Wetland Delineation Report for the Little Hanaford Road Property Centralia, Washington

Transcription

1 Wetland Delineation Report for the Little Hanaford Road Property Centralia, Washington Prepared for: City of Centralia Public Works Department 1100 N. Tower Avenue Centralia, Washington (206) Prepared by: Ecological Land Services, Inc rd Avenue, Suite 220 Longview, Washington (360) Project Number February 2015

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION...1 METHODOLOGY...1 SITE DESCRIPTION...2 VEGETATION...2 SOILS...3 HYDROLOGY...3 NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY...4 LEWIS COUNTY WETLAND MAPPING...4 CONCLUSIONS...4 WETLAND CATEGORIZATION... 4 WATER TYPING... 4 WETLAND AND STREAM BUFFER REQUIREMENTS... 4 LIMITATIONS...6 REFERENCES...7 FIGURES & PHOTOPLATES Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Wetland Rating Form 1 Figure 7 Wetland Rating Form 2 Figure 8 Wetland Rating Form 3 Vicinity Map Site Map Soil Survey Map National Wetlands Inventory Map Lewis County Wetland Inventory Map Figure 9 Wetland Rating Form 4 Photoplates Site Photos APPENDIX A Wetland Determination Data Forms APPENDIX B Western Washington Wetland Rating Form City of Centralia, Little Hanaford Road Ecological Land Services, Inc. Wetland Delineation Report i February 2015

3 SIGNATURE PAGE The information and data in this report were compiled and prepared under the supervision and direction of the undersigned. Joanne Bartlett, PWS Professional Biologist City of Centralia, Little Hanaford Road Ecological Land Services, Inc. Wetland Delineation Report ii February 2015

4 INTRODUCTION Ecological Land Services, Inc. (ELS) was contracted by the City of Centralia, Public Works Department to complete a wetland delineation and report for the Little Hanaford Road properties, parcel numbers and , within a portion of Section 4, Township 14 North, Range 2 West of the Willamette Meridian, near Centralia, Washington (Figure 1). This report summarizes findings of the wetland delineation according to the Lewis County Code (LCC), Title 17 Land Use and Development Regulations, Chapter 17.35A Critical Areas, Article IV (A) Wetlands and Article IV (B) Aquatic Habitats. METHODOLOGY The wetland delineation followed the Routine Determination Method according to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wetland Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast Region (Version 2.0) (U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, 2010). The Routine Determination Method examines three parameters vegetation, soils, and hydrology to determine if wetlands exist in a given area. Hydrology is critical in determining what is wetland, but is often difficult to assess because hydrologic conditions can change periodically ( hourly, daily, or seasonally). Consequently, it is necessary to determine if hydrophytic vegetation and hydric soils are present, which would indicate that water is present for long enough duration to support a wetland plant community. By definition, wetlands are those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands are regulated as Waters of the United States by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), as Waters of the State by the Washington Department of Ecology (DOE), and locally by Lewis County. To determine the presence or absence of wetlands on this property, ELS biologists collected data on vegetation, hydrology, and soils. During three site visits conducted November 14, 2014, December 18, 2014, and January 30, 2015, one wetland was identified across the northern ¾ s of the property extending from the toe of slope at the south end to China Creek, which runs along the north edge of the properties. Because most of these properties is composed of wetland, only the southern boundary of the wetland was delineated. Three areas of upland were identified in the wetland and were delineated to document the locations of the upland. The wetland boundary was delineated using consecutively numbered fluorescent flagging labeled WETLAND DELINEATION and pink and orange pin flags. Eleven test plots were conducted to verify the wetland boundary delineation but they were not marked in the field to reduce the overall number of wire pin flags within the mowed pasture area. Wetland boundaries were determined through breaks in topography, changes in vegetation, and evidence of surface hydrology. Vegetation, hydrology, and soil data was collected to verify the wetland boundary delineations (Appendix A). The wetland boundary flags and test plots were located using a Magellan Handheld GPS unit to show the wetland on the site map (Figure 2). The ditches in the wetland are visible on the aerial photos so were identified using aerial photo interpretation and during field delineation. City of Centralia, Little Hanaford Road Ecological Land Services, Inc. Wetland Delineation Report 1 February 2015

5 SITE DESCRIPTION The City of Centralia properties are located south of Little Hanaford Road just outside the eastern limits of the city (Figure 1). They are each composed of rectangles with the irregular property lines around the western property. The north edge of the properties is defined by Little Hanaford Road, a small residential development on Creekside Court, and a larger formerly farmed property west of the residential development (Figure 2). Additional residential development is located south, east, and west of the properties. Lundberg Road lies along the east edge of the properties and a mixed deciduous and coniferous forest lays along the south edge of the eastern property (Photoplates 1 and 2). The property itself is composed of mowed pasture, which is mostly at the base of the moderately steep slopes down from the south (Photoplates 3 through 6). The mowed pasture extends to the south bank of China Creek (Type F water), which runs along the north edge of the property (Photoplates 8 and 11). The property is composed mostly of wetland that lies within the low pasture but there are areas where the wetland extends a short distance up the south slope (Figure 2). There are upland islands located on the west half of the property and at the north edge along China Creek (Photoplates 6 and 9). Wetland extends to the adjacent north properties (Photoplate 8) and Little Hanaford Road and includes a roadside ditch at the north edge (Photoplate 11). Because the wetland extends to the properties and road to the north, the north boundary was not flagged as part of the delineation. The southern boundary was flagged and the upland islands were flagged to identify their locations within the wetland. The wetland appears to be partially fed by flood waters from China Creek through breaks in the low berm that lies along the north edge. A farm ditch crosses the south half of the wetland and conveys water from wetlands upslope into China Creek (Figure 2). This ditch curves to the north near the middle of the property and drains directly into China Creek. The wetland extends east to Lundberg Road (Figures 2 and 6). It is separated from wetlands east of Lundberg Road by the road itself and by a deep ditch along the west side of the road. There is no culvert under the road to connect the wetlands but there is a culvert under Lundberg Road for China Creek. The wetland extends a short distance onto a developed property to the north (north of the stream) and extends west along China Creek to Gold Road. VEGETATION The mowed pasture wetland was sampled at Test Plots 2, 5, 8, and 12. Each of the test plots is dominated by reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW) with lower percentages of mowed Nootka rose (Rosa nutkan a, FAC) and soft rush (Juncus effusus, FACW) present at Test Plot 8 (Photoplate 5). Unidentified sedge (Carex sp. FACW to OBL) were observed in several locations in the wetland. The species was not identified because of mowed conditions. The upland areas lie mostly on the slopes to the south and on the upland islands (Photoplates 3, 4, 5, 7, 9 and 10). The uplands on the slope are dominated by reed canarygrass, tall fescue (Schedonorus phoenix, FAC), orchard grass ( Dactylis glomerata, FACU), Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis, FAC), and soft rush. Lower percentages of mowed Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus, FACU), hairy cat s ear ( Hypochaeris radicata, FACU), dandelion ( Taraxacum City of Centralia, Little Hanaford Road Ecological Land Services, Inc. Wetland Delineation Report 2 February 2015

