Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Critical Area Report - PLN General - 4/26/2022
• • Fri r �' i 5;•� o�c y .,� • t���kv ♦t � ..Y K rt �f � ! � •( T■t H. �V1 i7 t 1 ��T S.♦ti _ �. A O ftt. . off ' em ■ - •� • 11111 ' / ' / / / •1 � •i Table of Contents Introduction.....................................................................................................................................3 SiteDescription..............................................................................................................................3 Methodology...................................................................................................................................3 Observation.....................................................................................................................................4 Vegetation.....................................................................................................................................4 Soils..............................................................................................................................................4 Hydrology......................................................................................................................................4 Wildlife..........................................................................................................................................5 Topography...................................................................................................................................5 Surrounding Wetlands and Impacts.............................................................................................5 Conclusions....................................................................................................................................5 References......................................................................................................................................6 Appendix A: Wetland Maps Figure 1: Site Location Map Figure 2: Test Plot Locations and Site Plan Figure 3: NRCS Soil Map Figure 4: National Wetlands Inventory Map Figure 5: Mason County Critical Areas Map Figure 6: DNR Stream Map Figure 7: Fish and Wildlife PHS Map Appendix B: Site Pictures Appendix C: Test Plot Data Forms Credentials 2 Job Number:2021-284 Client Name:Shumaker Introduction: Environmental Design, LLC conducted a Wetland Study on October 27, 2021 to determine if wetland habitat is present on the site located at E Grapeview Loop Road in Allyn. The client is proposing a residence on the site. In order to conduct a thorough review of the site to determine if wetlands are present on the site several resources were reviewed. The project started by pulling research and reviewing the research from several sources. After review of the research it was noted that wetlands were mapped on the site. A site visit was then conducted in order to test in areas for wetland habitat. Since the site has been primarily used and maintained as residential use, test sites were completed in areas where vegetation, elevation or other characteristics changed that indicated a possible presence of wetland habitat. Site Description: The site is located at E Grapeview Loop Road in Allyn, Washington. The site is in Section 29 of Township 22 North, Range 01 West and is identified by Mason County with the parcel number of 12229-43-00000. The total acreage of the parcel is about 8.31 acres. The site is currently vacant land. The area around the site is primarily residential and vacant land with wetland and stream habitat mapped around the sites. Methodology: A site visit was conducted on October 27, 2021 where Environmental Design walked the property and tested in various areas where vegetation seemed to have changed or where wetland habitat could be present. The site is consistent with the hydrology, vegetation, and soils at each test plot location. The site has been disturbed and has a variety of vegetation on it. Environmental Design, LLC completed the wetland study of this site by using the Routine Determination Method according to the 1987 U.S. Army Corp of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and the 2010 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region. In order to complete this method first research was conducted by pulling information and maps from the National Wetland Inventory website, the Lewis County Website, the NRCS website to find out what the soils were and also further information was pulled from the Department of Natural Resources website. After reviewing the research a site visit was conducted and areas were tested where vegetation, elevation, or the soil may have changed. When using the Routine Approach, a wetland area must meet three specific parameters. These three parameters are hydrology, vegetation and hydric soils. Hydrology can be difficult to assess because it may or may not be present, depending on the time of year. Vegetation and soils are important to assess if there has been hydrology present in the past. If the site meets the hydrology, vegetative and hydric soil parameters then the site is considered a wetland. If one parameter is not met then the area is not considered a wetland. There must be hydrology present as this is the most critical parameter that makes a wetland. Hydrology was able to be identified during the growing season at previous site inspections of the site. 3 Job Number:2021-284 Client Name:Shumaker Observations: Vegetation: Wetland Vegetation has been classified into indicator statuses of how likely the plant is to be found in a wetland habitat. The indicator status of each plant