Appendix B-M_WPPH FLA by rPlusEnergies

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project Prepared by HDR Engineering, Inc for White Pine Waterpower, LLC. White Pine County, Nevada

January 2023

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Contents ES.1 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................ 1 1

Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1

Study Area ........................................................................................................................................... 1 2.1

Overview.................................................................................................................................... 1 Location Description .................................................................................................................. 3

Methodology ........................................................................................................................................ 3 3.1

Desktop Review ........................................................................................................................ 3

3.2

Field Investigation ..................................................................................................................... 4 3.2.1 Aquatic Resources ....................................................................................................... 4

Existing Conditions .............................................................................................................................. 5 4.1

Climate ...................................................................................................................................... 5

4.2

Topography ............................................................................................................................... 6

4.3

Hydrology .................................................................................................................................. 6

4.4

Soils ........................................................................................................................................... 8

4.5

Vegetation Communities ........................................................................................................... 8 4.5.1 Great Basin Pinyon-Juniper Woodland ........................................................................ 9 4.5.2 Great Basin Semi-Desert Chaparral ............................................................................ 9 4.5.3 Great Basin Xeric Mixed Sagebrush Shrubland .......................................................... 9 4.5.4 Inter-Mountain Basins Big Sagebrush Shrubland ...................................................... 10 4.5.5 Inter-Mountain Basins Cliff and Canyon..................................................................... 10 4.5.6 Inter-Mountain Basins Curl-Leaf Mountain Mahogany Woodland ............................. 10 4.5.7 Inter-Mountain Basins Greasewood Flat .................................................................... 10 4.5.8 Inter-Mountain Basins Meadow .................................................................................. 10 4.5.9 Inter-Mountain Basins Mixed Desert Scrub ............................................................... 10 4.5.10 Inter-Mountain Basins Montane Riparian System ...................................................... 11 4.5.11 Inter-Mountain Basins Montane Sagebrush Steppe .................................................. 11 4.5.12 Inter-Mountain Basins Semi-Desert Grassland .......................................................... 11 4.5.13 Invasive Annual Grassland ........................................................................................ 11 4.5.14 Agriculture, Developed, Hardscape Road, and Railroad ........................................... 11 4.5.15 Disturbed .................................................................................................................... 11

4.6

Aquatic Resources .................................................................................................................. 12 4.6.1 Perennial Channel ...................................................................................................... 15 4.6.2 Ephemeral Channel.................................................................................................... 16 4.6.3 Freshwater Emergent Wetland .................................................................................. 16 4.6.4 Willow Scrub Wetland ................................................................................................ 16

Non-Jurisdictional Aquatic Resources .............................................................................................. 17

References ........................................................................................................................................ 18

January 2023 | i

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Tables Table ES-1. Acreage Summary of Aquatic Resources ................................................................................. 1 Table 1. NRCS Precipitation Data ................................................................................................................ 6 Table 2. Aquatic Resources in the Study area............................................................................................ 12

Figures Figure 1. Project Location ............................................................................................................................. 2 Figure 2. Watersheds .................................................................................................................................... 7

Appendices Appendix A. Aquatic Resources Delineation Study Plan Appendix B. Aquatic Resources Delineation Mapbook Appendix C. Datasheets Appendix D. Photo Log Appendix E. NRCS Climate Report Appendix F. NRCS Soil Report Appendix G. Soils Mapbook Appendix H. Vegetation Communities Mapbook Appendix I. Plant List Appendix J. Nearest Traditional Navigable Water Map Appendix K. Regional Hydrology Map

ii | January 2023

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Acronyms and Abbreviations BLM Corps Corps Manual EC ESRI FERC HUC NHD NRCS OHWM OHWM Manual PC Project Supplement USDA USFWS USGS W WPW

Bureau of Land Management U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual Ephemeral channel Environmental Systems Research Institute Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Hydrologic Unit Code National Hydrography Dataset Natural Resources Conservation Service ordinary high water mark A Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United States Perennial channel White Pine Pumped Storage Project Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region Version 2.0 United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Geological Survey wetland White Pine Waterpower, LLC

January 2023 | iii

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

ES.1

Executive Summary

The aquatic resources delineation was completed by HDR on behalf of White Pine Waterpower, LLC (WPW). The Aquatic Resources Study Area (study area) is 1,699 acres and is located in White Pine County, Nevada. The delineation was conducted from June 28 through July 1, 2021 and May 17 through May 20, 2022, in accordance with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) methodologies outlined in Part IV, Section D, of the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Corps Manual) (Environmental Laboratory 1987), the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region Version 2.0 (Supplement) (Environmental Laboratory 2008), and A Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United States (OHWM Manual) (Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory 2008). The Supplement was used where inconsistencies exist between the Corps Manual and the Supplement. This report presents (1) relevant available literature; (2) findings of climate, topographical, hydrological, and soil data; (3) findings of collected field data; (4) the location and extent of aquatic resources in the study area; and (5) an analysis discussing Corps jurisdiction. Forty-five (45) features (a total of 1.15-acre) were mapped in the study area that were assigned to four feature classes: perennial channel (PC), ephemeral channel (EC), and two wetland types (W): freshwater emergent wetland and willow scrub wetland. Table ES-1 summarizes aquatic resource acreages in the study area by feature class. Based on the delineations identified in this report, none of the aquatic resources identified in the study area are considered Waters of the U.S. under the December 2022 revised final definition of Waters of the U.S., as they are within closed hydrological basins with no outlets or tributary connections to Traditional Navigable Waters (33 CFR Part 328).

Table ES-1. Acreage Summary of Aquatic Resources Feature Class

Acreage

Perennial Channel

0.056

Ephemeral Channel

0.731

Freshwater Emergent Wetland

0.339

Willow Scrub Wetland

0.022

Total

1.15

January 2023 | ES-1

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Introduction

This Aquatic Resources Delineation Report has been prepared by HDR for White Pine Waterpower, LLC (WPW) in support of licensing and permitting for the proposed White Pine Pumped Storage Project (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [FERC] No. 14851) (Project). This report describes the results of the aquatic resources delineation conducted in 2021.

1.1

Overview

WPW is proposing the licensing, construction, and operation of the Project in White Pine County, Nevada, approximately 8 miles northeast of the City of Ely (Figure 1). The Project is a 1,000 megawatt, closed-loop, pumped storage facility that will require the construction of two new reservoirs. These reservoirs will be joined by underground conduits, along with an underground powerhouse and associated generation, pumping, and transmission equipment. New construction and operation phase access roads will also be required. The pumped storage facilities will be on land administered by BLM. The proposed power interconnection would extend approximately 25 miles west, through an existing Section 368 corridor that is designated for energy infrastructure, to the existing Robinson Summit Substation via a new 345 kilovolt (kV) transmission line. The Project will be located entirely off-stream, meaning neither the upper nor lower reservoir will intercept a perennial surface watercourse. The primary water source for the Project will come from groundwater wells. These wells will be drilled in a new wellfield in the Steptoe Valley Basin, south of the proposed lower reservoir. Water from the wellfield will be used for construction, for initial fill of the reservoir system, and for make-up water for losses from seepage, leakage, and evaporation. WPW will acquire the right to use the water from White Pine County and will obtain the necessary permits from the Nevada Division of Water Resources. This report describes the existing biological environment, summarizes the data collected during the field investigation, describes the location and extent of aquatic resources in the study area, and provides a detailed analysis which concludes there are no Federal or State jurisdictional aquatic resources in the study area. This report facilitates the following efforts:

•

Provide background information.

•

Provide detailed information the Corps may use to facilitate review of the approved jurisdictional determination request.

•

Provide a preliminary assessment of the potential for federally listed and/or candidate species to occur in the study area, as well as cultural resources.

Study Area

The study area consists of all lands projected to be affected by Project construction and operation for which access permission was granted. These lands include the proposed Project reservoirs, access roads, water source, transmission corridor, currently anticipated laydown yards and related disturbance areas, as well as an approximately 100-foot buffer surrounding each. Access was not granted for private parcels located in the Smith Valley portion of the study area.

January 2023 | 1

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Figure 1. Project Location 2 | January 2023

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

2.1

Location Description

The easternmost portion of the study area begins approximately 5 miles southeast of the Town of McGill near State Highway 486. The Project then spans approximately 30 miles west across Steptoe Valley and Smith Valley and terminates at an electrical substation approximately 8 miles east of Moorman Ranch Airport in White Pine County, Nevada. The study area is located in the Waldy Pond, Marking Corral Summit, Robinson Summit, Lusetti Canyon, Ruth, East Ely, and Cleve Creek Baldy United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute quadrangles. The Project is located in the following sections, townships, and ranges: • • • • • • •

Sections 1 and 12, Township 17N, Range 60E Sections 19-23, 25, 26, 30, and 31; Township 18N; Range 61E Sections 27-30, 34, and 35; Township 18N; Range 62E Sections 1 and 2, Township 17N, Range 62E Sections 6-11, 13, and 14; Township 17N; Range 63E Sections 4, 8, 9, 11-18, 20, 22, 23, 29; Township 17N; Range 64E Sections 7 and 18, Township 17N, Range 65

Land use in the study area is predominantly Bureau of Land Management (BLM)-managed public lands (1281 acres) and with 57 acres of private lands.

Methodology

This section describes the methodologies used by HDR wetland scientists to survey for and delineate aquatic resources. Prior to conducting the desktop review and field work, a Study Plan was developed to review the proposed methodologies included in this report (Appendix A). The Study Plan was submitted to WPW and agencies for review and approval.

3.1

Desktop Review

The desktop review consisted of collecting information related to aquatic resources in the vicinity of the study area prior to performing the field investigation. HDR wetland scientists reviewed the following data sources for information on vegetation, hydrology or drainage patterns, topography, and potential or known aquatic resources in the study area: • • • • • •

Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI) World Imagery (ESRI 2021) Google Earth Pro™ mapping service aerial photography from 2012-2015 for vegetative, topographic, and hydrologic signatures (Google Earth 2021) USGS National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) (USGS 2020) USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle maps United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey (USDA 2021a, 2021b) United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory Map (USFWS 2021a)

January 2023 | 3

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

3.2

Field Investigation

3.2.1

Aquatic Resources

HDR wetland scientists performed the aquatic resources delineation from June 28 through July 1, 2021, and May 17 through 20, 2022. The delineation followed Part IV, Section D, of the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Corps Manual) (Environmental Laboratory 1987); the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region Version 2.0 (Supplement) (Environmental Laboratory 2008); and A Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United States (OHWM Manual) (Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory 2008). The Supplement was followed when there were inconsistencies between the Corps Manual and the Supplement. Aquatic resources mapped in the field were mapped using a Trimble R1 GNSS Handheld Receiver with submeter accuracy. Reference lines and data points for the OHWM of linear drainages, wetland boundaries, and other wetland data were subsequently exported to the ArcGIS software program, then overlain on current aerial imagery and available topographic contours for the purpose of digitizing the extent of the features. Some portions of the study area were inaccessible because of steep slopes, dense vegetation, or access was not granted; therefore, some aquatic resources were edited and digitized using ESRI ArcGIS software based on aerial photos and topographic contours. A binocular scan of private parcels in which access was not granted was also used to gather information to inform digitizing the extent of features using ESRI ArcGIS software. All aquatic resources are represented in the mapbook provided in Appendix B. Data for each aquatic resource were recorded and representative photographs were taken. Datasheets can be found in Appendix C. Representative photographs are included in Appendix D, along with maps showing the location and compass direction of each photograph (Figure D-1).

Linear Drainage Features A combination of Level 1 (Onsite Inspection Unnecessary) and Level 2 (Onsite Inspection Necessary) of the Routine Determination Method was chosen for delineating perennial and ephemeral channels. Linear drainage features were evaluated to identify type based on the flow regime in an average precipitation year, such as ephemeral, intermittent, or perennial. The OHWM of a representative subset of features was delineated by collecting reference lines or points along their banks or by walking the center line of the feature and applying a standard channel width. In addition, detailed data for linear drainage features were collected, including OHWM indicators and extent of the active channel; stream forms present, such as pools, riffles, and runs; average water depth in channels and pools; presence of woody debris; channel characteristics, such as narrow/deep and wide/shallow; stream bottom characteristics; and vegetative cover. To define the OHWM, features were evaluated for the presence of shelving, vegetation wracking, deposition, changes in soil character, scouring, water staining, and changes in plant community (Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory 2008). Once sufficient representative data was collected for ephemeral channels, topographic contours and aerial photo-interpretation were used to desktop map ephemeral channels with similar characteristics to ephemeral channels in which detailed data was already collected. This extrapolation method was primarily used for areas that were not accessible due to being on private property or were difficult to access due to the terrain or limited access roads. However, most areas were able to be observed from a distance. Ephemeral channels with similar gradients, primary OHWM indicator (bed and bank or 4 | January 2023

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

OHWM), sediment sorting, OHWM widths, and vegetation cover were grouped together on datasheets with notes describing any variations among the channels. All NHD flowlines and aerial imagery which appeared to have hydrologic signatures were verified in the field for OHWM indicators and other secondary characteristics such as sediment sorting, a change in plants species, or a change in vegetation cover. For any NHD flowlines or aerial imagery that was verified to have no primary or secondary indicators required to meet the definition of a linear drainage, a reference point and photos were taken. A map and photo locations are provided in Appendix D.

Wetlands A combination of Level 1 (Onsite Inspection Unnecessary) and Level 2 (Onsite Inspection Necessary) of the Routine Determination Method was chosen for delineating wetlands. This methodology included collecting detailed data on vegetation coverage by species, documentation of signs of hydrology, and soil characterization at representative wetland types. Dominant plants associated with aquatic resources and adjacent uplands were identified to species, when possible. Each plant species was then assigned a wetland indicator status rating based on the Corps’ 2020 National Wetland Plant List (Version 3.5). The Corps assigns an indicator status to designate a plant species’ likelihood of occurrence in wetlands (hydrophytic plants) or uplands (Corps 2020). A hydrophyte or hydrophytic plant is a plant species that possesses physiological traits that allow the plant to grow and persist in soils subject to inundation and anaerobic soil conditions. Some plants were only identifiable to genus as they had no reproductive parts. In instances where plants were identifiable only to genus, the wetland indicator status was assigned by reviewing the most common status for the species of that genus known from the region. Soils were evaluated using paired data points in close proximity to the delineated boundary of each wetland. Exploratory soil pits were also dug in areas that appeared to support some hydrophytic vegetation but did not have any other apparent wetland indicators. In these cases, data points were collected as single upland data points. Twenty-inch-deep soil pits were dug at each data point, where possible, and assessed for hydric soil indicators. After evaluating vegetation and soils, hydrology was evaluated at each potential wetland. Positive signs of hydrology were determined by the presence of one or more primary or secondary indicators including, but not limited to, surface water and soil saturation (Environmental Laboratory 2008).

Existing Conditions

This section describes the regional and environmental setting of the study area, including the climate, topography, hydrology, soils, vegetation, aquatic resources, and level of human or natural disturbance. It also discusses federally listed species and cultural resources that may occur in the study area.

4.1

Climate

Local climate data was obtained from the NRCS Climate Analysis for Wetlands by County (USDA 2021b). Like much of Nevada, there is little precipitation and extreme temperature variation across the study area. From 2000-2021, precipitation that fell as rain ranged from an average high of 1.12 inches in May to an average low of 0.53-inch in June. Precipitation that fell as snow ranged from an average high of 9.9 inches in January to an average low of 0.1-inch in June with typically no snowfall in July or

January 2023 | 5

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

August. Mean temperatures ranged from an average high of 68.3 degrees Fahrenheit in July to an average low of 25.5 degrees Fahrenheit in January. Table 1 shows the precipitation amounts recorded at the Ely Airport NRCS Weather Station for the 2020-2021 water year, compared with the 20-year average (2000-2020). The 2020-2021 water year was drier than average, which likely resulted in lowflow conditions for linear drainages and wetlands with less saturation than in an average precipitation year (USDA 2021b). Additionally, the Antecedent Precipitation Tool yielded drier than normal conditions for all days at the west terminus and east terminus of the study area with the exception of normal conditions on July 1, 2021, at the west terminus of the study area. The NRCS climate report and Antecedent Precipitation Tool output is provided in Appendix E.

Table 1. NRCS Precipitation Data Ely Airport Weather Station monthly precipitation data(inches) Sept

Oct

Nov

Dec

Jan

Feb

March

April

May

June

July

Aug

Total

2020 to 2021 actual

0.04

0.00

0.54

0.39

0.43

0.72

1.54

0.77

0.27

0.12

1.25

0.13

6.2

2000 to 2020 average

0.62

0.83

0.65

0.79

0.73

0.82

0.96

1.15

0.95

0.35

0.69

0.74

9.28

4.2

Topography

The topography in the study area is typical of the basin and range province found in Nevada, with northsouth trending valleys and mountains. Elevations in the study area range from approximately 6,151 feet above mean sea level, where the study area crosses US-93, to approximately 8,636 feet above mean sea level at the proposed upper reservoir along the Duck Creek Range. From west to east, the study area crosses the following mountains and mountain ranges: Robinson Summit, Egan Range, the foothills of Heusser Mountain, and the Duck Creek Range. Major valleys include Smith Valley, Steptoe Valley, and Duck Creek Valley.

4.3

Hydrology

The study area falls within the Long-Ruby Valleys and Spring-Steptoe Valleys subbasins (Hydrologic Unit Codes [HUC] 16060007 and 16060008). More specifically, the Project falls within the following subwatersheds: Jakes Valley-Illipah Creek (160600070206), Summit Spring (160600070203), Upper Gleason Creek (16060081201), Smith Valley (160600081401), Steptoe Slough-Duck Creek (160600081402), and Gilford Creek-Duck Creek (160600081302) (Figure 2). All of the ephemeral channels originate in the surrounding mountains and water flowing down these channels likely only reaches the valley floor during heavy flow events. Duck Creek and one of its unnamed tributaries are the only channels in the study area that flow perennially. Duck Creek originates east of the Duck Creek Range on Forest Service land on the west slope of the Schell Creek Range. Tributaries of Duck Creek flow in from the east and include Berry Creek, Timber Creek, Bird Creek, East Creek, and North Creek. These tributaries originate in the upper elevations of the Schell Creek Mountain Range, within the Humboldt National Forest.

6 | January 2023

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Figure 2. Watersheds

January 2023 | 7

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Duck Creek flows north through Gallagher Gap and divides into several small channels before flowing into a large alluvial fan north of the Town of McGill. Duck Creek is used for irrigation and other purposes and then flows into Tailings Creek and Bassett Lake. During periods of very high flows, Duck Creek has reached Bassett Lake, about 5 miles northwest of McGill. Duck Creek continues as outflow from Basset Lake, flowing north. Approximately 47 miles to the north of the headwaters, in extremely wet years with high snowpack, Duck Creek occasionally flows into Goshute Lake, a normally dry lakebed which sits on the border of White Pine and Elko counties (Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 1967).

4.4

Soils

The NRCS Web Soil Survey (USDA 2022) identifies 33 soil types in the study area (Appendix F). Information on hydric soil ratings by soil type was also obtained from the Web Soil Survey. “Hydric” means that 100 percent of the components listed for a given map unit meet hydric soils criteria. “Predominantly hydric” means that 66 to 99 percent of the components listed for a given map unit meet hydric soils criteria. “Partially hydric” means that 33 to 66 percent of the map unit components meet hydric soils criteria. “Nonhydric” means that none of the map unit components meet hydric soils criteria. The Devilsgait-Duffer-Kunzler association is considered partially hydric and is 0.5 percent of the study area, a total of 6.7 acres. All other soils in the study area are ranked as nonhydric. Additional details on soils can be found in the NRCS soils report provided in Appendix F as well as a soils map in Appendix G.

4.5

Vegetation Communities

Vegetation communities are assemblages of plant species that occur in the same area and are defined by species composition and relative abundance. The study area is dominated by Great Basin PinyonJuniper Woodland, Great Basin Xeric Mixed Sagebrush Shrubland, and Inter-Mountain Basins Montane Sagebrush Steppe (Appendix H). A total of 25 land cover types and vegetation communities were found in the study area, some of which have varying forms that differ from the primary type or community as defined in the LANDFIRE classification system (USDA 2020). Full descriptions of these land cover types and vegetation communities are included below. These descriptions include the dominant and common associated plant species found in each community. A complete list of all plant species observed in the study area is provided in Appendix I. Most of the upland vegetation communities listed below have an herbaceous community with a low to moderate amount of cover, as well as perennial grasses with a low to moderate amount of cover. The most commonly encountered herb species include cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum), widewing spring parsley (Cymopterus purpurascens), thorny skeletonweed (Pleiacanthus spinosus), James’ cryptantha (Cryptantha cinera var. abortiva), flat spine sheepbur (Lappula occidentalis), long spur lupine (Lupinus arbustus), Northwestern Indian paintbrush (Castilleja chromosa), and Simpson’s buckwheat (Eriogonum microthecum var. simpsonii). The most common perennial grasses included streamside wild rye (Elymus lanceolatus), Sandberg bluegrass (Poa secunda), bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata), Letterman’s rice grass (Achnatherum lettermanii), and Indian ricegrass (Achnatherum hymenoides).

8 | January 2023

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

4.5.1

Great Basin Pinyon-Juniper Woodland

This vegetation community occurs in three forms throughout the study area, based on the density of the canopy. The closed canopy form generally occurs on slopes with minimal bare ground. Open and very open canopy forms have a high cover of shrub species with bare ground making up the remainder of the habitat, differing in tree cover density from approximately 5 to 20 percent for the open canopy form to less than 5 percent for the very open canopy form. This vegetation community is dominated by a variable mixture of Utah juniper (Juniperus osteosperma) and single leaf pinyon (Pinus monophylla), with the majority of areas having more Utah juniper cover. A shrub community is present and total cover is generally inversely proportional to the tree cover, with primarily low sagebrush (Artemisia arbuscula), black sagebrush (Artemisia nova), broom snakeweed (Gutierrezia sarothrae), matted wild buckwheat (Eriogonum caespitosum), and musk phlox (Phlox hoodii ssp. muscoides). The herbaceous community cover and perennial grasses are also generally inversely proportional to the tree cover.

4.5.2

Great Basin Semi-Desert Chaparral

This vegetation community occurs at the upper reservoir and is dominated by antelope bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata) in the shrub community, with lesser occurrences of perennial grasses, matted wild buckwheat, and broom snakeweed. Scattered Utah juniper trees do occur in this vegetation community but at minimal cover. The herb community has minimal cover, with a moderate to high amount of bare ground. This vegetation community is similar to Great Basin Xeric Mixed Sagebrush Shrubland, described below, but has low sagebrush species (Artemisia spp.) cover.

4.5.3

Great Basin Xeric Mixed Sagebrush Shrubland

This vegetation community occurs throughout the study area and is dominated by little sagebrush and/or black sagebrush in the shrub community, with lesser occurrences of broom matchweed, rubber rabbitbrush (Ericameria nauseosa), green rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus), and matted wild buckwheat. Scattered isolated Utah juniper trees may occur in this vegetation community, but at no more than one percent cover. The herb community has a relatively low amount of cheatgrass cover. This vegetation community is similar to Great Basin Semi-Desert Chaparral, but it is essentially devoid of antelope bitterbrush. This vegetation community has four forms in addition to the standard form described above. A big sagebrush shrubland form is present at various places along the proposed transmission line. This form differs from the standard form in that it has co-dominance with big sagebrush, but not at sufficient cover to define it as Inter-Mountain Basins Big Sagebrush Shrubland. A disturbed form is present at the west end of the proposed lower reservoir and appears to be disturbed from an abandoned development. This form differs from the standard form in that it has approximately half the vegetation cover. A juniper savannah form occurs at the eastern half of the proposed lower reservoir and along an access road to the proposed upper reservoir and differs from the standard form in that it has scattered clusters of Utah juniper, but not at sufficient levels to define it as a juniper woodland. The juniper savannah form also has a higher cover of perennial grass species. Lastly, a serviceberry shrubland form occurs along the middle portion of the proposed transmission line. This form differs from the standard form in that the dominant shrub species is alder leaf serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia) with low sagebrush as a co-dominant species.

January 2023 | 9

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

4.5.4

Inter-Mountain Basins Big Sagebrush Shrubland

This vegetation community occurs along the proposed transmission line. It is dominated in the shrub community by big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) with scattered occurrences of low sagebrush, black sagebrush, and rubber rabbitbrush. This vegetation type has minimal grass or herb cover and has disturbed forms near SR-490 and in Smith Valley with approximately 75 percent bare ground.

4.5.5

Inter-Mountain Basins Cliff and Canyon

This land cover type occurs at the proposed upper reservoir and is an exposed rocky cliff face surrounded by Inter-Mountain Basins Montane Sagebrush Steppe and Great Basin Pinyon-Juniper Woodland. Although scattered individuals from the plant species in those habitats do occur on the cliff, total vegetation cover is minimal.

4.5.6

Inter-Mountain Basins Curl-Leaf Mountain Mahogany Woodland

This vegetation community occurs at the proposed upper reservoir and is dominated by curl leaf mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus ledifolius) in the tree community. Sagebrush is present in this vegetation community at a relatively low cover and Utah juniper is nearly absent. Other species in the shrub community include Utah snowberry (Symphoricarpos oreophilus var. utahensis), broom matchweed, and perennial grasses. The herb community has minimal to moderate cheatgrass cover along with cover from other herb species.

4.5.7

Inter-Mountain Basins Greasewood Flat

This vegetation community occurs in the Smith Valley portion of the proposed transmission line. It is dominated by greasewood (Sarcobatus vermiculatus) in the shrub community with scattered occurrences of shadscale and rubber rabbitbrush.

4.5.8

Inter-Mountain Basins Meadow

This vegetation community occurs between the proposed central and eastern upper reservoir staging area and is dominated in the herb community by matted muhly (Muhlenbergia richardsonis), Arctic rush (Juncus balticus), Douglas’ sedge (Carex douglasii), and western dock (Rumex occidentalis), with great basin lyme grass (Leymus cinereus) around the margin of the vegetation community.

4.5.9

Inter-Mountain Basins Mixed Desert Scrub

This vegetation community occurs along the proposed transmission line and at the western end of the proposed lower reservoir. It is dominated by either winterfat and Indian ricegrass, or by sticky flower rabbitbrush in the shrub layer with some scattered and isolated broom matchweed and low sagebrush cover. The herb community has minimal cover and bare ground comprises approximately 25 percent of the area. This vegetation community is similar to the formally described Inter-Mountain Basins Mixed Salt Desert Scrub; however, it is devoid of saltbush.

10 | January 2023

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

4.5.10

Inter-Mountain Basins Montane Riparian System

This vegetation community occurs at the east end of the study area. It is dominated by narrow leaf willow (Salix exigua) and Booth’s willow (Salix boothii) in the tree community, with some lesser cover of ash leaf maple (Acer negundo) in a closed canopy. The shrub community has sparsely scattered occurrences of Wood’s rose (Rosa woodsii) and golden current (Ribes aureum). Rubber rabbitbrush and big sagebrush occur above the banks of this community. An herbaceous community is present along the banks of Duck Creek containing Arctic rush, Sierran rush (Juncus nevadensis), Nebraska sedge (Carex nebrascensis), tufted hair grass (Deschampsia cespitosa), watercress (Nasturtium officinale), bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare), and common dandelion (Taraxacum officinale).

4.5.11

Inter-Mountain Basins Montane Sagebrush Steppe

This vegetation community occurs at the proposed lower and upper reservoirs and is similar to Great Basin Xeric Mixed Sagebrush Scrub but differs in that perennial grass species range from subdominant to codominant with sagebrush species. The tree community is nearly absent. Other shrub species are present, including winterfat (Krascheninnikovia lanata) at lower elevations and lava aster (Ionactis alpina) and stemless mock goldenweed (Stenotus acaulis var. acaulis) at higher elevations. An herb community is present but of relatively low cover. Bare ground makes up approximately 25 to 75 percent of the landscape in this community.

4.5.12

Inter-Mountain Basins Semi-Desert Grassland

This vegetation community occurs at the northern portion of the proposed lower reservoir and is dominated by perennial grasses, with some cover of broom matchweed and little sagebrush. The herb community has minimal cover. The rest of the habitat is comprised of patches of pinnate tansymustard (Descurainia sophia), thick stem wild cabbage (Caulanthus crassicaulis), and bare ground.

4.5.13

Invasive Annual Grassland

This vegetation community occurs along US-93 at the proposed lower reservoir and is dominated by cheatgrass with scattered occurrences of pinnate tansymustard, saltlover (Halogeton glomeratus) and crossflower (Chorispora tenella).

4.5.14

Agriculture, Developed, Hardscape Road, and Railroad

Agriculture occurs along the proposed transmission line and consists of various planted crops. Developed areas occur at opposite ends of the proposed transmission line consisting of an electrical substation at the west end and a private junkyard at the east end. Hardscaped areas consist of all paved roads and any other paved areas in the study area. The railroad land cover type consists of the inactive railroad line and active railroad line running north-south through the proposed lower reservoir.

4.5.15

Disturbed

This land cover type occurs at scattered locations along the transmission line, typically as a transition from development to a natural habitat with minimal vegetation cover. Additionally, this land cover type also occurs at the upper reservoir around McGill Spring, which has been impacted heavily by a vertical culvert, fencing, and intensive cattle grazing. Vegetation outside of the fencing around McGill Spring is heavily trampled and grazed. As a result, the ground cover is mostly thatch. January 2023 | 11

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

4.6

Aquatic Resources

Several aquatic resources were identified in the study area, including 2 perennial channels, 31 ephemeral channels, 2 freshwater emergent wetlands, and 1 scrub-shrub wetland. The extent of these features is shown in the mapbook provided as Appendix B, and each feature class is described in more detail below. Table 2 summarizes the aquatic resources in the study area or directly adjacent to the study area. Datasheets in Appendix C contain field notes describing all the aquatic resources in Table 2.

Table 2. Aquatic Resources in the Study area Feature ID

Feature class

Area (acres)

Length (linear feet)

Latitude

Longitude

Appendix B. Page Number

PC1f1

Perennial Channel

0.003

43.9

R3UB1

39.34581128

-114.7138532

PC1g1

Perennial Channel

0.036

254.5

R3UB1

39.34560893

-114.7134622

PC2

Perennial Channel

0.017

251.1

R3UB2

39.34549881

-114.712974

Perennial channel total

0.056

550

EC0

Ephemeral Channel

0.026

1143.7

39.36667315

-115.161159

EC1

Ephemeral Channel

0.010

450.6

39.36667315

-115.161159

EC2

Ephemeral Channel

0.242

3510.4

39.37910466

-115.1488511

18, 19

EC5a

Ephemeral Channel

0.020

900.2

39.41310095

-115.1353962

EC5b

Ephemeral Channel

0.024

1028.5

39.41080934

-115.1295081

EC6b (Gleason Creek)

Ephemeral Channel

0.029

426.7

39.40295736

-115.0419529

EC7

Ephemeral Channel

0.013

290.2

39.3526911

-114.9132681

EC8

Ephemeral Channel

0.002

96.6

39.34871652

-114.8601315

EC8a

Ephemeral Channel

0.004

190.7

39.34757553

-114.8950755

EC8b

Ephemeral Channel

0.003

132.8

39.34701778

-114.8951308

EC9

Ephemeral Channel

0.008

178.6

39.34917404

-114.8592728

12 | January 2023

OHWM2 Cowardin (width in type3 feet)

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Feature ID

Feature class

Area (acres)

Length (linear feet)

OHWM2 Cowardin (width in type3 feet)

Latitude

Longitude

Appendix B. Page Number

EC10

Ephemeral Channel

0.007

348.4

39.30340074

-114.8121132

EC11

Ephemeral Channel

0.007

157.7

39.30900977

-114.8103177

EC12

Ephemeral Channel

0.005

206.6

39.34873996

-114.8562535

EC13a1

Ephemeral Channel

0.002

42.6

39.34235854

-114.8044054

EC14

Ephemeral Channel

0.004

165.3

39.31595373

-114.8095113

EC15

Ephemeral Channel

0.007

152.9

39.3197591

-114.8084033

EC16

Ephemeral Channel

0.007

156.7

39.32123456

-114.8090175

EC17a

Ephemeral Channel

0.004

156.7

39.32620025

-114.8083903

EC17b

Ephemeral Channel

0.001

60.7

39.32620025

-114.8083903

EC18

Ephemeral Channel

0.008

182.1

39.3303826

-114.8066615

EC23a1

Ephemeral Channel

0.019

405.4

39.33872679

-114.7971124

EC27a1

Ephemeral Channel

0.021

914.4

39.34290078

-114.7879028

EC37b1

Ephemeral Channel

0.045

1973.4

39.34808556

-114.7215509

EC40

Ephemeral Channel

0.113

4901.1

39.34053072

-114.7449995

3, 4, 5

EC43a1

Ephemeral Channel

0.056

2429.1

39.34782439

-114.7882637

7, 8

EC49

Ephemeral Channel

0.013

273.8

39.34799209

-114.9038626

EC50

Ephemeral Channel

0.008

182.02

39.34745517

-114.9027866

EC51

Ephemeral Channel

0.012

254.41

39.34733789

-114.9004698

January 2023 | 13

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Feature ID

Feature class

Area (acres)

Length (linear feet)

EC52

Ephemeral Channel

0.011

249.49

Ephemeral channel total

0.731

21,562

Freshwater Emergent Wetland

0.112

W4i1

Freshwater Emergent Wetland

W4j1

OHWM2 Cowardin (width in type3 feet)

Latitude

Longitude

Appendix B. Page Number

39.34742063

-114.89832

—

PEM

39.34106076

-114.7416262

0.005

—

PEM

39.34565364

-114.7134218

Freshwater Emergent Wetland

0.001

—

PEM

39.34559728

-114.7134992

W4k1

Freshwater Emergent Wetland

0.145

—

PEM

39.34553437

-114.7131062

W4l1

Freshwater Emergent Wetland

0.003

—

PEM

39.34543431

-114.7132716

W4m1

Freshwater Emergent Wetland

0.019

—

PEM

39.34548154

-114.7130196

W4n1

Freshwater Emergent Wetland

0.053

—

PEM

39.34543742

-114.7134002

W4o1

Freshwater Emergent Wetland

0.000028

—

PEM

39.3455266

-114.7127471

W4p1

Freshwater Emergent Wetland

0.001

—

PEM

39.34554519

-114.7126622

W4q1

Freshwater Emergent Wetland

0.000087

—

PEM

39.34555621

-114.712589

14 | January 2023

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Feature ID

Feature class

Area (acres)

Length (linear feet)

W4r1

Freshwater Emergent Wetland

0.000001

—

Freshwater emergent wetland total

0.34

Willow Scrub Wetland

0.022

Willow scrub wetland total

0.022

Total

1.15

OHWM2 Cowardin (width in type3 feet)

Latitude

Longitude

Appendix B. Page Number

PEM

39.34555953

-114.7125678

PSS

39.34540332

-114.7132569

22,112

1 These features are sections of one contiguous linear drainage feature or one hydrologically connected

wetland (i.e., W4i-W4r is a fringing freshwater emergent wetland along Duck Creek).

2 Italicized widths are averages based on field notes as width was variable across mapped length. 3 Federal Geographic Data Committee. 2013. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United

States. FGDC-STD-004-2013 Second Edition. Wetlands Subcommittee, Federal Geographic Data Committee and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC.

4.6.1

Perennial Channel

PC1f and PC1g, a reach of Duck Creek, is a meandering or sinuous channel that flows from south to north through the easternmost portion of the study area. The average width of the OHWM of the channel is three feet based on changes in vegetation species and cover, sediment sorting, and break in slope. Duck Creek flows over one dirt road crossing in the study area. On the north side of the road crossing, the channel banks are deeply incised, likely due to erosion from the road crossing. Duck Creek’s longitudinal profile from the south side of the road to the north side of the road (upstream to downstream), drastically decreases in elevation and changes from a moderate to high gradient for approximately 100 feet before the channel’s gradient returns to a moderate gradient. Surface water depth ranges from approximately 3-6 inches throughout the portions of Duck Creek in the study area. The sediment texture in the OHWM consists of mainly pebbles and cobbles. Duck Creek’s active floodplain is distinguished by a change in plant community to either herbaceous vegetation consisting of mostly Juncus sp. and Carex sp. species or scrub stands of Salix sp. which are up to 10 feet high in some areas. The low-flow channel had little vegetation growing in-stream but a predominance of vegetation cover from adjacent Salix sp. overhanging into the low-flow channel. Sediment texture in the low-flow channel is primarily pebbles and granules while herbaceous vegetation in the active floodplain consists of a silty sediment texture. PC2 is a sinuous, low gradient tributary to Duck Creek and flows from east to west where it converges with Duck Creek just south of the road crossing. The average width of the OHWM of the channel is 3 feet based on the presence of a bed and bank and a change in vegetation cover from little to no vegetation to a predominance of herbaceous vegetation consisting of Juncus sp. and Carex sp. The active floodplain is dominated by herbaceous vegetation and sediment is a silty texture. Surface water depth was approximately 4 inches on June 30, 2021. PC1f, PC1g, and PC2 had low turbidity at the time

January 2023 | 15

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

of the study based on visual observations of a clear or non-cloudy water column throughout the study area.

4.6.2

Ephemeral Channel

EC0-EC52 vary from low to moderate gradients with the average width of the OHWM portion of the channels varying from 1 to 6 feet. Channels in the western portion of the study area and the proposed upper reservoir are generally moderate gradient channels, while channels in the valley portions of the study are low gradient with some braided channels on valley floors which are consistent with alluvial fan systems in arid west regions. OHWM indicators were primarily identified based on a break in slope, change in sediment texture, and a change in vegetation cover from little to no vegetation to upland vegetation. Upland vegetation in the valley portions of the study area consisted of primarily sagebrush, greasewood, and rabbitbrush. Higher elevations had upland vegetation consisting of juniper trees and a mix of sagebrush species. Sediment texture in-stream ranges from coarse silt to cobble. No surface water was present in any of the ephemeral channels at the time of the study. For details on how each aquatic resource was characterized and grouped, refer to datasheets in Appendix C.

4.6.3

Freshwater Emergent Wetland

W2 is located on the eastern end of the study area, southwest of the McGill Spring area. Soil pits were not gathered as the area is located on a private parcel and digging was not permitted. Based on the presence of wetland hydrology and hydrophytic vegetation, W2 is considered a freshwater emergent wetland as defined by the Corps Manual. This feature is heavily dominated by Juncus balticus and Carex douglasii, with secondary wetland hydrology indicators that include drainage patterns and meeting the Facultative Plants (FAC)-neutral test as defined in the Corps manual. The position of the hillslope north of this wetland provides evidence that there may be water seepage from overland flow as well as subsurface water from McGill Spring. Drainage patterns include EC45 which traverses the wetland from west to east. W4i-W4r is a fringe freshwater emergent wetland along PC1f, PC1g, and PC2. This wetland is dominated by Juncus nevadensis and Carex nebrascensis, with an overstory of scrub-shrub species (predominantly willow) in some areas. Hydric soils are present as the soil matrix was depleted as described in the Supplement. Wetland hydrology indicators included soil saturation throughout the soil pit as well as aerial photography from 2015 where saturation is visible.

4.6.4

Willow Scrub Wetland

W5 qualifies as a willow scrub wetland as surface water was present along with a high water table. Dominant hydrophytic species included Salix exigua and Salix boothii, with an understory of Juncus sp. Due to the thick root system and presence of approximately four inches of surface water, hydric soils were assumed and the soil pit gathered for W4 was used as a representative soil pit. The soil pit for W4 is in close proximity to W5 and is similar in its landform position in a valley as well as concave local relief. W4 and W5 also receive similar amounts of inundation as they both abut PC1f, PC1g, and PC2. Willow communities north of the road crossing are not wetlands as they did not have wetland hydrology indicators or hydric soils. See datasheets for UP6a and UP6b in Appendix C for more detail.

16 | January 2023

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Non-Jurisdictional Aquatic Resources

This section provides an analysis describing the regional hydrology in relation to each aquatic resource in the study area to determine whether any aquatic resources are jurisdictional per Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Mapping of the nearest Traditional Navigable Water, and a regional hydrology map are appended to this report. The nearest Traditional Navigable Water is the Great Salt Lake which is within the HUC-2, Region 16 Great Basin watershed. The Great Salt Lake is approximately 154 miles northeast of the study area, and the study area is located within the Region 16 Great Basin watershed. EC0, EC1, and EC2 flow from east to west through the study area within the Jakes Valley-Illipah Creek subwatershed. Both of these channels turn to sheet flow prior to reaching Illipah Creek, which is the nearest waterbody. EC3-EC5 flow from southeast to northwest through the study area and are within the Summit Spring subwatershed. These channels are tributaries to several unnamed ephemeral drainages that flow northwest over Highway 50 before flowing southerly into Jakes Valley where they turn to sheet flow prior to reaching Illipah Creek. During large storms events, these channels may reach Illipah Creek, but likely most of the year they do not contribute any flow to Illipah Creek. Illipah Creek terminates in Jakes Valley and flow either infiltrates, evaporates, or transpiration occurs through plants. EC6 (Gleason Creek) flows from north to south through the study area within the Upper Gleason Creek subwatershed. EC6 continues southerly through the Lower Gleason Creek subwatershed, east through the Ely-Murry Creek watershed, then northerly through the Steptoe Slough-Duck Creek subwatershed where it converges with Steptoe Creek. Gleason Creek flows into Murry Creek which then converges with Steptoe Creek. Steptoe Creek is a tributary to Tailings Creek, then Duck Creek, where it finally empties into Goshute Lake. Goshute Lake has no outlets, so water either infiltrates to groundwater, evaporates, or transpiration occurs through plants. EC7 flows from south to north through the study area and turns to sheet flow prior to converging with any drainages. EC49-EC52 flow generally from south to north through the study area, converge with an unnamed drainage that flows from west to east through Hercules Gap along NV-490 into the Smith Valley where they eventually empty into Steptoe Creek. As discussed above, Steptoe Creek eventually empties into Goshute Lake. EC8-EC9 flow from south to north through the study area and are tributaries to Steptoe Creek. EC13 and EC23 generally flow from east to west through the study area and are tributaries to Steptoe Creek as well. EC27 and EC43 turn to sheet flow prior to reaching Steptoe Creek; however, during large storm events they may occasionally contribute flow to Steptoe Creek. These drainages are all within the Steptoe Slough-Duck Creek subwatershed and terminate at Goshute Lake, which has no outlets. EC37-EC40 all generally flow from west to east through the study area and are tributaries to PC1f and PC1g (Duck Creek). W2 is located on a hillside where there is likely some water seepage from McGill Spring that contributes to the hydrology in the area in addition to snowmelt and rain. McGill Spring is just northeast of W2. EC45 flows from west to east through W2 before it converges with EC40. Duck Creek flows from south to north through the study area and continues north for approximately 10 miles before flowing westerly along NV-486, then southwest to converge with Bassett Lake. Duck Creek then flows from Bassett Lake north into Goshute Lake where water infiltrates to groundwater, evaporates, or transpiration occurs through plants. W4a-W4r and W5 are fringing wetlands along Duck Creek. PC2 flows east to west through the study area where it converges with Duck Creek. All these aquatic resources are within the Gilford Creek-Duck Creek subwatershed and terminate at Goshute Lake, which has no outlets.

January 2023 | 17

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

All the subwatersheds discussed above are within closed hydrological basins with no outlets and no tributary connections to Traditional Navigable Waters. All the aquatic resources in the study area are hydrologically connected to valleys where flow either evaporates, infiltrates to groundwater, or transpiration occurs through plants. None of the aquatic resources in the study area are connected to any Navigable-in-Fact waterways and have no connection to interstate commerce.

