HomeMy WebLinkAboutChenega Bay Hydroelectric Wetlands Study - Dec 2011 - REF Grant 7030010environmental research & services
12 December 2011
TO: Robin Reich, Solstice Alaska
FROM: Wendy Davis, ABR Inc.
RE: Chenega Bay Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination and Functional
Assessment
ABR, Inc. was contracted by Solstice Alaska on behalf of Hatch to perform a preliminary
wetlands determination in support of a Section 404 Wetlands Permit sought for a small scale
hydroelectric project. The proposed project is located adjacent to Chenega Creek in the village of
Chenega Bay, Prince William Sound, Alaska (Figure 1). Wetlands in the area were previously
mapped and described by HDR, Inc. (HDR Inc. 2009) and National Wetland Inventory (NWI)
maps also exist for the area. The NWI maps show extensive saturated emergent and scrub
wetlands within the study area, but the maps are not at a fine enough scale for the purposes of a
404 permit application. HDR, Inc. performed more detailed mapping, but the effort was office
based; thus, a field survey was necessary to verify and finalize the map.
The project comprises 13.5 acres and includes the lower reaches of Chenega Creek and an access
road to an existing dam upstream (Figure 2). The legal description is Township 1 S, Range 8E,
Sections 23 and 26, Seward Meridian, Seward quadrangle A-3, centered on Latitude/Longitude
(WGS84) 60.070 °N, 148.017 °W (Figure 1). The study area generally slopes steeply toward the
coastline and is composed of mature Sitka spruce/hemlock forests and organic fen wetland
complexes common throughout the Prince William Sound area.
Routine wetland determinations were made at 9 locations throughout the study area on October 5
and 6, 2011. The determinations were performed using the Army Corps of Engineers three
parameter approach (USACE 1987, 2007a) (Appendix A). This method uses observations of
vegetation, hydrology, and hydric soil indicators to determine the wetland status of an area. To
be classified as a wetland, a site must be dominated by wetland plants (hydrophytes), have wet
(hydric) soils, and have wetland hydrology (saturation of sufficient duration). Indicator status of
dominant plants was determined using the National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands
(Reed 1988) Classification of upland/wetland communities followed guidelines outlined in the
Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al. 1979).
Taxonomic nomenclature followed Hulten (1968) with the exception of willows (Salix spp.),
which followed Viereck and Little (2007). Soil color was described using Munsell soil color
charts (2009). Photos of the vegetation and soils were taken at each site (Appendix B).
Verifications were completed at 3 plots, which are rapid on -site assessments of areas already
described with a full wetland determination (Appendix A).
Corporate Headquarters
Anchorage, Alaska
Pacific Northwest
Northeastern U.S.
P.O. Box 80410
P.O. Box 240268
P.O. Box 249
15 Bank Street, Suite B
Fairbanks, AK 99708
Anchorage, AK 99524
Forest Grove, OR 97116
Greenfield, MA 01301
907.455.6777
907.344.6777
503.359.7525
413.774.5515
907.455.6781 (fax)
907.770.1443 (fax)
503.359.8875 (fax)
413.774.5514 (fax)
e-mail: info@abrinc.com
website: www.abrinc.com
Page 12
Mapping was completed by digitizing polygon boundaries on -screen using high resolution digital
orthophotography obtained 6/28/2005 (provided by Hatch) and ArcGIS 10.0 software. Polygons
were digitized based on results of field data and photo interpretation of vegetation communities.
Polygons were coded using the National Wetland Inventory (NWI) system based on Cowardin et
al. (1979). Acreages were calculated and are summarized in Table 1.
A functional assessment for the wetlands and waters mapped in the study area was conducted
using a rapid assessment procedure based on the Literature Review and Evaluation Rationale of
the Wetland Evaluation Technique (Adamus et al. 1991), the Rapid Procedure for Assessing
Wetland Functional Capacity (Magee 1998), and recommendations summarized in a recent
Regulatory Guidance Letter (RGL 09-01) (USACE 2009). The USACE guidance includes
recommendations and a dataform for objectively evaluating wetland functions and values, using
hydrogeomorphic (HGM) principles (Appendix Q. The procedure facilitates a rapid assessment
of the many landscape functions that wetlands provide for overall ecosystem maintenance,
including hydrology, water quality, primary productivity, wildlife and fisheries habitat, and
providing for public needs such as subsistence. The functions performed by wetlands and waters
in the project area were qualitatively ranked depending on the extent to which various wetland
functions were occurring and/or site characteristics were present. The relative rankings are used
to determine compensation ratios should wetland mitigation be required.
Both waters of the U.S. and wetlands occur in the study area, comprising 5 NWI classes.
Chenega Creek is a water of the U.S. and was classified as an Upper Perennial Stream (R3UBH,
0.48 acres) and connects directly to Traditional Navigable Waters (Sawmill Bay) (Figure 2,
Table 1). The channel is a shallow permanently flooded feature with variable depths and
gradients along the reach in question.
The majority of wetlands within the study area boundaries are part of an interconnected series of
hillside organic fens. The fens are all gently sloping features made up of a complex of 3 NWI
types. Palustrine Seasonally Flooded/Saturated Emergent Meadow (PEMIE) and Palustrine
Seasonally Flooded/Saturated Emergent-Needleleaf Evergreen Meadow (PEMI/SS4E) together
account for 3.26 acres. These wetlands are characterized by a thick saturated moss peat layer.
Common emergent plant species include Eriophorum angustifolium (narrow -leaf cotton -grass),
Calamagrostis canadensis var. langsdorfii (bluejoint grass), Fauria crista-galli (deer cabbage),
Erigeron pergrinus (wandering fleabane), Geum macrophyllum (large -leaf avens) and Lysichiton
americanum (American skunk cabbage). PEMI/SS4E commonly support more dwarf and low
shrub species including Harimanella stellariana (Alaska moss heath), Tsuga mertensiana
(mountain hemlock) and Alnus sinuata (Sitka alder). Numerous small intermittent streams
(R4SBC, 0.18 acres) flow through the organic fen communities and are often difficult to separate
in mapping from the wetland complex. The intermittent streams are generally in the form of
beaded streams that may be actively flowing or a series of stagnant pools. Pools of surface water
within the hillside fen complexes may also support obligate aquatic plants such as Potamageton
sp. (pondweed).
One small area of Palustrine Saturated Needleleaf Evergreen Forest was identified near the
Chenega Bay community power plant. The area is a small topographic depression at the
headwaters of a small intermittent drainage connecting to Chenega Creek. The site does not meet
the hydrophytic vegetation criteria because of the high cover of the overstory facultative upland
tree species Picea sitchensis (Sitka spruce). The area was still classified as wetland, however,
due to strong hydric soil and hydrology indicators and the presence of obligate emergent species
such as Lysichiton americanum.
ABR, Inc.—Chenega Bay Study
Page 13
All of the waters and wetlands in the study area were assigned an overall functional category of
III (moderate to low functioning). None are unique to the area and are in close proximity to
existing local disturbance that surrounds the community of Chenega Bay. The highest value
wetlands in the area are the Organic Fens (PEM1E, PEM1/SS4E and R4SBC) because of their
importance in supporting hydrologic and water quality functions. The emergent fen plant
communities also score relatively high with respect to plant species richness. The Upper
Perennial Stream (R3UBH) was ranked high for fish habitat based on the presence or absence of
spawning and rearing habitat; however, this ranking does not take into account physical barriers
to fish traveling upstream. The ADF&G online database identifies Sockeye salmon presence
(ADF&G 2011) well above the first anadromous fish barrier identified by HDR (HDR, Inc.
2009). The fish habitat scoring of high for Chenega Creek may be reduced, pending confirmation
that anadromous fish are not present within the study area boundaries. The Saturated Forested
(PFO4B) wetlands were very limited in extent and had the lowest relative functional
performance scores across all categories.
The southern edge of the study area is 0.3 river miles along Chenega Creek from the nearest
section 10 TNW (Sawmill Bay) (USACE 2011). Chenega Creek is a permanently flooded
waterway and is considered to be a relatively permanent water (RPW). The Intermittent Streams
in the area should also be considered RPWs on the basis of having a surface water connection
throughout most of the growing season and detectable flow, occurring seasonally for at least 2
consecutive weeks (USACE 2007b). The Intermittent Streams can be considered tributaries to
Chenega Creek and connect directly at numerous locations along the lower reaches. On the basis
of the hydrologic connection described above we suggest that all waters of the U.S. and wetlands
mapped within the study area are jurisdictional.
Uplands dominate the study area and include existing disturbances such as the placement of fill,
steep slopes supporting mature Sitka spruce/hemlock forests and rarely, small convex features
within the hillside organic fens where the underlying bedrock is close to the surface. The mature
Sitka spruce/hemlock forests have 40-80% cover of Picea sitchensis and Tsuga heterophylla
(western hemlock). Common understory shrubs include Vaccinium alaskaense (Alaska
blueberry), Menziesia ferruginea (mock -azalea), and Rubus spectabilis (salmonberry). Forbs are
also common and include Blechnum spicant (deer fern), Coptis asplenifolia (spleenwort-leaf
goldthread) and Rubus pedatus (strawberry -leaf raspberry). My acreage estimates for Upland
(fill) are conservative because the 2005 imagery used for the mapping does not include two new
disturbances to the area since the photography was taken. These include a new gravel pad
expansion to the north of the existing powerplant and brush clearing and excavation along the
access road to the water tank. I do not believe any wetlands were disturbed in association with
these two new disturbances.
