Towanda Creek Stream and Wetland Propectus

Towanda Creek Stream & Wetland Mitigation Umbrella Bank Bradford County, PA

Prospectus February 2012

Prospectus – Towanda Creek Stream & Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank Restoration Systems, LLC to the PA IRT February 2012

Contents

Appendices ...................................................................................................................................... 2

1.0 Sponsor ................................................................................................................................ 3

2.0 Project Purpose .................................................................................................................... 3

3.0 Regulatory Authorities ......................................................................................................... 4

4.0 Project Location & Geographic Service Area: .................................................................... 4

4.1 Project Location .................................................................................................................... 4

4.2 Geographic Service Area (Figure 1) ................................................................................ 4

4.3 Watershed Approach ........................................................................................................ 5

4.4 Local Regulated Resources .............................................................................................. 5

5.0 Project Specifications........................................................................................................... 6

6.0 Conceptual Work Plan ......................................................................................................... 8

6.1 Stream Function Enhancement Plan – Orchard Creek & Spur Creek.............................. 8

6.2 Wetland Function Enhancement Plan – Chippewa Swamp & Saddle Swamp .............. 10

6.3 Preliminary Mitigation Quantities .................................................................................. 12

7.0 Proposed Monitoring Protocol ........................................................................................... 13

7.1 Riverine Monitoring ....................................................................................................... 13

7.2 Wetland Monitoring ....................................................................................................... 15

8.0 Proposed Credit Release Schedules ................................................................................... 17

9.0 Accounting & Reporting Protocol ..................................................................................... 17

10.0 Landowners & Long-Term Protection: .............................................................................. 18

11.0 Financial Assurances ......................................................................................................... 18

12.0 Assurance of Sufficient Water Rights ................................................................................ 19

13.0 Qualifications ..................................................................................................................... 19

Figures Figure 1. Geographic Service Area

Figure 2. Project Phase Location Figure 3. Natural Gas Infrastructure

Figure 4. Phase 1 Wetland & Stream Areas

Figure 5. Phase 1 Soils Figure 6. Orchard Creek Figure 7. Chippewa Swamp Figure 8. Saddle Swamp & Spur Creek

Appendices Appendix A – Sponsor Response to IRT Comments to Preliminary Prospectus Appendix B – Pennsylvania Natural Resources Inventory Review (PNDI) Appendix C – Draft Pennsylvania Department Environmental Protection Protocol Appendix D – Raw Riverine Data Appendix E – Raw Wetland Data


1.0 Sponsor Restoration Systems, LLC 1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211 Raleigh, NC 27604 Contact: Tara Disy Allden (919) 334-9119 [email protected] 2.0 Project Purpose The Towanda Creek Stream and Wetland Umbrella Bank will provide compensatory mitigation for permitted impacts to aquatic resources in the identified Geographic Service Area (Figure 1). It is the Sponsor’s intent to establish the Bank so that it may be appropriate to offset impacts from activities permitted by both the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection and/or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The Bank will be implemented in three phases, each containing wetland and stream components. Each phase is identified in this Prospectus. Detailed technical information is presented only for Phase 1, which is comprised of headwater systems that drain to Towanda Creek. The phases are anticipated to include the following resources as shown on Figure 2: Phase 1:

o Chippewa Swamp o Orchard Creek o Spur Creek o Saddle Swamp

Phase 2:

o Horse Pasture Swamp o Northbob Stream o Southbob Creek o Southbob Wetland o Northbob Lower Section o Towanda Creek Stream Enhancement

Phase 3:

o Northdon Creek o Southdon Creek


3.0 Regulatory Authorities Compensatory mitigation for impacts to aquatic resources is regulated by the following federal and state laws:

Federal

o Rivers & Harbors Act, Section 10 o Clean Water Act, Section 404, Section 401 . . . o 33 CFR 332 (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) o 40 CFR 230 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

State

o Pennsylvania Statute – Chapter 102 o Pennsylvania Statute – Chapter 105 o Pennsylvania Statute – Chapter 106

4.0 Project Location & Geographic Service Area: 4.1 Project Location The proposed Bank is located in Bradford County, Pennsylvania, east of the Town of Canton. See Figure 1. Project sites are located in the townships of Leroy and Granville. The Bank will be comprised of stream and wetland areas within the Towanda Creek watershed. Phase 1 site implementation will address the needs of headwater systems. Agriculture remains the dominant land use in the project area, but the development of the natural gas industry is bringing rapid change to the area (Figure 3). Well drilling, pipeline installation and associated infrastructure are expected to continue rapid expansion during the next decade. The proposed Bank will protect large areas of riparian corridor and wetlands from development and help to maintain the viability of hunting and fishing resources as well as improve water quality in the area. Local governance is carried out at both the County and township levels and neither Leroy nor Granville have any local zoning ordinance. (Sam Thrush, County Planner, Personal Communication, January 2012.) Communication and coordination will continue with local government personnel throughout project development and implementation. 4.2 Geographic Service Area (Figure 1) Towanda Creek is located in the Upper Susquehanna Planning Unit described in the Pennsylvania State Water Plan. The State water planning unit will serve as the appropriate Geographic Service Area for the Bank. According to the State Water Plan, the Upper/Middle Susquehanna Planning Unit contains the largest concentration of headwaters contributing to the Chesapeake Bay. Towanda Creek serves as a major tributary in the center of the watershed and is a seasonally stocked trout water with significant recreational value. The project presents a unique opportunity to restore and perpetually conserve significant headwater systems within the Towanda Creek watershed.


4.3 Watershed Approach The condition of Towanda Creek contributes greatly to the overall health of the Upper Susquehanna Watershed. The condition of a stream can influence the land directly around it and each body of water into which it flows and onward downstream. Towanda Creek ultimately flows into the Chesapeake Bay. The water quality of the Upper Susquehanna Watershed will increase with the remediation of Towanda Creek. According to the Towanda Creek Watershed Conservation plan, forty percent of the land in the Towanda Creek Watershed is used as cropland or pasture. This type of land usage is one of the main contributors to stream degradation. Croplands and pastures affect streams by creating pathways that allow excess sediment and nutrients to easily flow into the waterways. Excess sediment and nutrients negatively affect the biodiversity of life within the streams. Recreationally, the Upper Susquehanna Watershed is a popular trout fishing area in Pennsylvania. In 2007 an inventory of fish in the North Towanda Creek Basin was conducted which found that the streams were generally fertile but the wild trout populations had decreased. (Watershed plan pg. 102) In this study only one brook trout was collected along with rainbow trout, which were collected at only two sites of the eleven sites sampled- categorizing them as “Rare.” This study also found that water flow in Towanda Creek greatly diminishes in the summer, which could be one of the factors leading to smaller populations of fish in the streams. Along with diminishing fish populations due to poor stream quality there is another environmental threat facing the Towanda Creek Watershed, hydraulic fracturing. “Since 2008 Marcellus Shale natural gas drilling in Bradford County has increased by 20% and has hundreds of natural gas wells drilled” and this number will only continue to grow. (http://www.bradfordcountypa.org/Natural-Gas.asp) Heavy traffic and lots of dust and other organic waste is created at natural gas drilling sites which poses a threat to the Towanda Creek Watershed. The Susquehanna River Basin Commission continually monitors these sites throughout the hydraulic fracturing process (Figure 3). The restoration of headwater wetlands and streams will encourage and improve the water quality in the Towanda Creek Watershed. By removing field drainage tiles and beaver dams, and restoring the hydrology of wetlands, the ecological functions of 22.8 acres of wetlands will increase. This will decrease the amount of pollutants and sediments that run off from surrounding areas from settling in the wetlands and in time, benefitting the water quality within the wetlands and downstream. In regards to stream function – stabilizing bank conditions, adding appropriate vegetation, creating more in-stream habitats and utilizing the existing flood plains, more sediment and pollutant removal and nutrient cycling will increase in the watershed; ultimately improving the functions of 6,768 linear feet of stream. Improving the streams and wetlands in the Towanda Creek Watershed will benefit not only the subject properties, but all downstream aquatic resources. 4.4 Local Regulated Resources The Sponsor conducted a Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory (PNDI) review (receipt included as Appendix B) for the project area. The search results show no known impacts for PA Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, PA Fish and Boat Commission, or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services resources of concern. The PA Game Commission database, however, highlighted unspecified “Sensitive Species.” The Sponsor will send additional information to the Game Commission as requested.

http://www.bradfordcountypa.org/Natural-Gas.asp


5.0 Project Specifications The stream and wetland areas shown on Figure 3 comprise the first phase of the proposed Umbrella Bank. The Sponsor understands that no other commercial mitigation banks exist in the subject watershed and that regulatory personnel are working to establish appropriate criteria for quantifying ecological uplift in the form of mitigation “credits.” The Sponsor has based the information presented here on DRAFT guidance provided by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (included as Appendix C). For the stream mitigation, it is anticipated that the following four functional groups will be addressed:

1. HAB1 = in-stream habitat (to ordinary high water mark), including flora & fauna. 2. RS = for headwater and small systems, this is “Resource Support” of Recreation Value

(REC1), which are functions and attributes that support downstream recreation. 3. HYD1 = hydrologic functions such as floodwater storage, geomorphic channel stability &

sediment transport. 4. BGC1 = biogeochemical functions, such as temperature regulation, nutrient cycling, and

organic matter cycling. Figure 1 illustrates the spatial occurrence of these functions within the riparian corridor. Stream areas will be comprised of the stream channel and a 100-foot zone of influence on each side of the stream. Wetland function groups are as follows:

1. HAB2 = flora & fauna. Functional changes may be based on Cowardin and/or HGM classifications and/or specific species.

2. HYD2 = hydrologic functions such as floodwater storage, changes to surface water drainage, and landscape position.

3. BGC2 = biogeochemical functions, such as temperature regulation, nutrient cycling, and organic matter cycling, which are primarily a function of wetland hydroperiod.

Wetlands will include the wetland area and a 300-foot zone of influence. All stream and wetland areas will be protected by a perpetual conservation easement.


Illustration 1. Pennsylvania Headwater Stream – Functional Areas

Blue = stream; area used to calculate HAB1, RS, & stream + floodplain = HYD1 Green = active floodplain; area used to calculate BGC1 & floodplain + stream = HYD1 Black = zone of influence; does not generate credits but is a factor in credit generation.

Functional Groups HAB1 = in-stream habitat (to ordinary high water mark), including flora & fauna. RS = for headwater and small systems, this is “Resource Support” of Recreation Value (REC1), which are functions and attributes that support downstream recreation. HYD1 = hydrologic functions such as floodwater storage, geomorphic channel stability & sediment transport. BGC1 = biogeochemical functions, such as temperature regulation, nutrient cycling, and organic matter cycling.


6.0 Conceptual Work Plan The Sponsor intends to implement the proposed Bank in three phases as shown on Figure 2. Following review of this DRAFT Prospectus by the Interagency Review Team, the Sponsor intends to follow the following implementation schedule for the Bank:

Milestone Anticipated IRT Submittal Date Complete Prospectus February 2012 Draft MBI – with Phase 1 Mitigation Plan June 2012 Complete MBI September 2012 Phase 1 Implementation Spring 2013 Phase 2 Implementation Spring 2014 Phase 3 Implementation Spring 2015 All dates are tentative and subject to IRT review and other constraints. A conceptual mitigation plan for Phase 1 areas is presented below. The areas to be included in Phase 1 are shown in Figures 3 and 4 and include the following:

Orchard Creek – 5,518 linear feet of stream channel

Spur Creek – 1,250 linear feet of stream channel

Chippewa Swamp – 13 acres of wetland

Saddle Swamp – 9.8 acres of wetland 6.1 Stream Function Enhancement Plan – Orchard Creek & Spur Creek Stream systems will be restored to optimal natural physical and ecological conditions using structural and vegetation measures to match reference stream conditions. The resulting stream channel conditions will be optimal with no incision or bank erosion, resulting in a post project condition index of 1.00. Native plants and rock will provide complete surface protection. The stream will have access to the existing floodplain during high flows and will have minimal transient sediment deposition features. The riparian vegetation will be established to develop toward optimal condition with full tree canopy cover and native shrubs and grasses in the understory. The riparian zone of influence will also be optimal with similar vegetation characteristics. The instream habitat conditions will be optimal, consisting of variable bedform features, velocities, refuge with natural rock and log features, fine roots along the banks, and substantial native vegetation cover. 6.12 Orchard Creek (Figure 5) Orchard Creek is an approximately 5,500-ft perennial headwater tributary to Towanda Creek surrounded by farmland and a narrow buffer. The stream system includes Reach 1 upstream of Ayers Road, Reach 2 downstream of Ayers Road, and Reach 3, a tributary flowing from a pond to the West of the mainstem downstream of Ayers Road. Reaches 1 and 2 range in width from 10 to 15 ft and in depth from 1 to 4 ft, with varying degrees of incision and bank erosion along the stream length. Near the downstream end, the system is aggrading due to excessive alluvium transported during a September 2011 flood from unstable streambanks immediately upstream. The active floodplain width ranges from zero in the incised segments up to 20 ft where alluvial floodplain benches have formed and stabilized. Several crop field drainage diversion terraces carry stormwater


runoff into the stream near the upstream end. Reach 3 is a smaller tributary that has been substantially altered and re-routed near its confluence with Reach 2. The Orchard Creek natural stream functions will be enhanced through a combination of channel/floodplain morphology adjustments, in-stream log and rock structures, and native forest riparian buffer establishment. The channel cross-section will be adjusted to approximately 12 ft wide and 1 ft deep by lifting incised segments to re-connect with existing floodplain elevation. Log and boulder grade control sills and vanes will be used to maintain channel bottom elevation and enhance bedform diversity. Most of the stream system will remain in the current location with the exception of the downstream end of Reach 3, which will be relocated to flow across the floodplain to a natural confluence with Reach 2. Native trees and shrubs will be planted to establish a minimum 100-ft forest buffer on each side the entire stream system. 6.13 Spur Creek (Figure 7) Spur Creek is a 1,250-ft intermittent/perennial headwater tributary to Horsepasture Creek surrounded by farmland and a narrow buffer. The stream system originates in the Saddle Swamp wetland area with no defined channel and flows to the Southwest. The channel ranges in width from 5 to 10 ft and in depth from 1 to 2 ft, with varying degrees of incision and bank erosion along the stream length. Near the downstream end, the stream is surrounded by a wide tree buffer. The active floodplain width ranges from zero in the incised segments up to 40 ft where alluvial floodplain benches have formed and stabilized. The Spur Creek natural stream functions will be enhanced through a combination of channel/floodplain morphology adjustments, in-stream log and rock structures, and native forest riparian buffer establishment. The channel cross-section will be adjusted to approximately 6 ft wide and 0.5 ft deep by lifting incised segments to re-connect with existing floodplain elevation. Log and boulder grade control sills and vanes will be used to maintain channel bottom elevation and enhance bedform diversity. Most of the stream system will remain in the current location. Native trees and shrubs will be planted to establish a minimum 100-ft forest buffer on each side the entire stream system. The table below quantifies the existing and proposed conditions for Orchard Creek and Spur Creek as determined using the Draft Pennsylvania Riverine Condition Rapid Assessment, December 2011. Raw data can be found in spreadsheets included as Appendix D herein. Table 1. Riverine Functional Areas, Existing Condition Index, and Proposed Condition Index.