References

Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory. 2008. A Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United States. https://www.spk.usace.army.mil/Portals/12/documents/regulatory/pdf/Ordinary_High_Watermark _Manual_Aug_2008.pdf Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. January 1987. https://usace.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p266001coll1/id/4530 ———. 2008. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Delineation Manual: Arid West Region, Version 2.0. https://usace.contentdm.oclc.org/utils/getfile/collection/p266001coll1/id/7627a Environmental Systems Research Institute. 2021. ESRI’s World Imagery Map. https://services.arcgisonline.com/ArcGIS/rest/services/World_Imagery/MapServer Google Earth. 2021. Aerial imagery of the study area from 2012-2015. Google Earth, earth.google.com/web/. HDR. 2022. Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Wildlife Species Assessment Study Report. December 16, 2022. Report being prepared by HDR for WPW. Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (NDCNR). 1967. Water Resources Report 42. Accessed online May 26, 2021 at: http://images.water.nv.gov/images/publications/recon%20reports/rpt42-steptoe_valley.pdf United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). 2020. National Wetland Plant List (NWPL) Website Version 3.5. http://rsgisias.crrel.usace.army.mil/NWPL/index.html. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and U.S. Department of the Interior. 2020. LANDFIRE Landscape Fire and Resource Planning Tools - Vegetation. [Online] URL: https://landfire.gov/vegetation.php (Accessed July 19, 2021). ———. 2022. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey 2.3. http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/. ———. 2021b. NRCS Climate Analysis for Wetlands by County. https://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/climate/navigate_wets.html. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2021a. National Wetland Inventory, Wetlands Online Mapper. Division of Habitat and Resource Conservation. Arlington, VA. Accessed June 2021.https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/Mapper.html. ———. 2021b. Critical Habitat Mapper. Accessed: September 2021.https://fws.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html.

18 | January 2023

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

———. 2020. NHD Downloadable Data Collection Harvest Source. Accessed June 2021. https://www.usgs.gov/core-science-systems/ngp/national-hydrography/national-hydrographydataset?qt-science_support_page_related_con=0#qt-science_support_page_related_con.

January 2023 | 19

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Appendix A. Aquatic Resources Delineation Study Plan

White Pine Pumped Storage Project (FERC No. 14851) Aquatic Resources Delineation Study Plan March 2, 2021

DRAFT FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW

1.0 Introduction White Pine Waterpower, LLC (White Pine) is proposing the licensing, construction, and operation of the White Pine Pumped Storage Project (FERC No. 14851) (Project) in White Pine County, Nevada, approximately 8 miles northeast of the City of Ely. The Project is a 1,000 megawatt, closed-loop, pumped storage facility that will require the construction of two new reservoirs joined by underground or surface conduits along with a powerhouse and associated generation, pumping, and transmission equipment. The Project will be located entirely off-stream, meaning neither the upper nor lower reservoir will intercept a perennial surface watercourse. White Pine has initiated a licensing process for the Project with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the federal agency with jurisdiction over non-federal hydropower projects in the United States. During this process, White Pine will engage stakeholders and implement a suite of resource studies that will inform FERC’s environmental and developmental analyses and decision regarding license issuance. This document presents White Pine’s proposed approach to the scoping and implementation of a Aquatic Resources Delineation Study for the Project that will be provided to FERC to assist in the licensing analyses. White Pine anticipates filing a Draft License Application with FERC in December 2021.

2.0 Project Nexus and Study Goals This document presents White Pine’s proposed Aquatic Resources Delineation Study that is designed to assess the nature and degree of the Project’s potential impacts on areas subject to the jurisdiction of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The USACE regulates discharges of fill material into Waters of the United States (WOUS) under authority of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. A consideration for constructing the Project is the presence of WOUS, including wetlands. By federal law and associated policy, it is necessary to first avoid project impacts on these resources wherever practicable, minimize impacts that cannot be avoided and, in some cases, compensate for unavoidable impacts. WOUS, wetlands, and uplands (non-jurisdictional), as referenced in this study plan, are defined as follows: •

•

WOUS: The Clean Water Act (CWA) defines WOUS as “surface waters, including streams, streambeds, rivers, lakes, reservoirs, arroyos, washes, and other ephemeral watercourses and wetlands” [33 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 328.3(a)]. The jurisdictional limits of WOUS include: o In the absence of adjacent wetlands, CWA jurisdiction extends to the ordinary high water mark (OHWM); or o When adjacent wetlands are present, jurisdiction extends beyond the OHWM to the limits of the adjacent wetlands; and o When WOUS consist only of wetlands, jurisdiction extends to the limits of the wetlands. Wetlands: Wetlands are a subset of WOUS. The CWA defines wetlands as “Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to Page 1

White Pine Pumped Storage Project (FERC No. 14851) Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Study Plan

•

support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions” [33 CFR Part 328.3(b)]. Note that according to the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual and in the 2008 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (USACE 1987, 2008a), wetlands must possess the following three characteristics: (1) a vegetation community dominated by plant species that are typically adapted for life in saturated soils, (2) inundation or saturation of the soil during the growing season, and (3) soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions. Uplands: Non-water and non-wetland areas are called uplands.

The overall goal of this study is to prepare a baseline map of potential WOUS in the study area. This mapping information eventually will be used in White Pine’s license application and 404 permitting materials to assist in the assessment of potential impacts to WOUS from the proposed Project and to develop protection, mitigation, and enhancement measures, as appropriate.

3.0 Summary of Existing Information A full description of existing information can be found in the White Pine Pre-Application Document (PAD). For the PAD, existing geospatial information from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Geological Survey, and Federal Emergency Management Agency was reviewed to identify and describe WOUS, including wetlands, surface water, and drainages. These datasets indicate that development of the Project could result in impacts to potential WOUS. As noted in the PAD, White Pine’s review of aerial photographs and other available data suggests that the potential WOUS mapped within lands currently proposed for Project construction activities (with the exception of the transmission line corridor) consist of approximately 25 acres of potential wetland or riverine habitat, such as seasonally saturated emergent wetland, temporarily flooded riverine, or intermittently flooded riverine habitats.

4.0 Methods 4.1

Study Area

4.2

Study Methods

White Pine proposes to conduct the following four tasks: Planning, Field Work, Mapping, and Reports.

Task 1 - Planning White Pine will review existing information to identify focus areas for field confirmation and confer with the USACE regarding field work locations and on-site review of field work by USACE staff. White Pine’s planning efforts will prepare for field data collection, including measurements of the width, depth, flow direction, channel slope, substrate, estimation of flow frequency, and photographs looking

Page 2

White Pine Pumped Storage Project (FERC No. 14851) Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Study Plan

upstream, downstream, and across the channel for a representative sampling of potential WOUS within the study area. Additionally, the planning task includes field work preparations such as logistics, safety planning, quality control planning, mobilizing equipment, creating field maps, and installing data on hand-held field computers.

Task 2 – Field Work The goal of the field program is to collect sufficient data to be able to map potential WOUS across the study area. A field team of two wetland scientists will use hand-held Geographic Information System (GIS) and Global Positioning System (GPS)-enabled computers to locate the proposed Project facilities and to field verify the existing mapping. Boundaries of WOUS will be determined using methods described in the 2008 Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United States (USACE 2008b). The OHWM is defined as “the line on the shore established by fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as a clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of the soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, or the presence of litter and debris” [33 CFR Part 328.3]. Soil and geomorphic indicators present below, at, or above the OHWM will be investigated across the study area and marked on aerial photography field maps. Field teams will also collect additional data in accordance with the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual and in the 2008 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (USACE 1987, 2008a) in locations that exhibit wetland characteristics, as necessary. Scientists may also collect additional data in areas that are difficult to interpret from aerial imagery. The field team will collect approximately 10 data points per day, continuing to sample areas until the study area can be mapped by photo-interpretation. Upland areas will also be sampled to document these areas as non-jurisdictional. Data collection points will include photographs of indicators of OHWM, vegetation, soils, and hydrology parameters; National Wetlands Inventory (NWI)codes, and notes on the presence or absence of wetlands indicators to support a wetland determination for sites will also be collected, as necessary.

Task 3 - Mapping GPS locations of field-visited sites will be overlaid on the aerial photography in GIS to identify the limits of the WOUS and the presence of wetlands in the study area. Aerial photography signatures from these field-visited sites will then be extrapolated to similar locations throughout the study area and boundaries digitized into GIS. Boundaries of WOUS will be digitized onto aerial photography in GIS using the field maps, field investigation notes, and an on-screen review of recent and historical aerial photography. Wetlands, open water, and unvegetated areas with mud cracks, scour marks, sediment deposits, and cobble bars situated below the OHWM will be classified as potential WOUS. The mapping will be reviewed for Quality Control and revised, as needed, and incorporated into a Report.

Task 4 – Report The results of the field work and the mapping will be summarized in a Report. This Report will identify locations within the study area that may be subject to the jurisdiction of the USACE under authority of Section 404 of the CWA. The Report will follow the requirements for content using published guidelines for Aquatic Resources Delineations from the USACE Regulatory Division.

Page 3

White Pine Pumped Storage Project (FERC No. 14851) Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Study Plan

5.0 Schedule and Deliverables White Pine anticipates the schedule for Study completion as follows: Planning ................................................................................................................ March - May 2021 Study Season ........................................................................................................... May – July 2021 Study Report Preparation ..........................................................................August – November 2021 A description of the methods, field investigation findings, and rationale used to identify WOUS occurring in the Project area will be included in the Report. The Report will be incorporated into the Draft License Application.

6.0 References U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. [Online] URL: http://www.cpe.rutgers.edu/Wetlands/1987-Army-Corps-Wetlands-DelineationManual.pdf. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2008a. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region. [Online] URL: https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb1046489.pdf. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2008b. Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United States. [Online] URL: https://www.spl.usace.army.mil/Portals/17/docs/regulatory/JD/FinalOHWMManual_2008.pdf.

Page 4

White Pine Pumped Storage Project (FERC No. 14851) Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Study Plan

Attachment 1 Map of Study Area

LEGEND

MONITORING WELL

PRIMARY FACILITY CORRIDOR

PERMITTED ENERGY CORRIDOR

PROPOSED RESERVOIR

PROPOSED RESERVOIR ACCESS ROAD

PROPOSED STRUCTURE

CONVEYANCE

WATERBODY

RAILROADS

PROPOSED RAILROAD REALIGNMENT

Project Vicinity

Miles

Steptoe Slough

ACCESS ROAD

US93

INLET/OUTLET LOWER RESERVOIR

LAYDOWN PARKING Ä ! SUBSTATION

CONVEYANCE Ä !

POWERHOUSE STRUCTURE ! !

! Ä !

Ä !

INLET/OUTLET EXISTING GONDER SUBSTATION PERMITTED ENERGY CORRIDOR

ACCESS ROAD UPPER RESERVOIR ACCESS ROAD

PROJECT LOCATION

WHITE PINE WATERPOWER, LLC PATH: C:\USERS\SGRIFFIN\DESKTOP\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\WHITEPINE_LOCATION_MAP.MXD - USER: SGRIFFIN - DATE: 3/2/2021

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Appendix B. Aquatic Resources Delineation Mapbook

20 74

748 0f t

LEGEND

W4i 0.005 ac

PC1g 0.036 ac 750 0 ft

) "

Wetland Data Point

Aquatic Resource Type

W4j 0.001 ac

UP6a

) "

) " ) ) " "

PC1g 0.036 ac

Perennial Channel Willow Scrub Wetland (0.022 acre)

W4q 0.000087 ac W4p 0.001 ac

) "

Contour Line (20-ft interval)

W4o 0.000028 ac W4l 0.003 ac W5 0.022 ac

75 40 ft

74 40

Freshwater Emergent Wetland (0.340 acre)

W4r 0.000001 ac

UP4

74 00 ft

W4n 0.053 ac

0 ft

Upland Data Point Project Footprint

PC1f 0.003 ac UP6b

752

) "

W4m 0.019 ac W5

PC2 0.017 ac

Page 1 of 27 **Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.** DATA SOURCES: Bing Aerial (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

W4k 0.145 ac

DELINEATION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES

200 FEET

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

1 inch = 150 feet

746 0 I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

400

740 0 ft

EC37b 0.136 ac

LEGEND Aquatic Resource Type Ephemeral Channel (0.731 acre)

75 20 ft

Contour Line (20-ft interval)

7420 ft

00 75

7440 ft Page 2 of 27 **Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.** DATA SOURCES: Bing Aerial (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

DELINEATION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES

7460 ft

7480 ft

200 FEET

400

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

1 inch = 150 feet

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

40 80

80 60

0 ft 802

80 8

ft 00 81

0 ft 812

LEGEND

8 000 ft

790 0

) "

Upland Data Point

) "

Wetland Data Point Project Footprint

Aquatic Resource Type Ephemeral Channel (0.731 acre)

792 0

W2 0.112 ac

Freshwater Emergent Wetland (0.340 acre) ft

Contour Line (20-ft interval)

7940 ft

UP2

EC40 0.113 ac

Page 3 of 27 **Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.**

7960 ft

DATA SOURCES: Bing Aerial (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

) "

DELINEATION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES

) "

7980 ft

200 FEET

400

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

7880 ft

1 inch = 150 feet

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

8380 ft

8400

842 0f t

LEGEND Aquatic Resource Type Ephemeral Channel (0.731 acre) Contour Line (20-ft interval)

ft 60 83

0 834

0 ft 832

0 830

ft Page 4 of 27 **Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.** DATA SOURCES: Bing Aerial (2021).

12 0

818 0

EC40 0.113 ac

81 60 ft

DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

81 40 ft

DELINEATION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES

8200 ft 8220 ft

0 8240 ft

200 FEET

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

1 inch = 150 feet

8260 ft 8280 ft

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

400

8560 ft

ft 80 85

LEGEND Aquatic Resource Type

0 ft 854

0 852

Ephemeral Channel (0.731 acre)

EC40 0.113 ac

Contour Line (20-ft interval)

0 ft 850

82 80 ft

8300 8320 ft

ft Page 5 of 27 **Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.** DATA SOURCES: Bing Aerial (2021).

8340 ft

DELINEATION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES

8360 ft

8380 ft

8400 ft

8420 ft

8440 ft

8460 ft 8480 ft I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

200 FEET

400

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

1 inch = 150 feet

ft 64 80

64 60 ft

00 65

ft ft 20 65

0 654

ft 60 65

ft 20 66

40 66

80 66

EC27a 0.021 ac

ft 00 66

0 66

LEGEND

ft 80 65

Project Footprint Aquatic Resource Type Ephemeral Channel (0.731 acre) Contour Line (20-ft interval)

Page 6 of 27 **Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.** DATA SOURCES: Bing Aerial (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

67 40 ft

67 20 ft

DELINEATION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES

200 FEET

400

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

6760 ft

1 inch = 150 feet

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

ft 632 0

LEGEND Project Footprint Aquatic Resource Type Ephemeral Channel (0.731 acre)

6500 ft

6480 ft

634 0

Contour Line (20-ft interval)

EC43a 0.056 ac Page 7 of 27 EC43a 0.056 ac

**Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.** DATA SOURCES: Bing Aerial (2021).

0 ft

6360

DELINEATION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES

638

6460 ft

644 0 ft

ft 642 0

400

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

ft 640 0 I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

200 FEET

1 inch = 150 feet

6460 ft

LEGEND 6700 ft

Project Footprint Aquatic Resource Type Ephemeral Channel (0.731 acre) Contour Line (20-ft interval)

6600

6620

6640

6660

6680

ft 6580

6560

6540 ft

6520 ft

6500 ft

6480 ft

Page 8 of 27 **Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.** DATA SOURCES: Bing Aerial (2021).

EC43a 0.056 ac

DELINEATION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES

EC43a 0.056 acres

200 FEET

400

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

1 inch = 150 feet

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

62 60

62 80

622 0 ft

624 0

LEGEND Project Footprint Aquatic Resource Type Ephemeral Channel (0.731 acre)

63 20 ft

63 00

Contour Line (20-ft interval)

Page 9 of 27 **Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.** DATA SOURCES: Bing Aerial (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

DELINEATION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES

63 40

EC23a 0.009 ac

200 FEET

400

63 60

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

1 inch = 150 feet

LEGEND Project Footprint Aquatic Resource Type Ephemeral Channel (0.731 acre)

62 00 ft

616 0

61 80 ft

Contour Line (20-ft interval)

EC13a 0.028 ac Page 10 of 27 **Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.** DATA SOURCES: Bing Aerial (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

DELINEATION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES

200 FEET

400

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

622 0

1 inch = 150 feet

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

LEGEND Project Footprint Aquatic Resource Type Ephemeral Channel (0.731 acre)

EC12 0.004 ac

Page 11 of 27 **Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.** DATA SOURCES: Bing Aerial (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

DELINEATION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES

200 FEET

400

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

1 inch = 150 feet

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

LEGEND Project Footprint Aquatic Resource Type Ephemeral Channel (0.731 acre) Contour Line (20-ft interval)

EC8 0.002 ac

EC9 0.008 ac

Page 12 of 27 **Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.** DATA SOURCES: Bing Aerial (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

EC12 0.004 ac

DELINEATION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES

0 616 ft 0

200 FEET

400

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

1 inch = 150 feet

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

LEGEND 630 0

Project Footprint

Aquatic Resource Type Ephemeral Channel (0.731 acre) Contour Line (20-ft interval) 6280

63 20 ft

EC8a 0.004 ac

Page 13 of 27 **Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.** DATA SOURCES: Bing Aerial (2021).

EC51 0.011 ac

EC52 0.011 ac

EC8b 0.003 ac

DELINEATION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES

200 FEET

400

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

1 inch = 150 feet

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

6360 ft

LEGEND 630 0

Project Footprint Aquatic Resource Type Ephemeral Channel (0.731 acre) Contour Line (20-ft interval)

6320 ft

EC49 0.008 ac Page 14 of 27 **Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.** DATA SOURCES: Bing Aerial (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

EC50 0.008 ac

EC52 0.011 ac DELINEATION OF

EC51 0.011 ac

AQUATIC RESOURCES

6340 ft

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

200 FEET

400

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

1 inch = 150 feet

6300 ft

LEGEND Project Footprint Aquatic Resource Type Ephemeral Channel (0.731 acre) Contour Line (20-ft interval) 6340 ft

0 ft 636 Page 15 of 27

EC7 0.006 ac

6320 ft

**Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.** DATA SOURCES: Bing Aerial (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

DELINEATION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES

200 FEET

400

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

1 inch = 150 feet

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

7400 ft

LEGEND Project Footprint Aquatic Resource Type

7380 ft

Ephemeral Channel (0.731 acre)

7360 ft

EC6b 0.02 ac

Contour Line (20-ft interval)

7340 ft

7300 ft

Page 16 of 27 **Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.** DATA SOURCES: Bing Aerial (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

DELINEATION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES

7 32 0 ft

7280 ft

7260 ft

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

200 FEET

400

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

1 inch = 150 feet

7200 ft

7180 ft

LEGEND Project Footprint Aquatic Resource Type 7160 ft

Ephemeral Channel (0.731 acre) Contour Line (20-ft interval)

EC5a 0.02 ac Page 17 of 27 **Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.**

EC5b 0.02 ac

7140 ft

DELINEATION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES

200 FEET

400

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

1 inch = 150 feet

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

EC2 0.19 ac LEGEND Project Footprint Aquatic Resource Type 0 ft 698

ft 00 70

Ephemeral Channel (0.731 acre) Contour Line (20-ft interval)

ft 20 70

40 70 ft

ft 60 70

80 70

6960 ft

ft Page 18 of 27 **Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.** DATA SOURCES: Bing Aerial (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

0 ft 710

DELINEATION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES

ft 7120

EC2 0.19 ac

200 FEET

400

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

1 inch = 150 feet

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

0 ft 726

0 ft 728

6940 ft

LEGEND Project Footprint Aquatic Resource Type Ephemeral Channel (0.731 acre)

EC2 0.19 ac

69 80 ft

71 80 ft

72 00

696 0

71 60 ft

72 40

72 20 ft

Contour Line (20-ft interval)

Page 19 of 27 **Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.** DATA SOURCES: Bing Aerial (2021).

71 20 ft

71 40 ft

DELINEATION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES

71 00

0f 692 t

200 FEET

400

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

1 inch = 150 feet

6 70

20 70

70 00

40 70

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

6860 ft

6840 ft

6820 ft

LEGEND 6800 ft

Project Footprint Aquatic Resource Type Ephemeral Channel (0.731 acre)

6760 ft

Contour Line (20-ft interval)

6740 ft

6780 ft

6720 ft

6700 f t

EC1 0.008 ac

Page 20 of 27 **Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.** DATA SOURCES: Bing Aerial (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

DELINEATION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES

200 FEET

400

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

1 inch = 150 feet

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

LEGEND Project Footprint Aquatic Resource Type Ephemeral Channel (0.731 acre)

66 8

Contour Line (20-ft interval)

EC0b 0.007 ac ft 60 66

40 66

ft Page 21 of 27 **Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.**

EC0a 0.02 ac

DELINEATION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES

200 FEET

400

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

1 inch = 150 feet

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

62 20 ft ft

LEGEND

62 40

0 618

Project Footprint

62 80 ft

Ephemeral Channel (0.731 acre) Contour Line (20-ft interval)

620 0

62 60

Aquatic Resource Type

EC17b 0.001 ac EC17a 0.004 ac Page 22 of 27 **Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.** DATA SOURCES: Bing Aerial (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

630 0 ft

DELINEATION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES

200 FEET

400

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

1 inch = 150 feet

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

LEGEND Project Footprint Aquatic Resource Type Ephemeral Channel (0.731 acre)

EC18 0.008 ac 62 20 ft

62 00 ft

61 80 ft

Contour Line (20-ft interval)

Page 23 of 27 **Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.**

62 40 ft

62 60

DELINEATION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES

200 FEET

400

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

62 80

1 inch = 150 feet

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

620 0 ft

LEGEND Project Footprint Aquatic Resource Type Ephemeral Channel (0.731 acre) Contour Line (20-ft interval)

EC16 0.007 ac

Page 24 of 27 **Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.** DATA SOURCES: Bing Aerial (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

DELINEATION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES

EC15 0.007 ac 622 0

200 FEET

400

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

628 0 ft

626 0

62 40 ft

6300

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

1 inch = 150 feet

ft 628 0

630 0

6260 ft

6240 ft

LEGEND Project Footprint Aquatic Resource Type Ephemeral Channel (0.731 acre) Contour Line (20-ft interval)

6220 ft

EC14 0.004 ac

Page 25 of 27 **Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.** DATA SOURCES: Bing Aerial (2021).

6320 ft

DELINEATION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES

200 FEET

400

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

1 inch = 150 feet

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

LEGEND Project Footprint ft

Aquatic Resource Type 624 0

Ephemeral Channel (0.731 acre) Contour Line (20-ft interval)

6280

626 0

EC11 0.007 ac

Page 26 of 27 **Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.** DATA SOURCES: Bing Aerial (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

DELINEATION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES

6320 ft

630 0

6340 f t

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

200 FEET

400

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

1 inch = 150 feet

62 40 ft

LEGEND Project Footprint Aquatic Resource Type Ephemeral Channel (0.731 acre)

62 60 ft

Contour Line (20-ft interval)

63 00

62 80 ft

EC10 0.007 ac

Page 27 of 27 **Acreages in parenthesis are the total for the entire survey area.** DATA SOURCES: Bing Aerial (2021).

63 20 ft

634 0 ft

DELINEATION OF AQUATIC RESOURCES

200 FEET

400

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane Nevada East FIPS 2701 Ft US Projection: Transverse Mercator Datum: NAD 1983 2011

636 ft 0

1 inch = 150 feet

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_A_AR_DELINEATION.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/21/2022

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Appendix C. Datasheets

EC5a, EC5b

EC8a EC8b

EC8 EC10

EC2

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Appendix D. Photo Log

LEGEND Project Footprint

¶ Photo Point & Direction of View

! PC2

PC1

Page 1 of 11 DATA SOURCES: HDR, Inc. (2021); Bing Aerial (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness.

FIGURE D-1 PHOTO POINTS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_D_AR_PHOTOPOINTS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/19/2022

200 FEET

400

LEGEND Project Footprint

¶ Photo Point & Direction of View

Page 2 of 11

¶!

DATA SOURCES: HDR, Inc. (2021); Bing Aerial (2021).

EC40 W2

DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness.

FIGURE D-1

PHOTO POINTS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_D_AR_PHOTOPOINTS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/19/2022

200 FEET

400

LEGEND PP3

Project Footprint

¶ Photo Point & Direction of View

Page 3 of 11 DATA SOURCES: HDR, Inc. (2021); Bing Aerial (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness.

FIGURE D-1 PHOTO POINTS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_D_AR_PHOTOPOINTS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/19/2022

200 FEET

400

LEGEND Project Footprint

¶ Photo Point & Direction of View

EC13

Page 4 of 11 DATA SOURCES: HDR, Inc. (2021); Bing Aerial (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness.

FIGURE D-1 PHOTO POINTS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_D_AR_PHOTOPOINTS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/19/2022

200 FEET

400

LEGEND Project Footprint

¶ Photo Point & Direction of View

EC9

Page 5 of 11 DATA SOURCES: HDR, Inc. (2021); Bing Aerial (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness.

FIGURE D-1 PHOTO POINTS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_D_AR_PHOTOPOINTS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/19/2022

200 FEET

400

LEGEND Project Footprint

¶ Photo Point & Direction of View

PP2

Page 6 of 11 DATA SOURCES: HDR, Inc. (2021); Bing Aerial (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness.

FIGURE D-1 PHOTO POINTS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_D_AR_PHOTOPOINTS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/19/2022

200 FEET

400

LEGEND Project Footprint

¶ Photo Point & Direction of View

Page 7 of 11 DATA SOURCES: HDR, Inc. (2021); Bing Aerial (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness.

FIGURE D-1 PHOTO POINTS

EC6

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_D_AR_PHOTOPOINTS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/19/2022

200 FEET

400

LEGEND Project Footprint

¶ Photo Point & Direction of View

PP1

Page 8 of 11 DATA SOURCES: HDR, Inc. (2021); Bing Aerial (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness.

FIGURE D-1 PHOTO POINTS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_D_AR_PHOTOPOINTS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/19/2022

200 FEET

400

LEGEND EC4

Project Footprint

¶ Photo Point & Direction of View

Page 9 of 11 DATA SOURCES: HDR, Inc. (2021); Bing Aerial (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness.

FIGURE D-1 PHOTO POINTS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_D_AR_PHOTOPOINTS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/19/2022

200 FEET

400

LEGEND Project Footprint

¶ Photo Point & Direction of View

EC1

Page 10 of 11 DATA SOURCES: HDR, Inc. (2021); Bing Aerial (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness.

FIGURE D-1 PHOTO POINTS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_D_AR_PHOTOPOINTS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/19/2022

200 FEET

400

LEGEND Project Footprint

¶ Photo Point & Direction of View

EC15

Page 11 of 11 DATA SOURCES: HDR, Inc. (2021); Bing Aerial (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness.

FIGURE D-1 PHOTO POINTS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_D_AR_PHOTOPOINTS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/19/2022

200 FEET

400

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

EC1: Upstream, looking east (39.36667315, -115.161159)

EC1: Downstream, looking west (39.36667315, -115.161159)

Appendix D-2

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

EC4: Upstream, looking east (39.38182601, -115.1494651)

EC4: Downstream, looking west (39.41500027, -115.15496192) Appendix D-3

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

PP1: Representative photo of NHD flowlines with no (1) bed and bank or OHWM indicators, (2) change in plant species, (3) change in vegetation percent cover, or (4) change in sediment texture, looking north (39.41114032, -115.11537582)

Appendix D-4

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Appendix D-5

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

EC6: Upstream, looking north (39.40295736, -115.0419529)

EC6: Downstream, looking south (39.40295736, -115.0419529)

Appendix D-6

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

PP2: Representative photo of areas where aerial photography was reviewed and there was some evidence of a channel but was field verified to have no (1) bed and bank or OHWM indicators, (2) change in plant species, (3) change in vegetation percent cover, or (4) change in sediment texture, looking north (39.205601, -114.52617)

Appendix D-7

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Appendix D-8

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

EC9: Upstream, looking north (39.34917404, -114.8592728)

EC9: Downstream, looking south (39.34917404, -114.8592728)

Appendix D-9

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

EC13: Downstream, looking northwest

EC13: Upstream, looking east (39.342185974499, -114.803702444624)

(39.203161, -114.481160)

Appendix D-10

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

PP3: Representative photo of NHD flowlines with no (1) bed and bank or OHWM indicators, (2) change in plant species, (3) change in vegetation percent cover, or (4) change in sediment texture, looking north (39.3363647651216, -114.783068017102)

Appendix D-11

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Appendix D-12

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

EC40: Upstream, looking southwest (39.34117297, -114.74054451)

EC40: Downstream, looking northeast (39.34117297, -114.74054451) Appendix D-13

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

W2: Hydrophytic vegetation (Juncus sp. and Carex sp. dominants) in the foreground with upland vegetation (Artemisia arbuscula and Leymus cinereus) in the background, looking north (39.3411041168676, -114.741621347054)

W2: Juncus sp. and Carex sp. dominant throughout the center foreground and center background with upland areas (UP2) to the north and south, small drainage (EC45) flowing west to east, looking east (39.3411041168676, -114.741621347054)

Appendix D-14

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

W2: Upland areas (UP2) primarily in the background with some Juncus sp./wetland areas in the center foreground, looking south (39.3411041168676, -114.741621347054)

W2: Small drainage (EC45) flowing from west to east with Juncus sp./wetland area and upland areas (UP2) in the background which include Artemisia arbuscula and Leymus cinereus as dominants, looking west (39.3411041168676, -114.741621347054)

Appendix D-15

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

W4: Edge of freshwater emergent wetland, looking north with upland Artemisia sp. in the background (39.3455725708073, -114.713269462731) Appendix D-16

W4: Freshwater emergent wetland, looking east (39.3455725708073, -114.713269462731)

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

W4: Freshwater emergent wetland (W4) in foreground. Willow scrub wetland (W5) in background with approximately four inches of surface water present, facing south (39.3455725708073, -114.713269462731)

W4: Freshwater emergent wetland (W4) in foreground and UP6a and UP6b (Salix sp.) in background, no hydric soils or surface water present, facing west (39.3455725708073, -114.713269462731)

Appendix D-17

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

PC1: Duck Creek, looking northeast at dirt road crossing (39.204395, -114.424861)

PC1: Duck Creek and willow scrub wetland (W5), looking southeast (39.204395, -114.424861)

Appendix D-18

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

PC2: Upstream, looking east at dirt road crossing/culvert (39.345536128403, -114.712404883856)

PC2: Downstream, looking west at dirt road crossing/culvert (39.345536128403, -114.712404883856) Appendix D-19

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Appendix E. NRCS Climate Report

WETS Table

WETS Station: ELY AIRPORT, NV Requested years: 1971 - 2021 Month

Avg Max Temp

Avg Min Temp

Avg Mean Temp

Avg Precip

30% chance precip less than

30% chance precip more than

Avg number days precip 0. 10 or more

Avg Snowfall

Jan

40.0

10.9

25.5

0.73

0.40

0.89

9.9

Feb

43.2

15.4

29.3

0.76

0.40

0.92

8.2

Mar

50.6

22.2

36.4

1.03

0.55

1.26

9.8

Apr

58.1

26.8

42.5

1.00

0.52

1.21

5.4

May

67.7

33.5

50.6

1.12

0.49

1.37

2.7

Jun

80.2

41.0

60.6

0.53

0.17

0.58

0.1

Jul

88.1

48.5

68.3

0.66

0.29

0.79

0.0

Aug

85.7

46.8

66.3

0.81

0.29

0.95

0.0

Sep

76.5

38.0

57.3

0.81

0.26

0.97

0.4

Oct

63.4

28.1

45.7

0.91

0.51

1.09

2.5

Nov

49.6

18.6

34.1

0.64

0.35

0.78

6.1

Dec

40.4

11.0

25.7

0.63

0.30

0.76

8.4

8.08

10.88

53.4

Jul

Aug

Annual: Average

62.0

28.4

45.2

Total

9.63

Years with missing data:

24 deg = 1

28 deg = 1

32 deg = 0

Years with no occurrence:

24 deg = 0

28 deg = 0

32 deg = 0

Data years used:

24 deg = 50

28 deg = 50

32 deg = 51

Probability

24 F or higher

28 F or higher

32 F or higher

50 percent *

5/19 to 9/30: 134 days

6/2 to 9/ 18: 108 days

6/16 to 9/6: 82 days

70 percent *

5/14 to 10/6: 145 days

5/28 to 9/23: 118 days

6/11 to 9/11: 92 days

Jan

Feb

Mar

GROWING SEASON DATES

* Percent chance of the growing season occurring between the Beginning and Ending dates. STATS TABLE - total precipitation (inches) Yr 1888

Apr

May

0.69

0.37

Jun

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Annl 1.06

1889 1890 1891 1892 1893

1.30

0.60

2.60

1.50

0.58

0.00

0.30

0.85

0. 00

0. 35

1.06

9.14

1894

0.65

2.50

4.30

0.70

0.80

0.36

1.65

1.15

1. 65

0. 05

0. 00

M3. 15

16. 96

1895

2.10

2.40

1.65

1.85

2.65

0.25

0.27

0.65

0. 35

0. 80

1. 60

0.20

14. 77

1896

0.65

0.20

1.00

2.25

3.55

0.79

1.05

0. 30

0. 70

1. 10

0.23

11. 82

1897

1.20

3.75

2.65

0.75

1.35

0.15

0.80

0.55

0. 04

2. 86

1. 85

1.25

17. 20

1898

1.40

0.20

2.01

1.15

3.50

0.15

0.50

2.85

1.05

15.

1899

2.05

0.80

1.90

0.50

1.95

0.95

0.61

1.50

0. 16

2. 08

0. 50

1.35

14. 35

1900

0.20

0.18

0.43

5.52

0.18

0.01

1.15

0.05

1. 35

0. 79

0. 61

10. 47

1901

1.10

1.40

0.60

1.20

0.85

0.36

2.44

0. 50

1. 53

0. 45

0.72

11. 51

1902

0.91

0.65

2.25

1.00

0.39

0.03

0.31

0.26

0. 86

0. 43

2. 40

1.42

10. 91

1903

0.75

0.40

0.10

1.16

2.18

0.18

1. 10

0. 55

0. 36

1904

0.50

1.99

1.13

0.81

2.23

0.15

0.29

2.53

0. 02

M0.17

3.00

0. 73

0. 12

1. 02

1.00

6.96 9.65

1905 1906 1907

2.50

6.04 2.50

1908

0.23

1.11

0.68

0.90

0.99

1. 08

0. 16

0. 28

0.20

5.63

1909

2.03

0.77

0.89

0.25

0.89

0.16

2.43

2. 46

0. 20

1. 20

1.87

13. 15

1910

1.36

0.78

0.13

0.30

0.07

0.00

0.94

0.97

0. 83

0. 69

0.62

6.69

1911

1.53

2.12

1.45

1912

0.25

0.11

1.96

0.48

0.11

M0.22

0.72

0.00

5.10

0.15

4.00

1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938

M1. 29

0. 42

0.43

2.14

1939

0.83

0.56

0.87

1.57

0.60

0.94

1.42

0.53

1. 47

1. 69

0. 07

0.07

10. 62

1940

0.95

1.12

0.51

1.76

0.07

0.70

0.03

0.05

2. 07

1. 06

0. 19

0.15

8.66

1941

0.35

0.60

0.93

2.63

1.84

1.45

1.55

0.75

0. 19

1. 76

0. 67

0.80

13. 52

1942

0.63

0.27

1.03

0.59

0.69

0.15

0.17

0. 40

0. 61

0.06

4.60

1943

1.00

0.50

0.44

1.58

0.11

1.10

0.17

0.27

0. 35

1. 55

0. 29

0.91

8.27

1944

0.53

0.56

0.99

1.16

0.52

1.15

0. 11

0. 43

1. 60

0.44

7.49

1945

0.23

0.63

2.01

1.31

1.04

2.39

0.43

1.58

1. 03

1. 48

0. 87

0.23

13. 23

1946

0.62

0.08

1.22

0.97

1.21

1.18

0.54

0. 01

1. 46

1. 60

0.67

9.56

1947

0.14

0.28

0.21

1.79

1.17

0.49

0.48

1. 04

0. 81

0. 20

0.30

6.91

1948

0.89

0.87

0.62

0.92

0.26

0. 26

0. 47

0. 10

0.92

5.31

1949

0.78

0.48

0.53

0.36

1.53

0.57

0.63

0.18

0. 36

0. 61

0. 42

0.43

6.88

1950

0.45

0.13

0.88

0.16

0.87

0.04

0.87

0.06

0. 98

0. 63

0. 54

0.42

6.03

1951

0.13

0.08

0.20

0.94

0.48

0.36

1.33

1.05

0. 10

0. 32

0. 76

1.54

7.29

1952

1.92

0.87

2.40

1.77

0.36

0.51

1.51

0.19

0. 03

0. 00

0. 43

0.99

10. 98

1953

0.51

0.14

0.52

0.45

0.49

0.33

1.13

0.74

0. 57

0. 10

0.24

5.22

1954

0.94

0.54

1.37

0.54

0.28

0.19

0.32

0.05

1. 48

0. 47

1. 12

0.59

7.89

1955

1.00

0.76

0.07

0.21

1.74

0.76

0.47

1.21

0. 16

0. 04

0. 66

1.68

8.76

1956

0.99

0.94

0.34

0.63

1.61

0.38

0.18

0. 65

0. 54

0. 04

0.06

6.36

1957

1.01

0.17

1.14

0.53

2.68

0.41

0.66

0.71

0. 02

0. 77

0. 54

0.50

9.14

1958

0.53

1.08

2.25

0.69

0.58

0.35

0.12

0.49

0. 79

0. 53

0.17

7.58

1959

0.17

1.43

0.31

0.46

1.07

0.17

0.16

0.44

0. 99

0. 15

0.62

5.97

1960

0.80

0.70

0.77

0.67

0.79

0.21

0.26

0.19

0. 98

0. 37

1. 82

0.33

7.89

1961

0.15

0.36

1.21

0.80

0.64

0.56

0.64

1.16

0. 41

0. 52

0. 36

0.48

7.29

1962

0.81

1.51

1.09

0.18

1.26

0.45

0.62

0. 10

1. 06

0. 28

7.36

1963

0.11

0.49

0.84

2.12

0.40

3.53

0.01

0.29

2. 18

0. 37

0. 60

0.20

11. 14

1964

1.41

0.07

1.24

2.77

1.17

2.44

0.02

0.58

0. 09

0. 19

0. 93

1.79

12. 70

1965

0.46

0.64

0.46

0.74

0.54

1.25

1.12

1.52

1. 56

0. 27

0. 93

1.28

10. 77

1966

0.23

0.31

0.16

0.46

0.14

0.16

0.61

1. 34

0. 10

0. 30

2.11

6.08

1967

1.86

0.10

0.37

1.38

3.05

2.83

0.84

0.41

2. 23

0. 13

0. 84

0.69

14. 73

1968

0.15

0.92

0.67

1.26

1.00

1.12

1.32

1.04

0. 10

1. 44

0. 22

0.79

10. 03

1969

1.24

2.19

0.41

0.98

0.28

2.80

0.55

0.34

0. 37

0. 91

0. 79

0.59

11. 45

1970

0.11

0.14

0.59

1.55

0.01

1.09

1.81

1.45

0. 45

0. 23

1. 69

1.57

10. 69

1971

0.63

0.57

0.20

1.31

2.89

0.09

0.17

0.25

0. 39

1. 08

0. 59

1.25

9.42

1972

0.17

0.01

0.07

0.88

0.32

0.83

0.17

0.47

1. 82

1. 02

0. 14

0.69

6.59

1973

1.34

0.71

2.17

0.20

0.38

1.14

0.43

2.06

0. 07

0. 88

1. 10

0.75

11. 23

1974

0.41

0.29

0.67

0.18

0.30

0.29

0.02

0. 01

1. 54

0. 23

0.28

4.22

1975

0.74

0.76

1.59

1.20

1.48

0.31

1.04

0.51

0. 55

0. 91

0. 29

0.39

9.77

1976

0.38

1.51

0.77

0.45

0.34

1.57

0.16

0. 66

1. 48

0. 16

8.25

1977

0.39

0.09

0.74

0.17

3.26

0.49

1.59

0. 50

0. 33

0. 24

0.90

9.19

1978

0.64

1.27

2.00

3.41

0.45

0.19

0.23

1. 33

0. 82

1. 42

0.71

12. 47

1979

0.89

0.59

1.07

0.22

1.44

0.15

1.27

0.58

0. 07

0. 76

0. 28

0.07

7.39

1980

1.55

1.08

1.57

0.51

2.55

0.72

0.76

0.35

1. 65

0. 37

0. 55

1.12

12. 78

1981

0.77

0.16

1.32

1.10

2.02

0.15

0.24

0.07

0. 36

3. 67

0. 17

0.26

10. 29

1982

1.06

0.31

2.07

0.72

1.57

0.05

0.58

1.41

4. 99

1. 28

1. 03

0.46

15. 53

1983

1.41

1.33

1.18

1.87

0.38

2.28

0.09

2.51

0. 88

0. 50

0. 96

1.45

14. 84

1984

0.36

0.39

1.09

0.94

0.35

0.63

2.18

2.01

3. 73

1. 41

0. 99

0.76

14. 84

1985

0.49

0.42

1.07

0.17

1.33

0.43

0.58

1. 82

1. 44

1. 55

0.59

9.89

1986

0.29

0.75

1.47

1.32

0.51

0.02

0.09

1.24

1. 42

1. 24

0. 18

0.07

8.60

1987

0.76

0.61

0.91

0.33

2.35

0.15

2.30

1.21

0. 05

1. 43

1. 53

0.67

12. 30

1988

1.22

0.12

0.29

1.62

0.62

0.15

1.41

0. 15

0. 40

1. 24

0.82

8.66

1989

0.35

0.50

0.61

1.36

1.01

0.59

1.25

0. 46

0. 30

0. 15

0.02

6.60

1990

0.59

1.31

0.79

1.14

1.55

0.82

0.32

0.20

0. 64

0. 67

0. 42

0.31

8.76

1991

0.11

0.17

1.70

0.57

2.81

0.35

0.31

0.91

1. 32

0. 98

0. 48

0.27

9.98

1992

0.52

0.68

1.35

0.14

0.53

0.83

1.37

1.70

0. 25

1. 26

0. 25

0.90

9.78

1993

2.08

1.42

1.15

0.24

0.88

1.17

0.32

0.78

0. 15

1. 03

0. 69

0.15

10. 06

1994

0.59

1.09

0.96

1.76

1.03

0.05

0.61

0. 97

0. 46

1. 02

0.68

9.22

1995

1.24

0.70

1.75

1.57

2.85

1.53

0.01

1.38

0. 15

0. 46

0. 01

0.45

12. 10

1996

0.50

1.03

0.92

0.52

1.49

0.06

0.24

0.13

0. 39

0. 71

0. 98

0.33

7.30

1997

1.16

0.78

0.03

1.04

0.66

1.86

0.43

0.47

1. 44

0. 39

1. 11

0.23

9.60

1998

0.44

1.67

1.22

1.26

0.66

1.95

1.28

0.57

0. 98

1. 35

0. 54

0.31

12. 23

1999

0.43

0.38

0.23

0.86

0.58

1.58

0.37

1.46

0. 55

0. 18

0.05

6.67

2000

0.62

1.65

0.62

1.10

1.64

0.29

1.71

0. 37

1. 70

0. 32

0.10

10. 12

2001

0.14

0.44

0.84

1.20

0.04

0.94

0.78

0. 43

0. 46

0. 98

0.64

6.89

2002

0.46

0.62

0.26

0.68

0.02

0.06

0.26

0.02

0. 42

0. 91

0. 67

0.14

4.52

2003

0.22

0.47

0.41

1.74

1.80

0.10

0.49

1.19

0. 11

0. 07

0. 75

1.19

8.54

2004

0.01

0.83

0.28

1.00

0.44

0.77

0.71

0.78

0. 38

2. 32

0. 94

0.54

9.00

2005

1.08

1.03

1.29

1.97

2.45

0.19

0.24

1.75

0. 72

0. 79

0. 82

0.65

12. 98

2006

0.72

0.93

1.71

1.10

0.39

0.47

1.80

0.04

0. 41

1. 06

0. 26

0.30

9.19

2007

0.21

1.41

0.64

0.63

0.34

0.70

0.59

0. 59

0. 63

0.68

6.76

2008

0.68

0.60

0.14

0.01

0.44

0.33

0.94

0.38

0. 35

0. 16

1. 17

0.30

5.50

2009

1.49

0.54

0.65

1.18

0.33

1.78

0.92

0.33

0. 33

1. 44

1.05

10. 04

2010

0.81

0.20

0.73

0.72

1.37

0.15

0.69

0.13

0. 01

1. 32

1. 65

3.33

11. 11

2011

0.27

1.13

1.02

2.07

2.67

0.20

1.50

0.07

1. 33

1. 16

0. 36

0.22

12. 00

2012

0.67

1.22

0.84

1.03

0.08

0.04

1.17

2.88

1. 21

0. 91

0. 47

1.72

12. 24

2013

0.80

0.65

0.25

0.86

0.55

0.25

0.79

1. 71

0. 82

0. 87

0.99

8.54

2014

0.79

0.94

0.42

1.06

0.96

0.18

0.43

2.48

0. 83

0. 44

0.73

9.26

2015

0.31

0.21

0.36

0.67

1.78

0.46

0.66

0.54

0. 51

2. 06

1. 09

1.21

9.86

2016

2.11

0.55

1.56

1.69

0.53

1.56

0.17

0.33

0. 70

0. 11

0. 50

1.17

10. 98

2017

1.52

1.73

1.61

1.03

0.28

0.02

0.86

0.33

1. 72

0. 04

0. 36

0.18

9.68

2018

1.14

0.16

1.47

0.33

1.10

0.01

1.14

0.23

0. 01

1. 40

0. 45

0.39

7.83

2019

0.89

1.76

3.35

2.79

2.55

0.22

0.42

0.08

0. 80

1. 09

0.60

14. 55

2020

0.42

0.14

1.67

1.28

0.14

0.23

0.10

0.05

0. 04

0. 00

0. 54

0.39

5.00

2021

0.43

0.72

1.54

0.77

0.27

0.12

1.25

M0.12

Notes: Data missing in any month have an "M" flag. A "T" indicates a trace of precipitation. Data missing for all days in a month or year is blank. Creation date: 2021-08-30