ABR, Inc.—Chenega Bay Study
Page 14
References Cited
Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) 2011. ADF&G Fish Distribution Database: Interactive
mapper. [Online] Available http://gis.sfadfg.state.ak.us/AWC_IMS/viewer.htm. October 2011.
Adamus, P. R., L.T. Stockwell, E. J. Clairain, Jr., M. E. Morrow, L. P. Rozas, and R. D. Smith. 1991.
Wetland Evaluation Technique (WET); Vol. 1: Literature Review and Evaluation Rationale.
Technical Report WRP-DE-2. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, MS.
Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater
habitats of the United States. U. S. Fish and Wildl. Serv., Office of Biol. Serv., Washington, DC. 103
PP.
HDR, Inc. 2009. Chenega Bay Hydroelectric Feasibility Study: Reconnaissance Report. Report prepared
for Chenega Corporation, Anchorage, AK. 29pp. + Appendices.
Hult6n, E. 1968. Flora of Alaska and neighboring territories. Stanford Univ. Press, Stanford, CA. 1008
PP.
Magee, D. W. and G. G. Hollands. 1998. A rapid procedure for assessing wetland functional capacity
based on Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Report prepared for Association of State Wetland
Managers. 177 pp.
Municipality of Anchorage (MOA). 1996. Anchorage wetlands management plan. Department of
Community Planning and Development, Municipality of Anchorage, Alaska. 220 pp.
Munsell Soil Color Charts. 2009. Revised edition. Kollmorgen Instruments Corporation, Baltimore, MD.
Reed, P. B., Jr. 1988. National list of plant species that occur in wetlands: national summary. U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. Biological Report 88 (24). 244 pp.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands
Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterway Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, MS. 90 pp + appendices.
U.S. Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2007a. Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation
Manual: Alaska Region Version 2.0. Wetlands Regulatory Assistance Program, U.S. Army Engineer
Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS. 72 pp. + appendices.
U.S. Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2007b. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Jurisdictional Determination
Form Instructional Guidebook USACE and Environmental Protection Agency. 60pp.
U.S. Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2009. Alaska District Regulatory Guidance Letter on Implementation
of the Federal Rule on Compensatory Mitigation. RGL ID No. 09-01.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2011. USACE, Alaska District, Navigable Waters List.
[Online] http://www.poa.usace.anny.mil/reg/NavWat.htm. October 2011.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2011. The Anchorage Debit -Credit Method: A Procedure
for Determining Development Debits and Compensatory Mitigation Credits for Aquatic Areas in
Anchorage, Alaska. Revised Document, Heather Dean, April 2011. 33pp. + Appendices.
Viereck, L. A., and E. L. Little. 2007. Alaska trees and shrubs. Agriculture Handbook No. 410. U.S. Dept.
Agric., Washington, D.C. 265 pp.
ABR, Inc.--Chenega Bay Study
Table 1. Acreages of NWI wetland types found within the study area of the proposed small
scale hydroelectric project on Chenega Creek, Chenega Bay, AK.
NWI code Description Acres
Waters of the U.S.
R3UBH Upper Perennial Stream
R4SBC Intermittent Stream
Total Waters of the U.S.
Wetlands
PEM1E Palustrine Seasonally Flooded/Saturated Emergent Meadow
PEM1/SS4E Palustrine Seasonally Flooded/Saturated Emergent-Needleleaf Evergreen Meadow
PFO4B Palustrine Saturated Needleleaf Evergreen Forest
Uplands
U
Us
Total Area
Upland
Upland (Fill)
Total Wetlands
Total Water and Wetlands
Total Uplands
0.48
0.18
0.66
0.35
2.91
0.15
3.41
4.07
8.00
1.39
9.39
13.46
ABR, Inc.—Chenega Bay Study 5
Table 2. Functional performance of wetlands and waters within the study area, Chenega Creek
Hydroelectric project, Alaska. NWI wetland types are grouped into similar functional
groupings.
Wetland/ Water
Upper Perennial
Stream (R3UBH)
Saturated Forested
Wetland (PF04B)
Organic Fensa,
(PEM1E, PEMl/SS4B,
R4SBCb)
Overall Functional Category
III
III
III
Flood Flow Regulation
High
High
High
Sediment, Nutrient, &
Toxicant Removal
Low
Low -Moderate
High
Erosion Control and
Shoreline Stabilization
N/A
Moderate
High
Organic Matter Production &
Export
Low
Low -Moderate
High
General Habitat Suitability
Low
Low
Moderate
Fish Habitat
High
N/A
Low
Native Plant Richness
Low
Low
High
Subsistence/ Recreational/
Educational Value
High
Low
Low -Moderate
Uniqueness & Special Status
Low
Low
Low
a Confined to hillside in study area.
b These intermittent drainages are functionally part of the fen complexes and thus, cannot be evaluated separately even
though they do not directly support some wetland functions.
ABR, Inc.—Chenega Bay Study
1ursc rr run u•n r�nry
. •._ - _ ii _
1 y: R r.
} s (AWe
yr•�;. a i� r l iM1
4 .: Chenega C4VS
r r' 7,Siif say
_C
t r ilw. .r (ri71� Ism 7V leer $ I ► Bak
b��
• i '� S>ari ;,lean i � .� ��� � ` cM
i.
H �: V Figure 1. Chenega Bay
w f{��%' Project Location Map,
E
s
Approximate Scale
1.5
Kiiomeb
0.25 0.5 0.75 1
IVi9I@&�
1dA°d'W
.- Evans Island, Alaska
� Seward Quadran Ia A-3, Towns hi IS,
9 P
°
Ranges 8E, Sections 23 and 26, Seward Meridian
jr�,, - wrrprrr�mlGr:
1I 7� j 66ecem6e<20'1 ABR file: Chenega Bay_L-VSGS -111.rr•xd
1dA•9W Idfl°I1W t67°P
ABR, Inc.—Chenega Bay Study 7
ABR, Inc.—Chenega Bay Study
Appendix A. Wetland Determination Data and Verification Forms
ABR, Inc.—Chenega Bay Study
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Alaska Region
Project/Site: CHENEGA HYDRO Borough/City: CHENEGA BAY Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: HATCH/SOLSTICE
Investigator(s): WAD, NMT
Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave
Sampling Point:
Landform (hillside, terrace, hummocks etc.): Flat
Slope: 0.0 % / 0.0 o Elevation:
Subregion: Southeast Alaska Lat.: Long.:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: PF04E
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes U No U (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes OO No O
Are Vegetation ❑ Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
05-Oct-11
CH 11-01
Datum: WGS84
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes O No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No ❑
� within a Wetland? Yes * NO
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No O
Remarks: Very few forested sites in the area showed clear wetland soils and hydrology similar to this site. Although this area does not meet the
hydrophytic vegetation criteria we have identified it as a forested wetland for the limited concave area that it occupies.
VEGETATION Use scientific names of plants. List all species in the plot.
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
Picea sitchensis
80
d❑
FACU
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 _ (A)
2
Tsuga heterophylla
15
❑
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
0
❑
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
p
El
Percent of dominant Species
4
0
❑
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50.0% (A/B)
5
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total Cover: 95
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
50% of Total Cover: 47.5 20% of Total Cover:
19
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
Oplopanaxhorridus
20
91
FACU
OBL species 30 x 1 = 30
1
2
Vaccinium ovalifolium
3
❑
FAC
FACW species 0 x 2= 0
3.
Rubusspectabilis
15
d❑
FACU
FAC species 39 x 3 = 117
4
Alnus sinuata
10
d❑
FAC
FACU species 115 x 4 = 460
5
0
❑
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
6
0
❑
rnlumn Tntals- 184 (A) 607 (B)
7.
0
❑
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.299
8.
0
❑
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0 ❑
9
0
❑
❑ Dominance Test is > 500/o
10.
Total Cover: 48
❑ Prevalence Index is :53.0
50% of Total Cover: 24 20% of
Total Cover:
9.6
❑ Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
Herb Stratum
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1
Lysichiton americanum
30
66
OBL
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2.
Rubus pedatus
10
0
FAC
i
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3.
Tiarella trifoliata
1
El
FAC
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
0
❑
❑❑
5.
0
Plot size (radius, or length x width)
6.
0
❑
% Cover of Wetland Bryophytes 10
7
(Where applicable)
$
0
❑
% Bare Ground 0
9.
0
❑
Total Cover of Bryophytes 10
10.
— 0
❑
Hydrophytic
Total Cover: 41
Vegetation
50% of Total Cover: 20.5 20% of Total Cover:
8.2
Present? Yes O No
with skunk cabbage, alder and devils club and
Remarks: Mature Sitka spruce hemlock patch, patchy vegetation types in understory, low microsites
limited high microsites with mature sitka spruce, few understory species.