6 officinale, FACU), English plantain ( Plantago lanceolata, FACU), and bracken fern ( Pteridium aquilinum, FACU) are present in the partially un-mowed area where Test Plot 2 was conducted (Photoplate 2). The dominant vegetation found onsite is recorded on the attached wetland determination data forms (A ppendix A). The indicator status, following the common and scientific names, indicates how likely a species is to be found in wetlands. Listed from most likely to least likely to be found in wetlands, the indicator status categories are: OBL (obligate wetland) Almost always occur in wetlands. FACW (facultative wetland) Usually occur in wetlands, but may occur in non-wetlands. FAC (facultative) Occur in wetlands and non-wetlands. FACU (facultative upland) Usually occur in non-wetlands, but may occur in wetlands. UPL (obligate upland) Almost never occur in wetlands. NI (no indicator) Status not yet determined. SOILS As referenced on the U.S.D.A. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS 2014) website, Lacamas silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes (119) is mapped in a narrow strip along the south edge of the property and Reed silty clay loam (172) is mapped across the remainder of the property (Figure 3). The mapped Lacamas and Reed soils are classified as hydric (NRCS 2014). The mapped limits of the Reed soil lies in close proximity to the delineated wetland boundary. Areas mapped as nonhydric soils do not necessarily mean that an area is or is not a wetland hydrology, hydrophytic vegetation, and hydric soils must all be present to classify an area as a wetland. The evaluated wetland soils were composed of silt loam to silty clay loam profiles that exhibited black to grayish (10YR 4/1 to 5Y 4/1) soil matrix colors in both soil layers. There were redoximorphic concentrations in the subsurface layers that cover 5 to 20 percent of the matrix (10 YR 4/4 to 10YR 4/6). These profiles were determined to meet hydric soil indicators Depleted Below Dard Surface (A11) and Depleted Matrix (F3). The evaluated upland soils were primarily dark brown (10YR 4/2 to 2.5Y 5/2) silt loam and silty clay loam. Some of the upland soil holes revealed depleted matrix chromas in the subsurface layers and were determined to meet the hydric soil indicator F3. The areas in which these profiles were conducted are determined to be nonwetland because they lack positive indicators for wetland hydrology. HYDROLOGY Hydrology was present throughout the wetland as standing water and saturation during each of the site visits. The level of standing water varied from several inches within the wetland to at least 1- foot in the ditch along the south edge. Each of the wetland test plots exhibited water tables at and to within 12 inches of the soil surface. Areas with the water table at 12 inches exhibited saturation within 6 inches of the soil surface. None of the wetland test plots were conducted on the sloping portion of the wetland but it appears that water was present within 6 inches of the soil surface based on squishy conditions. The wetland drains north to China Creek via surface flows and through the ditch. The source of water includes floodwaters from China Creek, surface water City of Centralia, Little Hanaford Road Ecological Land Services, Inc. Wetland Delineation Report 3 February 2015

7 runoff, groundwater discharge from the south slope, and direct precipitation. Evidence of flooding was observed to the south edge of the wetland during the January 30, 2015 site visit indicating that much of the wetland is seasonally flooded due to riverine flooding. Therefore, the wetland is determined to be a Riverine system. Hydrology was not present in any of the upland test plots and there was no evidence of wetland hydrology. NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) map s wetland across most of the property (Figure 4). The wetland is mapped as palustrine emergent seasonally flooded (PEMC). ELS biologists agree with the NWI mapping because during the field visit, wetland was identified within the mapped area. ELS biologists disagree with the extent of wetland to the east across Lundberg Road because the road and roadside ditch on the west side does not provide continuation of wetland conditions. The wetland offsite to the west is also now a forested community and not a scrub shrub community (PSSC) as mapped. The NWI maps should be used with discretion because they are used to gather general wetland information about a regional area and therefore are limited in accuracy for smaller areas because of their large scale. LEWIS COUNTY WETLAND MAPPING The Lewis County GIS identifies both properties as composed entirely of wetlands based on the wetland and soil mapping sources (Figure 5). ELS agrees with the presence of wetlands on most of the site however, biologists determined that the southern portion of the site is composed of upland. CONCLUSIONS WETLAND CATEGORIZATION A single wetland was identified and delineated on these properties. It was rated according to the Washington State Wetlands Rating System for Western Washington-2014 Update (rating form; Hruby 2014) (Appendix B). The wetland system is composed of emergent and forested communities that lie along a stream that floods the wetland at least twice per year. It includes sloping areas along the south edge. The wetland was rated using the riverine section of the rating form per the guidance. The wetland is a Category II Riverine wetland based on functions. It scored a total of 20 points on the 2014 update rating form and rates Moderate for habitat functions. WATER TYPING China Creek is a permanently flowing stream that runs along the north edge of the site. It flows within a defined channel with a band of pine trees on a low berm along the north side and a low mowed berm on the south side. A separate roadside ditch runs along the very north edge of the property between the line of pine trees and Little Hanaford Road. China Creek is mapped as a Type F Water because it is not a Type S water that contains fish habitat and is greater than 10 feet in width. WETLAND AND STREAM BUFFER REQUIREMENTS The LCC Chapter 17.35A.610 specifies wetland buffer widths based on the wetland category along with the score for habitat functions and intensity of the proposed land use. The buffer widths City of Centralia, Little Hanaford Road Ecological Land Services, Inc. Wetland Delineation Report 4 February 2015

8 required for the wetland per the LCC have not be adapted for the 2014 updated wetland rating system. The wetland received a moderate rating for habitat functions, which is consistent with scoring less than 20 points for the 2004 wetland rating system. Therefore, buffers for wetlands scoring less than 20 points for habitat was used for this wetland system. The buffers for Type F Waters are greater for Water A types per LCC Chapter 17.35A.680(1). The buffers for the onsite wetland and China Creek per the LCC are provided in Table 1. Table 1. Wetland Classification, Water Type, and Buffer Requirements. Cowardin Wetland Habitat Wetland Buffer Widths Critical Area Class Category or Water Type Score Low Intensity Moderate Intensity High Intensity Wetland PEMB/C II Moderate 75 feet* 80 feet** 110 feet** PFOC -- Type F Water A China Creek * per LCC 17.35A.610(1)(a) ** per LCC 17.35A.610(2) feet from the ordinary high water line City of Centralia, Little Hanaford Road Ecological Land Services, Inc. Wetland Delineation Report 5 February 2015

9 LIMITATIONS The conclusions listed above are based on standard scientific methodology and best professional judgment. In our opinion, local, state, and federal regulatory agencies should agree with our conclusions; however, this should be considered a preliminary jurisdictional determination and should be used at your own risk until it has been reviewed and approved in writing by the appropriate regulatory agencies. City of Centralia, Little Hanaford Road Ecological Land Services, Inc. Wetland Delineation Report 6 February 2015

10 REFERENCES Cowardin, L.M., C. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS-78/31. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services, Washington D.C. Environmental Laboratory Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y U.S. Army Corps of Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Hruby, T. (2014). Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update (Publication # ). Olympia, WA: Washington Department of Ecology Lewis County Code. Title 17-Critical Areas, Chapter 17.35A Critical Areas, Article IV (A) Wetlands and Article IV (B) Aquatic Habitats Lewis County, Washington. Lewis County Parcel Search website. Website accessed November Lewis County Web Maps. Website accessed November U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0), ed. J.S. Wakeley, R.W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory. Online document < Website accessed November U.S.D.A. Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Lewis County Area. Online document < Website accessed November City of Centralia, Little Hanaford Road Ecological Land Services, Inc. Wetland Delineation Report 7 February 2015