5.22

Rainfall (Inches)

Antecedent Precipitation vs Normal Range based on NOAA's Daily Global Historical Climatology Network

Daily Total 30-Day Rolling Total 30-Year Normal Range

Survey Area West Terminus 2.0

1.5

1.0

2021-04-29 2021-05-29 0.5

0.0

Dec 2020 Coordinates Observation Date Elevation (ft) Drought Index (PDSI) WebWIMP H2O Balance

Jan 2021

Feb 2021 39.360026, -115.171559 2021-06-28 6626.04 Extreme drought Dry Season

Mar 2021

Apr 2021 30 Days Ending 2021-06-28 2021-05-29 2021-04-29 Result

May 2021 30th %ile (in) 0.225984 0.536614 0.762992

Weather Station Name MOORMAN RCH - RUTH 16WNW RUTH ELY YELLAND FLD AP

Jun 2021 70th %ile (in) 1.123228 1.75315 1.559843

2021-06-28

Jul 2021

Aug 2021

Sep 2021

Observed (in) Wetness Condition Condition Value Month Weight 0.389764 Normal 2 3 0.488189 Dry 1 2 0.5 Dry 1 1

Coordinates 39.3583, -115.3297 39.2764, -114.9911 39.2953, -114.8467

Oct 2021

Nov 2021 Product 6 2 1 Drier than Normal - 9

Elevation (ft) Distance (mi) Elevation Weighted Days (Normal) Days (Antecedent) 6539.042 8.449 86.998 4.537 6640 90 6857.94 11.244 231.9 7.667 4131 0 6262.139 17.929 363.901 14.593 582 0

Rainfall (Inches)

Antecedent Precipitation vs Normal Range based on NOAA's Daily Global Historical Climatology Network

Daily Total 30-Day Rolling Total 30-Year Normal Range

Survey Area West Terminus 2.0

1.5

1.0

2021-04-30 2021-05-30 0.5

0.0

Dec 2020 Coordinates Observation Date Elevation (ft) Drought Index (PDSI) WebWIMP H2O Balance

Jan 2021

Feb 2021 39.360026, -115.171559 2021-06-29 6626.04 Extreme drought Dry Season

Mar 2021

Apr 2021 30 Days Ending 2021-06-29 2021-05-30 2021-04-30 Result

May 2021 30th %ile (in) 0.211417 0.566929 0.776772

Weather Station Name MOORMAN RCH - RUTH 16WNW RUTH ELY YELLAND FLD AP

Jun 2021 70th %ile (in) 0.92874 1.926772 1.516535

2021-06-29

Jul 2021

Aug 2021

Sep 2021

Observed (in) Wetness Condition Condition Value Month Weight 0.389764 Normal 2 3 0.488189 Dry 1 2 0.5 Dry 1 1

Coordinates 39.3583, -115.3297 39.2764, -114.9911 39.2953, -114.8467

Oct 2021

Nov 2021 Product 6 2 1 Drier than Normal - 9

Elevation (ft) Distance (mi) Elevation Weighted Days (Normal) Days (Antecedent) 6539.042 8.449 86.998 4.537 6640 90 6857.94 11.244 231.9 7.667 4131 0 6262.139 17.929 363.901 14.592 582 0

Rainfall (Inches)

Antecedent Precipitation vs Normal Range based on NOAA's Daily Global Historical Climatology Network

Daily Total 30-Day Rolling Total 30-Year Normal Range

Survey Area West Terminus 2.0

1.5

1.0

2021-05-01 2021-05-31 0.5

0.0

Dec 2020 Coordinates Observation Date Elevation (ft) Drought Index (PDSI) WebWIMP H2O Balance

Jan 2021

Feb 2021 39.360026, -115.171559 2021-06-30 6626.04 Extreme drought Dry Season

Mar 2021

Apr 2021 30 Days Ending 2021-06-30 2021-05-31 2021-05-01 Result

May 2021 30th %ile (in) 0.211417 0.566929 0.776772

Weather Station Name MOORMAN RCH - RUTH 16WNW RUTH ELY YELLAND FLD AP

Jun 2021 70th %ile (in) 0.92874 1.926772 1.516535

2021-06-30

Jul 2021

Aug 2021

Sep 2021

Observed (in) Wetness Condition Condition Value Month Weight 0.389764 Normal 2 3 0.488189 Dry 1 2 0.5 Dry 1 1

Coordinates 39.3583, -115.3297 39.2764, -114.9911 39.2953, -114.8467

Oct 2021

Nov 2021 Product 6 2 1 Drier than Normal - 9

Elevation (ft) Distance (mi) Elevation Weighted Days (Normal) Days (Antecedent) 6539.042 8.449 86.998 4.537 6640 90 6857.94 11.244 231.9 7.667 4131 0 6262.139 17.929 363.901 14.592 582 0

Rainfall (Inches)

Antecedent Precipitation vs Normal Range based on NOAA's Daily Global Historical Climatology Network

Daily Total 30-Day Rolling Total 30-Year Normal Range

Survey Area West Terminus 2.0

1.5

2021-07-01 1.0

2021-05-02 2021-06-01 0.5

0.0

Dec 2020 Coordinates Observation Date Elevation (ft) Drought Index (PDSI) WebWIMP H2O Balance

Jan 2021

Feb 2021 39.360026, -115.171559 2021-07-01 6626.04 Extreme drought Dry Season

Mar 2021

Apr 2021 30 Days Ending 2021-07-01 2021-06-01 2021-05-02 Result

May 2021 30th %ile (in) 0.188583 0.556299 0.680315

Weather Station Name MOORMAN RCH - RUTH 16WNW RUTH ELY YELLAND FLD AP

Jun 2021 70th %ile (in) 0.724803 1.926772 1.516535

Jul 2021

Aug 2021

Sep 2021

Observed (in) Wetness Condition Condition Value Month Weight 1.07874 Wet 3 3 0.488189 Dry 1 2 0.5 Dry 1 1

Coordinates 39.3583, -115.3297 39.2764, -114.9911 39.2953, -114.8467

Oct 2021

Nov 2021

Product 9 2 1 Normal Conditions - 12

Elevation (ft) Distance (mi) Elevation Weighted Days (Normal) Days (Antecedent) 6539.042 8.449 86.998 4.537 6640 90 6857.94 11.244 231.9 7.667 4131 0 6262.139 17.929 363.901 14.592 582 0

Antecedent Precipitation vs Normal Range based on NOAA's Daily Global Historical Climatology Network

Daily Total 30-Day Rolling Total 30-Year Normal Range

Survey Area East Terminus

Rainfall (Inches)

2021-04-29

2021-05-29

2021-06-28 0

Dec 2020 Coordinates Observation Date Elevation (ft) Drought Index (PDSI) WebWIMP H2O Balance

Jan 2021

Feb 2021 39.348411, -114.707184 2021-06-28 7511.96 Extreme drought Dry Season

Mar 2021

Apr 2021 30 Days Ending 2021-06-28 2021-05-29 2021-04-29 Result

May 2021 30th %ile (in) 0.469291 1.497638 2.934646

Weather Station Name Berry Creek

Jun 2021 70th %ile (in) 1.757087 3.283071 4.121654

Jul 2021

Aug 2021

Sep 2021

Observed (in) Wetness Condition Condition Value Month Weight 0.098425 Dry 1 3 0.700787 Dry 1 2 1.795276 Dry 1 1

Coordinates 39.32, -114.62

Oct 2021

Nov 2021 Product 3 2 1 Drier than Normal - 6

Elevation (ft) Distance (mi) Elevation Weighted Days (Normal) Days (Antecedent) 9100.066 5.056 1588.106 10.304 11353 90

Antecedent Precipitation vs Normal Range based on NOAA's Daily Global Historical Climatology Network

Daily Total 30-Day Rolling Total 30-Year Normal Range

Survey Area East Terminus

Rainfall (Inches)

2021-04-30

2021-05-30

2021-06-29 0

Dec 2020 Coordinates Observation Date Elevation (ft) Drought Index (PDSI) WebWIMP H2O Balance

Jan 2021

Feb 2021 39.348411, -114.707184 2021-06-29 7511.96 Extreme drought Dry Season

Mar 2021

Apr 2021 30 Days Ending 2021-06-29 2021-05-30 2021-04-30 Result

May 2021 30th %ile (in) 0.469291 1.497638 2.934646

Weather Station Name Berry Creek

Jun 2021 70th %ile (in) 1.758268 3.208662 4.121654

Jul 2021

Aug 2021

Sep 2021

Observed (in) Wetness Condition Condition Value Month Weight 0.098425 Dry 1 3 0.700787 Dry 1 2 1.795276 Dry 1 1

Coordinates 39.32, -114.62

Oct 2021

Nov 2021 Product 3 2 1 Drier than Normal - 6

Elevation (ft) Distance (mi) Elevation Weighted Days (Normal) Days (Antecedent) 9100.066 5.056 1588.106 10.305 11353 90

Antecedent Precipitation vs Normal Range based on NOAA's Daily Global Historical Climatology Network

Daily Total 30-Day Rolling Total 30-Year Normal Range

Survey Area East Terminus

Rainfall (Inches)

2021-05-01

2021-05-31

Dec 2020 Coordinates Observation Date Elevation (ft) Drought Index (PDSI) WebWIMP H2O Balance

Jan 2021

Feb 2021 39.348411, -114.707184 2021-06-30 7511.96 Extreme drought Dry Season

Mar 2021

Apr 2021 30 Days Ending 2021-06-30 2021-05-31 2021-05-01 Result

May 2021 30th %ile (in) 0.36811 1.563386 3.000787

Weather Station Name Berry Creek

Jun 2021 70th %ile (in) 1.627953 3.244488 4.023228

2021-06-30

Jul 2021

Aug 2021

Sep 2021

Observed (in) Wetness Condition Condition Value Month Weight 0.5 Normal 2 3 0.700787 Dry 1 2 1.795276 Dry 1 1

Coordinates 39.32, -114.62

Oct 2021

Nov 2021 Product 6 2 1 Drier than Normal - 9

Elevation (ft) Distance (mi) Elevation Weighted Days (Normal) Days (Antecedent) 9100.066 5.056 1588.106 10.305 11353 90

Antecedent Precipitation vs Normal Range based on NOAA's Daily Global Historical Climatology Network

Daily Total 30-Day Rolling Total 30-Year Normal Range

Survey Area East Terminus

Rainfall (Inches)

2021-05-02

2021-06-01

Dec 2020 Coordinates Observation Date Elevation (ft) Drought Index (PDSI) WebWIMP H2O Balance

Jan 2021

Feb 2021 39.348411, -114.707184 2021-07-01 7511.96 Extreme drought Dry Season

Mar 2021

Apr 2021 30 Days Ending 2021-07-01 2021-06-01 2021-05-02 Result

May 2021 30th %ile (in) 0.268504 1.46378 2.771654

Weather Station Name Berry Creek

Jun 2021 70th %ile (in) 1.589764 3.385039 4.087795

2021-07-01

Jul 2021

Aug 2021

Sep 2021

Observed (in) Wetness Condition Condition Value Month Weight 0.5 Normal 2 3 0.700787 Dry 1 2 1.795276 Dry 1 1

Coordinates 39.32, -114.62

Oct 2021

Nov 2021 Product 6 2 1 Drier than Normal - 9

Elevation (ft) Distance (mi) Elevation Weighted Days (Normal) Days (Antecedent) 9100.066 5.056 1588.106 10.305 11353 90

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Appendix F. NRCS Soil Report

United States Department of Agriculture

Natural Resources Conservation Service

A product of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local participants

Custom Soil Resource Report for Western White Pine County Area, Nevada, Parts of White Pine and Eureka Counties

December 13, 2022

Preface Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require

alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

Contents Preface.................................................................................................................... 2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................6 Soil Map.................................................................................................................. 9 Soil Map..............................................................................................................10 Legend................................................................................................................11 Map Unit Legend................................................................................................ 12 Map Unit Descriptions........................................................................................ 13 Western White Pine County Area, Nevada, Parts of White Pine and Eureka Counties....................................................................................... 15 53—Palinor-Urmafot association.................................................................15 100—Pookaloo-Cavehill-Rock outcrop association.................................... 18 108—Pookaloo-Tecomar-Rock outcrop association MLRA 28B................. 21 109—Hyzen-Cavehill association................................................................24 111—Zimbob-Hyzen-Rock outcrop association...........................................26 189—Pyrat-Linoyer association.................................................................. 29 201—Mijoysee-Pookaloo-Tecomar association.......................................... 30 226—Hutchley-Tusel-Suak association.......................................................34 233—Linoyer silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes............................................. 37 282—Palinor very gravelly loam, 2 to 15 percent slopes............................ 38 286—Palinor-Shabliss association..............................................................40 297—Urmafot-Amelar-Izar association....................................................... 42 351—Heist-Tulase association....................................................................45 455—Shabliss-Tulase-Linoyer association................................................. 47 481—Douhide-Segura-Cropper association............................................... 50 531—Duffer-Uwell association.................................................................... 53 567—McIvey-Birchcreek-Hutchley association........................................... 55 690—Devilsgait-Cassiro association...........................................................57 710—Raph loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes...................................................... 59 752—Upatad-Atlow-Douhide association....................................................60 760—Segura-Upatad-Cropper association................................................. 63 763—Segura-Douhide-McIvey association................................................. 65 800—Broland association........................................................................... 68 801—Broland very gravelly loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes............................. 70 810—Yody-Fax association.........................................................................72 911—Devilsgait-Duffer-Kunzler association................................................ 74 977—Zimbob-Pookaloo association............................................................77 991—Blimo-Zerk association...................................................................... 80 1230—Garfan-McIvey-Hutchley association............................................... 81 1392—Chen-McIvey-Birchcreek association.............................................. 84 1451—Birchcreek-Segura-Chen association.............................................. 87 1520—Fax-Yody-Broland association......................................................... 89 3262—Grandeposit-Majorsplace-Grube association.................................. 92 Soil Information for All Uses...............................................................................96 Suitabilities and Limitations for Use....................................................................96

Custom Soil Resource Report Land Classifications........................................................................................ 96 Hydric Rating by Map Unit...........................................................................96 Ecological Sites................................................................................................ 102 All Ecological Sites — .................................................................................. 102 Map—Dominant Ecological Site................................................................103 Legend—Dominant Ecological Site...........................................................104 Table—Ecological Sites by Map Unit Component..................................... 106 References.......................................................................................................... 117

How Soil Surveys Are Made Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity. Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA. The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape. Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries. Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil

Custom Soil Resource Report scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research. The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape. Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties. While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil. Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and

Custom Soil Resource Report identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.

Soil Map The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.

655000

660000

665000

670000

675000

680000

114° 39' 58'' W

685000

690000

695000

700000

39° 29' 41'' N

4344000

4349000

4354000

4359000

4364000

4369000

39° 29' 41'' N

4374000

115° 13' 1'' W

Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map

39° 13' 2'' N

660000

665000

670000

675000

680000

Map Scale: 1:217,000 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet.

Meters 18000 Feet 0 10000 20000 40000 60000 Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 11N WGS84 0

3000

6000

685000

690000

695000

700000 114° 39' 58'' W

115° 13' 1'' W

655000

12000

39° 13' 2'' N

Custom Soil Resource Report

MAP LEGEND Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features Blowout Borrow Pit Clay Spot Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp

MAP INFORMATION The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000.

Spoil Area Stony Spot

Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements.

Very Stony Spot Wet Spot

Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)

Other Special Line Features Water Features

Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required.

Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes

This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below.

Major Roads Local Roads

Soil Survey Area: Western White Pine County Area, Nevada, Parts of White Pine and Eureka Counties Survey Area Data: Version 16, Sep 8, 2022

Background Aerial Photography

Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger.

Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water

Date(s) aerial images were photographed: 2003

Perennial Water Rock Outcrop Saline Spot

Jan 1, 1999—Dec 31,

The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.

Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot

Custom Soil Resource Report

Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol

Map Unit Name

Acres in AOI

Percent of AOI

Palinor-Urmafot association

328.5

24.5%

100

Pookaloo-Cavehill-Rock outcrop association

113.7

8.5%

108

Pookaloo-Tecomar-Rock outcrop association MLRA 28B

21.3

1.6%

109

Hyzen-Cavehill association

2.8

0.2%

111

Zimbob-Hyzen-Rock outcrop association

26.3

2.0%

189

Pyrat-Linoyer association

16.9

1.3%

201

Mijoysee-Pookaloo-Tecomar association

1.4

0.1%

226

Hutchley-Tusel-Suak association

132.8

9.9%

233

Linoyer silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes

5.8

0.4%

282

Palinor very gravelly loam, 2 to 15 percent slopes

3.2

0.2%

286

Palinor-Shabliss association

61.5

4.6%

297

Urmafot-Amelar-Izar association

10.7

0.8%

351

Heist-Tulase association

1.9

0.1%

455

Shabliss-Tulase-Linoyer association

4.1

0.3%

481

Douhide-Segura-Cropper association

13.9

1.0%

531

Duffer-Uwell association

1.1

0.1%

567

McIvey-Birchcreek-Hutchley association

0.8

0.1%

690

Devilsgait-Cassiro association

9.3

0.7%

710

Raph loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes

6.3

0.5%

752

Upatad-Atlow-Douhide association

39.6

3.0%

760

Segura-Upatad-Cropper association

49.8

3.7%

763

Segura-Douhide-McIvey association

41.0

3.1%

800

Broland association

76.4

5.7%

801

Broland very gravelly loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes

0.2

0.0%

810

Yody-Fax association

137.9

10.3%

Custom Soil Resource Report

Map Unit Symbol

Map Unit Name

Acres in AOI

Percent of AOI

911

Devilsgait-Duffer-Kunzler association

6.7

0.5%

977

Zimbob-Pookaloo association

4.4

0.3%

991

Blimo-Zerk association

54.7

4.1%

1230

Garfan-McIvey-Hutchley association

16.8

1.3%

1392

Chen-McIvey-Birchcreek association

14.8

1.1%

1451

Birchcreek-Segura-Chen association

56.8

4.2%

1520

Fax-Yody-Broland association

31.4

2.3%

3262

Grandeposit-MajorsplaceGrube association

38.7

2.9%

1,338.2

100.0%

Totals for Area of Interest

Map Unit Descriptions The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape.

Custom Soil Resource Report The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.

Custom Soil Resource Report

Western White Pine County Area, Nevada, Parts of White Pine and Eureka Counties 53—Palinor-Urmafot association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2t6h6 Elevation: 5,200 to 7,300 feet Mean annual precipitation: 8 to 14 inches Mean annual air temperature: 45 to 48 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 120 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Palinor and similar soils: 65 percent Urmafot and similar soils: 20 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Palinor Setting Landform: Fan remnants Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Loess over alluvium derived from limestone and dolomite Typical profile A - 0 to 3 inches: very gravelly loam Bw - 3 to 10 inches: very gravelly loam Bk - 10 to 18 inches: extremely gravelly loam Bkqm - 18 to 30 inches: cemented material 2Ckq - 30 to 46 inches: very gravelly loamy sand 2Ck - 46 to 60 inches: very gravelly loamy sand Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 14 to 20 inches to duripan Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 45 percent Maximum salinity: Very slightly saline to slightly saline (2.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 12.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s

Custom Soil Resource Report Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY011NV - SHALLOW CALCAREOUS LOAM 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Urmafot Setting Landform: Fan remnants Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Alluvium derived from sedimentary rock Typical profile A - 0 to 8 inches: very gravelly loam Bk - 8 to 14 inches: gravelly loam 2Bqkm - 14 to 32 inches: cemented material 3Bqk - 32 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly coarse sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 9 to 20 inches to duripan Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 40 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY006NV - SHALLOW CALCAREOUS LOAM 10-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Shabliss Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Fan remnants Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY010NV - LOAMY 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Izar Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Pediments Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Down-slope shape: Convex

Custom Soil Resource Report Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY011NV - SHALLOW CALCAREOUS LOAM 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Tulase Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Inset fans Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R028BY045NV - LOAMY FAN 8-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Rock outcrop Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Fan remnants Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Hydric soil rating: No Palinor, very shallow Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Fan remnants Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY040NV - BARREN FAN 8-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Pookaloo Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Lower third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: F028BY060NV - PIMO-JUOS/ARNO4/PSSPS-ACHY Hydric soil rating: No Automal Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Fan remnants Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R028BY011NV - SHALLOW CALCAREOUS LOAM 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No

Custom Soil Resource Report

100—Pookaloo-Cavehill-Rock outcrop association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2t6gm Elevation: 5,900 to 9,450 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 22 inches Mean annual air temperature: 36 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 30 to 120 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Pookaloo and similar soils: 40 percent Cavehill and similar soils: 35 percent Rock outcrop: 15 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Pookaloo Setting Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Lower third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Colluvium over residuum weathered from limestone and dolomite Typical profile A - 0 to 4 inches: very gravelly loam Bk1 - 4 to 9 inches: very gravelly loam Bk2 - 9 to 19 inches: very gravelly loam R - 19 to 60 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 14 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 50 percent Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s

Custom Soil Resource Report Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: F028BY060NV - PIMO-JUOS/ARNO4/PSSPS-ACHY Hydric soil rating: No Description of Cavehill Setting Landform: Mountains Landform position (three-dimensional): Upper third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Loess over colluvium derived from limestone and dolomite and/or colluvium derived from sandstone over residuum weathered from limestone and dolomite Typical profile A - 0 to 18 inches: very gravelly silt loam Bk - 18 to 29 inches: very gravelly loam R - 29 to 60 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 5.0 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 39 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 50 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 3.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: F028BY062NV - PIMO-JUOS/ARTRV/PSSPS-ACTH7 Hydric soil rating: No Description of Rock Outcrop Setting Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Minor Components Tecomar, very shallow Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (three-dimensional): Upper third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex

Custom Soil Resource Report Ecological site: R028BY090NV - SHALLOW CALCAREOUS HILL 14+ P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Tecomar Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Center third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY008NV - SHALLOW CALCAREOUS SLOPE 10-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Cavehill, cool Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (three-dimensional): Center third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: F028BY058NV - PIMO-CELE3/ARTRV/PSSPS-POFE Hydric soil rating: No Grink Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (three-dimensional): Center third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY043NV - CALCAREOUS MAHOGANY SAVANNA Hydric soil rating: No Onkeyo Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountaintop Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY079NV - SHALLOW LOAM 10-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Xine Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY088NV - CALCAREOUS LOAM 14-16 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Haunchee Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional): Upper third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear

Custom Soil Resource Report Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY032NV - STONY MAHOGANY SAVANNA Hydric soil rating: No

108—Pookaloo-Tecomar-Rock outcrop association MLRA 28B Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2t6gk Elevation: 5,240 to 8,790 feet Mean annual precipitation: 8 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 36 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 30 to 120 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Pookaloo and similar soils: 40 percent Tecomar and similar soils: 30 percent Rock outcrop: 15 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Pookaloo Setting Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Lower third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Colluvium over residuum weathered from limestone and dolomite Typical profile A - 0 to 4 inches: very gravelly loam Bk1 - 4 to 9 inches: very gravelly loam Bk2 - 9 to 19 inches: very gravelly loam R - 19 to 60 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 14 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 50 percent

Custom Soil Resource Report Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: F028BY060NV - PIMO-JUOS/ARNO4/PSSPS-ACHY Hydric soil rating: No Description of Tecomar Setting Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Center third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Colluvium derived from limestone and dolomite over residuum weathered from limestone and dolomite Typical profile A - 0 to 2 inches: extremely stony silt loam Bk - 2 to 19 inches: extremely cobbly silt loam R - 19 to 60 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 50 percent Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 10.0 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 10 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 40 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 5.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 0.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY008NV - SHALLOW CALCAREOUS SLOPE 10-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Rock Outcrop Setting Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex

Custom Soil Resource Report

Minor Components Mijoysee Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Mountain slopes Landform position (three-dimensional): Upper third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R028BY066NV - LIMESTONE HILL Hydric soil rating: No Onkeyo Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountaintop Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY079NV - SHALLOW LOAM 10-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Halacan Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional): Upper third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY038NV - MOUNTAIN RIDGE 14+ P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Xine Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Upper third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY088NV - CALCAREOUS LOAM 14-16 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Zimbob, very shallow Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Lower third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY059NV - SHALLOW CALCAREOUS HILL 8-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No

Custom Soil Resource Report

109—Hyzen-Cavehill association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: j3mw Elevation: 7,000 to 8,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 43 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 65 to 95 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Hyzen and similar soils: 40 percent Cavehill and similar soils: 30 percent Hyzen and similar soils: 20 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Hyzen Setting Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Typical profile H1 - 0 to 2 inches: extremely stony loam H2 - 2 to 12 inches: extremely stony loam R - 12 to 22 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 23.0 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 6 to 14 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 50 percent Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 0.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D

Custom Soil Resource Report Ecological site: F028BY060NV - PIMO-JUOS/ARNO4/PSSPS-ACHY Hydric soil rating: No Description of Cavehill Setting Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Loess over colluvium derived from limestone and dolomite and/or colluvium derived from sandstone over residuum weathered from limestone and dolomite Typical profile H1 - 0 to 15 inches: very gravelly silt loam H2 - 15 to 27 inches: very gravelly loam R - 27 to 37 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 39 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 50 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 3.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: F028BY062NV - PIMO-JUOS/ARTRV/PSSPS-ACTH7 Hydric soil rating: No Description of Hyzen Setting Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Typical profile H1 - 0 to 2 inches: extremely stony loam H2 - 2 to 12 inches: extremely stony loam R - 12 to 22 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 23.0 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 6 to 14 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high

Custom Soil Resource Report Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 50 percent Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 0.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY066NV - LIMESTONE HILL Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Unnamed Percent of map unit: 10 percent

111—Zimbob-Hyzen-Rock outcrop association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2wbks Elevation: 5,800 to 8,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 8 to 16 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 48 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 120 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Zimbob and similar soils: 40 percent Hyzen and similar soils: 30 percent Rock outcrop: 15 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Zimbob Setting Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Lower third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Colluvium derived from limestone and dolomite over residuum weathered from limestone and dolomite

Custom Soil Resource Report

Typical profile A - 0 to 1 inches: extremely gravelly loam Bk - 1 to 12 inches: very gravelly loam R - 12 to 60 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 4 to 14 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 55 percent Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 5.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY016NV - SHALLOW CALCAREOUS SLOPE 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Hyzen Setting Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Upper third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Colluvium derived from limestone and dolomite over residuum weathered from limestone and dolomite Typical profile A - 0 to 2 inches: extremely stony loam ABk - 2 to 12 inches: extremely stony loam R - 12 to 60 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 20.0 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 6 to 14 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 60 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 1.0

Custom Soil Resource Report Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 0.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY066NV - LIMESTONE HILL Hydric soil rating: No Description of Rock Outcrop Setting Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8s Minor Components Zimbob, very shallow Percent of map unit: 9 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Lower third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY059NV - SHALLOW CALCAREOUS HILL 8-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Tulase Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Inset fans Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R028BY010NV - LOAMY 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Urmafot Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Fan remnants Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY006NV - SHALLOW CALCAREOUS LOAM 10-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No

Custom Soil Resource Report

189—Pyrat-Linoyer association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: j3tq Elevation: 5,900 to 6,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 9 to 11 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 105 to 130 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance, if irrigated Map Unit Composition Pyrat and similar soils: 70 percent Linoyer and similar soils: 20 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Pyrat Setting Landform: Fan skirts Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Typical profile H1 - 0 to 6 inches: gravelly sandy loam H2 - 6 to 17 inches: very gravelly sandy loam H3 - 17 to 27 inches: very gravelly loam H4 - 27 to 39 inches: very gravelly sandy loam H5 - 39 to 60 inches: stratified extremely gravelly loamy sand to very gravelly coarse sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Medium Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 25 percent Maximum salinity: Very slightly saline to slightly saline (2.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 3.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified

Custom Soil Resource Report Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: R028BY010NV - LOAMY 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Linoyer Setting Landform: Inset fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Typical profile H1 - 0 to 4 inches: very fine sandy loam H2 - 4 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: Rare Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 30 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 10.1 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: R028BY013NV - SILTY 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Unnamed Percent of map unit: 10 percent

201—Mijoysee-Pookaloo-Tecomar association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: j3tw Elevation: 7,000 to 7,800 feet Mean annual precipitation: 8 to 16 inches Mean annual air temperature: 43 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 115 days

Custom Soil Resource Report Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Mijoysee and similar soils: 45 percent Pookaloo and similar soils: 25 percent Tecomar and similar soils: 15 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Mijoysee Setting Landform: Mountain slopes Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Colluvium over residuum weathered from limestone and dolomite Typical profile A - 0 to 3 inches: extremely gravelly sandy loam Bk - 3 to 6 inches: extremely gravelly sandy loam R - 6 to 16 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 5.0 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 4 to 8 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.14 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 50 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 3.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 0.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY066NV - LIMESTONE HILL Hydric soil rating: No Description of Pookaloo Setting Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Colluvium over residuum weathered from limestone and dolomite and/or calcareous siltstone Typical profile H1 - 0 to 4 inches: very gravelly loam

Custom Soil Resource Report H2 - 4 to 19 inches: very gravelly silt loam R - 19 to 29 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 14 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 50 percent Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 2.1 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: F028BY060NV - PIMO-JUOS/ARNO4/PSSPS-ACHY Hydric soil rating: No Description of Tecomar Setting Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Colluvium derived from limestone and dolomite over residuum weathered from limestone and dolomite Typical profile H1 - 0 to 2 inches: extremely gravelly silt loam H2 - 2 to 19 inches: extremely cobbly silt loam R - 19 to 29 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 10 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 40 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 5.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D

Custom Soil Resource Report Ecological site: R028BY008NV - SHALLOW CALCAREOUS SLOPE 10-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Rock outcrop Percent of map unit: 8 percent Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Hydric soil rating: No Zimbob Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY016NV - SHALLOW CALCAREOUS SLOPE 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Eganroc Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: F028BY049NV - Rocky Convex Mountain Slopes Hydric soil rating: No Pyrat Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Mountain valleys Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY010NV - LOAMY 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Cavehill Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank, side slope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: F028BY062NV - PIMO-JUOS/ARTRV/PSSPS-ACTH7 Hydric soil rating: No Tulase Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Inset fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R028BY045NV - LOAMY FAN 8-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No

Custom Soil Resource Report

226—Hutchley-Tusel-Suak association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: j3v9 Elevation: 7,000 to 9,120 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 20 inches Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 30 to 100 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Hutchley and similar soils: 35 percent Suak and similar soils: 25 percent Tusel and similar soils: 25 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Hutchley Setting Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Concave Parent material: Colluvium derived from mixed over residuum weathered from mixed Typical profile H1 - 0 to 3 inches: very gravelly loam H2 - 3 to 12 inches: very gravelly clay loam R - 12 to 22 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 10 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified

Custom Soil Resource Report Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY034NV - MOUNTAIN RIDGE 12-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Suak Setting Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Colluvium derived from sedimentary rock over residuum weathered from sedimentary rock Typical profile H1 - 0 to 6 inches: very stony loam H2 - 6 to 25 inches: extremely cobbly loam R - 25 to 35 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 30 percent Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 10.0 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 39 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R028BY032NV - STONY MAHOGANY SAVANNA Hydric soil rating: No Description of Tusel Setting Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Concave Parent material: Superficial deposits of volcanic ash over colluvium over residuum weathered from mixed Typical profile H1 - 0 to 13 inches: cobbly ashy loam H2 - 13 to 42 inches: extremely gravelly clay loam R - 42 to 52 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 39 to 60 inches to lithic bedrock 35

Custom Soil Resource Report Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 4.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R028BY029NV - LOAMY 16+ P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Bullump Percent of map unit: 6 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY030NV - LOAMY 12-16 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Cleavage Percent of map unit: 6 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit Landform position (three-dimensional): Upper third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY038NV - MOUNTAIN RIDGE 14+ P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Rock outcrop Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, backslope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Hydric soil rating: No Devilsgait Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Flood plains Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R028BY095NV - DRY MEADOW 12-16 P.Z. Other vegetative classification: WILLOW RIPARIAN (010XY030OR) Hydric soil rating: Yes

Custom Soil Resource Report

233—Linoyer silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: j3vf Elevation: 5,800 to 6,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 9 to 11 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 110 to 130 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Linoyer and similar soils: 100 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Linoyer Setting Landform: Inset fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Typical profile H1 - 0 to 4 inches: very fine sandy loam H2 - 4 to 45 inches: silt loam H3 - 45 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly loamy sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 30 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 6.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6c Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: R028BY013NV - SILTY 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No

Custom Soil Resource Report

282—Palinor very gravelly loam, 2 to 15 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2t6gw Elevation: 5,200 to 7,370 feet Mean annual precipitation: 8 to 12 inches Mean annual air temperature: 45 to 52 degrees F Frost-free period: 100 to 150 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Palinor and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Palinor Setting Landform: Fan remnants Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Loess over alluvium derived from limestone and dolomite Typical profile A - 0 to 3 inches: very gravelly loam Bw - 3 to 10 inches: very gravelly loam Bk - 10 to 18 inches: extremely gravelly fine sandy loam Bkqm - 18 to 30 inches: cemented material 2Ckq - 30 to 46 inches: extremely gravelly sandy loam 2Ck - 46 to 60 inches: very gravelly sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 14 to 20 inches to duripan Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 45 percent Maximum salinity: Very slightly saline to slightly saline (2.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 12.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s

Custom Soil Resource Report Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY011NV - SHALLOW CALCAREOUS LOAM 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Shabliss Percent of map unit: 6 percent Landform: Fan remnants Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY080NV - SHALLOW LOAM 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Okan Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Drainageways Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY052NV - DROUGHTY LOAM 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Linoyer Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Inset fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R028BY013NV - SILTY 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Okan Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Drainageways Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY010NV - LOAMY 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Biken Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Nose slope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY059NV - SHALLOW CALCAREOUS HILL 8-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Heist Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Fan skirts Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY084NV - COARSE SILTY 6-8 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No

Custom Soil Resource Report

Automal Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Fan remnants Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY011NV - SHALLOW CALCAREOUS LOAM 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No

286—Palinor-Shabliss association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: j3ws Elevation: 6,000 to 7,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 8 to 10 inches Mean annual air temperature: 43 to 54 degrees F Frost-free period: 100 to 120 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Palinor and similar soils: 60 percent Shabliss and similar soils: 25 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Palinor Setting Landform: Fan remnants Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Alluvium derived from limestone and dolomite Typical profile H1 - 0 to 10 inches: very gravelly loam H2 - 10 to 18 inches: extremely gravelly fine sandy loam H3 - 18 to 30 inches: cemented material H4 - 30 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 14 to 20 inches to duripan Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 45 percent

Custom Soil Resource Report Maximum salinity: Very slightly saline to slightly saline (2.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 12.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY011NV - SHALLOW CALCAREOUS LOAM 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Shabliss Setting Landform: Fan remnants Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Alluvium derived from mixed Typical profile H1 - 0 to 3 inches: gravelly loam H2 - 3 to 13 inches: gravelly loam H3 - 13 to 55 inches: cemented material Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 10 to 20 inches to duripan Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 5 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 12.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY080NV - SHALLOW LOAM 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Wintermute Percent of map unit: 6 percent Landform: Fan remnants Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY075NV - COARSE GRAVELLY LOAM 6-8 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No

Custom Soil Resource Report

Cliffdown Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Inset fans Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R028BY084NV - COARSE SILTY 6-8 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Tulase Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Inset fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R028BY045NV - LOAMY FAN 8-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Biken Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Nose slope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: F028BY083NV - Cobbly Calcareous Mountain Slopes 10-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No

297—Urmafot-Amelar-Izar association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: j3x4 Elevation: 6,790 to 8,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 8 to 20 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 48 degrees F Frost-free period: 40 to 120 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Urmafot and similar soils: 40 percent Amelar and similar soils: 30 percent Izar and similar soils: 15 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Urmafot Setting Landform: Fan remnants

Custom Soil Resource Report Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Alluvium derived from mixed Typical profile H1 - 0 to 8 inches: very gravelly loam H2 - 8 to 14 inches: gravelly loam H3 - 14 to 32 inches: cemented material H4 - 32 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 9 to 20 inches to duripan Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 40 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY006NV - SHALLOW CALCAREOUS LOAM 10-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Amelar Setting Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Lower third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Alluvium derived from limestone, sandstone, and shale and/or colluvium derived from limestone, sandstone, and shale Typical profile H1 - 0 to 6 inches: gravelly silt loam H2 - 6 to 15 inches: very cobbly clay loam H3 - 15 to 60 inches: very gravelly silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Medium Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None

Custom Soil Resource Report Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 10 percent Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 6.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6c Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R028BY088NV - CALCAREOUS LOAM 14-16 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Izar Setting Landform: Hills Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Colluvium derived from mixed over residuum weathered from mixed Typical profile H1 - 0 to 5 inches: very gravelly loam H2 - 5 to 11 inches: very gravelly loam R - 11 to 21 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 7 to 14 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 30 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 0.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY016NV - SHALLOW CALCAREOUS SLOPE 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Biken Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Nose slope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY059NV - SHALLOW CALCAREOUS HILL 8-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No

Custom Soil Resource Report

Bobs Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Fan remnants Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY094NV - CALCAREOUS LOAM 10-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Borvant Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Fan remnants Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: F028BY062NV - PIMO-JUOS/ARTRV/PSSPS-ACTH7 Other vegetative classification: SHALLOW CALCAREOUS SLOPE 10-14 P.Z. (028AY034NV_2) Hydric soil rating: No Segura Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY087NV - GRAVELLY CLAY 12-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No

351—Heist-Tulase association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: j3y5 Elevation: 6,000 to 6,800 feet Mean annual precipitation: 8 to 12 inches Mean annual air temperature: 45 to 52 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 150 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated and reclaimed of excess salts and sodium Map Unit Composition Heist and similar soils: 60 percent Tulase and similar soils: 30 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Custom Soil Resource Report

Description of Heist Setting Landform: Fan skirts Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Alluvium derived from mixed Typical profile H1 - 0 to 3 inches: silt loam H2 - 3 to 36 inches: fine sandy loam H3 - 36 to 60 inches: gravelly fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 20 percent Maximum salinity: Very slightly saline to slightly saline (2.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 12.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 6.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6c Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: R028BY084NV - COARSE SILTY 6-8 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Tulase Setting Landform: Inset fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium derived from mixed and/or some volcanic ash Typical profile H1 - 0 to 2 inches: silt loam H2 - 2 to 35 inches: silt loam H3 - 35 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches 46

Custom Soil Resource Report Frequency of flooding: Very rareNone Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 15 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 5.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 11.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2c Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6c Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: R028BY045NV - LOAMY FAN 8-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Pyrat Percent of map unit: 8 percent Landform: Inset fans Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY010NV - LOAMY 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Shabliss Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Fan remnants Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY080NV - SHALLOW LOAM 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No

455—Shabliss-Tulase-Linoyer association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2wbj1 Elevation: 5,580 to 7,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 8 to 12 inches Mean annual air temperature: 43 to 54 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 120 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Shabliss and similar soils: 40 percent Tulase and similar soils: 30 percent Linoyer and similar soils: 15 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Custom Soil Resource Report

Description of Shabliss Setting Landform: Fan remnants Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Alluvium derived from mixed Typical profile A - 0 to 4 inches: gravelly fine sandy loam Bw - 4 to 14 inches: very fine sandy loam Bkqm - 14 to 20 inches: cemented material Bkq - 20 to 52 inches: very fine sandy loam 2C - 52 to 62 inches: gravelly loamy sand Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 10 to 20 inches to duripan Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to low (0.00 to 0.01 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 5 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 12.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY080NV - SHALLOW LOAM 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Tulase Setting Landform: Inset fans Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium derived from volcanic rock and/or some volcanic ash Typical profile A - 0 to 5 inches: silt loam C - 5 to 11 inches: silt loam Cqk - 11 to 60 inches: silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches 48

Custom Soil Resource Report Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Medium Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.01 to 0.28 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: Very rareNone Frequency of ponding: Rare Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 15 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 5.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 10.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6c Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R028BY045NV - LOAMY FAN 8-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Linoyer Setting Landform: Inset fans Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Mixed alluvium Typical profile A1 - 0 to 2 inches: very fine sandy loam A2 - 2 to 7 inches: very fine sandy loam C1 - 7 to 17 inches: very fine sandy loam C2 - 17 to 34 inches: very fine sandy loam C3 - 34 to 43 inches: silt loam C4 - 43 to 60 inches: very fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Medium Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: Rare Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 5 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 12.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 7.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6c Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: R028BY013NV - SILTY 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No 49

Custom Soil Resource Report

Minor Components Pyrat Percent of map unit: 9 percent Landform: Fan remnants Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY010NV - LOAMY 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Blimo Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Fan skirts Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY014NV - LOAMY PLAIN 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Heist Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Fan skirts Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY084NV - COARSE SILTY 6-8 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No

481—Douhide-Segura-Cropper association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: j3zy Elevation: 6,500 to 8,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 16 inches Mean annual air temperature: 41 to 46 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 100 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Douhide and similar soils: 40 percent Segura and similar soils: 30 percent Cropper and similar soils: 15 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Custom Soil Resource Report

Description of Douhide Setting Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Residuum weathered from volcanic rock Typical profile H1 - 0 to 7 inches: very gravelly loam H2 - 7 to 15 inches: very cobbly clay loam R - 15 to 25 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 15.0 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 14 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.6 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: F028BY062NV - PIMO-JUOS/ARTRV/PSSPS-ACTH7 Hydric soil rating: No Description of Segura Setting Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Colluvium derived from volcanic rock over residuum weathered from volcanic rock Typical profile H1 - 0 to 3 inches: very cobbly loam H2 - 3 to 10 inches: gravelly clay loam R - 10 to 20 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 30 percent Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 2.0 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 7 to 14 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high