species can be found on the data forms. The different indicator statuses are listed below: - Obligate Wetland (OBL)—highly likely to be in a natural wetland environment - Facultative Wetland (FACW)—most likely to be present in a natural wetland environment - Facultative (FAC)—can be present in both a natural wetland and non-wetland environment - Facultative Upland (FACU)—may be present in a natural wetland, but most likely to be seen in non-wetland conditions - Obligate Upland (UPL)—most likely to occur in non-wetland conditions - No Indicator—the plant does not have enough data to determine the indicator status yet The site is consistently vegetated with a variety of trees and shrubs. The primary vegetation identified is as listed: Common Name Scientific Name Indicator Douglas Fir Pseudotsu a menziesii FACU Red Alder Alnus rubra FAC Sword Fern Pol stichum munitum FACU Trailing Blackberry Rubus ursinus FACU The vegetation did not meet the criteria for wetland vegetation. There were areas where slough sedge was noted to be growing, but these areas also had upland vegetation around them and the slough sedge was not thick. It was noted that these areas were more of a seasonal drainage. Soils: The site is mapped as Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam according to the U.S.D.A Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey of Lewis County, Washington (1980). The series are not listed on the hydric soils list produced by the U.S.D.A Natural Resources Conservation. The areas where test plots were conducted, the soil appeared to be consistent with the mapped series. The NRCS describes the Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam as moderately well drained soil located on glacial till plains. In a representative profile, the surface layer is about 6 inches thick and is very dark brown gravelly sandy loam. The following layer is about 9 inches thick and is dark brown gravelly sandy loam. The next layer is dark brown very gravelly sandy loam about 15 inches thick. The next layer is a weakly cemented hardpan that is at a depth of about 30 inches. The hardpan is strongly compacted and crushes to very gravelly loamy sand. The depth of the hardpan is between 20 to 40 inches. The soil appeared to be well drained throughout the site. The soil was evaluated to a depth of about 20 inches at each test plot location as required. Indicators of hydric soil were not observed in the soil profile on the site. See Appendix C for the profile details at the test plot locations. Hydrology: The site appears to be well drained and did not have evidence of standing water, drainage patterns or oxidized rhizospheres in the soil profile throughout the site. The site does have areas that were observed for seasonal drainage or were low areas that diverted road run off. Wildlife: The area is shown to have priority fish species present as listed on the Priority Habitat Species Map produced by Fish and Wildlife. The site does have habitat for a variety of wildlife as the site 4 Job Number:2021-284 Client Name:Shumaker has forested areas on it. The stream with the fish is located off the site to the east and will not be impacted by the client's project. The fish species appear to possibly be present in a pond located off the site to the south. Topography: The topography of the site is relatively flat and has a slope of 0-3%. There are some undulating areas where the topography becomes a little steeper, but most of the site does not exceed 10% or more. Surroundinq Wetlands and Impacts: The National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) map and other maps do depict mapped wetlands within the area. It needs to be noted that the NWI maps and GeoData Center needs to be used cautiously as they compile general wetland data. Environmental Design concludes that wetland habitat is not present on the site or within 300 feet of the proposed residence. At all the test plot locations the three criteria for wetland habitat were not able to be met. It was noted that possible wetland habitat is located off the site; however, these areas were over 300 feet away from the building site. Conclusions: Environmental Design, LLC concludes that wetland habitat is not present on the site or within 300 feet of the proposed residence. 5 Job Number:2021-284 Client Name:Shumaker References: Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station,Vicksburg, Mississippi. Mason County. Critical Areas Map. Online map. www.co.mason.wa.us Soil Conservation Service. 1995. Hydric Soils for Washington. Online document: http://www.statlab.iastate.edv:80/soils/hydric/wa/htmi. Soil Conservation Service. 1980. Soil Survey of Lewis County, Washington. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington DC. Soil Conservation Service. 1980. Soil Survey of Mason County, Washington. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington DC. Soil Conservation Service. 1990. Soil Survey of Thurston County, Washington. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington DC. U.S Army Corps of Engineers. 2010. 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-103.Vicksburg, MS: U.S.Army Engineer Research and Development Center. Washington State Department of Ecology. 1997. Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. Publication#96-94. Olympia, Washington. Washington State Department of Ecology. 2004. Washington State Wetlands Rating System: Western Washington Revised. Publ. #04-06-025. Olympia, Washington. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Priority Habitat Species (PHS) Database. The determination of this wetland was completed by Environmental Design, LLC. The determination of this wetland is based on scientific method and our best professional judgment. Environmental Design, LLC agrees that the conclusion should agree with the local, state, and federal regulatory agencies. Completed By: &C4 Ala Becky Rieger, Wetland Specialist 6 Job Number:2021-284 Client Name:Shumaker Appendix A: Wetland Maps Figure 1 : Site Location Map C+ 4/26/2022, 5:39:24 PM 1:6,126 0 0.05 0.1 0.2 mi L J County Boundary 0 0.07 0.15 0.3 km -- No Filled Sources:Esn,HERE,Gannin,Intermap,increment P Corp.,GEBCO,USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL,Ordnance Survey, Esn Japan,METI,Esn China(Hong Kong),(c)OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS User Community Mason County WA GIS Web Map Application Bureau of Land Management,Esn Canada,Esn,HERE,Garmin,GeoTechnologies,Inc.,Intermap,USGS,METIMASA,EPA,USDA i Environmental Design, LLC. 609.40' Septic Design •Wetlands•Mapping 901 L Street / Centralia,Wa.98531 r , (360)219-3343 7 u p euo / N LEGEND VICINITY MAP L rear vn d ._ _ _ — E NELSON RD °R0"OBEDN� I I 0 140 280 I O � 1" = 140 FT o O LU I o a I WI FIGURE 2: SITE MAP TEST PLOT LOCATIONS PROPOSED 3-BEDROOM RESIDENCE I 100 FT WELL RADIUS I PROPERTY LINES SHOWN AS PER RECORDED DOCUMENT AFN:1996783 THE PROPERTY LINES IN THIS MAP ARE APPROXIMATE AND ARE NOT INTENDED O / TO BE USED AS A SURVEY. WTP PROPOSED DRIVEWAY / CLIENT NAME:AUSTIN&TAYLOR SHUMAKER � MAILING ADDRESS:PO BOX 2692 / BELFAIR,WA 98528 ^ / PHONE NUMBER: 380.990.9515 SITE ADDRESS:E GRAPEVIEW LOOP ROAD,ALLYN � O n / PARCEL NUMBER:122291300000 S-T-R:29-22N-01 W 1 VVTP 3 PERMIT NUMBER: 145.26 ROAD I DRAFTED BY: BUR )OB NUMBER:2021-284 PAGE 1 OF 1 ACCESS RO REVIEWED BY:BUR DATE:02 21 2022 Soil Map—Mason County,Washington 3 (Figure 3 NRCS Soil Map) a 512fX 51TW 51TW 51 51JM 51J780 51TIO .. y� 47°21'45"N 14 14 f All 6; t ► " I Map may not be va"i J it t:11,! 47"21'35'N -" - '� r 47"21'35"N 512800 512110 512Ee0 512980 512910 3 3 Map Scale:1:1,520 f printed on A portrait(8.5"x 11")sheet $ N N Meters n 0 20 40 eD 120 N reset o so 1ao zao 300 Map projection:Web Mercator Comer coordinates:WGS84 Edge tics:UTM Zone 10N WGSB4 t1Spa Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 4/26/2022 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 3 Soil Map—Mason County,Washington (Figure 3 NRCS Soil Map) MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest(A01) Spoil Area The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at Area of Interest(AOI) Stony Spot t 1:31,700. Soils Very Stony Spot Warning:Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. 0 Soil Map Unit Polygons �* Wet Spot Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause Soil Map Unit Lines y misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil r� Other line placement.The maps do not show the small areas of Soil Map Unit Points Special Line Features contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed ,. Special Point Features scale. V Blowout Water Features Streams and Canals Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map 19 Borrow Pit measurements. Transportation Clay Spot Rails Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service 4 Closed Depression Web Soil Survey URL: r� Interstate Highways Coordinate System: Web Mercator(EPSG:3857) X Gravel Pit us Routes Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator Gravelly Spot Major Roads projection,which preserves direction and shape but distorts • distance and area.A projection that preserves area,such as the Landfill Local Roads Albers equal-area conic projection,should be used if more p Lava Flow accurate calculations of distance or area are required. I1. Background Marsh or swamp . Aerial Photography This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s)listed below. Mine or Quarry Soil Survey Area: Mason County,Washington 0 Miscellaneous Water Survey Area Data: Version 17,Aug 31,2021 0 Perennial Water Soil map units are labeled(as space allows)for map scales V Rock Outcrop 1:50,000 or larger. +. Saline Spot Date(s)aerial images were photographed: Nov 21,2021—Nov 29,2021 Sandy Spot • ° The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were .M, Severely Eroded Spot compiled and digitized probably differs from the background Sinkhole imagery displayed on these maps.As a result,some minor 0 shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Slide or Slip Sodic Spot USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 4/26/2022 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 3 Soil Map—Mason County,Washington Figure 3 NRCS Soil Map Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI Ab Alderwood gravelly sandy 7.1 57.5% loam,8 to 15 percent slopes Mg Mukitteo peat,0 to 2 percent 1.6 13.2% slopes so Sinclair shotty loam,5 to 15 3.6 29.3% percent slopes Totals for Area of Interest 12.3 100.0% int3A Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 4/26/2022 �� Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3 National Wetlands Inventor Figure 4. NWI Map tA • 1 , j / r • . by it4111. � A:11• ... 110 �f/� ��• � S` i �-Air..• � � "��,,, 'fit `S'�r; �2*'�',« i � � i 7 ,►7'r ,, toy f �• try .i�;✓,�!�+* n"l t, t� •�. ���,. �•�'• tr �. > , 107 OU 0 0.05 0.1 0.2 mi d t AP } ' II , W t�`r a �^' r '•t' � � r!; exar,`Geile,Earth r Geographies.CNES/Airbus DS, I 0 0.1 0.2 0.4 km S AeroG D,IGN.ancie GIS User Community IL f• - ►, 46t April 27. 2022 This map is for general reference only.The US Fish and Wildlife Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the Wetlands base data shown on this map.All wetlands related data should Freshwater Emergent Wetland Lake be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. Estuarine and Marine Deepwater ❑ Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Other Estuarine and Marine Wetland ❑ Freshwater Pond ❑ Riverine National Wetlands Inventory(NWI) This page was produced by the NWI mapper Figure 5- Mason County Critical Area Map VW_ ep . ► 3 M a. 4Nw xr dam • �`� ol- Of WIWI if kt :'•- s ale.