Functional Area (ac)

HAB1 RS HYD1 BGC1 Existing CI Proposed

CI CIdiff

OR 1 0.68 0.68 9.14 8.46 0.53 1.00 0.47

OR 2 0.57 0.57 7.66 7.09 0.53 1.00 0.47

OR 3 0.23 0.23 3.67 3.44 0.15 1.00 0.85

Orchard Total 1.47 1.47 20.48 19.00

Spur Total 0.17 0.17 3.04 2.87 0.51 1.00 0.49

Total 1.65 1.65 23.52 21.87


6.2 Wetland Function Enhancement Plan – Chippewa Swamp & Saddle Swamp Jurisdictional wetlands are defined by the presence of three criteria: hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and evidence of wetland hydrology during the growing season (Environmental Laboratory 1987). Portions of the Bank supporting jurisdictional wetlands may originally have been characterized by palustrine, forested wetlands which were saturated to seasonally flooded. However, onsite wetland areas have been impacted by beaver, stormwater and nutrient inputs, livestock trampling, application of herbicides and fertilizers, deforestation, fill, and grading. Two degraded wetland areas are located within Phase 1 of the proposed Bank: the Chippewa Swamp located in the northern portion of the Bank, and the Saddle Swamp located near the center of the Bank. Soil types for these areas are shown in Figure 4. Wetland mitigation efforts are intended to normalize surface and groundwater levels to those characteristic of appropriate wetland hydrology, replace native vegetation communities, and reestablish soil structure and microtopographic variations. Mitigation efforts will allow the wetland areas to perform functions such as flood-flow suppression, nutrient cycling, and sediment and pollutant removal, and are expected to raise the function of approximately 19.8 acres of wetland. Pennsylvania Wetland Condition Stressor Worksheets (PWCSWs) were completed to quantify the major stressors on Site wetlands. Site wetlands were evaluated for the functional condition of the area within the 300-foot Zone of Influence (ZOI), evidence of vegetation stressors, hydrologic modifications, sediment inputs, eutrophication, water contaminants, and the presence of roads and invasive species. Each functional condition score represents the approximate percentage of wetland function maintained by the wetland area as compared to a system with no stressors. The PWCSWs indicate that each wetland area is subject to numerous stressors that will be addressed by wetland mitigation activities. Raw data forms are included as Appendix E. 6.21 Chippewa Swamp (Figure 6) The Chippewa Swamp portion of the Bank supports riparian jurisdictional wetlands that are characterized by permanent to semi-permanently flooded, palustrine wetlands underlain by hydric soils that exhibit low chroma colors, and that generally supports emergent marsh vegetation. This area occupies approximately 12.8 acres and has been physically and chemically impacted by filling and grading, culverts, drain tiles, and agricultural roads, nutrient inputs from adjacent row crop production, and beaver activity. Hydrology in this area has been increased by concentrated stormwater flow from adjacent agricultural field drainage tiles, and altered by beaver and undersized drainage culverts. The dominant stressor of the Chippewa Swamp wetland is the ZOI composition. The ZOI encompassing this wetland area is composed primarily of pasture lands that are dominated by low herbaceous vegetation and compacted soils. Numerous hydrologic modifications also contribute to the degradation of this wetland system. Fill from adjacent agricultural areas and roads, beaver activity, and stormwater input from adjacent pasture and agricultural land drainage tiles have altered the hydrology and generally increased water levels in this area. Undersized drainage culverts have lengthened the inundated hydroperiod. The primary stressor to vegetation within the Chippewa Swamp is the destruction of most trees by beaver herbivory and increased water levels. Water quality stressors include the application of herbicides and fertilizers to adjacent areas. A summary of


current wetland stressor conditions along with the expected post-project conditions and resultant functional uplift are presented in the following table. Table 2. Chippewa Swamp Wetland Functional Condition Indices

Functional Condition Indices *Pre-Project Condition Score

Expected Post-Project Condition Score

Percent Change to Functional Condition

1. Wetland ZOI Condition 0.31 1.00 223

2. Roadbed Presence 0.75 0.75 0

3. Vegetation Condition 0.88 1.00 14

4. Hydrologic Modification 0.45 1.00 122

5. Sediment Stressor 1.00 1.00 0

6. Water Quality Stressor 0.88 1.00 14

Total of Indices 4.27 5.75 35 Average of Indices (Overall Wetland Condition Index)

0.71 0.96 35

*Pre-Project Condition Score: Scores for wetland condition indices have been generated by a field assessment of Site wetlands with

the PWCSW. The maximum score for any individual index is 1.0.

6.22 Saddle Swamp (Figure 7) The Saddle Swamp portion of the Bank supports non-riparian jurisdictional wetlands that are characterized by palustrine wetlands underlain by hydric soils that are generally saturated and exhibit low chroma colors. Vegetation within this area is generally composed of a single stratum of herbaceous vegetation due to livestock grazing, row crop production, and routine maintenance. The saddle swamp occupies approximately 7.0 acres and has been impacted by livestock grazing and row crop production, filling, grading, installation of a dam, and the removal of native vegetation and woody debris. Approximately 6.2 acres supports livestock and is impacted by livestock grazing and associated soil compaction, while the remaining 0.8 acre is in use for row crops and has incurred tilling, maintenance, and row crop production. Hydrology in this area is primarily due to groundwater springs and surface runoff. Soil infiltration has been reduced through compaction due to hoof shear and agricultural equipment. Hydric soils have generally been mapped by the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) as Chippewa; however, the wetland area located on the western slope of the Saddle Swamp is located within a Volusia channery silt loam mapping unit. According to the Cowardin classification (Cowardin et al. 1979), jurisdictional wetlands located within the beaver swamp may be generally classified as palustrine, persistent emergent wetlands that are semipermanently to seasonally flooded (PEM1F/H). Jurisdictional wetlands within the Saddle Swamp may be generally classified as palustrine, broad-leaved and deciduous shrub-scrub wetlands that are saturated on a semipermanent to seasonal basis (PSS1Y). The dominant stressor of the Saddle Swamp wetland is the ZOI composition. The ZOI encompassing this wetland area is composed primarily of pasture lands that are dominated by low herbaceous vegetation and compacted soils. Numerous hydrologic modifications also contribute to the degradation of this wetland system and include fill from adjacent agricultural areas and a breached dam. Vegetation alteration is a serious stressor of the Saddle Swamp. Vegetation is grazed by livestock throughout the majority of the area, along with areas of mowing, brushcutting, woody


debris removal, row crop production, and herbicide applications. Fertilizer and herbicide applications to adjacent areas are also dominant water quality stressors. A summary of current wetland stressor conditions along with the expected post-project conditions and resultant functional uplift are presented in the following table. Table 3. Saddle Swamp Wetland Functional Condition Indices

Functional Condition Indices *Pre-Project Condition Score

Expected Post-Project Condition Score

Percent Change to Functional Condition

1. Wetland ZOI Condition 0.19 1.00 426

2. Roadbed Presence 0.95 0.95 0

3. Vegetation Condition 0.48 1.00 108

4. Hydrologic Modification 0.75 1.00 33

5. Sediment Stressor 0.75 1.00 33

6. Water Quality Stressor 0.65 1.00 54

Total of Indices 3.77 5.95 58 Average of Indices (Overall Wetland Condition Index)

0.63 0.99 58

*Pre-Project Condition Score: Scores for wetland condition indices have been generated by a field assessment of Site wetlands with

the PWCSW. The maximum score for any individual index is 1.0.

6.23 Wetland Approach Currently, Bank wetlands exhibit overall wetland functions of approximately two-thirds the level of a reference system. Alternatives for wetland mitigation are designed to raise multiple functions within each wetland to a level generally analogous to those of an undisturbed wetland area. These activities are anticipated to result in the improvement of degraded emergent and scrub shrub wetlands to forested palustrine wetlands with natural hydrology ranging from soil saturation to seasonal inundation (PFO1B/C). This forested palustrine system is expected to provide surface water energy dissipation, nutrient cycling, removal of imported elements and compounds, and will create a variety and abundance of wildlife habitat. Mitigation activities are expected to raise the functional conditions of approximately 19.8 acres of jurisdictional wetlands. Wetland areas are expected to benefit from the following activities:

Mitigation of Site hydrology.

o Remove adjacent agricultural field drainage tiles that drain to wetland areas.

o Remove beaver structures and debris.

o Replace/upgrade drainage culverts under road adjacent to the beaver swamp.

o Ground surface alteration/introduction of microtopographic variation.

o Restore hydrology from upslope springs through channel creation.

Remove fill and relict dam.

Plant Zones of Influence with native forest vegetation typical of wetland communities in the

region. 6.3 Preliminary Mitigation Quantities Preliminary determinations of the compensatory mitigation credits that will be provided from the Bank are shown in Tables 4 (Riverine) and 5 (Wetlands) below. The quantities were determined using field indicators or existing resource conditions and proposed post-project resource conditions


as described in the sections above and based on the DRAFT Pennsylvania Aquatic Resource Function Based Compensation Protocol, December 2011. Functional credit gain was determined for each functional group based on the relevant resource area to be improved and then adjusted in all cases as a perimeter Zone of Influence (ZOI) will be established and conserved for all project areas. Field data forms and raw numerical data are included as Appendix D. Table 4. Preliminary Riverine Mitigation Quantities (Rv = 2; Cv = 3; Af = 0.75)

Functional Credit Gain Adjusted Functional Credit Gain

HAB1 RS HYD1 BGC1 HAB1 RS HYD1 BGC1

OR 1 1.91 1.91 25.78 23.87 2.66 2.66 26.53 24.62

OR 2 1.60 1.60 21.60 20.00 2.35 2.35 22.35 20.75

OR 3 1.17 1.17 18.73 17.56 1.92 1.92 19.48 18.31

Orchard Total 4.68 4.68 66.12 61.44 5.43 5.43 66.87 62.19

Spur Total 0.51 0.51 8.94 8.44 1.26 1.26 9.69 9.19

Total 5.19 5.19 75.06 69.87 6.69 6.69 76.56 71.37

Table 5. Preliminary Wetland Mitigation Quantities

Function Group Chippewa Chippewa

+ ZOI Saddle Saddle +

ZOI

Total Phase 1 Wetland

Functional Credit Gain

Total Phase 1 Wetland

Functional Credit Gain

w/ZOI

BGC2 13.00 39.29 14.14 60.06 27.14 99.35

HYD2 13.00 39.29 14.14 60.06 27.14 99.35

HAB2 13.00 39.29 14.14 60.06 27.14 99.35 Where FCG = Ap*Rv*Cv*CIdiff; Resource Value Factor (Rv = 2); Compensation Value Factor (Cv =2).

7.0 Proposed Monitoring Protocol The objective of the Bank is to implement appropriate, sustainable aquatic resource communities. The Sponsor will develop an appropriate monitoring protocol to address the core resource functions – water quality, carrying capacity, habitat and recreation – and to provide quantifiable measures of success. It is anticipated that the site will be monitored for five years post implementation. Proposed monitoring protocol includes the following. 7.1 Riverine Monitoring The protocol developed by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection focuses on four primary riverine functional areas. Data collected for each functional group and rationale for such is described below.


7.11 HAB1 All restored streams will be assessed annually for habitat quality and compared to reference streams using EPA’s Rapid Bioassessment for Wadeable Streams and Rivers, which accounts for the value of the following 10 parameters: (1) Epifaunal Substrate/Available Cover: Small deadfall and snags placed throughout the newly designed channels to provide cover, spawning areas, and food. (2) Pool Substrate Characterization: Multiple substrates provide for higher diversity and increased habitat. Submerged and adjacent vegetation increases niches. (3) Pool Variability: Multiple pool types including large-shallow, large-deep, small-shallow, and small-deep, support diverse aquatic communities. Variability in pool sizes will increase and encourage organisms’ re-establishment. (4) Sediment Deposition: Increased sediment deposition leads to decreased diversity. By designing new streams that function properly with a bankfull at or near top of bank, excessive sediment deposition should be decreased. (5) Channel Flow Status: When water does not fill all the available channel, suitable substrate for aquatic organisms is limited. Re-configured channels/floodplains allow for water to fill all the available channel thus increasing available habitat. (6) Channel Alteration: Incised streams increase velocity and shear stress, causing erosion and sedimentation, and limiting habitat. (7) Channel Sinuosity: Increased bends provide refuge for fish and macros during high flow and storm events. (8) Bank Stability: Eroded banks indicate a problem of sediment movement and deposition, and suggest a scarcity of cover and organic input to streams. (9) Bank Vegetative Protection: Bank vegetation provides organic input, shading, and bank stabilization. (10) Riparian Vegetative Zone Width: Vegetative zones serve as buffers to pollutants, controls erosion, and provide nutrients and habitat in and near the stream. 7.12 RS Downstream recreation value is related to trout fisheries. This will be evaluated using annual benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring to document populations of EPT taxa compared to reference streams. 7.13 HYD1 Stream morphology will be measured annually to evaluate hydrologic functions. For every 1,000 linear feet of restored stream, a 300-ft monitoring segment will be identified for repeated measurements: (1) cross-sections will be surveyed in two riffles and two pools to assess changes in channel and floodplain width, depth, area, and entrenchment ratio; (2) a longitudinal profile will be


measured to assess bed feature slopes, depths, riffle and pool lengths, and step heights; (3) a plan view survey will be used to determine sinuosity, meander length, belt width, and radius of curvature; (4) pebble counts collected reach-wide and in riffle pavement will be used to assess trends in sediment transport. 7.14 BGC1 Biogeochemical functions will be assessed using annual measures of shade cover, baseflow temperature and DO.

7.2 Wetland Monitoring The proposed monitoring protocol has been developed utilizing PA DEP draft Level 2 Rapid Assessment Methods (PA DEP draft) and documentation concerning hydrogeomorphic classification of wetlands in Pennsylvania and across the United States (Wardrop et al. 2004, and Brinson et al. 1995). HGM wetland types identified at the Site include Riverine Headwater Complex, Stratigraphic Slope (mineral soil), and Lacustrine - Semipermanently Flooded; each of which is characterized as providing a series of distinct wetland functions. Wetland functions provided by each HGM wetland type may be monitored to determine functional uplift for mitigation activities implemented at the Site. Three main functional groups have been identified for the Site using HGM methodology: hydrology, biogeochemical reactions, and habitat. Within each functional group, metrics have been identified which may be measured, or observed for Site mitigation monitoring. Functional groups and monitoring metrics include the following. HYDROLOGY (HYD2) Groundwater Hydrology Redoxomorphic Features Stressors Macrotopography Elevation Gradient Floodplain Function Deviation Mannings Roughness Coefficient Floodplain Wetland Hydrology BIOGEOCHEMICAL REACTIONS (BGC2) Elevation Gradient Biomass Mannings Roughness Coefficient Presence of Snags Macrotopographic Roughness Coarse Woody Debris Redoxomorphic Features Soil Texture Organic Matter Fine Woody Debris HABITAT (HAB2) Species Composition Percent Development and Road Density Coarse Woody Debris Organic Matter Aquatic Conductivity Presence of Snags Regeneration of Canopy Species Fine Woody Debris Percent of Non-native Plant Species Habitat Suitability Diversity Mean Forest Patch Size


From a mitigation perspective, several of these metrics are landscape dependent, encompassing 1 kilometer of the land adjacent to the Site. These metrics will not be altered by mitigation activities (i.e. Elevation Gradient, Percent Development and Road Density, and Mean Forest Patch Size). Therefore, these metrics will not be useful to monitor for mitigation success. Other metrics which are not expected to be altered by mitigation activities, or will not alter during the relatively short (5 to 7 year) monitoring period include soil texture, regeneration of canopy species, and presence of snags. Monitoring for the Site is proposed to measure functions that are easily observed and readily alterable through the mitigation process. These functions include the following. HYDROLOGY VHYDROCHAR (Characteristic Wetland Groundwater Hydrology) – Groundwater gauge data collection

and/or visual assessments of hydrologic conditions typical of the appropriate wetland system. VHYDROSTRESS (Hydrologic Modifications) – Determine stressors to hydrology using stressor checklists

(PA DEP draft). VROUGH (Manning’s Roughness Coefficient) – Identify roughness at the Site resulting from coarse

woody debris, microtopography, and biomass. VFLOODP (Characteristic Floodplain Wetland Hydrology) – Visual indicators of overbank flooding

and measurements of bankfull width/area. VMACRO (Macrotopographic Relief) – Identify the number of macrotopographic depressions

encountered along transects. BIOGEOCHEMICAL REACTIONS VROUGH (Manning’s Roughness Coefficient) – Identify roughness at the Site resulting from coarse

woody debris, microtopography, and biomass. VMACRO (Macrotopographic Relief) – Identify the number of macrotopographic depressions

encountered along transects. VORGMA (% Soil Organic Matter) – Determine the organic content of the top 5 cm of soil sample. VFWD (Fine Woody Debris) – Visual estimate of depth of litter layer. VBIOMASS (Biomass) – A combination of percent cover of trees, shrubs, and herbs to determine

vegetative biomass at the site. HABITAT VSPPCOMP (Species Composition) – Determine the species composition for each plot within the Site. VEXOTIC (Percent of Non-Native Plant Species) – Generate a plant list and determine the ratio of

native species to exotic/invasive species, or map areas of exotic/invasive species and determine area as a percentage of the total area.


