (perpendicular to direction of flow) and rutted tracks from the forestry harvest
remained. The upstream east end of the bowl had a design elevation of 8.30 feet where it joined the
downstream end of the upper headwater valley 40 -foot meander belt. The downstream west end of the
bowl had a design elevation of 8.0 feet; the elevations of the lowest points in of the center of the bowl
were at 6.5 feet.
The lower stream channel section of the system consisted of a 2 -foot wide by 1 -foot deep channel
constructed from the vicinity of station 48+00 downstream along the centerline of the valley to station
71+41. LiDAR was used to establish the centerline and a mini -excavator with a small bucket was used to
construct the channel at the design invert. Between station 44+68 and station 48+00, no 2 -foot channel
was constructed as the existing elevations over this distance were already at the design invert. Within the
lower stream channel section of Gum Swamp Run restoration, the cross-sections were measured every
year.
GEOMORPHIC SUCCESS CRITERIA
Restoration of the upper watershed of Gum Swamp Run was designed to remain stable with minimal
changes through the monitoring period; however, the longitudinal profiles and cross-sections were
expected to show minor changes in flow patterns as the headwater riparian valley system evolved,
adjusted, and developed.
Longitudinal Profiles
While the profiles show evidence of some sediment movement downstream in the vicinity of the bowl,
instability of the system would be evidenced in the profile by a head cut that moves upstream. As
depicted, the downstream portions of the profiles are very similar over the years.
Upper Headwater Valley Permanent Cross-sections 14-16 and 20-25
These nine cross-sections represent the upper headwater riparian valley that had a 40 -foot design width.
The cross-sections represent the upper 4,000 linear feet of the Gum Swamp Run meander belt and were
surveyed immediately after construction and during Y3 and Y5 for verification of channel development.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-4 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Sections 20-25 show very little lateral change in their cross-section dimensions. There was vertical
change in the sections, but they are considered stable. The vertical changes seen are from the expected
development of the flow patterns within the valley caused by the movement of the sediments as the
meander belt adjusted to rehydration and during stronger periods of flow. These changes are anticipated
for a low gradient system (0.00058 ft/ft), such as the upper headwater valley (stations 0+00 through
40+12). The maximum vertical change is approximately 6 inches and is seen in two cross-sections:
cross-section 14 changed from elevation 7.36 in the as -built profile to elevation 6.66 in the final year
survey and cross-section 25 changed from elevation 9.2 in the as -built profile to elevation 6.73 in the final
year survey. All nine of these cross-sections are considered stable and within expected movements of
channel development as noted above.
Bowl (No Construction) Permanent Cross-section 13
This single cross-section is for the existing "bowl section" where no valley or channel construction of any
kind occurred. The location of the cross-section is at the downstream western edge of the bowl. Only
minor changes in the elevation are noted between the as -built thalweg of elevation 7.3 and the final
thalweg which was elevation 7.12.
Lower Stream Channel Permanent Cross-sections 9-12
These cross-sections are located in the upper 1,000 feet of the 2 -foot constructed channel. From the as -
built survey in 2014 through the final survey in 2018, these sections showed a typical vertical change of
0.35 -foot downward. No significant lateral movement was noted in these four cross-sections.
Lower Stream Channel Permanent Cross-section 8
This cross-section showed a vertical change of 0.7 -foot at the design location of the thalweg of the 2 -foot
channel and also showed formation of a second thalweg with a change of 0.83 foot from the as -built
survey. This second flow path is evidence of a braided system and is normal for low gradient systems.
Lower Stream Channel Permanent Cross-sections 1-7
These seven cross-sections represent the most downstream portion of the 2 -foot constructed channel of
Gum Swamp Run and show only a slight decrease in the elevation of the thalweg through the monitoring
period. The range of the change in elevation is 0.38 -foot to 0.13 -foot. Cross-section 6 and cross-section
2 both showed the development of a second flow path, typical in a low gradient system. The last two
cross sections represent the final 235 feet of the constructed channel and showed only a 0.13 -foot
change in elevation over the monitoring period.
The majority of the cross-sections from all three areas showed some signs of channel development.
Cross-sections that showed a small drop in the elevation of the section over time or a secondary or
braided channel should be considered within expectations of a typical low-energy stream system in the
coastal plain of North Carolina either while the system adjusts to immediate post -restoration conditions or
in general. These small migrations from the as -built elevations do not indicate instability. During all of the
measurement periods, water was present and flowing within the system.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-5 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LONGITUDINAL PROFILE
QTR
Jonathan T. Ricketts h..
10.0
(TRANSITIONAL
AREA BOW -
9.0
8.0
0
7.0
z
w
c
0
M 6.0
v
w
5.0
4.0
3.0
+ 10+00 20+00 30+00 40+00 50+00 60+00 70+00 80+00
Station (ft)
2014 THALWEG 2016 THALWEG 2017 THALWEG 2018 THALWEG
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-6 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
JR
Jonathan T. Rtts
icke.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-7 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
--------------
--------------
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-7 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
-
Jonad= T. Ricketts, z �.
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-8 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
VAIMI �
FM
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-8 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
-
Jonad= T. Ricketts, z �.
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-9 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
-
Jonad= T. Ricketts, z �.
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
• Ak • 11 0
_
I MIA I
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-10 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

F
GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
-
Jonad= T. Ricketts, z �.
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-11 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
--------------
--------------
--------------
1 .1 1 •1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 •1 1 .1 1
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-11 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

11.5
11.0
10.5
10.0
D
Q
Z 9.5
9.0
a�
W
8.5
7.5
7.0
GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
-
Jonad= T. Ricketts, z �.
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-12 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
►ice\���� 1����1 ����
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-12 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
-
Jonad= T. Ricketts, z �.
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-13 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
•
����!*,i������s►ice■���
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-13 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
-
Jonad= T. Ricketts, z �.
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
-70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
t2014AS-BU ILT — • DESIGN CENTERLINE (PROPOSED
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-14 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
-----1111111111111111111_-- � �-----
-----111111111111111111111_—�-----
-----11111111111111111111111_—�� •�-----
/
-----1111111111111111111111111
•
-----111111111111111111111111111-_ � ��------
-----111111111111111111111111111 �--------
--------------
-70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
t2014AS-BU ILT — • DESIGN CENTERLINE (PROPOSED
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-14 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
-
Jonad= T. Ricketts, z �.
Con hmS&g.— • Cammsrioa Manages
X -SECTION #14 - STATION 39+15
10.0
9.5
9.0
D
Z8.5
`~
8.4
c
0
M8.0
a,
8.0
W
7.5
7.5
7.0
6.5
-70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
• DESIGN CENTERLINE 2014 AS -BUILT PROPOSED
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-15 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
BOWL
-
Jonad= T. Ricketts, z �.
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-16 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
QTR
Jonathan T. Ricketts, h..
• 1
■
1
1
.
I
i
1 11 1 11 1 11 1 11 1 /1 1 11 1 11 1 11 � 1 11
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-17 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
Jonathan T. Ricketts, i.,
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
• Ak• 1
rA
•
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-18 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
J-�R- -
Jonadvn T. Ricketts, i.,
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
• IBM—�
Mw
�mm
•
-40 -30 -20 -10
10 20 30 40
— • DESIGN CENTERLINE t2014AS-BUILT --dr—PROPOSED
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-19 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
-
Jonad= T. Ricketts, z �.
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
a
i
MM
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-20 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
J-�R- -
Jonadvn T. Ricketts, i.,
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-21 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
•
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-21 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
J-�R- -
Jonadvn T. Ricketts, i.,
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-22 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
i ids
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-22 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
J-�R- -
Jonadvn T. Ricketts, i.,
C—kmgEng— - Cammsrioa Manages
■
1
1
•
11111111111
� 1
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-23 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
J-�R- -
Jonadvn T. Ricketts, i.,
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
R
��dLil����Jr�i•��Zi .
•
���� -w�ww�
Mf
-40 -30 -20 -10
10 20 30 40
— • DESIGN CENTERLINE t2014AS-BUILT --dr—PROPOSED
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-24 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
J-�R- -
Jonadvn T. Ricketts, i.,
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
■
•
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-25 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
Jonathan T. Ricketts, i.,
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-26 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
-
Jonad= T. Ricketts, z �.
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
• • 1 '
i
/��
1iw/-
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-27 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
JR
Jonathan T. Ricketts h.c
-70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
DESIGN CENTERLINE 2014 AS -BUILT 2016 STATUS
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-28 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
����\'�\���i►�����►.i��il�!
�ii���!!■�AaN-111111 Miiii
13 7E��T�wgh' iW.WAM1111 0 iM
-70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
DESIGN CENTERLINE 2014 AS -BUILT 2016 STATUS
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-28 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
BOWL
- JR
Jonathan T. Ricketts,.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-29 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
- JR
Jonathan T. Ricketts.
• 1
1
'
1
.
1
,
, 1
off off 1 11 1 11 1 11 1 11 1 11 1 11 1 11
• 1 , • 1
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-30 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
JR
Jonathan T. Ricketts h.c
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-31 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
• A • �: 1
000 MA
t: i
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-31 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
JR
Jonathan T. Ricketts h.c
,
-rte
�1
,
-40 -30
-20 -10
DESIGN CENTERLINE
0
2014 AS -BUILT
10 20 30
2016STATUS
40
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-32 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
JR
Jonathan T. Rtts
icke.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-33 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
7
VOW
EM&MriL�- l �
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-33 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
- SJR
Jonas T. Ricke.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-34 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
i
I-
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-34 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
JR
Jonathan T. Ricketts h.c
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-35 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
i •
MENNEN_-
L�
t �
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-35 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
JTR
Jonathan T. Ricketts.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-36 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
JR
Jonathan T. Rtts
icke.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-37 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
1
1
1
1
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-37 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
JR
Jonathan T. Rtts
icke.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-38 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
JR
Jonathan T. Rtts
icke.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-39 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
NKwfwilff!
r/-
���= s -ice
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-39 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
JR
Jonathan T. Rtts
icke.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-40 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
•
1-��►�a�= " •L�L�
����� ■r irk
,
I
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-40 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
Jonathan T. Ricketts,
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-41 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
MINN! INN
MINN! IN
MINN! a
MINN! N MINN INN
MINN! IN
MINN! z
MINN! N MINN INN
MINN! IN
MINN! w
MINN!
IN
MINN!
MINN!
•
&I Nz A 0
MINN!-
MINN! fAII�111111111111111
sr�
MINN! N �A�AN Wr I
=r
MINN!-�Y
I
MINN! N
'
IIIIIIIIIN LC�MINN! MINNMINN! VMINN! 0
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-41 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
-
Jonad= T. Ricketts, z �.
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-42 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
-
Jonad= T. Ricketts, z �.
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-43 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Owlsw��
r�������■�
111111111111111511
■ ■ ��
w ■ �-
����a ■ WA&M-0����
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-43 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
-
Jonad= T. Ricketts, z �.
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-44 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
-
Jonad= T. Ricketts, z �.
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
• Ak • 11
a•��������as��DEW �
17= M. F
�riM� l/AILWP�lk i�
LTi�A�
�V -Aw.:a■�����:a�.�ari����
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-45 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