Custom Soil Resource Report Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY087NV - GRAVELLY CLAY 12-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Cropper Setting Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Colluvium derived from andesite over residuum weathered from andesite Typical profile H1 - 0 to 4 inches: very cobbly loam H2 - 4 to 16 inches: extremely gravelly sandy clay loam R - 16 to 26 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 30 percent Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 5.0 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 14 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: F028BY058NV - PIMO-CELE3/ARTRV/PSSPS-POFE Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Pookaloo Percent of map unit: 9 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Down-slope shape: Linear

Custom Soil Resource Report Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: F028BY060NV - PIMO-JUOS/ARNO4/PSSPS-ACHY Hydric soil rating: No Cassiro Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Fan remnants Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY007NV - LOAMY 10-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Upatad Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY093NV - SHALLOW CLAY LOAM 12-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Rock outcrop Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, backslope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Hydric soil rating: No

531—Duffer-Uwell association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: j40d Elevation: 5,800 to 6,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 7 to 9 inches Mean annual air temperature: 45 to 48 degrees F Frost-free period: 100 to 120 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Duffer and similar soils: 60 percent Uwell and similar soils: 30 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Custom Soil Resource Report

Description of Duffer Setting Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Typical profile H1 - 0 to 6 inches: silt loam H2 - 6 to 60 inches: silty clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained Runoff class: Medium Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 36 to 60 inches Frequency of flooding: Rare Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 60 percent Gypsum, maximum content: 5 percent Maximum salinity: Moderately saline to strongly saline (8.0 to 16.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 90.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 12.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4w Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6w Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R028BY004NV - SALINE BOTTOM Hydric soil rating: No Description of Uwell Setting Landform: Lake plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Typical profile H1 - 0 to 3 inches: silt loam H2 - 3 to 26 inches: silt loam H3 - 26 to 60 inches: silty clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Moderately well drained Runoff class: Medium Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 15 percent 54

Custom Soil Resource Report Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 30.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 11.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R028BY045NV - LOAMY FAN 8-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Unnamed Percent of map unit: 10 percent

567—McIvey-Birchcreek-Hutchley association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: j40y Elevation: 7,000 to 8,800 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 41 to 44 degrees F Frost-free period: 60 to 95 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Mcivey and similar soils: 40 percent Birchcreek and similar soils: 30 percent Hutchley and similar soils: 20 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Mcivey Setting Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Typical profile H1 - 0 to 12 inches: cobbly loam H2 - 12 to 18 inches: very gravelly clay loam H3 - 18 to 62 inches: extremely cobbly clay Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high

Custom Soil Resource Report Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 6.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY026NV - FRACTURED STONY LOAM 14+ P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Birchcreek Setting Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Colluvium derived from andesite and/or alluvium derived from andesite over residuum weathered from andesite Typical profile H1 - 0 to 3 inches: very cobbly loam H2 - 3 to 13 inches: very cobbly clay loam H3 - 13 to 23 inches: very cobbly clay R - 23 to 33 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 2.0 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 39 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 5.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 2.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY046NV - GRAVELLY LOAM 12-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Hutchley Setting Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex

Custom Soil Resource Report

Typical profile H1 - 0 to 3 inches: very gravelly loam H2 - 3 to 12 inches: very gravelly clay loam R - 12 to 22 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 30 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 10 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY034NV - MOUNTAIN RIDGE 12-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Unnamed Percent of map unit: 10 percent

690—Devilsgait-Cassiro association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: j427 Elevation: 6,400 to 6,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 9 to 11 inches Mean annual air temperature: 45 to 48 degrees F Frost-free period: 100 to 120 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Devilsgait and similar soils: 65 percent Cassiro and similar soils: 20 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Custom Soil Resource Report

Description of Devilsgait Setting Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Typical profile H1 - 0 to 9 inches: silt loam H2 - 9 to 46 inches: stratified silt loam to silty clay loam H3 - 46 to 60 inches: stratified loamy fine sand to silt loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Very poorly drained Runoff class: Medium Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 48 to 72 inches Frequency of flooding: Rare Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 5 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 11.1 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3c Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6c Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R028BY024NV - LOAMY BOTTOM 14+ P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Cassiro Setting Landform: Fan remnants Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Alluvium derived from igneous, metamorphic and sedimentary rock and/or colluvium derived from conglomerate and/or colluvium derived from quartzite Typical profile H1 - 0 to 5 inches: stony loam H2 - 5 to 60 inches: very gravelly clay Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 4 percent Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 2.0 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None 58

Custom Soil Resource Report Frequency of ponding: None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 3.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R028BY030NV - LOAMY 12-16 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Typic haplaquolls Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R028BY022NV - WET MEADOW 14+ P.Z. Hydric soil rating: Yes Cumulic haplaquolls Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Drainageways Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Concave Ecological site: R028BY095NV - DRY MEADOW 12-16 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: Yes Unnamed Percent of map unit: 1 percent

710—Raph loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: j42b Elevation: 5,800 to 6,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 6 to 8 inches Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 48 degrees F Frost-free period: 110 to 130 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Raph and similar soils: 100 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Raph Setting Landform: Beach plains Down-slope shape: Convex

Custom Soil Resource Report Across-slope shape: Convex Typical profile H1 - 0 to 4 inches: loam H2 - 4 to 30 inches: loam H3 - 30 to 42 inches: gravelly sandy loam H4 - 42 to 60 inches: stratified very gravelly coarse sand to fine sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: Rare Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 5 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 45.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 7.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2c Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7c Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: R028BY017NV - LOAMY 5-8 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No

752—Upatad-Atlow-Douhide association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: j42n Elevation: 6,400 to 7,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 8 to 16 inches Mean annual air temperature: 43 to 48 degrees F Frost-free period: 70 to 120 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Upatad and similar soils: 35 percent Atlow and similar soils: 30 percent Douhide and similar soils: 25 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Upatad Setting Landform: Hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope

Custom Soil Resource Report Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Colluvium over residuum weathered from volcanic rock Typical profile H1 - 0 to 3 inches: very gravelly silt loam H2 - 3 to 12 inches: gravelly silty clay loam H3 - 12 to 15 inches: extremely cobbly clay loam R - 15 to 25 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 30 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 14 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 10 percent Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.6 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY093NV - SHALLOW CLAY LOAM 12-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Atlow Setting Landform: Hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Upper third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Residuum weathered from tuff and/or residuum weathered from sedimentary rock Typical profile H1 - 0 to 3 inches: very gravelly loam H2 - 3 to 14 inches: very gravelly sandy clay loam R - 14 to 24 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 30 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 14 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 5 percent

Custom Soil Resource Report Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY089NV - SHALLOW CLAY LOAM 10-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Douhide Setting Landform: Hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Residuum weathered from volcanic rock Typical profile H1 - 0 to 7 inches: very gravelly loam H2 - 7 to 15 inches: very cobbly clay loam R - 15 to 25 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 15.0 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 14 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.6 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: F028BY062NV - PIMO-JUOS/ARTRV/PSSPS-ACTH7 Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Cassiro Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Fan remnants Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY007NV - LOAMY 10-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No

Custom Soil Resource Report

Garfan Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY039NV - COBBLY CLAYPAN 12-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Rock outcrop Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, backslope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Hydric soil rating: No

760—Segura-Upatad-Cropper association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: j42s Elevation: 7,000 to 7,800 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 41 to 48 degrees F Frost-free period: 75 to 120 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Segura and similar soils: 45 percent Upatad and similar soils: 25 percent Cropper and similar soils: 20 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Segura Setting Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Typical profile H1 - 0 to 3 inches: very cobbly loam H2 - 3 to 10 inches: sandy clay loam R - 10 to 20 inches: bedrock

Custom Soil Resource Report

Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 2.0 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 7 to 14 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY087NV - GRAVELLY CLAY 12-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Upatad Setting Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Typical profile H1 - 0 to 3 inches: very gravelly silt loam H2 - 3 to 12 inches: gravelly silty clay loam H3 - 12 to 15 inches: extremely cobbly clay loam R - 15 to 25 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 14 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 10 percent Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.6 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY093NV - SHALLOW CLAY LOAM 12-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Cropper Setting Landform: Mountains 64

Custom Soil Resource Report Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Typical profile H1 - 0 to 4 inches: very cobbly loam H2 - 4 to 16 inches: extremely gravelly sandy clay loam R - 16 to 26 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 2.0 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 14 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: F028BY058NV - PIMO-CELE3/ARTRV/PSSPS-POFE Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Unnamed Percent of map unit: 10 percent

763—Segura-Douhide-McIvey association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: j42w Elevation: 7,000 to 7,870 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 46 degrees F Frost-free period: 65 to 100 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Segura and similar soils: 35 percent Douhide and similar soils: 30 percent Mcivey and similar soils: 20 percent Minor components: 15 percent

Custom Soil Resource Report Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Segura Setting Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Colluvium derived from volcanic rock over residuum weathered from volcanic rock Typical profile H1 - 0 to 3 inches: very cobbly loam H2 - 3 to 10 inches: gravelly clay loam R - 10 to 20 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 30 percent Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 2.0 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 7 to 14 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY087NV - GRAVELLY CLAY 12-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Douhide Setting Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Residuum weathered from volcanic rock Typical profile H1 - 0 to 7 inches: very gravelly loam H2 - 7 to 15 inches: very cobbly clay loam R - 15 to 25 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 15.0 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 14 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high 66

Custom Soil Resource Report Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.6 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: F028BY062NV - PIMO-JUOS/ARTRV/PSSPS-ACTH7 Hydric soil rating: No Description of Mcivey Setting Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Concave Parent material: Alluvium derived from volcanic and sedimentary rock and/or colluvium derived from volcanic and sedimentary rock Typical profile A - 0 to 13 inches: gravelly loam Bt1 - 13 to 23 inches: very gravelly clay loam Bt2 - 23 to 60 inches: very gravelly clay Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately high (0.00 to 0.38 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 5.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R028BY030NV - LOAMY 12-16 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Upatad Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex

Custom Soil Resource Report Ecological site: R028BY093NV - SHALLOW CLAY LOAM 12-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Mcivey Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Concave Ecological site: R028BY015NV - LOAMY SLOPE 12-16 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Cavehill Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (three-dimensional): Upper third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: F028BY062NV - PIMO-JUOS/ARTRV/PSSPS-ACTH7 Hydric soil rating: No Rock outcrop Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Hydric soil rating: No

800—Broland association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: j43d Elevation: 6,000 to 6,800 feet Mean annual precipitation: 8 to 10 inches Mean annual air temperature: 47 to 49 degrees F Frost-free period: 100 to 120 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Broland and similar soils: 65 percent Broland and similar soils: 25 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Custom Soil Resource Report

Description of Broland Setting Landform: Fan remnants Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Alluvium derived from volcanic rock Typical profile H1 - 0 to 3 inches: very gravelly loam H2 - 3 to 9 inches: gravelly clay loam H3 - 9 to 16 inches: extremely gravelly sandy clay loam H4 - 16 to 19 inches: extremely gravelly sandy loam H5 - 19 to 40 inches: cemented material H6 - 40 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly coarse sand Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 14 to 20 inches to duripan Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 5 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 5.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY089NV - SHALLOW CLAY LOAM 10-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Broland Setting Landform: Fan remnants Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Alluvium derived from volcanic rock Typical profile H1 - 0 to 3 inches: very gravelly loam H2 - 3 to 9 inches: gravelly clay loam H3 - 9 to 16 inches: extremely gravelly sandy clay loam H4 - 16 to 19 inches: extremely gravelly sandy loam H5 - 19 to 40 inches: cemented material H6 - 40 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly coarse sand Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 30 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 14 to 20 inches to duripan 69

Custom Soil Resource Report Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 5 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 5.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY089NV - SHALLOW CLAY LOAM 10-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Unnamed Percent of map unit: 10 percent

801—Broland very gravelly loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: j43f Elevation: 6,000 to 7,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 8 to 10 inches Mean annual air temperature: 45 to 48 degrees F Frost-free period: 100 to 120 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance, if irrigated Map Unit Composition Broland and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Broland Setting Landform: Fan remnants Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Alluvium derived from volcanic rock

Custom Soil Resource Report

Typical profile H1 - 0 to 3 inches: very gravelly loam H2 - 3 to 9 inches: gravelly clay loam H3 - 9 to 16 inches: extremely gravelly sandy clay loam H4 - 16 to 19 inches: extremely gravelly sandy loam H5 - 19 to 40 inches: cemented material H6 - 40 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly coarse sand Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 14 to 20 inches to duripan Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 5 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 5.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY089NV - SHALLOW CLAY LOAM 10-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Cowgil Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Beach plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY010NV - LOAMY 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Tulase Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Inset fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R028BY045NV - LOAMY FAN 8-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Broyles Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Inset fans Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down-slope shape: Linear

Custom Soil Resource Report Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY017NV - LOAMY 5-8 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Hunnton Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Fan remnants Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit Landform position (three-dimensional): Nose slope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY010NV - LOAMY 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No

810—Yody-Fax association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: j43j Elevation: 6,200 to 6,900 feet Mean annual precipitation: 8 to 13 inches Mean annual air temperature: 45 to 48 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 120 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance, if irrigated Map Unit Composition Yody and similar soils: 50 percent Fax and similar soils: 40 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Yody Setting Landform: Fan remnants Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Typical profile H1 - 0 to 4 inches: gravelly sandy loam H2 - 4 to 30 inches: gravelly sandy clay loam H3 - 30 to 36 inches: gravelly sandy loam H4 - 36 to 60 inches: cemented Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 30 to 39 inches to duripan Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches

Custom Soil Resource Report Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 10 percent Maximum salinity: Very slightly saline to slightly saline (2.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 12.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 5.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R028BY086NV - GRAVELLY CLAY 10-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Fax Setting Landform: Fan remnants Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Typical profile H1 - 0 to 3 inches: very cobbly coarse sandy loam H2 - 3 to 12 inches: very gravelly sandy clay loam H3 - 12 to 22 inches: very gravelly sandy clay loam H4 - 22 to 48 inches: cemented material Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 36 inches to duripan Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 10 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R028BY007NV - LOAMY 10-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Unnamed Percent of map unit: 10 percent

Custom Soil Resource Report

911—Devilsgait-Duffer-Kunzler association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: j44c Elevation: 6,000 to 6,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 6 to 12 inches Mean annual air temperature: 45 to 52 degrees F Frost-free period: 95 to 160 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance, if irrigated Map Unit Composition Devilsgait and similar soils: 40 percent Duffer and similar soils: 30 percent Kunzler and similar soils: 15 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Devilsgait Setting Landform: Flood plains Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Silty alluvium derived from mixed and/or a component of volcanic ash and/or loess Typical profile H1 - 0 to 10 inches: loam H2 - 10 to 60 inches: silty clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Very poorly drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 0 to 8 inches Frequency of flooding: FrequentNone Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 5 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 5.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 12.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6w

Custom Soil Resource Report Hydrologic Soil Group: C/D Ecological site: R028BY041NV - DRY FLOODPLAIN Other vegetative classification: WILLOW RIPARIAN (010XY030OR) Hydric soil rating: Yes Description of Duffer Setting Landform: Flood plains Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium derived from mixed and/or loess derived from mixed over lacustrine deposits derived from mixed Typical profile H1 - 0 to 6 inches: silt loam H2 - 6 to 60 inches: silty clay loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained Runoff class: Medium Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 36 to 60 inches Frequency of flooding: Rare Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 60 percent Gypsum, maximum content: 5 percent Maximum salinity: Moderately saline to strongly saline (8.0 to 16.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 90.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 12.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4w Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6w Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R028BY004NV - SALINE BOTTOM Hydric soil rating: No Description of Kunzler Setting Landform: Fan remnants Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Alluvium derived from limestone and sandstone Typical profile H1 - 0 to 4 inches: loam H2 - 4 to 11 inches: loam H3 - 11 to 41 inches: sandy loam H4 - 41 to 60 inches: loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent 75

Custom Soil Resource Report Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: Very rareNone Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 20 percent Maximum salinity: Slightly saline to strongly saline (4.0 to 16.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 60.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 7.9 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4c Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7c Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R028BY028NV - SODIC TERRACE 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Duffer Percent of map unit: 9 percent Landform: Flood plains Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R028BY002NV - SALINE MEADOW Hydric soil rating: No Pern, moist Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R028BY003NV - LOAMY BOTTOM 10-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Devilsgait Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Flood plains Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R028BY001NV - WET MEADOW 10-14 P.Z. Other vegetative classification: WILLOW RIPARIAN (010XY030OR) Hydric soil rating: Yes Boofuss Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Alluvial flats Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R028BY020NV - SODIC FLAT 5-8 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: Yes 76

Custom Soil Resource Report

977—Zimbob-Pookaloo association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2rn40 Elevation: 6,490 to 7,600 feet Mean annual precipitation: 11 to 16 inches Mean annual air temperature: 45 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 115 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Zimbob and similar soils: 40 percent Zimbob, very shallow, and similar soils: 30 percent Pookaloo and similar soils: 15 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Zimbob Setting Landform: Hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Colluvium derived from limestone and dolomite over residuum weathered from limestone and dolomite Typical profile H1 - 0 to 1 inches: extremely gravelly loam H2 - 1 to 12 inches: very gravelly loam R - 12 to 22 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 4 to 14 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 55 percent Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 5.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 0.9 inches)

Custom Soil Resource Report

Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY016NV - SHALLOW CALCAREOUS SLOPE 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Zimbob, Very Shallow Setting Landform: Hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Colluvium derived from limestone and dolomite over residuum weathered from limestone and dolomite Typical profile H1 - 0 to 1 inches: very gravelly loam H2 - 1 to 8 inches: very gravelly loam R - 8 to 18 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 4 to 14 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 55 percent Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 5.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 0.6 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY059NV - SHALLOW CALCAREOUS HILL 8-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Pookaloo Setting Landform: Hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Colluvium over residuum weathered from limestone and dolomite and/or calcareous siltstone Typical profile H1 - 0 to 4 inches: very gravelly loam H2 - 4 to 19 inches: very gravelly silt loam R - 19 to 29 inches: bedrock 78

Custom Soil Resource Report

Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 14 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 50 percent Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 2.1 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: F028BY060NV - PIMO-JUOS/ARNO4/PSSPS-ACHY Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Pyrat Percent of map unit: 6 percent Landform: Alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY094NV - CALCAREOUS LOAM 10-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Tecomar Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY008NV - SHALLOW CALCAREOUS SLOPE 10-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Rock outcrop Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Hydric soil rating: No Mijoysee Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY066NV - LIMESTONE HILL Hydric soil rating: No

Custom Soil Resource Report

991—Blimo-Zerk association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: j44z Elevation: 5,800 to 6,400 feet Mean annual precipitation: 6 to 9 inches Mean annual air temperature: 47 to 50 degrees F Frost-free period: 100 to 125 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance, if irrigated Map Unit Composition Blimo and similar soils: 70 percent Zerk and similar soils: 20 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Blimo Setting Landform: Beach plains Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Alluvium derived from mixed Typical profile H1 - 0 to 8 inches: gravelly loam H2 - 8 to 21 inches: gravelly sandy loam H3 - 21 to 60 inches: gravelly sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Medium Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 15 percent Maximum salinity: Very slightly saline to slightly saline (2.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 12.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 5.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s

Custom Soil Resource Report Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R028BY014NV - LOAMY PLAIN 8-10 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Zerk Setting Landform: Beach plains Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Typical profile H1 - 0 to 3 inches: gravelly loam H2 - 3 to 12 inches: very gravelly loam H3 - 12 to 60 inches: stratified extremely gravelly coarse sand to extremely gravelly loamy sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 35 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 12.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 3.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: R028BY084NV - COARSE SILTY 6-8 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Unnamed Percent of map unit: 10 percent

1230—Garfan-McIvey-Hutchley association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: j3pf Elevation: 7,540 to 8,530 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 20 inches

Custom Soil Resource Report Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 30 to 100 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Garfan and similar soils: 50 percent Mcivey and similar soils: 20 percent Hutchley and similar soils: 15 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Garfan Setting Landform: Hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Alluvium derived from quartzite Typical profile H1 - 0 to 8 inches: extremely gravelly loam H2 - 8 to 27 inches: extremely cobbly clay H3 - 27 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly clay Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 15.0 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 3.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY035NV - GRAVELLY CLAYPAN 14+ P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Mcivey Setting Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Alluvium derived from volcanic and sedimentary rock and/or colluvium derived from volcanic and sedimentary rock Typical profile H1 - 0 to 5 inches: gravelly loam

Custom Soil Resource Report H2 - 5 to 12 inches: very gravelly loam H3 - 12 to 18 inches: very gravelly clay loam H4 - 18 to 62 inches: very gravelly clay Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 6.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY030NV - LOAMY 12-16 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Hutchley Setting Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Concave Parent material: Colluvium derived from mixed over residuum weathered from mixed Typical profile H1 - 0 to 3 inches: very gravelly loam H2 - 3 to 12 inches: very gravelly clay loam R - 12 to 22 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 30 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 10 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY034NV - MOUNTAIN RIDGE 12-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No

Custom Soil Resource Report

Minor Components Cassiro Percent of map unit: 9 percent Landform: Fan remnants Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY046NV - GRAVELLY LOAM 12-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Chen Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Upper third of mountainflank, nose slope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY037NV - CLAYPAN 12-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Bigwash Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Drainageways Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Concave Ecological site: R028BY095NV - DRY MEADOW 12-16 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No

1392—Chen-McIvey-Birchcreek association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: j3r8 Elevation: 7,500 to 9,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 50 to 100 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Chen and similar soils: 45 percent Birchcreek and similar soils: 20 percent Mcivey and similar soils: 20 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Custom Soil Resource Report

Description of Chen Setting Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Upper third of mountainflank, nose slope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Loess over colluvium derived from volcanic and sedimentary rock over residuum weathered from volcanic and sedimentary rock Typical profile H1 - 0 to 7 inches: very gravelly loam H2 - 7 to 17 inches: extremely gravelly clay R - 17 to 27 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 12 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY037NV - CLAYPAN 12-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Birchcreek Setting Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank Down-slope shape: Concave Across-slope shape: Concave Parent material: Colluvium derived from andesite and/or alluvium derived from andesite over residuum weathered from andesite Typical profile H1 - 0 to 3 inches: very cobbly loam H2 - 3 to 13 inches: very cobbly clay loam H3 - 13 to 23 inches: very cobbly clay R - 23 to 33 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 15 percent Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 10.0 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 39 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained 85

Custom Soil Resource Report Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 5.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 2.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY046NV - GRAVELLY LOAM 12-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Mcivey Setting Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Alluvium derived from volcanic and sedimentary rock and/or colluvium derived from volcanic and sedimentary rock Typical profile H1 - 0 to 5 inches: gravelly loam H2 - 5 to 12 inches: very gravelly loam H3 - 12 to 18 inches: very gravelly clay loam H4 - 18 to 62 inches: very gravelly clay Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 6.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY030NV - LOAMY 12-16 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Suak Percent of map unit: 9 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope

Custom Soil Resource Report Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY032NV - STONY MAHOGANY SAVANNA Hydric soil rating: No Segura Percent of map unit: 6 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY087NV - GRAVELLY CLAY 12-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No

1451—Birchcreek-Segura-Chen association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: j3rn Elevation: 7,500 to 8,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 11 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 41 to 46 degrees F Frost-free period: 75 to 95 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Birchcreek and similar soils: 45 percent Segura and similar soils: 25 percent Chen and similar soils: 20 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Birchcreek Setting Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Colluvium derived from andesite and/or alluvium derived from andesite over residuum weathered from andesite Typical profile H1 - 0 to 3 inches: very cobbly loam H2 - 3 to 13 inches: very cobbly clay loam H3 - 13 to 23 inches: very cobbly clay R - 23 to 33 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 30 percent

Custom Soil Resource Report Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 2.0 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 39 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 5.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 2.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY046NV - GRAVELLY LOAM 12-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Segura Setting Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Typical profile H1 - 0 to 3 inches: very cobbly loam H2 - 3 to 10 inches: sandy clay loam R - 10 to 20 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 2.0 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 7 to 14 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY087NV - GRAVELLY CLAY 12-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Chen Setting Landform: Mountains Down-slope shape: Convex

Custom Soil Resource Report Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Loess over colluvium derived from volcanic and sedimentary rock over residuum weathered from volcanic and sedimentary rock Typical profile H1 - 0 to 7 inches: very gravelly loam H2 - 7 to 17 inches: extremely gravelly clay R - 17 to 27 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 30 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 12 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY037NV - CLAYPAN 12-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Unnamed Percent of map unit: 10 percent

1520—Fax-Yody-Broland association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: j3s4 Elevation: 6,200 to 6,900 feet Mean annual precipitation: 8 to 13 inches Mean annual air temperature: 45 to 49 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 120 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Fax and similar soils: 45 percent Yody and similar soils: 25 percent Broland and similar soils: 20 percent Minor components: 10 percent

Custom Soil Resource Report Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Fax Setting Landform: Fan remnants Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Typical profile H1 - 0 to 3 inches: very cobbly coarse sandy loam H2 - 3 to 12 inches: very gravelly sandy clay loam H3 - 12 to 22 inches: very gravelly sandy clay loam H4 - 22 to 48 inches: cemented material Properties and qualities Slope: 4 to 30 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 36 inches to duripan Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 10 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R028BY086NV - GRAVELLY CLAY 10-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Yody Setting Landform: Fan remnants Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Typical profile H1 - 0 to 4 inches: gravelly sandy loam H2 - 4 to 30 inches: gravelly sandy clay loam H3 - 30 to 36 inches: gravelly sandy loam H4 - 36 to 60 inches: cemented material Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 30 to 39 inches to duripan Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None 90

Custom Soil Resource Report Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 10 percent Maximum salinity: Very slightly saline to slightly saline (2.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 12.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 5.3 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R028BY086NV - GRAVELLY CLAY 10-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Broland Setting Landform: Fan remnants Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Alluvium derived from volcanic rock Typical profile H1 - 0 to 3 inches: very gravelly loam H2 - 3 to 9 inches: gravelly clay loam H3 - 9 to 16 inches: extremely gravelly sandy clay loam H4 - 16 to 19 inches: extremely gravelly sandy loam H5 - 19 to 40 inches: cemented material H6 - 40 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly coarse sand Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 14 to 20 inches to duripan Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 5 percent Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 5.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY089NV - SHALLOW CLAY LOAM 10-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Unnamed Percent of map unit: 10 percent

Custom Soil Resource Report

3262—Grandeposit-Majorsplace-Grube association Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2tzj4 Elevation: 6,560 to 7,710 feet Mean annual precipitation: 10 to 16 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 40 to 100 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Grandeposit, dry, and similar soils: 40 percent Majorsplace and similar soils: 35 percent Grube and similar soils: 15 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Grandeposit, Dry Setting Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Colluvium derived from quartzite and/or colluvium derived from slate over residuum weathered from quartzite and/or residuum weathered from slate Typical profile H1 - 0 to 7 inches: gravelly loam H2 - 7 to 19 inches: very gravelly clay loam R - 19 to 29 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 30 to 50 percent Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 2.0 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 14 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low (0.00 to 0.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (1.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 2.2 inches)

Custom Soil Resource Report

Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: F028BY062NV - PIMO-JUOS/ARTRV/PSSPS-ACTH7 Hydric soil rating: No Description of Majorsplace Setting Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Colluvium derived from quartzite over residuum weathered from quartzite and/or minor admixtures of calcareous loess derived from sedimentary rock Typical profile H1 - 0 to 7 inches: very gravelly loam H2 - 7 to 13 inches: extremely cobbly clay loam H3 - 13 to 18 inches: extremely cobbly loam R - 18 to 28 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 30 to 75 percent Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 10.0 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 14 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.01 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 25 percent Maximum salinity: Slightly saline to moderately saline (4.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm) Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: R028BY059NV - SHALLOW CALCAREOUS HILL 8-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Description of Grube Setting Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Colluvium derived from quartzite

Custom Soil Resource Report

Typical profile H1 - 0 to 5 inches: extremely cobbly loam H2 - 5 to 11 inches: extremely cobbly loam H3 - 11 to 26 inches: extremely cobbly clay loam H4 - 26 to 39 inches: extremely cobbly clay loam H5 - 39 to 60 inches: extremely cobbly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 10.0 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 30 percent Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum: 5.0 Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 4.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R028BY079NV - SHALLOW LOAM 10-14 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Atlow Percent of map unit: 4 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Upper third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Ecological site: R028BY089NV - SHALLOW CLAY LOAM 10-12 P.Z. Hydric soil rating: No Rubble land Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Hydric soil rating: No Lehmandow Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Concave Ecological site: R028AY072NV - WET MEADOW Hydric soil rating: Yes

Custom Soil Resource Report

Steptoe Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Concave Ecological site: R028BY103NV - STREAMBANK 12+ Hydric soil rating: No Devilsgait Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Flood plains Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: R028BY103NV - STREAMBANK 12+ Other vegetative classification: WILLOW RIPARIAN (010XY030OR) Hydric soil rating: Yes

Soil Information for All Uses Suitabilities and Limitations for Use The Suitabilities and Limitations for Use section includes various soil interpretations displayed as thematic maps with a summary table for the soil map units in the selected area of interest. A single value or rating for each map unit is generated by aggregating the interpretive ratings of individual map unit components. This aggregation process is defined for each interpretation.

Land Classifications Land Classifications are specified land use and management groupings that are assigned to soil areas because combinations of soil have similar behavior for specified practices. Most are based on soil properties and other factors that directly influence the specific use of the soil. Example classifications include ecological site classification, farmland classification, irrigated and nonirrigated land capability classification, and hydric rating.

Hydric Rating by Map Unit This rating indicates the percentage of map units that meets the criteria for hydric soils. Map units are composed of one or more map unit components or soil types, each of which is rated as hydric soil or not hydric. Map units that are made up dominantly of hydric soils may have small areas of minor nonhydric components in the higher positions on the landform, and map units that are made up dominantly of nonhydric soils may have small areas of minor hydric components in the lower positions on the landform. Each map unit is rated based on its respective components and the percentage of each component within the map unit. The thematic map is color coded based on the composition of hydric components. The five color classes are separated as 100 percent hydric components, 66 to 99 percent hydric components, 33 to 65 percent hydric components, 1 to 32 percent hydric components, and less than one percent hydric components. In Web Soil Survey, the Summary by Map Unit table that is displayed below the map pane contains a column named 'Rating'. In this column the percentage of each map unit that is classified as hydric is displayed.

Custom Soil Resource Report Hydric soils are defined by the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils (NTCHS) as soils that formed under conditions of saturation, flooding, or ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part (Federal Register, 1994). Under natural conditions, these soils are either saturated or inundated long enough during the growing season to support the growth and reproduction of hydrophytic vegetation. The NTCHS definition identifies general soil properties that are associated with wetness. In order to determine whether a specific soil is a hydric soil or nonhydric soil, however, more specific information, such as information about the depth and duration of the water table, is needed. Thus, criteria that identify those estimated soil properties unique to hydric soils have been established (Federal Register, 2002). These criteria are used to identify map unit components that normally are associated with wetlands. The criteria used are selected estimated soil properties that are described in "Soil Taxonomy" (Soil Survey Staff, 1999) and "Keys to Soil Taxonomy" (Soil Survey Staff, 2006) and in the "Soil Survey Manual" (Soil Survey Division Staff, 1993). If soils are wet enough for a long enough period of time to be considered hydric, they should exhibit certain properties that can be easily observed in the field. These visible properties are indicators of hydric soils. The indicators used to make onsite determinations of hydric soils are specified in "Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States" (Hurt and Vasilas, 2006). References: Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. Soil Survey Staff. 2006. Keys to soil taxonomy. 10th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.

655000

660000

665000

670000

675000

680000

114° 39' 58'' W

685000

690000

695000

700000

39° 29' 41'' N

4344000

4349000

4354000

4359000

4364000

4369000

39° 29' 41'' N

4374000

115° 13' 1'' W

Custom Soil Resource Report Map—Hydric Rating by Map Unit

39° 13' 2'' N

660000

665000

670000

675000

680000

Map Scale: 1:217,000 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet.

Meters 18000 Feet 0 10000 20000 40000 60000 Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 11N WGS84 0

3000

6000

685000

690000

695000

700000 114° 39' 58'' W

115° 13' 1'' W

655000

12000

39° 13' 2'' N

Custom Soil Resource Report

MAP LEGEND Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils

MAP INFORMATION The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000.

Transportation Rails Interstate Highways

Soil Rating Polygons Hydric (100%) Hydric (66 to 99%) Hydric (33 to 65%) Hydric (1 to 32%)

Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements.

US Routes Major Roads

Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)

Local Roads Background Aerial Photography

Not Hydric (0%) Not rated or not available Soil Rating Lines Hydric (100%)

This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below.

Hydric (66 to 99%) Hydric (33 to 65%)

Soil Survey Area: Western White Pine County Area, Nevada, Parts of White Pine and Eureka Counties Survey Area Data: Version 16, Sep 8, 2022

Hydric (1 to 32%) Not Hydric (0%) Not rated or not available

Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger.

Soil Rating Points Hydric (100%)

Date(s) aerial images were photographed: 2003

Hydric (66 to 99%)

Jan 1, 1999—Dec 31,

Hydric (33 to 65%)

Hydric (1 to 32%) Not Hydric (0%) Not rated or not available Water Features Streams and Canals

Custom Soil Resource Report

Table—Hydric Rating by Map Unit Map unit symbol

Map unit name

Rating

Acres in AOI

Percent of AOI

Palinor-Urmafot association

328.5

24.5%

100

Pookaloo-Cavehill-Rock outcrop association

113.7

8.5%

108

Pookaloo-Tecomar-Rock outcrop association MLRA 28B

21.3

1.6%

109

Hyzen-Cavehill association

2.8

0.2%

111

Zimbob-Hyzen-Rock outcrop association

26.3

2.0%

189

Pyrat-Linoyer association 0

16.9

1.3%

201

Mijoysee-PookalooTecomar association

1.4

0.1%

226

Hutchley-Tusel-Suak association

132.8

9.9%

233

Linoyer silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes

5.8

0.4%

282

Palinor very gravelly loam, 2 to 15 percent slopes

3.2

0.2%

286

Palinor-Shabliss association

61.5

4.6%

297

Urmafot-Amelar-Izar association

10.7

0.8%

351

Heist-Tulase association

1.9

0.1%

455

Shabliss-Tulase-Linoyer association

4.1

0.3%

481

Douhide-Segura-Cropper 0 association

13.9

1.0%

531

Duffer-Uwell association

1.1

0.1%

567

McIvey-BirchcreekHutchley association

0.8

0.1%

690

Devilsgait-Cassiro association

9.3

0.7%

710

Raph loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes

6.3

0.5%

752

Upatad-Atlow-Douhide association

39.6

3.0%

760

Segura-Upatad-Cropper association

49.8

3.7%

763

Segura-Douhide-McIvey association

41.0

3.1%

800

Broland association

76.4

5.7%

100

Custom Soil Resource Report

Map unit symbol

Map unit name

Rating

Acres in AOI

Percent of AOI

801

Broland very gravelly loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes

0.2

0.0%

810

Yody-Fax association

137.9

10.3%

911

Devilsgait-Duffer-Kunzler 43 association

6.7

0.5%

977

Zimbob-Pookaloo association

4.4

0.3%

991

Blimo-Zerk association

54.7

4.1%

1230

Garfan-McIvey-Hutchley association

16.8

1.3%

1392

Chen-McIvey-Birchcreek association

14.8

1.1%

1451

Birchcreek-Segura-Chen 0 association

56.8

4.2%

1520

Fax-Yody-Broland association

31.4

2.3%

3262

GrandepositMajorsplace-Grube association

38.7

2.9%

1,338.2

100.0%

Totals for Area of Interest

Rating Options—Hydric Rating by Map Unit Aggregation Method: Percent Present Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified Tie-break Rule: Lower

101

Custom Soil Resource Report

Ecological Sites Individual soil map unit components can be correlated to a particular ecological site. The Ecological Site Assessment section includes ecological site descriptions, plant growth curves, state and transition models, and selected National Plants database information.

All Ecological Sites — An "ecological site" is the product of all the environmental factors responsible for its development. It has characteristic soils that have developed over time; a characteristic hydrology, particularly infiltration and runoff, that has developed over time; and a characteristic plant community (kind and amount of vegetation). The vegetation, soils, and hydrology are all interrelated. Each is influenced by the others and influences the development of the others. For example, the hydrology of the site is influenced by development of the soil and plant community. The plant community on an ecological site is typified by an association of species that differs from that of other ecological sites in the kind and/or proportion of species or in total production. An ecological site name provides a general description of a particular ecological site. For example, "Loamy Upland" is the name of a rangeland ecological site. An "ecological site ID" is the symbol assigned to a particular ecological site. The map identifies the dominant ecological site for each map unit, aggregated by dominant condition. Other ecological sites may occur within each map unit. Each map unit typically consists of one or more components (soils and/or miscellaneous areas). Each soil component is associated with an ecological site. Miscellaneous areas, such as rock outcrop, sand dunes, and badlands, have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation and therefore are not linked to an ecological site. The table below the map lists all of the ecological sites for each map unit component in your area of interest.

102

655000

660000

665000

670000

675000

680000

114° 39' 58'' W

685000

690000

695000

700000

39° 29' 41'' N

4344000

4349000

4354000

4359000

4364000

4369000

39° 29' 41'' N

4374000

115° 13' 1'' W

Custom Soil Resource Report Map—Dominant Ecological Site

39° 13' 2'' N

660000

665000

670000

675000

680000

Map Scale: 1:217,000 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet.

Meters 18000 Feet 0 10000 20000 40000 60000 Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 11N WGS84 0

3000

6000

685000

690000

695000

700000 114° 39' 58'' W

115° 13' 1'' W

655000

12000

103

39° 13' 2'' N

Custom Soil Resource Report

MAP LEGEND Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Rating Polygons F028BY060NV F028BY062NV R028BY004NV R028BY006NV R028BY010NV R028BY011NV R028BY013NV R028BY014NV R028BY016NV R028BY017NV R028BY024NV R028BY026NV R028BY034NV R028BY035NV R028BY037NV R028BY041NV R028BY046NV R028BY066NV R028BY080NV R028BY084NV R028BY086NV R028BY087NV

R028BY089NV

R028BY093NV

Not rated or not available

Soil Rating Lines

Soil Rating Points

F028BY060NV

F028BY062NV

R028BY004NV

R028BY006NV

R028BY010NV

R028BY011NV

R028BY013NV

R028BY014NV

R028BY016NV

R028BY017NV

R028BY024NV

R028BY026NV

R028BY034NV

R028BY035NV

R028BY037NV

R028BY041NV

R028BY046NV

R028BY066NV

R028BY080NV

R028BY084NV

R028BY086NV

R028BY087NV

104

Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography

Custom Soil Resource Report

MAP INFORMATION The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Western White Pine County Area, Nevada, Parts of White Pine and Eureka Counties Survey Area Data: Version 16, Sep 8, 2022 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: 2003

Jan 1, 1999—Dec 31,

105

Custom Soil Resource Report

Table—Ecological Sites by Map Unit Component Map unit symbol 53

Map unit name Palinor-Urmafot association

Component name (percent)

Ecological site

Palinor (65%)

R028BY011NV — SHALLOW CALCAREOUS LOAM 8-10 P.Z.

Urmafot (20%)

R028BY006NV — SHALLOW CALCAREOUS LOAM 10-12 P.Z.

Shabliss (5%)

R028BY010NV — LOAMY 8-10 P.Z.

Izar (4%)

R028BY011NV — SHALLOW CALCAREOUS LOAM 8-10 P.Z.

Tulase (2%)

R028BY045NV — LOAMY FAN 8-12 P.Z.

Automal (1%)

R028BY011NV — SHALLOW CALCAREOUS LOAM 8-10 P.Z.

Acres in AOI

Percent of AOI

328.5

24.5%

113.7

8.5%

Palinor, very shallow R028BY040NV — (1%) BARREN FAN 8-12 P.Z. Pookaloo (1%)

F028BY060NV — PIMO-JUOS/ ARNO4/PSSPSACHY

Rock outcrop (1%) 100

Pookaloo-CavehillRock outcrop association

Pookaloo (40%)

F028BY060NV — PIMO-JUOS/ ARNO4/PSSPSACHY

Cavehill (35%)

F028BY062NV — PIMO-JUOS/ ARTRV/PSSPSACTH7

Rock outcrop (15%) Tecomar, very shallow (3%)

R028BY090NV — SHALLOW CALCAREOUS HILL 14+ P.Z.

Tecomar (2%)

R028BY008NV — SHALLOW CALCAREOUS SLOPE 10-12 P.Z.

106

Custom Soil Resource Report

Map unit symbol

108

Map unit name

Component name (percent)

Ecological site

Cavehill, cool (1%)

F028BY058NV — PIMO-CELE3/ ARTRV/PSSPSPOFE

Grink (1%)

R028BY043NV — CALCAREOUS MAHOGANY SAVANNA

Haunchee (1%)

R028BY032NV — STONY MAHOGANY SAVANNA

Onkeyo (1%)

R028BY079NV — SHALLOW LOAM 10-14 P.Z.

Xine (1%)

R028BY088NV — CALCAREOUS LOAM 14-16 P.Z.

Pookaloo-Tecomar- Pookaloo (40%) Rock outcrop association MLRA 28B

F028BY060NV — PIMO-JUOS/ ARNO4/PSSPSACHY

Tecomar (30%)

Acres in AOI

Percent of AOI

21.3

1.6%

2.8

0.2%

R028BY008NV — SHALLOW CALCAREOUS SLOPE 10-12 P.Z.

Rock outcrop (15%)

109

Hyzen-Cavehill association

Mijoysee (5%)

R028BY066NV — LIMESTONE HILL

Halacan (3%)

R028BY038NV — MOUNTAIN RIDGE 14+ P.Z.

Onkeyo (3%)

R028BY079NV — SHALLOW LOAM 10-14 P.Z.

Xine (2%)

R028BY088NV — CALCAREOUS LOAM 14-16 P.Z.

Zimbob, very shallow (2%)

R028BY059NV — SHALLOW CALCAREOUS HILL 8-12 P.Z.

Hyzen (40%)

F028BY060NV — PIMO-JUOS/ ARNO4/PSSPSACHY

Cavehill (30%)

F028BY062NV — PIMO-JUOS/ ARTRV/PSSPSACTH7

Hyzen (20%)

R028BY066NV — LIMESTONE HILL

Unnamed (10%)

107

Custom Soil Resource Report

Map unit symbol 111

Map unit name

Component name (percent)

Ecological site

Zimbob-Hyzen-Rock Zimbob (40%) outcrop association

R028BY016NV — SHALLOW CALCAREOUS SLOPE 8-10 P.Z.

Hyzen (30%)

R028BY066NV — LIMESTONE HILL

Acres in AOI

Percent of AOI

26.3

2.0%

16.9

1.3%

1.4

0.1%

132.8

9.9%

Rock outcrop (15%)

189

Pyrat-Linoyer association

Zimbob, very shallow (9%)

R028BY059NV — SHALLOW CALCAREOUS HILL 8-12 P.Z.

Tulase (4%)

R028BY010NV — LOAMY 8-10 P.Z.

Urmafot (2%)

R028BY006NV — SHALLOW CALCAREOUS LOAM 10-12 P.Z.

Pyrat (70%)

R028BY010NV — LOAMY 8-10 P.Z.

Linoyer (20%)

R028BY013NV — SILTY 8-10 P.Z.

Unnamed (10%) 201

Mijoysee-PookalooTecomar association

Mijoysee (45%)

R028BY066NV — LIMESTONE HILL

Pookaloo (25%)

F028BY060NV — PIMO-JUOS/ ARNO4/PSSPSACHY

Tecomar (15%)

R028BY008NV — SHALLOW CALCAREOUS SLOPE 10-12 P.Z.