~-•••-:----:':�1tc• f � �, '. i� 4/26/2022, 5:40:38 PM 1:1,532 0 0.01 0.03 0.05 mi C] County Boundary DNR Water Courses No Filled Fish 0 0.02 0.04 0.08 km ❑ • Site Address(Zoom in to 1:3,000) Non-fish ❑ Shorelines of the State Tax Parcels(Zoom in to 1:30,000) Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, _ Unknown USDA,USGS,AeroGRID,IGN,and the GIS User Community ® National Wetlands Inventory(Hyperlinked) Waters with no type designation Mason County WA GIS Web Map Application Maxar,Microsoft Forest Practices Activity Map - Application # 05 1 5640 17 642 20 9 S ke Berson o \� 2� o S Puget Soun S t 0 0552 5620 17056 0 2 R01 �00 29 S Puget Sound CD 7055 Mill P 17 0 7+ F Catfish Lake u 0 0 V fov. 17 a"'r" , :,Y,�• �g682 - 170_ �u rM 2R 11Arti•�~ •"" 31 •� • „ s2 epartment of atural Resource�s� (DWM,-Forest Map Symbols Additional Information Legal Description Harvest Boundary Q Landing S20 T22.01Y R01.OW,S29 T22.011Y R01.OW --- Road Construction Q Waste Area S32 T22.ON R01.OW,S31 T22.ON R01.OW ice/ Stream S30 T22.ON R01.OW,S19 T22.ON R01.OW Clumped W RMZ/ MZ Buffers Wumped TS X' Rock Pit * Existing Structure Extreme care was used during the compilation of this map to ensure 0 025 its accuracy. However,due to changes in data and the need to 11ATURArL�RES1)URCES rely on outside information,the Department of Natural Resources Miles cannot accept responsibility for errors or omissions, and therefore, there are no warranties that accompany this material. Data 4/26/2022 Time:5i43 21 PM I'lis Report https://geodataservices.wdfw.wa.gov/hp/phs/ Priority Habitats and Species on the Web Or fjL jb- air . ► 4PI,, � � I� •� q « ,k,. Y.. �r' .t r •tea ♦ Fr .��• `� 1. ♦ .� r � ..yam TI. of � � � \� �►� •� � t � «`�- ^ '��� ��, ~� .h.� • . �.A•_ ..mot ,►, .-, err i♦�•�*.`�� ' t��/• f'�►".��'�'+�.1 A irk 00 " VA i-46 t 'C Ii s 1- - Report Date: 04/26/2022, Parcel ID: 122294300000 PHS Species/Habitats Overview: Occurence Name Federal Status State Status Sensitive Location Resident Coastal Cutthroat N/A N/A No Freshwater Pond N/A N/A No PHS Species/Habitats Details: 1 of 2 4/26/2022,5:46 PM PHS Report https://geodataservices.wdfw.wa.gov/hp/phs/ Resident Coastal Cutthroat Scientific Name Oncorhynchus clarki Priority Area Occurrence/Migration Accuracy NA Notes LLID: 1228273473666, Fish Name:Cutthroat Trout,Run Time: Unknown or not Applicable,Life History:Unknown Source Record 53528 Source Dataset SWIFD Federal Status N/A State Status N/A PHS Listing Status PHS Listed Occurrence Sensitive N SGCN N Display Resolution AS MAPPED More Info http://wdfw.wa,gov/wlm/diversty./soc/soc.htm Geometry Type Lines Freshwater Pond Priority Area Aquatic Habitat Site Name N/A Accuracy NA Notes Wetland System:Freshwater Pond-NWI Code:PABH Source Dataset NWIWetlands Source Name Not Given Source Entity US Fish and Wildlife Service Federal Status N/A State Status WA PHS Listing Status PHS Listed Occurrence Sensitive N SGCN N Display Resolution AS MAPPED ManagementRecommendations http://www.ecy.wa.g v/programs/sea/wetlands/bas/index.html Geometry Type Polygons DISCLAIMER.This report includes information that the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife(WDFW)maintains in a central computer database.it is not an attempt to provide you with an official agency response as to the impacts of your project on fish and wildlife.This information only documents the location of fish and wildlife resources to the best of our knowledge. it is not a complete inventory and it is important to note that fish and wildlife resources may occur in areas not currently known to W DFW biologists,or in areas for which comprehensive surveys have not been conducted.Site specific surveys are frequently necesssary to rule out the presence of priority resources.Locations of fish and wildlife resources are subject to variation caused by disturbance,changes in season and weather,and other factors.W DFW does not recommend using reports more than six months old. 2 of 2 4/26/2022,5:46 PM Appendix 6: Site Pictures Environmental Design, LLC. Septic Design Wetlands oMapping t r View of Upland N; �w View of Upland �r �r �' aL � � Y Seasonal Drainage Area Appendix C: Test Plot Data Forms WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Western Mountains,Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: E Grapeviewv Loop Road City/county: Allyn/Mason Sampling Date: 27-Oct-21 Applicant/Owner: Austin&Taylor Shumaker State: Washington Sampling Point: WTP 1 Investigator(s): Becky Rieger Section,Township,Range: S 29 T 22 N R 01 W Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Flat Local relief(concave,convex,none): Slope: o.0%/ 0.0 ° Subregion(LRR): Lat.: Long.: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Aiderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam NWI classification: N/A Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No 0 (If no,explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation ❑ Soil [ or Hydrology i significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes '0 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 lJ Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes NO Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes NO Remarks: Site does not meet criteria VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Dominant Species? Absolute Rel.Strat. Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) %Cover Cover Status _ Number of Dominant Species 1.Pseudotsuga menziesii 40 0 80.0% FACU That are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 1 (A) 2.Alnus rubra 10 ® 20.0% FAC 0 ❑ 0.0% Total Number of Dominant 3• Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) 4. 0 ❑ o.o% 50 =Total Cover Percent of dominant Species a Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: _Z5.0 h (A/B) 1•Polystichum munitum 40 © 100.0% FACU Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. 0 ❑ 0.0% Total%Cover of: Multiply by: _ 3. 0 ❑ 0.0% OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 4. 0 ❑ 0.0% FACW species _Q_ x 2 = 0 5. 0 ❑ 0.0% i FAC species 1_ x 3 = 30 40 in Total Cover FACU species 120 x 4 = 480 Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1 uPL species - 0 x 5 = 0 1 0 El 0.0% - column Totals: 130 (q) 510 (B) 2 0 El 0.0% 3 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index= B/A= 3.923 4 0 ❑ 0.0% 0 ❑ 00% Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5 . ❑ 1-Rapid Test for Hydrologic Vegetation 6 o ❑ o.0% El7 0 ❑ 0.0% 2 Dominance Test is>50% 8 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑3-Prevalence Index is 53.0 1 9 o ❑ o.0% ❑4-Morphological Adaptations'(Provide supporting 0 ❑ 0.0% data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 10 0 [1-0.0% ❑5-Wetland Non-Vascular Plants 1 0 :Total Cover ❑Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1(Explain) woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must 1.Rubus ursinus 40 ❑ 100.0% FACU be present,unless disturbed or problematic. 2. 0 ❑ 0.00% Hydrophytic Vegetation 40 =Total Cover present? Yes - No Bare Ground in Herb Stratum: 0 Remarks: Vegetation did not meet criteria 'Indicator suffix= National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains,Valleys,and Coast-Version 2.0 Soil Sampling Point: WTP_] Profile Description:(Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color(moist) �r -um!Color(moist) �q �1 Inca Texture Remarks 0-19 10YR 4/3 100 Sandy Loam 1Type:C=Concentration.D=Depletion.RM=Reduced Matrix,CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining.M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs,unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: ❑ Histosol(Al) ❑Sandy Redox(S5) ❑ 2 cm Muck(A10) ❑ Histic Epipedon(A2) ❑Stripped Matrix(S6) ❑ Red Parent Material(TF2) ❑ Black Histic(A3) ❑Loamy Mucky Mineral(Fl)(except in MLRA 1) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) ❑Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) ❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface(All) ❑Depleted Matrix(F3) ❑ Thick Dark Surface(Al2) ❑Redox Dark Surface(F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and ❑ Sandy Muck Mineral(Sl) ❑Depleted Dark Surface(F7) wetland hydrology must be present, ❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) ❑Redox depressions(F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer(if present): Type' --- ----�_ ._._._.�. � _.. Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No Depth(inches): Remarks: Soil does not appear to be hydric Hydrology Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators(minimum of one required;check all that apply) Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required) ❑ Surface Water(Al) ❑Water-Stained Leaves(B9)(except MLRA ❑ Water-Stained Leaves(B9)(MLRA 1,2, ❑ High Water Table(A2) 1,2,4A,and 4B) 4A,and 4B) ❑ Saturation(A3) ❑Salt Crust(Bll) ❑ Drainage Patterns(B10) ❑ Water Marks(Bl) ❑Aquatic Invertebrates(B13) ❑ Dry Season Water Table(C2) ❑ Sediment Deposits(B2) ❑Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9) ❑ Drift deposits(B3) ❑Oxidized Rhizospheres on 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 Stressed Plants(DI)(LRR A) ❑ Raised Ant Mounds(136)(LRR A) ❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(B7) ❑Other(Explain in Remarks) ❑ Frost Heave Hummocks(D7) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(BB) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes O No Depth(inches): Water Table Present? Yes O No O Depth(inches): Saturation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O NO C includes ca illa frin a Yes O No� Depth(inches): Describe Recorded Data(stream gauge,monitor well,aerial photos,previous inspections),if available: Aerial Photos Remarks: Hydrology is not present US Army Corps of Engineers Westem Mountains,Valleys,and Coast-Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM-Western Mountains,Valleys,and Coast Region Project/Site: E Grapeviewv Loop Road City/County: Allyn/Mason Sampling Date: 27-Oct-21 Applicant/Owner: Austin&Taylor Shumaker State: Washington Sampling Point: WTP 2 Investigator(s):,Becky Rieger Section,Township,Range: S 29 T 22 N R 01 W Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Flat Local relief(concave,convex,none): Slope: 0.0%/ 0.00 Subregion(LRR): Lat.: Long.: Datum: Soil Map unit Name: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam NWI classification: N/A Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes O No O (If no,explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation ❑ ,Soil ❑ ,or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes 0 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,etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes O NO O Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes O NO within a Wetland? Yes O NO Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O No O 0 Remarks: Site does not meet criteria VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Dominant Species? Absolute Rel.Strat. Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) y r Cover" Status —'�v"g`"""'"— Number of Dominant Species 1_Pseudotsuga menziesii 40 © 80.0% FACU That are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 1 Y (A) 2,Alnus rubra 10 © 20.0% FAC 3 0 ❑ 0.0% Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) 4. 0 ❑ 0.0% 5o =Total Cover Percent of dominant Species That Are OBL FACW or FAC: 25.0% (A/B) Sailing f Shrub_Stratum (Plot size: ) � � �-�- 1_Polystichum munitum 40 © 100.0% FACU Prevalence Index worksheet: 2. 0 ❑ 0.0% Total%Cover of: Multiply by: 3. 0 ❑ 0.0% OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 4. 0 ❑ 0.0% FACW species 0 x 2 = _._Q--- 5. 0 ❑ 0.0% FAC species 10 x 3 = 30 40 =Total Cover FACU species 120 x 4 = 480 Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) uPL species 0 x 5 = 0 1 0 ❑ 0.0% 2 0 ❑ 0.0% Column Totals: 130 (A) 510 (B) 3 0 ❑ o.o% Prevalence Index= B/A= 3.923 4 0 ❑ o.o% 0 El 0.0% Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5 5 El0 El 0.0% 1-Rapid Test for Hydrologic Vegetation El2-Dominance Test is>so% 7 0 Eli 0.0% g 0 El 0.0% ❑3 Prevalence Index is:53.0 1 9 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑4-Morphological Adaptations 1[Provide supporting 10. p El o.o% El in Remarks or on a separate sheet) El5-Wetland Non-Vascular Plants 11 0 El o.o% 1 0 =Total Cover ❑Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1(Explain) Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must 1.Rubus ursinus 40 El100.0% FACU be present,unless disturbed or problematic. 2. _ 0 ❑ 0.0% Hydrophytic -- Vegetation 40 =Total Cover Present? Yes O No O %Bare Ground in Herb Stratum: Remarks: Vegetation did not meet criteria *Indicator suffix= National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains,Valleys,and Coast-Version 2.0 Soil sampling Point: _WTP 2 Profile Description:(Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth ___ Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color1ID4ist) _% Color(moist) % _TyIl Locz Texture Remarks 0-21 10YR 4/3 100 Sandy Loam 1Type:C=Concentration.D=Depletion.RM=Reduced Matrix,CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining.M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs,unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: ❑ Histosol(Al) ❑Sandy Redox(S5) ❑ 2 cm Muck(A10) ❑ Histic Epipedon(A2) ❑Stripped Matrix(S6) ❑ Red Parent Material(TF2) ❑ Black Histic(A3) ❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral(Fl)(except in MLRA 1) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) ❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface(All) ❑ Depleted Matrix(F3) ❑ Thick Dark Surface Al2 El Redox Dark Surface(F6) 3 ( ) Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and ❑ Sandy Muck Mineral(Sl) ❑Depleted Dark Surface(F7) wetland hydrology must be present, ❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix(54) ❑ Redox depressions(F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer(if present): Type: Depth(inches):_ Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No O Remarks: Soil does not appear to be hydric Hydrology Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators(minimum of one required:check all that apply) Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required,_ ❑ Surface Water(Al) ❑Water-Stained Leaves(B9)(except MLRA ❑ Water-Stained Leaves(B9)(MLRA 1,2, ❑ High Water Table(A2) 1,2,4A,and 4B) 4A,and 4B) ❑ Saturation(A3) ❑Salt Crust(Bll) ❑ Drainage Patterns(B10) ❑ Water Marks(Bl) ❑Aquatic Invertebrates(B13) ❑ Dry Season Water Table(C2) ❑ Sediment Deposits(B2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9) ❑ Drift deposits(B3) ❑Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots(0) ❑ 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 Stressed Plants(Dl)(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 O No Depth(inches): Water Table Present? Yes O No O Depth(inches): Saturation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O No O includes capillary frin a Yes O No O Depth(inches): Describe Recorded Data(stream gauge,monitor well,aerial photos,previous inspections), if available: Aerial Photos Remarks: Hydrology is not present US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains,Valleys,and Coast-Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM-Western Mountains,Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: E Grapeviewv Loop Road City/County: Allyn/Mason Sampling Date: 27-Oct-21 Applicant/Owner: Austin&Taylor Shumaker State: Washington Sampling Point: WTP 3 Investigator(s): Becky Rieger Section,Township,Range: S 29 T 22 N R 01 W Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Flat Local relief(concave,convex,none): Slope: 0.0%/ 0.0 ° Subregion(LRR): Lat.: Long.: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam NWI classification: N/A Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No lJ (If no,explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation ❑ Soil ,I or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes ( No Are Vegetation ❑ soil 'u 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 0 NO Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes C) No within a Wetland? Yes NO Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes '� No Remarks: Site does not meet criteria VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Dominant Species? Absolute Rel.Strat. Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) %Cover Cover Status Number of Dominant Species 1_Pseudotsuga menziesii 40 © 80.0% FACU That are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 2 (A) 2,Alnus rubra 10 © 20.0% FAC 3. 0 ❑ 0.0% Total Number of Dominant _0.0%__ Species Across All Strata: 5 (B) 4. 