F
GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
-
Jonad= T. Ricketts, z �.
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-46 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
�'7�'�cT:��������:1�■l'i■ice■���
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-46 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

11.5
11.0
10.5
10.0
LU
8.5
Egg]
7.5
7.0
GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
-
Jonad= T. Ricketts, z �.
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-47 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
If �m�
EIIIIW�P�.iIWA' WLglll OF
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-47 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
-
Jonad= T. Ricketts, z �.
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-48 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
�IWW4W
��� f6ii���1��i�=i"ri'L���■���
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-48 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
-
Jonad= T. Ricketts, i.,
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-49 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
������� ■tip ���L111�6t���3�1���
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-49 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
-
Jonad= T. Ricketts, z �.
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-50 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
��►�\�iiii��������iiiiiiiii
�����E�ii' I����f�ii■��i����
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-50 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
BOWL
-
Jonad= T. Ricketts, z �.
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-51 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
-
Jonad= T. Ricketts, z �.
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-52 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Rbis
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-52 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
QTR
Jonathan T. Ricketts, h..
c—wft%. c-�
X -SECTION #11 - STATION 48+10
8.5
SOUT "ORT
8.0
7.5
7.50 jl� 744
7.0
Q
'
Z 6.5
w
6.0
cc
W
5.5
5.0
4.5
4.0
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
DESIGN CENTERLINE 2016 STATUS -->(--2017 STATUS
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-53 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
QTR
Jonathan T. Ricketts, h..
c—wft%. c-�
X -SECTION #10 - STATION 49+39
8.5 8.38
i
SOUT
8.0
7 64
7.5
7.0
D
Q
Z 6.5
w
6.0
a�
W
5.5
5.0
4.5
4.0
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
DESIGN CENTERLINE 2016 STATUS -->(--2017 STATUS
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-54 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
Jonathan T. Ricketts,
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-55 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
•L�
�-i,VI
llll�`4 w.I�L-IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIVrAw
•
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-55 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
J-�R- -
Jonadvn T. Ricketts, z �.
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-56 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
•- ���� iii
NUA
•
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-56 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
J-�R- -
Jonadvn T. Ricketts, z �.
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
a
•
�elt►a.�
�
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-57 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
-
Jonad= T. Ricketts, z �.
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-58 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
��t�1lZ�� ■ �S �
-v�_54'�i�zS1 �
MIA 7 49a&�
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-58 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
Jonathan T. Ricketts,
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-59 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
1
1
MIER
\CiL'�i IIID
1
i
� 1
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-59 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
Jonathan T. Ricketts,
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-60 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
•
. i[��t�:
SII/■
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-60 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
Jonathan T. Ricketts,
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-61 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
I/-
tad: M II
�1�11
�I�II
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-61 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
Jonathan T. Ricketts,
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-62 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
1
1
1
•
iir �
►�� A ■r1
I 1
11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 /I
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-62 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
-
Jonad= T. Ricketts, z �.
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-63 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
mii�
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-63 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

11.5
11.0
10.5
10.0
D
a
Z 9.5
GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
-
Jonad= T. Ricketts, z �.
C—kmgEng— • Cammsrioa Manages
W
8.5
8.0
7.5
Gt,0
-70
-60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10
— • DESIGN CENTERLINE ---)<— 2017 STATUS
20 30
2018STATUS
40 50 60 70
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-64 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
Jonathan T. Ricketts,
��z�.
�ki.g Ems–. C—.
-70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
— • DESIGN CENTERLINE ---)<— 2017 STATUS 2018 STATUS
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-65 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
Jonathan T. Ricketts,
��z�.
�ki.gE,,&--C ,
• • ::
Mff
-70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
— • DESIGN CENTERLINE ---)<— 2017 STATUS 2018 STATUS
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-66 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
Jonathan T. Ricketts,
• � • 11
MIIIIl'v7��� II�m
az�a,��■■■���atMOM ���
-70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20
— • DESIGN CENTERLINE ---)<— 2017 STATUS
30 40
2018STATUS
50 60 70
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-67 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

F
GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
JOrmthm T. Ricketts,
C-kmgE"g:.--C-
-70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
— • DESIGN CENTERLINE ---)<— 2017 STATUS 2018 STATUS
50 60 70
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-68 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
•
���r1��3rJ�Z7T��!l�l�L'!/�ll�,���
-70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
— • DESIGN CENTERLINE ---)<— 2017 STATUS 2018 STATUS
50 60 70
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-68 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
JR
Jonathan T. Ricketts.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-69 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
f(Yi���lllr•��. E������.�I�li�i���
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-69 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
Jonathan T. Ricketts,
��z�.
�ki.gE,,&--C ,MY AM"
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-70 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
UPPER HEADWATER VALLEY
Jonathan T. Ricketts,
��z�.
�ki.gE,,&--C ,
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-71 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
���\��'�►�'\S"iW4�\EMIN EMINil WiInEMINM11 ENIN
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-71 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
BOWL
Jonathan T. Ricketts,
��z�.
�ki.g Ems–. C—.
-70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30
• DESIGN CENTERLINE ---X— 2017 STATUS 2018 STATUS
40 50 60 70
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-72 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
������i1•�iSilVf�ii������
�
-70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30
• DESIGN CENTERLINE ---X— 2017 STATUS 2018 STATUS
40 50 60 70
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-72 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
Jonathan. T. Ricketts,
• 1
�/rte
� ��•::,_ -ice
�Orddll!W\il7Ti7/'
1
i�� ►'vTii71 iI►L�`►�� �"fil:l �r.II _ _
1
.
1
� 1
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-73 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
Jonathan. T. Ricketts,
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-74 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
�i
•
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-74 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
Jonathan. T. Ricketts,
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-75 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
�Q471f���i
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-75 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
Jonathan T. Ricketts,
� l �
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-76 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-76 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
Jonathan T. Ricketts, w,
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-77 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
1
--� r'q1 AILa
--%ii9'�
EM—�i
1
1
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-77 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
Jonathan T. Ricketts,
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-78 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
I
�d[:71:ISv�
1 �
1�-
•
1
J.Z71Ci�
�
•
1
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-78 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
Jonathan T. Ricketts,
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-79 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
��iT
-
A =■ �
ALOElIi AW
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-79 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
Jonathan T. Ricketts,
NO.
1
1
• 1
M�WAIW
si•,i
1
� 1
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-80 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
Jonathan T. Ricketts,
C—king k&�-C'—�
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-81 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
�Vi A-
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-81 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
Jonathan T. Ricketts,
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-82 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
� a �
- W4
�Um
=■
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-82 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
Jonathan T. Ricketts,
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-83 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
� a �
I
I '
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-83 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

GUM SWAMP RUN
LOWER STREAM CHANNEL
Jonathan T. Ricketts, w,
i
•
gra■ i■ �
-
-'il
!'
I�
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix A-84 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