US Army Corps of Engineers Alaska Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point: CH11-01
Profile Description: Describe to depth needed to document the presence or absence of indicators
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loci
0-2 10YR 2/1 100 Peat
2-4 10YR 3/3 100 Peat
4-5 10YR 2/1 100 Peat
5-19 2.5Y 3/1
Texture Remarks
oe
Oi
oe
Peat Oa, sand and silt content
'Type: C=Concentration D=Depletion RM=Reduced Matrix 2Location: PL=Pore Lining RC=Root Channel M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:'
❑d Histosol or Histel (Al)
4
❑ Alaska Color Change (TA4)
❑ Alaska Gleyed Without Hue 5Y or Redder
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Alaska Alpine swales (TA5)
Underlying Layer
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Alaska Redox With 2.5Y Hue
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Alaska Gleyed (A13)
3 One indicator of hydrophytic vegetation, one
primary indicator of wetland hydrology,
❑ Alaska Redox (A14)
and an appropriate landscape position must be present
❑ Alaska Gleyed Pores (A15)
4 Give details of color change in Remarks
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type: frost
Hydric Soil Present? Yes OO No 0
Depth (inches): 19
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (any one is sufficient)
❑ Surface Water (Al) ❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (671,
❑� High Water Table (A2) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138;
❑� Saturation (A3) ❑ Marl Deposits (615)
❑ Water Marks (131) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Sediment Deposits (132) ❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Drift Deposits (133) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (64)
❑ Iron Deposits (135)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No Depth (inches): 0
Secondary Indicators (two or more are required)
❑ Water Stained Leaves (139)
W Drainage Patterns (1310)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Salt Deposits (C5)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (131)
0 Geomorphic Position (132)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (134)
❑ FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Water Table Present? Yes * No 0 Depth (inches): 7 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes * No 0
Saturation Present? Yes 0 No* Depth (inches): 0
(includes cagillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitor well, aerial photos, previous inspection) if available:
Remarks:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Alaska Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Alaska Region
Project/Site: CHENEGA HYDRO Borough/City: CHENEGA BAY Sampling Date: 05-Oct-11
Applicant/Owner: HATCH/SOLSTICE Sampling Point: CHII-02
Investigator(s): WAD, NMT Landform (hillside, terrace, hummocks etc.): Toeslope
Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope: 0.0 % / 0.0 ° Elevation:
Subregion : Southeast Alaska Lat.: 60.0681033333333 Long.:-148.016026666667 Datum: WGS84
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: PEM1E
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes U No U (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No O
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
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes O No O
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O NO O
within a Wetland? Yes * No U
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes NO O
Remarks: Flooded area potentially toeslope accumulation or stream headwater
photos 374-378
VEGETATION Use scientific names of plants. List all species in the plot.
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
❑
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A)
2
El
Total Number of Dominant
❑
Species Across All Strata: 2 (B)
3.
❑
Percent of dominant Species
4.
❑
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
5
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total Cover: 0
Sapling/Shrub Stratum SO%of Total Cover:
0 20% of
Total Cover:
0
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
❑
OBL species 55 x 1 = 55
1
❑
FACW species 0 x 2= 0
2.3.
❑
FAC species 0 x 3 = 0
4.
❑
FACU species 0 x 4 = 0
5
❑
UPL species 10 x 5 = 50
6
❑
rnlumn Tntalse 65 (p) 105 (B)
❑❑
7.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 1.615
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
9. ❑
❑
e Dominance Test is > 50%
10.
Total Cover:
0
?] Prevalence Index is <_3.0
SO% of Total Cover:
0 20% of
Total Cover:
0
❑ Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
Herb Stratum
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1 Carex lyngbyei
35
OBL
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2 Calamagrostis canadensis var. langsdorfii
10
❑
UPL
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3. Juncus mertensianus
5
ElOBL
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4 Cinna latifolia
15
OBL
0
❑
5.
Plot size (radius, or length x width)
6.
o
s % Cover of Wetland Bryophyte
7
(Where applicable)
$
0
❑
% Bare Ground
9.
0
❑
Total Cover of Bryophytes
10.
0
❑
Hydrophytic
Total Cover:
65
Vegetation
SO% of Tota I Cover: 32.5
20% of Total Cover:
13
Present? Yes O No O
Remarks: potomageton unidentified OBL 15, unidentified
forb 5
US Army Corps of Engineers Alaska Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point: CH11-02
Profile Description: Describe to depth needed to document the presence or absence of indicators
Depth Matrix Redox Features
% Color (moist) (inches) Color (moist) t) % Type' Loci
Texture
'Type: C=Concentration D=Depletion RM=Reduced Matrix 2Location: PL=Pore Lining RC=Root Channel M=Matrix
Remarks
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:'
ElHistosol or Histel (Al) ElAlaska Color Change (TA4) ❑ Alaska Gleyed Without Hue 5Y or Redder
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑ Alaska Alpine swales (TA5) Underlying Layer
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑ Alaska Redox With 2.5Y Hue ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Alaska Gleyed (A13) 3 One indicator of hydrophytic vegetation, one primary indicator of wetland hydrology,
and an appropriate landscape position must be present
❑ Alaska Redox (A14)
❑ Alaska Gleyed Pores (A15) 4 Give details of color change in Remarks
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
no pit permanently innundated
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (any one is sufficient)
❑� Surface Water (Al) ❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (671,
❑ High Water Table (A2) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138;
❑ Saturation (A3) ❑ Marl Deposits (615)
❑ Water Marks (131) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Sediment Deposits (132) ❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Drift Deposits (133) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (64)
❑ Iron Deposits (135)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No 0 Depth (inches): 2
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No 0
Secondary Indicators (two or more are required)
❑ Water Stained Leaves (139)
❑ Drainage Patterns (1310)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Salt Deposits (C5)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (131)
❑ Geomorphic Position (132)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (134)
❑� FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Water Table Present? Yes* No 0 Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes * No 0
Saturation Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches):
(includes cagillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitor well, aerial photos, previous inspection) if available:
Remarks:
flooded area at toeslope, ditch drainages from side near pad
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Alaska Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Alaska Region
Project/Site: CHENEGA HYDRO Borough/City: CHENEGA BAY Sampling Date: 05-Oct-11
Applicant/Owner: HATCH/SOLSTICE Sampling Point: CHII-03
Investigator(s): WAD, NMT Landform (hillside, terrace, hummocks etc.): Flat
Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex slope: 0.0 % / 0.0 ° Elevation:
Subregion : Southeast Alaska Lat.: 60.0680316666667 Long.:-148.016558333333 Datum: WGS84
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: Upland
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes U No U (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes UO No O
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
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes O NO
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O NO
within a Wetland? Yes 0 No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes * No O
UO
Remarks: just at edge of sapling sitka spruce, alnus growing on old patch of fill
photos 380-383
VEGETATION Use scientific names of plants. List all species in the plot.
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
Picea sitchensis
2
d❑
FACU
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A)
2
0
❑
Total Number of Dominant
0
❑
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
p
El
Percent of dominant Species
4
0
❑
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 40.0% (A/B)
5
Total Cover:
2
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
50% of Total Cover:
1 20% of Total Cover:
0.4
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
0
FACU
OBL species 5 x 1 = 5
Picea sitchensis
85
2.
Tsuga heterophylla
10
❑
FAC
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
3
Alnuscrispa
10
❑
FAC
FAC species 23 x 3 = fi9
4
Rubus spectabilis
5
❑
FACU
FACU species 92 x 4 = 368
5
0
❑
UPL species 2 x 5= 10
6.
0
❑
rnlumn Tntals- 122 (A) 452 (B)
7.
0
❑
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.705
8.
0
❑
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0 ❑
9
0
❑
❑ Dominance Test is > 500/o
10.
Total Cover:
110
❑ Prevalence Index is :53.0
50% of Total Cover:
55 20% of
Total Cover:
22
❑ Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
Herb Stratum
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1.
Lysichiton americanum
5
66
OBL
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2
Calamagrostis canadensis var. langsdorfii
2
d❑
UPL
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3.
Athyrium filix-femina
2❑
-
FAC
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4
Blechnum spicant
1
❑
FAC
U
❑
5.
❑❑
Plot size (radius, or length x width)
6.
0
% Cover of Wetland Bryophytes
7
(Where applicable)
$
0
❑
% Bare Ground
9.
0
❑
Total Cover of Bryophytes
10.