Rock outcrop (8%)

226

Zimbob (3%)

R028BY016NV — SHALLOW CALCAREOUS SLOPE 8-10 P.Z.

Cavehill (1%)

F028BY062NV — PIMO-JUOS/ ARTRV/PSSPSACTH7

Eganroc (1%)

F028BY049NV — Rocky Convex Mountain Slopes

Pyrat (1%)

R028BY010NV — LOAMY 8-10 P.Z.

Tulase (1%)

R028BY045NV — LOAMY FAN 8-12 P.Z.

Hutchley-Tusel-Suak Hutchley (35%) association

R028BY034NV — MOUNTAIN RIDGE 12-14 P.Z.

108

Custom Soil Resource Report

Map unit symbol

Map unit name

Component name (percent)

Ecological site

Suak (25%)

R028BY032NV — STONY MAHOGANY SAVANNA

Tusel (25%)

R028BY029NV — LOAMY 16+ P.Z.

Bullump (6%)

R028BY030NV — LOAMY 12-16 P.Z.

Cleavage (6%)

R028BY038NV — MOUNTAIN RIDGE 14+ P.Z.

Acres in AOI

Percent of AOI

Rock outcrop (2%) Devilsgait (1%)

R028BY095NV — DRY MEADOW 12-16 P.Z.

Linoyer (100%)

R028BY013NV — SILTY 8-10 P.Z.

5.8

0.4%

R028BY011NV — SHALLOW CALCAREOUS LOAM 8-10 P.Z.

3.2

0.2%

61.5

4.6%

233

Linoyer silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes

282

Palinor very gravelly Palinor (85%) loam, 2 to 15 percent slopes

286

Palinor-Shabliss association

Shabliss (6%)

R028BY080NV — SHALLOW LOAM 8-10 P.Z.

Okan (4%)

R028BY052NV — DROUGHTY LOAM 8-10 P.Z.

Automal (1%)

R028BY011NV — SHALLOW CALCAREOUS LOAM 8-10 P.Z.

Biken (1%)

R028BY059NV — SHALLOW CALCAREOUS HILL 8-12 P.Z.

Heist (1%)

R028BY084NV — COARSE SILTY 6-8 P.Z.

Linoyer (1%)

R028BY013NV — SILTY 8-10 P.Z.

Okan (1%)

R028BY010NV — LOAMY 8-10 P.Z.

Palinor (60%)

R028BY011NV — SHALLOW CALCAREOUS LOAM 8-10 P.Z.

Shabliss (25%)

R028BY080NV — SHALLOW LOAM 8-10 P.Z.

109

Custom Soil Resource Report

Map unit symbol

297

351

455

Map unit name

Component name (percent)

Ecological site

Wintermute (6%)

R028BY075NV — COARSE GRAVELLY LOAM 6-8 P.Z.

Cliffdown (4%)

R028BY084NV — COARSE SILTY 6-8 P.Z.

Tulase (3%)

R028BY045NV — LOAMY FAN 8-12 P.Z.

Biken (2%)

F028BY083NV — Cobbly Calcareous Mountain Slopes 10-12 P.Z.

Urmafot-Amelar-Izar Urmafot (40%) association

R028BY006NV — SHALLOW CALCAREOUS LOAM 10-12 P.Z.

Amelar (30%)

R028BY088NV — CALCAREOUS LOAM 14-16 P.Z.

Izar (15%)

R028BY016NV — SHALLOW CALCAREOUS SLOPE 8-10 P.Z.

Biken (5%)

R028BY059NV — SHALLOW CALCAREOUS HILL 8-12 P.Z.

Bobs (5%)

R028BY094NV — CALCAREOUS LOAM 10-14 P.Z.

Borvant (3%)

F028BY062NV — PIMO-JUOS/ ARTRV/PSSPSACTH7

Segura (2%)

R028BY087NV — GRAVELLY CLAY 12-14 P.Z.

Heist (60%)

R028BY084NV — COARSE SILTY 6-8 P.Z.

Tulase (30%)

R028BY045NV — LOAMY FAN 8-12 P.Z.

Pyrat (8%)

R028BY010NV — LOAMY 8-10 P.Z.

Shabliss (2%)

R028BY080NV — SHALLOW LOAM 8-10 P.Z.

Shabliss (40%)

R028BY080NV — SHALLOW LOAM 8-10 P.Z.

Heist-Tulase association

Shabliss-TulaseLinoyer association

110

Acres in AOI

Percent of AOI

10.7

0.8%

1.9

0.1%

4.1

0.3%

Custom Soil Resource Report

Map unit symbol

481

Map unit name

Douhide-SeguraCropper association

Component name (percent)

Ecological site

Tulase (30%)

R028BY045NV — LOAMY FAN 8-12 P.Z.

Linoyer (15%)

R028BY013NV — SILTY 8-10 P.Z.

Pyrat (9%)

R028BY010NV — LOAMY 8-10 P.Z.

Blimo (4%)

R028BY014NV — LOAMY PLAIN 8-10 P.Z.

Heist (2%)

R028BY084NV — COARSE SILTY 6-8 P.Z.

Douhide (40%)

F028BY062NV — PIMO-JUOS/ ARTRV/PSSPSACTH7

Segura (30%)

R028BY087NV — GRAVELLY CLAY 12-14 P.Z.

Cropper (15%)

F028BY058NV — PIMO-CELE3/ ARTRV/PSSPSPOFE

Pookaloo (9%)

F028BY060NV — PIMO-JUOS/ ARNO4/PSSPSACHY

Cassiro (3%)

R028BY007NV — LOAMY 10-12 P.Z.

Upatad (2%)

R028BY093NV — SHALLOW CLAY LOAM 12-14 P.Z.

Acres in AOI

Percent of AOI

13.9

1.0%

1.1

0.1%

0.8

0.1%

Rock outcrop (1%) 531

Duffer-Uwell association

Duffer (60%)

R028BY004NV — SALINE BOTTOM

Uwell (30%)

R028BY045NV — LOAMY FAN 8-12 P.Z.

Unnamed (10%) 567

McIvey-BirchcreekHutchley association

McIvey (40%)

R028BY026NV — FRACTURED STONY LOAM 14+ P.Z.

Birchcreek (30%)

R028BY046NV — GRAVELLY LOAM 12-14 P.Z.

Hutchley (20%)

R028BY034NV — MOUNTAIN RIDGE 12-14 P.Z.

Unnamed (10%)

111

Custom Soil Resource Report

Map unit symbol 690

Map unit name Devilsgait-Cassiro association

Component name (percent)

Ecological site

Devilsgait (65%)

R028BY024NV — LOAMY BOTTOM 14+ P.Z.

Cassiro (20%)

R028BY030NV — LOAMY 12-16 P.Z.

Typic Haplaquolls (10%)

R028BY022NV — WET MEADOW 14+ P.Z.

Acres in AOI

Percent of AOI 9.3

0.7%

Cumulic Haplaquolls R028BY095NV — (4%) DRY MEADOW 12-16 P.Z. Unnamed (1%) 710

Raph loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes

Raph (100%)

R028BY017NV — LOAMY 5-8 P.Z.

6.3

0.5%

752

Upatad-AtlowDouhide association

Upatad (35%)

R028BY093NV — SHALLOW CLAY LOAM 12-14 P.Z.

39.6

3.0%

Atlow (30%)

R028BY089NV — SHALLOW CLAY LOAM 10-12 P.Z.

Douhide (25%)

F028BY062NV — PIMO-JUOS/ ARTRV/PSSPSACTH7

Cassiro (5%)

R028BY007NV — LOAMY 10-12 P.Z.

Garfan (3%)

R028BY039NV — COBBLY CLAYPAN 12-14 P.Z.

49.8

3.7%

41.0

3.1%

Rock outcrop (2%) 760

Segura-UpatadCropper association

Segura (45%)

R028BY087NV — GRAVELLY CLAY 12-14 P.Z.

Upatad (25%)

R028BY093NV — SHALLOW CLAY LOAM 12-14 P.Z.

Cropper (20%)

F028BY058NV — PIMO-CELE3/ ARTRV/PSSPSPOFE

Unnamed (10%) 763

Segura-DouhideMcIvey association

segura (35%)

R028BY087NV — GRAVELLY CLAY 12-14 P.Z.

Douhide (30%)

F028BY062NV — PIMO-JUOS/ ARTRV/PSSPSACTH7

112

Custom Soil Resource Report

Map unit symbol

Map unit name

Component name (percent)

Ecological site

McIvey (20%)

R028BY030NV — LOAMY 12-16 P.Z.

McIvey (5%)

R028BY015NV — LOAMY SLOPE 12-16 P.Z.

Upatad (5%)

R028BY093NV — SHALLOW CLAY LOAM 12-14 P.Z.

Cavehill (3%)

F028BY062NV — PIMO-JUOS/ ARTRV/PSSPSACTH7

Acres in AOI

Percent of AOI

Rock outcrop (2%) 800

Broland association

Broland (65%)

R028BY089NV — SHALLOW CLAY LOAM 10-12 P.Z.

Broland (25%)

R028BY089NV — SHALLOW CLAY LOAM 10-12 P.Z.

76.4

5.7%

0.2

0.0%

137.9

10.3%

6.7

0.5%

Unnamed (10%) 801

810

Broland very Broland (85%) gravelly loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes

Yody-Fax association

R028BY089NV — SHALLOW CLAY LOAM 10-12 P.Z.

Cowgil (5%)

R028BY010NV — LOAMY 8-10 P.Z.

Tulase (5%)

R028BY045NV — LOAMY FAN 8-12 P.Z.

Broyles (4%)

R028BY017NV — LOAMY 5-8 P.Z.

Hunnton (1%)

R028BY010NV — LOAMY 8-10 P.Z.

Yody (50%)

R028BY086NV — GRAVELLY CLAY 10-12 P.Z.

Fax (40%)

R028BY007NV — LOAMY 10-12 P.Z.

Unnamed (10%) 911

Devilsgait-DufferKunzler association

Devilsgait (40%)

R028BY041NV — DRY FLOODPLAIN

Duffer (30%)

R028BY004NV — SALINE BOTTOM

Kunzler (15%)

R028BY028NV — SODIC TERRACE 8-10 P.Z.

Duffer (9%)

R028BY002NV — SALINE MEADOW

113

Custom Soil Resource Report

Map unit symbol

977

Map unit name

Zimbob-Pookaloo association

Component name (percent)

Ecological site

Pern, moist (3%)

R028BY003NV — LOAMY BOTTOM 10-14 P.Z.

Devilsgait (2%)

R028BY001NV — WET MEADOW 10-14 P.Z.

Boofuss (1%)

R028BY020NV — SODIC FLAT 5-8 P.Z.

Zimbob (40%)

R028BY016NV — SHALLOW CALCAREOUS SLOPE 8-10 P.Z.

Zimbob, very shallow (30%)

R028BY059NV — SHALLOW CALCAREOUS HILL 8-12 P.Z.

Pookaloo (15%)

F028BY060NV — PIMO-JUOS/ ARNO4/PSSPSACHY

Pyrat (6%)

R028BY094NV — CALCAREOUS LOAM 10-14 P.Z.

Tecomar (5%)

R028BY008NV — SHALLOW CALCAREOUS SLOPE 10-12 P.Z.

Mijoysee (2%)

R028BY066NV — LIMESTONE HILL

Acres in AOI

Percent of AOI

4.4

0.3%

54.7

4.1%

16.8

1.3%

Rock outcrop (2%) 991

Blimo-Zerk association

Blimo (70%)

R028BY014NV — LOAMY PLAIN 8-10 P.Z.

Zerk (20%)

R028BY084NV — COARSE SILTY 6-8 P.Z.

Unnamed (10%) 1230

Garfan-McIveyHutchley association

Garfan (50%)

R028BY035NV — GRAVELLY CLAYPAN 14+ P.Z.

McIvey (20%)

R028BY030NV — LOAMY 12-16 P.Z.

Hutchley (15%)

R028BY034NV — MOUNTAIN RIDGE 12-14 P.Z.

Cassiro (9%)

R028BY046NV — GRAVELLY LOAM 12-14 P.Z.

114

Custom Soil Resource Report

Map unit symbol

1392

1451

Map unit name

Chen-McIveyBirchcreek association

Birchcreek-SeguraChen association

Component name (percent)

Ecological site

Chen (5%)

R028BY037NV — CLAYPAN 12-14 P.Z.

Bigwash (1%)

R028BY095NV — DRY MEADOW 12-16 P.Z.

Chen (45%)

R028BY037NV — CLAYPAN 12-14 P.Z.

Birchcreek (20%)

R028BY046NV — GRAVELLY LOAM 12-14 P.Z.

McIvey (20%)

R028BY030NV — LOAMY 12-16 P.Z.

Suak (9%)

R028BY032NV — STONY MAHOGANY SAVANNA

Segura (6%)

R028BY087NV — GRAVELLY CLAY 12-14 P.Z.

Birchcreek (45%)

R028BY046NV — GRAVELLY LOAM 12-14 P.Z.

Segura (25%)

R028BY087NV — GRAVELLY CLAY 12-14 P.Z.

Chen (20%)

R028BY037NV — CLAYPAN 12-14 P.Z.

Acres in AOI

Percent of AOI

14.8

1.1%

56.8

4.2%

31.4

2.3%

38.7

2.9%

Unnamed (10%) 1520

Fax-Yody-Broland association

Fax (45%)

R028BY086NV — GRAVELLY CLAY 10-12 P.Z.

Yody (25%)

R028BY086NV — GRAVELLY CLAY 10-12 P.Z.

Broland (20%)

R028BY089NV — SHALLOW CLAY LOAM 10-12 P.Z.

Unnamed (10%) 3262

GrandepositGrandeposit, dry Majorsplace(40%) Grube association Majorsplace (35%)

F028BY062NV — PIMO-JUOS/ ARTRV/PSSPSACTH7 R028BY059NV — SHALLOW CALCAREOUS HILL 8-12 P.Z.

115

Custom Soil Resource Report

Map unit symbol

Map unit name

Component name (percent)

Ecological site

Grube (15%)

R028BY079NV — SHALLOW LOAM 10-14 P.Z.

Atlow (4%)

R028BY089NV — SHALLOW CLAY LOAM 10-12 P.Z.

Acres in AOI

Percent of AOI

Rubble land (3%) Devilsgait (1%)

R028BY103NV — STREAMBANK 12+

Lehmandow (1%)

R028AY072NV — WET MEADOW

Steptoe (1%)

R028BY103NV — STREAMBANK 12+

Totals for Area of Interest

1,338.2

116

100.0%

References American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262 Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084

117

Custom Soil Resource Report United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf

118

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Appendix G. Soils Mapbook

LEGEND Project Footprint

Soil Map Units 1230 - Raglan-Mazuma association 226 - Enko-Rad association 297 - Creemon-Orovada-Tulase association 690 - Sodhouse-Golconda association

Page 1 of 20 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Aerial (2021); USDA (2003). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

SOILS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX G_AR_SOILS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

LEGEND Project Footprint

Soil Map Units 1230 - Raglan-Mazuma association 226 - Enko-Rad association 3262 - Grandeposit-MajorsplaceGrube association

Page 2 of 20 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Aerial (2021); USDA (2003). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

SOILS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX G_AR_SOILS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

LEGEND Project Footprint

Soil Map Units 109 - Hyzen-Cavehill association 286 - Chiara-Jenor association 53 - Zola loam 0 to 2 percent slopes

Page 3 of 20 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Aerial (2021); USDA (2003). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

SOILS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX G_AR_SOILS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

LEGEND Project Footprint

Soil Map Units 233 - Dun Glen very fine sandy loam 0 to 2 percent slopes 1 / 286 - Chiara-Jenor association 53 - Zola loam 0 to 2 percent slopes 810 - Batan-Goldrun association 991 - Hyzen-Cavehill-Tecomar association

¬ « US93

Page 4 of 20 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Aerial (2021); USDA (2003). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

SOILS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX G_AR_SOILS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

LEGEND Project Footprint

Soil Map Units 991 - Hyzen-Cavehill-Tecomar association

Page 5 of 20 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Aerial (2021); USDA (2003). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

SOILS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX G_AR_SOILS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

LEGEND Project Footprint

Soil Map Units 189 - Cleavage-SoftscrabbleSumine complex 710 - Xipe silt loam 1/ 991 - Hyzen-Cavehill-Tecomar association

Page 6 of 20 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Aerial (2021); USDA (2003). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

SOILS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX G_AR_SOILS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

SR490

LEGEND Project Footprint

Soil Map Units 189 - Cleavage-SoftscrabbleSumine complex 282 - Bloor-Enko association 53 - Zola loam 0 to 2 percent slopes 710 - Xipe silt loam 1/ 977 - Zimbob-Pookaloo association

SR490

Page 7 of 20 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Aerial (2021); USDA (2003). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

SOILS

SR490 I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX G_AR_SOILS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

SR490

LEGEND Project Footprint

Soil Map Units 111 - Aycab-Alta-Tosp association 351 - Cowbell-Brownsbowl association 53 - Zola loam 0 to 2 percent slopes 911 - Barnard-Devada association

Page 8 of 20 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Aerial (2021); USDA (2003). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

SOILS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX G_AR_SOILS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

LEGEND Project Footprint

Soil Map Units 111 - Aycab-Alta-Tosp association 53 - Zola loam 0 to 2 percent slopes

Page 9 of 20 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Aerial (2021); USDA (2003). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

SOILS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX G_AR_SOILS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

LEGEND Project Footprint

Soil Map Units 53 - Zola loam 0 to 2 percent slopes

Page 10 of 20 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Aerial (2021); USDA (2003). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

SOILS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX G_AR_SOILS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

LEGEND Project Footprint

Soil Map Units 100 - Anawalt-Vanwyper-Alyan association 481 - Ninemile-WestbutteSoftscrabble association 53 - Zola loam 0 to 2 percent slopes

Page 11 of 20 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Aerial (2021); USDA (2003). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

SOILS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX G_AR_SOILS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

LEGEND Project Footprint

Soil Map Units 100 - Anawalt-Vanwyper-Alyan association 1451 - Atlow-Reluctan-Trunk association 567 - Softscrabble-Dosie-Hutchley association

Page 12 of 20 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Aerial (2021); USDA (2003). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

SOILS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX G_AR_SOILS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

LEGEND Project Footprint

Soil Map Units 1451 - Atlow-Reluctan-Trunk association 481 - Ninemile-WestbutteSoftscrabble association

Page 13 of 20 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Aerial (2021); USDA (2003). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

SOILS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX G_AR_SOILS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

¬ « US50

LEGEND Project Footprint

Soil Map Units 100 - Anawalt-Vanwyper-Alyan association 1392 - Ninemile-Newlands association 1451 - Atlow-Reluctan-Trunk association 481 - Ninemile-WestbutteSoftscrabble association

Page 14 of 20 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Aerial (2021); USDA (2003). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

SOILS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX G_AR_SOILS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

¬ « US50

LEGEND Project Footprint

Soil Map Units 1392 - Ninemile-Newlands association 1451 - Atlow-Reluctan-Trunk association 763 - Segura-Douhide-McIvey association

Page 15 of 20 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Aerial (2021); USDA (2003). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

SOILS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX G_AR_SOILS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

LEGEND Project Footprint

Soil Map Units 1520 - Croesus-Rock outcrop complex, 50 to 75 percent slopes 760 - Piline complex 763 - Segura-Douhide-McIvey association

Page 16 of 20 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Aerial (2021); USDA (2003). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

SOILS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX G_AR_SOILS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

LEGEND Project Footprint

Soil Map Units 1520 - Croesus-Rock outcrop complex, 50 to 75 percent slopes 760 - Piline complex

Page 17 of 20 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Aerial (2021); USDA (2003). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

SOILS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX G_AR_SOILS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

LEGEND Project Footprint

Soil Map Units 108 - Anawalt-Oreneva complex 1520 - Croesus-Rock outcrop complex, 50 to 75 percent slopes 760 - Piline complex

Page 18 of 20 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Aerial (2021); USDA (2003). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

SOILS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX G_AR_SOILS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

LEGEND Project Footprint

Soil Map Units 108 - Anawalt-Oreneva complex 1520 - Croesus-Rock outcrop complex, 50 to 75 percent slopes 752 - Snapp-Orovada association

Page 19 of 20 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Aerial (2021); USDA (2003). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

SOILS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX G_AR_SOILS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

LEGEND Project Footprint

Soil Map Units 286 - Chiara-Jenor association 531 - Raglan-Isolde association 752 - Snapp-Orovada association

Page 20 of 20 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Aerial (2021); USDA (2003). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

SOILS

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX G_AR_SOILS.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Appendix H. Vegetation Communities Mapbook

LEGEND Project Footprint

Page 1 of 15 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Imagery (2022) DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

VEGETATION COMMUNITIES

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_H_AR_VEGETATION_COMMUNITIES.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

LEGEND Project Footprint

Page 2 of 15 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Imagery (2022) DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

VEGETATION COMMUNITIES

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_H_AR_VEGETATION_COMMUNITIES.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

LEGEND Project Footprint

Page 3 of 15 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Imagery (2022) DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

VEGETATION COMMUNITIES

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_H_AR_VEGETATION_COMMUNITIES.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

LEGEND Project Footprint

Page 4 of 15

¬ « US50

DATA SOURCES: NAIP Imagery (2022) DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

VEGETATION COMMUNITIES

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_H_AR_VEGETATION_COMMUNITIES.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

¬ « US50

LEGEND Project Footprint

Page 5 of 15 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Imagery (2022) DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

VEGETATION COMMUNITIES

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_H_AR_VEGETATION_COMMUNITIES.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

LEGEND Project Footprint

Page 6 of 15 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Imagery (2022) DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

VEGETATION COMMUNITIES

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_H_AR_VEGETATION_COMMUNITIES.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

LEGEND Project Footprint

Page 7 of 15 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Imagery (2022) DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

VEGETATION COMMUNITIES

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_H_AR_VEGETATION_COMMUNITIES.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

SR490

LEGEND Project Footprint

Page 8 of 15 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Imagery (2022) DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

VEGETATION COMMUNITIES

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_H_AR_VEGETATION_COMMUNITIES.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

SR490

LEGEND Project Footprint

SR490

Page 9 of 15 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Imagery (2022) DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

VEGETATION COMMUNITIES

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_H_AR_VEGETATION_COMMUNITIES.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

LEGEND Project Footprint

SR490

Page 10 of 15 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Imagery (2022) DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

VEGETATION COMMUNITIES

0 SR490

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_H_AR_VEGETATION_COMMUNITIES.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

LEGEND Project Footprint

Vegetation Communites N22: Developed, Medium - High Intensity S055: Great Basin Xeric Mixed Sagebrush Shrubland - Disturbed S065: Inter-Mountain Basins Mixed Desert Scrub

Page 11 of 15 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Imagery (2022) DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

VEGETATION COMMUNITIES

¬ « US93

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_H_AR_VEGETATION_COMMUNITIES.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

¬ « US93

LEGEND Project Footprint

Vegetation Communites Railroad S055: Great Basin Xeric Mixed Sagebrush Shrubland S071: Inter-Mountain Basins Montane Sagebrush Steppe

Page 12 of 15 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Imagery (2022) DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

VEGETATION COMMUNITIES

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_H_AR_VEGETATION_COMMUNITIES.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

LEGEND Project Footprint

Vegetation Communites Hardscape Road Railroad D08: Invasive Annual Grassland N22: Developed, Medium - High Intensity S040: Great Basin Pinyon-Juniper Woodland - Closed S040: Great Basin Pinyon-Juniper Woodland - Open S055: Great Basin Xeric Mixed Sagebrush Shrubland S055: Great Basin Xeric Mixed Sagebrush Shrubland - Disturbed S055: Great Basin Xeric Mixed Sagebrush Shrubland - Juniper Savannah

¬ « US93

S065: Inter-Mountain Basins Mixed Desert Scrub S071: Inter-Mountain Basins Montane Sagebrush Steppe S090: Inter-Mountain Basins SemiDesert Grassland

Page 13 of 15 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Imagery (2022) DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

VEGETATION COMMUNITIES

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_H_AR_VEGETATION_COMMUNITIES.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

LEGEND Project Footprint

No Data Available

Vegetation Communites S040: Great Basin Pinyon-Juniper Woodland - Closed S040: Great Basin Pinyon-Juniper Woodland - Open S050: Inter-Mountain Basins Curl-Leaf Mountain Mahogany Woodland S053: Great Basin Semi-Desert Chaparral S071: Inter-Mountain Basins Montane Sagebrush Steppe

Page 14 of 15 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Imagery (2022) DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

VEGETATION COMMUNITIES

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_H_AR_VEGETATION_COMMUNITIES.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

LEGEND CR 486

Project Footprint

No Data Available

Vegetation Communites Hardscape Road S040: Great Basin Pinyon-Juniper Woodland - Closed S040: Great Basin Pinyon-Juniper Woodland - Open S053: Great Basin Semi-Desert Chaparral S055: Great Basin Xeric Mixed Sagebrush Shrubland S118: Inter-Mountain Basins Montane Riparian System

Page 15 of 15 DATA SOURCES: NAIP Imagery (2022) DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

VEGETATION COMMUNITIES

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_H_AR_VEGETATION_COMMUNITIES.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

500 FEET

1,000

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Appendix I. Plant List

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Vascular Plant Species Observed in the Aquatic Resources Study area Scientific Name

Common Name

Corps Wetland Indicator Status Rating (Arid West)1

LYCOPODS SELAGINELLACEAE – SPIKE MOSS FAMILY Selaginella watsonii

Watson's Spike Moss

FERNS WOODSIACEAE – CLIFF FERN FAMILY Woodsia oregana

Oregon Cliff Fern

GYMNOSPERMS CUPRESSACEAE – CYPRESS FAMILY Callitropsis arizonica

Arizona Cypress

Juniperus osteosperma

Utah Juniper

EPHEDRACEAE – EPHEDRA FAMILY Ephedra viridis var. viridis

Mormon Tea

PINACEAE – PINE FAMILY Pinus monophylla

Single Leaf Pinyon

EUDICOTS ADOXACEAE – ADOXA FAMILY Sambucus nigra ssp. caerulea

Blue Elderberry

AMARANTHACEAE – AMARANTH FAMILY Atriplex confertifolia

Shadscale

Grayia spinosa

Spiny hop sage

Halogeton glomeratus*

Saltlover

Kochia prostrata*

Prostrate Smotherweed

Krascheninnikovia lanata

Winterfat

Salsola tragus*

Prickly Russian Thistle

Appendix I-1

FACU

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Common Name

Corps Wetland Indicator Status Rating (Arid West)1

Berula erecta

Cut Leaf Water Parsnip

OBL

Cymopterus ibapensis

Ibapah spring parsley

Cymopterus purpurascens

Widewing Spring Parsley

Lomatium cf. dissectum

Cut Leaf Desert Parsley

Lomatium foeniculaceum

Carrot Leaf Desert Parsley

Lomatium nudicaule

Indian consumption plant

Scientific Name APIACEAE – CARROT FAMILY

APOCYNACEAE – DOGBANE FAMILY Asclepias hallii

Hall's milkweed

ASTERACEAE – SUNFLOWER FAMILY Achillea millefolium

Woolly Yarrow

FACU

Agoseris parviflora

Small Flower Goat Chicory

FACU

Artemisia arbuscula

Little Sagebrush

Artemisia ludoviciana

White Sagebrush

Artemisia nova

Black Sagebrush

Artemisia pygmaea

Pygmy Sagebrush

Artemisia tridentata ssp. tridentata

Basin Big Sagebrush

Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana

Mountain Big Sagebrush

Balsamorhiza sagittata

Arrow Leaf Balsamroot

Carduus nutans*

Nodding Plumeless Thistle

Chaetopappa ericoides

Rose Heath

Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus var. puberulus

Yellow Rabbitbrush

Cirsium arvense*

Canadian Thistle

FACU

Cirsium scariosum

Meadow Thistle

FAC

Cirsium vulgare*

Bull Thistle

FACU

Crepis intermedia

Limestone Hawk's Beard

Appendix I-2

FACU

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Corps Wetland Indicator Status Rating (Arid West)1

Scientific Name

Common Name

Dieteria canescens var. leucanthemifolia

Hoary Tansyaster

Enceliopsis nudicaulis

Naked Stem Sunray

Ericameria nauseosa var. hololeuca

Rubber Rabbitbrush

Erigeron cf. caespitosus

Tufted Fleabane

Erigeron leiomerus

Rockslide Fleabane

Gutierrezia sarothrae

Broom Snakeweed

Hymenopappus filifolius

Fine Leaf Woollywhite

Ionactis alpina

Lava Ankle Aster

Iva axillaris

Deer Root

Malacothrix torreyi

Torrey's Desert Dandelion

Packera multilobata

Lobe Leaf Groundsel

Petradoria pumila

Grassy Rock Goldenrod

Picrothamnus desertorum

Bud Sagebrush

Pleiacanthus spinosa

Thorny Skeletonweed

Senecio integerrimus

Lamb Tongue Ragwort

Stenotus acaulis var. acaulis

Stemless Mock Goldenweed

Symphyotrichum spathulatum var. spathulatum

Western Mountain Aster

FAC

Taraxacum officinale*

Common Dandelion

FACU

Tetradymia canescens

Spineless Horsebrush

Tragopogon dubius*

Meadow Goat's Beard

BERBERIDACEAE – BARBERRY FAMILY Berberis repens

Creeping Oregon Grape

BORAGINACEAE – BORAGE FAMILY Amsinckia tessellate

Devil’s Lettuce

Cryptantha cinerea var. abortiva

James' cryptantha

Appendix I-3

FACU

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Scientific Name

Common Name

Cryptantha torreyana

Torrey's Cat's Eye

Hackelia patens var. patens

Spotted Stickseed

Hydrophyllum capitatum var. alpinum

Alpine Waterleaf

Lappula occidentalis

Flat Spine Sheepburr

Mertensia oblongifolia

Green Bluebells

Phacelia crenulata

Notch Leaf Phacelia

Corps Wetland Indicator Status Rating (Arid West)1

FAC

BRASSICACEAE – MUSTARD FAMILY Boechera retrofracta

Holboell's Rock Cress

Caulanthus crassicaulis

Thick Stem Wild Cabbage

Chorispora tenella*

Crossflower

Descurainia sophia*

Pinnate Tansy Mustard

Lepidium virginicum

Poorman's Pepperwort

FACU

Nasturtium officinale

Watercress

OBL

Sisymbrium altissimum

Tall Hedge Mustard

FACU

Sisymbrium linifolium

Flaxleaf Plainsmustard

Stanleya pinnata var. pinnata

Golden Prince’s Plume

Thlaspi arvense*

Field Pennycress

CACTACEAE – CACTUS FAMILY Escobaria vivipara

Spinystar

Opuntia polyacantha

Plains Pricklypear

Pediocactus simpsonii

Mountain Ball Cactus

Pediocactus simpsonii

Simpson's Pincushion Cactus

CAPRIFOLIACEAE – HONEYSUCKLE FAMILY Symphoricarpos oreophilus var. utahensis

Utah Mountain Snowberry

CARYOPHYLLACEAE – PINK FAMILY

Appendix I-4

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Scientific Name

Common Name

Eremogone congesta var. congesta

Ball Head Matted Sandwort

Corps Wetland Indicator Status Rating (Arid West)1

CRASSULACEAE – STONECROP FAMILY Sedum cf. debile

Weak Stem Stonecrop

CROSSOSOMATACEAE – ROCKFLOWER FAMILY Glossopetalon spinescens var. microphyllum

Spiny Greasebush

FABACEAE – LEGUME FAMILY Astragalus argophyllus var. argophyllus

Silver Leaf Milk Vetch

FACW

Astragalus cibarius

Browse Milk Vetch

Astragalus cf. filipes

Basalt Milk Vetch

Astragalus purshii var. purshii

Pursh's Milk Vetch

Lupinus arbustus

Long Spur Lupine

Lupinus holosericeus

Holo Lupine

Lupinus prunophilus

Hairy Bigleaf Lupine

Thermopsis montana var. montana

Montane Golden Banner

FAC

Trifolium repens*

White Clover

FACU

GERANIACEAE – GERANIUM FAMILY Erodium cicutarium*

Red Stem Stork's Bill

GROSSULARIACEAE – GOOSEBERRY FAMILY Ribes aureum

Golden Currant

Ribes cereum

White Squaw Currant

Ribes velutinum

Desert Gooseberry

FAC

LAMIACEAE – MINT FAMILY Marrubium vulgare*

White Horehound

FACU

Mentha arvensis*

American Wild Mint

FACW

Appendix I-5

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Scientific Name

Common Name

Corps Wetland Indicator Status Rating (Arid West)1

LINACEAE – FLAX FAMILY Linum cf. perenne

Blue Flax

LOASACEAE – LOASA FAMILY Mentzelia albicaulis

White Stem Blazingstar

Mentzelia laevicaulis

Giant Blazingstar

MALVACEAE – MALLOW FAMILY Sidalcea cf. oregana

Oregon Checkerbloom

Sphaeralcea parvifolia

Small Leaf Globe Mallow

MONTIACEAE – MINER'S LETTUCE FAMILY Oregon Bitter Root

Lewisia rediviva ONAGRACEAE – EVENING PRIMROSE FAMILY Eremothera boothii var. alyssoides

Alyssum Evening Primrose

Gayophytum decipiens

Deceptive Groundsmoke

Oenothera caespitosa var. crinita

Tufted Evening Primrose

OROBANCHACEAE – BROOMRAPE FAMILY Castilleja angustifolia var. dubia

Northwestern Indian Paintbrush

Castilleja linariifolia

Wyoming Indian Paintbrush

Pedicularis centranthera

Dwarf Lousewort

PAPAVERACEAE – POPPY FAMILY Argemone munita ssp. rotundata

Round Flat Bud Prickly Poppy

PLANTAGINACEAE – PLANTAIN FAMILY Collinsia parviflora

Small Flower Blue Eyed Mary

Penstemon confusus

Owens Valley Beardtongue

Appendix I-6

FACW

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Scientific Name

Common Name

Penstemon pachyphyllus var. congestus

Thickleaf Beardtongue

Penstemon palmeri var. palmeri

Palmer’s Beardtongue

Penstemon watsonii

Watson's Beardtongue

Veronica anagallis-aquatica*

Blue Water Speedwell

Corps Wetland Indicator Status Rating (Arid West)1

OBL

POLEMONIACEAE – PHLOX FAMILY Aliciella micromeria

Dainty Cheat Gily Flower

Eriastrum sparsiflorum

Great Basin Woollystar

Gilia inconspicua

Shy Gily Flower

Ipomopsis macrosiphon

Large Tube Skyrocket

Microsteris gracilis

Annual Phlox

Phlox hoodii ssp. muscoides

Musk Phlox

Phlox longifolia

Long Leaf Phlox

Phlox pulvinata

Cushion Phlox

FACU

POLYGONACEAE – BUCKWHEAT FAMILY Eriogonum caespitosum

Matted Wild Buckwheat

Eriogonum cernuum

Nodding Wild Buckwheat

Eriogonum heracleoides var. heracleoides

Parsnip Flower Wild Buckwheat

Eriogonum microthecum var. simpsonii

Simpson's Buckwheat

Eriogonum ovalifolium var. nivale

Cushion Wild Buckwheat

Eriogonum umbellatum var. versicolor

Sulphur Flower Wild Buckwheat

Polygonum aviculare*

Yard Knotweed

RANUNCULACEAE – BUTTERCUP FAMILY Aquilegia shockleyi

Shockley's Columbine

Delphinium depauperatum

Slim Larkspur

Appendix I-7

FACU

FAC

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Corps Wetland Indicator Status Rating (Arid West)1

Scientific Name

Common Name

Delphinium scaposum var. andersonii

Anderson's Bare Stem Larkspur

Cyrtorhyncha cymbalaria

Akali Buttercup

OBL

Ranunculus glaberrimus var. elipticus

Sagebrush Buttercup

FAC

Ranunculus testiculatus

Curveseed Butterwort

RHAMNACEAE – BUCKTHORN FAMILY Ceanothus martinii

Martin's Ceanothus

ROSACEAE – ROSE FAMILY Amelanchier alnifolia

Saskatoon Service Berry

FACU

Cercocarpus ledifolius

Curl Leaf Mountain Mahogany

Holodiscus discolor

Oceanspray

Petrophytum caespitosum

Rocky Mountain Rockmat

Potentilla rubricaulis

Rocky Mountain Cinquefoil

Potentilla X diversifolia

Varileaf Cinquefoil

Prunus virginiana var. demissa

Western Chokecherry

Purshia tridentata

Antelope Bitterbrush

Rosa woodsii

Woods' Rose

FACU

Populus tremuloides

Quaking Aspen

FACU

Salix boothii

Barren Ground Willow

FACW

Salix exigua

Narrow Leaf Willow

FACW

FACU

FAC

SALICACEAE – WILLOW FAMILY

SANTALACEAE – SANDALWOOD FAMILY Comandra umbellata

Bastard Toadflax

SAPINDACEAE – SOAPBERRY FAMILY Acer negundo

Ash Leaf Maple

Appendix I-8

FACW

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Scientific Name

Common Name

Corps Wetland Indicator Status Rating (Arid West)1

Greasewood

FACU

SARCOBATACEAE – GREASEWOOD FAMILY Sarcobatus vermiculatus SAXIFRAGACEAE – SAXIFRAGE FAMILY Lithophragma tenellum

Slender Woodlandstar

URTICACEAE – NETTLE FAMILY Urtica dioica ssp. holosericea

Hoary Nettle

FAC

VIOLACEAE – VIOLET FAMILY Viola nuttallii

Yellow Prairie Violet

HORNWORTS CERATOPHYLLACEAE – HORNWORT FAMILY Ceratophyllum demersum

Hornwort

OBL

MONOCOTS AMARYLLIDACEAE – AMARYLLIS FAMILY Allium atrorubens

Dark Red Onion

ASPARAGACEAE – ASPARAGUS FAMILY Star Lily

Leucocrinum montanum CYPERACEAE – SEDGE FAMILY Carex douglasii

Douglas' Sedge

FAC

Carex nebrascensis

Nebraska Sedge

OBL

Eleocharis rostellata

Beaked Spike Rush

OBL

Iris missouriensis

Missouri Iris

FACW

Sisyrinchium halophilum

Nevada Blue Eyed Grass

FACW

Baltic Rush

FACW

IRIDACEAE – IRIS FAMILY

JUNCACEAE – RUSH FAMILY Juncus balticus

Appendix I-9

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Scientific Name

Common Name

Corps Wetland Indicator Status Rating (Arid West)1

Juncus nevadensis

Sierran Rush

FACW

Juncus saximontanus

Rocky Mountain Rush

FACW

LILIACEAE – LILY FAMILY Calochortus bruneaunis

Bruneau Mariposa Lily

Calochortus nuttallii

Sego Lily

Fritillaria atropurpurea

Spotted Missionbells

MELANTHIACEAE – CAMAS FAMILY Toxicoscordion venenosum

Nerve Death Camas

FACU

POACEAE – GRASS FAMILY Achnatherum hymenoides

Indian Ricegrass

Achnatherum lettermanii

Letterman's Rice Grass

Achnatherum pinetorum

Pine Needlegrass

Agropyron cristatum*

Crested Wheat Grass

Bouteloua gracilis

Blue Grama

Bromus tectorum*

Cheat Grass

Catabrosa aquatica*

Water Whorl Grass

OBL

Deschampsia caespitosa

Tufted Hair Grass

FACW

Elymus elymoides

Western Bottle Brush Grass

FACU

Elymus lanceolatus

Streamside Wild Rye

Glyceria striata

Fowl Manna Grass

OBL

Hordeum brachyantherum

Meadow Barley

FACW

Hordeum jubatum

Fox Tail Barley

FAC

Leymus cinereus

Great Basin Lyme Grass

FAC

Muhlenbergia richardsonis

Matted Muhly

FAC

Poa bulbosa

Bulbous Bluegrass

FACU

Poa compressa*

Canada Bluegrass

FACU

Appendix I-10

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Scientific Name

Common Name

Corps Wetland Indicator Status Rating (Arid West)1

Poa secunda

Sandberg Bluegrass

FACU

Pseudoroegneria spicata

Bluebunch Wheatgrass

* Non-native species cf. confer: This designation is used when a species or infraspecific taxon cannot be confirmed, but is believed to be the selected species of infraspecific taxon based on available anatomy. Obligate (OBL): Plants that occur almost always (estimated probability >99 percent) in wetlands under natural conditions, but which may also occur rarely (estimated probability <1 percent) in non-wetlands (Environmental Laboratory 1987). 1

1Facultative Wetland Plants (FACW): Plants that occur usually (estimated probability >67 percent to

99 percent) in wetlands, but also occur (estimated probability 1 percent to 33 percent) in nonwetlands (Environmental Laboratory 1987).

1Facultative Plants (FAC): Plants with a similar likelihood (estimated probability 33 percent to 67

percent) of occurring in both wetlands and non-wetlands (Environmental Laboratory 1987).

1Facultative Upland Plants (FACU): Plants that occur sometimes (estimated probability 1 percent to

<33 percent) in wetlands, but occur more often (estimated probability >67 percent to 99 percent) in non-wetlands (Environmental Laboratory 1987). 1Obligate Upland Plants (OBL): Plants that occur rarely (estimated probability <1 percent) in

wetlands, but occur almost always (estimated probability >99 percent) in non-wetlands under natural conditions (Environmental Laboratory 1987).

Appendix I-11

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Appendix J. Nearest Traditional Navigable Water Map

Pacific Northwest Region

ID A H O

OREGON

Pacific Northwest Region

UTAH

NEVAD A

Project Location

C A LI F O R N I A

A R IZ O N A

LEGEND Project Footprint HUC-2 Boundary Traditional Navigable Water

Great Basin Region

Great Salt Lake

DATA SOURCES: HDR, Inc. (2021); ESRI Topo (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

California Region Lower Colorado Region

NEAREST TRADITIONAL NAVIGABLE WATER

G:\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_J_AR_NAVIGABLE_WATERS.MXD - JOBAIRD - 12/22/2022

25 MILES

Aquatic Resources Delineation Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Appendix K. Regional Hydrology Map

Bassett Lake

Duck Creek

To Goshute Lake See Inset 1

Goshute Lake

Duck Creek Reservoir Steptoe Slough

LEGEND ( !

Aquatic Resources Project Footprint Lake/Pond

EC6

Swamp/Marsh

( !

Stream/River

Inset 1 EC53

EC7

( !

EC49

EC10 !! ( ( ! (

!! ( ( (! (! (!

a le G

EC51

EC11 EC52

n so e Cr

Steptoe Creek

EC50

EC43

EC12

EC8

( !

EC39

( !

EC9

( !

EC23

W2 ( !

EC13

EC37

EC27

PC2 ( !

EC40

! ( ( ! ( (! (! !! (

PC1 EC38

DATA SOURCES: HDR, Inc. (2021); Bing Aerial (2021); National Hydrography Dataset (2021). DISCLAIMER: Map information was compiled from the best available sources. No warranty is made for its accuracy or completeness. Actual survey boundaries may extend beyond the project footprint depicted.

REGIONAL HYDROLOGY

Murry C reek

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_K_AR_REGIONAL_HYDROLOGY.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

1 MILES

To Goshute Lake See Inset 1

LEGEND ( !

EC4

EC5 ! ( ( !

Aquatic Resources Project Footprint Stream/River

( !

EC6

EC3 ( ! ( !

EC1

( ! n aso Gle

EC53

ek Cre

Illipah Creek

Inset 1

EC2

REGIONAL HYDROLOGY

I:\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\AQUATICRESOURCES_STHOMASCOPIES\APPENDIX_K_AR_REGIONAL_HYDROLOGY.MXD - SGRIFFIN - 12/16/2022

1 MILES

Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project Prepared by HDR Engineering, Inc. for White Pine Waterpower, LLC. White Pine County, Nevada

January 2023

This page is intentionally blank.

Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Contents 1

Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1

Project Description .................................................................................................................... 1

1.2

Study Area ................................................................................................................................. 1

1.3

Environmental Setting ............................................................................................................... 3

Methods ............................................................................................................................................... 4 2.1

Definitions and Standards ......................................................................................................... 4

2.2

Database Search ....................................................................................................................... 4

2.3

Preparation for the Study .......................................................................................................... 4

2.4

Field Methodology ..................................................................................................................... 5

2.5

Survey Timing ........................................................................................................................... 5

Results ................................................................................................................................................. 6 3.1

Database Search ....................................................................................................................... 6

3.2

Soils ........................................................................................................................................... 7

3.3

Special-Status Plant Species .................................................................................................... 7 3.3.1 Plains Pricklypear (Opuntia polyacantha) .................................................................... 8 3.3.2 Mountain Ball Cactus (Pediocactus simpsonii) ............................................................ 8

3.4

Noxious Weeds ......................................................................................................................... 8 3.4.1 Canada Thistle (Cirsium arvense)................................................................................ 8 3.4.2 Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) .................................................................................... 8 3.4.3 Musk Thistle (Carduus nutans) .................................................................................... 9

References ........................................................................................................................................ 10

January 2023 | i

Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Tables Table 1. Survey Events ................................................................................................................................. 5 Table 2. BLM Sensitive Plant Species Potentially Occurring in the Study Area ........................................... 6

Figures Figure 1. Project Location and Study Area .................................................................................................. 2

Appendices Appendix A. Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Plan Appendix B. Vascular Plant Species Observed in the Study Area Appendix C. Protected Cactus Species Observed in the Study Area Appendix D. State of Nevada Noxious Weed Species Observed in the Study Area

ii | January 2023

Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Acronyms and Abbreviations BLM ESA GPS IPaC NRCS Project USFWS WPW

Bureau of Land Management Endangered Species Act Global Positioning System Information for Planning and Consultation

Natural Resources Conservation Service White Pine Pumped Storage Project U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service White Pine Waterpower, LLC

January 2023 | iii

Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Introduction

This Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Report has been prepared by HDR for White Pine Waterpower, LLC (WPW) in support of the licensing of the proposed White Pine Pumped Storage Project (FERC Number 14851) (Project). This report describes the results of the specialstatus plants and noxious weeds study (study) conducted in 2021 and 2022.

1.1

Project Description

1.2

Study Area

The study area was defined in the Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Plan (Study Plan) (Appendix A), consisting of lands projected to be affected by Project construction (Project footprint) and operation (Project boundary) for which access permission was granted, which is approximately 1,338 acres in size (Error! Reference source not found.). Additional surveys to support this study are planned for 2023 in areas within the Project footprint that have been added to the Project design since the 2022 field study was conducted. These added areas are labeled as No Data in the maps attached to this study report. For the purposes of this report, the study area is separated into three components. These consist of: •

The proposed upper reservoir vicinity. This portion includes the proposed upper reservoir and Duck Creek Access.

•

The proposed lower reservoir vicinity. This portion includes the proposed lower reservoir, wellfield, and the portion of the transmission line and substation occurring east of US-93.

•

The proposed transmission corridor. This portion includes all other areas of the project west of US-93.

January 2023 | 1

Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Figure 1. Project Location and Study Area

2 | January 2023

Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

1.3

Environmental Setting

The study area occurs between elevations 6,140 and 8,650 feet above mean sea level in the Central Basin and Range Ecoregion of Nevada (United States Geologic Survey 2012). The average temperatures range from 39.0 degrees Fahrenheit in January to 86.9 degrees Fahrenheit in July. The average annual rainfall for the period of record (1892-2016) in the study area is 8.86 inches, which is partially comprised of an average annual snowfall of 22.10 inches (Western Regional Climate Center 2021). Broadly, the study area is dominated by sagebrush scrub in areas below 6,800 feet and pinyonjuniper woodland above 6,500 feet. A riparian woodland occurs at the east end of the study area. Chaparral habitat types also occur intermittently in the study area. Seasonal cattle grazing occurs throughout the study area. Specific vegetation types are mapped in the 2022 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Wildlife Species Study Report (HDR 2022a) for the Project with descriptions and a detailed map included therein. The sagebrush scrub in the study area is dominated by a mixture of little sagebrush (Artemisia arbuscula), black sagebrush (Artemisia nova), and mountain big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana) in the shrub community, along with scattered occurrences of broom snakeweed (Gutierrezia sarothrae), basin big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata ssp. tridentata), matted wild buckwheat (Eriogonum caespitosum), and rubber rabbitbrush (Ericameria nauseosa). In some isolated areas, big sagebrush is the dominant species. A steppe form of this habitat also occurs in the study area, with lesser cover of woody shrubs and greater cover of grasses such as thickspike wheatgrass (Elymus lanceolatus), Sandberg bluegrass (Poa secunda), bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata), Letterman’s rice grass (Achnatherum lettermanii), and Indian rice grass (Achnatherum hymenoides). Stands of chaparral or mountain mahogany woodland occur in this habitat in which either antelope bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata) or curl leaf mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus ledifolius) is the dominant species. The pinyon-juniper woodland is a mix of Utah juniper (Juniperus osteosperma) and single-leaf pinyon (Pinus monophylla) with variable dominance of both species in the tree community, along with some occurrences of the same species found in sagebrush scrub in the shrub community, most notably matted wild buckwheat. The density of shrub species is directly correlated with how open the canopy is, with tree canopy cover of approximately 5 to 75 percent in the study area. A juniper savannah-like habitat occurs around the proposed reservoir locations that is similar to the steppe form of sagebrush scrub but differs in having cover of mature Utah juniper trees. A closed canopy riparian woodland occurs at the east end of the study area in Duck Creek. This habitat is dominated by barren ground willow (Salix boothii) along with some occurrences of ash leaf maple (Acer negundo) in the tree community. The shrub community is dominated by narrow leaf willow (Salix exigua), golden currant (Ribes aureum), and Woods’ rose (Rosa woodsii). Some open patches dominated by herbs occur in this habitat along creek banks, which are dominated by woolly yarrow (Achillea millefolium), bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare), watercress (Nasturtium officinale), and common dandelion (Taraxacum officinale). The most common herbaceous species observed in the study area were cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum), widewing spring parsley (Cymopterus purpurascens), thorny skeletonweed (Pleiacanthus spinosus), James’ cryptantha (Cryptantha cinera var. abortiva), flat spine sheepbur (Lappula occidentalis), long spur lupine (Lupinus arbustus), northwestern Indian paintbrush (Castilleja angustifolia var. dubia), and Simpson’s buckwheat (Eriogonum microthecum var. simpsonii). January 2023 | 3

Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Methods

The study was conducted in compliance with the study plan (Appendix A). No variances from the study plan were required.

2.1

Definitions and Standards

As defined in the study plan, special-status plants are those plants that are (1) listed under the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) as proposed or a candidate for listing as endangered, threatened or proposed for delisting; (2) listed by the State of Nevada as critically endangered; or (3) found on Nevada Regional Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land and formally listed as sensitive. Cactus species were also surveyed because the State of Nevada protects all species of cactus under Title 47, Chapter 527, §060 through §120 of Nevada Revised Statutes, and the BLM also protects all species of native cactus on BLM lands in Nevada. Noxious weeds are those plants that are included in the State of Nevada Noxious Weed List (Nevada Department of Agriculture 2021). Although not a designated noxious weed by the Nevada Department of Agriculture, cheatgrass was also surveyed using the methodology applied to noxious weeds. Documentation of all species observed used the taxonomy and nomenclature standard of the Integrated Taxonomic Information System Thesaurus filter of the Intermountain Region Herbarium Network (Intermountain Region Herbarium Network 2021).

2.2

Database Search

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) System was reviewed for ESA-listed plant species within 5 miles of the study area (USFWS 2022). Additionally, a list of BLM sensitive plants known to occur in White Pine County was downloaded and reviewed (BLM 2017; Nevada Division of Natural Heritage 2019; 2021), and records of these species were analyzed (Intermountain Region Herbarium Network 2021). Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) soil data for the study area was also reviewed to obtain information about unique soils that are sometimes required by special-status species (NRCS 2021a, 2021b).

2.3

Preparation for the Study

WPW prepared field maps and global positioning system (GPS) units for use in conducting field work. Forms were created to document information from the field in a consistent manner. Vegetation mapping surveys and vegetation transect measurements for greater sage-grouse habitat were conducted under related study efforts in 2021 and earlier in 2022 (HDR 2022a, 2022b, 2022c) (Table 1). Information from these studies served as site reconnaissance to compile photographs documenting site conditions, determine access and safety issues, and initiate a list of plant species in the study area. During a pre-study meeting, this information was shared with field crew members to familiarize them with the study area, discuss the survey methodology, and to plan for the field portions of the study.

4 | January 2023

Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

2.4

Field Methodology

The study was floristic in nature and followed the study plan, which conforms to the intuitive controlled survey found in Survey Protocols Required for NEPA and ESA Compliance for BLM Special Status Plant Species (BLM 2009). The surveyors used meandering transects to survey the study area for special-status plant species. These transects were located in areas of suitable habitat and surveyors were spaced approximately 50 to 100 feet apart, with spacing varying according to habitat type and shrub or tree density. Field leads directed the intensity of survey coverage in any given area based on slope, habitat suitability for special-status plants, and shrub or tree density. Plant species were identified in the field or collected for later identification. Any observed specialstatus plant and discrete noxious weed populations were mapped with a GPS unit and data were collected on the number of individuals. For special-status species, field crews collected information on site characteristics such as slope, aspect, soil texture, and associated species. Data on widespread populations of noxious weeds were collected in a manner to describe where they occur and provide an approximate population estimate. Noxious weed populations, when first found, are treated as discreet and mapped accordingly and only considered widespread after enough of the study area is surveyed and the noxious weed is found frequently enough to cease discreet mapping. For this study, widespread is defined as that the species occurs in more than 5 percent of the study area.

2.5

Survey Timing

Information collected during the study, as well as other studies that involved analyzing vegetation, was used to inform the results of the study. Table 1 depicts the survey timing, purpose of the survey, and number of personnel involved. Each survey day consisted of approximately 7 to 9 survey hours.

Table 1. Survey Events Dates of Survey

Survey Purpose

Number of Personnel Per day

September 15 to 16, 2020

Preliminary vegetation mapping

April 20 to 21, 2021

Supplemental vegetation mapping

May 3 to 9, 2021

Vegetation transect measurements supporting the Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study

May 17 to 20, 2021

Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study first full pass

June 28 to July 2, 2021

Aquatic Resources Delineation Study

June 29 to July 1, 2021

Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study light pass

July 12 to 15, 2021

Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study second full pass

May 16 to 18, 2022

Supplemental vegetation mapping and Special-Status Plants light pass

Supplemental Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study full pass

June 27 to July 1, 2022

January 2023 | 5

Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Results

3.1

Database Search

As discussed in the White Pine Pumped Storage Project Pre-Application Document (WPW 2020), no ESA-listed plant species were found in the first search of the USFWS IPaC system. A follow-up review in the IPaC system also found no records of ESA-listed plant species (USFWS 2022). Additionally, no plant species on the list of the State of Nevada Critically Endangered Plant species known or with potential to occur in White Pine County were determined to have the potential to occur in the study area. Eight BLM sensitive plant species, identified in the PAD (WPW 2020) from a search of the Nevada Division of Natural Heritages Records of Special Status Species and Occurrence Details for White Pine County (Nevada Division of Natural Heritage 2019) were determined to have the potential to occur in the study area (Table 2).

Table 2. BLM Sensitive Plant Species Potentially Occurring in the Study Area Common Name

Scientific Name

Habitat Requirements

Eastwood’s milkweed

Asclepias eastwoodiana

Open areas on a wide variety of basic (pH usually 8 or higher) soils, including calcareous clay knolls, sand, carbonate or basaltic gravels, or shale outcrops in areas that are generally barren and lacking competition and frequently in small washes or other moisture-accumulating microsites. In shadscale, mixed-shrub, sagebrush, and lower pinyonjuniper habitats. Elevation: 4,600– 6,785 feet above mean sea level. Blooming period: late spring.

Basalt springparsley

Cymopterus basalticus

Desert shrub communities, gravelly hills, and alluvial fans. Mostly on dolomite. Elevation: 5,590–6,510 feet above mean sea level.

Waxflower

Jamesia terapetala

Limestone cliffs, crevices, talus. Elevation: 7,001–11,286 feet above mean sea level. Blooming period: June–August.

Pennel beardtongue

Penstemon leiophyllus var. francisci-pennellii

Moist to dry, open, or forested carbonate talus, scree, and rocky soils. Mostly in or just above subalpine conifer and mountain sagebrush habitats. Elevation: 7,001–10,600 feet above mean sea level. Blooming period: July–August.

Mount Moriah beardtongue

Penstemon moriahensis

Open, gravelly, and/or silty carbonate soils in drainages and on gentle slopes and on road banks or other recovering disturbances with enhanced runoff. In subalpine conifer, subalpine sagebrush, mountain mahogany, and upper pinyon-juniper habitats. Elevation: 7,100–9,239 feet above mean sea level. Blooming period: June–July.

6 | January 2023

Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Common Name

Scientific Name

Habitat Requirements

Lahontan beardtongue

Penstemon palmeri var. macranthus

Along washes, roadsides, and canyon floors, particularly on carbonate-containing substrates, usually where subsurface moisture is available throughout most of the summer but unknown if restricted to calcareous substrates. Pinyon-juniper and sagebrush-juniper woodlands. Elevation: 3,428–7,067 feet above mean sea level. Blooming period: May–August.

Great Basin fishhook cactus

Sclerocactus pubispinus

Light colored soils of limestone or dolostone origin, sagebrush, and shadscale flats, pinyon-juniper woodlands. Elevation: 4,249–7,210 feet above mean sea level. Blooming period: April–May.

Nachlinger catchfly

Silene nachlingerae

Generally dry, exposed, or somewhat sheltered carbonate (rarely quartzite) crevices on ridgeline outcrops, talus, or very rocky soils on or at the bases of steep slopes or cliffs and on all aspects but predominantly on northwestward to northeastward exposures. Mainly in subalpine conifer habitats with sparse Rocky Mountain rockmat (Petrophytum caespitosum), onestem fleabane (Erigeron simplex), limber pine (Pinus flexilis), intermountain bristlecone pine (P. longaeva), little sagebrush, birch leaf mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus betuloides), Watson’s heath goldenrod (Ericameria watsonii), Utah snowberry (Symphoricarpos oreophila), four petal cliffbush (Jamesia tetrapetala), and Nevada primrose (Primula cusickiana var. nevadensis). Elevation: 7,159–10,732 feet above mean sea level. Blooming period: August–September.

Sources: Flora of North America 2020; Intermountain Region Herbarium Network 2021; Nevada Division of Natural Heritage 2019; WPW 2020.

3.2

Soils

Most of the study area is mapped as having a non-specific mix of sandy to gravelly soils, with slight alkalinity and some components of limestone. However, some portions of the study area, most notably the portion in the Smith Valley, were mapped to have concentrations of calcium carbonate above 50 percent in the first 12 inches of soil (NRCS 2021a, 2021b).

3.3

Special-Status Plant Species

No special-status or BLM sensitive plant species were observed during the study. A list of all plant species found during the study, and from other studies mentioned in Table 1 occurring in the study area, is included in Appendix B. Two protected cactus species were observed scattered throughout the study area and are described below. Estimates of total population size were determined by visually estimating numbers of individuals in areas of high density, and then multiplying by a factor of 1.5 to compensate for individuals in other areas at a lower density. The locations of these observations of high-density populations are depicted in Appendix B.

January 2023 | 7

Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

3.3.1

Plains Pricklypear (Opuntia polyacantha)

In the study area, plains pricklypear occurs sporadically in the vicinity of the proposed upper and lower reservoirs and along the western half of the proposed transmission corridor, with high concentrations along the proposed transmission corridor near the Robinson Summit Substation as well as between US-50 and Gleason Creek Road at the west end of the study area. The total estimated population size for plains pricklypear in the study area is 238 individuals.

3.3.2

Mountain Ball Cactus (Pediocactus simpsonii)

In the study area, mountain ball cactus occurs sporadically in the vicinity of the proposed upper reservoir and along the western half of the proposed transmission corridor, with high concentrations where the proposed transmission corridor turns from a westward direction to a southward direction. The total estimated population size for mountain ball cactus in the study area is 363 individuals.

3.4

Noxious Weeds

Two noxious weed species, as defined in the study plan, were found in the study area and the region around Duck Creek. These species are depicted in Appendix D. 1 Additionally cheatgrass was found with occurrence data taken in response to public comments made after the draft license application was submitted for the project. These species are discussed below. WPW will develop a Project specific Weed Management Plan in coordination with the BLM prior to construction.

3.4.1

Canada Thistle (Cirsium arvense)

Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) is a Category C rated noxious weed and was observed along Duck Creek and at one spot along the Duck Creek Access. In the study area, Canada thistle generally grows in moderately disturbed habitats either along a road or watercourse. The total estimated population for Canada thistle in the study area is 5 individuals.

3.4.2

Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum)

Cheatgrass is not rated as a noxious weed by the Nevada Department of Agriculture (Nevada Department of Agriculture 2021). Cheatgrass is widespread throughout the majority of the study area and was only noticeably absent from the Smith Valley and Steptoe Valley portions of the proposed transmission corridor. Areas of relatively high concentration of cheatgrass were found in the northern half of the upper reservoir vicinity, the western half of the proposed lower reservoir vicinity, and a portion of the proposed transmission corridor approximately 3 miles from the Robinson Summit Substation. Areas of very high concentration of cheatgrass, sufficient to make the vegetation type of the area be an invasive annual grassland, are found in the northwestern portion of the proposed lower reservoir vicinity. These areas of invasive annual grassland are mapped in the 2022 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Wildlife Species Assessment Study Report (HDR 2022a). The total estimated population of cheatgrass in the study area is over 100,000 individuals.

1 Note: only portions of the study area where noxious weeds were observed are shown in Appendix D.

Noxious weeds were not found in other portions of study area not depicted in Appendix D.

8 | January 2023

Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

3.4.3

Musk Thistle (Carduus nutans)

Musk thistle (Carduus nutans) is a Category C rated noxious weed and was observed at three locations along Duck Creek and at one spot along the Duck Creek Access. In the study area, musk thistle grows along the Duck Creek stream margins in areas with a relatively open canopy. The total observed population for musk thistle in the study area is 10 individuals.

January 2023 | 9

Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

References

Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 2009. Survey Protocols Required for NEPA and ESA Compliance for BLM Special Status Plant Species. Bureau of Land Management California State Office. Geographic Services. ———. 2017. Updated BLM Sensitive Species List for Nevada. Reno, Nevada. Accessed March 17, 2021. https://www.blm.gov/policy/nv-im-2018-003. Environmental Laboratory. 2008. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Delineation Manual: Arid West Region, Version 2.0. https://usace.contentdm.oclc.org/utils/getfile/collection/p266001coll1/id/7627a Flora of North America. 2020. Flora of North America Editorial Committee, eds.2001. Flora of North America. Accessed March 15, 2021. http://beta.floranorthamerica.org/Main_Page. HDR Engineering, Inc. (HDR). 2022a. 2021 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Wildlife Species Assessment Study Report. _____. 2022b. Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report. _____. 2022c. 2022 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Wildlife Species Assessment Study Report. Intermountain Region Herbarium Network. 2021. Records Accessed for White Pine County. Accessed March 15, 2021. http://www.intermountainbiota.org/portal/. Utah State University, Utah. Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). 2021a. “Web Site for Official Soil Series Descriptions and Series Classification.” Accessed March 17, 2021. https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov/ ———. 2021b. Soil layer for White Pine County, Nevada. Accessed March 17, 2021. https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/soils/survey/. Nevada Revised Statutes. Title 47, Chapter 527, §060 through §120. Nevada Department of Agriculture. 2021. “Nevada Noxious Weed List.” Last updated February 2, 2021. http://agri.nv.gov/Plant/Noxious_Weeds/Noxious_Weed_List/. Sparks, Nevada. Nevada Division of Natural Heritage. 2019. Records of Special Status Species and Occurrence Details for White Pine County. Accessed December 17, 2019. https://heritage.nv.gov/species_info. Reno, Nevada. _____. 2021. At-Risk Plant and Animal Tracking List. July. Carson City, Nevada. Accessed May 13, 2021. https://heritage.nv.gov/species_info. Reno, Nevada. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2020. National Wetland Plant List, version 3.5. Accessed January 4, 2023. http://wetland-plants.usace.army.mil/. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Engineer Research and Development Center Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, NH.

10 | January 2023

Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2022. IPaC Information for Planning and Consultation. Environmental Conservation Online System. Accessed September 15, 2022. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington D.C. United States Geologic Survey (USGS). 2012. Central Basin and Range Ecoregion. Accessed June 28, 2021. https://www.usgs.gov/science-explorer-results?es=ecoregions. Western Regional Climate Center. 2021. Climate Summary for the Period of Record (1892–2016) in McGill, Nevada (Station 264950). Accessed June 28, 2021. https://wrcc.dri.edu/summary/. Western Regional Climate Center, Reno, NV. White Pine Waterpower (WPW). 2020. White Pine Pumped Storage Project Pre-Application Document. March. Prepared by HDR for rPlus.

January 2023 | 11

Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Appendix A. Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Plan

White Pine Pumped Storage Project (FERC No. 14851) Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Plan May 25, 2021

1.0 Introduction White Pine Pumped Storage, LLC (White Pine), is proposing the licensing, construction, and operation of the White Pine Pumped Storage Project (FERC No. 14851) (Project) in White Pine County, Nevada, approximately 8 miles northeast of the City of Ely. The Project is a 1,000 megawatt, closed-loop, pumped storage facility that will require the construction of two new reservoirs joined by underground or surface conduits along with a powerhouse and associated generation, pumping, and transmission equipment. The Project will be located entirely off-stream, meaning neither the upper nor lower reservoir will intercept a perennial surface watercourse. White Pine has initiated a licensing process for the Project with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the federal agency with jurisdiction over non-federal hydropower projects in the United States. During this process, White Pine will engage stakeholders and implement a suite of resource studies that will inform FERC’s environmental and developmental analyses and decisionmaking regarding license issuance. This document presents White Pine’s proposed approach to the scoping and implementation of Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study plans for the Project that will be provided to FERC to assist in the licensing analyses. White Pine anticipates filing a Draft License Application with FERC in December 2021.

2.0 Project Nexus and Study Goals The construction, operation, and maintenance of the reservoirs and associated proposed transmission corridor has the potential to affect special-status plants or increase the potential for the spread of noxious weeds in Nevada. The goal of this study is to determine the potential occurrence of these species in all areas affected by Project construction and operation. Special-status plants are considered those species that are: (1) listed, proposed, under review, or candidate for listing under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), or proposed for delisting; (2) found on Nevada Regional Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land and formally listed as sensitive (BLMS); or (3) listed by the State of Nevada as critically endangered. Noxious weeds are plants defined as noxious weeds by the State of Nevada in Category A, B, or C (Nevada Department of Agriculture 2019). White Pine will assess the nature and degree of the Project’s likely effects on special-status plants and noxious weeds. These effects may be direct (for example, ground-disturbing activities such as mechanical or chemical clearing of vegetation or trampling of plants), indirect (for example, construction activity that results in erosion of adjacent land), or cumulative (caused by a Project activity in association with a non-Project activity, such as loss of habitat attributable to the introduction of invasive plants from a non-Project vector). The study will provide information to determine the extent to which certain Project activities may have the potential to adversely affect botanical resources. A Project effect may exist if both of the following occur: Page 1

White Pine Pumped Storage Project (FERC No. 14851) Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Plan

• •

A botanical resource is found to occur within the study area, as defined below in Section 4.1; and A specific Project activity has a reasonable possibility of having an adverse effect on the botanical resource found.

The goal of this study is to gather the information necessary to perform this analysis and evaluate the Project’s potential to adversely affect botanical resources.

3.0 Summary of Existing Information A full description of existing information associated with the Project can be found in the Pre-Application Document (PAD) (White Pine 2020). Database queries for this Study Plan reviewed an approximate 5-mile buffer surrounding the proposed Project facilities, including the proposed transmission line corridor. According to the Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) System Report (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2020), no plant species listed under the ESA are known to occur in White Pine County, Nevada. Three State of Nevada Critically Endangered plant species have the potential to occur in White Pine County. As explained in Table 5.8-1 of the PAD, none of these are expected to occur in the study area because of a lack of required soils, habitat, or records in White Pine County. Table 1 lists the BLM special-status species identified in the PAD that have the potential to occur in the transmission study area.

Table 1. BLM Sensitive Plant Species with Potential to Occur in the Study Area Common Name

Scientific Name

Eastwood Milkweed

Asclepias eastwoodiana

Shadscale Spring Parsley

Cymopterus basalticus

Waxflower

Jamesia tetrapetala

Pennell Beardtongue

Penstemon leiophyllus var. francisci-pennellii

Mount Moriah Beardtongue

Penstemon moriahensis

Lahontan Beardtongue

Penstemon palmeri var. macranthus

Great Basin Fishhook Cactus

Sclerocactus pubispinus

Nachlinger Catchfly

Silene nachlingerae

Sources: Intermountain Region Herbarium Network (2019), Nevada Natural Heritage Program (2020), BLM (2017).

A total of 47 noxious weed taxa have been recorded in White Pine County, Nevada. All of these taxa, listed in Table 2, could occur in the study area.

Page 2

White Pine Pumped Storage Project (FERC No. 14851) Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Plan

Table 2. State of Nevada Noxious Weed Species in White Pine County Common Name

Scientific Name

Noxious Weed Designation

Russian knapweed

Acroptilon repens

Camelthorn

Alhagi maurorum

Mayweed chamomile

Anthemis cotula

Giant reed

Arundo donax

African mustard

Brassica tournefortii

Hoary cress

Cardaria draba

Musk thistle

Carduus nutans

Purple starthistle

Centaurea calcitrapa

Diffuse knapweed

Centaurea diffusa

Iberian starthistle

Centaurea iberica

Spotted knapweed

Centaurea maculosa

Malta starthistle

Centaurea melitensis

Yellow starthistle

Centaurea solstitialis

Squarrose knapweed

Centaurea virgata

Rush skeletonweed

Chondrilla juncea

Spotted water hemlock

Cicuta maculata

Canada thistle

Cirsium arvense

Poison-hemlock

Conium maculatum

Common crupina

Crupina vulgaris

Houndstongue

Cynoglossum officinale

Leafy spurge

Euphorbia esula

Goatsrue

Galega officinalis

Hydrilla

Hydrilla verticillata

Black henbane

Hyoscyamus niger

Common St. Johnswort

Hypericum perforatum

Dyer’s woad

Isatis tinctoria

Perennial pepperweed

Lepidium latifolium

Dalmatian toadflax

Linaria dalmatica

Yellow toadflax

Linaria vulgaris

Purple loosestrife

Lythrum ssp.

Eurasian water-milfoil

Myriophyllum spicatum

Scotch thistle

Onopordum acanthium

African rue

Peganum harmala

Crimson fountain grass

Pennisetum setaceum

A Page 3

White Pine Pumped Storage Project (FERC No. 14851) Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Plan

Common Name

Scientific Name

Noxious Weed Designation

Sulfur cinquefoil

Potentilla recta

Austrian fieldcress

Rorippa austriaca

Mediterranean sage

Salvia aethiopis

Giant salvinia

Salvinia molesta

Carolina horsenettle

Solanum carolinense

Silverleaf nightshade

Solanum elaeagnifolium

Sow thistle

Sonchus arvensis

Johnsongrass

Sorghum halepense

Swainsonpea

Sphaerophysa salsula

Medusahead

Taeniatherum caput-medusae

Salt cedar

Tamarix spp.

Puncture vine

Tribulus terrestris

Syrian bean caper

Zygophyllum fabago

Source: Nevada Department of Agriculture (2019). Noxious weed designation definitions: A = Weeds that are generally not found or that are limited in distribution throughout the State. B = Weeds that are generally established in scattered populations in some counties of the State. C = Weeds that are generally established and generally widespread in many counties of the State.

4.0 Methods 4.1

Study Area

4.2

Study Methods

The study approach will consist of four steps, as discussed in the following sections.

4.2.1

Step 1 – Gather Data and Prepare for Field Effort

White Pine will prepare maps for use by survey teams in the field. The maps will include aerial imagery and the study area boundary. Survey timing will be planned based on blooming periods and/or herbarium collection dates of species in the general area.

4.2.2

Step 2 – Conduct Field Surveys

The surveyors will conduct botanical resource surveys that follow the BLM Special-Status Plant Protocol for an Intuitive Controlled Survey (BLM 2009). Field surveys will be conducted at the times of year when botanical resources potentially occurring in the study area are both evident and identifiable, generally during their flowering and/or fruiting period. It is expected that the first survey will occur in the late-spring and the second survey in mid-summer. Page 4

White Pine Pumped Storage Project (FERC No. 14851) Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Plan

Surveys will use a random meander technique and focus additional efforts in high-quality habitats or those with a higher probability of supporting special-status plants (for example, stream channels). Surveys will be floristic in nature with documentation of all species observed using a taxonomy and nomenclature standard of the Integrated Taxonomic Information System Thesaurus filter of the Intermountain Region Herbarium Network (Intermountain Region Herbarium Network 2019). Appropriate survey methods generally require multiple survey passes of suitable habitats.

4.2.2.1

Methods Specific to Special-status Plants

In the event any occurrence of cactus species are found in the study area, GPS data and a population estimate will be made of that occurrence. In the event occurrences of BLM special-status plants are found in the study area, the following information will be collected: • •

• • • • •

4.2.2.2

Digital photographs (both large and small scale) to depict the species and its habitat (one set per species); If an occurrence is estimated to cover an area greater than 0.05 acre, surveyors will delineate the occurrence boundary using a handheld GPS, collecting either polygon data or sufficient point data such that a realistic polygon can be constructed from the point data using a geographic information system (GIS); For occurrences less than 0.05 acre in size, the location of the approximate center of the occurrence will be taken as point data using a handheld GPS unit; Estimated population total; A list of the three to five of the most common species in the immediate vicinity; A generalized soil description of the immediate area (for example, gravelly soils, streambed, limestone outcrop); and Level of disturbance in the immediate area.

Methods Specific to Noxious Weeds

In the event that State of Nevada designation A noxious weed plants, listed on Table 2, are found in the study area, surveyors will collect the following data to the edge of the occurrence, or to the edge of the study area if the occurrence goes beyond it: • •

• •

Digital photographs to depict the species and its habitat (one set per species); If an occurrence is estimated to cover an area greater than 0.05 acre, surveyors will delineate the occurrence boundary using a handheld Global Positioning System (GPS) unit, collecting either polygon data or sufficient point data such that a realistic polygon can be constructed from the point data using GIS; For occurrences less than 0.05 acre in size, the location of the approximate center of the occurrence will be taken as point data using a handheld GPS unit; and Estimated population total.

If a designation A noxious weed plant population is determined to be widespread throughout more than 5 percent of the study area, or occurs frequently in a specific habitat in the study area, that species will not have GPS data collected. Instead, a detailed description of that specie’s distribution will be recorded in field notes and included in the study report. State of Nevada designation B and C noxious weed species, if found, will be noted in field notes and described in the study report. Areas greater than 1 acre in size determined to have a high concentration Page 5

White Pine Pumped Storage Project (FERC No. 14851) Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Plan

of designation B or C noxious weed species will be delineated on field maps or on handheld GPS units and included in the study report. Although not included in Table 2, cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) will be noted and mapped as if it were a B or C noxious weed species.

4.2.3

Step 3 – Compile Data and Perform Quality Assurance/Quality Control

Following field surveys, White Pine will develop separate GIS maps depicting special-status plants and noxious weed occurrences. Field data will then be subject to quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) procedures, including spot-checks of transcription and comparison of GIS maps with field notes to verify locations of botanical resource occurrences.

4.2.4

Step 4 – Report Development

White Pine will prepare a report that includes study goals, methodology, and results. White Pine will make the report available to Relicensing Participants upon completion.

5.0 Schedule and Deliverables White Pine anticipates the schedule for Study completion as follows: Planning ..................................................................................................... January – February 2021 Study Season ................................................................................................April – September 2021 Study Report Preparation ........................................................................ October – November 2021 A description of the methods and field investigation findings will be included in the Report. The Report will be incorporated into the Draft License Application.

6.0 References Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 2009. Survey Protocols Required for NEPA/ESA Compliance for BLM Special Status Plant Species. Bureau of Land Management California State Office. Geographic Services. ———. 2017. Updated BLM Sensitive Species List for Nevada. Reno, Nevada. [Online] URL: https://www.blm.gov/policy/nv-im-2018-003. Intermountain Region Herbarium Network. 2019. Records Accessed within the Project Vicinity. December 17, 2019. Utah State University, Utah. [Online] URL: http://www.intermountainbiota.org/portal/. Nevada Department of Agriculture. 2019. List of Noxious Weeds. Sparks, Nevada. [Online] URL: http://agri.nv.gov/Plant/Noxious_Weeds/Noxious_Weed_List/. Nevada Natural Heritage Program. 2020. Records of Special Status Species and Occurrence Details for White Pine County.” March 16. Reno, Nevada. [Online] URL: http://heritage.nv.gov/species/. White Pine Energies. (White Pine). 2020. White Pine Pumped Storage Project Pre-Application Document. [Online] URL: https://elibrary.ferc.gov/eLibrary/search. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2020. IPaC: Information for Planning and Consultation. Environmental Conservation Online System. Accessed March 16, 2020. [Online] URL: https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. Page 6

White Pine Pumped Storage Project (FERC No. 14851) Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Plan

Attachment 1 Map of Study Area

LEGEND

MONITORING WELL

PRIMARY FACILITY CORRIDOR

PERMITTED ENERGY CORRIDOR

PROPOSED RESERVOIR

PROPOSED RESERVOIR ACCESS ROAD

PROPOSED STRUCTURE

CONVEYANCE

WATERBODY

RAILROADS

PROPOSED RAILROAD REALIGNMENT

Project Vicinity

Miles

Steptoe Slough

ACCESS ROAD

US93

INLET/OUTLET LOWER RESERVOIR

LAYDOWN PARKING Ä ! SUBSTATION

CONVEYANCE Ä

TUNNEL ACCESS/DEBRIS AREA POWERHOUSE STRUCTURE

! !

! Ä

INLET/OUTLET EXISTING GONDER SUBSTATION PERMITTED ENERGY CORRIDOR

ACCESS ROAD UPPER RESERVOIR ACCESS ROAD

PROJECT LOCATION

WHITE PINE WATERPOWER, LLC PATH: C:\USERS\SGRIFFIN\DESKTOP\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\WHITEPINE_LOCATION_MAP.MXD - USER: SGRIFFIN - DATE: 3/5/2021

Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Appendix B. Vascular Plant Species Observed in the Study Area

Vascular Plant Species Observed in the Study Area Scientific Name

Common Name

Arid West U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Rank

LYCOPODS SELAGINELLACEAE – SPIKE MOSS FAMILY Selaginella watsonii

Watson's Spike Moss

FERNS WOODSIACEAE – CLIFF FERN FAMILY Woodsia oregana

Oregon Cliff Fern

GYMNOSPERMS CUPRESSACEAE – CYPRESS FAMILY Callitropsis arizonica

Arizona Cypress

Juniperus osteosperma

Utah Juniper

EPHEDRACEAE – EPHEDRA FAMILY Ephedra viridis var. viridis

Mormon Tea

PINACEAE – PINE FAMILY Pinus monophylla

Single Leaf Pinyon

EUDICOTS ADOXACEAE – ADOXA FAMILY Sambucus nigra ssp. caerulea

Blue Elderberry

AMARANTHACEAE – AMARANTH FAMILY Atriplex confertifolia

Shadscale

Grayia spinosa

Spiny hop sage

Halogeton glomeratus*

Saltlover

Kochia prostrata*

Prostrate Smotherweed

Krascheninnikovia lanata

Winterfat

Salsola tragus*

Prickly Russian Thistle

Appendix B-1

FACU

State of Nevada Noxious Weed Rank

Common Name

Arid West U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Rank

Berula erecta

Cut Leaf Water Parsnip

OBL

Cymopterus ibapensis

Ibapah spring parsley

Cymopterus purpurascens

Widewing Spring Parsley

Lomatium cf. dissectum

Cut Leaf Desert Parsley

Lomatium foeniculaceum

Carrot Leaf Desert Parsley

Lomatium nudicaule

Indian consumption plant

Scientific Name

State of Nevada Noxious Weed Rank

APIACEAE – CARROT FAMILY

ASTERACEAE – SUNFLOWER FAMILY Achillea millefolium

Woolly Yarrow

FACU

Agoseris parviflora

Small Flower Goat Chicory

FACU

Artemisia arbuscula

Little Sagebrush

Artemisia ludoviciana

White Sagebrush

Artemisia nova

Black Sagebrush

Artemisia pygmaea

Pygmy Sagebrush

Artemisia tridentata ssp. tridentata

Basin Big Sagebrush

Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana

Mountain Big Sagebrush

Balsamorhiza sagittata

Arrow Leaf Balsamroot

Carduus nutans*

Nodding Plumeless Thistle

Chaetopappa ericoides

Rose Heath

Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus var. puberulus

Yellow Rabbitbrush

Cirsium arvense*

FACU

Canadian Thistle

FACU

Cirsium scariosum

Meadow Thistle

FAC

Cirsium vulgare*

Bull Thistle

FACU

Crepis intermedia

Limestone Hawk's Beard

Dieteria canescens var. leucanthemifolia

Hoary Tansyaster

Enceliopsis nudicaulis

Naked Stem Sunray

Appendix B-2

Arid West U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Rank

Scientific Name

Common Name

Ericameria nauseosa var. hololeuca

Rubber Rabbitbrush

Erigeron leiomerus

Rockslide Fleabane

Gutierrezia sarothrae

Broom Snakeweed

Hymenopappus filifolius

Fine Leaf Woollywhite

Ionactis alpina

Lava Ankle Aster

Malacothrix torreyi

Torrey's Desert Dandelion

Packera multilobata

Lobe Leaf Groundsel

Petradoria pumila

Grassy Rock Goldenrod

Picrothamnus desertorum

Bud Sagebrush

Pleiacanthus spinosa

Thorny Skeletonweed

Senecio integerrimus

Lamb Tongue Ragwort

Stenotus acaulis var. acaulis

Stemless Mock Goldenweed

Symphyotrichum spathulatum var. spathulatum

Western Mountain Aster

FAC

Taraxacum officinale*

Common Dandelion

FACU

Tetradymia canescens

Spineless Horsebrush

Tragopogon dubius*

Meadow Goat's Beard

BERBERIDACEAE – BARBERRY FAMILY Berberis repens

Creeping Oregon Grape

BORAGINACEAE – BORAGE FAMILY Amsinckia tessellata

Devil’s Lettuce

Cryptantha cinerea var. abortiva

James' Cryptantha

Cryptantha torreyana

Torrey's Cat's Eye

Hackelia patens var. patens

Spotted Stickseed

Hydrophyllum capitatum var. alpinum

Alpine Waterleaf

Lappula occidentalis

Flat Spine Sheepburr

Appendix B-3

FACU

State of Nevada Noxious Weed Rank

Scientific Name

Common Name

Arid West U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Rank

Mertensia oblongifolia

Green Bluebells

FAC

Phacelia crenulata

Notch Leaf Phacelia

BRASSICACEAE – MUSTARD FAMILY Boechera retrofracta

Holboell's Rock Cress

Caulanthus crassicaulis

Thick Stem Wild Cabbage

Chorispora tenella*

Crossflower

Descurainia sophia*

Pinnate Tansy Mustard

Lepidium virginicum

Poorman's Pepperwort

FACU

Nasturtium officinale

Watercress

OBL

Sisymbrium altissimum

Tall Hedge Mustard

FACU

Sisymbrium linifolium

Flaxleaf Plainsmustard

Stanleya pinnata var. pinnata

Golden Prince’s Plume

CACTACEAE – CACTUS FAMILY Opuntia polyacantha

Plains Pricklypear

Pediocactus simpsonii

Mountain Ball Cactus

CAPRIFOLIACEAE – HONEYSUCKLE FAMILY Symphoricarpos oreophilus var. utahensis

Utah Mountain Snowberry

CARYOPHYLLACEAE – PINK FAMILY Eremogone congesta var. congesta

Ball Head Matted Sandwort

CRASSULACEAE – STONECROP FAMILY Sedum cf. debile

Weak Stem Stonecrop

CROSSOSOMATACEAE – ROCKFLOWER FAMILY Glossopetalon spinescens var. microphyllum

Spiny Greasebush

FABACEAE – LEGUME FAMILY

Appendix B-4

State of Nevada Noxious Weed Rank

Scientific Name

Common Name

Arid West U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Rank

Astragalus argophyllus var. argophyllus

Silver Leaf Milk Vetch

FACW

Astragalus cibarius

Browse Milk Vetch

Astragalus multiflorus

Many Flower Milk Vetch

Astragalus purshii var. purshii

Pursh's Milk Vetch

Lupinus arbustus

Long Spur Lupine

Lupinus holosericeus

Holo Lupine

Lupinus prunophilus

Hairy Bigleaf Lupine

FACU

GERANIACEAE – GERANIUM FAMILY Erodium cicutarium*

Red Stem Stork's Bill

GROSSULARIACEAE – GOOSEBERRY FAMILY Ribes aureum

Golden Currant

Ribes cereum

White Squaw Currant

Ribes velutinum

Desert Gooseberry

FAC

LAMIACEAE – MINT FAMILY Marrubium vulgare*

White Horehound

FACU

Mentha arvensis*

American Wild Mint

FACW

LINACEAE – FLAX FAMILY Linum cf. perenne

Blue Flax

LOASACEAE – LOASA FAMILY Mentzelia albicaulis

White Stem Blazingstar

Mentzelia laevicaulis

Giant Blazingstar

MALVACEAE – MALLOW FAMILY Sidalcea cf. oregana

Oregon Checkerbloom

Sphaeralcea parvifolia

Small Leaf Globe Mallow

MONTIACEAE – MINER'S LETTUCE FAMILY

Appendix B-5

FACW

State of Nevada Noxious Weed Rank

Scientific Name

Common Name

Lewisia rediviva

Oregon Bitter Root

Arid West U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Rank

ONAGRACEAE – EVENING PRIMROSE FAMILY Eremothera boothii var. alyssoides

Alyssum Evening Primrose

Gayophytum decipiens

Deceptive Groundsmoke

Oenothera caespitosa var. crinita

Tufted Evening Primrose

OROBANCHACEAE – PAINTBRUSH FAMILY Castilleja angustifolia var. dubia

Northwestern Indian Paintbrush

Castilleja linariifolia

Wyoming Indian Paintbrush

Pedicularis centranthera

Dwarf Lousewort

PAPAVERACEAE – POPPY FAMILY Argemone munita ssp. rotundata

Round Flat Bud Prickly Poppy

PLANTAGINACEAE – PLANTAIN FAMILY Collinsia parviflora

Small Flower Blue Eyed Mary

Penstemon confusus

Owens Valley Beardtongue

Penstemon pachyphyllus var. congestus

Thickleaf Beardtongue

Penstemon palmeri var. palmeri

Palmer’s Beardtongue

Penstemon watsonii

Watson's Beardtongue

Veronica anagallis-aquatica*

Blue Water Speedwell

POLEMONIACEAE – PHLOX FAMILY Aliciella micromeria

Dainty Cheat Gily Flower

Eriastrum sparsiflorum

Great Basin Woollystar

Gilia inconspicua

Shy Gily Flower

Ipomopsis macrosiphon

Large Tube Skyrocket

Appendix B-6

OBL

State of Nevada Noxious Weed Rank

Scientific Name

Common Name

Arid West U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Rank

Microsteris gracilis

Annual Phlox

FACU

Phlox hoodii ssp. muscoides

Musk Phlox

Phlox longifolia

Long Leaf Phlox

Phlox pulvinata

Cushion Phlox

POLYGONACEAE – BUCKWHEAT FAMILY Eriogonum caespitosum

Matted Wild Buckwheat

Eriogonum cernuum

Nodding Wild Buckwheat

Eriogonum heracleoides var. heracleoides

Parsnip Flower Wild Buckwheat

Eriogonum microthecum var. simpsonii

Simpson's Buckwheat

Eriogonum ovalifolium var. nivale

Cushion Wild Buckwheat

Eriogonum umbellatum var. versicolor

Sulphur Flower Wild Buckwheat

Eriogonum villiflorum

Gray Wild Buckwheat

Polygonum aviculare*

Yard Knotweed

FACU

FAC

RANUNCULACEAE – BUTTERCUP FAMILY Aquilegia shockleyi

Shockley's Columbine

Delphinium depauperatum

Slim Larkspur

Delphinium scaposum var. andersonii

Anderson's Bare Stem Larkspur

Ranunculus cymbalaria

Akali Buttercup

OBL

Ranunculus glaberrimus var. elipticus

Sagebrush Buttercup

FAC

Ranunculus testiculatus

Curveseed Butterwort

RHAMNACEAE – BUCKTHORN FAMILY Ceanothus martinii

Martin's Ceanothus

ROSACEAE – ROSE FAMILY Amelanchier alnifolia

Saskatoon Service Berry

Appendix B-7

FACU

State of Nevada Noxious Weed Rank

Scientific Name

Common Name

Cercocarpus ledifolius

Curl Leaf Mountain Mahogany

Holodiscus discolor

Oceanspray

Petrophytum caespitosum

Rocky Mountain Rockmat

Potentilla rubricaulis

Rocky Mountain Cinquefoil

Potentilla X diversifolia

Varileaf Cinquefoil

Prunus virginiana var. demissa

Western Chokecherry

Purshia tridentata

Antelope Bitterbrush

Rosa woodsii

Woods' Rose

Arid West U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Rank

FACU

FAC

FACU

SANTALACEAE – SANDALWOOD FAMILY Comandra umbellata

Bastard Toadflax

SARCOBATACEAE – GREASEWOOD FAMILY Sarcobatus vermiculatus

Greasewood

FACU

SAXIFRAGACEAE – SAXIFRAGE FAMILY Lithophragma tenellum

Slender Woodlandstar

SALICACEAE – WILLOW FAMILY Salix boothii

Barren Ground Willow

FACW

Salix exigua

Narrow Leaf Willow

FACW

Ash Leaf Maple

FACW

Hoary Nettle

FAC

SAPINDACEAE – SOAPBERRY FAMILY Acer negundo URTICACEAE – NETTLE FAMILY Urtica dioica ssp. holosericea VIOLACEAE – VIOLET FAMILY Viola nuttallii

Yellow Prairie Violet

MONOCOTS

Appendix B-8

State of Nevada Noxious Weed Rank

Scientific Name

Common Name

Arid West U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Rank

AMARYLLIDACEAE – AMARYLLIS FAMILY Allium atrorubens

Dark Red Onion

ASPARAGACEAE – ASPARAGUS FAMILY Leucocrinum montanum

Star Lily

CYPERACEAE – SEDGE FAMILY Carex nebrascensis

Nebraska Sedge

OBL

Eleocharis rostellata

Beaked Spike Rush

OBL

Iris missouriensis

Missouri Iris

FACW

Sisyrinchium halophilum

Nevada Blue Eyed Grass

FACW

Juncus balticus

Baltic Rush

FACW

Juncus nevadensis

Sierran Rush

FACW

IRIDACEAE – IRIS FAMILY

JUNCACEAE – RUSH FAMILY

LILIACEAE – LILY FAMILY Calochortus bruneaunis

Bruneau Mariposa Lily

Calochortus nuttallii

Sego Lily

Fritillaria atropurpurea

Spotted Missionbells

MELANTHIACEAE – CAMAS FAMILY Toxicoscordion venenosum

Nerve Death Camas

POACEAE – GRASS FAMILY Achnatherum hymenoides

Indian Ricegrass

Achnatherum lettermanii

Letterman's Rice Grass

Achnatherum pinetorum

Pine Needlegrass

Agropyron cristatum*

Crested Wheat Grass

Bouteloua gracilis

Blue Grama

Bromus tectorum*

Cheat Grass

Appendix B-9

FACU

State of Nevada Noxious Weed Rank

Scientific Name

Common Name

Arid West U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Rank

Catabrosa aquatica*

Water Whorl Grass

OBL

Deschampsia caespitosa

Tufted Hair Grass

FACW

Elymus elymoides

Western Bottle Brush Grass

FACU

Elymus lanceolatus

Streamside Wild Rye

Glyceria striata

Fowl Manna Grass

OBL

Hordeum brachyantherum

Meadow Barley

FACW

Hordeum jubatum

Fox Tail Barley

FAC

Poa bulbosa

Bulbous Bluegrass

FACU

Poa compressa*

Canada Bluegrass

FACU

Poa secunda

Sandberg Bluegrass

FACU

Pseudoroegneria spicata

Bluebunch Wheatgrass

State of Nevada Noxious Weed Rank

Legend

* Non-native species cf. confer: This designation is used when a species or infraspecific taxon cannot be confirmed, but is believed to be the selected species of infraspecific taxon based on available anatomy U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Rank: OBL Wetland-dependent plants that require standing water or seasonally saturated soils near the surface. FACW Plants dependent on and predominantly occur with hydric soils, standing water, or seasonally high water tables in wet habitats. FAC These plants can occur in wetlands or nonwetlands. They can grow in hydric, mesic, or xeric habitats. FACU Plants that are not wetland dependent. They are non-wetland plants by habitat preference.