11 FIGURES AND PHOTOPLATES

12 BLAINE 5 SAN JUAN 9 ORCAS FRIDAY HARBOR LOPEZ ANACORTES 20 SEDRO WOOLLEY ROCKPORT MOUNT VERNON NEAH BAY SKAGIT OAK HARBOR CLALLAM BAY DARRINGTON ISLAND STANWOOD PORT ANGELES PORT TOWNSEND ARLINGTON EVERETT SEQUIM CLALLAM MONROE BOTHELL QUILCENE JEFFERSON MASON AMANDA PARK 5 KITSAP 3 QUEETS DUVALL KIRKLAND REDMOND POULSBO SEATTLE BREMERTON BELLEVUE PORT ORCHARD NORTH BEND KENT HOODSPORT 18 FEDERAL WAY 3 BUCKLEY LONG BEACH ORTING DUPONT ROY 5 12 EATONVILLE MT. 123 RAINIER THURSTON LEWIS PACKWOOD RANDLE MOSSYROCK WINLOCK PACIFIC LONGVIEW SKAMANIA 504 CASTLE ROCK COWLITZ CATHLAMET MT. ST. HELENS KELSO 503 KALAMA WOODLAND SITE 12 7 MORTON 12 6 ILWACO NOTE: USGS topographic quadrangle map reproduced using MAPTECH Inc., Terrain Navigator Pro software. 410 YELM CENTRALIA CHEHALIS RAYMOND PIERCE 161 TENINO SOUTH BEND OCEAN PARK KING AUBURN PUYALLUP ENUMCLAW STEILACOOM OLYMPIA HOQUIAM ELMA ABERDEEN 12 MONTESANO WESTPORT SITE GIG HARBOR TACOMA SHELTON RIDGEFIELD 0 CLARK LA CENTER 5 BATTLE GROUND STEVENSON VANCOUVER 14 CAMAS SCALE IN MILES WASHOUGAL CARSON NORTH BONNEVILLE SCALE IN FEET COPALIS BEACH OCEAN SHORES GRAYS HARBOR 4000 PACIFIC BEACH 2 SKYKOMISH 2000 LOCATION MAP SNOHOMISH 9 MUKILTEO 0 FORKS 2/10/ :50 AM C:\Users\Jack\Desktop\ Figures\ DL.dwg Jack ROSS LAKE WHATCOM BELLINGHAM Figure 1 VICINITY MAP Little Hanaford Road Wetland Delineation City of Centralia Centralia, Lewis County, WA Section 4, Township 14N, Range 2W, W.M. SITE PROJECT VICINITY MAP LYNDEN FERNDALE DATE: 2/10/15 DWN: JLL REQ. BY: PRJ. MGR: JB CHK: PROJECT NO: WASHINGTON

13 2/10/ :50 AM C:\Users\Jack\Desktop\ Figures\ DL.dwg Jack China Creek 42 TP4 LEGEND: Site Boundary Wetland Boundary Stream with Flow Direction Test Plot Location Wetland Flag NOTE(S): 1. Aerial from Google Earth SCALE IN FEET DATE: 2/10/15 DWN: JLL REQ. BY: PRJ. MGR: JB CHK: PROJECT NO: Figure 2 SITE MAP Little Hanaford Road Wetland Delineation City of Centralia Centralia, Lewis County, WA Section 4, Township 14N, Range 2W, W.M.

14 SITE DATE: 2/10/15 DWN: JLL REQ. BY: PRJ. MGR: JB CHK: PROJECT NO: Figure 3 SOIL SURVEY MAP Little Hanaford Road Wetland Delineation City of Centralia Centralia, Lewis County, WA Section 4, Township 14N, Range 2W, W.M. 2/10/ :50 AM C:\Users\Jack\Desktop\ Figures\ DL.dwg Jack LEGEND: 27 Buckpeak silt loam, 30 to 65 percent slopes. Not hydric. 119 Lacamas silt loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes. Hydric. 172 Reed silty clay loam. Hydric. NOTE(S): 1. Map provided on-line by NRCS at web address: SCALE IN FEET

15 0 PEMC PSSC NOTE(S): 1. Map provided on-line by US Fish & Wildlife Service at web address: LEGEND: Freshwater Emergent Wetland Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Palustrine, emergent, seasonally flooded. Palustrine, scrub-shrub, seasonally flooded. SCALE IN FEET 400 2/10/ :50 AM C:\Users\Jack\Desktop\ Figures\ DL.dwg Jack DATE: 2/10/15 DWN: JLL REQ. BY: PRJ. MGR: JB CHK: PROJECT NO: SITE Figure 4 NTIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY Little Hanaford Road Wetland Delineation City of Centralia Centralia, Lewis County, WA Section 4, Township 14N, Range 2W, W.M.

16 SITE DATE: 2/10/15 DWN: JLL REQ. BY: PRJ. MGR: JB CHK: Figure 5 LEWIS COUNTY WETLAND MAPPING PROJECT NO: Little Hanaford Road Wetland Delineation City of Centralia Centralia, Lewis County, WA Section 4, Township 14N, Range 2W, W.M. 2/10/ :50 AM C:\Users\Jack\Desktop\ Figures\ DL.dwg Jack LEGEND: Wetlands Hydric Soils NOTE(S): 1. Map provided on-line by Lewis County GIS at web address: SCALE IN FEET

17 2/10/ :50 AM C:\Users\Jack\Desktop\ Figures\ DL.dwg Jack LEGEND: Gold Street Palustrine Forested Seasonally Flooded SITE UPL Saturated Palustrine Emergent UPL Permanently Flowing Stream China Creek UPL (Permanently Flowing) Seasonally Flooded Farm Ditch (Seasonally Flowing) Lundberg Road Roadside Ditch Site Boundary Wetland Unit Boundary Hydrologic Unit Division 150' Wetland Offset Riverine, Forested & Emergent R1.1 - Depressions cover > 1/2 the area of wetland (seasonally flooded area). R1.2 Herbaceous plants (>6" high) > 2/3 area of the wetland. R2.4 - Greater than 10% within 150 feet of wetland in land uses that generate pollutants. R4.1 - The ratio of wetland width is 10 to 20 (seasonally flooded area). R4.2 - Emergent plants > 2/3 area. H1.1 - Emergent, Forested, Forested areas have 3 out of 5 strata. H1.2 - Seasonally flooded, saturated, permanently flowing stream, seasonally flowing stream. H1.4 - Low interspersion of habitats. NOTE(S): 1. Aerial photograph from Google Earth SCALE IN FEET DATE: 2/10/15 DWN: JLL REQ. BY: PRJ. MGR: JB CHK: PROJECT NO: Figure 6 WETLAND RATING FORM 1 Little Hanaford Road Wetland Delineation City of Centralia Centralia, Lewis County, WA Section 4, Township 14N, Range 2W, W.M.

18 2/10/ :50 AM C:\Users\Jack\Desktop\ Figures\ DL.dwg Jack LEGEND: Site Boundary Wetland Unit Boundary Contributing Basin City of Centralia R2.2 - Contributing basin of wetland includes UGA or incorporated area. R2.3 - At least 10% of contributing basin contains tilled fields and pastures. R5.2 - Up-gradient watershed does not include a UGA or incorporated area. NOTE(S): 1. Aerial photograph from Google Earth SCALE IN FEET DATE: 2/10/15 DWN: JLL REQ. BY: PRJ. MGR: JB CHK: PROJECT NO: Figure 7 WETLAND RATING FORM 2 Little Hanaford Road Wetland Delineation City of Centralia Centralia, Lewis County, WA Section 4, Township 14N, Range 2W, W.M.

19 2/10/ :50 AM C:\Users\Jack\Desktop\ Figures\ DL.dwg Jack LEGEND: Site Boundary Wetland Unit Boundary (1.83%) M/L Accessible Habitat (4.28%) H Undisturbed Habitat (32.47%) H High Intensity Land Uses (42.63%) M/L Moderate/Low Intensity Land Uses (18.52%) H2.1 - Accessible habitat 10-19% of 1km polygon. H2.2 - Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and in 1-3 patches. H2.3 - < 50% of 1km polygon is high intensity. H M/L M/L H H H M/L NOTE(S): 1. Aerial photograph from Google Earth SCALE IN FEET 3000 DATE: 2/10/15 DWN: JLL REQ. BY: PRJ. MGR: JB CHK: PROJECT NO: Figure 8 WETLAND RATING FORM 3 Little Hanaford Road Wetland Delineation City of Centralia Centralia, Lewis County, WA Section 4, Township 14N, Range 2W, W.M.