APPENDIX B
2018 Third Annual 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 fifth (2018) annual fall monitoring. Numbers in each column indicate stems unquestionably alive at sampling. Plot size is 0.3 acre.
Zone 2
PUM112
Zone 1
PUM115
PUM116
PUM191
PUM196
Total
1 st
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
Common name
Scientific name
Unknown
?
4
8
5
1
2
1
1
Serviceberry
Amelanchier canadensis
18
16
21
22
9
4
10
2
4
Red chokeberry
Aronia arbutifolia
8
4
7
2
2
6
Paw paw
Asima triloba
5
1
1
3
River birch
Betula nigra
4
14
2
2
12
2
2
American beautyberry
Callicarpa americana
1
13
7
10
5
Ironwood
Carpinus caroliniana
1
1
1
2
2
2
Water hickory
Carya aquatica
1
2
Sugarberry
Celtis laevigata
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Buttonbush*
Cephalanthus occidentalis
1
1
Atlantic white cedar
Chamaecyparis thyoides
2
10
9
37
30
23
Sweet pepperbush
Clethra alnifolia
5
22
21
13
1
16
1
1
2
1
Silky dogwood
Cornus amomum
1
1
1
Swamp dogwood
Cornus foemina
3
2
3
Titi
Cyrilla racemiflora
2
2
2
2
Persimmon
Diospora virginiana
5
5
3
2
6
4
5
3
13
Strawberry bush
Euonymous americana
1
7
6
1
4
1
6
3
3
Green ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
17
17
34
34
5
4
27
25
83
80
Holly
Ilex spp.
4
2
5
5
10
10
Deciduous holly
I. decidua
1
1
Inkberry
I. glabra
2
Winterberry
Ilex verticillata
3
19
16
13
12
14
5
12
5
19
Virginia sweetspire
Itea virginica
4
1
1
1
Swamp doghobble
Leucothoe (Eubotrys) racemosa
15
18
3
3
7
7
22
Spicebush
Lindera benzoin
10
12
11
26
25
1
Fetterbush
Lyonia lucida
1
1
2
Sweetbay
Magnolia virginiana
3
3
2
1
5
4
Mulberry
Morus rubra
1
1
1
Unknown gum/tupelo
Nyssa spp.
58
109
1
76
3
97
41
78
4
0
Water tupelo
N. aquatica
20
18
17
16
11
11
15
13
63
58
Swamp tupelo
Nyssa biflora
28
22
14
8
11
1
1
1
54
32
Red bay
Persea borbonia
Pond pine
Pinus serotina
Sycamore
Platanus occidentalis
9
7
9
7
Oak
Quercus spp.
White oak
Q. alba
Laurel oak
Q. laurifolia
1
1
Overcup oak
Q. lyrata
2
3
2
1
10
11
17
14
31
29
Swamp chestnut oak
Q. michauxii
48
45
19
21
27
20
11
11
105
97
Water oak
Q. nigra
Cherrybark oak
Q. pagoda
Willow oak
Quercus phellos
1
1
21
19
22
20
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
8
12
12
38
40
American elm
Ulmus americana
1
1
6
5
5
4
12
10
High bush blueberry
Vaccinium corymbosum
2
1
2
1
Possumhaw
Viburnum nudum
1
2
1
1
2
3
Dusty zenobia
Zenobia pulverulenta
ALIVE STEMS1
124
1 114
102
95
102
79
115
104
443
392
TOTAL STEMS
134
139
123
125
103
105
126
127
486
496
Zone 2
PUM112
PUM114
PUM117
PUM118
PUM127
PUM193
PUM194
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
4
8
5
2
1
2
18
16
21
22
9
4
10
2
4
4
14
8
4
7
2
2
6
5
1
1
3
4
14
14
12
12
1
13
7
10
5
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
10
9
37
30
23
7
30
5
22
21
13
12
16
16
2
1
1
1
3
2
3
2
1
5
5
3
2
6
4
5
3
13
11
2
1
7
6
1
4
1
6
3
3
2
6
5
13
10
14
11
6
3
13
9
4
2
5
5
10
10
1
1
2
7
3
19
16
13
12
14
5
12
5
19
14
7
4
1
15
18
3
3
7
7
22
21
9
10
12
11
26
25
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
64
58
109
91
76
40
97
41
78
66
112
90
115
103
68
75
118
119
129
129
119
117
98
101
112
113
120
120
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix B-2 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Appendix B. (continued)
Zone 2A
PUM121
Zone 2
PUM123
PUM125
PUM195
PUM197
PUM198
Total
Common name
Scientific name
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
Unknown
?
1
4
5
9
1
1
29
2
Serviceberry
Amelanchier canadensis
2
5
5
6
2
1
Red chokeberry
Aronia arbutifolia
18
3
1
9
9
1
Paw paw
Asima triloba
1
1
1
3
3
River birch
Betula nigra
23
20
14
9
18
12
135
104
American beautyberry
Callicarpa americana
1
1
5
3
3
Ironwood
Carpinus caroliniana
4
3
1
1
6
15
Water hickory
Carya aquatica
4
3
6
110
6
2
39
38
Sugarberry
Celtis laevigata
2
1
1
2
1
6
26
13
Buttonbush"
Cephalanthus occidentalis
9
1
2
81
6
4
Atlantic white cedar
Chamaecyparis thyoides
14
39
31
141
120
Sweet pepperbush
Clethra alnifolia
7
1
1
1
1
5
4
Silky dogwood
Cornus amomum
121
118
1
1
122
5
4
3
Swamp dogwood
Cornus foemina
5
1
Titi
Cyrilla racemiflora
1
2
Persimmon
Diospora virginiana
1
62
13
28
Strawberry bush
Euonymous americana
6
36
27
139
65
Green ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
10
13
13
14
31
25
205
152
Holly
Ilex spp.
16
23
27
32
33
13
Deciduous holly
I. decidua
4
8
8
60
57
1
Inkberry
I. glabra
1
2
223
140
10270
Winterberry
Ilex verticillata
53
109
91
525
1
224
1
107
Virginia sweetspire
Itea virginica
1
1
1
1
1
2
6
6
Swamp doghobble
Leucothoe (Eubotrys) racemosa
Spicebush
Lindera benzoin
Fetterbush
Lyonia lucida
Sweetbay
Magnolia virginiana
6
4
Mulberry
Morus rubra
Unknown gum/tupelo
Nyssa spp.
1
Water tupelo
N. aquatica
10
7
4
4
2
2
57
45
Swamp tupelo
Nyssa biflora
12
8
10
5
9
4
78
49
Red bay
Persea borbonia
Pond pine
Pinus serotina
Sycamore
Platanus occidentalis
19
18
12
3
19
15
88
65
Oak
Quercus spp.
2
White oak
Q. alba
Laurel oak
Q. laurifolia
1
1
4
Overcup oak
Q. lyrata
1
1
Swamp chestnut oak
Q. michauxii
4
4
14
12
9
11
118
86
Water oak
Q. nigra
Cherrybark oak
Q. pagoda
Willow oak
Quercus phellos
Dwarf azalea
Rhododendron atlanticum
Swamp azalea
Rhododendron viscosum
Swamp rose
Rosa palustris
Pond cypress
Taxodium ascendens
5
5
18
16
22
17
139
133
Bald cypress
Taxodium distichum
2
3
American elm
Ulmus americana
1
High bush blueberry
Vaccinium corymbosum
Possumhaw
Viburnum nudum
3
Dusty zenobia
Zenobia pulverulenta
ALIVE STEMS
89
84
99
66
121
1 92
958
730
TOTAL STEMS
100
107
102—F
103
126
1 127
1,092
1,111
Zone 2A
PUM121
PUM122
PUM123
PUM125
Total
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
4
1
5
4
1
9
1
1
2
8
4
2
5
5
6
2
1
9
18
3
1
9
9
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
1
3
13
19
3
3
4
3
5
3
1
1
5
3
3
1
3
1
43
22
24
12
19
4
24
22
110
60
18
13
14
10
2
1
2
1
6
3
2
2
20
9
2
2
81
72
4
3
17
14
39
31
141
120
12
7
12
7
10287
1
27
171
121
118
118
1
122
5
180
5
1
1
1
1
62
13
28
19
13
6
36
27
139
65
2
2
9
11
14
16
23
27
32
33
13
12
7
4
8
8
60
57
1
2
1
2
223
140
10270
91
53
109
91
525
354
224
224
107
108
108
107
132
134
571
573
Zone 3
PUMill
PUM119
PUM120
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
2
12
1
3
1
4
1
1
1
10
8
5
5
2
3
6
9
18
3
9
9
1
3
22
21
1
3
13
19
5
3
4
3
37
17
1
1
3
1
4
3
4
7
4
17
9
6
4
18
13
14
10
16
7
18
10
6
3
4
3
20
9
1
2
16
16
1
28
28
3
1
4
10287
72
27
171
121
118
118
121
122
179
180
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix B-3 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Appendix B. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix B-4 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Zone 3
PUM124
PUM126
PUM128
PUM129
PUM130
PUM131
PUM132
PUM133
PUM135
PUM136
PUM137
PUM138
PUM139
Common name
Scientific name
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
Unknown
?
2
9
9
9
3
2
2
6
39
2
15
8
Serviceberry
Amelanchier canadensis
Red chokeberry
Aronia arbutifolia
Paw paw
Asima triloba
River birch
Betula nigra
11
10
American beautyberry
Callicarpa americana
Ironwood
Carpinus caroliniana
1
1
Water hickory
Carya aquatica
Sugarberry
Celtis laevigata
1
1
Buttonbush*
Cephalanthus occidentalis
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
Atlantic white cedar
Chamaecyparis thyoides
21
19
17
14
12
10
15
12
20
5
11
10
14
10
6
6
6
6
3
2
9
5
2
Sweet pepperbush
Clethra alnifolia
1
9
4
9
5
5
3
4
1
2
5
3
2
1
5
3
Silky dogwood
Cornus amomum
Swamp dogwood
Cornus foemina
4
1
1
1
2
2
1
3
Titi
Cyrilla racemiflora
6
5
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
31
29
2
2
1
1
Persimmon
Diospora virginiana
Strawberry bush
Euonymous americana
Green ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
1
1
1
1
1
1
6
4
Holly
Ilex spp.
Deciduous holly
L decidua
Inkberry
L glabra
1
1
Winterberry
Ilex verticillata
1
Virginia sweetspire
Itea virginica
2
2
1
2
2
1
1
1
Swamp doghobble
Leucothoe (Eubotrys) racemosa
Spicebush
Lindera benzoin
Fetterbush
Lyonia lucida
Sweetbay
Magnolia virginiana
5
5
2
2
5
4
3
2
1
16
12
8
7
1
1
1
1
3
3
Mulberry
Morus rubra
Unknown gum/tupelo
Nyssa spp.
3
1
2
2
3
5
1
5
1
2
Water tupelo
N. aquatica
12
12
2
2
22
22
8
11
4
4
9
7
14
10
5
10
25
13
12
2
10
8
22
11
21
14
Swamp tupelo
Nyssa biflora
16
10
1
12
9
6
3
20
11
8
4
12
4
2
2
29
15
16
9
12
3
18
10
6
7
Red bay
Persea borbonia
2
1
1
2
2
1
3
1
Pond pine
Pinus serotina
Sycamore
Platanus occidentalis
Oak
Quercus spp.
4
9
2
10
5
7
20
7
1
6
3
16
White oak
Q. alba
Laurel oak
Q. laurifolia
16
7
2
10
10
11
11
10
13
6
1
14
2
8
5
7
6
3
7
3
2
1
6
4
Overcup oak
Q. lyrata
6
6
5
3
26
23
31
26
15
13
21
12
13
9
17
14
7
4
4
9
5
8
7
Swamp chestnut oak
Q. michauxii
8
6
12
11
19
14
36
25
37
34
31
8
17
10
14
6
7
24
33
6
22
11