VFWD (Fine Woody Debris) – Visual estimate of depth of litter layer. VORGMA (% Soil Organic Matter) – Determine the organic content of the top 5 cm of soil sample. 8.0 Proposed Credit Release Schedules In accordance with the federal Compensatory Mitigation Rule, the first credit release shall occur upon execution of the Mitigation Banking Instrument, provision of financial assurances (FA) and protection of the project area within a conservation easement (CE). Subsequent credit releases should be based on the ability of the project to meet success criteria as determined through the monitoring protocol that indicate the restored and enhanced aquatic resources are trending toward full functionality. Site performance will be documented in an annual monitoring report that will be submitted to the IRT no later than December 31 of each year. Table 6. Proposed Credit Release Schedule for Riverine Systems.

Task Percent Credit Release MBI Execution, FA, CE 15 Construction, Planting, As-Built 15 Year 1 Successful Monitoring 10 Year 2 Successful Monitoring 15 (max., 10 w/o bf) Year 3 Successful Monitoring 15 (10 w/o bf) Year 5 Successful Monitoring 15 (10 w/o bf) Year 7 Successful Monitoring 15 (10 w/o bf)

Table 7. Proposed Credit Release Schedule for Wetland Systems.

Task Percent Credit Release MBI Execution, FA, CE 15 Construction, Planting, As-Built 15 Year 1 Monitoring 15 Year 2 Monitoring 15 Year 3 Monitoring 15 Year 5 Monitoring 15 Year 7 Monitoring 10

9.0 Accounting & Reporting Protocol The Sponsor shall submit to the DE, for distribution to each member of the IRT, an annual report describing the current condition of the Bank and the condition of the Bank in relation to the success criteria in the Mitigation Plan. The Sponsor shall provide to the DE annual monitoring reports documenting the criteria and relative success of the project as described herein. The Sponsor shall provide ledger reports documenting credit transactions and shall provide notification the DE each time a credit transaction occurs.


10.0 Landowners & Long-Term Protection: The Sponsor currently has permission from each landowner to investigate the feasibility of developing the Towanda Creek Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank. This prospectus is the first step in assessing the Bank project. Each landowner understands that prior to the first credit release the Sponsor will acquire a Conservation Easement over each project segment in order to provide perpetual protection of the mitigation area. As such, the Sponsor will work with the landowners listed in Table 8 below to ensure that no conflicting property interests exist at the time the Conservation Easement is placed upon the subject property. It is anticipated that an approved conservation organization will be the long-term holder of the easements. The Sponsor will provide a template Conservation Easement document to the IRT at the time the Mitigation Banking Instrument is submitted. Table 8. Adjacent property owners for Phase 1.

Owner Name Address City State Zip Code Deed

Orchard Creek

Jennings, Robert L. 639 Jennings Rd. Canton PA 17724 2001/12207


West Martin O. 755 Bunyan Hill Rd. Granville Summit PA 16926 2004/14093

Decristo, David M. 6740 Windfall Road Canton PA 17724 2004/05124


Fleming, Elwin E. 1619 Route 514 Granville Summit PA 16926 049/90128

Saddle Swamp / Spur Creek & Chippewa Swamp

Shedden Scott L. 6197 Route 414 Canton PA 17724 055/90270

Jennings, Gregory D. 1400 Deboy St. Raleigh NC 27606 2002/14090



N. Hills Gun Club INC. 2370 Ogden Ave. Bensalem PA 19020 035/00800

Jennings, Robert L. RR 1 BOX 82A Canton PA 17724 029/61035

11.0 Financial Assurances The Sponsor shall provide financial assurances in a form acceptable to the IRT sufficient to assure completion of all remaining mitigation work, required reporting and monitoring, and any remedial work required pursuant to this MBI. It is anticipated that financial assurances will be either in the form of a surety bond or casualty insurance. The Sponsor shall secure financial assurances in compliance with current industry standard and in compliance with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers guidance.


12.0 Assurance of Sufficient Water Rights The wetland and stream areas that comprise the Bank present a unique opportunity to address several headwater systems to Towanda Creek, which is a major tributary to the Susquehanna River. These headwater areas are driven primarily groundwater hydrology originating onsite. These seeps will be protected by conservation easements. As such, it is unlikely that offsite activities or topographic manipulation will interfere with hydrology of project reaches. 13.0 Qualifications Sponsor – Restoration Systems is a leading environmental restoration and mitigation banking company with more than 40 bonded, turn-key mitigation sites and banks in Georgia, Louisiana, Maryland, North Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and North-Central Pennsylvania. These projects total more than 22,000 acres of wetlands and 50 miles of creeks, streams, rivers and bayous. Founded in 1998, the company is headquartered in Raleigh, North Carolina. RS was formed to improve the quality of environmental restoration and mitigation by locating and acquiring the best properties, planning their restoration using advanced science and technology, constructing them in the most conscientious manner, and maintaining and monitoring them over the long term. Each RS project or bank is protected, in perpetuity, by environmentally protective conservation easements. RS has been a preeminent force in the development of successful aquatic mitigation Banks and turnkey projects in North Carolina for more than 15 years. RS’s qualifications are best illustrated by its track record in selecting high quality sites and highly skilled technical experts in site evaluation, design and implementation is well-demonstrated. RS has designed and implemented more than 25 wetland, stream and riparian buffer mitigation sites/banks in Maryland, Texas, Tennessee, Louisiana, Pennsylvania and North Carolina, representing thousands of acres of wetlands and miles of streams. Furthermore, RS provides financial surety for every project through every phase of work and each site is inspected by staff at least quarterly following the completion of monitoring responsibilities. Included among the stream and wetland mitigation projects completed, or in advanced planning by RS are:

Project State Status Anderson NC Monitoring Year 5 Angola Bay NC In Development Bear Creek NC Post-Monitoring Big Bull Creek NC Monitoring Year 5 Brogdon Road NC Monitoring Year 5 Brown Marsh Swamp NC Monitoring Year 4 Burrows Cove TN Monitoring Year 2 Cane Creek NC Monitoring Year 4 Carbonton Dam NC Close-Out Casey Dairy NC Close-Out Causey Farm NC Close-Out The Cliffs NC In Development


Columbus Swamp NC Monitoring Year 3 Cutawhiskie NC Monitoring Year 4 Elk Shoals NC Monitoring Year 5 Fox Run NC Monitoring Year 2 Frog Hollow NC Close-Out Gatlin Swamp NC Monitoring Year 5 Gray Farm NC Monitoring Year 5 Haw River NC Close-Out Herman Dairy NC Under Construction Holly Grove NC Monitoring Year 4 Jarman’s Oak NC Monitoring Year 4 Lick Creek NC Monitoring Year 5 Lloyd NC Monitoring Year 5 Lowell Mill Dam NC Close-Out Morgan Creek NC Monitoring Year 3 Salisbury-Wicomico MD Monitoring Year 4 Sleepy Creek NC Monitoring Year 5 Summit Seep NC Under Construction Three-Mile Creek NC Monitoring Year 3 Cranstons Mill Pond VA Under Construction Cripple Creek NC Monitoring Year 2 Bass Mountain NC In Development Pancho NC In Development Salisbury III MD In Development Jesuit Bend LA In Development South Lafourche LA In Development

Little Hazel GA In Development Katy Prairie TX In Development

Specific project information and reference contacts are available upon request. In addition to the Sponsor, Dr. Greg Jennings (landowner, lead project designer) will play a key role in project development and implementation. Greg Jennings, PhD, is a professional engineer with 25 years of experience in education, research, and consulting on ecosystem assessment and restoration. As a Professor at North Carolina State University, he teaches watershed hydrology, fluvial geomorphology, stream assessment and restoration, ecological engineering, erosion and sedimentation control, natural channel design, and stormwater management. Dr. Jennings directs the NCSU Stream Restoration Program, which conducts research and education programs focused on natural approaches for restoring stream and floodplain functions and stability. He also advises government agencies, non-profit organizations, and private landowners on effective watershed management and stream restoration and protection approaches. Dr. Jennings has provided technical support for stream assessment and restoration implementation for more than 150,000 linear feet of streams and rivers on more than 80 watershed restoration project sites throughout the nation. He has also taught more than 150 professional development workshops in 20 states on stream assessment, restoration planning, natural channel design, watershed management, construction practices for stream restoration, and ecosystem restoration monitoring. Dr. Jennings is a native of Canton, Pennsylvania, and holds B.S. and M.S. degrees in engineering from The Pennsylvania State University and a Ph.D. in engineering from the University of Nebraska.

!.

Latitude: 41.667905 Longitude: -76.749811(NAD 83/wgs 84)

1101 Haynes St., Suite 211Raleigh, NC 27605Ph: 919.755.9490Fax: 919.755.9492www.restorationsystems.com

Figure 1Imagery: © 2011 N. G. Society, i-cubedCoordinate System: NAD_83_SPPAN FTScale: 1 inch = 10,000 feetDate: February 2012PM - TDA Drawn By - RJH

Geographic Service Area

Upper SusquehannaRiver Basin

Towa

nda C

reek S

tream

& W

etlan

dMi

tigati

on U

mbrel

la Ba

nk

q

_̂

Service Area LegendUpper Susquehanna Service Area_̂ Project Location

0 2 4 6 81

Miles

LegendBradford County Streams Project Location

BradfordCounty

LegendSpecial Note: Map data sponsored by the Susquehanna River Basin Commission

General Project Location

Approved Gas Pad Locations


Figure 3a

Imagery: Susquehanna R.B.C.

Coordinate System: NAD_83_SPPAN FT

Not to Sacle

Date: February 2012

PM - TDA Drawn By - RJH

Natural GasActivity

Tow

anda

Cre

ek S

tream

& W

etla

ndM

itiga

tion

Um

brel

la B

ank

q

Legend Special Note: Map data sponsored by Bradford County GIS

Transport- BuiltGathering - Built

Gathering - Proposed

Service - Built

Storage - Built Transport- Proposed Substation

Meter Station

Compressor Station

Tap Location Active

Vertical Gas Well

Horizontal Gas Well

Geneeral Project Location


Figure 3b

Imagery: Bradford County GIS 2012

Coordinate System:

Not to Sacle

Date: February 2012

PM - TDA Drawn By - RJH

Natural GasPipeline Activity

Tow

anda

Cre

ek S

tream

& W

etla

ndM

itiga

tion

Um

brel

la B

ank

q

Spur Creek & Saddle Swamp

Orchard Creek

Chippewa Swamp


Figure 4Imagery: Ortho PA 2010Coordinate System: NAD_83_SPPAN FTScale: 1 inch = 2,500 feetDate: February 2012PM - TDA Drawn By - RJH

Phase 1:Wetland &

Stream Areas

Towa

nda C

reek S

tream

& W

etlan

dMi

tigati

on U

mbrel

la Ba

nk

q

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.50.25

Miles

Legend

FEMA 100 Year FloodplainTowanda Creek & Existing TributariesPhase 1: Zone of Influence Boundary

Spur Creek & Saddle Swamp

Orchard Creek

Chippewa Swamp

VoC

VoC

VoB

Uc

VoC

VoB

MoB

VoB

MoC

VoC

LnUc

VoC

Uc

VoC

MaC

MoC

VoB

Md

MoC

VoB

CpA

Ho

WgB

VoC

VoC

VoC

VoB

MoB

MoC

Ho

MaCWbC

WbB

MoB

MaC

VoB

MoC

MoCMoC

VoC

VoC

VoC

VoD

MoC

VoC

VoC

VoC

MoB

Ho

VoB

Ln

Uc

MoC

VoB

MaC

Uc

VoB

VoB

VoB

Ho

Ln

CpB

Ln

MaC

MaB

MoBVoB

MsB

MoBReA

VoBMaB

MaC

VoB

MaC

Ln

CpA

MaC

MoC

MsB

MoC

VoB

Ln

VsD

MoC

MaB

VoB

VoB

CpB

MaC

MbD

CpA

MoC

Uc

VoB

MoB

VsD

MaC

VoB

WbC

MaC

VoB

WbC

CpA

VoBVoB

CpB

Ho

VoB

WbC

MoB

MoC

VoB

VoB

VoB

MaB

VoB

VoB

MoC

MaB

WbB

VsB

WbC

MaB

CpBMoC

Ln

CpB

VoD

VoD

VsB

WbC

VoB

MoC

VoD

CpB

VoB

Ho

CpB

VoD

WbC

VoD

CpB

MoC

MsD

MaC

MaC

CpB

MaC

MoC

MsD

VoD

MbD

MsB

Ho

CpB

MoB

CpB VoD

Ho

WbC

VoD

MoC

Ho

ReB

MsD

CpA

MsD

VoD

Ln

MsD

MbD

VsB

MaB

MaB

Po

CpA

MsB

MaC

CpA

MbD

CpA

WgB

WbC

CpA

MaB

WbB

MaB

CpB

MsD


Figure 5Imagery: Ortho PA 2010Coordinate System: NAD_83_SPPAN FTScale: 1 inch = 2,500 feetDate: February 2012PM - TDA Drawn By - RJH

Phase 1:Soils

Towa

nda C

reek S

tream

& W

etlan

dMi

tigati

on U

mbrel

la Ba

nk

q

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.50.25

Miles

Legend

NRCS Hydric A SoilsPhase 1: Zone of Influence Boundaries

NRCS Hydric B Soils

CpACpBHo

!.

AYRES RD

CIDER MILL RD

Reach 1 ~ 2,458 l. ft.

Reach 3 ~ 1,000 l. ft.