0
❑
Hydrophytic
Total Cover:
10,
Vegetation
SO% of Total Cover:
5 20% of Total Cover:
2
Present? Yes O No O
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Alaska Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point: CH11-03
Profile Description: Describe to depth needed to document the presence or absence of indicators
Depth Matrix Redox Features
% Color (moist) (inches) Color (moist) t) % Type' Loci
0-16 10YR 2/1 100 Peat
Texture
'Type: C=Concentration D=Depletion RM=Reduced Matrix 2Location: PL=Pore Lining RC=Root Channel M=Matrix
Remarks
with sand and big hunks of woody debris thro
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:'
ElHistosol or Histel (Al) ElAlaska Color Change (TA4) ❑ Alaska Gleyed Without Hue 5Y or Redder
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑ Alaska Alpine swales (TA5) Underlying Layer
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑ Alaska Redox With 2.5Y Hue ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Alaska Gleyed (A13) 3 One indicator of hydrophytic vegetation, one primary indicator of wetland hydrology,
and an appropriate landscape position must be present
❑ Alaska Redox (A14)
❑ Alaska Gleyed Pores (A15) 4 Give details of color change in Remarks
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (any one is sufficient)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑� High Water Table (A2)
❑� Saturation (A3)
❑ Water Marks (131)
❑ Sediment Deposits (132)
❑ Drift Deposits (133)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (64)
❑ Iron Deposits (B5)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67;
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138;
❑ Marl Deposits (615)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No O
Secondary Indicators (two or more are required)
❑ Water Stained Leaves (139)
❑ Drainage Patterns(B10)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Salt Deposits (C5)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (131)
❑ Geomorphic Position (132)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (134)
❑ FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Water Table Present? Yes* No O Depth (inches): 17 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes * No O
Saturation Present? Yes 0 No O Depth (inches):
(includes cagillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitor well, aerial photos, previous inspection) if available:
Remarks:
saturated at surface but only because of heavy rain at the time of sampling.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Alaska Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Alaska Region
Project/Site: CHENEGA HYDRO Borough/City: CHENEGA BAY _ Sampling Date: 06-Oct-11
Applicant/Owner: HATCH/SOLSTICE Sampling Point: CHII-04
Investigator(s): WAD, NMT Landform (hillside, terrace, hummocks etc.): ditch
Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope: 1.7 % / 1.0 ° Elevation:
Subregion : Southeast Alaska Lat.: 60.0676516666667 Long.:-148.016783333333 Datum: WGS84
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: 114SBC
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes U No U (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes UO No O
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
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
within a Wetland? Yes * No O
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No O
Remarks: ditch running around power plant pad. running water silt fence.
VEGETATION Use scientific names of plants. List all species in the plot.
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
❑
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A)
2
El
Total Number of Dominant
❑
Species Across All Strata: 3 (B)
3.
—
❑
Percent of dominant Species
4
❑
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 66.7% (A/B)
5
Total Cover:
0
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
50% of Total Cover:
0 20% of Total Cover:
0
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
10
9❑
FACU
OBL species 10 x 1 = 10
Rubusspectabilis
1'
2 Alnus crisps
5
❑
FAC
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
3
0
❑
FAC species 5 x 3= 15
4
0
❑
FACU species 10 x 4 = 40
5
0
❑
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
6
0
❑
rnlumn Tntalse 25 (A) 65 (B)
7.
0
❑
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.600
8.
0
❑
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0 ❑
9
0
El❑�
Dominance Test is > 50%
10.
Total Cover:
—
15
Prevalence Index is <_3.0
50% of Total Cover:
7.5 20% of
Total Cover:
3
❑ Morphological Adaptations 1(Provide supporting
Herb Stratum
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1 Cinna latifolia
10
66
OBL
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2
0
❑
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3.
0
Elbe
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
0
❑
5.
0
El
Plot size (radius, or length x width)
6.
0
❑
% Cover of Wetland Bryophytes
7
(Where applicable)
$
0
❑
% Bare Ground
9.
0
❑
Total Cover of Bryophytes
10.
0
❑
Hydrophytic
Total Cover:
10,
Vegetation
SO% of Total Cover:
5 20% of Total Cover:
2
Present? Yes O No O
Remarks: channel with overhanging shrubs
US Army Corps of Engineers Alaska Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point: CH11-04
Profile Description: Describe to depth needed to document the presence or absence of indicators
Depth Matrix Redox Features
% Color (moist) (inches) Color (moist) t) % Type' Loci
Texture
'Type: C=Concentration D=Depletion RM=Reduced Matrix 2Location: PL=Pore Lining RC=Root Channel M=Matrix
Remarks
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:'
ElHistosol or Histel (Al) ElAlaska Color Change (TA4) ❑ Alaska Gleyed Without Hue 5Y or Redder
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑ Alaska Alpine swales (TA5) Underlying Layer
❑d Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑ Alaska Redox With 2.5Y Hue ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Alaska Gleyed (A13) 3 One indicator of hydrophytic vegetation, one primary indicator of wetland hydrology,
and an appropriate landscape position must be present
❑ Alaska Redox (A14)
❑ Alaska Gleyed Pores (A15) 4 Give details of color change in Remarks
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
no pit, saturated
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (any one is sufficient)
❑d Surface Water (Al)
❑� High Water Table (A2)
❑� Saturation (A3)
❑ Water Marks (131)
❑ Sediment Deposits (132)
❑ Drift Deposits (133)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (64)
❑ Iron Deposits (135)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No 0
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67;
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138;
❑ Marl Deposits (615)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depth (inches): 4
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No 0
Secondary Indicators (two or more are required)
U Water Stained Leaves (139)
❑ Drainage Patterns (1310)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Salt Deposits (C5)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (131)
❑ Geomorphic Position (132)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (134)
❑ FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Water Table Present? Yes* No 0 Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes * No 0
Saturation Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches):
(includes cagillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitor well, aerial photos, previous inspection) if available:
Remarks:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Alaska Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Alaska Region
Project/Site: CHENEGA HYDRO Borough/City: CHENEGA BAY Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: HATCH/SOLSTICE
Investigator(s): WAD, NMT
Local relief (concave, convex, none): PLANAR
Sampling Point:
Landform (hillside, terrace, hummocks etc.): Ravine
Slope: 99.9 % / 45.0 ° Elevation:
Subregion: Southeast Alaska Lat.: Long.:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: Uplan(
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes U No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes OO No ❑
Are Vegetation ❑ Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
06-Oct-11
CH 11-05
Datum: WGS84
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes * No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No
within a Wetland? Yes 0 NO OO
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes * No O
Remarks: Steep ravine sideslope down to creek
photos 395 399
VEGETATION Use scientific names of plants. List all species in the plot.
Tree Stratum
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Tsuga heterophylla
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1 Vaccinium alaskaense
Absolute
Dominant
% Cover
Species?
65
d❑
0
❑
0
❑
0
❑
0
❑
Total Cover: 65
50% of Total Cover: 32.5 20% of Total Cover:
2
Menziesia ferruginea
3
Harrimanella stelleriana
4
Tsuga heterophylla
5
Phyllodoce aleutica
6.
7.
8.
9.
_
10.
Total Cover
Herb Stratum 50% of Total Cover:
1 Blechnum spirant
2 Coptis aspleniifolia
3. Fauria crista-galli
4 Rubus pedatus
5 Calamagrostis canadensis var. langsdorfii
6.
7.
8.
9.
1n
30
0
50
66
5
❑
5
❑
3
❑
0
❑
0
❑
0
❑
0
❑
0
❑
93
46.5 20% of Total Cover:
10
d❑
5
d❑
5
d❑
2
❑
5
d❑
0
❑
0
❑
0
❑
0
❑
0
❑
Total Cover: 27
50% of Total Cover: 13.5 20% of Total Cover:
Remarks: unknown graminoid, thin leaved sedge
Indicator
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Percent of dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
5
7
71.4%
(A)
(B)
(A/B)
FAC
13
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
OBL species 0
FACW species 10
FAC species 117
FACU species 0
UPL species 58
rnlumn Tntals- 185
Multiply
x 1 =
x 2 =
x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
(A)
by:
0
20
351
0
290
661
(B)
FAC
UPL
FACW
FAC
UPL
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.573
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
❑d Dominance Test is > 50%
❑ Prevalence Index is :53.0
18.6 ❑ Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
FAC ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
FAC 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
FACW be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
FAC
UPL Plot size (radius, or length x width)
Cover of Wetland Bryophytes 0
(Where applicable)
Bare Ground
Total Cover of Bryophytes 30
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
5.4 Present? Yes * No O
US Army Corps of Engineers Alaska Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point: CH11-05
Profile Description: Describe to depth needed to document the presence or absence of indicators
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loci
0-5 10YR 2/1 100 Peat
5-8 2.5Y 4/1 95 10YR 4/6 5 C PL Loamy Sand
8-9
Texture
'Type: C=Concentration D=Depletion RM=Reduced Matrix 2Location: PL=Pore Lining RC=Root Channel M=Matrix
Remarks
oe
90 coarse FRAGMENTS
bedrock
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:'
ElHistosol or Histel (Al)
ElAlaska Color Change (TA4)
❑ Alaska Gleyed Without Hue 5Y or Redder
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Alaska Alpine swales (TA5)
Underlying Layer
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Alaska Redox With 2.5Y Hue
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Alaska Gleyed (A13)
3 One indicator of hydrophytic vegetation, one
primary indicator of wetland hydrology,
❑ Alaska Redox (A14)
and an appropriate landscape position must be present
❑ Alaska Gleyed Pores (A15)
4 Give details of color change in Remarks
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type: bedrock
Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No OO
Depth (inches): 8
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (any one is sufficient)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑ High Water Table (A2)
❑� Saturation (A3)
❑ Water Marks (131)
❑ Sediment Deposits (132)
❑ Drift Deposits (B3)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (64)
❑ Iron Deposits (135)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes 0 No
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67;
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138;
❑ Marl Deposits (615)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depth (inches):
Secondary Indicators (two or more are required)
❑ Water Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Drainage Patterns(B10)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Salt Deposits (C5)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (131)
❑ Geomorphic Position (132)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (134)
❑ FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Water Table Present? Yes 0 No* Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes * No 0
Saturation Present? Yes* No 0 Depth (inches):
(includes cagillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitor well, aerial photos, previous inspection) if available:
Remarks:
Saturated at the surface, but its due to heavy rain.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Alaska Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Alaska Region
Project/Site: CHENEGA HYDRO Borough/City: CHENEGA BAY _ Sampling Date: 06-Oct-11
Applicant/Owner: HATCH/SOLSTICE Sampling Point: CHII-06
Investigator(s): WAD, NMT Landform (hillside, terrace, hummocks etc.): Gulch or Gully
Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope: 46.6 % / 25.0 ° Elevation:
Subregion : Southeast Alaska Lat.: 60.0722 Long.:-148.018816666667 Datum: WGS84
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: pEM1E
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes U No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes OO 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
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No ❑
within a Wetland? Yes * No O
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No O
Remarks: finger of wet bog extending downslope to creek. drainage feature. photos 400-404
VEGETATION Use scientific names of plants. List all species in the plot.