20
5
Water oak
Q. nigra
Cherrybark oak
Q. pagoda
22
1
Willow oak
Quercus phellos
5
5
8
7
24
14
37
15
8
5
2
10
6
11
8
7
3
1
1
3
3
14
13
7
3
Dwarf azalea
Rhododendron atlanticum
Swamp azalea
Rhododendron viscosum
Swamp rose
Rosa palustris
Pond cypress
Taxodium ascendens
Bald cypress
Taxodium distichum
5
5
26
25
17
17
27
27
7
7
14
12
18
17
21
23
15
15
25
22
20
19
16
16
11
11
American elm
Ulmus americana
High bush blueberry
Vaccinium corymbosum
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
Possumhaw
Viburnum nudum
3
1
3
5
3
3
3
3
2
2
3
4
2
3
1
1
1
1
Dusty zenobia
Zenobia pulverulenta
ALIVE STEMS1
120
85
86
78
186
138
205
153
166
109
133
69
136
79
147
107
123
58
140
48
120
57
136
76
113
54
TOTAL STEMS
127
127
92
93
190
189
209
211
174
176
134
134
139
139
156
161
140
140
154
154
147
147
143
144
142
144
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix B-4 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Appendix B. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix B-5 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Zone 3
PUM140
PUM141
PUM142
PUM147
PUM149
PUM150
PUM151
PUM178
PUM179
PUM182
PUM183
PUM184
PUM186
Common name
Scientific name
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
Unknown
?
23
48
13
3
3
1
12
2
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
1
Atlantic white cedar
Chamaecyparis thyoides
29
18
6
5
26
20
7
7
5
5
15
15
24
22
63
54
17
8
24
22
33
20
21
19
21
17
Sweet pepperbush
Clethra alnifolia
4
3
1
1
3
6
1
1
4
1
Silky dogwood
Cornus amomum
Swamp dogwood
Cornus foemina
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
Titi
Cyrilla racemiflora
1
1
1
1
6
4
2
2
Persimmon
Diospora virginiana
Strawberry bush
Euonymous americana
Green ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
1
Holly
Ilex spp.
Deciduous holly
I. decidua
Inkberry
I. glabra
1
Winterberry
Ilex verticillata
1
Virginia sweetspire
Itea virginica
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
Swamp doghobble
Leucothoe (Eubotrys) racemosa
Spicebush
Lindera benzoin
Fetterbush
Lyonia lucida
Sweetbay
Magnolia virginiana
7
4
1
1
2
1
9
4
1
1
2
2
Mulberry
Morus rubra
Unknown gum/tupelo
Nyssa spp.
1
2
1
Water tupelo
N. aquatica
12
1
16
3
14
7
16
12
5
5
6
4
4
4
17
10
26
18
16
11
15
14
14
12
20
15
Swamp tupelo
Nyssa biflora
12
6
13
3
20
10
6
1
2
1
9
6
7
2
1
3
3
6
5
5
3
10
8
Red bay
Persea borbonia
2
1
4
4
5
4
2
1
Pond pine
Pinus serotina
1
Sycamore
Platanus occidentalis
Oak
Quercus spp.
1
3
12
6
3
1
7
4
7
4
8
3
White oak
Q. alba
Laurel oak
Q. laurifolia
4
2
1
1
7
4
1
1
2
3
2
2
1
1
5
6
9
5
17
10
11
8
30
17
12
13
Overcup oak
Q. lyrata
7
3
7
13
7
2
8
3
8
3
9
34
30
21
19
19
12
52
43
15
15
10
10
Swamp chestnut oak
Q. michauxii
19
2
16
1
16
4
9
2
9
6
19
1
13
2
12
11
8
4
41
18
21
21
24
13
28
26
Water oak
Q. nigra
Cherrybark oak
Q. pagoda
Willow oak
Quercus phellos
17
6
4
1
13
6
6
1
9
2
4
2
12
4
2
2
6
5
32
14
20
14
19
15
12
11
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
17
34
31
8
8
18
18
16
15
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
Possumhaw
Viburnum nudum
2
1
1
2
3
1
1
3
2
1
1
Dusty zenobia
Zenobia pulverulenta
ALIVE STEMS1
148
60
138
35
161
84
81
51
92
66
82
49
130
67
151
128
11983
182
105
186
149
160
115
149
130
TOTAL STEMS
153
153
149
149
169
171
113
113
103
104
110
110
141
141
156
157
126
126
198
200
194
194
167
172
158
160
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix B-5 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Appendix B. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix B-6 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Zone 3
PUM187
PUM188
PUM201
PUM206
PUM207
PUM208
PUM209
PUM210
PUM211
PUM212
PUM213
Total
Common name
Scientific name
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
4th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
Unknown
?
6
1
1
1
3
1
9
256
Serviceberry
Amelanchier canadensis
Red chokeberry
Aronia arbutifolia
Paw paw
Asima triloba
River birch
Betula nigra
7
6
21
17
American beautyberry
Callicarpa americana
Ironwood
Carpinus caroliniana
1
Water hickory
Carya aquatica
2
2
Sugarberry
Celtis laevigata
1
1
Buttonbush*
Cephalanthus occidentalis
2
19
14
Atlantic white cedar
Chamaecyparis thyoides
1
1
4
4
5
2
31
30
7
4
14
13
14
13
24
17
31
23
20
20
572
471
Sweet pepperbush
Clethra alnifolia
2
2
1
1
57
36
Silky dogwood
Cornus amomum
Swamp dogwood
Cornus foemina
6
3
2
1
1
1
2
2
4
2
2
1
12
7
44
25
Titi
Cyrilla racemiflora
4
5
5
5
2
1
71
72
Persimmon
Diospora virginiana
Strawberry bush
Euonymous americana
Green ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
11
7
39
17
Holly
Ilex spp.
Deciduous holly
I. decidua
Inkberry
I. glabra
3
Winterberry
Ilex verticillata
1
Virginia sweetspire
Itea virginica
1
1
1
1
14
10
Swamp doghobble
Leucothoe (Eubotrys) racemosa
Spicebush
Lindera benzoin
Fetterbush
Lyonia lucida
Sweetbay
Magnolia virginiana
2
1
2
2
77
64
Mulberry
Morus rubra
Unknown gum/tupelo
Nyssa spp.
1
32
Water tupelo
N. aquatica
4
3
5
4
24
18
10
7
7
4
10
5
34
26
22
22
1
1
19
10
16
12
515
397
Swamp tupelo
Nyssa biflora
10
3
2
2
12
10
8
7
17
9
12
4
28
15
5
5
13
6
20
11
415
230
Red bay
Persea borbonia
20
18
Pond pine
Pinus serotina
1
Sycamore
Platanus occidentalis
5
1
8
1
Oak
Quercus spp.
2
7
8
5
4
4
1
3
185
White oak
Q. alba
Laurel oak
Q. laurifolia
2
3
15
10
28
11
15
5
22
14
18
16
28
18
21
11
37
32
48
22
20
13
474
307
Overcup oak
Q. lyrata
6
6
18
9
5
3
24
24
37
25
30
27
7
7
29
22
23
17
9
26
17
9
586
459
Swamp chestnut oak
Q. michauxii
18
15
10
7
14
5
28
20
20
16
29
24
16
13
17
9
11
9
22
17
16
4
736
413
Water oak
Q. nigra
Cherrybark oak
Q. pagoda
1
22
Willow oak
Quercus phellos
6
5
18
6
21
16
61
50
13
7
20
17
29
28
23
18
18
12
50
43
54
21
634
394
Dwarf azalea
Rhododendron atlanticum
Swamp azalea
Rhododendron viscosum
Swamp rose
Rosa palustris
Pond cypress
Taxodium ascendens
9
8
10
10
Bald cypress
Taxodium distichum
7
7
24
24
14
15
10
10
15
15
26
25
24
23
21
21
38
38
26
25
34
34
733
743
American elm
Ulmus americana
High bush blueberry
Vaccinium corymbosum
1
1
2
1
17
8
Possumhaw
Viburnum nudum
28
37
Dusty zenobia
Zenobia pulverulenta
ALIVE STEMS1
108
80
106
68
134
85
164
127
156
115
157
127
166
133
187
133
175
140
220
172
209
125
5,567
3,772
TOTAL STEMS
119
119
126
128
140
141
169
170
164
164
160
162
172
172
195
195
185
187
223
223
210
211
6,165
6,201
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix B-6 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Appendix B. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix B-7 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Zone 4
PUM143
PUM144
PUM152
PUM153
PUM154
PUM155
PUM156
PUM157
PUM158
PUM159
PUM160
PUM161
PUM162
Common name
Scientific name
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
Unknown
?
5
3
12
16
12
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
1
1
1
Atlantic white cedar
Chamaecyparis thyoides
7
4
5
4
17
13
8
6
15
13
6
8
16
16
6
4
9
9
11
13
16
17
Sweet pepperbush
Clethra alnifolia
5
3
3
3
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
9
4
5
3
Silky dogwood
Cornus amomum
1
Swamp dogwood
Cornus foemina
1
1
Titi
Cyrilla racemiflora
1
1
Persimmon
Diospora virginiana
Strawberry bush
Euonymous americana
Green ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Holly
Ilex spp.
Deciduous holly
I. decidua
2
Inkberry
I. glabra
1
1
3
Winterberry
Ilex verticillata
6
1
1
4
1
3
Virginia sweetspire
Itea virginica
3
3
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
3
6
6
Swamp doghobble
Leucothoe (Eubotrys) racemosa
Spicebush
Lindera benzoin
1
Fetterbush
Lyonia lucida
1
7
6
Sweetbay
Magnolia virginiana
1
1
2
4
8
5
23
13
1
1
4
4
8
9
2
2
2
2
4
4
6
6
Mulberry
Morus rubra
Unknown gum/tupelo
Nyssa spp.
1
Water tupelo
N. aquatica
1
2
1
1
Swamp tupelo
Nyssa biflora
22
19
12
7
11
2
46
26
25
22
41
32
17
14
20
12
20
14
13
7
37
26
13
11
15
11
Red bay
Persea borbonia
1
4
2
1
1
1
Pond pine
Pinus serotina
56
50
50
46
3
1
24
15
38
18
54
32
46
39
31
19
28
24
55
51
35
32
24
28
Sycamore
Platanus occidentalis
Oak
Quercus spp.
5
1
13
3
1
2
3
4
White oak
Q. alba
Laurel oak
Q. laurifolia
3
1
9
5
7
1
2
2
1
2
3
3
2
13
8
9
6
11
5
Overcup oak
Q. lyrata
3
1
1
1
1
1
Swamp chestnut oak
Q. michauxii
4
1
Water oak
Q. nigra
Cherrybark oak
Q. pagoda
1
Willow oak
Quercus phellos
8
2
18
15
1
3
2
2
5
3
8
3
8
4
4
10
6
19
7
7
2
Dwarf azalea
Rhododendron atlanticum
Swamp azalea
Rhododendron viscosum
Swamp rose
Rosa palustris
Pond cypress
Taxodium ascendens
11
10
3
2
Bald cypress
Taxodium distichum
8
8
24
24
15
16
4
5
2
2
15
12
10
10
20
20
20
20
35
32
41
40
42
40
16
16
American elm
Ulmus americana
High bush blueberry
Vaccinium corymbosum
4