Reach 2 ~ 2,060 l. ft.Latitude: 41.684084

Longitude: -76.72973(NAD 83/WGS 84)

1468

1470

1472

1474

1456

1452

1454

1458

1464

1462

1460

1450

1434

1466

1432

1436

1446

1438

1440

1442

1444

1448

1476

1478

1480

1482

1484

1486

14881490

1492

1430

1494

1428

1426

1496

1424

1498

1500

1502

1422

1420

1418

1416

1414

1412

1410

1408

1404

1402

1400

1398

1396

1394

1392

1390

1388

1386

1406

1384

1382

1380

1378

1376

1374

1372

1370

1368

1366

1364

1362

1360

1358

1356

1354

1352

1504

1350

1506

1348

1508

1346

1510

1344

1512

1342

1340

1514

1338

1516

1336

1334

1332

1518

1330

1520

1522

1328

1524

1326

1526

1324

1528

1322

1530

1320

1532

1318

1316

1314

1534

1312

1310

1536

1308

1306

1538

1304

1540

1302

15421544

1300

1548

1298

1296

1550

1294

15541556

1292

15581560

1288

1286

15621566

1280

1278

1572

15741576

1268

15841586

1264

1262

1260

1396

1428

1398

1488

1534

1496

1482

1530

1512

1352

1416

1292

1522 1518

1524

1430

1432

1474

1394

1510

1484

1470

1380

1446

1464

1334

1372

1334

1340

1504

1374

1462

1344

1440

1434

1478

1506

1480

1396

1420

1500

1496

1458

1434

1486

1452

1342

1376

1346

1348

1348

1338

1440

1456

1522

13481480

1476

1514

1480

1458

1486

1494

1450

1436

1336

1466

1392

1516

1332

1386

1440

1392

1506

1382

1448 1462

1412

13661348

1422

1472

1476

1352

1332

1414

1350

1440

1476

1522

1504

1502

1356

1462

1456

1490

1412

1440

1478

1378

1410

1376

1346

1350

1422

1404

1442

1370

1480

1334

1358

1340

1506

1508

1408

1482

1356

1518

1468

1366

1342

1406

1504

1370

1464

1400

1334

1388

1464

1488

1388

1410

1444

1354

1472

1500

1420

1414

1390

1360

1364

1342

1406

1454

1518

1424

1400

1460

1456

1402

1504

1370

1362

1418

1422

1316

1520

1520

1454

1472

1340

1334

1444

1504

1456

139013841488

1362

1406

1384

1446

1458

1444

1374

1468

1342

1394

1438

1344

1342

1382

1460

1398

1434

1336

1484

1360

1478

1340

1408

1454

1402

1536

1418

1364

1516

1378

1372

1510

1444

1468

1342

1432

1514

1474

1368

1464

1470

1426

1512

1452

1484

1404

1416

1386

1482

1506

1101 Haynes St., Suite 211Raleigh NC 27604Ph: 919.755.9490Fax: 919.755.9492www.restorationsystems.com

Figure 6

Scale: ShownCoordinate System: NAD_83_SPPAN FT

Date: February 2012Project Manager: TDA Drawn By: RJH

Aerial Image: NAIP2010_Bradford

Orchard CreekReach Name:

0 525 1,050 1,575 2,100262.5Feet

Towa

nda C

reek S

tream

& W

etlan

dM

itigati

on U

mbrel

la Ba

nkPH

ASE I

Drainage Area ~ 274 ac.

q

1 inch = 500 feet

Site Drainage Legend

Orchard Creek Restoration

Towanda Creek & Tributaries

FWS Nation Wetland InventoryFreshwater Emergent Wetland

Freshwater Forested / Shrub WetlandFreshwater PondRiverine Wetland

Orchard Creek Legend

!. Site Location

Existing Channel to be Filled

Orchard Creek Restoration

Approx. Location of Future Stream

2 Foot Contours

Orchard Creek Zone of Influence ~ 30.0 ac.

Towanda Creek & Existing Tributaries

!.

!.

Latitude: 41.681318 Longitude: -76.76511 (NAD 83/WGS 84)

1432

1430

1428

1426 1424

1482

14841486

1488

1490

14601462

1464

1418

14201416

1422

1458

1466

1456

1454

1452

1468

1450

1448

1470

1446

1444

1442

14401438

1436

1472

1434

1474

1476

1478

1480

1414

1412

1494

1410

1408

1496

1406

1498

1492

1404

1402

1504

1506

1500

1502

1510

1400

1512

1398

1508

1396

1394

1514

1392

15161518

1520

1522

1390

1388

1386

1384

1524

1526

15281530 15

32

1534

1554

1536

1538

1540

1542

1544 15

46

15481550

1552

1556

1558

1562

1560

1564

1382

15661568

1380

1570

1572

1378

1574

1576

1376

1578

1374

1372

1580

1354

1582

1470

1438

1524

1464

1416

1468

1414

1388

1408

1382

1506

1456

1492

1462

1528

1462

1468

1376

1386

1396

1380

1466

1448

1434

1414

1456

1398

1488

148015

20

1478

1398

1464

1460

1462

1396

14441442

1428

1466

1414

1470

1388

14581462

1420

1468

1414

1390

1526

1428

1520

14141434

1518

1384

1484

1510

1386

1524

1428

1458

1416

1518

1390

1468

1422

1464

1446

1466

1414

1414

1460

1414

1454

1396

1388

1480

1410

1468

1388

1400

1520 1422

1412

1392

1444

1408

1474

1414

1444

1466

1404

1460

1526

1458

1424

1440

1414

1432

1396

1510

1472

1478

1498

1426

1426

1394

1472

1472

1488

1456

1400

1458

1476

1454

1402

1458

1406

1516

1384

1496

1528

1396

1504

1426

1402

1420

1416

1388

1414

1494

1428

1450

1456

1376

1432

1464

1390

1398

1440

1518

1520

1458

1458

1478

1464

1408

1396

1414

1430

1418

1458

1520

1512

1458

1486

1386

1416

1414

1502

1436

1474

1394

1418

1404

1462

1478

1524

1524

1402

1408

1384

1522

1514

1474

1500

1398

1464

1412

1420

1460

1448

1508

1430

1400

1506

1494

1410

1420

1476

1414

1490

1492

1520

1420

1490

1484

1520

1410

1432

1436

1388

1450

1424

1452

1426

1502

1442

1466

1470

1460

1414

1486

1420

1414

1386

1500

1378

1414

1504

1388

1406

1388

1520

1416

1482

14601460

1446

1430

1432 1452

1438

1520 1482

1460

1422

1452

1414

1416

1412

1454

1472

1462

Drainage Area ~ 75 ac.

TOWANDA C

REEK


Figure 7

Scale:Coordinate System: NAD_83_SPPAN FT

Date: February 20121 inch = 417 feet

Project Manager: TDA Drawn By: RJH


ChippewaSwamp

Reach Name:

0 450 900 1,350 1,800225

Feet

Towa

nda C

reek S

tream

& W

etlan

dM

itigati

on U

mbrel

la Ba

nkPH

ASE I

Chippewa Swamp Legend!. Site Location


Spoil Area

Existing Culverts

Zone of Influence Approx. 39.5 ac.

Chippewa Swamp Approx. 13.0 ac.

2 Foot Contours

qSite Drainage Legend

Towanda Creek & Existing TributariesChippewa Swamp Drainage

FWS National Wetland InventoryFreshwater Emergent WetlandFreshwater Forested/Shrub WetlandFreshwater PondRiverine Wetland

1 inch = 417 feetSite: Zone of Influence Boundary

!.

Spur Creek Headwater ~ 1,250 l. ft.

Latitude: 41.673136 Longitude: -76.769089 (NAD 83/WGS 84)

1450 1448

1446 1444

1442 1440

1438

1436

1434

1432

1430

1428

14261424

1422

1420

1418

1416

1414

1412

1410

1404

1396

1408

1406

1394

1402

1392

1400

1398

1390

1388

1386

1488

1486

1484

1482

1480

1478

1476

1474

1472

1470

1384

1468

1466

1464

1462

1460

1456

1454

1452

1458

1490

1492

1494

1496

1498

1500

1502

1504

1506

1508

1510

1512

1514

1516

1518

1520

1382

1522

1380

1524

1526

1528

1530

1532

1534

1536

1378

1542

1544

1546

1550

1552

1554

1556

1558

1376

1560

1374

1562

1564

1566

1372

1568

1570

1370

1572

1368

1366

1574

1364

1576

1362

1388

1420

1436

1486

14841494

1404

1522

1446

1474

1520

1434

14381442

1390

1440

1390

1502

1526

1388

1388

1524

1456

1496

1490

1492

1456

1490

1506

1488

1376

1454 1418

1504

1496

1400

1476

1398

1460

1508

1476

1428

1394

1512

1400

1514

1484

1474

1502

1384

13861508

1506

1412

1500

1458

1492

1478

1444

1510

1516

1494

1406

1518

1388

1380

1520

1490

1462

1450

1384

14241466

1386

1408

1480

1450 1472

1394

1486

1512

1522

1498

1384146

4

1448

1518

1410

1428

1382

1514

14001518

1486

1494

1406

1396

1482

1476

1488

1426

1416

1444

1386

1468

14701504

1402

1456

1388

1414

1520

1356

1358

136013621364

1366

1368

1370

1372

1374

1376

1378

1380

1382 1384

1386

1388

13901392

13941396

1398

1354

1352

1350

1348

1346

1344

1342

1340

1338

13361334

1332

1400

1330

1328

1402

1326

1404

1406

1408

1324

1322

1410

1320

1318

1412

1316

1414

13141312

1416

1310

1308

1418

1306

1304

1420

1302

1422

1300

1424

1298

1426

1296

1428

1294

1430

1432

14341436 1438 1440

1442

1292

1444

1290

1446

1288

1448

1286

1450

1284

1282

1452

1280

1454

1278

1456

1276

1458

1274

1460

1272

1462

1464

1270

1466

1472

1474

1478

1480

1268

1482

1266

1264 12621260

1484

1486 148

8

1378

1416

1420

1370

1450

1428

1330

1422

1428

1304

1420

1324

1448

1326

1360

1368

1320

1336

1412

1442

1418

1412

1446

1360

1408

1416

1378

1440

1310

1366

1370

1370

1438

1432

1394

1324

1422

1370

1400

1384

1448

1390

1370

1362

1366

13781344

1444

1412

1408

1424

1376

1292

1380

1420

1372

1414

1368

1356

1418

1378

1394

1364

1412

1388

1380

1370

1406

1448

1406

1426

1434

1408

1370

1280

1440

1370

14061412

1400

1358

1364

1372

1404

1408

1394

1410

1400

1414

1426 1430

1414

1370

1416

1438

1368

1368

1318

1404

1414

1396

1410

1430

1444

1436

1398

1306

1418

1334

1308

1422

1444

1422

1370

1330

1382

1412

1418 1414

1436

1380

1358

1396

1412

1374

1442

1400

1414

1402

1334

1392

1420

1446

1376

14021424

1380

13001398

1416

1404

1318

1432

1350

1374

1410

1434

1446

1402

1386

1414

1382

1370

1424


Figure 8

Scale:Coordinate System: NAD_83_SPPAN FT

Date: February 20111 inch = 417 feet

Project Manager: TDA Drawn By: RJH


Saddle Swamp& Spur Creek

Reach Name:

0 550 1,100 1,650 2,200275

Feet

Towa

nda C

reek S

tream

& W

etlan

dM

itigati

on U

mbrel

la Ba

nkPH

ASE I

Drainage Area ~ 71.5 ac.

qSite Drainage Legend

Towanda Creek & Existing TributariesFWS National Wetland Inventroy

Freshwater Emergent WetlandFreshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland

RiverineSite: Zone of Influence Boundary

1 inch = 1,667 feet

Freshwater PondSpur Creek Headwater Restoration

Saddle Swamp & Spur Creek Legend

Spur Creek Headwater Restoration


Gas Well Pad

Spoil Areas

Saddle Swamp ~ 9.8 ac.

Zone of Influence ~ 44 ac.

!. Site Location

RS – Towanda – 2/23/12 – Page 1

February 23, 2012 Wade Chandler, Chief Pennsylvania Section Department of the Army U.S. Army Corps of Engineers – Baltimore District P.O. Box 1716 Baltimore, MD 21203-1715 Via electronic transmittal RE: Towanda Creek Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank Prospectus Dear Mr. Chandler: This letter serves as a transmittal for the Towanda Creek Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank Prospectus. In preparation of this Prospectus, your comments to the Draft Prospectus (letter dated December 15, 2011) have been fully considered and incorporated as feasible. An overview of the comments and our responses is provided below:

a) The GSA Service Area for the Bank has been clarified (Section 4.2 and Figure 1) to include the

Upper Susquehanna River Basin as described in the Pennsylvania State Water Plan. A watershed

based rationale for this GSA is included in Section 4.3.

b) Specific regulatory authorities for the Bank have been added as Section 3.0.

c) Names and addresses of all property owners who are adjacent to Phase 1 of the Bank are included in

Table 8, which is included in Section 10. Please note that the Sponsor believes that the Prospectus is

not the appropriate stage to invest in wholesale title work and research on the land parcels. At this

stage, we have spoken with all landowners and gotten agreement to move forward. Each landowner

understands what would be expected and the necessary property interest for the mitigation bank to

proceed on their land. This is the standard practice in all Corps Districts in which the Sponsor has

developed compensatory mitigation projects.

d) The Sponsor has not solicited or received correspondence from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (other

than through the IRT) or the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission. The Sponsor has

entered the project to the Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory (PNDI) and a receipt is included

in Appendix B to the Prospectus.

e) Through (g) – each of these comments request greater detail. Significant detail regarding project

selection, site suitability and proposed implementation has been added throughout the Prospectus.

h) Latitude and longitude coordinates have been added to the figures. Figure 1 shows the overall project

area and Figures 6, 7 and 8 show the Phase 1 areas in detail.

RS – Towanda – 2/23/12 – Page 2

i) And (j) – The functional analysis of both existing and proposed conditions has been substantially

uplifted. The raw data for both riverine (Appendix D) and wetland (Appendix E) systems has been

added.

k) The credit release schedule has been modified (Section 8) from the release schedule previously

submitted. The Sponsor has proposed a credit release schedule that is more conservative than that

previously submitted and strikes a balance between assurance that the site is stable and meeting

performance objectives and the financial considerations of implementing and operating a mitigation

bank. Specific information regarding monitoring and documentation have also been added.

l) Through (o), see item (c) above.

p) The Sponsor believes that a water budget for a specific project area is beyond the scope of

information needed at the Prospectus stage. The Sponsor will initiate such action upon determination

by the IRT whether or not the Bank has the potential to provide compensatory mitigation.

q) Information regarding maintenance, monitoring and long-term management has been expanded. A

specific long-term conservation holder has not been identified at this time. The Sponsor intends to

begin conversations with potential conservation groups or government entities once the Corps has

determined the suitability of the proposed project through the Prospectus process.

r) Financial Assurances are described in general in Section 11 of the Prospectus. Because financial

assurance amounts are directly correlated to implementation costs, the precise form and amount

cannot be determined at the Prospectus stage.

s) The sponsor understands the permitting needs for the proposed Bank and will coordinate with the

Corps and other regulatory agencies as the project proceeds.

t) The qualifications section (Section 13) of the Prospectus has been expanded.

u) Accounting and Reporting Protocol are included as Section 9 of the Prospectus.

v) The Sponsor believes that the Prospectus submitted herein is complete.

Your time and attention in reviewing this revised documentation for the Towanda Creek Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank is greatly appreciated. Please call or email to discuss these items at any time. Best regards,

Tara Disy Allden Cc: Mike Danko, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

PNDI Project Environmental Review Receipt Project Search ID: 20120126335953

Page 1 of 4

1. PROJECT INFORMATIONProject Name: Towanda Creek Stream & Wetland Mitigation BankDate of review: 1/26/2012 4:02:02 PMProject Category: In-stream / Riverine Activities and Projects,OtherProject Area: 1021.4 acresCounty: Bradford Township/Municipality: Granville,LeroyQuadrangle Name: CANTON ~ ZIP Code: 16926Decimal Degrees: 41.679066 N, -76.770744 WDegrees Minutes Seconds: 41° 40' 44.6" N, -76° 46' 14.7" W

2. SEARCH RESULTSAgency Results ResponsePA Game Commission Potential Impact FURTHER REVIEW IS REQUIRED,

See Agency ResponsePA Department of Conservationand Natural Resources

No Known Impact No Further Review Required

PA Fish and Boat Commission No Known Impact No Further Review Required

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service No Known Impact No Further Review Required

As summarized above, Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory (PNDI) records indicate there may be potentialimpacts to threatened and endangered and/or special concern species and resources within the project area. Ifthe response above indicates "No Further Review Required" no additional communication with the respectiveagency is required. If the response is "Further Review Required" or "See Agency Response," refer to theappropriate agency comments below. Please see the DEP Information Section of this receipt if a PA Departmentof Environmental Protection Permit is required.