20 Rated Wetland Figure 3a-303(d) Map: Multiple listings for Chehalis River. The wetland along China Creek is greater than 1 mile from the Chehalis River. Figure 3b: TMDL List for Lewis County and the Chehalis River. China Creek is not listed as one of the tributaries with TMDLs rd Ave., Suite 220 Longview, WA (360) Fax: (360) DATE: 2/9/15 DWN: JB PRJ. MGR JB PROJ.#: Figure 9 Wetland Rating Form 4

21 Photo 1 is taken from the east end of the property at the start of the wetland delineation. It looks west along the south edge of the property. The wetland is mostly in the low area on the right edge of the photo but extends up the slope in several locations crossing to the tree line on the left edge. Photo 2 is taken from the same location as Photo 1 and looks northwesterly across the east end of the wetland. Photo 3 is taken from the same location as Photos 1 and 2. It looks north along the east edge of the property. This onsite wetland extends to Lundberg Road, which is just visible on the right edge of the photo (beyond the utility pole) rd Ave., Suite 220 Longview, WA (360) Fax: (360) DATE: 1/30/15 DWN: JB PRJ. MGR: JB PROJ.#: Photoplate #1 Project Name: Little Hanaford Road Property Client: City of Centralia Lewis County, Washington

22 Photo 4 shows the area of wetland where Test Plot 1 was conducted. This area is dominated by reed canarygrass and hydrology was present as standing water and a shallow water table. Photo 5 shows the area where Test Plot 2 is located. This area is composed of sloping upland that is dominated by a mixture of grasses. Photo 6 is taken from the existing farm road that provides access to these city owned properties from Little Hanaford Road. This photo looks west along the south edge of the eastern property with wetlands beginning along the tree line to the left rd Ave., Suite 220 Longview, WA (360) Fax: (360) DATE: 1/30/15 DWN: JB PRJ. MGR: JB PROJ.#: Photoplate #2 Project Name: Little Hanaford Road Property Client: City of Centralia Lewis County, Washington

23 Photo 7 shows the area where Test Plot 3 was completed. This area is located on the upland slope south of the delineated wetland. It is dominated by grasses that are partially mowed (the upper half of the test plot area is not mowed). Photo 8 shows the area where Test Plot 4 was completed downslope of Test Plot 3. This area is composed of regularly mowed upland. Photo 9 shows the area of wetland where Test Plot 5 is located. It is located about 25 feet south of the ditch that crosses the south half of the wetland. The ditch is visible as the tall grasses in the right background rd Ave., Suite 220 Longview, WA (360) Fax: (360) DATE: 11/17/14 DWN: JB PRJ. MGR: JB PROJ.#: Photoplate #3 Project Name: Little Hanaford Road Property Client: City of Centralia Lewis County, Washington

24 Photo 10 is taken from near Wetland Boundary (WB) flag 36 and looks south up the slope. There is an upland ravine that begins at the top of the slope. No water flow was observed coming down through the swale although there is a shallow ditch part of the way up the slope delineated at WB flag 38. Photo 11 is taken of the area where Test Plot 6 is located. This test plot lies in the area of un-mowed grasses visible in Photo 10. This area is determined to be non-wetland because it lacks positive indicators for wetland hydrology. Photo 12 shows the area where Test Plot 7 is located. It is situated downslope of Test Plot 6 and upslope of the wetland as sampled at Test Plot 8 This area is determined to be upland because it lacks positive indicators of wetland hydrology rd Ave., Suite 220 Longview, WA (360) Fax: (360) DATE: 11/17/14 DWN: JB PRJ. MGR: JB PROJ.#: Photoplate #4 Project Name: Little Hanaford Road Property Client: City of Centralia Lewis County, Washington

25 Photo 13 shows the area of wetland where Test Plot87 was conducted. It is situated just outside the area of standing water south of the ditch where the vegetation is dominated by mowed reed canarygrass. Photo 14 is taken from the south property line and looks west across the west half of the property. The property line is demarcated by the fence on the left edge of the photo. Photo 15 is taken from the same location as Photo 14. It looks northwest across the sloping upland pasture that occupies most of the southwestern portion of the property. The residential properties offsite to the north are visible across the right background rd Ave., Suite 220 Longview, WA (360) Fax: (360) DATE: 12/18/14 DWN: JB PRJ. MGR: JB PROJ.#: Photoplate #5 Project Name: Little Hanaford Road Property Client: City of Centralia Lewis County, Washington

26 Photo 16 is taken from the same location as Photos 14 and 15. It looks north across property toward the residential developments that lie along Little Hanaford Road north of China Creek. Photo 17 is taken from the same location as Photos 14 through 16. It looks northeasterly across the finger of wetland that extends to the south property line and is delineated with WB flags 40 through 46. The portion of the slope in the foreground of this photo is composed of wetland. Photo 18 is taken from the same location as Photos 14 through 17. It looks easterly along the south edge of the property, which is demarcated by the fence on the right side of the photo rd Ave., Suite 220 Longview, WA (360) Fax: (360) DATE: 12/18/14 DWN: JB PRJ. MGR: JB PROJ.#: Photoplate #6 Project Name: Little Hanaford Road Property Client: City of Centralia Lewis County, Washington

27 Photo 19 is at the north end of the upland island that lies in the northwestern portion of the property. This photo looks east along the north side of the upland island with wetland to the left (darkened grasses) and the island is on the right. WB flag 61 is visible at the lower right edge of the photo. Photo 20 is taken from the same location as Photo 19 and looks southeasterly across the upland island. WB flag 61 is visible in the lower left corner of this photo. Photo 21 is taken from the same location as Photos 19 and 20. It looks southerly across the wetland that lies south of the upland island. This photo also shows the slope south of the wetland rd Ave., Suite 220 Longview, WA (360) Fax: (360) DATE: 11/17/14 DWN: JB PRJ. MGR: JB PROJ.#: Photoplate #7 Project Name: Little Hanaford Road Property Client: City of Centralia Lewis County, Washington

28 Photo 22 is taken from near the north property line and looks west along China Creek. China Creek lies along the entire north edge of the property and was at least 10 feet wide in this location. Photo 23 is taken from the same location as Photo 22 and looks north across China Creek to the offsite portion of the wetland. Photo 24 is taken from the same location as Photos 22 and 23. It looks easterly along China Creek rd Ave., Suite 220 Longview, WA (360) Fax: (360) DATE: 11/17/14 DWN: JB PRJ. MGR: JB PROJ.#: Photoplate #8 Project Name: Little Hanaford Road Property Client: City of Centralia Lewis County, Washington

29 Photo 25 is taken of the upland in the northeastern portion of the property. This upland area slopes gradually up from the delineated wetland, which lies on the left side, and ends at the top of the bank above China Creek (to the right in the un-mowed area). Photo 26 is taken from the same location as Photo 25 and looks northwesterly across this upland area. China Creek lies in a defined channel between the tall grasses and line of pine trees across the background. Photo 27 is taken from the same location as Photos 25 and 26. It looks north along the east end of the upland area toward Little Hanaford Road, which lies beyond the line of pine trees in the background rd Ave., Suite 220 Longview, WA (360) Fax: (360) DATE: 11/17/14 DWN: JB PRJ. MGR: JB PROJ.#: Photoplate #9 Project Name: Little Hanaford Road Property Client: City of Centralia Lewis County, Washington

30 Photo 28 shows the area where Test Plot 11 was conducted. It is located on the upland area along the north edge of the property. China Creek is the right and the wetland is to the left. Photo 29 shows the area where Test Plot 12 was conducted. This area is part of the delineated wetland, which like the rest of the wetland, is dominated by mowed reed canarygrass. Photo 30 shows the areas where Test Plots 9 and 10 were completed. This area is dominated by tall fescue and orchard grass with low percentages of soft rush rd Ave., Suite 220 Longview, WA (360) Fax: (360) DATE: 11/17/14 DWN: JB PRJ. MGR: JB PROJ.#: Photoplate #10 Project Name: Little Hanaford Road Property Client: City of Centralia Lewis County, Washington