3
2
2
1
1
1
Possumhaw
Viburnum nudum
1
1
Dusty zenobia
Zenobia pulverulenta
ALIVE STEMS1
139
96
135
115
83
40
108
62
75
57
120
75
122
82
114
84
122
81
124
70
168
134
158
124
140
102
TOTAL STEMS
157
157
153
153
93
94
110
110
89
90
141
141
131
131
116
116
132
134
129
129
180
180
172
174
154
155
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix B-7 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Appendix B. (continued)
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix B-8 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
Zone 4
PUM163
PUM164
PUM165
PUM166
PUM167
PUM168
PUM169
PUM170
PUM171
PUM174
PUM175
PUM176
PUM180
Common name
Scientific name
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
Unknown
?
3
16
16
3
5
12
2
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
2
Atlantic white cedar
Chamaecyparis thyoides
27
24
15
13
14
11
17
16
5
5
20
17
50
40
22
21
18
18
13
13
25
24
31
30
43
43
Sweet pepperbush
Clethra alnifolia
1
5
3
1
1
3
2
5
2
5
3
1
2
4
3
2
2
2
2
Silky dogwood
Cornus amomum
Swamp dogwood
Cornus foemina
Titi
Cyrilla racemiflora
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Persimmon
Diospora virginiana
Strawberry bush
Euonymous americana
Green ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Holly
Ilex spp.
Deciduous holly
I. decidua
1
1
1
Inkberry
1. glabra
2
3
1
1
Winterberry
Ilex verticillata
4
1
5
3
2
Virginia sweetspire
Itea virginica
2
1
1
1
8
8
5
3
3
3
2
1
Swamp doghobble
Leucothoe (Eubotrys) racemosa
Spicebush
Lindera benzoin
Fetterbush
Lyonia lucida
1
Sweetbay
Magnolia virginiana
7
6
2
5
1
2
1
1
1
8
7
3
3
5
6
3
3
4
1
5
5
Mulberry
Morus rubra
Unknown gum/tupelo
Nyssa spp.
Water tupelo
N. aquatica
1
5
5
1
1
Swamp tupelo
Nyssa biflora
16
8
11
2
27
24
16
14
13
8
20
13
11
12
16
15
15
12
19
16
6
3
21
9
Red bay
Persea borbonia
5
1
2
5
1
2
4
3
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
Pond pine
Pinus serotina
27
18
66
43
34
24
38
27
56
37
10
8
46
46
62
53
42
41
35
34
29
30
48
46
Sycamore
Platanus occidentalis
Oak
Quercus spp.
2
8
3
1
5
2
2
3
2
8
1
White oak
Q. alba
Laurel oak
Q. laurifolia
2
2
9
5
3
3
3
1
3
15
10
4
3
27
15
16
5
9
1
12
9
Overcup oak
Q. lyrata
Swamp chestnut oak
Q. michauxii
Water oak
Q. nigra
1
Cherrybark oak
Q. pagoda
Willow oak
Quercus phellos
6
1
3
4
2
5
4
6
3
2
3
4
17
12
32
31
11
2
10
3
18
15
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
18
17
19
9
10
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
1
1
6
6
1
1
2
2
Possumhaw
Viburnum nudum
Dusty zenobia
Zenobia pulverulenta
ALIVE STEMS1
124
88
147
85
114
89
108
78
100
66
73
48
105
74
166
144
145
128
152
124
140
107
148
99
175
150
TOTAL STEMS
161
161
155
155
141
136
108
110
127
127
108
107
107
108
172
172
165
166
155
155
146
147
160
160
176
176
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix B-8 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Appendix B. (continued)
Zone 5
PUM110
Zone 4
PUM173
PUM177
Total
Common name
Scientific name
1 st
5th
Unknown
?
221
5th
Serviceberry
Amelanchier canadensis
1 st
5th
Red chokeberry
Aronia arbutifolia
1 st
5th
Paw paw
Asima triloba
3
1
River birch
Betula nigra
10
10
American beautyberry
Callicarpa americana
13
1
Ironwood
Carpinus caroliniana
Water hickory
Carya aquatica
Sugarberry
Celtis laevigata
2
Buttonbush
Cephalanthus occidentalis
13
6
Atlantic white cedar
Chamaecyparis thyoides
416
382
Sweet pepperbush
Clethra alnifolia
57
39
Silky dogwood
Cornus amomum
Swamp dogwood
Cornus foemina
1
1
Titi
Cyrilla racemiflora
4
7
Persimmon
Diospora virginiana
3
1
Strawberry bush
Euonymous americana
10
3
Green ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
1
Holly
Ilex spp.
2
1
Deciduous holly
I. decidua
3
2
Inkberry
I. glabra
4
8
Winterberry
Ilex verticillata
25
6
Virginia sweetspire
Itea virginica
36
38
Swamp doghobble
Leucothoe (Eubotrys) racemosa
4
4
Spicebush
Lindera benzoin
1
8
Fetterbush
Lyonia lucida
9
6
Sweetbay
Magnolia virginiana
102
89
Mulberry
Morus rubra
Unknown gum/tupelo
Nyssa spp.
1
Water tupelo
N. aquatica
9
9
Swamp tupelo
Nyssa biflora
483
339
Red bay
Persea borbonia
31
11
Pond pine
Pinus serotina
937
762
Sycamore
Platanus occidentalis
Oak
Quercus spp.
69
1
White oak
Q. alba
1
1
Laurel oak
Q. laurifolia
166
84
Overcup oak
Q. lyrata
5
3
Swamp chestnut oak
Q. michauxii
4
1
Water oak
Q. nigra
1
Cherrybark oak
Q. pagoda
1
Willow oak
Quercus phellos
211
120
Dwarf azalea
Rhododendron atlanticum
1
10
Swamp azalea
Rhododendron viscosum
1
Swamp rose
Rosa palustris
4
1
Pond cypress
Taxodium ascendens
17
15
Bald cypress
Taxodium distichum
459
455
American elm
Ulmus americana
1
6
High bush blueberry
Vaccinium corymbosum
17
18
Possumhaw
Viburnum nudum
2
Dusty zenobia
Zenobia pulverulenta
4
4
ALIVE STEMS
3,305
2,401
TOTAL STEMS
3,638
3,648
Zone 5
PUM110
PUM172
PUM173
PUM177
PUM181
PUM185
Total
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
9
3
1
2
10
10
5
1
13
1
42
2
3
2
2
20
3
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
26
5
3
1
3
2
3
1
1
10
3
3
1
1
1
2
1
2
3
15
2
1
1
4
4
4
4
8
3
11
8
2
2
7
6
4
4
32
23
4
1
1
2
1
4
2
2
1
1
2
3
2
1
6
1
3
1
3
6
1
1
4
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
10
11
2
1
1
4
1
8
20
17
1
1
6
4
1
3
3
3
2
7
6
4
4
1
2
17
15
9
8
17
14
12
11
16
12
4
1
12
9
70
55
7
4
3
4
20
18
9
6
26
17
4
2
69
51
1
1
1
1
5
2
11
11
16
13
4
9
6
5
3
5
32
17
8
9
5
13
6
24
15
16
14
10
15
89
63
12
11
25
12
17
13
11
13
11
7
76
56
1
1
11
6
17
9
23
19
29
12
12
9
30
15
122
70
4
4
12
12
17
17
8
9
8
8
40
40
89
90
1
1
1
3
2
1
2
4
1
2
7
11
3
3
8
7
1
1
1
2
13
13
112
58
128
79
120
91
136
89
11583
115
82
726
482
119
119
133
134
126
126
151
152
142
142
124
125
795
798
Zone 6
PUM134
PUM145
PUM146
PUM148
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
12
4
3
6
1
10
4
1
1
3
2
14
15
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
2
3
1
1
1
5
2
3
15
8
5
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
3
2
7
6
4
3
6
1
1
4
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
10
11
2
1
7
4
12
8
20
17
7
1
6
4
6
3
3
3
3
1
2
2
1
2
2
89
53
36
4
38
22
59
35
105
102
84
84
44
44
91
92
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix B-9 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Appendix B. (concluded)
Gum Swamp Run Buffer Plot
A
Zone 6
C
D
Total
Common name
Scientific name
1 st
5th
Unknown
?
25
5th
Serviceberry
Amelanchier canadensis
1 st
5th
Red chokeberry
Aronia arbutifolia
1 st
5th
Paw paw
Asima triloba
4
River birch
Betula nigra
1
American beautyberry
Callicarpa americana
6
Ironwood
Carpinus caroliniana
12
4
Water hickory
Carya aquatica
Sugarberry
Celtis laevigata
Buttonbush
Cephalanthus occidentalis
3
2
Atlantic white cedar
Chamaecyparis thyoides
14
15
Sweet pepperbush
Clethra alnifolia
3
2
Silky dogwood
Cornus amomum
3
Swamp dogwood
Cornus foemina
Titi
Cyrilla racemiflora
1
Persimmon
Diospora virginiana
4
4
Strawberry bush
Euonymous americana
1
1
Green ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
28
10
Holly
Ilex spp.
3
1
Deciduous holly
I. decidua
3
3
Inkberry
I. glabra
Winterberry
Ilex verticillata
Virginia sweetspire
Itea virginica
1
1
Swamp doghobble
Leucothoe (Eubotrys) racemosa
5
5
Spicebush
Lindera benzoin
1
1
Fetterbush
Lyonia lucida
Sweetbay
Magnolia virginiana
4
1
Mulberry
Morus rubra
2
1
Unknown gum/tupelo
Nyssa spp.
1
8
Water tupelo
N. aquatica
1
9
Swamp tupelo
Nyssa biflora
2
3
Red bay
Persea borbonia
4
8
Pond pine
Pinus serotina
Sycamore
Platanus occidentalis
Oak
Quercus spp.
13
White oak
Q. alba
15
5
Laurel oak
Q. laurifolia
1
1
Overcup oak
Q. lyrata
2
1
Swamp chestnut oak
Q. michauxii
2
1
Water oak
Q. nigra
19
16
Cherrybark oak
Q. pagoda
12
8
Willow oak
Quercus phellos
39
25
Dwarf azalea
Rhododendron atlanticum
Swamp azalea
Rhododendron viscosum
Swamp rose
Rosa palustris
1
Pond cypress
Taxodium ascendens
Bald cypress
Taxodium distichum
3
3
American elm
Ulmus americana
9
2
High bush blueberry
Vaccinium corymbosum
1
2
Possumhaw
Viburnum nudum
2
Dusty zenobia
Zenobia pulverulenta
ALIVE STEMS
222
114
TOTAL STEMS
324
322
Gum Swamp Run Buffer Plot
A
B
C
D
E
F
Total
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
1 st
5th
2
4
11
3
7
6
33
1
5
6
5
7
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
7
11
14
1
3
1
11
1
3
3
30
26
3
3
1
1
1
1
5
5
1
1
2
1
8
1
8
10
9
16
9
1
27
36
1
4
3
4
4
8
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
3
7
7
25
27
24
20
21
19
20
10
6
9
103
92
1
2
3
2
4
3
3
6
1
3
7
4
10
11
12
12
23
23
3
56
53
16
25
53
65
47
39
51
43
81
48
24
24
272
244
16
28
53
67
47
52
51
51
81
84
24
31
272
307
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix B-10 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