Page 2 of 4

3. AGENCY COMMENTSRegardless of whether a DEP permit is necessary for this proposed project, any potential impacts to threatenedand endangered species and/or special concern species and resources must be resolved with the appropriatejurisdictional agency. In some cases, a permit or authorization from the jurisdictional agency may be needed ifadverse impacts to these species and habitats cannot be avoided.

These agency determinations and responses are valid for one year (from the date of the review), and are basedon the project information that was provided, including the exact project location; the project type, description,and features; and any responses to questions that were generated during this search. If any of the followingchange: 1) project location, 2) project size or configuration, 3) project type, or 4) responses to the questions thatwere asked during the online review, the results of this review are not valid, and the review must be searchedagain via the PNDI Environmental Review Tool and resubmitted to the jurisdictional agencies. The PNDI tool is aprimary screening tool, and a desktop review may reveal more or fewer impacts than what is listed on this PNDIreceipt. The jursidictional agencies strongly advise against conducting surveys for the species listed on thereceipt prior to consultation with the agencies.

PA Game CommissionRESPONSE: Further review of this project is necessary to resolve the potential impacts(s). Please sendproject information to this agency for review (see WHAT TO SEND).

PGC Species: (Note: The PNDI tool is a primary screening tool, and a desktop review mayreveal more or fewer species than what is listed below.)Scientific Name: Sensitive Species**Common Name: Current Status: Special Concern Species*Proposed Status: Special Concern Species*

PA Department of Conservation and Natural ResourcesRESPONSE: No Impact is anticipated to threatened and endangered species and/or special concernspecies and resources.

PA Fish and Boat CommissionRESPONSE: No Impact is anticipated to threatened and endangered species and/or special concernspecies and resources.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceRESPONSE: No impacts to federally listed or proposed species are anticipated. Therefore, no furtherconsultation/coordination under the Endangered Species Act (87 Stat. 884, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.is required. Because no take of federally listed species is anticipated, none is authorized. This response does notreflect potential Fish and Wildlife Service concerns under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act or otherauthorities.

* Special Concern Species or Resource - Plant or animal species classified as rare, tentatively undetermined orcandidate as well as other taxa of conservation concern, significant natural communities, special concernpopulations (plants or animals) and unique geologic features.


Page 3 of 4

** Sensitive Species - Species identified by the jurisdictinal agency as collectible, having economic value, orbeing susceptible to decline as a result of visitation.

WHAT TO SEND TO JURISDICTIONAL AGENCIES

If project information was requested by one or more of the agencies above, send the following informationto the agency(s) seeking this information (see AGENCY CONTACT INFORMATION).

Check-list of Minimum Materials to be submitted:

____SIGNED copy of this Project Environmental Review Receipt____Project narrative with a description of the overall project, the work to be performed, current physicalcharacteristics of the site and acreage to be impacted.____Project location information (name of USGS Quadrangle, Township/Municipality, and County)____USGS 7.5-minute Quadrangle with project boundary clearly indicated, and quad name on the map

The inclusion of the following information may expedite the review process.____A basic site plan(particularly showing the relationship of the project to the physical features such aswetlands, streams, ponds, rock outcrops, etc.)____Color photos keyed to the basic site plan (i.e. showing on the site plan where and in what direction eachphoto was taken and the date of the photos)____Information about the presence and location of wetlands in the project area, and how this was determined(e.g., by a qualified wetlands biologist), if wetlands are present in the project area, provide project plans showingthe location of all project features, as well as wetlands and streams

4. DEP INFORMATIONThe Pa Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) requires that a signed copy of this receipt, along with anyrequired documentation from jurisdictional agencies concerning resolution of potential impacts, be submitted withapplications for permits requiring PNDI review. For cases where a "Potential Impact" to threatened andendangered species has been identified before the application has been submitted to DEP, the applicationshould not be submitted until the impact has been resolved. For cases where "Potential Impact" to specialconcern species and resources has been identified before the application has been submitted, the applicationshould be submitted to DEP along with the PNDI receipt, a completed PNDI form and a USGS 7.5 minutequadrangle map with the project boundaries delineated on the map. The PNDI Receipt should also be submittedto the appropriate agency according to directions on the PNDI Receipt. DEP and the jurisdictional agency willwork together to resolve the potential impact(s). See the DEP PNDI policy athttp://www.naturalheritage.state.pa.us.


Page 4 of 4

5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATIONThe PNDI environmental review website is a preliminary screening tool. There are often delays in updatingspecies status classifications. Because the proposed status represents the best available information regardingthe conservation status of the species, state jurisdictional agency staff give the proposed statuses at least thesame consideration as the current legal status. If surveys or further information reveal that a threatened andendangered and/or special concern species and resources exist in your project area, contact the appropriatejurisdictional agency/agencies immediately to identify and resolve any impacts.

For a list of species known to occur in the county where your project is located, please see the species lists bycounty found on the PA Natural Heritage Program (PNHP) home page (www.naturalheritage.state.pa.us). Alsonote that the PNDI Environmental Review Tool only contains information about species occurrences that haveactually been reported to the PNHP.

6. AGENCY CONTACT INFORMATIONPA Department of Conservation andNatural ResourcesBureau of Forestry, Ecological Services Section400 Market Street, PO Box 8552, Harrisburg, PA.17105-8552Fax:(717) 772-0271

PA Fish and Boat CommissionDivision of Environmental Services450 Robinson Lane, Bellefonte, PA. 16823-7437NO Faxes Please

U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceEndangered Species Section315 South Allen Street, Suite 322, State College, PA.16801-4851NO Faxes Please.

PA Game CommissionBureau of Wildlife Habitat ManagementDivision of Environmental Planning and Habitat Protection2001 Elmerton Avenue, Harrisburg, PA. 17110-9797Fax:(717) 787-6957

7. PROJECT CONTACT INFORMATION

Name:______________________________________________________________Company/Business Name:______________________________________________Address:____________________________________________________________City, State, Zip:_______________________________________________________Phone:(_____)_________________________Fax:(______)___________________Email:_____________________________________________________________

8. CERTIFICATIONI certify that ALL of the project information contained in this receipt (including project location, projectsize/configuration, project type, answers to questions) is true, accurate and complete. In addition, if the projecttype, location, size or configuration changes, or if the answers to any questions that were asked during thisonline review change, I agree to re-do the online environmental review.

__________________________________________ _______________________ applicant/project proponent signature date

DRAFT DOCUMENT NOT FOR PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION Confidential Page 1 3/15/2012

PENNSYLVANIA FUNCTION BASED AQUATIC RESOURCE

COMPENSATION PROTOCOL

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Watershed Management

Draft Version 1.0 December 14, 2011


Table of Contents Purpose 3 Introduction 3 1.0 Aquatic Resource Functions 4

1.1 Riverine: Watercourses, Streams, Wadeable Rivers and their Floodplains 4

1.2 Palustrine: Wetlands 6

1.3 Lacustrine: Lakes, Reservoirs and Open Bodies of Water 7 2.0 Compensation Evaluation Determination 8

2.1 Area of Impact 8 2.2 Project Effect Factor 9

2.2.1 Riverine: Watercourses, Streams, Wadeable Rivers and their Floodplains 9 2.2.2 Palustrine: Wetland 10 2.2.3 Lacustrine: Lakes, Reservoirs and Open Bodies of Water 11

3.0 Resource Value Factor 15 4.0 Resource Condition Assessment(s) 17 5.0 Determining Compensation Requirements 18 6.0 Evaluating Compensation Proposals 18 Definitions 21 Resources Appendix A


Purpose The purpose of this protocol is to:

1.) Establish a standardized process for determining aquatic resource compensation requirements

2.) Establish a standardized process for determining the potential value of proposed aquatic resource compensation projects.

This protocol is intended for use in determining functional compensation requirements for projects effecting water courses (streams and rivers); floodways and floodplains, wetlands and open bodies of water; such as lakes and reservoirs requiring authorization by PA DEP’s Chapters 102 and 105 and the USACE Sections 10 and 404 regulatory programs. This protocol does not take the place of avoidance and minimization of a project’s proposed direct and secondary impacts or take the place of a project specific review and evaluation. The project specific review may result in adjustments to the compensation requirements or credits obtained through the application of this process. This protocol is intended to:

1.) Assist in standardizing the manner in which compensation is required to offset proposed aquatic resource impacts.

2.) Assist in identifying measures that minimize proposed project effects and thereby reduce subsequent compensation requirements.

3.) Evaluate proposed compensation projects performed on-site, off-site, at a mitigation bank, or through an in-lieu fee project.

The utilization of this protocol ensures a standardized process for determining compensation requirements, evaluating and crediting compensation projects regardless of the method of implementation. This protocol and companion aquatic resource condition assessment protocols (See Section 1.0) can be found on the World Wide Web at www.dep.state.pa.us/XXXXX. Introduction One of the purposes of Title 25 PA Code Chapter 105, among others, is to protect the natural resources, environmental rights and values secured by the PA Const. Art I, §27 and conserve and protect the water quality and carrying capacity of watercourses. The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA DEP) has established the following protocol to standardize the process for determining aquatic resource compensation requirements that result from impacts to aquatic resources authorized pursuant to Chapter 102 (riparian buffers), Chapter 105, Chapter 106 and 401 Water Quality Certification authorizations. This protocol is intended to ensure that compensation requirements and proposals meet the requirements of the Title 25 PA Code Chapter 105 Rules and Regulations, as well as, the Army Corp of Engineers (ACOE) 33 CFR 332 and Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) 40 CFR 230 Final Joint Federal Mitigation Rule published in April 2008.


The following protocol applies to all intermittent and perennial watercourses (wadeable and non-wadeable), floodways and floodplains, wetlands and other open bodies of water; such as lakes and reservoirs. 1.0 Aquatic Resource Functions Each type of aquatic resource has an inherent suite of functions and values that may be present or occurring, herein referred to as “functions”. The functions occurring within an aquatic resource can naturally vary due to differences in the chemical, physical and biological composition of the resource at any given location. In addition, anthropogenic influences can greatly affect the presence or performance level of these inherent functions. To account for the natural variation in functions, function groupings were established for each aquatic resource type. These function groups represent multiple functions associated with or related to the physical, chemical or biological nature of the resource. The effects that anthropogenic activities have on aquatic resources are established through the use of resource condition level 2 rapid assessment protocols. The resource condition is considered in the determination of any compensation requirements. The three companion resource condition assessment protocols are:

• PA Wetland Condition Level 2 Rapid Assessment • PA Riverine Condition Level 2 Rapid Assessment • PA Lacustrine Condition Level 2 Rapid Assessment

The function groups for each aquatic resource type are identified and briefly described below. The groups described for each aquatic resource type provide the basis for determining functional compensation requirements. These function groups are not intended to represent all resource functions occurring within a given aquatic resource type but are designed to represent the predominant functions present within each resource. Additional compensation requirements may be required based upon a project’s effect on other functions not considered as part of this process and will be determined on a case by case basis. 105.13 language for Level 3 HGM assessments? For wetland impacts equal to or greater than 1 acre The grouping of aquatic resources within this protocol was established utilizing the terminology from the Cowardin classification system. This terminology is used for organizational purposes only and should not be confused with specific state or federal regulatory classification requirements and nor should they be interpreted to replace or supplant regulatory definitions and requirements. At this time these include Riverine, Palustrine/Tidal and Lacustrine environments. While there are numerous ways of classifying aquatic resources, the use of Cowardin classification system provides a common bridge between the state and federal regulatory programs that in some instances may label resources differently for various purposes. This labeling may differ from the current terminology used by either of the state or federal regulatory programs, however, the intent for establishing these categories and labels is for organizational and instructional purposes only and in no way expands or diminishes either state or federal regulatory program authorities.


The following functional groups have been established for each of the resource categories: 1.1 Riverine: Watercourses, Streams, Wadeable Rivers and their Floodplains The traditional approach for evaluating a project’s effect on this type of resource has been to primarily focus on the wetted perimeter or instream habitat component of the watercourse. To ensure the long-term viability of this aquatic resource, it is necessary to consider a project’s effect on the entire resource and not just the habitat component of the resource. The functions inherent in this resource are driven by more than instream habitat and a more holistic or encompassing view of the resource is necessary to ensure the long-term health and viability of these ecosystems. In more recent efforts led by the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers’ Ecosystem Management and Restoration Research Program (Fischenich, 2006), three key functions in five functional groupings were selected from a list of over 60 identified functions associated with riverine environments. There is a significant amount of interdependence between these functions and the framework established by that effort underscores the complexity of riverine ecosystems. While this framework provides a significant advance in understanding stream functioning and their interrelationships, it is not yet clear how this effort would integrate with the existing regulatory program requirements. However, this work does provide a glimpse into future efforts at the state and federal levels for ensuring impacts to riverine functions are avoided, minimized and compensated for when affected. While the above mentioned work provides a glimpse into the future, the concept of the riparian ecotone provides the comprehensive view of the resource that will meet the current regulatory program requirements. The coupling of these two approaches will be investigated in the future through program development efforts. The riparian ecotone provides a robust basis for defining the extent of this type of aquatic resource, delineating its boundaries and is useful for describing the basic processes and functions that occur within this type of aquatic resource. Ecotones are an assemblage of ecosystems that interact with each other chemically, physically and biologically. Riparian ecotones are a three dimensional space of interaction that include terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems that extend down into the groundwater, up above the canopy, outward across the floodplain, up the near-slopes that drain water laterally into the terrestrial ecosystem, and along the water course at a variable width. The riparian ecotone includes the watercourse, 100 year floodplain and 100 feet landward along the valley, where obvious slumps or landslides occur near the floodplain they are banded 45 feet around their edge instead of the 100 feet, adapted from Verry et al (2004). The riverine functions have been grouped into four basic function groups:


• Hydrologic • Biogeochemical • Habitat • Recreation or Resource Support

The following function groups are representative of the basic functions occurring within the riparian ecotone that are most affected by the typical structures and activities seeking Chapter 105 authorization. These functions groups will provide the basis for determining compensatory requirements or valuation of compensation proposals:

Hydrologic (HYD1) functions include the physical storage capacity of the floodplain, energy dissipating characteristics, maintenance of characteristic watershed hydrologic dynamics, (e.g., seasonal and storm flow patterns), geomorphic channel stability and sediment transport processes. Biogeochemical (BGC1) functions include the biogeochemical processes, temperature regulation, nutrient cycling and organic matter cycling (both above and below ground). The level of performance of this function group is primarily driven by the type and quality of riparian vegetation located within the floodplain and the vegetation root system’s interactions with the ground water table. Note: This function group does not encompass the role of a best management practice (BMP) for removing nutrients or pollutants from runoff. The role of a BMP may provide additional credits under other regulatory or non-regulatory programs and may be considered above and beyond the inherent biogeochemical functions evaluated under this protocol.

Habitat (HAB1) functions are comprised of numerous attributes within and immediately adjacent to the watercourse. This area is commonly referred to as instream habitat. The ordinary high water mark (OHWM) and/or the banks of the watercourse provide easily observable delineating points to establish the physical boundaries of this area. These functions include providing for the life requirements of invertebrate, vertebrate, emergent plant, macrophytes and other plant species located within or on the banks of an active watercourse. Standard habitat types will be utilized to provide consistency in the process; however, other habitat types may be identified for unique resources on a case by case basis. The protected uses for aquatic life contained in Title 25 PA Code Chapter 93 Water Quality Standards will be used to describe general habitat types consisting of cold water fishery (CWF), warm water fishery (WWF), trout stocked fishery (TSF) and migratory fishery (MF).