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
❑
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
2
El
Total Number of Dominant
❑
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
3.
—
❑
Percent of dominant Species
4
❑
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 66.7% (A/B)
5
Total Cover:
0
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
50% of Total Cover:
0 20% of Total Cover:
0
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
Cornuscanadensis
d❑
FACU
OBL species 20 x 1 = 20
1
5
2
Harrimanella stelleriana
2
d❑
FACW
FACW species 46 x 2 = 92
3
Rubusarcticus
2
d❑
FAC
FAC species 2 x 3= 6
4
Menziesia ferruginea
1
❑
UPL
FACU species 5 x 4 = 20
5
0
❑
UPL species 11 x 5 = 55
6.
0
❑
rnlumn Tntals- 84 (A) 193 (B)
7.
0
❑
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.298
8.
0
❑
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0 ❑
9
0
El❑�
Dominance Test is > 50%
10.
Total Cover:
—
10
Prevalence Index is <_3.0
50% of Total Cover:
5 20% of
Total Cover:
2
❑ Morphological Adaptations 1(Provide supporting
Herb Stratum
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1
Eriophorum angustifolium
10
d❑
OBL
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2
Calamagrostis canadensis var. langsdorfli
10❑
UPL
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3.
Gentian douglasiana
2
—
❑
FACW
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4
Carex pluriflora
5
❑
OBL
5.
Geum macrophyllum
5
El
FACW
length
❑
Plot size (radius, or x width)
6.
Lysichiton americanum
5
OBL
%Cover of Wetland Bryophytes 50
7.
Fauria crista-galli
2
❑
FACW
(Where applicable)
8.
Erigeron peregrinus
35
0
FACW
% Bare Ground
9.
0
❑
Total Cover of Bryophytes 50
10.
0
❑
Hydrophytic
Total Cover:
74
Vegetation
SO% of Total Cover:
37 20% of Total Cover:
14.8
Present? Yes O No O
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Alaska Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point: CH11-06
Profile Description: Describe to depth needed to document the presence or absence of indicators
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loci
0-3 10YR 4/6 100 Peat
3-5 10YR 5/6 100 Peat
5-16 10YR 3/6 100 Peat
Texture Remarks
of
of
of
'Type: C=Concentration D=Depletion RM=Reduced Matrix 2Location: PL=Pore Lining RC=Root Channel M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:'
❑d Histosol or Histel (Al)
4
❑ Alaska Color Change (TA4)
❑ Alaska Gleyed Without Hue 5Y or Redder
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Alaska Alpine swales (TA5)
Underlying Layer
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Alaska Redox With 2.5Y Hue
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Alaska Gleyed (A13)
3 One indicator of hydrophytic vegetation, one
primary indicator of wetland hydrology,
❑ Alaska Redox (A14)
and an appropriate landscape position must be present
❑ Alaska Gleyed Pores (A15)
4 Give details of color change in Remarks
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Hydric Soil Present? Yes OO No 0
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (any one is sufficient)
❑d Surface Water (Al)
❑� High Water Table (A2)
❑� Saturation (A3)
❑ Water Marks (61)
❑ Sediment Deposits (132)
❑ Drift Deposits (133)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (64)
❑ Iron Deposits (65)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No 0
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67;
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138;
❑ Marl Deposits (615)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depth (inches):
Secondary Indicators (two or more are required)
U Water Stained Leaves (139)
❑ Drainage Patterns(810)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Salt Deposits (C5)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (131)
❑ Geomorphic Position (132)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (134)
❑� FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Water Table Present? Yes* No 0 Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes * No 0
Saturation Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches):
(includes cagillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitor well, aerial photos, previous inspection) if available:
Remarks:
surface water in patches, small beaded stream
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Alaska Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Alaska Region
Project/Site: CHENEGA HYDRO Borough/City: CHENEGA BAY _ Sampling Date: 06-Oct-11
Applicant/Owner: HATCH/SOLSTICE Sampling Point: CHII-07
Investigator(s): WAD, NMT Landform (hillside, terrace, hummocks etc.): Hillside
Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope: 8.7 % / 5.0 ° Elevation:
Subregion : Southeast Alaska Lat.: Long.: Datum: WGS84
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: PEM1/SS4E
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes U No O (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes OO No O
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
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No O
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No O
within a Wetland? Yes OO No O
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No O
Remarks: Bog patch centerline of proposed trench. Beaded stream runs around edge of bog
photos 415-420
VEGETATION Use scientific names of plants. List all species in the plot.
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
❑
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)
2
El
Total Number of Dominant
❑
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
3.
—
❑
Percent of dominant Species
4
❑
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
5
Total Cover:
0
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
50% of Total Cover:
0 20% of Total Cover:
0
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
El
OBL species 13 x 1 = 13
1
Tsuga mertensiana
5
2
Cornus suecica
5
❑
FAC
FACW species 30 x 2 = 60
3.
Harrimanella stelleriana
15
d❑
FACW
FAC species 18 x 3 = 54
4.
Alnus sinuata
1
❑
FAC
FACU species 0 x 4 = 0
5
0
❑
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
6.
0
❑
rnlumn Tntals- 61 (A) 127 (B)
7.
0
❑
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.082
8.
0
❑
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0 ❑
9
0
El❑�
Dominance Test is > 50%
10.
Total Cover:
—
26
Prevalence Index is <_3.0
50% of Total Cover:
13 20% of
Total Cover:
5.2
❑ Morphological Adaptations 1(Provide supporting
Herb Stratum
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1.
Eriophorum angustifolium
5
d❑
OBL
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2
Carex pluriflora
5
d❑
OBL
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3.
Geum macrophyllum
5
d❑
FACW
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Lycopodium annotinum
2
El
FAC
5.
]uncus stygius
3
ElOBL
length
Gentians douglasiana
❑
FACW
Plot size (radius, or x width)
6.
3
%Cover of Wetland Bryophytes 30
7.
Fauria crista-galli
2
❑
FACW
(Where applicable)
8.
Rubus arcticus
5❑
FAC
% Bare Ground
9.
Erigeron peregrinus
5❑
FACW
Total Cover of Bryophytes 30
10.
0
❑
Hydrophytic
Total Cover:
35
Vegetation
50% of Total Cover: 17.5 20% of Total Cover:
7
Present? Yes O No O
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Alaska Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point: CH11-07
Profile Description: Describe to depth needed to document the presence or absence of indicators
Depth Matrix Redox Features
% Color (moist) (inches) Color (moist) t) % Typel Loci
0-16 10YR 3/2 100 Peat
16-21 10YR 2/1 100
Texture
of
Peat oe
'Type: C=Concentration D=Depletion RM=Reduced Matrix 2Location: PL=Pore Lining RC=Root Channel M=Matrix
Remarks
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:'
4
❑d Histosol or Histel (Al) ❑ Alaska Color Change (TA4) ❑ Alaska Gleyed Without Hue 5Y or Redder
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑ Alaska Alpine swales (TA5) Underlying Layer
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑ Alaska Redox With 2.5Y Hue ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Alaska Gleyed (A13) 3 One indicator of hydrophytic vegetation, one primary indicator of wetland hydrology,
and an appropriate landscape position must be present
❑ Alaska Redox (A14)
❑ Alaska Gleyed Pores (A15) 4 Give details of color change in Remarks
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (any one is sufficient)
❑d Surface Water (Al)
❑� High Water Table (A2)
❑� Saturation (A3)
❑ Water Marks (131)
❑ Sediment Deposits (132)
❑ Drift Deposits (133)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (64)
❑ Iron Deposits (135)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No ❑
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67;
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138;
❑ Marl Deposits (615)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depth (inches): 5
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No O
Secondary Indicators (two or more are required)
U Water Stained Leaves (139)
❑ Drainage Patterns (1310)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Salt Deposits (C5)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (131)
❑ Geomorphic Position (132)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (134)
❑� FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Water Table Present? Yes* No O Depth (inches): 13 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes * No O
Saturation Present? Yes 0 No O Depth (inches):
(includes cagillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitor well, aerial photos, previous inspection) if available:
Remarks:
surface water in patches
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Alaska Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Alaska Region
Project/Site: CHENEGA HYDRO Borough/City: CHENEGA BAY Sampling Date: 06-Oct-11
Applicant/Owner: HATCH/SOLSTICE Sampling Point: CHII-08
Investigator(s): WAD, NMT Landform (hillside, terrace, hummocks etc.): Channel (active)
Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope: 8.7 % / 5.0 ° Elevation:
Subregion : Southeast Alaska Lat.: Long.: Datum: WGS84
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: R4SBC
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes U No U (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ , Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes O No O
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
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes O No O
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O NO O
within a Wetland? Yes * No U
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes NO O
Remarks: beaded stream runs at edge of bog
photos 426-428
VEGETATION Use scientific names of plants. List all species in the plot.