APPENDIX C
Selected Fifth Annual (2018) 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 almost all photos. The photos are identified with the station number (see
Figure 2), direction of view, and date taken.
PLPS 5: northeast, top photo 31 October 2018, bottom photo 23 October 2014.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix C-1 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

PLPS 6: northwest, top photo 31 October 2018, bottom photo 23 October 2014.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix C-2 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

PLPS 14: southeast, top photo 31 October 2018, bottom photo 22 October 2014.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix C-3 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

PLPS 15: northwest, top photo 31 October 2018, bottom photo 22 October 2014.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix C-4 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

PLPS 16: northwest, top photo 31 October 2018, bottom photo 22 October 2014.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix C-5 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

PT,. .1.Y.". 1. .
Tf-
�. �' � •., rf��s��`F'�'{eir' 'L�.�� ;r','+F �.'V.r .'J' �Ir I`jjr ����. i � .ilyi
-�. {f ,i�. /�} t.� J. '�11+' 1{37 {����.'•I3i! � r1 �.. �•
Iy ' +.•`: r,{�{; lA ��;���'1 �F'Fk! 'i. .is� .�� rl'r,l 7I"i � �.1� ii ��;�,
,, ti
�'"��_•..._�.- .:� � .- .�' =:ger:' ~'x `�

F�
y
PLPS 17: northeast, top photo 31 October 2018, bottom photo 22 October 2014.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix C-7 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

PLPS 17: northwest, top photo 31 October 2018, bottom photo 22 October 2014.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix C-8 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

x r J'r ja°s"ti r -tk._r w" c
k,
4iii
rp
4 `
I
Oh.

ior
070
gi
fin' . A
d A i r �Y
ri r 7
. VP
1

PLPS 19: northeast, top photo 31 October 2018, bottom photo 23 October 2014.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix C-11 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

4

PLPS 20: northeast, top photo 31 October 2018, bottom photo 22 October 2014.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix C-13 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

PLPS 20: northwest, top photo 31 October 2018, bottom photo 22 October 2014.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix C-14 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

PLPS 23: southeast, top photo 31 October 2018, bottom photo 22 October 2014.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix C-15 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

PLPS 25: northeast, top photo 31 October 2018, bottom photo 22 October 2014.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix C-16 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

APPENDIX D
Soil Descriptions at Selected Well Locations

P and U Lands Phase 3
Non -hydric Soil Field Investigation at Eight Wells
September and November 2017
A field investigation of the soil and areas surrounding the eight wells (PUM113, 115, 116, 129,170, 175,
187, and 195) which have not met the hydrology restoration criterion was conducted on 21 September
2017.Complete soil profile data were collected at each of the eight wells 7-9 November 2017. The
Beaufort County soil survey shows three wells (PUM115, 116, and 129) underlain by Wasda soil, three
wells (PUM170, 175, and 187) by Dare soil, one well (PUM113) by Portsmouth soil, and one well
(PUM195) by Ponzer soil; all of these soil series are considered hydric soils.
Prior to the field investigation on 21 September, 12 rainfall events were documented by the Bay City rain
gauge since 1 September 2017. Of the 12 events, nine were less than 0.1 inch. The most rainfall
recorded during this time was 1.24 inches on 1 September. None of the eight wells recorded water within
12 inches of the soil surface on the day of the field investigation in September. At each well, the soil
profile was explored in the immediate vicinity of the well to a depth of at least 15 to 20 inches. Wetland
hydroperiod occurrences, descriptions of soil profiles, and the hydric soil indicators that were assigned
are shown in Table X.
PUM113
The landscape surrounding the well in September showed dense clumps of drier vegetation (Solidago
rugosa, Eupatorium capillifolium) to the north to the berm, east to 200 feet from well, and west to 50 feet
from the well (Photos 1, 2, 4). To the south, a vegetation change to Scirpus cyperinus, the brown
vegetation beyond biologist, was seen towards PUM114 (Photo 3). In Photo 3, the biologist is standing on
a slight elevation change where the soil was visibly wetter. The soil profile at PUM113 showed evidence
of disturbance and mixing (Photo 5). The matrix for each layer described contained at least two different
colors. The first 15 inches of soil had both redox depletions and concentrations and met hydric soil
indicator F3 (depleted matrix). The well is mapped as Portsmouth soil, which is typically sandy loam for
the first 23 inches, picking up sandy clay loam textures after 23 inches. The top 15 inches of soil profile
was determined to be sandy clay loam, followed by loamy sand. The well was installed near a ditch that
was filled during the construction and a berm that was built for the Phase 3 site, which may explain
elevational differences and soil mixing.
Photo 1. To north from PUM113.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
Monitoring Year 4 — 8 Well Memo
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
Fifth Annual and Summary Report
Photo 2. To east from PUM113
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
November 2017 updated early 2018
Appendix D-2 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
March 2019