State of Nevada Department of Agriculture Noxious Weed Rank: C Weeds that are generally established and generally widespread in many counties of the State.

No Entry If no indicator is listed is considered UPL Plants that almost never occur in wetlands. According to the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0), “In general, species that are not listed on the wetland plant list are assumed to be upland (UPL) species” (Environmental Laboratory 2008).

Appendix B-10

Special-Status Plants and Noxious Weeds Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Appendix C. Protected Cactus Species Observed in the Study Area

! ª

( ! ! ª ! (

! ª

17N 64E

17N 65E

! ª

! ª ( !! ª

( !

LEGEND

MOUNTAIN BALL CACTUS (PEDIOCACTUS SIMPSONII) PLAINS PRICKLYPEAR (OPUNTIA POLYACANTHA) PROJECT FOOTPRINT NO DATA

PLSS TOWNSHIP / RANGE PLSS SECTION

550

Feet PATH: \\BIL-SRV02\BILDATA\GIS\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\STUDYPLANS\VEGETATION_CACTIWEED_MAPBOOK_DEC2022.MXD - USER: CGEESEY - DATE: 12/20/2022

1,100

BLM PROTECTED CACTUS SPECIES

WHITE PINE WATERPOWER, LLC APPENDIX C Page 1 of 12

! ª 11

! ª ! (

! ª ( ! ! !ª ª

! ª

! ª 15

! ª

( !

! ª

( !

( ( ! !! ª

( !

!ª ! 17N 64E ª

! ( !

( !

14 ! !( ª

( !

! ª ( !

! ª ! ª ! ª ! !ª ª ! !ª ª ! ª

! ª ( !

! ª (! ! (

Service Layer Credits: Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, 23 NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community USGS The National Map: National

22 21

LEGEND

! ª ( !

MOUNTAIN BALL CACTUS (PEDIOCACTUS SIMPSONII)

PLAINS PRICKLYPEAR (OPUNTIA POLYACANTHA)

PLAINS PRICKLYPEAR (OPUNTIA POLYACANTHA) PROJECT FOOTPRINT NO DATA

PLSS TOWNSHIP / RANGE PLSS SECTION

550

Feet PATH: \\BIL-SRV02\BILDATA\GIS\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\STUDYPLANS\VEGETATION_CACTIWEED_MAPBOOK_DEC2022.MXD - USER: CGEESEY - DATE: 12/20/2022

1,100

BLM PROTECTED CACTUS SPECIES

WHITE PINE WATERPOWER, LLC APPENDIX C Page 2 of 12

17N 64E

28 27

LEGEND PROJECT FOOTPRINT NO DATA

PLSS TOWNSHIP / RANGE PLSS SECTION

550

Feet PATH: \\BIL-SRV02\BILDATA\GIS\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\STUDYPLANS\VEGETATION_CACTIWEED_MAPBOOK_DEC2022.MXD - USER: CGEESEY - DATE: 12/20/2022

1,100

BLM PROTECTED CACTUS SPECIES

WHITE PINE WATERPOWER, LLC APPENDIX C Page 3 of 12

17N 64E

LEGEND PROJECT FOOTPRINT NO DATA

PLSS TOWNSHIP / RANGE PLSS SECTION

550

Feet PATH: \\BIL-SRV02\BILDATA\GIS\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\STUDYPLANS\VEGETATION_CACTIWEED_MAPBOOK_DEC2022.MXD - USER: CGEESEY - DATE: 12/20/2022

1,100

BLM PROTECTED CACTUS SPECIES

WHITE PINE WATERPOWER, LLC APPENDIX C Page 4 of 12

17N 63E

17N 64E

31 32

LEGEND PROJECT FOOTPRINT NO DATA

PLSS TOWNSHIP / RANGE PLSS SECTION

550

Feet PATH: \\BIL-SRV02\BILDATA\GIS\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\STUDYPLANS\VEGETATION_CACTIWEED_MAPBOOK_DEC2022.MXD - USER: CGEESEY - DATE: 12/20/2022

1,100

BLM PROTECTED CACTUS SPECIES

WHITE PINE WATERPOWER, LLC APPENDIX C Page 5 of 12

( ! ! (

21 24

17N 64E

17N 63E

Service Layer Credits: Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) 28 OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community USGS The National Map: National

LEGEND PROJECT FOOTPRINT NO DATA

PLSS TOWNSHIP / RANGE PLSS SECTION

550

Feet PATH: \\BIL-SRV02\BILDATA\GIS\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\STUDYPLANS\VEGETATION_CACTIWEED_MAPBOOK_DEC2022.MXD - USER: CGEESEY - DATE: 12/20/2022

1,100

BLM PROTECTED CACTUS SPECIES

WHITE PINE WATERPOWER, LLC APPENDIX C Page 6 of 12

( !

17N 64E

! ª

( !

LEGEND

! ª ( !

MOUNTAIN BALL CACTUS (PEDIOCACTUS SIMPSONII) PLAINS PRICKLYPEAR (OPUNTIA POLYACANTHA) PROJECT FOOTPRINT NO DATA

PLSS TOWNSHIP / RANGE PLSS SECTION

550

Feet PATH: \\BIL-SRV02\BILDATA\GIS\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\STUDYPLANS\VEGETATION_CACTIWEED_MAPBOOK_DEC2022.MXD - USER: CGEESEY - DATE: 12/20/2022

1,100

BLM PROTECTED CACTUS SPECIES

WHITE PINE WATERPOWER, LLC APPENDIX C Page 7 of 12

17N 64E

17N 63E

13 16

Service Layer Credits: Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, 19 Esri China (Hong 20 NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community USGS The National Map: National

LEGEND PROJECT FOOTPRINT NO DATA

PLSS TOWNSHIP / RANGE PLSS SECTION

1,400 Feet

PATH: \\BIL-SRV02\BILDATA\GIS\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\STUDYPLANS\VEGETATION_CACTIWEED_MAPBOOK_DEC2022.MXD - USER: CGEESEY - DATE: 12/20/2022

2,800

BLM PROTECTED CACTUS SPECIES

WHITE PINE WATERPOWER, LLC APPENDIX C Page 8 of 12

18N 62E 35

18N 63E

17N 63E

08 11

17N 62E

( !

LEGEND PROJECT FOOTPRINT NO DATA

PLSS TOWNSHIP / RANGE PLSS SECTION

1,400 Feet

PATH: \\BIL-SRV02\BILDATA\GIS\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\STUDYPLANS\VEGETATION_CACTIWEED_MAPBOOK_DEC2022.MXD - USER: CGEESEY - DATE: 12/20/2022

2,800

BLM PROTECTED CACTUS SPECIES

WHITE PINE WATERPOWER, LLC APPENDIX C Page 9 of 12

18N 62E 27

LEGEND

18N 61E

Service Layer Credits: Sources: 34 Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community USGS The National Map: National

( !

PLAINS PRICKLYPEAR (OPUNTIA POLYACANTHA)

PROJECT FOOTPRINT NO DATA

PLSS TOWNSHIP / RANGE PLSS SECTION

1,400 Feet

PATH: \\BIL-SRV02\BILDATA\GIS\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\STUDYPLANS\VEGETATION_CACTIWEED_MAPBOOK_DEC2022.MXD - USER: CGEESEY - DATE: 12/20/2022

2,800

BLM PROTECTED CACTUS SPECIES

WHITE PINE WATERPOWER, LLC APPENDIX C Page 10 of 12

18N 60E 23

( !! ª ! ª ! ª ! ª

! ª !! ª ª

20 ! ( ! ! ª ( ( !

( !

18N 61E

( ! ( !

( ! ! !ª ( ( ! !( ª !! (

30 26

( ! !! ( ( ( ! ( (! ! ! ( ( !

LEGEND

36 MOUNTAIN BALL CACTUS (PEDIOCACTUS SIMPSONII)

! ( ( !

PROJECT FOOTPRINT NO DATA

PLSS TOWNSHIP / RANGE PLSS SECTION

1,400 Feet

PATH: \\BIL-SRV02\BILDATA\GIS\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\STUDYPLANS\VEGETATION_CACTIWEED_MAPBOOK_DEC2022.MXD - USER: CGEESEY - DATE: 12/20/2022

2,800

BLM PROTECTED CACTUS SPECIES

WHITE PINE WATERPOWER, LLC APPENDIX C Page 11 of 12

( ! 25

!! ( ( ( ! ( (! !

! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( !

18N 60E

18N 61E 34

35 33

( (! !! (

( ! ! ª ( ! ! !ª ( ( ! 05

( !

( ! ( ! ( !

17N 61E

17N 60E

LEGEND

Service Layer Credits: Sources: 09 Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community USGS The National Map: National

PLAINS PRICKLYPEAR (OPUNTIA POLYACANTHA)

PROJECT FOOTPRINT NO DATA

PLSS TOWNSHIP / RANGE PLSS SECTION

1,400 Feet

PATH: \\BIL-SRV02\BILDATA\GIS\PROJECTS\GRIDFLEX\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\MXD\STUDYPLANS\VEGETATION_CACTIWEED_MAPBOOK_DEC2022.MXD - USER: CGEESEY - DATE: 12/20/2022

2,800

BLM PROTECTED CACTUS SPECIES

WHITE PINE WATERPOWER, LLC APPENDIX C Page 12 of 12

Appendix D. State of Nevada Noxious Weed Species Observed in the Study Area

07 12

! ( ! (

! (! ( ! (

17N 64E

17N 65E

! (

Service Layer Credits: World Street Map: Esri, HERE, Garmin, NGA, USGS, NPS USGSTopo: USGS The National Map: National Boundaries Dataset, 3DEP Elevation Program, Geographic Names Information System, National Hydrography Dataset, National Land Cover Database, National

! (

CANADA THISTLE (CIRSIUM ARVENSE)

! (

MUSK THISTLE (CARDUUS NUTANS)

CANADA THISTLE (CIRSIUM ARVENSE)

LEGEND PROJECT FOOTPRINT

PLSS TOWNSHIP / RANGE

NO DATA

PLSS SECTION

I 500

Feet PATH: C:\USERS\CGEESEY\APPDATA\LOCAL\TEMP\ARCGISPROTEMP16020\757B97F0-0F43-4514-9E26-08074C768AF5\UNTITLED.APRX - USER: CGEESEY - DATE: 1/12/2023

1,000

NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE RATED NOXIOUS WEEDS

WHITE PINE WATERPOWER, LLC APPENDIX D

NOXIOUS WEEDS WERE NOT FOUND IN OTHER PORTIONS OF THE STUDY AREA NOT DEPICTED ON THIS MAP.

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project Prepared by HDR Engineering, Inc. for White Pine Waterpower, LLC. White Pine County, Nevada

January 2023

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Contents 1

Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1

Project Description .................................................................................................................... 1

1.2

Study Area ................................................................................................................................. 1

Methods ............................................................................................................................................... 4 2.1

Noise Impact Analysis ............................................................................................................... 4 2.1.1 Noise Measurements ................................................................................................... 4 2.1.2 Noise Modeling ............................................................................................................. 6

2.2

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek Monitoring ....................................................................................... 7

2.3

Conservation Credit System Analysis ....................................................................................... 8 2.3.1 Debit Project Analysis .................................................................................................. 8 2.3.2 Credit Project Estimate................................................................................................. 8

2.4

Habitat Suitability ....................................................................................................................... 8

2.5

Lek Proximity Analysis .............................................................................................................. 9

Results ............................................................................................................................................... 10 3.1

Noise Impact Analysis ............................................................................................................. 10 3.1.1 Noise Measurement Results ...................................................................................... 10 3.1.2 Noise Modeling Inputs and Results ............................................................................ 12

3.2

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek Monitoring ..................................................................................... 15

3.3

CCS Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 18 3.3.1 Debit Project Analysis ................................................................................................ 18 3.3.2 Credit Estimate ........................................................................................................... 19

3.4

Habitat Suitability ..................................................................................................................... 19

3.5

Lek Proximity Analysis ............................................................................................................ 21

Discussion ......................................................................................................................................... 23 4.1

Noise Impact Analysis ............................................................................................................. 23

4.2

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek Monitoring ..................................................................................... 23

4.3

CCS Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 23

4.4

Habitat Suitability ..................................................................................................................... 23

4.5

Lek Proximity Analysis ............................................................................................................ 23

References ........................................................................................................................................ 24

January 2023 | i

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Tables Table 1. Greater Sage-Grouse Leks Within 3.1 Miles of the Project Area ................................................... 7 Table 2. Summary of Sound Measurements at Leks (dBA) ....................................................................... 10 Table 3. Baseline Ambient Sound Levels ................................................................................................... 11 Table 4. Percent of Audible Noise Sources at Leks ................................................................................... 11 Table 5. Corona Noise Model Inputs .......................................................................................................... 13 Table 6. Noise Modeling Results – Measured and Projected Noise Levels at Leks (dBA) ........................ 14 Table 7. Results of Greater Sage-Grouse Lek Monitoring.......................................................................... 15 Table 8. Debit Estimate Summary .............................................................................................................. 18 Table 9. Site-Scale Habitat Suitability in the Study Area ............................................................................ 19

Figures Figure 1. Greater Sage-Grouse Report Study Area ..................................................................................... 2 Figure 2: Noise Monitoring Locations ........................................................................................................... 5 Figure 3. 2021, 2022 Greater Sage-Grouse Lek Monitoring Locations ...................................................... 17 Figure 4. Habitat Suitability and Transect Locations .................................................................................. 20 Figure 5. Lek Proximity Analysis ................................................................................................................. 22

Appendices Appendix A. Study Plan Appendix B. Hourly Noise Measurements Appendix C. Lek Monitoring Datasheets

ii | January 2023

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Other Special Nomenclature ARMPA BLM Cadna-A CCS cm dB dBA GHMA GIS GPS HAF HQT ISO Leq L10 L50 L90 Lmax Lmin Ln NDOW OHMA PHMA Project SEP SETT State Route 486 USGS WPW

Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment Bureau of Land Management Computer Aided Noise Abatement Conservation Credit System centimeter decibel A-weighted decibel General Habitat Management Area Geographic information system Global Positioning System Habitat Assessment Framework Habitat Quantification Tool International Organization for Standardization Equivalent sound level Sound level that is exceeded 10% of the time in a given period Median sound level Sound level that is exceeded 90% of the time in a given period Maximum sound level Minimum sound level Statistical sound level Nevada Department of Wildlife Other Habitat Management Area Priority Habitat Management Area White Pine Pumped Storage Project Sagebrush Ecosystem Program Sagebrush Ecosystem Technical Team (State of Nevada) Duck Creek Road United States Geological Survey White Pine Waterpower, LLC

January 2023 | iii

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Introduction

This Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report has been prepared by HDR for White Pine Waterpower, LLC (WPW) in support of the licensing of the proposed White Pine Pumped Storage Project (FERC Number 14851) (Project). This report describes the results of the Greater SageGrouse Lek and Habitat Study (study) conducted in 2021, and lek monitoring that was conducted in 2022.

1.1

Project Description

1.2

Study Area

The Project area consists of lands within the Project Footprint (Figure 1): the proposed Project reservoirs, access roads, water source, transmission corridor, currently anticipated laydown yards, and related disturbance areas, as well as a 200-foot-buffer surrounding each facility. The study area was defined in the Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Plan (study plan) (Appendix A) as all lands consisting of greater sage-grouse habitat projected to be affected by Project construction and operation. For each task described in Section 2, the study area encompasses the entire Project area plus the following buffer areas: •

Task 1 (noise impact analysis), Task 2 (lek monitoring), and Task 4 (habitat suitability): All known leks within 3.1 miles of the Project area.

•

Task 3 (Conservation Credit System [CCS] analysis): The Project area plus a buffer of 3.7 miles (6000 meters) on each side of the proposed transmission line and between 1.86 miles (3000 meters) and 3.7 miles (6000 meters) around other Project components, as determined through coordination with the State of Nevada’s Sagebrush Ecosystem Technical Team (SETT).

January 2023 | 1

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Figure 1. Greater Sage-Grouse Report Study Area

2 | January 2023

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

The sage-grouse habitat management areas, Priority Habitat Management Area (PHMA), General Habitat Management Area (GHMA), and Other Habitat Management Area (OHMA), depicted in Figure 1 are the habitat management areas updated by Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in 2022 (BLM 2022).

January 2023 | 3

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Methods

The study was conducted in compliance with the study plan (Appendix A). No variances from the study plan were required.

2.1

Noise Impact Analysis

A noise impact study was completed to compare pre-Project noise levels to anticipated noise levels during construction and operation of the Project. The noise impact study was done in accordance with Appendix G: Noise Protocol of the Nevada and Northeastern California Greater Sage-Grouse Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment (ARMPA), (BLM 2015); Acoustic Impacts and Greater Sage-grouse: A Review of Current Science, Sound Measurement Protocols, and Management Recommendations (Nevada Department of Wildlife [NDOW] 2018); and the Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW) Interim Sage-Grouse Noise Protocol Clarifications (NDOW 2020). The Nevada and Northeastern California Greater Sage-Grouse Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment stipulates that noise as a result of the Project will not increase 10 decibels (dB) above ambient noise levels during lekking.

2.1.1

Noise Measurements

NDOW biologists requested that noise monitors be placed at five lek locations within the Duck Creek Basin: Paine Meadows lek, Timber Creek Turnoff lek, Berry Creek Turnoff lek, Gilford Meadows lek, and the Canyon Springs NE lek. The Paine Meadows lek and Timber Creek Turnoff lek are more than 3.1 miles away from the Project area; however, NDOW requested noise measurements be collected at these leks to better model current and projected noise from traffic on Duck Creek Road (State Route 486) in the Duck Creek Basin. Construction noise modeling results are not reported for the Paine Meadows lek and the Timber Creek lek because they are more than 3.1 miles away from the Project. Additionally, due to limited information at this time, noise from construction traffic on State Route 486 could not be modeled, so measurements collected at Timber Creek Turnoff and Paine Meadows will be used in subsequent models as additional engineering and planning information becomes available. Noise monitoring systems were deployed on May 4, 2021 and collected on May 18, 2021. Monitoring locations are shown in Figure 2 below. Monitoring locations were 1/4 mile away from lek sites and between the lek site and to the nearest Project location (for Canyon Springs NE and Gilford Meadows), or 1/4 mile away from the lek site at the same distance to the nearest roadway as the lek site (Berry Creek Turnoff, Timber Creek Turnoff, and Paine Meadows). Minor adjustments were made in the field as needed based on constraining terrain and other features in the area.

4 | January 2023

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Figure 2: Noise Monitoring Locations January 2023 | 5

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Instrumentation HDR used Larson-Davis 831C digital sound level meters with PCB 378A04 low-noise microphones. Continuous audio recordings were captured during the measurements by Roland R-05 digital audio recorders attached to the sound level meters. The system noise floor, or the level created by unwanted signals within a measurement system, was 5.5-5.6 A-weighted decibels (dBA) for all systems. The instrumentation was field-calibrated prior to and upon completion of each measurement to a reference level traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology using a Larson-Davis Cal200 handheld calibrator. The sound level meters and handheld calibrator meet Class 1/Type 1 precision requirements of American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and International Electrotechnical Commission standards. All instrumentation used to measure noise levels for this study is calibrated on a regular basis by an independent accredited calibration laboratory using standards traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology.

Data Processing Data were processed according to the NDOW protocols (NDOW 2018, 2020). Although data were captured from May 4 through 18, only data through May 15 were included in the processing based on the NDOW noise guidance to process 10 days of data. Noise floor corrections were calculated and applied to the hourly dBA metrics at each location. Summary metrics, including statistical sound levels (Ln), were calculated as the arithmetic mean of noise-floor-corrected hourly values within the specified time periods across the entire measurement period, with the exception of the maximum sound level recorded during a given period (Lmax) and minimum sound level recorded during a given period (Lmin). Audio captured during the measurements was reviewed to determine typical noise sources at each site. Audio files were reviewed in 10-second intervals every four minutes for two full days at each site, including one weekday and one weekend day.

2.1.2

Noise Modeling

Project-related noise levels, including anticipated construction noise at the upper and lower reservoir sites, and operational noise were modeled using the three-dimensional environmental noise analysis program Computer Aided Noise Abatement (Cadna-A). Cadna-A is based on International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 9613, “Attenuation of Sound during Propagation Outdoors” (ISO 9613-2 1996). The model incorporates the effects of topography and typical weather conditions, and attenuation due to atmospheric absorption and ground absorption. Weather conditions were set to 7⁰ C and 50% relative humidity to represent typical conditions during lekking season (NOAA 2015). Ground absorption was set to 0.5 to account for the mix of vegetation and rocky soil in the Project area. ISO 9613 includes downwind propagation from all noise sources to all receptors, a conservative assumption that may not reflect prevailing wind patterns in the area. Topography was modeled with 10-foot contours from the United States Geological Survey (USGS). Receptors were set at lek center points with a height of 0.3 meter to represent sage-grouse ear height. Model inputs and results are given as the equivalent level, or logarithmic average of sound levels recorded over a period of time (Leq), assuming constant operation at maximum load. However, compliance is determined by L50 measurements. This is the sound level that is exceeded 50 percent

6 | January 2023

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

of the time during a given period and is, thus, also the median sound level. In cases where noise emissions are predicted to be constant, such as ventilation noise when the Project is operational, Leq is a reasonable approximation of L50. However, when noise levels are sporadic or variable (such as during construction, or noise from traffic pass-bys), the modeled Leq is likely to exceed the measured L50. The difference could be quite large, depending on the loudness and the duration of the noise. For example, a loud noise that lasted less than 50% of a given period could strongly elevate the Leq but have a minimal effect on the L50, depending on the ambient noise during the rest of the period. Corona noise from the power transmission lines was estimated using the CFI8X model developed by Bonneville Power Administration. Traffic noise of workers driving to and from the Project facilities was not modeled at this time, pending vehicle volumes and mixes and construction schedules.

2.2

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek Monitoring

HDR completed sage-grouse lek monitoring during the spring of 2021 and 2022 at eight known lek locations identified by NDOW (Table 1) that are located within 3.1 miles of the Project, as required by the Nevada and Northeastern California Greater Sage-grouse Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment (BLM 2015). Field biologists followed the NDOW SageGrouse Lek Count Protocol and conducted counts during breeding season, between March 1 and May 1, 2021, and March 1 and May 4, 2022. During each lek count, if greater sage-grouse were present, biologists conducted three counts at 15-minute intervals. If no greater sage-grouse were observed, biologists searched the lekking areas on foot for sage-grouse sign. The Mosier lek is counted by NDOW biologists and is not included in lek monitoring by HDR, however data from NDOW for the Mosier lek is included in this Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report. The Mosier lek is also 3.86 miles from the Project area, outside of the 3.1 mile study area, however, it has been included in this report at the request of NDOW.

Table 1. Greater Sage-Grouse Leks Within 3.1 Miles of the Project Area Lek Name

Last Survey

Status during last Survey

Bolo Spring

2022

Unknown

Canyon Springs NE

2022

Active

Central Smith Valley 1

2022

Unknown

Gilford Meadows

2022

Active

Heusser Mountain S

2022

Unknown

Locket Spring

2022

Pending

McGill Junction

2022

Inactive

Tank Spring West

2022

Active

Mosier*

2022

Active

*Mosier lek is outside of the 3.1-mile study area for greater sage-grouse

January 2023 | 7

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

2.3

Conservation Credit System Analysis

The Project area is on public and private lands in greater sage-grouse habitat and is, therefore, required to enroll in the credit system established by the State of Nevada’s Sagebrush Ecosystem Council (NRS 232.162) (Sagebrush Ecosystem Program [SEP] 2019). The CCS analyzes the direct and indirect adverse impacts that a development project could have on greater sage-grouse habitat. The results of this analysis will be used to determine both the debits incurred by the Project and potential credits available to offset the debits.

2.3.1

Debit Project Analysis

HDR coordinated with the SETT to complete a debit evaluation for the Project. The debit project began by completing the Debit Project Review Form and submitting it to the SETT for use throughout the life of the debit project. The CCS User’s Guide version 1.6.21 was followed to complete a desktop analysis of the Habitat Quantification Tool (HQT) using a geographic information system (GIS). This analysis included defining a debit project area based upon the proposed Project surface disturbance, identifying existing anthropogenic disturbances, and delineating map units to determine transect locations for the field survey that were submitted to the SETT for review. The SETT identified 97 transect locations. Those transects were surveyed during the 2021 growing season, May 2 to 8, 2021, to get accurate site-scale data for the Debit Project Calculator. At each 50-meter-long transect, biologists estimated vegetation coverage and diversity using the line intercept method and Daubenmire plots. The field data were collected using iPads with the ESRI Collector map, the Survey123 application, and 1-meter Global Positioning System (GPS) receivers. Following the completion of field work, the transect data were entered into the Debit Project Calculator v1.6.21 to determine the number of debits that the Project is estimated to incur. The estimated debits that are a result of this analysis will be valid for 5 years. The field data and debit calculator were packaged for submittal to the SETT by finalizing transect datasheets, transect photographs, map unit datasheets, and other applicable forms and shapefiles.

2.3.2

Credit Project Estimate

WPW coordinated with the SETT and local credit developers to determine credit availability within the vicinity of the Project.

2.4

Habitat Suitability

When calculating the number of debits, the Debit Calculator for the HQT calculates site-scale habitat suitability for breeding, brood-rearing, and winter habitat, including average sagebrush cover, average sagebrush height, average perennial forb cover, and average perennial grass cover. These parameters can be compared to the recommended habitat suitability parameters defined in the BLM’s Sage-grouse Habitat Assessment Framework (HAF) (Stiver et al. 2015) to determine the habitat suitability of greater sage-grouse habitat in the study area. HDR reviewed the GIS data for Spatially Explicit Modeling of Annual and Seasonal Habitat for Greater Sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) in Nevada and Northeastern California—An Updated Decision-support Tool for Management (Coates et al. 2016) made available by the USGS to map spring (breeding), summer (brood-rearing), and winter habitat in the CCS study area. This

8 | January 2023

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

data is subdivided into high, moderate, and low value habitat for each habitat type. HDR compared results from vegetation transects located in each high value seasonal habitat type to the output of the Debit Calculator to determine the site-scale habitat suitability for each high value seasonal habitat type within the study area.

2.5

Lek Proximity Analysis

A proximity analysis for three active greater sage-grouse leks within 3.1 miles of the Project was conducted with GIS to model the line of sight from the leks towards the Project area. The Nevada and Northeastern California Greater Sage-Grouse Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment (BLM 2015) stipulates that no new surface disturbance may occur within 3.1 miles of a lek within priority habitat management area, however, this may be subject to change according to ground conditions, such as topographic features. The proximity analysis modeled the line of sight from the ground at each lek and incorporated surrounding ground conditions within the study area.

January 2023 | 9

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Results

3.1

Noise Impact Analysis

3.1.1

Noise Measurement Results

Table 2 below presents the measured baseline (or current conditions) summary sound level metrics for each lek.

Table 2. Summary of Sound Measurements at Leks (dBA) Measurement Location Canyon Springs NE

Gilford Meadows

Berry Creek Turnoff

Timber Creek Turnoff

Paine Meadows

Time Period

Leq

Lmin

Lmax

L10

L50

L90

0000-2400

0400-0900

1800-1000

0000-2400

0400-0900

1800-1000

0000-2400

0400-0900

1800-1000

0000-2400

0400-0900

1800-1000

0000-2400

0400-0900

1800-1000

Source: HDR 2022 Notes: Leq – equivalent sound level; Lmin – minimum sound level; Lmax – maximum sound level; L10 – sound level that is exceeded 10 percent of the time in a given period; L50 – median sound level; L90 – sound level that is exceeded 90 percent of the time in a given period.

The background ambient sound level for each location is presented in Table 3 in A-weighted decibels (dBA). A-weighting is a sound pressure level weighting scheme in which the influence of high- and low-frequency sound is reduced in order to approximate human hearing. A-weighting also provides a defensible approximation for the sound spectrum for many birds, including sage-grouse. The dBA is the unit used to quantify the strength of sound to which A-weighting has been applied. These levels are equivalent to the sound level that is exceeded 90 percent of the time in a 24-hour period (L90) presented in Table 2 and represent the 24-hour levels which Project sound levels must not exceed by more than 10 dB between March 1 and June 30.

10 | January 2023

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Table 3. Baseline Ambient Sound Levels Location

Background Ambient Sound Level (dBA)

Canyon Springs NE

Gilford Meadows

Berry Creek Turnoff

Timber Creek Turnoff

Paine Meadows

Source: HDR 2022 Note: dBA -A-weighted decibel.

Hourly metrics for each location are listed in Appendix B, including metrics before and after noise floor corrections and hourly one-third octave band metrics.

Audio Review The digital audio recordings at each location were reviewed to determine typical noise sources. Ten (10) seconds of audio every 4 minutes for 2 days (total of 360 sample periods per day), including one weekday and one weekend day, were listened to at each site and each source of audible noise was recorded. The Berry Creek Turnoff location uses different days than the other locations due to a late start of the audio recording equipment at that site. Results of this audio review are shown in Table 4, with the percentage of sample periods during which each noise source was audible.

Table 4. Percent of Audible Noise Sources at Leks Noise Source

Canyon Springs NE

Gilford Meadows

Berry Creek Turnoff

Timber Creek Paine Meadows* Turnoff*

Sat 5/8

Tue 5/11

Sat 5/8

Tue 5/11

Sun 5/9

Wed 5/12

Sat 5/8

Tue 5/11

Sat 5/8

Tue 5/11

Aircraft

14%

21%

11%

21%

14%

13%

15%

11%

14%

Vehicles

13%

20%

21%

14%

Wind

50%

45%

59%

28%

41%

65%

37%

41%

27%

Insects

22%

11%

23%

15%

31%

16%

18%

17%

20%

Livestock

34%

12%

Sage grouse

Other birds

50%

51%

40%

49%

67%

57%

35%

51%

59%

64%

No sound

14%

12%

18%

Creek

45%

62%

Rain

Machinery

36%

Music

Squeak1

January 2023 | 11

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Noise Source

Canyon Springs NE

Gilford Meadows

Berry Creek Turnoff

Timber Creek Paine Meadows* Turnoff*

Sat 5/8

Tue 5/11

Sat 5/8

Tue 5/11

Sun 5/9

Wed 5/12

Sat 5/8

Tue 5/11

Sat 5/8

Tue 5/11

Flagpole

Anthropogenic2

14%

26%

42%

28%

68%

27%

33%

38%

27%

25%

Source: HDR 2022 Notes: *The Timber Creek Turnoff lek and Paine Meadows lek are more than 3.1 miles from the proposed Project facilities. Due to their proximity to State Route 486, NDOW requested that noise measurements be taken at these leks to model noise from construction traffic. 1 Unidentifiable squeaking noise - possibly birds or rubbing metal on nearby fence. 2 Percentage of sample periods that any anthropogenic noise was audible, including aircraft, vehicles, livestock, machinery, music, and flagpole. NA – not applicable, noise source not present; 0% - noise source not detected during audio review but may still be present at location.

3.1.2

Noise Modeling Inputs and Results

Noise modeling was conducted for both construction-related noise and operational noise.

Noise Model Inputs Construction Noise The primary noise-generating construction activity in terms of both duration and volume would be excavation of the upper and lower reservoirs and dam construction. The construction schedule is not known at this time, but construction is expected to last about 7 years. For noise modeling purposes, 12 each of excavators, bulldozers, and dump trucks were assumed to be operating at any given time. Sound pressure levels of 85 dBA at 50 feet for all equipment were assumed based on the Federal Highway Administration’s Roadway Construction Noise Model (FHWA 2018). For modeling purposes this translates to a sound power level (as compared to the previous sound pressure level) of 117 dBA for each piece of equipment, or 132 dBA overall sound power level for each construction area. Because the octave-band characteristics of the equipment are not known at this time, dBA levels were modeled in the 500 Hz band following ISO 9613-2. For each construction area, this overall sound power level was modeled as an area source encompassing the reservoir footprint and a 1,000-foot buffer to account for spoil and borrow areas. This is a conservative representation of what is expected to be the loudest phase of construction. When the construction schedule is developed, the equipment used for each phase can be modeled individually for a more realistic representation of the noise emissions. Noise from construction traffic was not quantitatively modeled at this time, however at NDOW’s request, the following information is provided to give a qualitative impression of construction traffic noise. During construction, there would be an increase in traffic along State Route 486 to reach the upper reservoir. This road and the upper reservoir access road pass within 1 mile of all measured leks except for Gilford Meadows. Heavy equipment would be moved along these roads during construction mobilization and demobilization. It is anticipated that the heavy equipment operators and support staff would be bussed to the upper reservoir area from the construction administration yard in the lower reservoir area to minimize extensive personal vehicle traffic. It is also anticipated

12 | January 2023

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

that approximately 100 daily round trips over the course of a 12 hour to 20 hour work day to the upper reservoir along State Route 486 are expected, primarily pickup trucks and equipment maintenance vehicles used for engineering inspections and construction management purposes. Bus trips would be concentrated during shift changes, which could elevate the L50 during those hours, but have no effect on levels during other times.

Operational Noise Above-ground elements of the Project that would generate noise during operation include the following: •

Ventilation equipment at powerhouse tunnel mouths

•

HVAC equipment at the administration building/warehouse

•

Corona noise from transmission lines

•

Staff traffic

VENTILATION NOISE

Ventilation noise from the powerhouse tunnel mouths and the administration building was modeled using Cadna-A. Because the octave-band characteristics of the equipment are not known at this time, dBA levels were modeled in the 500 Hz band following ISO 9613-2. A sound power level of 110 dBA was assumed for each of the three sources, as a conservative upper-bound estimate. Operational (ventilation) noise modeling results are shown in Table 6. CORONA NOISE

Corona noise from the power transmission lines was calculated using the CFI8X model developed by Bonneville Power Administration (Table 5).

Table 5. Corona Noise Model Inputs Parameter

Value

Line voltage

345 kV

Height

75 feet

Number of lines

Conductors per line

Spacing of conductors

10 in.

Distance between lines

Not Applicable

Phase difference between lines

Not Applicable

Using these inputs and assuming wet conditions, an L50 sound pressure level of 7 dBA is calculated 1 foot above the ground at the centerline of the transmission line. This low level is due to singlephase lines causing less noise than multi-phase lines. If the existing background ambient level at leks near the transmission line is assumed to be 15 dBA, this puts the cumulative noise limit at 25 dBA, and the limit for contribution from Project operation at 24 dBA. This level is not reached at any distance from the transmission line.

January 2023 | 13

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Global step-up transformers are expected to be located underground. The switchyard is not expected to have noise sources other than corona noise. OPERATIONAL TRAFFIC

The Project is expected have up to 24 full-time staff when operational. Traffic associated with these jobs will be almost exclusively to and from the powerhouse tunnel, which is accessed from Highway 93, and would not be near any active or pending leks. Traffic along State Route 486 to the upper reservoir would be minimal during operation. Because operational traffic is not expected to pass within 1 mile of established leks, operational traffic noise was not modeled.

Noise Modeling Results Modeling results include the cumulative L50 limit at each site based on measured existing L50 and L90 levels and the resulting effective L50 limit for Project noise emissions only (Table 6). Modeled Project noise emissions represent levels assuming constant, 24-hour operation. For construction noise, noise from the upper and lower reservoir excavations are included individually and combined. Levels with an asterisk are in excess of at least one of the time-period based limits at a given location. Modeling results for projected noise levels are not included for the Timber Creek lek and the Paine Meadows lek. Both of these leks are more than 3.1 miles away from the Project facilities and thus are not within the buffer area for the noise restrictions defined in the ARMPA. Due to the lek proximity to State Route 486, NDOW requested that noise at these leks be measured because of concerns of increased traffic on State Route 486 from construction, and these leks may be included in future models for construction traffic traveling to and from the Project upper reservoir facilities. Additionally, ISO 9613-2 has an uncertainty of +/- 3 dB within 1 kilometer (0.6 miles) of the noise source, assuming a mild temperature inversion and moderate downwind propagation. Uncertainty is assumed to be greater at greater distances and ISO 9613-2 does not provide an estimate for the magnitude of the uncertainty.

Table 6. Noise Modeling Results – Measured and Projected Noise Levels at Leks (dBA) Existing Measurement Time Location Period

Canyon Springs NE

Gilford Meadows

14 | January 2023

Limits

Modeled Project Leq

Construction Effective Project Operational Upper Lower Combined L50 Limit Res. Res.

L50

L90

Cumul. L50 Limit

00002400

04000900

18001000

00002400

04000900

18001000

42*

29*

42*

33*

27*

34*

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Existing Measurement Time Location Period

Berry Creek Turnoff

Limits

Modeled Project Leq

Construction Effective Operational Project Upper Lower Combined L50 Limit Res. Res.

L50

L90

Cumul. L50 Limit

00002400

04000900

18001000

26*

29*

dBA – A-weighted decibel; * - level in excess of at least one limit at this location; L50 – median sound level; L90 – sound level that is exceeded 90 percent of the time in a given period. Source: HDR.

The construction noise modeling results show that construction noise is expected to exceed the limits at almost all leks, both with the upper and lower reservoir activities combined and individually. Noise levels during operation are expected to be within the allowable L50 limits at each lek. Although the modeled construction noise levels are very quiet in a typical human context (20-30 dBA is similar to levels experienced in a quiet library), existing levels are quieter still (levels less than 10 dBA would typically not be encountered except in an acoustical laboratory). All noise modeling should be updated when additional details become available, including daily vehicle traffic to and from the Project facilities, construction schedule, construction equipment, ventilation equipment, and transmission line design.

3.2

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek Monitoring

HDR biologists monitored eight greater sage-grouse lek locations on March 29-31, April 13-15, and April 27-29, 2021, and March 23-24, April 5-7, April 19-20, and May 3-4, 2022 (Figure 3). Lek survey datasheets are included in Appendix C. The Mosier lek is monitored by NDOW, and was reported to be active in 2021 and 2022. Greater sage-grouse were observed at three leks at least once during monitoring (Table 7). No sage grouse were observed at the Bolo Spring, Central Smith Valley 1, Locket Spring, or McGill Junction leks. One female was observed flying near Heusser Mountain S in 2022, however no other activity or sign was observed. Old scat and cecal tar were observed near the Locket Spring lek, no other activity was observed.