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
❑
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (A)
2
El
Total Number of Dominant
❑
Species Across All Strata: 0 (B)
3.
❑
Percent of dominant Species
4.
❑
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0.0% (A/B)
5
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total Cover: 0
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
SO%of Total Cover:
0 20% of
Total Cover:
0
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
❑
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
1
❑
FACW species 0 x 2= 0
2.
3.
❑
FAC species 0 x 3 = 0
4
❑
FACU species 0 x 4= 0
5
❑
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
6.
❑
[nlumn Tntals, 0 fnl 0 (B)
❑❑
7.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 0.000
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
9. ❑
❑
❑ Dominance Test is > 50%
10.
❑ Prevalence Index is <_3.0
Total Cover:
0
50% of Total Cover:
0 20% of
Total Cover:
0
❑ Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
Herb Stratum
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1 .
0
❑
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2.
0
❑
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3.
0
❑
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
a
❑
0
5.
Plot size (radius, or length x width)
6.
0
❑
% Cover of Wetland Bryophytes 0
7
(Where applicable)
$
0
❑
% Bare Ground
9.
0
❑
Total Cover of Bryophytes 0
10.
0
❑
Hydrophytic
Total Cover:
0
Vegetation
SO% of Tota I Cover:
0 20% of Total Cover:
0
Present? Yes O No O
Remarks: potamageton in channel 3%
US Army Corps of Engineers Alaska Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point: CH11-08
Profile Description: Describe to depth needed to document the presence or absence of indicators
Depth Matrix Redox Features
% Color (moist) (inches) Color (moist) t) % Type' Loci
Texture
'Type: C=Concentration D=Depletion RM=Reduced Matrix 2Location: PL=Pore Lining RC=Root Channel M=Matrix
Remarks
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:'
ElHistosol or Histel (Al) ElAlaska Color Change (TA4) ❑ Alaska Gleyed Without Hue 5Y or Redder
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑ Alaska Alpine swales (TA5) Underlying Layer
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑ Alaska Redox With 2.5Y Hue ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Alaska Gleyed (A13) 3 One indicator of hydrophytic vegetation, one primary indicator of wetland hydrology,
and an appropriate landscape position must be present
❑ Alaska Redox (A14)
❑ Alaska Gleyed Pores (A15) 4 Give details of color change in Remarks
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
no pit saturated
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (any one is sufficient)
❑d Surface Water (Al) ❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (671,
❑� High Water Table (A2) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138;
❑� Saturation (A3) ❑ Marl Deposits (615)
❑ Water Marks (131) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Sediment Deposits (132) ❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Drift Deposits (133) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (84)
❑ Iron Deposits (135)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No 0 Depth (inches): 12
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No 0
Secondary Indicators (two or more are required)
❑ Water stained Leaves (139)
❑ Drainage Patterns (1310)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Salt Deposits (C5)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (131)
❑ Geomorphic Position (132)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (134)
❑ FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Water Table Present? Yes* No 0 Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes * No 0
Saturation Present? Yes 0 No 0 Depth (inches):
(includes cagillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitor well, aerial photos, previous inspection) if available:
Remarks:
beaded stream with deep pools and saturated edges
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Alaska Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Alaska Region
Project/Site: CHENEGA HYDRO Borough/City: CHENEGA BAY _ Sampling Date: 06-Oct-11
Applicant/Owner: HATCH/SOLSTICE Sampling Point: CHII-09
Investigator(s): WAD, NMT Landform (hillside, terrace, hummocks etc.): Hillside
Local relief (concave, convex, none): planar Slope: 70.0 % / 35.0 ° Elevation:
Subregion : Southeast Alaska Lat.: Long.: Datum: WGS84
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: Upland
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes U No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ Soil ❑ , or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes OO No O
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
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes O NO
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O NO
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O No within a Wetland? Yes NO
Remarks: steep hillside above disturbance. Still some small drainages through here, but too small to map
photos 433-439
VEGETATION Use scientific names of plants. List all species in the plot.
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
Picea sitchensis
15❑
FACU
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A)
2
Tsuga heterophylla
10
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
0
❑
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
p
El
Percent of dominant Species
4
0
❑
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50.0% (A/B)
5
Total Cover:
25
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
50% of Total Cover: 12.5
20% of Total Cover:
5
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
ferruginea
ElUPL
OBL species 1 x 1 = 1
1.
Menziesia
5
2.
Vaccinium ovalifolium
15
d❑
FAC
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
3.
Rubusspectabilis
10
❑
FACU
FAC species 55 x 3 = 165
4
Alnus sinuata
5
❑
FAC
FACU species 51 x 4 = 204
5
Cornuscanadensis
25❑
FACU
UPL species 35 x 5 = 175
6
Oplopanax horridus
1
❑
FACU
rnlumn Tntals- 142 (A) 545 (B)
7.
0
❑
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.838
8.
0
❑
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0 ❑
9
0
❑
❑ Dominance Test is > 500/o
10.
Total Cover:
61
❑ Prevalence Index is :53.0
50% of Total Cover: 30.5
20% of
Total Cover:
12.2
❑ Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
Herb Stratum
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1.
Calamagrostis canadensis var. langsdorfii
30❑
UPL
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
2.
Athyrium filix-femina
20
FAC
i
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3.
Lysichiton americanum
1
-
El
OBL
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4
Coptis aspleniifolia
5
❑
FAC
U
❑
5.
❑❑
Plot size (radius, or length x width)
6.
0
% Cover of Wetland Bryophytes 0
7
(Where applicable)
$
0
❑
% Bare Ground
9.
0
❑
Total Cover of Bryophytes 0
10.
0
❑
Hydrophytic
Total Cover:
56
Vegetation
50% of Total Cover: 28
20% of Total Cover:
11.2
Present? Yes O No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Alaska Version 2.0
SOIL
Sampling Point: CH11-09
Profile Description: Describe to depth needed to document the presence or absence of indicators
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loci
0-8 10YR 2/1 100 Peat
Texture
8-13 2.5Y 4/2 95 10YR 4/3 5 C PL Silt Loam
'Type: C=Concentration D=Depletion RM=Reduced Matrix 2Location: PL=Pore Lining RC=Root Channel M=Matrix
oe
Remarks
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:'
ElHistosol or Histel (Al) ElAlaska Color Change (TA4) ❑ Alaska Gleyed Without Hue 5Y or Redder
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑ Alaska Alpine swales (TA5) Underlying Layer
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑ Alaska Redox With 2.5Y Hue ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Alaska Gleyed (A13) 3 One indicator of hydrophytic vegetation, one primary indicator of wetland hydrology,
and an appropriate landscape position must be present
❑ Alaska Redox (A14)
❑ Alaska Gleyed Pores (A15) 4 Give details of color change in Remarks
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type: rock
Depth (inches): 13
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (any one is sufficient)
❑ Surface Water (Al)
❑� High Water Table (A2)
❑� Saturation (A3)
❑ Water Marks (131)
❑ Sediment Deposits (132)
❑ Drift Deposits (133)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (64)
❑ Iron Deposits (135)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes O No
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67;
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138;
❑ Marl Deposits (615)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No O
Secondary Indicators (two or more are required)
❑ Water Stained Leaves (139)
❑ Drainage Patterns (1310)
❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Salt Deposits (C5)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (131)
❑ Geomorphic Position (132)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (134)
❑ FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Water Table Present? Yes* No O Depth (inches): 10 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes * No O
Saturation Present? Yes 0 No O Depth (inches): 2
(includes cagillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitor well, aerial photos, previous inspection) if available:
Remarks:
Pit filled with water despite steep slope. May be due to heavy rain.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Alaska Version 2.0
Appendix B. Site Photos
ABR, Inc.—Chenega Bay Study 29
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
g" . y
CH11-01: Palustrine Saturated Needle -leaf Evergreen Forest Hydrology: High water table, saturation
NWI Class: PF04B Soils: Histosol
CHII-02: Palustrine Seasonally Flooded/Saturated Emergent
Meadow
NWI Class: PEM1E
CHII-03: Upland
NWI Class: U
Hydrology: Surface water
Soils: Inundated
Hydrology: Saturation, high water table
Soils: Histic epipedon
aak�, �i_
J�17 ey •.. � Y - fit, ��` 'i.. hR r ' '�
Aw
AL
CH11-07: Palustrine Seasonally Flooded/Saturated Emergent- Hydrology: Surface water, saturation, high water table
Needleaf Evergreen Meadow
NWI Class: PEM1/SS4E Soils: Histosol
CH11-08: Intermittent Stream
NWI Class: R4SBC
CH11-09: Upland
NWI Class: U
Hydrology: Running water
Soils: Inundated
Hydrology: Saturation at surface due to heavy rain
Soils: Organics over silt loam
CHV11-01: Upland
NWI Class: U
CHV11-03: Upland
NWI Class: U
CHV11-02: Upland
NWI Class: U
Appendix C. Functional Assessment Forms
ABR, Inc. Chenega Bay Study 35
Wetland Functions Data Form -Alaska Regulatory Best Professional Judgment Characterization
(Modified by ABR, Inc. -Environmental Research & Services; March 2009)
File #:Chenega Bay Date:12/1/2011
Wetland:PF04B PM/RS: WAD
A. Flood Flow Regulation (Storage and Desynchronization)
Likely or not likely to Provide (Y or N): Y
Rating: HIGH
1. Wetland is capable of retaining much higher volumes of water during
1. Y
storm events than under normal rainfall conditions.