Photo 3. PUM113, to south. Biologist standing
on line of vegetation change with saturated soil.
Photo 5. Soil profile at PUM113.
PUM115
Photo 4. To west from PUM113.
Soil was saturated at the surface 30 feet north of PUM115 with areas of standing water near the Gum
Swamp Run stream valley; in Photo 6 near the bay tree. The elevation difference between the well and
stream valley can be seen in Photos 6 and 7. In Photo 7, the biologist in the photo is approximately 3 feet
higher in elevation than the biologist who took the photo. Based on vegetation, areas directly east, south,
and west appeared to be drier than the stream valley. Black mucky sandy loam was noted within the first
8 inches followed by 2 inches of mostly very dark or black sand that had clumps of 10YR 7/3 pale yellow,
although it was difficult to determine if a chroma of 2 was more accurate. Black organic streaks and redox
concentrations began at 10 inches. The soil met hydric soil indicators A7 and F1 (5 cm mucky mineral
and loamy mucky mineral).
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
Monitoring Year 4 — 8 Well Memo
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
Fifth Annual and Summary Report
2 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
November 2017 updated early 2018
Appendix D-3 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
March 2019

Photo 6. To north from PUM115.
Photo 8. To south from PUM115.
Photo 10. Soil profile at PUM115.
PUM116
Photo 7. Standing at bay tree (shown on the right
in Photo 6) showing —3 -foot elevation difference
just north of PUM115.
Photo 9. To west from PUM115.
Scirpus cyperinus, an obligate wetland species, was abundant in the areas around the well in all
directions, as shown in Photos 11-14. PUM114, a well that had wetland hydroperiods in previous years, is
located just north of PUM116; the Gum Swamp Run stream valley is to the south. The top 2 inches of the
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 3 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Monitoring Year 4 - 8 Well Memo November 2017 updated early 2018
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix D-4 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

soil profile seemed disturbed, with 40 percent of the matrix occurring as light gray redox depletions.
Beneath this layer was black mucky sandy loam with 5 percent light gray redox depletions to 15 inches.
The soil met hydric soil indicators A7, F1, and F3.
Photo 11. To north towards PUM114 from
PUM116.
Photo 13. To south from PUM116.
Photo 15. Soil profile at PUM116.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
Monitoring Year 4 — 8 Well Memo
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
Fifth Annual and Summary Report
Photo 12. Southeast from PUM116 to the Gum
Swamp Run stream valley.
Photo 14. To west from PUM116.
4 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
November 2017 updated early 2018
Appendix D-5 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
March 2019

PUM129
PUM129 was installed just north of the unplugged Bay City No. 4 roadside ditch. A vegetation change can
be seen behind the well in Photo 16 when compared to the vegetation in Photo 17 looking in the opposite
direction. The tree line in Photo 17 is along the roadside ditch edge. A strip about 70 feet wide that
borders the ditch to the north, which includes PUM129, was a haul road used by large equipment during
the construction of Phase 3 (Photo 18). This area experienced soil disturbance and compaction from
construction; in addition, the soil may also be affected by proximity to the unplugged roadside ditch (per
NRCS 1998 Scope and Effect Guide, saturation of Wasda soil may show ditch effects from 85 to 105 feet
away depending on ditch depth). Other wells, near this strip, such as PUM128 and PUM130, had wetland
hydroperiods. The soil profile taken at PUM129 met hydric soil indicators A7 and F1 (Photo 19). A soil
profile dug about 40 feet south of PUM129 had a bright orange color within the top 12 inches and did not
meet a hydric soil indicator (Photo 20).
Photo 16. To north with PUM129 in left corner,
marker pole is in the middle.
Photo 17. To south from PUM129.
Photo 18. A screen shot of Bay City No. 4 and Phase 3 from January 2014 Google Earth photo.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 5 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Monitoring Year 4 — 8 Well Memo November 2017 updated early 2018
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix D-6 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Photo 19. Soil profile at PUM129.
PUM170
Photo 20. Soil profile just south of PUM129.
The soil at PUM170 was dry, friable muck with wood chips comprising less than 1 percent. The area just
west of County Line Road 2 has pockets of both thick and sparse vegetation, as can be seen in Photo 21
with sparse vegetation shown in the bottom left. East of the well, the number and size of sparsely
vegetated areas increases closer to the west roadside beside County Line Road 2. The sparsely
vegetated areas appeared dry close to PUM170 and PUM175. Moving north towards PUM176, crusty
algal mats were observed in the sparsely vegetated areas, indicators of periods of standing water.
Photo 21. To north. PUM170 marker pole circled
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
Monitoring Year 4 — 8 Well Memo
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
Fifth Annual and Summary Report
Photo 22. Thicker vegetation to south from
PUM170.
6 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
November 2017 updated early 2018
Appendix D-7 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
March 2019

PUM175
Similar to PUM170, the soil profile consisted of friable muck and areas with sparse vegetation, which are
shown in Photos 24 and 25.
Photo 24. PUM175 and mixed degree of cover. Photo 25. Soil profile at PUM175.
PUM1R7
PUM187 is located at a higher elevation in an area approximately 75 feet running north to south and 50
feet east to west as observed on as -built figures sent by Jonathan T. Ricketts, Inc. and in the field. In
Photo 27, lower elevation and a vegetation change are shown on the left. Photos 28 and 29 both face the
same direction, and show a change in the elevation, with the well on a gradient and the debris pile
(vegetation in distance to right of well) on the highest point. The soil showed signs of drainage with
uncoated sand grains and redox depletions in the top 12 inches of the soil. Soil profiles were dug near the
debris mound and in the saturated soil approximately 35 feet north of the well. The soil near the debris
pile had increased uncoated sand grains and redox depletions. The soil in the wetter area did not contain
uncoated sand grains or redox depletions.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
Monitoring Year 4 — 8 Well Memo
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
Fifth Annual and Summary Report
7 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
November 2017 updated early 2018
Appendix D-8 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
March 2019
4V
Photo 23. Soil profile at
PUM170.
PUM175
Similar to PUM170, the soil profile consisted of friable muck and areas with sparse vegetation, which are
shown in Photos 24 and 25.
Photo 24. PUM175 and mixed degree of cover. Photo 25. Soil profile at PUM175.
PUM1R7
PUM187 is located at a higher elevation in an area approximately 75 feet running north to south and 50
feet east to west as observed on as -built figures sent by Jonathan T. Ricketts, Inc. and in the field. In
Photo 27, lower elevation and a vegetation change are shown on the left. Photos 28 and 29 both face the
same direction, and show a change in the elevation, with the well on a gradient and the debris pile
(vegetation in distance to right of well) on the highest point. The soil showed signs of drainage with
uncoated sand grains and redox depletions in the top 12 inches of the soil. Soil profiles were dug near the
debris mound and in the saturated soil approximately 35 feet north of the well. The soil near the debris
pile had increased uncoated sand grains and redox depletions. The soil in the wetter area did not contain
uncoated sand grains or redox depletions.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
Monitoring Year 4 — 8 Well Memo
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
Fifth Annual and Summary Report
7 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
November 2017 updated early 2018
Appendix D-8 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
March 2019

Photo 26. From Gum Road to east. PUM187
marker pole is circled in black.
Photo 28. From PUM187 to southwest; elevation
difference near debris pile.
Photo 30. From 35 feet northeast of PUM187 view
Photo 27. To east. Lower elevation to left side of
photo and saturated soil surface; ground slopes
up to right side of photo with unsaturated soil.
Photo 29. From 35 feet northeast of PUM187,
to southwest. Photo taken in wet area with
standing water and wetland vegetation.
Photo 31. Soil profile at PUM187.
to northeast; surface water and wetland species.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 8
Monitoring Year 4 — 8 Well Memo
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix D-9
Fifth Annual and Summary Report
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
November 2017 updated early 2018
PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
March 2019

PUM195
The well appeared to be drier based on vegetation and the lack of hydrologic indicators in the vicinity; as
one walks toward the well, the elevation is higher than other nearby areas and one can see over the top
of the perimeter berm. This higher area near this well was estimated to vary between 40 to 60 feet in
diameter. During the September 2017 investigation, Solidago rugosa was present all around the well with
a mix of Solidago rugosa, Scirpus cyperinus, and Juncus species nearby. Redox depletions and
concentrations were observed in the first 7 inches of the soil profile, indicators of rapid water movement
through the soil. The lack of hydrologic restoration success at this well could be due to drainage effects
from either the perimeter canal or the closest interior ditch; however, the interior ditches are plugged and
other wells in vicinity closer to interior ditches have met the hydrology criterion (e.g., PUM191, PUM199,
and PUM201) and the keyway installed in the perimeter berm appears to be an effective preventer of
lateral drainage effects from the perimeter canal (e.g., PUM192 and PUM103 have both met hydrology
criterion); so the higher elevation is the likely cause of no wetland hydroperiods.
Photo 32. From 30 feet northwest; PUM195 marker Photo 33. From 50 feet west; PUM195 marker
pole is circled. is circled.
Photo 37. Soil profile at PUM195.
SUMMARY
All eight wells in Phase 3, which have not met the hydrology restoration success criterion to date, are
mapped as underlain by hydric soil and met at least one hydric soil indicator during this investigation;
however, it is possible the soils at some of the wells are relict hydric soils.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
Monitoring Year 4 — 8 Well Memo
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3
Fifth Annual and Summary Report
9 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
November 2017 updated early 2018
Appendix D-10 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
March 2019