Recreation or Resource Support (REC1 or RS) is a dual function group in which values are comprised of either public recreational opportunities including fishing, boating, swimming, etc. or the chemical, physical and


biological attributes that contribute to maintaining downstream water quality designations and uses. This may also include the maintenance of existing and designated recreational uses. The protected uses for recreation and fish consumption contained in Title 25 PA Code Chapter 93 Water Quality Standards will be used to describe general types of recreation consisting of boating (B), fishing (F), water contact sports (WC) and esthetics (E).

1.2 Palustrine/Tidal Wetlands The hydrogeomorphic (HGM) wetland classification system provides a robust basis for describing the basic processes and function groups that occur within any given wetland type. There are currently eleven HGM function models that were developed for use in Pennsylvania as listed in Table 1 (Brooks, 2004). However, greater than 95% wetland impacts are not sufficient in size to warrant the use of HGM function models. Wetland functions vary greatly from one wetland to another due to a variety of factors, including landscape position, hydrodynamics and naturally occurring differences in the chemical, physical and biological composition of the wetland. This resource category represents all wetland types as defined in §105.1 and includes those wetlands classified by Cowardin as palustrine, tidal, estuarine and lacustrine. The HGM function models developed represent the predominant functions that occur across the range of HGM wetland types found in PA. The HGM models are grouped into three basic function groups:

• Hydrologic (HYD2) • Biogeochemical (BGC2) • Habitat (HAB2)

The following three function groups are representative of the basic functions occurring within wetlands and will provide the basis for determining any compensatory requirements or valuation of compensation projects:

Hydrologic (HYD2) group functions include energy dissipation, short-term and long-term surface water detention, and maintenance of characteristic hydrology. These functions are driven by the hydrodynamics of the wetland, gradient, roughness, landscape position, macrotopography, hydrologic source, recharge zones, aquatic connectivity, as well as, other geomorphological features. The source of water (surface versus ground) may also be a determinate of plant communities (Bishop, 2004).

Group Function DescriptionF1 Energy Dissipation/Short-term Surface Water Detention

F2 Long term surface Water Storage

F3 Maintian Characteristic Hydrology

F4 Reserved

F5 Removal of Imported Inorganic nitrogen

F6 Solute Adsorption Capacity

F7 Retention of Inorganic Particulates

F8 Export of Organic Carbon (dissolved and particulate)

F9 Maintain Characteristic Native Plant Community Composition

F10 Maintian Characteristic Detrital Biomass

F11 Vertebrate Community Structure and Composition

F12 Maintain Landscape Scale Biodiversity

HYD2

BGC2

HAB2

Table 1. HGM Functions by Functional Group


Biogeochemical (BIOG2) group functions include inorganic nitrogen removal, solute adsorption capacity, inorganic particulate retention and export of dissolved and particulate organic carbon. These functions are driven by the percent of organic matter, reduction/oxidation processes, gradient, biomass, roughness, macrotopography, coarse woody debris and fine woody debris.

Habitat (HAB2) group functions are comprised of characteristic native plant community compositions, characteristic detrital biomass, vertebrate community structure and composition and maintenance of landscape scale biodiversity. These functions are driven by species composition, regeneration capability, coarse woody debris, fine woody debris, snags, organic matter, habitat attributes, landscape condition and aquatic connectivity. While standard habitat types will be utilized, specific habitats types may be identified for unique resource types on a case by case basis. The Cowardin classification system will be used in most cases as follows:

CODE DESCRIPTION

EAB Estuarine Aquatic BedEEM Estuarine EmergentEFL Estuarine FlatLAB Lacustrine Aquatic BedLEM Lacustrine EmergentLFL Lacustrine FlatPAB Palustrine Aquatic BedPEM Palustrine EmergentPFL Palustrine FlatPFO Palustrine ForestedPSS Palustrine Scrub/Shrub

Table 2. Wetland Habitat Types

1.3 Lacustrine: Lakes, Reservoirs and Non-Wadeable Rivers Though these three water bodies differ substantially in some ways, several characteristics demonstrate a convergence in functions. Lakes lack significant flow while rivers are defined by flow for most of their length. Reservoirs are largely manmade hybrids of the former systems. However, as rivers approach their mouths and the gradient decreases, lacustrine qualities predominate under normal and low flow conditions in many areas of large rivers and inputs become more autochthonous. Shoreline and backwater areas can be indistinguishable from a lake or reservoir environment.

The following function groups are representative of the basic functions occurring within lakes, reservoirs and large rivers that will provide the basis for determining any compensatory requirements or valuation of compensation projects:


Habitat (HAB3) functions are comprised of numerous attributes within and adjacent to the wetted perimeter of the lake, reservoir or large river. These functions include the physical requirements to provide invertebrate, vertebrate and macrophyte species’ life requirements. These functions are driven by the composition of the substrate, water depth and velocity, shoreline vegetation, near shore vegetation condition, etc. Some standard habitat types may be utilized; however, specific habitats types may be identified for unique resource types on case by case basis. The protected uses for aquatic life contained in Title 25 PA Code Chapter 93 Water Quality Standards will be used to describe general habitat types consisting of cold water fishery (CWF), warm water fishery (WWF), trout stocked fishery (TSF) and migratory fishery (MF).

Recreation (REC2) values are comprised of public recreational opportunities including fishing, boating, swimming, etc. This also includes the maintenance of existing and designated recreational uses. The protected uses for recreation and fish consumption contained in Title 25 PA Code Chapter 93 Water Quality Standards will be used to describe general types of recreation consisting of boating (B), fishing (F), water contact sports (WC) and esthetics (E).

2.0 Compensation Requirement Evaluation The evaluation process for determining whether a project may require compensation begins with establishing a project’s potential effect on the respective function groups for the applicable resource category. This process begins with determining the area of impact for each applicable resource category function group and then proceeds to determining the project effect category for each of the applicable function groups. Compensation requirements will be determined for each resource function group. The determination of compensation follows the evaluation of avoidance and minimization of project impacts that is performed during the permit application review. 2.3 Area of Impact The area of impacts must be determined for each of the resource category function groups proposed to be affected. Acreage is calculated to the nearest one hundredth of an acre (0.00). In many instances, the project may affect more than one function group. Impacts are comprised of both direct and indirect or secondary project effects. Direct impacts are considered to have both acreage and functional losses, whereas secondary impacts result in a change in function without the loss of acreage. Direct impacts consist of filling, draining or conversion of a resource to another type such as a wetland to an open body of water. Examples include placement of fill in a wetland, placement of a box culvert in a stream, placement of fill in the floodplain, building a dam where the impoundment area will flood resources (stream, floodplain, wetlands) with a sufficient depth as to change the existing aquatic resource to another aquatic resource type. This would include changes such as converting a riverine system to a lacustrine system, changing a palustrine wetland to a lacustrine system, etc


Secondary impacts consist of altering the chemical, physical or biological components of an aquatic resource to the extent that changes to the functions of the resource results. However, secondary impacts do not result in a loss of resource acreage. Changes include such things as conversion of a forested wetland system to a non-forested state through chemical, mechanical or hydrologic manipulation that results in a maintained state of vegetation; altered hydrologic conditions (increases or decreases) such as stormwater discharges or water withdrawals that alter the chemical, physical or biological functions of the resource, areas upstream and downstream of a culvert or bridge that require periodic excavation to ensure waterway openings (e.g. bedload deposition removal), etc. Criteria for establishing direct and secondary impacts associated with navigational and commercial dredging projects are not considered in this process. The impacts from these activities have unique conditions and this process was not developed to establish compensatory requirements for these types of projects. However, impacts associated with maintenance dredging around facilities have been incorporated into this process and this approach must be applied. Compensatory mitigation for navigational and commercial dredging projects can use the basic framework utilized in the protocol, however, unique measures or resource condition, function groups, project effect factors and compensation value tables will need to be determined on a case by case basis.

2.4 Project Effect Factor (PE) Impacts result in varying levels of effect to aquatic resources and their corresponding functions. Different types of impacts can therefore be classified based upon the degree to which they are expected to affect the various functions. However, the effects of a project are not necessarily equal across the suite of functions. A project’s effect is evaluated for each applicable function group of the aquatic resource category proposed to be affected. Table 3 provides example criteria for each of the four Project Effect Categories (Severe, Moderate, Limited, and Minimal) for each of the aquatic resource types. Each Project Effect Category has a corresponding Project Effect Factor Value (PE). As provided for in Table 3, the more severe the effect, the higher the PE value. Therefore, an activity considered to have a Severe effect has the highest PE value of 3.0 representing an activity or structure that is presumed to have a complete or near-complete loss of all beneficial functions for the applicable resource function group. Conversely, an activity considered to have a Minimal effect has a PE of 0.0. These activities or structures generally will not require compensation; however, they are included in Table 3 to show that project designs or modifications can result in the minimization of a project’s effect. This minimization may reach the point to which that activity or structure falls into the Minimal Project Effect Category and therefore compensation may not be required. As described above, the project’s effect is individually evaluated for each applicable resource category function group. A project may have differing PE values for individual function groups depending on the project parameters. The criteria listed in Table 3 or discussed in the narrative can be used directly or used to guide project reviewers for establishing additional equivalent criterion. If an identified criterion for a project’s effect is not listed for an applicable resource function group, then best professional judgment must be used in determining the most applicable Project Effect Category. A project reviewer may identify alternative criteria to determine the Project Effect Category.


2.4.1 Riverine: Watercourses, Streams, Wadeable Rivers and their Floodplains

Hydrologic (HYD1) The project by altering the cross-sectional area of the floodplain, roughness or flood storage capacity can have a significant effect on the carrying capacity of the floodplain and secondary effects by altering hydraulic characteristics of the stream channel resulting in possible changes to aquatic habitat and sediment transport processes. The PE value is determined by the extent of the change in 100 year frequency flood event elevation and the existence of detailed flood studies. Biogeochemical (BGC1) A project can have a significant affect on the fundamental nutrient, organic matter processing and chemical or biological processes that occur within or originate from these areas. Particular attention is placed on the ability of the floodplain area to support a mature forested community or any type of vegetated wetland when present. The key to determining the project effect value is to evaluate the potential ability of the floodplain area to support a forested condition. The current vegetation condition of the floodplain area (forested versus lawn) does not alter the PE value determination. The existing floodplain vegetation is considered as part of the resource condition assessment and is reflected in the resulting resource condition score. Habitat (HAB1) The project can have a significant effect on aquatic habitat from direct losses through the displacement of the habitat, indirectly affected by hydraulic changes and sediment transport changes or through re-occurring long term maintenance activities of the project. The PE value is determined by evaluating the capacity of the area to be used as habitat after the project is completed and the extent of any changes or transformations of the area that may result from indirect changes to the habitat. Recreation or Resource Support (REC1 or RS) This is a dual function group where if recreation uses are present, they take precedent over the resource support function group. If recreation functions are not present, then the resource falls into the Resource Support function group and impacts are evaluated as such. The project can have a significant effect on the ability of the public to utilize the resource for recreational opportunities by preventing access to the resource, blocking navigation, eliminating the resource, etc. Watercourses that do not provide recreation (i.e. headwater streams), projects may cause interference of various physical, chemical and biological processes that contribute to the maintenance of downstream designated or existing uses.

2.4.2 Palustrine/Tidal: Wetlands

Hydrologic (HYD2) Changes to surface water drainage patterns, regulation of flow or source of hydrology, as a result of a project, can result in long term changes to other function groups that may not be readily observable or measurable and may take long periods of time to manifest. In other instances,


the changes may be quick and dramatic. Landscape position plays a dominate role in establishing the source of hydrology and in many instances the general movement or pathway that the hydrology takes. Biogeochemical (BGC2) Changes to the typical hydroperiod of the HGM subclass of wetland, as a result of a project, can result in long term changes of this function group. Changes to macrotopography, biomass and both coarse and fine woody debris through vegetation management can result in modifications to the biogeochemical functioning of a wetland. Many types of projects not associated with direct losses, such as utility line crossings, may result in impacts to this function group depending upon the level of disturbance, vegetation management and relation of disturbed area to overall wetland size. Habitat (HAB2) Changes to habitat functions can result from a project through direct loss of habitat acreage, conversion of resources from palustrine to lacustrine or from vegetation management. Changes in vegetation structure or potential for regeneration through management while not a direct loss are a secondary loss of function. Cowardin vegetation classification in the form of aquatic bed (AB), emergent (EM), scrub shrub (SS) and forested (FO) will form the basis for recording loss of habitat functions. In certain circumstances, species specific habitat may form the basis, especially where threatened or endangered species are concerned. Note: Vernal pools are considered Palustrine wetlands HGM subclasses: DFC or DFA

2.4.3 Lacustrine: Large Rivers, Reservoirs or Open Body of Waters

Habitat (HAB3) The project can have a significant effect on aquatic habitat through actual losses through the displacement of the habitat, areas affected by shading and sediment transport and deposition pattern changes and areas affected through long term maintenance activities resulting from the project. Recreation (REC2) The project can have a significant effect on the ability of the public to utilize the resource for recreational opportunities by preventing access to the resource, blocking navigation, eliminating the resource, etc. Projects can also result in interference of processes that contribute to the maintenance of downstream recreational opportunities such as flow regulation.


Function Group

Waterways Function Group

Wetlands Function Group

Reservoirs, Lakes

HYD1

1. Fills or structures that result in any increase in the 100-year frequency water surface elevation in a delineated FEMA mapped floodway; or 2. Fills that eliminate the floodplain of streams with less than or equal to 6,400 acre drainage areas

HYD2

1. Wetland area converted to open water or dry land (non-wetland); or 2. Wetland connection to floodplain or natural surface drainage features lost; or, 3. Wide spread hydrologic modification through draining, flooding or topographic modification (>4 hydrologic stressors from Level 2 RAP resulting from proposed project)

BGC1

1. Floodplain ability to support vegetation eliminated through filling/devleopment; or 2. Floodplain converted to open body of water through inundation; or 3. Floodplain vegetation isolated from accessing groundwater table via activities that lower groundwater table levels (e.g. dredging of stream channel, filling of floodplain areas).

BGC2

1. Wetland area converted to open water or dry land (non-wetland); 2. Wide spread activities effecting surface roughness (vegetation clearing or maintenance, clearing or grubbing (macro and microtopography reduction), 3. Wide spread hydrologic modification through draining, flooding or topographic modification (>4 hydrologic stressors from Level 2 RAP existing and resulting from proposed project)

HAB11. Stream substrate and banks replaced by concrete, metal, plastic, riprap, buried with fill, etc.

HAB2

1. Wetland area converted to open water or dry land (non-wetland); or 2. Greater than 50% of deliineated wetland area effected by vegetation clearing or long term vegetation management.

HAB31. Bottom substrate or banks replaced by concrete, metal, plastic, riprap, buried with fill, etc.

REC1 1. 1. Recreational use potential eliminated or alterd to the point of unavailbility.

RS

1. Greater than 500 feet of stream elimented, enclosed or disconnected form the groundwater table; or 2. Cumulative effect of a project greater than 2,000 feet in any one State Water Plan designated watershed.

1. Recreational use potential eliminated or alterd to the point of unavailbility.

ValueProject Effect Category

N/A

Severe Effect

3.0

N/A REC2


Value

Function Group



Reservoirs, Lakes

HYD1

1. Fills or structures that result in greater than 1.0 foot rise in the 100-year frequency water surface elevation of the natural unobstructed water surface elevation; or 2. Fills that eliminate the floodplain of streams with less than or equal to 6,400 acre drainage areas extending along greater than 100 but less than 500 linear feet of stream length.