31 Photo 31 looks east along the north edge of the wetland where it abuts the fill along the south side of Little Hanaford Road. China Creek flows in a well defined channel just beyond the line of pine trees. Photo 32 looks south across the wetland along Little Hanaford Road into the property. Photo 33 looks west along Little Hanaford Road to document the continuation of wetland conditions up to the road fill rd Ave., Suite 220 Longview, WA (360) Fax: (360) DATE: 11/17/14 DWN: JB PRJ. MGR: JB PROJ.#: Photoplate #11 Project Name: Little Hanaford Road Property Client: City of Centralia Lewis County, Washington

32 APPENDIX A

33 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Little Hanaford Road City/County: Centralia/Lewis Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: City of Centralia State: WA Sampling Point: TP 1 Investigator(s): J. Bartlett Section, Township, Range: S 4 T 14 N R 2 WWM Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 10 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: Long: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: 172 Reed silty clay loam NWI classification: UPL Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology, significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes No Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Test Plot 1 is located in an upland section upslope of the delineated wetland. The area is composed of mowed pasture with a mixture of dominant grasses. VEGETATION Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test Worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3. Total Number of Dominant 4. Species Across All Strata: 2 (A) 3 (B) 50% =, 20% = = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1. UPL Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% =, 20% = = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30' diameter) UPL species x5 = 67 (A/B) 1. Schedonorus phoenix 30 yes FAC Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Dactylis glomerata 30 yes FACU Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Poa pratensis 30 yes FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. Phalaris arundinacea 10 no FACW 1 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is < Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting 8. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain) % = 50, 20% = = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) % =, 20% = = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? The hydrophytic vegetation criterion is met because there is greater than 50% dominance by FAC species. Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Version 2.0

34 Project Site: Little Hanaford Road SOIL Sampling Point: TP 1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Loc 2 Texture Remarks Y 3/2 100 silt loam 11-16" 2.5Y 5/ YR 4/4 20 C M clay 1 Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2 Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils 3 : Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydric Soils Present? Yes No The soil profile meets none of the hydric soil indicators because the matrix chroma in the surface layer is too high. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Hydrology was not present during the field visit and there is no evidence of wetland hydrology. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Version 2.0

35 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Little Hanaford Road City/County: Centralia/Lewis Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: City of Centralia State: WA Sampling Point: TP 2 Investigator(s): J. Bartlett Section, Township, Range: S 4 T 14 N R 2 WWM Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Valley Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 10 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: Long: Datum: Magellan Soil Map Unit Name: 172 Reed silty clay loam NWI classification: PEM Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology, significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes No Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Test Plot 2 is located in the wetland where there was standing water and soil saturation during the field visit. VEGETATION Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test Worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3. Total Number of Dominant 4. Species Across All Strata: 1 (A) 1 (B) 50% =, 20% = = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% =, 20% = = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30' diameter) UPL species x5 = 100 (A/B) 1. Phalaris arundinacea 90 yes FACW Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. 1 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is < Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting 8. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain) % = 45, 20% = = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) % =, 20% = = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 10 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? The hydrophytic vegetation criterion is met because there is greater than 50% dominance by FACW species. Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Version 2.0

36 Project Site: Little Hanaford Road SOIL Sampling Point: TP 2 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Loc 2 Texture Remarks 0-11" 10YR 2/1 100 silt loam 11-16" 2.5Y 3/ YR 4/4 20 C M clay 1 Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2 Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils 3 : Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) The soil profile meets hydric soil indicator A12 due to the dark surface and subsurface layers. 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydric Soils Present? Yes No HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 4" Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): at surface Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Hydrology was present during the field delineation as standing water with the water table at the surface of the soil hole. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Version 2.0

37 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Little Hanaford Road City/County: Centralia/Lewis Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: City of Centralia State: WA Sampling Point: TP 3 Investigator(s): J. Bartlett Section, Township, Range: S 4 T 14 N R 2 WWM Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 10 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: Long: Datum: Magellan Soil Map Unit Name: 172 Reed silty clay loam NWI classification: UPL Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology, significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes No Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Test Plot 3 is located on the slope south of the wetland. Partially mowed-upper limits of slope not mowed perhaps due to the steepness of the slope. VEGETATION Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test Worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3. Total Number of Dominant 4. Species Across All Strata: 1 (A) 3 (B) 50% =, 20% = = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30' diameter) That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1. Rubus armeniacus 10 yes FACU Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% = 5, 20% = 2 10 = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30' diameter) UPL species x5 = 33 (A/B) 1. Schedonorus phoenix 50 yes FAC Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Dactylis glomerata 50 yes FACU Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Poa pratensis 25 no FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. Hypochaeris radicata 15 no FACU 1 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. Taraxacum officinale 10 no FACU 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 6. Pteridium aquilinum 10 no FACU 3 - Prevalence Index is < Plantago lanceolata 10 no FACU 4 - Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting 8. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain) % = 85, 20% = = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) % =, 20% = = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? The hydrophytic vegetation criterion is not met because there is less than 50% dominance by FAC species. Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Version 2.0

38 Project Site: Little Hanaford Road SOIL Sampling Point: TP 3 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Loc 2 Texture Remarks 0-16" 2.5Y 3/3 100 silt loam 1 Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2 Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils 3 : Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) The soil profile meets none of the hydric soil indicators because the matrix chroma is too high. 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydric Soils Present? Yes No HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Hydrology was not present during the field visit and there is no evidence of wetland hydrology. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Version 2.0

39 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Little Hanaford Road City/County: Centralia/Lewis Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: City of Centralia State: WA Sampling Point: TP 4 Investigator(s): J. Bartlett Section, Township, Range: S 4 T 14 N R 2 WWM Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Valley Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 5 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: Long: Datum: Magellan Soil Map Unit Name: 172 Reed silty clay loam NWI classification: UPL Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology, significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes No Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Test Plot 4 is located on the slope just outside the southern delineated wetland boundary. This area is composed of mowed pasture with starts of evergreen blackberry and Nootka rose present. The blackberry and rose are included in the herb stratum because they do not form a shrub layer due to regular mowing. VEGETATION Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test Worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3. Total Number of Dominant 4. Species Across All Strata: 1 (A) 2 (B) 50% =, 20% = = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% =, 20% = = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 20' diameter) UPL species x5 = 50 (A/B) 1. Schedonorus phoenix 50 yes FAC Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Dactylis glomerata 50 yes FACU Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Phalaris arundinacea 15 no FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. Juncus effusus 5 no FACW 1 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5. Rubus laciniatus 5 no FACU 2 - Dominance Test is >50% 6. Rosa nutkana 5 no FAC 3 - Prevalence Index is < Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting 8. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain) % = 65, 20% = = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) % =, 20% = = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? The hydrophytic vegetation criterion is not met because there is not greater than 50% dominance by FAC species. Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Version 2.0

40 Project Site: Little Hanaford Road SOIL Sampling Point: TP 4 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Loc 2 Texture Remarks 0-6" 2.5Y 3/2 100 silt loam no redoximorphic features 6-16" 2.5Y4/2 100 silty clay no redoximorphic features loam 1 Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2 Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils 3 : Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydric Soils Present? Yes No The soil profile meets none of the hydric soil indicators because the matrix chroma is too high and there are no redoximorphic features to accompany the 4/2 soil matrix chroma. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Hydrology was not present during the field visit and there is no evidence of wetland hydrology. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Version 2.0

41 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Little Hanaford Road City/County: Centralia/Lewis Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: City of Centralia State: WA Sampling Point: TP 5 Investigator(s): J. Bartlett Section, Township, Range: S 4 T 14 N R 2 WWM Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Valley Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: Long: Datum: Magellan Soil Map Unit Name: 172 Reed silty clay loam NWI classification: PEM Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology, significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes No Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Test Plot 5 is located within the wetland area at the base of the southern slope. It is composed of mowed emergent vegetation dominated by reed canarygrass. VEGETATION Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test Worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3. Total Number of Dominant 4. Species Across All Strata: 1 (A) 1 (B) 50% =, 20% = = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% =, 20% = = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 20' diameter) UPL species x5 = 100 (A/B) 1. Phalaris arundinacea 100 yes FACW Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. 1 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is < Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting 8. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain) % = 50, 20% = = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) % =, 20% = = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? The hydrophytic vegetation criterion is met because there is greater than 50% dominance by FACW species. Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Version 2.0