2. N
2. Wetland is a closed (depressional) system subject to flooding or
3. N
shows evidence of flooding.
4. Y
3. If flow -through, wetland has constricted outlet with signs of fluctuating
5. Y
water levels, algal mats, and/or lodged debris.
6. Y
4. Wetland has dense (>40% cover) woody vegetation.
5. Wetland receives floodwater from an adjacent water course at least
once every 10 years.
> 4 attributes (Y)-High Function
6. Floodwaters enter and flow through wetland predominantly as sheet
2-3 attributes (Y)-Moderate Function
flow rather than channel flow.
0-1 attributes (Y)-Low Function
B. Sediment, Nutrient (N and P), Toxicant Removal
Likely or not likely to Provide (Y or N): N
Rating: LOW -MODERATE
1. Sediment, nutrients and/or toxicants (from tillage, mining,
1. Y
construction or other sources of pollution) appear to be or are likely to
2' N
3. N
be entering the wetland.
4. N
2. Slow -moving or still water is present or occurs during flooding that
5. N
happens at least once every 10 years.
6. Y
3. Dense (>50% cover) herbaceous vegetation is present.
4. At least moderate interspersion of vegetation and water is present or
occurs during flooding that happens at least once every 10 years.
> 4 attributes (Y)-High Function
5. Sediment deposits are present (evidence of deposition during floods).
2-3 attributes (Y)-Moderate Function
6. Thick surface organic horizon and/or abundant fine organic litter is
0-1 attributes (Y)-Low Function
present.
C. Erosion Control and Shoreline Stabilization
Likely or not likely to Provide (Y or N): Y
(Only assess if directly abuts permanent or relatively permanent water)
Rating: MODERATE
1. Wetland has dense, energy absorbing vegetation (trees, shrubs)
1.Y
bordering the water course and no evidence of erosion.
2.N
2. An at least moderately dense herbaceous layer is present.
1-2 attributes (Y)-High Function
None -Low Function
D. Production of Organic Matter and its Export
Likely or not likely to Provide (Y or N): Y
Rating: LOW -MODERATE
1. Wetland has at least 30% cover of herbaceous vegetation.
1. Y
2. Woody plants in wetland are mostly deciduous.
2. N
3. High degree of plant community structure, vegetation density, and
3. N
species richness present.
4. N
5. Y
4. Interspersion of vegetation and water is at least moderate.
6. N
5. Wetland is flooded at least once every 10 years.
6. A more than minimal amount of organic matter is flushed from the
wetland by water flow at least once every 10 years.
>_ 4 attributes (Y)-High Function
2-3 attributes (Y)-Moderate Function
0-1 attributes (Y)-Low Function
If Function 5 or 6 is N, then automatically low function
E. General Habitat Suitability
Likely or not likely to Provide (Y or N): N
Rating: LOW
1. Wetland is not fragmented by development.
1.N
2. Upland surrounding wetland is undisturbed.
2. N
3. Diversity (evenness of cover) of plant species is moderately high (>_5
3. N
species with at least 10% cover each).
4. Y
4. Plant community has two or more strata, with at least two of those
5. N
strata having >10% total cover.
6. N
5. Wetland has at least a moderate degree of Cowardin Class
interspersion.
6. Evidence of wildlife use (e.g., nests, tracks, scat, gnawed stumps,
> 5 attributes (Y)-High Function
survey data) is present.
2-4 attributes (Y)-Moderate Function
0-1 attributes (Y)-Low Function
F. General Fish Habitat (must be associated with a fish -bearing
Likely or not likely to Provide (Y or N): N/A
stream)
Rating:
1. Wetland has perennial or intermittent surface water connection to a
1.
fish -bearing water body.
2.
2. Wetland has sufficient size and depth of open water so as not to
3.
freeze completely during winter.
4.
3. Fish are present or are known to be present.
5.
4. Herbaceous and/or woody vegetation is present in wetland and/or
6.
buffer to provide cover, shade, and/or detrital matter.
5. Spawning areas are present (aquatic vegetation and/or gravel beds
>_ 5 attributes (Y)-High Function
6. Juvenile rest areas present (e.g. pools with organic debris or
3-4 attributes (Y)-Moderate Function
overhanging vegetation).
0-2 attributes (Y)-Low Function
G. Native Plant Richness
Likely or not likely to Provide (Y or N): N
Rating: LOW
1. At least 20 native plant species occur in the wetland
1. N
2. Wetland contains two or more Cowardin Classes.
2. N
3. Wetland has three or more strata of vegetation with at least 10%
3. N
cover in each stratum.
>_ 2 attributes (Y)-High Function
1 attribute (Y)-Moderate Function
None -Low Function
H. Educational, Scientific, Recreational, or Subsistence Use
Likely or not likely to Provide (Y or N): N
Rating: LOW
1. Site has documented scientific or educational use.
1. N
2. Wetland is in public ownership.
2. Y
3. Accessible trails are available.
3. Y
4. Wetland supports subsistence activities (e.g., hunting, fishing, berry
4. N
picking).
>_ 2 attributes (Y)-High Function
1 attribute (Y)-Moderate Function
None -Low Function
I. Uniqueness and Special Status
Likely or not likely to Provide (Y or N): N
Rating: LOW
1. Wetland contains documented occurrence of a state or federally
1. N
listed threatened or endangered species.
2. N
2. Wetland contains documented critical habitat, high quality
3. N
ecosystems, or priority species, respectively designated by the U.S.
4. N
Fish and Wildlife Service
3. Wetland has biological, geological, or other features that are
>_ 2 attributes (Y)-High Function
determined to be rare.
1 attribute (Y)-Moderate Function
4. Wetland has been determined significant because it provides
None -Low Function
functions scarce for the area.
If attribute 1 is Y, then automatically High Function
Wetland Functions Data Form -Alaska Regulatory Best Professional Judgment Characterization
(Modified by ABR, Inc. -Environmental Research & Services; March 2009)
File #:Chenega Bay Date:12/1/2011
Wetland:PEM1E, PEM/SS4E, R4SBC PM/RS: WAD
A. Flood Flow Regulation (Storage and Desynchronization)
Likely or not likely to Provide (Y or N): Y
Rating: HIGH
1. Wetland is capable of retaining much higher volumes of water during
1. Y
storm events than under normal rainfall conditions.
2. N
2. Wetland is a closed (depressional) system subject to flooding or
3. Y
shows evidence of flooding.
4. Y
3. If flow -through, wetland has constricted outlet with signs of fluctuating
5. N
water levels, algal mats, and/or lodged debris.
6. Y
4. Wetland has dense (>40% cover) woody vegetation.
5. Wetland receives floodwater from an adjacent water course at least
once every 10 years.
> 4 attributes (Y)-High
Function
6. Floodwaters enter and flow through wetland predominantly as sheet
2-3 attributes (Y)-Moderate
Function
flow rather than channel flow.
0-1 attributes (Y)-Low
Function
B. Sediment, Nutrient (N and P), Toxicant Removal
Likely or not likely to Provide (Y or N): Y
Rating: HIGH
1. Sediment, nutrients and/or toxicants (from tillage, mining,
1. Y
construction or other sources of pollution) appear to be or are likely to
2' Y
3. Y
be entering the wetland.
4. Y
2. Slow -moving or still water is present or occurs during flooding that
5. Y
happens at least once every 10 years.
6. Y
3. Dense (>50% cover) herbaceous vegetation is present.
4. At least moderate interspersion of vegetation and water is present or
occurs during flooding that happens at least once every 10 years.
> 4 attributes (Y)-High
Function
5. Sediment deposits are present (evidence of deposition during floods).
2-3 attributes (Y)-Moderate
Function
6. Thick surface organic horizon and/or abundant fine organic litter is
0-1 attributes (Y)-Low
Function
present.
C. Erosion Control and Shoreline Stabilization
Likely or not likely to Provide (Y or N): Y
(Only assess if directly abuts permanent or relatively permanent water)
Rating: HIGH
1. Wetland has dense, energy absorbing vegetation (trees, shrubs)
1. N
bordering the water course and no evidence of erosion.
2.Y
2. An at least moderately dense herbaceous layer is present.
1-2 attributes (Y)-High
Function
None -Low Function
D. Production of Organic Matter and its Export
Likely or not likely to Provide (Y or N): Y
Rating: HIGH
1. Wetland has at least 30% cover of herbaceous vegetation.
1. Y
2. Woody plants in wetland are mostly deciduous.
2. N
3. High degree of plant community structure, vegetation density, and
3. N
species richness present.
4. Y
5. Y
4. Interspersion of vegetation and water is at least moderate.
6. Y
5. Wetland is flooded at least once every 10 years.
6. A more than minimal amount of organic matter is flushed from the
wetland by water flow at least once every 10 years.