HYD2

1. Loss of macrotopographic features due to clearing or related activities; or 2. Hydrology altered from seasonal saturation / fluctuation to static persistent level; or 3. Features contributing to roughness lost/removed; 4. Multiple stormwater runoff sources directed to wetland point or non-point sources; or 5. Moderate hydrologic modification through draining, flooding or topographic modification (2-4 hydrologic stressors from Level 2 RAP existing and resulting from proposed project)

BGC1

1. Floodplain vegetation maintained in a non-forested state through physical, mechanical or chemical means (e.g. maintaining right of ways).

BGC2

1. Wetland vegetation maintained in a non-forested state through physical, mechanical or chemical means (e.g. maintaining right of ways).

HAB1

1. Stream substrate altered by flow and velocity changing scour and deposition features; or 2. Areas authorized to be maintained.

HAB2

1. Greater than 25% but less than 50% of delineated wetland area effected by vegetation clearing or long term vegetation management.

HAB3

1. Bottom substrate of near shore areas altered through maintenance activities (i.e.dredging); or 2. Shading of bottom prohibiting macrophyte growth.

REC11. Recreational use potential interrupted requiring walk arounds, portages, etc.

RS

1. Greater than 100 but less than 500 feet of stream eliminated, enclosed or disconnected form the groundwater table; or 2. Cumulative effect of a project greater than 1,000 but less than 2,000 feet of stream in any one State Water Plan.

2.0

Project Effect CategoryModerate Effect

N/A

1. Recreational use potential interrupted or restricted due

to project, etc.REC2


Value

Function Group



Reservoirs, Lakes

HYD1

Fills or structures that result in an increase of the 100-year frequency water surface elevation of the natural unobstructed water surface elevation but result in less than a 1.0 foot rise. [Fills utilize floodplain culverts, fills reduce floodplain cross section no more than 25% vertically]

HYD2

limited hydrologic modification through draining, flooding or topographic modification (<2 hydrologic stressors from Level 2 RAP existing and resulting from proposed project)

BGC1

Floodplain vegetation removed and left to natural regeneration, potential for canopy closure is limited

BGC2

HAB1Bridges spanning the channel and floodplain, with instream piers

HAB2<25% of wetland area effected by vegetation clearing or long term vegetation management

HAB3

REC1Recreational and/or biological use capacity effect limited (<25% loss)

RS

1. Less than 100 feet of stream eliminated, enclosed or disconnected form the groundwater table; or 2. Cumulative effect of a project greater than 100 but less than 1,000 linear feet of stream in any one State Water Plan.

1.0

Limited Effect

N/A

N/A REC2

Project Effect Category


Value

Function Group



Reservoirs, Lakes

HYD1

Fills or structures that do not result in a rise in the 100-year frequency water surface elevation of the natural unobstructed water surface elevation. [Fill reduces floodplain cross section no more than 10% vertically, flow characteristics and storage capacity minimally altered]

HYD2

No hydrologic modification through draining, flooding, topographic modification or from stormwater discharges (0 hydrologic stressors from Level 2 RAP)

BGC1

Floodplain tree canopy closure maintained or potential for canopy closure remains, if vegetation removed, replanted to contain native tree and shrub species

BGC2

HAB1Bridges spanning the channel and floodplain, no instream piers

HAB2No wetland area effected by vegetation clearing or long term vegetation management,

HAB3

REC11. Recreational uses unimpeded or maintained without altering recreational use.

RS

1. Stream not eliminated, enclosed or disconnected form the groundwater table; or 2. Cumulative effect of a project less than 100 feet in any one State Water Plan.

0.0

Project Effect CategoryMinimal Effect

N/A

N/A REC21. Recreational uses unimpeded or maintained without altering recreational use.


3.0 Resource Value Factor All Commonwealth waters have designated or in some cases existing use protections as defined in Title 25 PA Code Chapter 93 Water Quality Standards and Chapter 105 Dam Safety and Waterways Management. The Aquatic Resource Value Category takes into consideration certain uses when assigning an Aquatic Resource Value (RV) category, however, other criteria for assigning a resource value are related to resource condition, biological communities, impaired waters/TMDLS, special regulation areas established by the PA Fish and Boat Commission and public recreation opportunities. The Resource Value is determined by using the criteria below and applying it to the reach or area of aquatic resource that was used to assess condition. The highest resource value that occurs within the assessment area will be used in determining compensation requirements. Table 4. Resource Value Table

Waterways Wetlands Large Rivers/ReservoirsWaters with a designated or

existing use of Exceptional

Value under Chapter 93 (relating

to water quality standards).

Presence of federal or state

threatened or endangered

species.

Wetlands classified Exceptional

Value in accordance with 105.17.

Wetlands that support a significant

aquatic community scoring equal to

or greater than 0.87 using the DEP's

Level 2 Wetland Rapid Assessment

Protocol. Wetlands characterized by

the DCNR's natural community

classification system and designated

a State Rank of S1 Critically

Imperiled or S2 Imperiled.

Waters with a designated or existing

use of Exceptional Value under

Chapter 93 (relating to water quality

standards). Presence of federal or

state threatened or endangered

species.

Waterways Wetlands Large Rivers/ReservoirsWaters with a designated or

existing use of High Quality

under Chapter 93 (relating to

water quality standards). Waters

used by migratory fish

populations for reproduction,

waters designated with special

regulations by the PAFBC such

as big bass waters, trophy trout

waters,etc. Geographically

unique or rare fisheries (i.e.

salmon/steelhead waters,

naturally reproducing northern

pike waters).

Wetlands that are located in or along

the floodplain of the reach of waters

with a designated or existing use

listed as high quality under Chapter

93 (relating to water quality

standards). Wetlands that support a

high quality aquatic community

based upon scoring equal to or

greater than 0.58 but less than 0.87

using the DEP's Wetland Condition

Level 2 Rapid Assessment Protocol.

Wetlands characterized by the

DCNR's natural community

classification system and designated

a State Rank of S3 Vulnerable.

Waters with a designated or existing

use of High Quality under Chapter 93

(relating to water quality standards).

Waters designated with special

regulations by the PAFBC such as

big bass waters, trophy trout

waters,etc.

Value

3.0

Aquatic Resource Value Category

2.5

Significant Resource Waters

Special Resource Waters


Waterways Wetlands Large Rivers/ReservoirsSmall streams with greater than

1,280 acre drainage areas but

less than or equal to 6,400 acre

drainage areas, streams

designated Trout Stocked

Fisheries (TSF) under Ch. 93 and

streams with other recreation

valued species present with

sufficient populations to provide

recreational opportunities.

This category includes all other

wetlands not categorized as

significant, special, support or

minimal resource wetlands.

Wetlands that support a quality

aquatic community based upon upon

scoring equal to or greater than

greater than or equal to 0.42 but less

than 0.58 using the DEP's Wetland

Condition Level 2 Rapid Assessment

Protocol.

Includes all other waters not

categorized as significant, special,

support or minimal resource waters.

Waterways Wetlands Large Rivers/ReservoirsHeadwater streams with less

than or equal to 1,280 acre

drainage areas and streams

containing non-recreation valued

fisheries (CWF and WWF) not

identified in above sections.

Wetlands that support an aquatic

community based upon scoring less

than 0.42 using the DEP's Wetland

Condition Level 2 Rapid Assessment

Protocol.

Private ponds (including farm or

stock ponds) greater than 10 acres in

size.

Waterways Wetlands Large Rivers/ReservoirsArmored swales, gabion lined

channels, riprap lined channels,

concrete lined channels and

channels constructed to control

erosion and sediment or to

convey stormwater.

Wetlands as defined in 105.12a(6)

related to erosion and sediment

control and stormwater management.

Treatment wetlands as defined in

105.12a(5) constructed and

maintained for the treatment of mine

drainage, sewage, or other waste.

Private ponds (including farm or

stock ponds) less than 10 acres in

size.

Aquatic Resource Value Category Value

1.0

Minimal Resource Waters

Support Resource Waters

2.0

Quality Resource Waters

1.5

Table 4. Resource Value Factor Con’t.

4.0 Resource Condition Assessment Three companion resource condition assessment protocols have been developed and are to be used in establishing the applicable resource condition for utilization in determining the compensation requirements as outlined in Section 5.0 Determining Compensation Requirements. This protocol is designed to work with these companion condition assessment protocols and substitutions are not permitted without prior written approval by DEP. The resource condition protocols were developed to be rapid and cost effective while providing reliable estimates of resource condition. The condition assessments also provide additional information that is considered during the environmental review performed by DEP and ACOE.


There may be instances where intensive Level 3 HGM functional assessments, Index of Biological Integrity (IBI) protocols, Habitat Suitability Models, or other such quantitative methods as approved by the PA DEP are performed in addition to these rapid condition assessments. These circumstances are dealt with on a case by case basis, as their occurrence is rare. The condition assessment protocols have been designed to result in a single score that does not exceed 1.0. Results will fall between 0 and 1 and are carried to two decimal places (0.00). The following condition assessment protocols can be found on the World Wide Web at www.dep.state.pa.us/XXXXX

• Pennsylvania Wetland Condition Level 2 Rapid Assessment

• Pennsylvania Waterway Condition Level 2 Rapid Assessment

• Pennsylvania Large River and Reservoir Condition Level 2 Rapid Assessment

Proposed compensation projects for permittee responsible mitigation, mitigation bank development or in-lieu program should refer to Section 6.0 Evaluating Compensation Proposals for direction on utilizing resource condition assessments or more intensive methods for establishing condition differential. 5.0 Determining Compensation Requirements The Compensation Requirement (CR) for a project is calculated after the following values have been determined:

1) Determine the area(s) of direct and secondary impacts in acres to the nearest hundredth of an acre (AI) for each of the applicable resource category function groups;

2) Determine the Project Effect Category and PE value(s) for each of the applicable functional groups from Table 2;

3) Determine the appropriate RV value(s) for each of the applicable resources from Table 3; 4) Obtain the appropriate resource condition score(s) for each of the applicable resource

categories. The CR for each applicable function group is calculated using the following equation:

Compensation Requirement (CR) = AI x PE x RV x CI

Where, CR = Compensation Requirement AI = Area of Impact (in acres, 0.00) PE = Project Effect Factor (Table 1) RV = Resource Value (Table 2) CI = Condition Index Value (0.00) (from applicable resource condition assessment)


To determine the CR, the area of impact (AI) is multiplied by the PE obtained from Table 2, then multiplied by the RV from Table 3, then multiplied by the applicable resource CI. The end product is the amount of compensation credits necessary to offset the effects the project has on each functional group. Where both direct and secondary impacts are documented the CR for each of the impact types for the applicable function groups should be determined independently. The CR should indicate (label) which type of impact direct or secondary for each applicable function group as well. 6.0 Evaluating Compensation Proposals Proposals for compensating aquatic resource impacts from an applicant, mitigation banker or an in-lieu-fee program, will utilize the following process to evaluate whether the mitigation project proposal will provide adequate compensation to offset the function compensation requirements as determined in Section 5.0. Projects proposed by mitigation bankers and in-lieu-fee program may be evaluated independent of compensation requirements to determine the type and amount of function credits generated by a compensatory mitigation project.

6.1 Compensation Value Factor The compensatory mitigation project will be evaluated for each applicable aquatic resource function group and the level of credits will be determined on a function group basis. The same process for determining function compensation requirements is applied to compensatory mitigation project proposals, except that instead of utilizing the Project Effect Factor table, reviewers will use the Compensation Value Factor table (Table 5) in the calculation to determine the overall value of the compensation proposal. Additional adjustment factors and procedures that may alter the Compensation Value Factor are outlined in Section 7.0 Compensation Value Adjustment. 6.2 Condition Differential The difference between the condition of the resource pre-project implementation and post-project implementation must be determined for each applicable resource proposal. This condition differential will be used to determine the function gains realized as a result of the project. The initial function gain will be based upon design plans and expectations as outlined in the final compensatory mitigation project proposal. The Level 2 resource condition assessments discussed previously may be utilized in the planning stages to establish the potential for condition improvement and under some circumstances may be sufficient to document the condition differential; however, in most instances more intensive methods will be needed to ascertain the amount of improvement in resource condition and the methods may vary from function group to function group. Need additional text explaining differential and starting values: The resource condition starting point for determining functional gains under the following circumstances will be considered 0 and the compensation project will be given the maximum function gain based upon the final resource condition assessment values:


• Dam removal with riverine and floodplain reestablishment • Legacy sediment removal with riverine and floodplain reestablishment • Wetland establishment and reestablishment

The resource condition starting point for determining functional gains under the following circumstances will be based upon the existing resource condition:

• Enhancement of wetland, riverine or lacustrine resources • Rehabilitation of wetland, riverine or lacustrine resources

It may be necessary to perform more detailed or intensive resource condition assessments, including but not limited to Hydrogeomorphic functional assessments, Index of Biological Integrity (IBI’s) and Habitat Evaluation Procedure models. When enhancement or rehabilitation of existing resources is proposed, project developers should coordinate with the DEP and ACOE early in the process to determine the need for more intensive assessment methods. It may be necessary to convert or aggregate intensive findings. After the project has stabilized and successfully completed monitoring requirements, the selected methods would be performed again and the condition differential would be calculated to determine the final amount of resource credits generated from the project. The timing of the second cevaluation may vary from project to project and will be decided upon by DEP and the ACOE.


6.3 Calculating Function Credit Gain (FCG) The FCG for a compensation project proposal is calculated after the following values have been determined:

1) Determine the area(s) anticipated to gain in functional capacity in acres to the nearest hundredth of an acre (AP) for each of the applicable functional groups;

2) Determine the Compensation Value Category and CV value(s) for each of the applicable aquatic resources from Table 5;

3) Determine the appropriate RV value(s) for each of the applicable resources from Table 2; 4) Obtain the existing resource condition score for each of the applicable resources, utilize

protocols and design plans to project final resource condition upon project completion; calculate the condition index differential (CIdiff) by subtracting the existing resource condition from the projected resource condition.

The FCG for each applicable function group is then calculated using the following equation:

Functional Credit Gain (FCG) = AP x RV x CV x CIdiff FCG = Functional Credit gain AP = Area of Project for applicable function group (in acres, 0.00) RV = Resource Value (Table 2) CV = Compensation Value (Table 4) CIdiff = Condition Index Differential Value (0.00) (this is the difference between the existing condition and the projected condition post project implementation for each applicable resource condition assessment)


Table 5. Compensation Value Factor

Waterways Wetlands Reservoirs/Lakes1.) Proposed project entails a

comprehensive restoration of

stream and floodplain areas as

appropriate in consideration of

existing watershed conditions

Project must provide all 4 functional

groups.

2.) Stream and floodplain

restoration in conjunction with a

wetland establishment component

must provide at least 3 of 4 function

groups.

1.) Proposed project entails

reestablishment of wetlands, not

establishment or enhancement.

Projects must be equal to or

greater than 5.0 acres in size or

2.) Any size wetland

reestablishment in conjunction with

a riverine and floodplain restoration

effort. Wetland project must

provide all 3 functional groups and

waterway project must provide at

least 3 of 4 function groups.

1.) Proposed project entails a

comprehensive effort. Project

would include public recreation

improvements, easements or

access acquisition; and habitat

restoration/creation.

2.) Projects including one of the

previous and coupled with other

efforts involving water quality

improvements such as: phosphorus

control, sediment control, nitrate

control; or shoreline and riaprian

zone revegetation; or upstream

stream or floodplain restoration (i.e.

sediment supply) or adjacent

wetland reestablishment.

Waterways Wetlands Reservoirs/Lakes1.) Stream and floodplain

restoration project designed in

consideration of existing watershed

conditions, providing at least 3 of 4

function groups.

2.) Any stream restoration or

floodplain restoration inconjunction

with a wetland reestablishment or

enhancement project.