42 Project Site: Little Hanaford Road SOIL Sampling Point: TP 5 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Loc 2 Texture Remarks 0-6" 2.5Y 3/ YR 4/4 5 C M silt loam 6-16" 5Y 4/ YR 4/4 15 C M silty clay loam 1 Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2 Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils 3 : Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydric Soils Present? Yes No The soil profile meets hydric soil indicator A11 because of low matrix chroma over a depleted matrix with redoximorphic features present. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 12 Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): 6 Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Hydrology present during the field visit as a shallow water table with evidence of soil saturation during the growing season (oxidized rhizospheres along living roots). US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Version 2.0

43 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Little Hanaford Road City/County: Centralia/Lewis Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: City of Centralia State: WA Sampling Point: TP 6 Investigator(s): J. Bartlett Section, Township, Range: S 4 T 14 N R 2 WWM Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 10 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: Long: Datum: Magellan Soil Map Unit Name: 172 Reed silty clay loam NWI classification: UPL Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology, significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes No Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Test Plot 6 is located halfway up the slope south of the wetland. There is an upland swale upslope that is dominated by blackberry with unmowed grasses in the test plot area. This area is located beneath the power lines that run north to south across the property. This area has positive indicators for hydrophytic vegetation and hydric soils but is not wetland because there are no positive indicators for wetland hydrology. VEGETATION Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test Worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3. Total Number of Dominant 4. Species Across All Strata: 2 (A) 2 (B) 50% =, 20% = = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% =, 20% = = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30' diameter) UPL species x5 = 100 (A/B) 1. Phalaris arundinacea 75 yes FACW Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Juncus effusus 25 yes FACW Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Juncus sp. 15 no FACW Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. 1 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is < Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting 8. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain) % = 57.5, 20% = = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) % =, 20% = = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? The hydrophytic vegetation criterion is met because there is greater than 50% dominance by FACW species. Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Version 2.0

44 Project Site: Little Hanaford Road SOIL Sampling Point: TP 6 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Loc 2 Texture Remarks 0-6" 10YR 4/2 100 silty clay loam 6-16" 10YR 4/ YR 4/6 10 C M silty clay loam 1 Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2 Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils 3 : Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydric Soils Present? Yes No The soil profile meets hydric soil indicator F3 because of low matrix chroma over a depleted matrix with redoximorphic features present. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Hydrology was not present during the field visit and there was no evidence of wetland hydrology. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Version 2.0

45 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Little Hanaford Road City/County: Centralia/Lewis Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: City of Centralia State: WA Sampling Point: TP 7 Investigator(s): J. Bartlett Section, Township, Range: S 4 T 14 N R 2 WWM Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 10 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: Long: Datum: Magellan Soil Map Unit Name: 172 Reed silty clay loam NWI classification: UPL Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology, significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes No Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Test Plot 7 is located in the mowed portion of the upland pasture below the power lines and downslope from Test Plot 6. This area is dominated by mowed reed canarygrass with low cover by Nootka rose starts that are included in the herb stratum because they do not form a shrub layer. This area is determined to be non-wetland despite the presence of positive indicators of hydric soil and hydrophytic vegetation because there are no positive indicators of wetland hydrology. VEGETATION Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test Worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A) 3. Total Number of Dominant 4. Species Across All Strata: 1 (B) 50% =, 20% = = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% = 5, 20% = 2 10 = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 10' diameter) UPL species x5 = 100 (A/B) 1. Phalaris arundinacea 100 yes FACW Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Rosa nutkana starts 10 no FAC Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. 1 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is < Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting 8. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain) % = 50, 20% = = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) % =, 20% = = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? The hydrophytic vegetation criterion is met because there is greater than 50% dominance by FACW and FAC species. Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Version 2.0

46 Project Site: Little Hanaford Road SOIL Sampling Point: TP 7 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Loc 2 Texture Remarks 0-6" 10YR 4/2 100 silty clay loam 6-16" 10YR 4/ YR 4/6 10 C M silty clay loam 1 Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2 Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils 3 : Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydric Soils Present? Yes No The soil profile meets hydric soil indicator F3 because of low matrix chroma over a depleted matrix with redoximorphic features present. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Hydrology was not present during the field visit and there was no evidence of wetland hydrology. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Version 2.0

47 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Little Hanaford Road City/County: Centralia/Lewis Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: City of Centralia State: WA Sampling Point: TP 8 Investigator(s): J. Bartlett Section, Township, Range: S 4 T 14 N R 2 WWM Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): valley Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: Long: Datum: Magellan Soil Map Unit Name: 172 Reed silty clay loam NWI classification: PEM Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology, significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes No Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Test Plot 8 is located in the mowed wetland area beginning at the toe of the moderate slopes down from the south. This mowed area of wetland is dominated by reed canarygrass with Nootka rose starts. The Nootka rose starts are included in the herb stratum because they are low in stature and do not form a shrub layer. VEGETATION Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test Worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3. Total Number of Dominant 4. Species Across All Strata: 1 (A) 1 (B) 50% =, 20% = = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% =, 20% = = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 20' diameter) UPL species x5 = 100 (A/B) 1. Phalaris arundinacea 100 yes FACW Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Rosa nutkana starts 20 no FAC Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Juncus effusus 10 no FACW Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. 1 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is < Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting 8. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain) % = 65, 20% = = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) % =, 20% = = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? The hydrophytic vegetation criterion is met because there is greater than 50% dominance by FACW and FAC species. Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Version 2.0

48 Project Site: Little Hanaford Road SOIL Sampling Point: TP 8 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Loc 2 Texture Remarks 0-16" 10YR 4/ YR 4/6 15 C M silty clay loam 1 Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2 Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils 3 : Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydric Soils Present? Yes No The soil profile meets hydric soil indicator F3 because of low matrix chroma with redoximorphic features present. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): surface Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Hydrology was present during field visit with a water table at the surface of the soil. Standing water was present nearby to a depth of 6 inches. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Version 2.0

49 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Little Hanaford Road City/County: Centralia/Lewis Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: City of Centralia State: WA Sampling Point: TP 9 Investigator(s): J. Bartlett Section, Township, Range: S 4 T 14 N R 2 WWM Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): valley slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: Long: Datum: Magellan Soil Map Unit Name: 119 Lacamas silt loam, 3 to 8% slopes NWI classification: UPL Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology, significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes No Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Test Plot 9 is located on the slope in the southwestern portion of the property and upslope of TP 10. Area of soft rush extends up the slope but is not wetland due to the absence of wetland hydrology indicators. Soft rush continues upslope from TP 9 with increasing cover by trailing blackberry. VEGETATION Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test Worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3. Total Number of Dominant 4. Species Across All Strata: 1 (A) 2 (B) 50% =, 20% = = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% =, 20% = = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30' diameter) UPL species x5 = 50 (A/B) 1. Schedonorus phoenix 70 yes FAC Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Dactylis glomerata 30 yes FACU Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Juncus effusus 15 no FACW Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. Cirsium arvense 5 no FAC 1 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is < Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting 8. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain) % = 60, 20% = = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) % =, 20% = = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? The hydrophytic vegetation criterion is not met because there is not greater than 50% dominance by FAC and FACW species. Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Version 2.0

50 Project Site: Little Hanaford Road SOIL Sampling Point: TP 9 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Loc 2 Texture Remarks 0-10" 2.5Y 3/2 100 silt loam 10-16" 5Y 3/ YR 4/6 15 C M clay loam 1 Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2 Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils 3 : Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydric Soils Present? Yes No The soil profile meets hydric soil indicator A11 due to low matrix chroma at 10 inches with low chroma in the upper layer. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 15" Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water table was below 12 inches during field visit and water in hole only because the surface soils were damp due to recent heavy rains. There was no evidence of wetland hydrology in the soil profile (no oxidized rhizospheres) and no evidence of regular surface water inundation or flow. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Version 2.0