0 ❑ 0.0% 50 =Total cover Percent of dominant Species Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 40.0% (A/B) 1,Poh/stichum munitum 40 0 80.0% FACU Prevalence Index worksheet: 2.Carex obnupta 10 ❑d 20.0% OBL Total%Cover of: Multiply by: 3. _ 0._ El 0.0% OBL species 10 x 1 = 10 4. 0 ❑ 0.0% FACW species 0 x 2 = 0 5. 0 ❑ 0.0% FAC species 10 x 3 - 30 50 =Total Cover FACU species 120 x 4 = 480 Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 1 UPL species 0 x 5 = �--0 -- 0 ❑ 0.0% Column Totals: 140 (A) 5.-Q (B) 2 0 El 0.0% 3 0 ❑ 0.o% Prevalence Index= B/A= 3.714 4 0 EL 0.0°r° 5 � Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 0 ❑ 0.0% 5 0 El 0.0% ❑ 1- Rapid Test for Hydrologic Vegetation ❑ 7 0 El 0.0% 2- Dominance Test is>50% 8 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑3-Prevalence Index is:53.0 1 9 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑4-Morphological Adaptations 1(Provide supporting 10. 0 ❑ 0.0% data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 0 El0.0% -1 5-Wetland Non-Vascular Plants 1 0 =Total Cover ❑Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1(Explain) Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must 1.Rubus ursinus 40 ❑ 100.0% FACU be present,unless disturbed or problematic. 2. 0 ❑ 0.0% Hydrophytic Vegetation 40 =Total Cover Present? Yes No Bare Ground in Herb Stratum: 0 Remarks: Vegetation did not meet criteria *Indicator suffix= National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains,Valleys,and Coast-Version 2.0 I� Soil Sampling Point: ,WTF3__..___ Profile Description:(Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth _.._.... ._._ Matrix _ Red_ox Features (inu cam)_ Color(moist) Color(moig) - -!YL nm! _LM-2 Texture Remarks 0-19 10YR 4/3 100 Sandy Loam 1Type:C=Concentration.D=Depletion.RM=Reduced Matrix,CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains zLocation: PL=Pore Lining.M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs,unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: ❑ Histosol(Al) ❑Sandy Redox(S5) ❑ 2 cm Muck(AW) ❑ Histic Epipedon(A2) ❑Stripped Matrix(S6) ❑ Red Parent Material(TF2) ❑ Black Histic(A3) ❑Loamy Mucky Mineral(Fl)(except in MLRA 1) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) ❑Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) ❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface(All) ❑Depleted Matrix(F3) ❑ Thick Dark Surface Al2 ❑Redox Dark Surface(F6) 3 ( ) Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and ❑ Sandy Muck Mineral(Sl) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface(F7) wetland hydrology must be present, ❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) ❑Redox depressions(F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer(if present): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No O Remarks: Soil does not appear to be hydric Hydrology Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators(minimum of one required;check all that aDDly) Secondary Indicators(minimum of two r uired ❑ Surface Water(Al) ❑Water-Stained Leaves(B9)(except MLRA ❑ Water-Stained Leaves(B9)(MLRA 1,2, ❑ High Water Table(A2) 1,2,4A,and 4B) 4A,and 4B) ❑ Saturation(A3) ❑Salt Crust(Bll) ❑ Drainage Patterns(B10) ❑ Water Marks(B1) ❑Aquatic Invertebrates(B13) ❑ Dry Season Water Table(C2) ❑ Sediment Deposits(B2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9) ❑ Drift deposits(B3) ❑Oxidized Rhizospheres on 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) W FAC-neutral Test(135) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks(B6) ❑Stunted or Stressed 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 O No 0 Depth(inches): Water Table Present? Yes O No O Depth(inches): Saturation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O No O includes ca illa fringe) Yes O No O Depth(inches): Describe Recorded Data(stream gauge,monitor well,aerial photos,previous inspections),if available: Aerial Photos Remarks: Hydrology is not present US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains,Valleys,and Coast-Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -Western Mountains,Valleys,and Coast Region Project/Site: E Grp apeviewv Loop Road City/County: Allyn/Mason Sampling Date:,27- ct-21 Applicant/Owner: Austin&Taylor Shumaker State: Washington Sampling Point: WTP 4 Investigator(s): Becky Rieger Section,Township,Range: S 29 T 22 N R 01 W Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Flat Local relief(concave,convex,none): Slope: 0.0%/ 0.0 ° Subregion(LRR): Lat.: Long.: Datum: Soil Map unit Name: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam NWI classification: N/A Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ("I No 1J (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 Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 NO within a Wetland? Yes 0 No O Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No Remarks: Site does not meet criteria VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants. Dominant Species? Absolute Rel.Strat. Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: 1 v r Cover Status_, Number of Dominant Species 1,Pseudotsuga menziesii 40 © 80.0% FACU That are OBL,FACW,or FAC: l (A) 2,Alnus rubra 10 0 20.0% FAC 3, 0 El 0.0% Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 4 (13) 4. 0 ❑ 0.0% 50 =Total Cover Percent of dominant Species Sa lin Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 25.00)b (A/B) 1,Polystichum munitum 40 ❑d 100.0% FACU Prevalence Index worksheet: 2, ._ ❑ 0.0% Total%Cover of: Multiply by: 3. _0 ❑ 0.0% OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 4. 0 ❑ O.O% FACW species _0 x 2 = 0 5. i 0 ❑ O.O% _ FAC species 10 x 3 = 30 _40 =Total Cover FACU species 120 x 4 = 480 Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) _.1. 