1.) Wetland reestablishment

project equal to or greater than 1.0

acre but less than 5.0 acres in

size.

2.) Wetland establishment or

enhancement projects equal to or

greater than 5.0 acres in size must

provide at least 2 of 3 functional

groups.

3.) Any wetland establishmewnt or

enhancement project in conjunction

with waterway or floodplain

restoration project.

1.) Lake project providing both

public recreation improvements,

easements or access acquisition

and habitat restoration,

enhancement or creation.

2.) Lake project coupled with either

stream, floodplain or wetland

project, providing at least 1 of 2

functional groups.

Waterways Wetlands Reservoirs/Lakes1.) Stream or floodplain restoration

or enhancement project, must

provide a minimum 2 of 4 functional

groups.

2.) Any stream or floodplain project

coupled with wetland or lake

project must provide at least 1 of 4

function groups excluding HAB1

function group.

1.) Wetland reestablishment only

project less than 1.0 acre in size

2.) Wetland establishment or

enhancement projects less than

5.0 acres in size must provide at

least 2 of 3 functional groups.

3.) Any wetland reestablishment,

establishment or enhancement

project coupled with stream,

floodplain or lake project must

provide at least 1 of 3 function

groups.

1.) Lake project providing at least 1

of 2 functional groups, if HAB3

functional group, physical habitat

improvement must be done,

vegetation control planting ineligible

(see Minimal Project Category).

Waterways Wetlands Reservoirs/Lakes1.) Proposed project entails stream

fishery habitat, HAB1 functional

group only.

1.) Proposed project entails efforts

to enhance wetlands through

plantings or invasive species

control, HAB2 function group only.

1.) Proposed project entails

invasive species control efforts or

efforts to establish native aquatic

plant species, HAB3 function group

only.

Value

3.0

Aquatic Compensation Value CategoryExtensive

1.0

Minimal

2.0

1.5

Moderate

Limited


7.0 Compensation Value Adjustment The preservation of aquatic resources in lieu of providing compensatory mitigation through enhancing or restoring aquatic resources is not accepted as compensatory mitigation for offsetting projects authorized to effect aquatic resources pursuant to Chapters 105 and 106. However, there is a role for preservation related to compensatory enhancement or restoration mitigation projects. As required pursuant to the joint federal mitigation rule (332.##), areas that encompass the enhancement or restoration project area must be protected under a conservation easement or deed restricted covenants. Lands owned by government entities must have a resource management plan that encompasses the project area and specifically controls activities and (federal rule language)… The areas directly part of the enhancement or restoration project are not considered preservation for the purposes of adjusting the compensation value. However, preservation of areas in conjunction with an enhancement or restoration project must be directly linked to and contribute to the long-term viability of the project. The Compensation Value (Cv) established in Section 6.0 may be adjusted according to the requirements outlined in Sections 7.1 – 7.3 resulting in an Adjusted Compensation Value (Cvaf) that is then used in place of the Cv value used for calculating the potential function credit generation from a project. The Cvaf values are determined for the applicable resource and are not used across resource types. The area of preservation must meet the minimum requirements as indicated below for each applicable resource type in order to adjust the Cv initially determined for the proposed project. 7.1 Riverine Preservation Areas There are two types of preservation that may be used to adjust the Compensation Value of a project; Upstream Corridor Preservation and Lateral Buffer Preservation. These two types of preservation areas must consider, at a minimum, the following:

• Riparian Ecotone Condition of the proposed Upstream Corridor Preservation area; • Length of the Upstream Corridor Preservation area in relation to the downstream project

length; • Upstream Corridor Preservation must be immediately upstream of the enhancement or

restoration project, preservation area must also include the floodplain and the Riparian Zone of Influence (RZOI);

• The condition of the vegetation/land cover of the Lateral Buffer Preservation; • Areas extending laterally from the floodplain boundary of the enhancement or restoration

project at a minimum include the RZOI.


7.1.1 Upstream Corridor Preservation The upstream corridor preservation area extends upstream from the compensation project upstream boundary; and extends laterally to encompass the stream channel, the 100 year floodplain and the Riparian Zone of Influence (ZOI). The overall RECI of the upstream corridor preservation area must be > = 0.65. The example to the right depicts a project with a proposed upstream preservation area that is greater than 2Xs the project length and with a RECI condition >0.65. This upstream corridor preservation would provide result in adding an additional 0.65 - 1.0 to the compensation value established in Section 6.0. Table 6 Riverine Upstream Preservation Corridor Adjustment Factor provides the adjustment factor ranges and length of preservation corridor to project length criteria that will be considered.

Table 6. Riverine Upstream Preservation Corridor Adjustment Factor

Preservation Area (length of stream)

Adjustment Factor (AF)

Value Range RECI x AF

½ of project stream length 0.25 0.17 – 0.25

½ – Equal to project stream length 0.50 0.33 – 0. 50

Equal to – 2 times project stream length 0.75 0.49 – 0.75

>2 times project stream length 1.0 0.65 – 1.00

The following formula is used to determine the adjusted compensation value for use in calculating the function credit gain as described in Section 6.0:

CVAF = CV + (RECI x AF) 7.1.2 Lateral Riverine Riparian ZOI Preservation

Area must be immediately adjacent to the 100 year floodplain and at a minimum, extend to the limits of the Riparian ZOI and extend along the compensation project area. The Riparian ZOI CI of the preservation area must be > = 0.65. Table 7 Riverine Lateral Preservation Corridor Adjustment Factor provides the adjustment factor ranges and lateral extent of preservation extending from the Riparian area (100 year floodplain) that will be considered.



CVAF = CV + (Riparian ZOI CI x AF)

7.2 Wetland Preservation Areas

Preservation of uplands adjacent to wetland compensation projects The area proposed to be preserved must extend from the wetland boundary into the uplands and at a minimum encompass the Wetland Zone of Influence (WZOI) area as defined in the Wetland Condition Level 2 Rapid Assessment Protocol. The WZOI condition index must have an existing condition or a projected increase in condition of >= 0.65. If the increase in condition is projected, then the adjustment factor is a projected one and the final rating will be determined at a point in time based upon the proposed project’s monitoring plans, time scales and the established success criteria. At a minimum, the WZOI condition index will be used to determine the value range of the adjustment factor. If the averaged condition index fails to meet the minimum condition rating, no adjustment factor will be awarded for the preserved areas and the project’s credit determination will be adjusted accordingly. Table 8 Wetland ZOI Preservation Adjustment Factor provides the adjustment factor ranges and lateral extent of preservation extending from the wetland boundary that will be considered.

Table 7. Riverine Lateral Riparian ZOI Preservation Adjustment Factor Preservation Area (length of stream)

Adjustment Factor (AF)

Value Range Riparian ZOI CI x AF

ZOI of riparian area 0.25 0.17 – 0.25 ZOI of riparian area plus greater than or equal to 100 feet

0.50 0.33 – 0. 50

ZOI of riparian area plus greater than or equal to 200 feet

0.75 0.49 – 0.75

ZOI of riparian area plus greater than or equal to 300 feet

1.0 0.65 – 1.00


Additional consideration of the Hydrogeomorphic wetland classification should be taken into account when establishing the extended areas for the WZOI.

• Condition of the proposed preservation area • Hydrogeomorphic wetland class (important to establishing areas beyond the ZOI) • Area adjacent to the wetland known as the Wetland ZOI is considered the minimum

area necessary for preservation • Physical barriers such as roads, vertical topography, adjacent streams, etc.


CVAF = CV + (WZOI CI x AF)

7.3 Lacustrine Preservation Areas Preservation of lands adjacent to lacustrine compensation projects The area proposed to be preserved must extend from the lacustrine boundary into the adjoining lands and at a minimum encompass the lacustrine Riparian Shoreline area and the Riparian Zone of Influence (ZOI) area which in combination extends 100 feet from the edge of water as defined in the Lacustrine Condition Level 2 Rapid Assessment Protocol. The averaged Riparian Shoreline Vegetation and the Riparian ZOI condition indexes must have an existing condition or a projected increase in condition of > = 0.65. If the increase in condition is projected, then the adjustment factor is a projected one and the final rating will be determined at a point in time based upon the proposed project’s monitoring plans and time scales and the established success criteria. At a minimum, the averaged Riparian Shoreline Vegetation and the Riparian ZOI condition indexes will be used to determine the value range of the adjustment factor. If the averaged condition index fails to meet the minimum condition rating, no adjustment factor will be awarded for the preserved areas and the project’s credit determination will be adjusted accordingly.

Table 8. Wetland ZOI Preservation Adjustment Factor

Preservation Area Adjustment Factor (AF)

Value Range WZOICI x AF

ZOI of wetland area 0.25 0.17 – 0.25 ZOI of wetland area plus greater than or equal to 100 feet

0.50 0.33 – 0. 50

ZOI of wetland area plus greater than or equal to 200 feet

0.75 0.49 – 0.75

ZOI of wetland area plus greater than or equal to 300 feet

1.0 0.65 – 1.00


Table 9 Lacustrine Riparian Shoreline & ZOI Preservation Adjustment Factor provides the adjustment factor ranges and lateral extent of preservation extending from the Riparian Shoreline that will be considered.

Additional consideration of the following factors should be taken into account when establishing the extended areas for the Riparian Shoreline and ZOI.

• Condition of the proposed preservation area • Area adjacent to the lacustrine resource known as the Riparian ZOI is considered

the minimum area necessary for preservation • The type of lacustrine environment such as reservoir, large river, small

impoundment, etc.


CVAF = CV + ([(Riparian Shoreline CI + ZOI CI)] x AF)

2

7.4 Addressing TMDL Related Impairments Projects that directly address sources of impairments with related TMDLS may receive additional compensation value adjustment factors. The proposed project must result in reduction of sources that are addressed as part of the TMDL. <<Additional language for values pending>>>

Table 9. Lacustrine Riparian Shoreline & ZOI Preservation Adjustment Factor

Preservation Area Adjustment

Factor (AF)

Value Range (Riparian Shoreline + ZOI CI) x AF 2

Riparian Shoreline Vegetation and Riparian ZOI area 0.25 0.17 – 0.25

Riparian Shoreline Vegetation and Riparian ZOI area plus greater than or equal to 100 feet

0.50 0.33 – 0. 50


0.75 0.49 – 0.75


1.0 0.65 – 1.00


7.5 Adjusting the Overall Functional Credit Calculation The CVAF calculated in the above sections is used in place of the CV in the functional credit calculation, thereby increasing the overall credit value for each applicable function group. The CVAF values in some instances are additive, such as the riverine upstream and lateral preservation adjustment factors. The values may also differ for components of larger projects and may not be carried forward to another stream reach or separate wetland area for example.

Functional Credit Gain (FCG) = AP x RV x CV x CIDIFF Definitions {Mitigation rule definitions for project types} Chapter 105 definitions Resources Unified Stream Methodology; January 2007. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Norfolk District And Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Stream Mitigation Method; February 2007. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, State of Missouri. PSU HGM Cowardin, L. M., Carter,V., Giolet, F. C. and LaRoe, E. T.: 1979, 'Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States', FSW/OBS-79/31, USDI Fish and Wildlife Service. Office of Biologic Services, Washington, D.C., 102 pp. Harrelson, Cheryl C; Rawlins, C. L.; Potyondy, John P. 1994. Stream channel reference sites: an illustrated guide to field technique. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-245. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 61 p. Fischenich, J.C. (2006). Functional objectives for stream restoration. EMRRP Technical Notes Collection (ERDC TN-EMRRP-SR-52). Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. www.wes.army.mil/el/emrrp Mitigation Rule Chapter 93 Chapter 102 Chapter 105 DEP Riparian Buffer Guidance? Verry, E.S., Dolloff, C.A., and Manning, M.E.: 2004, Riparian Ecotone: A functional definition and delineation for resource assessment. Water, Air and Soil Pollution: Focus 4:67-94

http://www.wes.army.mil/el/emrrp�


Stroud Water Research Center: 2008, Protecting Headwaters: The Scientific Basis for Safeguarding Stream and River Ecosystems. A Research Synthesis from the Stroud™ Water Research Center.


Appendix A

Aquatic Resource Function Compensation

Worksheets


Resource Type

Function Group

Area of Impact (AI in 0.00 acres)

Project Effect Factor

(PE)

Resource Value Factor

(RV)

Resource Condition Value

(CI)

Compensation Requirement (credits 0.00)

WQ 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00

CC 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00

HAB1 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00

RRS 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00

HYD 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00

BGC 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00

HAB2 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00

HAB3 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00

REC 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00

Compensation Requirement Determination

Streams and/or

Floodplains

Wetlands

Reservoirs and Large

Rivers

Aquatic Resource Function Worksheet 1

Draft Version 1.0

Project Name: Resource Identifier:


Resource Type

Function Group

Area of Impact (AI in 0.00 acres)

Compensation Value Factor

(CV)

Resource Value Factor

(RV)

Resource Condition

Differential Value (CI)

Proposed Compensation Value (credits

0.00)

WQ 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00

CC 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00

HAB1 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00

RRS 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00

HYD 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00

BGC 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00

HAB2 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00

HAB3 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00

REC 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00

Streams and/or

Floodplains

Wetlands

Reservoirs and Large

Rivers

Proposed Compensation Valuation Aquatic Resource Function Worksheet 2

Draft Version 1.0

Project Name: Site Identifier:

Channel Left ZOI Right ZOI floodplain Existing Existing

Stream Length (ft) Width (ft) Width (ft) Width (ft) width (feet) Area (ac) Channel Rip Veg

Orchard Reac 2458 12 100 100 150 11.96 0.65 0.50

Orchard Reac 2060 12 100 100 150 10.03 0.65 0.50

Orchard Reac 1000 10 100 100 150 4.82 0.25 0.20

Orchard TOT 5518 26.81

Spur TOTAL 1250 6 100 100 100 5.91 0.75 0.35

Functional Area (ac)HAB1 RS HYD1 BGC1 Rv Cv CIdiff

OR 1 0.68 0.68 9.14 8.46 2.00 3.00 0.47OR 2 0.57 0.57 7.66 7.09 2.00 3.00 0.47OR 3 0.23 0.23 3.67 3.44 2.00 3.00 0.85Orchard Total 1.47 1.47 20.48 19.00

Spur Total 0.17 0.17 3.04 2.87 2.00 3.00 0.49Total 1.65 1.65 23.52 21.87

Where FCG = Ap*Rv*Cv*CIdiff; Resource Value Factor (Rv = 2); Compensation Value Factor (Cv =3).

Functional Credit Gain Adjusted Functional Credit GainHAB1 RS HYD1 BGC1 HAB1 RS HYD1 BGC1

OR 1 1.91 1.91 25.78 23.87 2.66 2.66 26.53 24.62OR 2 1.60 1.60 21.60 20.00 2.35 2.35 22.35 20.75OR 3 1.17 1.17 18.73 17.56 1.92 1.92 19.48 18.31Orchard Total 4.68 4.68 66.12 61.44 5.43 5.43 66.87 62.19

Spur Total 0.51 0.51 8.94 8.44 1.26 1.26 9.69 9.19Total 5.19 5.19 75.06 69.87 6.69 6.69 76.56 71.37

Where ZOI adjustment of 0.75 (200 feet lateral w/CI o

Existing Existing Existing Existing Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed ProposedRip ZOI Instream Alteration RECI Channel Rip Veg Rip ZOI Instream Alteration

0.25 0.50 0.75 0.53 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.000.25 0.50 0.75 0.53 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.000.20 0.05 0.05 0.15 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

0.15 0.55 0.75 0.51 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

of 1).

ProposedRECI

1.001.001.00

1.00

Towanda Creek Stream and Wetland Propectus

Documents

Transcript of Towanda Creek Stream and Wetland Propectus