51 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Little Hanaford Road City/County: Centralia/Lewis Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: City of Centralia State: WA Sampling Point: TP 10 Investigator(s): J. Bartlett Section, Township, Range: S 4 T 14 N R 2 WWM Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): valley slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: Long: Datum: Magellan Soil Map Unit Name: 119 Lacamas silt loam, 3 to 8% slopes NWI classification: UPL Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology, significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes No Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Test Plot 10 is located on the slope in the southwestern portion of the property. Area of soft rush extends up the slope but is not wetland due to the absence of wetland hydrology indicators. VEGETATION Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test Worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3. Total Number of Dominant 4. Species Across All Strata: 1 (A) 2 (B) 50% =, 20% = = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% =, 20% = = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30' diameter) UPL species x5 = 50 (A/B) 1. Schedonorus phoenix 70 yes FAC Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Dactylis glomerata 30 yes FACU Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Juncus effusus 10 no FACW Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. 1 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is < Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting 8. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain) % = 55, 20% = = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) % =, 20% = = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? The hydrophytic vegetation criterion is not met because there is not greater than 50% dominance by FAC and FACW species. Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Version 2.0

52 Project Site: Little Hanaford Road SOIL Sampling Point: TP 10 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Loc 2 Texture Remarks 0-10" 2.5Y 3/2 100 silt loam 10-16" 2.5Y 3/ YR 4/6 20 C M clay loam 1 Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2 Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils 3 : Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) The soil profile meets none of the hydric soil indicators because of the high matrix chromas. 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydric Soils Present? Yes No HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 15" Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water table was below 12 inches during field visit and water in hole only because the surface soils were damp due to recent heavy rains. There was no evidence of wetland hydrology in the soil profile (no oxidized rhizospheres) and no evidence of regular surface water inundation or flow. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Version 2.0

53 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Little Hanaford Road City/County: Centralia/Lewis Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: City of Centralia State: WA Sampling Point: TP 11 Investigator(s): J. Bartlett Section, Township, Range: S 4 T 14 N R 2 WWM Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): valley Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: Long: Datum: Magellan Soil Map Unit Name: 172 Reed silty clay loam NWI classification: UPL Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology, significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes No Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Test Plot 11 is located on the low raised upland area along the north edge of the wetland. China Creek lies to the north of this raised area. VEGETATION Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test Worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3. Total Number of Dominant 4. Species Across All Strata: 1 (A) 1 (B) 50% =, 20% = = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% =, 20% = = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30' diameter) UPL species x5 = 100 (A/B) 1. Phalaris arundinacea 100 yes FACW Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. 1 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is < Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting 8. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain) % = 50, 20% = = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) % =, 20% = = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? The hydrophytic vegetation criterion is met because there is greater than 50% dominance by FACW species. Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Version 2.0

54 Project Site: Little Hanaford Road SOIL Sampling Point: TP 11 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Loc 2 Texture Remarks 0-4" 2.5Y 3/2 100 silt loam 4-12" 10YR 4/1 50 silt loam 4-12" 10YR 2/1 50 silty clay loam 1 Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2 Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils 3 : Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydric Soils Present? Yes No The soil appears to have an old fill appearance due to the compacted condition at 12 inches and mixture of matrix chromas and soil textures. It meets hydric soil indicator F3 because of the low matrix chroma beginning within 6 inches of the soil surface and at least 6 inches thick. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 14" Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water table present at 14 inches and there is no evidence of long term soil saturation to indicate this area is influenced by hydrology of the wetland to the south and China Creek to the north. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Version 2.0

55 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project Site: Little Hanaford Road City/County: Centralia/Lewis Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: City of Centralia State: WA Sampling Point: TP 12 Investigator(s): J. Bartlett Section, Township, Range: S 4 T 14 N R 2 WWM Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): valley Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0 Subregion (LRR): LRR A Lat: Long: Datum: Magellan Soil Map Unit Name: 172 Reed silty clay loam NWI classification: PEM Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology, significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances present? Yes No Are Vegetation, Soil, or Hydrology, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area within a Wetland? Yes No Test Plot 12 is located in the wetland just south of the low raised area along the north edge. VEGETATION Use scientific names of plants Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover Species? Status Dominance Test Worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3. Total Number of Dominant 4. Species Across All Strata: 1 (A) 1 (B) 50% =, 20% = = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1. Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3. OBL species x1 = 4. FACW species x2 = 5. FAC species x3 = 50% =, 20% = = Total Cover FACU species x4 = Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30' diameter) UPL species x5 = 100 (A/B) 1. Phalaris arundinacea 100 yes FACW Column Totals: (A) (B) 2. Prevalence Index = B/A = 3. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4. 1 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation Dominance Test is >50% Prevalence Index is < Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting 8. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Wetland Non-Vascular Plants Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain) % = 50, 20% = = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) % =, 20% = = Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? The hydrophytic vegetation criterion is met because there is greater than 50% dominance by FACW species. Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Version 2.0

56 Project Site: Little Hanaford Road SOIL Sampling Point: TP 12 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type 1 Loc 2 Texture Remarks 0-8" 10YR 5/1 100 gr loam 8-16" 10YR 4/ YR 4/6 20 C M silty clay loam 1 Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2 Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils 3 : Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) 3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydric Soils Present? Yes No The soil profile meets hydric soil indicator F3 because of the low matrix chromas in both layers and the presence of redoximorphic features in the subsurface layer. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): surface Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Water table present to surface of the soil and sulfidic odor emitted when the soil hole dug. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Version 2.0

57 APPENDIX B

58 Wetland name or number RATING SUMMARY Western Washington Name of wetland (or ID #): China Creek Date of site visit: Rated by J. Bartlett Trained by Ecology? X Yes No Date of training Nov HGM Class used for rating Riverine Wetland has multiple HGM classes? X_Y N NOTE: Form is not complete without the figures requested (figures can be combined). Source of base aerial photo/map Google Earth OVERALL WETLAND CATEGORY II (based on functions or special characteristics _) 1. Category of wetland based on FUNCTIONS Category I Total score = X Category II Total score = Category III Total score = Category IV Total score = 9-15 FUNCTION Improving Water Quality Hydrologic Habitat Circle the appropriate ratings Site Potential H M L H M L H M L Landscape Potential H M L H M L H M L Value H M L H M L H M L TOTAL Score Based on Ratings Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland Score for each function based on three ratings (order of ratings is not important) 9 = H,H,H 8 = H,H,M 7 = H,H,L 7 = H,M,M 6 = H,M,L 6 = M,M,M 5 = H,L,L 5 = M,M,L 4 = M,L,L 3 = L,L,L CHARACTERISTIC CATEGORY Estuarine I II Wetland of High Conservation Value I Bog I Mature Forest I Old Growth Forest I Coastal Lagoon I II Interdunal I II III IV None of the above X Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form Effective January 1,

59 Wetland name or number Maps and figures required to answer questions correctly for Western Washington Depressional Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes D 1.3, H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods D 1.4, H 1.2 Location of outlet (can be added to map of hydroperiods) D 1.1, D 4.1 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) D 2.2, D 5.2 Map of the contributing basin D 4.3, D km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) D 3.1, D 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) D 3.3 Riverine Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H Hydroperiods H Ponded depressions R Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) R Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants R 1.2, R Width of unit vs. width of stream (can be added to another figure) R Map of the contributing basin R 2.2, R 2.3, R km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including H 2.1, H 2.2, H polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) R Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) R 3.2, R Lake Fringe Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes L 1.1, L 4.1, H 1.1, H 1.4 Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants L 1.2 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) L km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) L 3.1, L 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) L 3.3 Slope Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods H 1.2 Plant cover of dense trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants S 1.3 Plant cover of dense, rigid trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants S 4.1 (can be added to figure above) Boundary of 150 ft buffer (can be added to another figure) S 2.1, S km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) S 3.1, S 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) S 3.3 Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form Effective January 1,