Of the eight wells, PUM170 and 175 soil profiles matched the soil profile description from the county soil
survey. Both wells are located on the Dare soil series, which is described in the survey as typically muck
down to 60 inches, followed by sand and loamy sand textures. Muck was observed down to at least 24
inches, but the material was friable and indicates the soil was not saturated for extended periods. During
all rainfall conditions, PUM170 had a wetland hydroperiod for more than 10 percent of the growing
season for all four years (2014-2017); however, when periods of above normal rainfall were excluded,
PUM170 did not have a wetland hydroperiod for 10 percent of the growing season in 2016. PUM175 did
not have a wetland hydroperiod for 10 percent of the growing season from 2014-2017.
Also mapped as in Dare soil, PUM187 had a mucky mineral character only in the top 3 inches of the
profile followed by sandy loam and loamy sand. At this location, there could be a band of a different soil
series, perhaps Cape Fear fine sandy loam, which is a better match for the actual PUM187 soil profile
than Dare muck; Cape Fear is not a completely uncommon soil series along the upper reaches of some
Beaufort County creeks and streams. Google Earth historic photos and LiDAR data indicate the upper
basin of the original South Creek extended into the portion of Phase 3 between the north end of Gum and
Rodman roads; PUM187 lies just outside this upper basin/valley signature. Since the site was previously
used for silviculture, the native organic materials likely oxidized, other native soil characteristics were
altered, and trees were removed from the site more than once. Only a soil scientist would be able to
officially describe the soil profile of a drained Dare muck, e.g., how much oxidation and subsidence would
change a muck to a sandy loam. PUM187 had one wetland hydroperiod for more than 10 percent of the
growing season in 2015.
The Ponzer soil series is described as muck down to 24 inches, underlain by silt loam and silt clay
textures. The soil profile at PUM195 did not contain muck and had sandy clay loam, sandy loam, and
sand in the top 24 inches. It is possible that like PUM187, the original soil series is something other than
what shows in the soil survey as this location is also along the outside edge of the South Creek upper
basin/valley signature. And it is also likely that previous human activities such as movement of soil during
active forestry practices, or recent construction during restoration severely altered the soil at PUM195. No
wetland hydroperiods during the growing season were recorded at PUM195.
The Wasda soil series is described as muck for the first 14 inches, followed by a layer of clay loam to 42
inches, then sandy loam and sand to 74 inches. The three wells mapped as underlain by Wasda soil
series (PUM115, 116, and 129) lacked the top layers of muck, but had mucky mineral layers at the
beginning of the soil profiles and had more sandy textures than a typical Wasda soil. PUM115 and 116
had a wetland hydroperiod for more than 10 percent of the growing season in 2015; PUM129 had a
wetland hydroperiod for more than10 percent of the growing season in 2015 and 2017.
The soil textures at PUM113 were flipped compared to the soil survey description of typical Portsmouth
soil, suggesting alteration to the natural soil profile. A typical Portsmouth soil has sandy loam to 23
inches, followed by layers of sandy clay loam; PUM113 had sandy clay loam and sandy clay to 15 inches,
followed by loamy sand. Due to the proximity to a constructed berm and filled ditch as part of the
restoration activity in addition to past silviculture and drainage, the soil around PUM113 was disturbed.
PUM113 experienced a wetland hydroperiod for more than 10 percent of the growing season in 2015.
Five of the eight wells (PUM113, 115, 116, 187, and 195) are drier likely due to topographic differences or
disturbances which result from construction of the site. It is possible three wells (PUM170, 175, and 195)
are drier due to ditch effect, although it was difficult to confidently determine a cause. At PUM129, the
natural soil profile and its response to saturation was likely altered by frequent disturbance of large
equipment during construction and/or adjacency to an unplugged roadside ditch.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 10 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Monitoring Year 4 — 8 Well Memo November 2017 updated early 2018
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix D-11 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table D-1. Summary of occurrence of hydroperiods during normal and below normal WETS rainfall and soil descriptions for wells in Phase 3 that did not meet the hydrology restoration criterion; rounding up would allow PUM116 and
PUM187 to meet the criteron. The PDSI and PHDI drought status for each year, mapped soil unit and its description where each well is located, and field observations are also included. (WH=wetland hydroperiod, NN= nearly normal,
BN= below normal, MBN= much below normal, AN= above normal, and MAN= much above normal). Field observations were made on 21 September 2017. Blue highlighted cells indicate a hydroperiod that met the stated success
criterion for the geomorphic position in the landscape .
Note: The longest hydroperiod at each well is depicted as a percentage of the 282 -day (or 283 -day for leap years) growing season when the water table was recorded as -12" or above for each monitoring year.
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix D-12 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
# of
% of
Mapped
Hydric soil
Years
Years
Soil Unit as
Official Soil Description of
indicators
Well
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
with
with WH
Shown on
Mapped Soil Unit
2017 Field Observations
for soil
WH
for All
County
profiles
Years
Survey
0-12 in. (10YR 2/1) fine sandy
loam
Soil at the well showed signs of disturbance. Sandy clay loam to sandy clay textures were documented
12-19 in. (10YR 5/1) fine sandy
from 0-15 in.; 15-20 in. of the soil was described as loamy sand. Colors throughout the profile were also
113
0.0 11.7 5.7 9.2 9.2
1
20
Portsmouth
loam
mixed in the first 15 in. with varying percentages of the 10YR 3/1 matrix, redox concentrations, and
F3
19-23 in. (10YR 5/1 and 4/1) fine
depletions. The OSD for Portsmouth shows a texture change of sandy clay loam with lenses of sandy
sandy loam (10YR 6/8 and 7/8)
loam and sandy clay after 23 in.
common medium iron masses
0-6 in. (10YR 2/1) muck
The first 8 in. of the profile contained muck and sandy loam soil. Just below this layer, 2 in. of sand with
115 0.0 12.4 0.0 0 0.0
1
20
Wasda
a mixture of a 10YR 3/1 matix, 10YR 2/1, and 10YR 7/3 was documented. From 10-16 in., the texture
A7, F1
6-14 in. (5YR 2/2) muck
changed to sandy clay with a matrix of 10YR 6/2, reddish dark brown (5YR 3/3) concentrations, black
streaks, and small pieces of 10YR 7/2 and 7/3.
14-20 in. (10YR 4/2) clay loam
The top 2 in. of the soil had a matrix of 60% 10YR 3/1 and 40% 10YR 7/1. From 2-15 in., a layer of 10YR
116 0.0 12.8 7.1 9.6 12.8
2
40
Wasda
(see previous)
2/1 friable mucky sandy loam with 5% 10YR 7/2 depletions was documented. Loamy sand with 60% of
A7, F1, F3
matrix 10YR 7/2 and a mixture of 10YR 4/2 at 35%, 10 YR 2/1 at 5%, and less than 1 % 10YR 6/6 redox
concentrations.
Mucky mineral soil and small amounts of wood chips were found throughout the first 22 in. of the profile.
129 5.3 12.8 4.9 10.3 8.5
2
40
Wasda
(see previous)
The texture ranged from sandy loam to loam with 0-7 in. 10YR 2/1, 7-12 in. with an even mixture of 10YR
A7, F1
2/1 and 3/2, and 12-22 in. 10YR 3/1.
0-4 in. slightly decomposed
leaves and twigs
175 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0
0
0
Dare
4-16 in. (N 2/) broken face and
10YR 2/1 muck was observed down to 30 in. with saturation at 22 in. Muck was friable through much of
A2, A3
rubbed muck
the profile.
16-60 in. (5YR 2/2) broken face
and rubbed muck
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix D-12 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019

Table D-1. (concluded)
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix D-13 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019
0-3 in. was 10YR 2/1 mucky sandy loam with 20-30% of uncoated sand grains. From 3-12 in., 80% of the
sandy loam soil was 10YR 2/1 with 20% 10YR 7/1 depletions. From 12-18 in., 75% of the soil was 10YR
187
0.0 12.8 5.3 9.9 22.3
2
40
Dare
(see previous)
4/6 loamy sand with 20% 10YR 2/1 and 5% 10YR 7/1 depletions. The last 3 in. of the profile had 90%
F7
10YR 7/2 with the remaining 10% a mixture of 10YR 5/2 and 10YR 5/6 redox concentrations. Saturation
was observed at 12 in.
0-7 in. (10YR 4/2) sandy loam
Field observations were made in March 2019. Well is located within the 25ft offset and is in similar
position to PUM113. 0-8 in. was 10 YR 2/1 saturated sandy loam containing 5-10 percent organic
192
0.0 5.7 7.4 9.6 12.1
1
20
Tomotley
7-12 in. (10YR 7/1) fine sandy
material such as roots and leaf litter. From 8-15 in., soil is 10 YR 2/2, fine sandy loam with lighter mottles
F3
of 10 YR 5/4 present (20%). 15-21 in., soil is 10 YR 4/2 sandy clay loam with redox features and some
loam
dark streaking. Similar profiles with the same landscape positioning, 30 ft, east and west, indicate
12-42 in. (2.5YR 6/2) sandy clay
previous disturbance and compaction which may provide some explanation for PUM192's performance.
loam
0-9 in. (N 2/) broken face and
rubbed muck, 35% mineral
195
0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0
0
0
Ponzer
content
Depletions and redox concentrations were noted 0-7 in. and 10.5-20 in. Both layers of soils had a sandy
F6
clay loam texture. The layer from 7-10.5 in. was a 10YR 2/2 mucky sandy loam layer.
9-26 in. (10YR 2/1) broken face,
(N 2/) rubbed muck, 30% mineral
content
PDSI AN MAN MAN NN NN
PHDI AN MAN MAN NN NN
P and U Lands Restoration Site Phase 3 Appendix D-13 PCS Phosphate Company, Inc.
Fifth Annual and Summary Report March 2019