0 ❑ 0.o% UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 2. 0 ❑ 0.o% Column Totals: 130_ (A) 510 (B) 3 0 ❑ 0.0% Prevalence Index= B/A= 3.923 4. 0-- ❑ 0.0% _ Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. 0 ❑ O.o°r° El-- 0 ❑ 0.0% 1-Rapid Test for Hydrologic Vegetation 6. ❑0 0 0.o°r° 2- Dominance Test is>50% 7.8 0 ❑ 0.0% ❑3-Prevalence Index is 53.0 1 9 0 El 0.0% ❑4-Morphological Adaptations 1(Provide supporting 0 El0.o% data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 10. 0 El 0.0% El5 Wetland Non-Vascular Plants 1 0 =Total Cover ❑Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1(Explain) Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: �) 1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must ].Rubus ursinus 40 ❑ 100.0% FACU be present,unless disturbed or problematic. 2. 0 ❑ 0.0% Hydrophytic Vegetation 40 =Total Cover Present? Yes No %Bare Ground in Herb Stratum: 0 Remarks: Vegetation did not meet criteria *Indicator suffix= National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains,Valleys,and Coast-Version 2.0 �I Soil Sampling Point: Profile Description:(Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix _ Redox Features (inches) Color(moist) "may, Color(moist) IWoe 1 �Q�? __,w_Sgxture Remarks 0-19 10YR 4/3 100 Sandy Loam IType:C=Concentration.D=Depletion.RM=Reduced Matrix,CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains 21-ocation: PL=Pore Lining.M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs,unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: ❑ Histosol(Al) ❑Sandy Redox(S5) ❑ 2 cm Muck(A10) ❑ Histic Epipedon(A2) ❑Stripped Matrix(S6) ❑ Red Parent Material(TF2) ❑ Black Histic(A3) ❑Loamy Mucky Mineral(Fl)(except in MLRA 1) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) ❑Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) ❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface(All) ❑ Depleted Matrix(F3) ❑ Thick Dark Surface(Al2) ❑ Redox Dark Surface(F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and ❑ Sandy Muck Mineral(Sl) ❑Depleted Dark Surface(F7) wetland hydrology must be present, ❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) ❑Redox depressions(F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer(if present): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes O No O Remarks: Soil does not appear to be hydric Hydrology Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators(minimum of one required;check all that apply)_- Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required ❑ Surface Water(Al) ❑Water-Stained Leaves(B9)(except MLRA ❑ Water-Stained Leaves(B9)(MLRA 1,2, ❑ High Water Table(A2) 1,2,4A,and 4B) 4A,and 4B) ❑ Saturation(A3) ❑Salt Crust(Bll) ❑ Drainage Patterns(B10) ❑ Water Marks(Bl) ❑Aquatic Invertebrates(B13) ❑ Dry Season Water Table(C2) ❑ Sediment Deposits(B2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9) ❑ Drift deposits(B3) ❑Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots(0) ❑ 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(135) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks(B6) ❑Stunted or Stressed Plants(Dl)(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 O No 0 Depth(inches): Water Table Present? Yes O No Depth(inches): Saturation Present? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes O No O includes capillary frin a Yes 0 No Depth(inches): Describe Recorded Data(stream gauge,monitor well,aerial photos,previous inspections),if available: Aerial Photos Remarks: Hydrology is not present US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains,Valleys,and Coast-Version 2.0 Credentials Becky Rieger Home Address: 901 L Street Phone: (360)219-3343 Centralia,WA 98531 Education Associates Degree in Arts Centralia Community College Centralia,Washington Date of Graduation:June 2007 Associates Degree in Applied Science Major in Geographic Information Systems Grays Harbor Community College Aberdeen,Washington Date of Graduation:June 2002 Continuing Education/Awards/Organizations Coastal Training Program o Certificate in Using the Revised Wetland Rating System(2014) o Certificate in Identifying Hydric Soils(2012) o Certificate in Using the Revised Wetland Rating System(2007) Oregon State University(2006) o Certificate in Soil Identification Portland State University Wetland Program(2006) o Certificate in Wetland Delineation Course o Certificate in Advanced Hydric Soils and Hydrology Course o Certificate in Hydrophytic Vegetation Identification Coarse Licensed On-Site Wastewater Designer(2009-Current) License#5100369 Olympia Master Builders o Lewis County Chapter Vice President P o Olympia Master Builders Associate Vice President Washington On-Site Sewage Association o SW Washington Designer Rep.(2018—Current) Professional Experience Licensed Designer/Wetland Specialist/Owner May 5,2010-Current Environmental Design,LLC • Complete Site and Soil Evaluations,Site Consultations,Topography Field Work • Complete Septic Designs and mapping projects using MicroSurvey • Complete Wetland and other Critical Area Reports per regulations in multiple jurisdictions • Perform presentations to educate people about wetlands and septic systems Assistant Designer/Certified Wetland Specialist Feb.24,2005—Oct.30,2007, Goode&Associates Supervisor:Jeannie Yackley • Complete designs of on-site wastewater designs for county submittal • Communicate with county regulators,installers,and clients • Conduct wetland determinations,delineations,mitigations and consultations • Research projects,apply for permits,and conduct final inspections on installed septic systems • Perform presentations to educate people about wetlands and septic systems t