>_ 4 attributes (Y)-High
Function
2-3 attributes (Y)-Moderate
Function
0-1 attributes (Y)-Low
Function
If Function 5 or 6 is
N, then automatically low function
E. General Habitat Suitability
Likely or not likely to Provide (Y or N): Y
Rating: MODERATE
1. Wetland is not fragmented by development.
1. N
2. Upland surrounding wetland is undisturbed.
2. N
3. Diversity (evenness of cover) of plant species is moderately high (>_5
3. Y
species with at least 10% cover each).
4. N
4. Plant community has two or more strata, with at least two of those
5. Y
strata having >10% total cover.
6. N
5. Wetland has at least a moderate degree of Cowardin Class
interspersion.
6. Evidence of wildlife use (e.g., nests, tracks, scat, gnawed stumps,
> 5 attributes (Y)-High Function
survey data) is present.
2-4 attributes (Y)-Moderate Function
0-1 attributes (Y)-Low Function
F. General Fish Habitat (must be associated with a fish -bearing
Likely or not likely to Provide (Y or N): N
stream)
Rating: LOW
1. Wetland has perennial or intermittent surface water connection to a
1.Y
fish -bearing water body.
2.N
2. Wetland has sufficient size and depth of open water so as not to
3.N
freeze completely during winter.
4.N
3. Fish are present or are known to be present.
5.N
4. Herbaceous and/or woody vegetation is present in wetland and/or
6.Y
buffer to provide cover, shade, and/or detrital matter.
5. Spawning areas are present (aquatic vegetation and/or gravel beds
>_ 5 attributes (Y)-High Function
6. Juvenile rest areas present (e.g. pools with organic debris or
3-4 attributes (Y)-Moderate Function
overhanging vegetation).
0-2 attributes (Y)-Low Function
G. Native Plant Richness
Likely or not likely to Provide (Y or N): Y
Rating: HIGH
1. At least 20 native plant species occur in the wetland
1. Y
2. Wetland contains two or more Cowardin Classes.
2. Y
3. Wetland has three or more strata of vegetation with at least 10%
3. N
cover in each stratum.
>_ 2 attributes (Y)-High Function
1 attribute (Y)-Moderate Function
None -Low Function
H. Educational, Scientific, Recreational, or Subsistence Use
Likely or not likely to Provide (Y or N): N
Rating: LOW -MODERATE
1. Site has documented scientific or educational use.
1. N
2. Wetland is in public ownership.
2. Y
3. Accessible trails are available.
3. Y
4. Wetland supports subsistence activities (e.g., hunting, fishing, berry
4. N
picking).
>_ 2 attributes (Y)-High Function
1 attribute (Y)-Moderate Function
None -Low Function
I. Uniqueness and Special Status
Likely or not likely to Provide (Y or N): N
Rating: LOW
1. Wetland contains documented occurrence of a state or federally
1. N
listed threatened or endangered species.
2. N
2. Wetland contains documented critical habitat, high quality
3. N
ecosystems, or priority species, respectively designated by the U.S.
4. N
Fish and Wildlife Service
3. Wetland has biological, geological, or other features that are
>_ 2 attributes (Y)-High Function
determined to be rare.
1 attribute (Y)-Moderate Function
4. Wetland has been determined significant because it provides
None -Low Function
functions scarce for the area.
If attribute 1 is Y, then automatically High Function
Wetland Functions Data Form -Alaska Regulatory Best Professional Judgment Characterization
(Modified by ABR, Inc. -Environmental Research & Services; March 2009)
File #:Chenega Bay Date:12/1/2011
Wetland:R3UBH PM/RS:WAD
A. Flood Flow Regulation (Storage and Desynchronization)
Likely or not likely to Provide (Y or N): Y
Rating: HIGH
1. Wetland is capable of retaining much higher volumes of water during
1. Y
storm events than under normal rainfall conditions.
2. N
2. Wetland is a closed (depressional) system subject to flooding or
3. Y
shows evidence of flooding.
4. N
3. If flow -through, wetland has constricted outlet with signs of fluctuating
5. Y
water levels, algal mats, and/or lodged debris.
6. Y
4. Wetland has dense (>40% cover) woody vegetation.
5. Wetland receives floodwater from an adjacent water course at least
once every 10 years.
> 4 attributes (Y)-High
Function
6. Floodwaters enter and flow through wetland predominantly as sheet
2-3 attributes (Y)-Moderate
Function
flow rather than channel flow.
0-1 attributes (Y)-Low
Function
B. Sediment, Nutrient (N and P), Toxicant Removal
Likely or not likely to Provide (Y or N): N
Rating: LOW
1. Sediment, nutrients and/or toxicants (from tillage, mining,
1. Y
construction or other sources of pollution) appear to be or are likely to
2' N
3. N
be entering the wetland.
4. N
2. Slow -moving or still water is present or occurs during flooding that
5. Y
happens at least once every 10 years.
6. N
3. Dense (>50% cover) herbaceous vegetation is present.
4. At least moderate interspersion of vegetation and water is present or
occurs during flooding that happens at least once every 10 years.
> 4 attributes (Y)-High
Function
5. Sediment deposits are present (evidence of deposition during floods).
2-3 attributes (Y)-Moderate
Function
6. Thick surface organic horizon and/or abundant fine organic litter is
0-1 attributes (Y)-Low
Function
present.
C. Erosion Control and Shoreline Stabilization
Likely or not
likely to Provide (Y or N): N/A
(Only assess if directly abuts permanent or relatively permanent water)
Rating:
1. Wetland has dense, energy absorbing vegetation (trees, shrubs)
1.
bordering the water course and no evidence of erosion.
2.
2. An at least moderately dense herbaceous layer is present.
1-2 attributes (Y)-High
Function
None -Low Function
D. Production of Organic Matter and its Export
Likely or not likely to Provide (Y or N): N
Rating: LOW
1. Wetland has at least 30% cover of herbaceous vegetation.
1. N
2. Woody plants in wetland are mostly deciduous.
2. N
3. High degree of plant community structure, vegetation density, and
3. N
species richness present.
4. N
5. Y
4. Interspersion of vegetation and water is at least moderate.
6. N
5. Wetland is flooded at least once every 10 years.
6. A more than minimal amount of organic matter is flushed from the
wetland by water flow at least once every 10 years.
>_ 4 attributes (Y)-High
Function
2-3 attributes (Y)-Moderate
Function
0-1 attributes (Y)-Low
Function
If Function 5 or 6 is
N, then automatically low function
E. General Habitat Suitability
Likely or not likely to Provide (Y or N):Y
Rating: LOW
1. Wetland is not fragmented by development.
1. Y
2. Upland surrounding wetland is undisturbed.
2. N
3. Diversity (evenness of cover) of plant species is moderately high (>_5
3. N
species with at least 10% cover each).
4. N
4. Plant community has two or more strata, with at least two of those
5. N
strata having >10% total cover.
6. N
5. Wetland has at least a moderate degree of Cowardin Class
interspersion.
6. Evidence of wildlife use (e.g., nests, tracks, scat, gnawed stumps,
> 5 attributes (Y)-High Function
survey data) is present.
2-4 attributes (Y)-Moderate Function
0-1 attributes (Y)-Low Function
F. General Fish Habitat (must be associated with a fish -bearing
Likely or not likely to Provide (Y or N): Y
stream)
Rating: HIGH
1. Wetland has perennial or intermittent surface water connection to a
1.Y
fish -bearing water body.
2.N
2. Wetland has sufficient size and depth of open water so as not to
3.Y
freeze completely during winter.
4.Y
3. Fish are present or are known to be present.
5.Y
4. Herbaceous and/or woody vegetation is present in wetland and/or
6.Y
buffer to provide cover, shade, and/or detrital matter.
5. Spawning areas are present (aquatic vegetation and/or gravel beds
>_ 5 attributes (Y)-High Function
6. Juvenile rest areas present (e.g. pools with organic debris or
3-4 attributes (Y)-Moderate Function
overhanging vegetation).
0-2 attributes (Y)-Low Function
G. Native Plant Richness
Likely or not likely to Provide (Y or N): N
Rating: LOW
1. At least 20 native plant species occur in the wetland
1. N
2. Wetland contains two or more Cowardin Classes.
2. N
3. Wetland has three or more strata of vegetation with at least 10%
3. N
cover in each stratum.
>_ 2 attributes (Y)-High Function
1 attribute (Y)-Moderate Function
None -Low Function
H. Educational, Scientific, Recreational, or Subsistence Use
Likely or not likely to Provide (Y or N): Y
Rating: HIGH
1. Site has documented scientific or educational use.
1. N
2. Wetland is in public ownership.
2. Y
3. Accessible trails are available.
3. Y
4. Wetland supports subsistence activities (e.g., hunting, fishing, berry
4. Y
picking).
>_ 2 attributes (Y)-High Function
1 attribute (Y)-Moderate Function
None -Low Function
I. Uniqueness and Special Status
Likely or not likely to Provide (Y or N): N
Rating: LOW
1. Wetland contains documented occurrence of a state or federally
1. N
listed threatened or endangered species.
2. N
2. Wetland contains documented critical habitat, high quality
3. N
ecosystems, or priority species, respectively designated by the U.S.
4. N
Fish and Wildlife Service
3. Wetland has biological, geological, or other features that are
>_ 2 attributes (Y)-High Function
determined to be rare.
1 attribute (Y)-Moderate Function
4. Wetland has been determined significant because it provides
None -Low Function
functions scarce for the area.
If attribute 1 is Y, then automatically High Function