60 Wetland name or number HGM Classification of Wetlands in Western Washington For questions 1-7, the criteria described must apply to the entire unit being rated. If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply, and go to Question Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides except during floods? NO go to 2 YES the wetland class is Tidal Fringe go to Is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? NO Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) YES Freshwater Tidal Fringe If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is an Estuarine wetland and is not scored. This method cannot be used to score functions for estuarine wetlands. 2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is the only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water runoff are NOT sources of water to the unit. NO go to 3 YES The wetland class is Flats If your wetland can be classified as a Flats wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any plants on the surface at any time of the year) at least 20 ac (8 ha) in size; At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m). NO go to 4 YES The wetland class is Lake Fringe (Lacustrine Fringe) 4. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual), The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks, The water leaves the wetland without being impounded. NO go to 5 YES The wetland class is Slope NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than 1 ft deep). 5. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? X The unit is in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river, X The overbank flooding occurs at least once every 2 years. Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form Effective January 1,

61 Wetland name or number NO go to 6 YES The wetland class is Riverine NOTE: The Riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding 6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time during the year? This means that any outlet, if present, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO go to 7 YES The wetland class is Depressional 7. Is the entire wetland unit located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding? The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. NO go to 8 YES The wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a Depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO BACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within the wetland unit being scored. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the HGM class listed in column 2 is less than 10% of the unit; classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area. HGM classes within the wetland unit being rated Slope + Riverine Slope + Depressional Slope + Lake Fringe Depressional + Riverine along stream within boundary of depression Depressional + Lake Fringe Riverine + Lake Fringe Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater wetland HGM class to use in rating Riverine Depressional Lake Fringe Depressional Depressional Riverine Treat as ESTUARINE If you are still unable to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or if you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form Effective January 1,

62 Wetland name or number RIVERINE AND FRESHWATER TIDAL FRINGE WETLANDS Water Quality Functions - Indicators that the site functions to improve water quality R 1.0. Does the site have the potential to improve water quality? R 1.1. Area of surface depressions within the Riverine wetland that can trap sediments during a flooding event: Depressions cover > 3 / area of wetland points = 8 4 Depressions cover > ½ area of wetland points = 4 Depressions present but cover < ½ area of wetland points = 2 No depressions present points = 0 R 1.2. Structure of plants in the wetland (areas with >90% cover at person height, not Cowardin classes) Trees or shrubs > 2 / area of the wetland points = 8 3 Trees or shrubs > 1 / area of the wetland points = 6 3 Herbaceous plants (> 6 in high) > 2 / area of the wetland points = 6 3 Herbaceous plants (> 6 in high) > 1 / 3 area of the wetland points = 3 Trees, shrubs, and ungrazed herbaceous < 1 / 3 area of the wetland points = 0 Total for R 1 Add the points in the boxes above 10 Rating of Site Potential If score is: = H X 6-11 = M 0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page R 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the water quality function of the site? R 2.1. Is the wetland within an incorporated city or within its UGA? Yes = 2 No = 0 0 R 2.2. Does the contributing basin to the wetland include a UGA or incorporated area? Yes = 1 No = 0 1 R 2.3. Does at least 10% of the contributing basin contain tilled fields, pastures, or forests that have been clearcut within the last 5 years? Yes = 1 No = 0 R 2.4. Is > 10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate pollutants? Yes = 1 No = 0 1 R 2.5. Are there other sources of pollutants coming into the wetland that are not listed in questions R 2.1-R 2.4 Other sources Yes = 1 No = 0 Total for R 2 Add the points in the boxes above 3 Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: X 3-6 = H 1 or 2 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page R 3.0. Is the water quality improvement provided by the site valuable to society? R 3.1. Is the wetland along a stream or river that is on the 303(d) list or on a tributary that drains to one within 1 mi? 0 Yes = 1 No = 0 R 3.2. Is the wetland along a stream or river that has TMDL limits for nutrients, toxics, or pathogens? Yes = 1 No = 0 R 3.3. Has the site been identified in a watershed or local plan as important for maintaining water quality? (answer 0 YES if there is a TMDL for the drainage in which the unit is found) Yes = 2 No = 0 Total for R 3 Add the points in the boxes above 0 Rating of Value If score is: 2-4 = H 1 = M X 0 = L Record the rating on the first page 0 Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form Effective January 1,

63 Wetland name or number RIVERINE AND FRESHWATER TIDAL FRINGE WETLANDS Hydrologic Functions - Indicators that site functions to reduce flooding and stream erosion R 4.0. Does the site have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? R 4.1. Characteristics of the overbank storage the wetland provides: Estimate the average width of the wetland perpendicular to the direction of the flow and the width of the stream or river channel (distance between banks). Calculate the ratio: (average width of wetland)/(average width of stream between banks). If the ratio is more than 20 points = 9 If the ratio is points = 6 If the ratio is 5-<10 points = 4 If the ratio is 1-<5 points = 2 If the ratio is < 1 points = 1 R 4.2. Characteristics of plants that slow down water velocities during floods: Treat large woody debris as forest or shrub. Choose the points appropriate for the best description (polygons need to have >90% cover at person height. These are NOT Cowardin classes). Forest or shrub for > 1 / 3 area OR emergent plants > 2 / 3area points = 7 Forest or shrub for > 1 / 10 area OR emergent plants > 1 / 3area points = 4 Plants do not meet above criteria points = Total for R 4 Add the points in the boxes above 13 Rating of Site Potential If score is: X = H 6-11 = M 0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page R 5.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the hydrologic functions of the site? R 5.1. Is the stream or river adjacent to the wetland downcut? Yes = 0 No = 1 1 R 5.2. Does the up-gradient watershed include a UGA or incorporated area? Yes = 1 No = 0 0 R 5.3. Is the up-gradient stream or river controlled by dams? Yes = 0 No = 1 0 Total for R 5 Add the points in the boxes above 1 Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 3 = H X 1 or 2 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page R 6.0. Are the hydrologic functions provided by the site valuable to society? R 6.1. Distance to the nearest areas downstream that have flooding problems? Choose the description that best fits the site. The sub-basin immediately down-gradient of the wetland has flooding problems that result in damage to human or natural resources (e.g., houses or salmon redds) points = 2 Surface flooding problems are in a sub-basin farther down-gradient points = 1 No flooding problems anywhere downstream points = 0 1 R 6.2. Has the site been identified as important for flood storage or flood conveyance in a regional flood control plan? 2 Yes = 2 No = 0 Total for R 6 Add the points in the boxes above 3 Rating of Value If score is: X 2-4 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form Effective January 1,

64 Wetland name or number These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes. HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that site functions to provide important habitat H 1.0. Does the site have the potential to provide habitat? H 1.1. Structure of plant community: Indicators are Cowardin classes and strata within the Forested class. Check the Cowardin plant classes in the wetland. Up to 10 patches may be combined for each class to meet the threshold of ¼ ac or more than 10% of the unit if it is smaller than 2.5 ac. Add the number of structures checked. Aquatic bed 4 structures or more: points = 4 X Emergent 3 structures: points = 2 Scrub-shrub (areas where shrubs have > 30% cover) 2 structures: points = 1 X Forested (areas where trees have > 30% cover) 1 structure: points = 0 If the unit has a Forested class, check if: X The Forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-cover) that each cover 20% within the Forested polygon H 1.2. Hydroperiods Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or ¼ ac to count (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods). Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present: points = 3 X Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present: points = 2 Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present: points = 1 X Saturated only 1 type present: points = 0 X Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland X Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland Lake Fringe wetland 2 points Freshwater tidal wetland 2 points H 1.3. Richness of plant species Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft 2. Different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold and you do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian milfoil, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian thistle If you counted: > 19 species points = species points = 1 < 5 species points = 0 H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion among Cowardin plants classes (described in H 1.1), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, moderate, low, or none. If you have four or more plant classes or three classes and open water, the rating is always high None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points All three diagrams in this row are HIGH = 3points Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form Effective January 1,