Table 7. Results of Greater Sage-Grouse Lek Monitoring Lek Name

1st Count

Birds Present

2nd Count

Birds Present

3rd Count

Birds Present

2021 Bolo Spring

3/31/2021

4/15/2021

4/29/2021

Canyon Springs NE

3/29/2021

Yes; 3 males/ 2 females

4/14/2021

Yes; 2 males

4/28/2021

Yes; 5 males

Central Smith Valley 1

3/31/2021

4/15/2021

4/29/2021

January 2023 | 15

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Lek Name

1st Count

Birds Present

Gilford Meadows

3/29/2021

Heusser Mountain S

3/31/2021

Locket Spring

2nd Count 2021

Birds Present

3rd Count

Birds Present

4/14/2021

4/28/2021

Yes; 5 males

4/15/2021

4/29/2021

3/30/2021

4/13/2021

4/27/2021

McGill Junction

3/31/2021

4/15/2021

4/29/2021

Tank Spring West

3/30/2021

Yes; 2 males

4/13/2021

Yes; 1 male

4/27/2021

2022 Bolo Spring

3/24/2022

4/7/2022

Canyon Springs NE

4/6/2022

Yes; 5 males 1 female

4/20/2022

Yes; 5 males

5/4/2022

Yes; 8 males 2 females

Central Smith Valley 1

3/24/2022

4/7/2022

Gilford Meadows

3/23/2022

Yes; 2 males, 1 female

4/6/2022

Yes; 6 males, 5 females

4/20/2022

Yes; 2 males 1 unknown

Heusser Mountain S

3/24/2022

Yes; 1 female in flight

4/7/2022

Locket Spring

4/5/2022

4/19/2022

5/3/2022

McGill Junction

3/24/2022

4/7/2022

Tank Spring West

4/5/2022

Yes; 2 males

4/19/2022

Yes; 2 males

5/3/2022

Yes; 3 males

16 | January 2023

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Figure 3. 2021, 2022 Greater Sage-Grouse Lek Monitoring Locations

January 2023 | 17

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

3.3

CCS Analysis

3.3.1

Debit Project Analysis

HDR completed a Debit Project Analysis for the Project using the CCS HQT Version 1.6.21 following the CCS User’s Guide v1.6.21 (SETT 2021). The desktop portion was completed and submitted to the SETT for review and concurrence prior to the habitat assessment. HDR biologists conducted vegetation transects at 97 transect locations identified by the SETT following the CCS User’s Guide v1.6.21 from May 2 to May 8, 2021. As required by the ARMPA and Nevada Mitigation Regulation 232.400-232.480, direct and indirect impacts to sage-grouse habitat as a result of the proposed Project were analyzed using the CCS. Prior to receiving a Notice to Proceed, the Project proponent must offset the credit obligation in its entirety, complete an authorized Phased Purchase Agreement, or develop a mitigation plan in coordination with the SETT. If a mitigation plan is developed, it must be approved by the Sagebrush Ecosystem Council. If the entire credit obligation is not mitigated for up front, at least 1/3 of the total required compensatory mitigation must be offset prior to receiving a Notice to Proceed. Any balance of a credit obligation (including a five percent phasing factor applied to a balance) would be required to be offset within 10 years. The estimate of the total debits resulting from direct and indirect impacts of the Project is 827 (Table 8). Debits resulting from direct and indirect impacts from surface disturbance that will be reclaimed are Term debits. Debits resulting from direct and indirect impacts from surface disturbance that are permanent and will not be reclaimed are Permanent debits. If the Project footprint changes, the Debit Project Analysis will be revised to address changes.

Table 8. Debit Estimate Summary Total Analysis Area (acres)

111,475.1

Current Area-Weighted Average Habitat Function

10%

Current Area-Weighted Average Habitat Function

10%

Projected Area-Weighted Average Habitat Function

10%

Permanent Area-Weighted Average Habitat Function

11%

Projected Functional Acres below Current (f-acres)

695.5

Permanent Functional Acres below Current (f-acres)

447.4

Projected Area-Weighted Average Multiplier (multiplier)

0.42

Permanent Area-Weighted Average Multiplier (multiplier)

1.19

Term Debits Generated (credits)

295

Permanent Debits Generated (credits)

532

Total Estimated Debits Source: Nevada CCS Debit Calculator v1.6.21.

18 | January 2023

827

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

3.3.2

Credit Estimate

WPW will coordinate directly with a credit developer and the SETT to purchase credits through a Phased Purchase Agreement equal to the debits calculated for the Project plus debits resulting from a proximity factor. WPW may also develop a mitigation plan in coordination with the SETT and Sagebrush Ecosystem Council.

3.4

Habitat Suitability

Of the 97 transects where vegetation data was collected for the CCS, 68 transects were located in high-value spring habitat, 75 were in high-value, late-brood rearing habitat, and 1 was in high-value winter habitat. In general, the site-scale habitat suitability parameters from transects collected in the study area were within the ranges recommended by the HAF (Table 9). Exceptions include spring average sagebrush cover (14% measures versus 15-25% recommended in the HAF), sagebrush height in summer habitat (17 centimeters [cm] measured versus 40-80 cm recommended), and average sagebrush height in winter habitat (24 cm measured versus greater than 25-35 cm recommended). It should be noted that seasonal habitats within the study area were not mapped in the field, rather this analysis was completed using transects where data was collected for the CCS analysis.

Table 9. Site-Scale Habitat Suitability in the Study Area Source Habitat Assessment Framework recommended ranges 2021 vegetation transects

Seasonal Habitat Type1

Average Average Average Average Preferred Sagebrush Sagebrush Perennial Perennial Forb Cover Height (cm) Grass Cover Forb Cover Availability2

Spring

15-25%

30-80

≥10%

≥5%

High

Summer

10-25%

40-80

≥15%

High

Winter

>10-30%

>25-35

Spring

14%

10%

34%

Summer

15%

21%

60%

Winter

26%

1. Spring = nesting and breeding, Summer = early and late-brood rearing, Winter = Winter. 2. Preferred forb availability is measured in the HQT by assigning a forb species richness score; forb species richness

is the number of forb species available across the seasonal habitat type (SEP 2017).

January 2023 | 19

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Figure 4. Habitat Suitability and Transect Locations

20 | January 2023

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

3.5

Lek Proximity Analysis

Figure 5 shows the line of sight from Canyon Springs NE lek, Gilford Meadows lek, Berry Creek Turnoff lek, and Mosier lek looking towards the proposed Project facilities. Shaded areas show what is visible from the ground at the lek locations, looking toward the Project. The access road from State Route 486 and the northern-most portion of the proposed upper reservoir area are the only Project features that are visible from ground level from the Canyon Springs NE lek, the Gilford Meadows lek, and the Berry Creek Turnoff lek. The access road in the Steptoe Valley is in the viewshed from the Mosier lek.

January 2023 | 21

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Figure 5. Lek Proximity Analysis

22 | January 2023

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Discussion

4.1

Noise Impact Analysis

Preliminary results of the noise measurements and modeling indicate that operational noise is expected to be within the allowable L50 limits at each lek. However, construction noise is expected to exceed the limits at almost all locations, both with the upper and lower reservoir activities combined and individually. All noise modeling should be updated when additional details become available, including construction schedule, construction equipment, ventilation equipment, and transmission line design. At that point, specific mitigation strategies can be recommended to reduce the effect of construction noise at lek locations.

4.2

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek Monitoring

Greater sage-grouse were observed at three lek locations at least once during the lek monitoring, including at the two leks closest to the proposed reservoir facilities. Ongoing lek monitoring would establish a record of activities at the Canyon Springs NE lek and Gilford Meadows lek.

4.3

CCS Analysis

The estimate of the total debits resulting from direct and indirect impacts of the Project is 827 debits. If the Project footprint changes, the Debit Project Analysis must be revised to include any changes. WPW will coordinate directly with a credit developer and the SETT to purchase credits through a Phased Purchase Agreement equal to the debits calculated for the Project plus debits resulting from a proximity factor. WPW may also develop a mitigation plan in coordination with the SETT and Sagebrush Ecosystem Council.

4.4

Habitat Suitability

In general, the site-scale habitat suitability parameters from transects collected in the study area were within the parameters recommended by the HAF. Seasonal habitats within the study area were not mapped in the field, rather this analysis was completed using transects where data was already being collected for the CCS analysis.

4.5

Lek Proximity Analysis

Primary facilities that may be visible from the four active leks closest to the Project include the access road from State Route 486 to the upper reservoir, portions of the proposed upper reservoir area, and the access road to the upper reservoir from the Steptoe Valley. Factors like topography and vegetation cover may reduce the view of Project facilities from the leks.

January 2023 | 23

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

References

Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 2015. Nevada and Northeastern California Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment Greater Sage-grouse Habitat mapping. Available at https://data.doi.gov/dataset/blm-nvca-armpa-grsg-habitat-2015 ______. 2015. Nevada and Northeastern California Greater Sage-grouse Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment. March. ______. 2022. BLM National Western US GRSG ROD Habitat Management Areas August 2022. Updated October 12, 2022. https://data.doi.gov/dataset/blm-natl-westernus-grsg-rod-habitatmgmt-areas-august-2022#sec-dates. Accessed November 15, 2022. Coates, P.S., Casazza, M.L., Brussee B.E., Ricca, M.A., Gustafson, K.B., Sanchez-Chopitea, E., Mauch, K., Niell, L., Gardner, S., Espinosa, S., and Delehanty, D.J., 2016, Spatially explicit modeling of annual and seasonal habitat for greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) in Nevada and Northeastern California—An updated decision-support tool for management: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2016-1080, 160 p., http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/ofr20161080. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2018. Roadway Construction Noise Model Version 2.0. October. International Standards of Organization (ISO 9613-2:1996). 1996. Acoustics – Attenuation of Sound during Propagation Outdoors. December. Available at https://www.iso.org/standard/20649.html National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2015. Average weather conditions from March to May at the Ely Yelland Airport. September. Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW). 2018. Acoustic Impacts and Greater Sage-grouse: A Review of Current Science, Sound Measurement Protocols, and Management Recommendations. February. ______. 2020. Interim Sage-Grouse Noise Protocol Clarifications. March 31, 2020. State of Nevada. Sagebrush Ecosystem Program (SEP). 2017. Nevada Habitat Quantification Tool Scientific Methods Document v1.3. Prepared by Environmental Incentives, LLC and EcoMetrix Solutions Group, LLC, South Lake Tahoe, CA. ______.2019. Approved Regulation of the Sagebrush Ecosystem Council. §§1-19, NRS 232.162. October 30, 2019. ______.2021. Sagebrush Ecosystem Technical Team (SETT). Nevada Conservation Credit System User’s Guide v1.6.21. January. Stiver, S.J., E.T. Rinkes, D.E. Naugle, P.D. Makela, D.A. Nance, and J.W. Karl, eds. 2015. SageGrouse Habitat Assessment Framework: A Multiscale Assessment Tool. Technical Reference 6710-1. Bureau of Land Management and Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, Denver, Colorado. United States Department of Energy (USDOE). 2008. Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, Designation of Energy Corridors on Federal Land in the 11 Western States, DOE/EIS-0386. November.

24 | January 2023

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Appendix A. Study Plan

White Pine Pumped Storage Project (FERC No. 14851) Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Plan May 25, 2021

1.0 Introduction White Pine Waterpower, LLC (White Pine) is proposing the licensing, construction, and operation of the White Pine Pumped Storage Project (FERC No. 14851) (Project) in White Pine County, Nevada, approximately 8 miles northeast of the City of Ely. The Project is a 1,000 megawatt, closed-loop, pumped storage facility that will require the construction of two new reservoirs joined by underground or surface conduits along with a powerhouse and associated generation, pumping, and transmission equipment. The Project will be located entirely off-stream, meaning neither the upper nor lower reservoir will intercept a perennial surface watercourse. White Pine has initiated a licensing process for the Project with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the federal agency with jurisdiction over non-federal hydropower projects in the United States. During this process, White Pine will engage stakeholders and implement a suite of resource studies that will inform FERC’s environmental and developmental analyses and decision regarding license issuance. This document presents White Pine’s proposed approach to the scoping and implementation of a Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study assessment for the Project that will be provided to FERC to assist in the licensing analyses. White Pine anticipates filing a Draft License Application with FERC in December 2021.

2.0 Project Nexus and Study Goals Construction, operation, and maintenance of the Project may have the potential to affect greater sagegrouse. These effects may be direct (e.g., result of ground-disturbing activities) or indirect (e.g., due to noise or addition of tall structures). The goal of this study is to assess the direct and indirect effects the Project may have on greater sage-grouse habitat. The study will include: • • • •

Noise impact analysis; Greater sage-grouse lek monitoring; Conservation Credit System analysis; and Proximity analysis of the Project to nearby greater sage-grouse leks.

The overall goal of this study is to conduct a fine-scale outcome-based baseline assessment of greater sage-grouse habitat and lek status nearby and within the study area. The study will also assess potential direct and indirect impacts the Project may have on greater sage-grouse habitat.

3.0 Summary of Existing Information A full description of existing information can be found in the White Pine Pre-Application Document (PAD). For the PAD, existing geospatial information from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW) was reviewed to identify and describe greater sage-grouse habitat within the study area, as well as the proximity of the study area to greater sage-grouse leks.

Page 1

Appendix A-1

White Pine Pumped Storage Project (FERC No. 14851) Greater Sage-grouse Lek and Habitat Study Plan

These datasets indicate that development of the Project could result in potential impacts to greater sage-grouse and greater sage-grouse habitat. As noted in the PAD, White Pine’s review of greater sage-grouse habitat and consultation with NDOW and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) suggests that habitat in the vicinity of the Project is primarily classified as Priority habitat management area (PHMA) and General habitat management area (GHMA) by the2015 BLM Nevada and North Eastern California Approved Resource Management Plan (BLM 2015).. Other habitat management areas (OHMA) also exist in the vicinity of the Project. There are eight known greater sage-grouse lek sites within 3.1 miles of the Project shown in Table 1 below. Table 1. Known Greater Sage-Grouse Lek Sites in Project Vicinity

Lek Name

Township/Range/Section

Last Survey

Status

Canyon Spring NE

21 0170N 0640E 024

2018

Active

Gilford Meadow

21 0170N 0650E 030

2018

Active

McGill Junction

21 0170N 0630E 002

2009

Unknown

Tank Spring West

21 0180N 0610E 010

2017

Active

Locket Spring

21 0180N 0610E 012

2019

Pending

Central Smith Valley 1

21 0180N 0630E 031

2014

Unknown

Huesser Mountain South

21 0170N 0630E 008

2009

Unknown

Bolo Spring

21 0170N 0630E 017

2009

Unknown

McGill Junction

21 0170N 0630E 002

2009

Unknown

Source: NDOW 2019.

4.0 Methods 4.1

Study Area

The project area consists of lands within the Primary Facility Corridors as depicted in Attachment 1. The sage-grouse habitat management areas (Priority, General, Other, and Non-habitat) depicted in Attachment 1 are the habitat management areas mapped in the 2015 BLM Nevada and North Eastern California Approved Resource Management Plan (BLM 2015). These lands include the proposed Project reservoirs, access roads, water source, transmission corridor, railroad realignment, currentlyanticipated laydown yards and related disturbance areas, as well as a 200 foot buffer surrounding each. The study area for each task described in Section 4.2 encompasses the entire project area plus a buffer area as noted below: •

Tasks 1, 2 and 4: All known leks in 3.1 miles of the project area.

•

Task 3: The project area plus an appropriate buffer determined in consultation with the State of Nevada’s Sagebrush Ecosystem Technical Team (SETT). This will result in a buffer 6 kilometers in size for the proposed transmission line and buffers between 3 and 6 kilometers for other project components.

Page 2

Appendix A-2

White Pine Pumped Storage Project (FERC No. 14851) Greater Sage-grouse Lek and Habitat Study Plan

4.2

Study Methods

White Pine proposes to conduct the following four tasks: Noise Impact Analysis, Greater-Sage Grouse lek monitoring, Conservation Credit System Analysis, and habitat suitability, and a lek proximity analysis.

Task 1 – Noise Impact Analysis A noise impact study will be completed to compare pre-Project noise levels to anticipated noise levels during construction of the Project. The noise impact study will be done in accordance with Appendix G: Noise Protocol of the Nevada and Northeastern California Greater Sage-Grouse Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment (Nevada Regional BLM 2019), Acoustic Impacts and Greater Sage-grouse: A Review of Current Science, Sound Measurement Protocols, and Management Recommendations (NDOW 2018), and the Nevada Department of Wildlife Interim SageGrouse Noise Protocol Clarifications (NDOW 2020) . The Nevada and Northeastern California Greater Sage-Grouse Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment stipulates that noise as a result of the Project will not increase above 10 decibels (dB) above ambient noise levels during lekking. White Pine will coordinate with the BLM and NDOW to determine the anticipated noise levels as a result of construction, operations, and maintenance of the Project and will incorporate the anticipated noise levels into the noise model. NDOW staff have requested that noise monitors be placed at five lek locations within the Duck Creek Basin: Paine Meadows lek, Timber Creek Turnoff lek, Berry Creek lek, Gilford Meadows lek, and the Canyon Springs NE lek. Field work to collect noise measurements will follow Appendix G: Noise Protocol of the Nevada and Northeastern California Greater Sage-Grouse Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment (BLM 2019). Measurements will be collected at multiple locations between each noise source and the lekking areas, during times when noise exposure would most likely affect greater sage-grouse. Where quiet conditions exist, empirical sampling and ambient noise modeling will be used to establish baseline ambient values. Project-related noise levels will be calculated with a noise model and will be compared to the measured noise levels. The noise analysis results will be reported in a draft and final noise analysis report.

Task 2 – Greater Sage-grouse Lek Monitoring White Pine will complete sage-grouse lek monitoring during the spring of 2021 for eight leks that are located within 3.1 miles of the Project as required by the Nevada and Northeastern California Greater Sage-grouse Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment (BLM 2019). Field biologists will follow the NDOW Sage-Grouse Lek Count Protocol and will conduct counts at each lek four times during breeding season, between March 1 and May 1, 2021. During each lek count, if birds are present, biologists will collect a minimum of three counts at 15-minute intervals. If no birds are observed, biologists will search the lekking areas on foot for sage-grouse sign. The results of the lek monitoring will be reported in a draft and final 2021 Greater Sage-Grouse Lek Monitoring Results report.

Task 3 – Conservation Credit System (CCS) Analysis and Habitat Suitability The Project is located on public and private lands in greater sage-grouse habitat and is, therefore, required to enroll in the credit system established by the State of Nevada’s Sagebrush Ecosystem Council (NRS 232.162). The CCS analyzes the direct and indirect adverse impacts that a development Page 3

Appendix A-3

White Pine Pumped Storage Project (FERC No. 14851) Greater Sage-grouse Lek and Habitat Study Plan

project could have on greater sage-grouse habitat. The results of this analysis will be used to determine both the debits incurred by the Project, and potential credits available to offset the debits. During the field data collection, parameters will also be collected to characterize habitat suitability within the direct footprint of the project area. These parameters are used to determine the site-scale habitat suitability for breeding, late-brood rearing, and winter habitat, and are defined in the BLM’s Sage-grouse Habitat Assessment Framework (Stiver et al 2015). Results of the habitat suitability assessment will be presented in a technical memo.

Debit Project Analysis White Pine will coordinate with the SETT to complete a debit evaluation for the Project. The debit project will begin by completing the Debit Project Review Form and submitting it to the SETT for use throughout the life of the debit project. The CCS User’s Guide will be followed to complete the desktop analysis of the Habitat Quantification Tool (HQT) using a geographic information system (GIS). These steps include defining a debit project area based upon the proposed Project surface disturbance, identifying existing anthropogenic disturbances, delineating map units, and generating transect locations for the field survey that will be submitted to the SETT for review. The SETT will provide the number and location of transects that will need to be completed to get an accurate site scale score for the Debit Project Calculator. Transects will consist of 50 meter (m) transects upon which biologists will collect data for vegetation coverage and diversity using the line intercept method and Daubenmire plots. Field work will occur during the 2021 growing season, from approximately April 15 to June 30, 2021, depending on weather and ground conditions. The latest CCS User’s Guide will be followed for collecting field data. Transect locations will be accessed by driving as close as possible to the survey transects using existing roads and then hiking on foot to survey locations to avoid sagebrush disturbance. Field data will be collected using iPads with submeter GPS receivers to record data on digital versions of the CCS field forms. Following the completion of field work, the transect data will be entered into the Debit Project Calculator to determine the number of debits that the Project is estimated to incur. The estimated debits that are a result of this analysis will be valid for 5 years. The field data and debit calculator will be packaged for submittal to the SETT by finalizing transect datasheets, transect photographs, map unit datasheets, and other applicable forms and shapefiles.

Credit Project Estimate White Pine will coordinate with the SETT to determine if there are any potential credit project opportunities within the vicinity of the Project. If it is determined that a credit project opportunity is available, a credit project analysis will be initiated and conducted following the CCS User’s Guide. Credits may also be available through the open marketplace to offset the debits the Project may incur.

Task 4 – Lek Proximity Analysis A proximity analysis for three greater sage-grouse leks near the Project will be completed with GIS to model the line of sight from the nearest sage-grouse lek towards the Project. The Nevada and Northeastern California Greater Sage-Grouse Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment (BLM 2019) stipulates that no new surface disturbance may occur within 3.1 miles of a lek within PHMA; however, this may be subject to change according to ground conditions, such as topographic features. The proximity analysis will model the line of sight and will

Page 4

Appendix A-4

White Pine Pumped Storage Project (FERC No. 14851) Greater Sage-grouse Lek and Habitat Study Plan

incorporate surrounding ground conditions within the Project vicinity. Results of the proximity analysis will be delivered in a map set.

5.0 Schedule and Deliverables White Pine anticipates the schedule for Study completion as follows: Planning ................................................................................................ February – March 2021 Study Season ................................................................................................. March– July 2021 Study Report Preparation .......................................................................August – October 2021 A description of the methods and field investigation findings will be included in the Report. The Report will be incorporated into the Draft License Application.

6.0 References Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 2015. Nevada and Northeastern California Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment Greater Sage-grouse Habitat mapping. Available at https://data.doi.gov/dataset/blm-nvca-armpa-grsg-habitat-2015 ______. 2019. Nevada and Northeastern California Greater Sage-grouse Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment. March. Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW). 2018. Acoustic Impacts and Greater Sage-grouse: A Review of Current Science, Sound Measurement Protocols, and Management Recommendations. February 2018. ______. 2019. White Pine Consultation Letter, December 19, 2019. ______. 2020. Interim Sage-Grouse Noise Protocol Clarifications. March 31, 2020. State of Nevada. 2019. Approved Regulation of the Sagebrush Ecosystem Council. §§1-19, NRS 232.162. October 30, 2019. Stiver, S.J., E.T. Rinkes, D.E. Naugle, P.D. Makela, D.A. Nance, and J.W. Karl, eds. 2015. SageGrouse Habitat Assessment Framework: A Multiscale Assessment Tool. Technical Reference 6710-1. Bureau of Land Management and Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, Denver, Colorado.

Page 5

Appendix A-5

White Pine Pumped Storage Project (FERC No. 14851) Greater Sage-grouse Lek and Habitat Study Plan

Attachment 1 Map of Study Area

Appendix A-6

LEGEND

18N 60E

18 18N 60E

18N 59E

25 36

18N 59E

17N 59E

18N 60E 17N 60E

19N 64E

19N 63E

18N 63E

17N 62E

19N 64E

17N 63E

17N 59E

17N 60E 16N 60E

16N 59E

33 17N 61E

16N 61E

16N 62E

33 17N 63E

16N 63E

17N 62E

16N 62E

16N 61E

16N 60E

18N 64E

17N 64E

15 13

17 20

BH-2

18N 65E

17N 65E

BH-3 23

11 12

14 13

23 24

US93

17N 64E

17N 65E 16N 65E

16N 64E

21 21

17N 63E

16N 60E

17N 62E

16 16

09 09

04 04

19N 65E

17N 64E

16N 59E

ElyBSU 28 29

16N 64E

16N 63E

16N 62E

17N 62E

17N 61E

17N 60E

17N 59E

BH-1 07

18N 65E

18N 64E

18N 63E

18N 62E

18N 61E

17N 61E

18N 62E

19N 62E

19N 65E

19N 64E

19N 63E

19N 62E

28 2.5

Steptoe01 02 Slough

18N 61E

19N 61E

18N 61E

29 Miles

18N 64E

19N 60E

16N 65E

18N 65E

18N 64E

17N 65E

18N 59E

Project Vicinity 19 20

17N 64E

16N 64E

19N 61E

30ROUTE 29 US - US

19N 59E

18N 63E

GREATER SAGE-GROUSE BUFFER 6000(M)

PLSSFIRSTDIVISION

SR - STATE ROUTE

23PHMA

18N 63E

RAILROADS

20 19 UNKNOWN

18N 62E

23 22 PLSSTOWNSHIP

OHMA

18N 62E

WATERBODY

18N 61E

CONVEYANCE 19

NON-HABITAT

HISTORIC

18N 60E

PROPOSED STRUCTURE

PROPOSED RESERVOIR ACCESS ROAD

GHMA

ACTIVE

19N 60E

PERMITTED ENERGY CORRIDOR

GRSG_CATEG

LEK STATUS

19N 62E

PROPOSED RESERVOIR

19N 61E

SAGE GROUSE KNOWN LEK LOCATIONS PRIMARY FACILITY CORRIDOR

PROPOSED RAILROAD REALIGNMENT

19N 60E

BOREHOLE

19N 59E

GREATER SAGE-GROUSE STUDY AREA WHITE PINE WATERPOWER, LLC

PATH: C:\USERS\SGRIFFIN\DESKTOP\WHITEPINE\MAP_DOCS\GREATERSAGEGROUSE_STUDYPLAN_MAP.MXD - USER: SGRIFFIN - DATE: 5/13/2021

Appendix A-7

Greater Sage-Grouse Lek and Habitat Study Report White Pine Pumped Storage Project

Appendix B. Hourly Noise Measurements

Canyon Spring Date Time 2021-05-04 15:21:47 2021-05-04 16:00:00 2021-05-04 17:00:00 2021-05-04 18:00:00 2021-05-04 19:00:00 2021-05-04 20:00:00 2021-05-04 21:00:00 2021-05-04 22:00:00 2021-05-04 23:00:00 2021-05-05 00:00:00 2021-05-05 01:00:00 2021-05-05 02:00:00 2021-05-05 03:00:00 2021-05-05 04:00:00 2021-05-05 05:00:00 2021-05-05 06:00:00 2021-05-05 07:00:00 2021-05-05 08:00:00 2021-05-05 09:00:00 2021-05-05 10:00:00 2021-05-05 11:00:00 2021-05-05 12:00:00 2021-05-05 13:00:00 2021-05-05 14:00:00 2021-05-05 15:00:00 2021-05-05 16:00:00 2021-05-05 17:00:00 2021-05-05 18:00:00 2021-05-05 19:00:00 2021-05-05 20:00:00 2021-05-05 21:00:00 2021-05-05 22:00:00 2021-05-05 23:00:00 2021-05-06 00:00:00 2021-05-06 01:00:00 2021-05-06 02:00:00 2021-05-06 03:00:00 2021-05-06 04:00:00 2021-05-06 05:00:00 2021-05-06 06:00:00 2021-05-06 07:00:00 2021-05-06 08:00:00 2021-05-06 09:00:00 2021-05-06 10:00:00 2021-05-06 11:00:00 2021-05-06 12:00:00 2021-05-06 13:00:00 2021-05-06 14:00:00 2021-05-06 15:00:00 2021-05-06 16:00:00 2021-05-06 17:00:00 2021-05-06 18:00:00 2021-05-06 19:00:00 2021-05-06 20:00:00 2021-05-06 21:00:00 2021-05-06 22:00:00 2021-05-06 23:00:00 2021-05-07 00:00:00 2021-05-07 01:00:00 2021-05-07 02:00:00 2021-05-07 03:00:00 2021-05-07 04:00:00 2021-05-07 05:00:00 2021-05-07 06:00:00 2021-05-07 07:00:00 2021-05-07 08:00:00 2021-05-07 09:00:00 2021-05-07 10:00:00 2021-05-07 11:00:00 2021-05-07 12:00:00 2021-05-07 13:00:00

Raw LAeq LAFmin LAFmax LAF10.00 LAF50.00 LAF90.00 40.0 10.2 71.3 32.9 21.2 13.2 21.5 8.7 45.2 24.2 15.6 11.3 28.2 8.4 49.3 30.7 15.3 10.9 19.2 7.5 39.7 20.9 11.1 8.6 22.5 7.0 55.0 20.8 9.2 7.6 9.1 6.7 34.4 11.0 7.4 7.1 11.4 6.9 32.8 12.8 8.5 7.5 31.2 6.6 59.4 12.2 7.7 7.1 13.8 6.8 35.2 11.2 9.1 7.8 16.8 6.8 42.4 12.8 9.3 7.6 8.4 6.6 29.1 9.6 7.8 7.1 9.9 6.7 19.6 11.8 9.2 7.8 11.3 6.4 30.3 9.3 7.4 6.9 15.8 6.7 47.5 16.6 7.9 7.3 24.9 6.8 48.4 25.4 14.2 8.9 26.7 6.5 54.8 26.1 13.2 8.7 27.2 7.6 55.3 28.4 14.6 9.6 18.1 7.5 43.4 20.2 11.3 8.8 21.5 8.0 53.8 21.0 12.7 9.4 21.8 8.3 50.6 22.0 12.5 9.4 25.7 8.7 52.3 21.2 14.0 10.2 21.4 9.1 45.4 23.2 15.4 11.3 21.1 8.9 48.4 20.7 13.6 10.6 20.5 8.7 39.5 23.7 14.1 9.8 23.0 9.0 49.8 22.1 12.8 10.1 26.0 8.6 54.2 21.7 13.8 10.0 17.1 8.2 38.5 19.6 12.2 9.1 18.5 7.8 38.8 21.4 13.7 9.2 23.6 7.9 47.1 21.5 10.9 8.9 18.1 10.5 35.2 19.5 16.9 13.6 20.7 13.4 36.4 23.5 18.0 15.7 21.7 12.8 37.5 25.1 18.8 15.7 25.6 19.3 43.7 28.0 24.6 22.3 24.6 18.9 35.8 26.9 23.7 21.8 22.4 14.7 35.8 24.8 21.7 18.5 19.3 11.2 40.1 20.6 17.7 13.8 17.9 8.1 40.4 14.7 10.6 9.3 27.5 7.4 49.3 26.8 9.3 8.0 29.1 8.9 51.2 30.6 18.1 11.5 21.5 8.9 43.2 23.0 15.1 11.5 28.4 7.7 52.2 27.6 15.2 10.6 28.5 8.1 63.6 25.0 15.9 10.7 23.2 8.5 43.2 26.7 19.3 11.6 28.0 9.8 50.4 30.3 22.4 14.9 30.6 12.5 48.9 34.2 25.6 18.0 35.3 13.5 59.2 37.7 29.0 21.3 33.6 12.1 56.7 37.0 27.4 19.6 30.6 11.4 52.1 33.9 26.0 18.1 32.9 11.2 57.6 33.1 22.4 14.8 32.5 11.4 51.9 35.7 27.2 18.4 30.8 13.0 53.4 33.7 26.5 19.5 28.8 16.3 49.6 31.6 23.8 19.2 25.4 10.8 47.4 27.2 18.4 13.8 19.9 9.6 44.2 21.9 15.3 12.0 20.2 7.8 47.9 23.5 10.1 8.7 17.0 8.2 37.1 19.3 12.9 9.4 18.6 8.2 47.0 18.4 11.7 9.6 12.2 7.3 30.1 14.3 9.6 8.2 9.6 7.6 21.1 11.2 9.1 8.3 9.3 7.3 32.7 10.4 8.6 8.0 14.0 7.8 42.5 14.5 11.8 9.6 28.2 9.4 52.7 24.9 14.4 12.0 30.3 8.8 52.1 31.9 21.8 13.9 22.1 8.8 44.3 24.7 18.2 14.3 29.5 12.0 51.8 32.1 24.7 18.1 31.8 13.0 68.6 32.2 25.5 20.1 33.3 11.3 53.9 36.5 28.3 20.5 34.7 19.5 52.1 38.0 31.6 25.8 34.9 15.1 55.9 36.9 29.9 23.2 29.3 11.1 49.0 32.4 25.4 14.1 33.3 11.9 52.1 36.0 27.5 17.8

Noise floor corrected LAeq LAFmin LAFmax LAF10.00 LAF50.00 LAF90.00 40.0 8.4 71.3 32.9 21.2 12.4 21.5 5.8 45.2 24.2 15.1 9.9 28.2 5.2 49.3 30.7 14.8 9.4 19.2 3.0 39.7 20.9 9.7 5.6 22.5 1.4 55.0 20.8 6.7 3.3 6.5 0.2 34.4 9.5 2.7 1.8 10.1 1.0 32.8 11.9 5.4 3.0 31.2 0.0 59.4 11.1 3.5 1.8 13.1 0.6 35.2 9.8 6.5 3.8 16.8 0.6 42.4 11.9 6.9 3.3 5.2 0.0 29.1 7.4 3.8 1.8 7.9 0.2 19.6 10.6 6.7 3.8 9.9 0.0 30.3 6.9 2.7 1.0 15.8 0.2 47.5 16.6 4.0 2.4 24.9 0.6 48.4 25.4 13.6 6.2 26.7 0.0 54.8 26.1 12.4 5.8 27.2 3.3 55.3 28.4 14.0 7.4 18.1 3.0 43.4 20.2 9.9 6.0 21.5 4.3 53.8 21.0 11.8 7.1 21.8 5.0 50.6 22.0 11.5 7.1 25.7 5.8 52.3 21.2 13.3 8.4 21.4 6.5 45.4 23.2 14.9 9.9 21.1 6.2 48.4 20.7 12.9 8.9 20.5 5.8 39.5 23.7 13.4 7.7 23.0 6.3 49.8 22.1 11.9 8.2 26.0 5.6 54.2 21.7 13.1 8.0 17.1 4.7 38.5 19.6 11.1 6.5 18.5 3.8 38.8 21.4 13.0 6.7 23.6 4.0 47.1 21.5 9.4 6.2 18.1 8.8 35.2 19.5 16.9 12.9 20.7 12.6 36.4 23.5 18.0 15.7 21.7 11.9 37.5 25.1 18.8 15.7 25.6 19.3 43.7 28.0 24.6 22.3 24.6 18.9 35.8 26.9 23.7 21.8 22.4 14.1 35.8 24.8 21.7 18.5 19.3 9.8 40.1 20.6 17.7 13.1 17.9 4.5 40.4 14.1 8.9 6.9 27.5 2.7 49.3 26.8 6.9 4.3 29.1 6.2 51.2 30.6 18.1 10.2 21.5 6.2 43.2 23.0 14.6 10.2 28.4 3.5 52.2 27.6 14.7 8.9 28.5 4.5 63.6 25.0 15.9 9.1 23.2 5.4 43.2 26.7 19.3 10.3 28.0 7.7 50.4 30.3 22.4 14.4 30.6 11.5 48.9 34.2 25.6 18.0 35.3 12.7 59.2 37.7 29.0 21.3 33.6 11.0 56.7 37.0 27.4 19.6 30.6 10.1 52.1 33.9 26.0 18.1 32.9 9.8 57.6 33.1 22.4 14.2 32.5 10.1 51.9 35.7 27.2 18.4 30.8 12.1 53.4 33.7 26.5 19.5 28.8 16.3 49.6 31.6 23.8 19.2 25.4 9.2 47.4 27.2 18.4 13.1 19.9 7.4 44.2 21.9 14.8 10.9 20.2 3.8 47.9 23.5 8.2 5.8 17.0 4.7 37.1 19.3 12.0 7.1 18.6 4.7 47.0 18.4 10.5 7.4 11.1 2.4 30.1 13.7 7.4 4.7 7.4 3.3 21.1 9.8 6.5 5.0 6.9 2.4 32.7 8.7 5.6 4.3 13.3 3.8 42.5 13.9 10.6 7.4 28.2 7.1 52.7 24.9 13.8 10.9 30.3 6.0 52.1 31.9 21.8 13.2 22.1 6.0 44.3 24.7 18.2 13.7 29.5 10.9 51.8 32.1 24.7 18.1 31.8 12.1 68.6 32.2 25.5 20.1 33.3 9.9 53.9 36.5 28.3 20.5 34.7 19.5 52.1 38.0 31.6 25.8 34.9 14.6 55.9 36.9 29.9 23.2 29.3 9.7 49.0 32.4 25.4 13.4 33.3 10.7 52.1 36.0 27.5 17.8

Appendix B-1

Canyon Spring Date Time 2021-05-07 14:00:00 2021-05-07 15:00:00 2021-05-07 16:00:00 2021-05-07 17:00:00 2021-05-07 18:00:00 2021-05-07 19:00:00 2021-05-07 20:00:00 2021-05-07 21:00:00 2021-05-07 22:00:00 2021-05-07 23:00:00 2021-05-08 00:00:01 2021-05-08 01:00:00 2021-05-08 02:00:00 2021-05-08 03:00:00 2021-05-08 04:00:00 2021-05-08 05:00:00 2021-05-08 06:00:00 2021-05-08 07:00:00 2021-05-08 08:00:00 2021-05-08 09:00:00 2021-05-08 10:00:00 2021-05-08 11:00:00 2021-05-08 12:00:00 2021-05-08 13:00:00 2021-05-08 14:00:00 2021-05-08 15:00:00 2021-05-08 16:00:00 2021-05-08 17:00:00 2021-05-08 18:00:00 2021-05-08 19:00:00 2021-05-08 20:00:00 2021-05-08 21:00:00 2021-05-08 22:00:00 2021-05-08 23:00:00 2021-05-09 00:00:00 2021-05-09 01:00:00 2021-05-09 02:00:00 2021-05-09 03:00:00 2021-05-09 04:00:00 2021-05-09 05:00:00 2021-05-09 06:00:00 2021-05-09 07:00:00 2021-05-09 08:00:00 2021-05-09 09:00:00 2021-05-09 10:00:00 2021-05-09 11:00:00 2021-05-09 12:00:00 2021-05-09 13:00:00 2021-05-09 14:00:00 2021-05-09 15:00:00 2021-05-09 16:00:00 2021-05-09 17:00:00 2021-05-09 18:00:00 2021-05-09 19:00:00 2021-05-09 20:00:00 2021-05-09 21:00:00 2021-05-09 22:00:00 2021-05-09 23:00:00 2021-05-10 00:00:00 2021-05-10 01:00:00 2021-05-10 02:00:00 2021-05-10 03:00:00 2021-05-10 04:00:00 2021-05-10 05:00:00 2021-05-10 06:00:00 2021-05-10 07:00:00 2021-05-10 08:00:00 2021-05-10 09:00:00 2021-05-10 10:00:00 2021-05-10 11:00:00 2021-05-10 12:00:00

Raw LAeq LAFmin LAFmax LAF10.00 LAF50.00 LAF90.00 31.0 16.6 49.5 34.1 27.8 21.9 34.6 12.7 63.9 34.4 25.3 17.3 27.5 12.8 47.7 30.8 23.4 17.0 24.9 8.5 43.3 29.0 15.6 9.9 21.8 8.4 45.1 21.0 13.5 9.6 27.2 7.4 48.1 26.9 14.5 9.6 15.9 7.8 34.6 19.1 12.1 9.5 20.9 7.8 43.1 22.6 14.0 10.5 13.1 7.0 36.8 11.9 8.3 7.6 16.4 6.9 36.3 17.1 8.8 7.6 9.2 6.8 29.2 9.5 8.0 7.5 21.7 6.9 49.8 12.4 8.8 7.6 9.3 6.5 31.4 10.4 7.2 6.8 21.8 6.5 50.3 12.4 7.8 6.9 34.1 6.6 53.7 28.1 8.5 7.4 29.4 6.6 52.8 32.2 24.4 14.3 28.1 6.6 47.8 31.4 21.6 10.5 23.4 7.8 48.8 25.4 16.6 11.0 32.5 9.0 60.8 30.0 20.3 12.7 23.0 9.3 44.4 26.0 17.3 12.2 24.6 8.9 56.7 25.2 15.4 10.4 23.8 9.0 47.5 25.5 16.1 11.0 25.8 8.9 53.6 26.6 16.0 11.0 21.6 8.5 47.8 23.9 13.8 9.8 25.9 8.3 49.8 28.1 17.7 11.0 22.4 8.4 42.6 25.8 15.5 11.4 21.7 8.5 45.4 24.7 14.7 10.3 24.1 8.4 43.8 27.6 16.9 11.4 19.8 7.9 42.9 22.0 13.6 9.7 21.7 7.6 40.6 25.4 12.2 9.3 20.7 6.6 41.0 21.7 9.5 7.3 17.6 6.5 46.1 19.2 8.2 6.8 18.3 6.3 38.6 19.9 7.3 6.7 14.3 6.3 39.5 8.7 6.8 6.6 7.0 6.1 22.2 7.5 6.8 6.5 7.6 5.8 33.4 8.1 7.2 6.8 7.0 6.1 14.8 7.6 6.8 6.5 6.6 6.1 21.6 6.7 6.5 6.4 31.2 6.1 57.2 28.4 7.0 6.5 29.9 6.4 49.3 33.1 23.8 11.9 30.6 6.5 54.3 30.8 19.1 8.8 30.3 6.7 55.6 29.0 16.7 8.1 31.4 7.2 53.0 30.2 16.0 8.8 23.5 7.6 53.7 26.0 14.2 9.7 23.6 8.2 49.3 25.8 14.7 11.0 27.7 9.4 49.2 29.7 17.0 11.7 33.7 9.8 60.1 32.6 19.2 12.4 26.9 8.6 52.9 29.0 16.2 10.9 28.9 7.9 46.2 29.3 14.4 9.5 34.5 8.6 74.6 29.6 17.4 11.6 19.7 8.6 42.7 19.7 12.2 10.2 25.2 7.9 44.7 28.5 15.1 9.4 24.4 11.0 39.2 27.8 22.1 16.4 26.6 8.1 45.3 29.9 15.1 10.3 26.9 7.2 46.8 30.4 13.4 8.4 24.2 7.5 49.3 22.4 10.3 8.8 19.7 6.9 43.4 14.4 10.1 7.7 18.6 7.4 55.2 20.0 13.0 10.3 9.1 6.6 16.9 10.9 8.5 7.3 7.5 6.4 17.0 8.1 7.3 6.9 8.7 6.4 21.6 10.4 7.8 7.0 8.5 6.4 35.6 9.8 7.9 7.2 37.0 6.5 55.9 37.0 8.0 7.1 35.0 7.6 57.9 36.7 25.2 14.1 31.0 7.6 49.8 34.0 23.6 13.0 31.7 7.8 58.0 34.2 18.7 10.3 33.6 7.8 58.1 33.2 17.4 9.5 27.2 8.7 51.0 29.5 18.2 12.2 29.5 10.4 50.4 32.2 22.5 13.4 29.6 9.7 51.4 33.1 18.6 12.3 28.4 9.6 51.0 32.4 21.0 12.6

Noise floor corrected LAeq LAFmin LAFmax LAF10.00 LAF50.00 LAF90.00 31.0 16.6 49.5 34.1 27.8 21.9 34.6 11.8 63.9 34.4 25.3 17.3 27.5 11.9 47.7 30.8 23.4 17.0 24.9 5.4 43.3 29.0 15.1 7.9 21.8 5.2 45.1 21.0 12.7 7.4 27.2 2.7 48.1 26.9 13.9 7.4 15.9 3.8 34.6 19.1 11.0 7.2 20.9 3.8 43.1 22.6 13.3 8.8 12.2 1.4 36.8 10.7 5.0 3.3 16.4 1.0 36.3 17.1 6.0 3.3 6.7 0.6 29.2 7.2 4.3 3.0 21.7 1.0 49.8 11.4 6.0 3.3 6.9 0.0 31.4 8.7 2.1 0.6 21.8 0.0 50.3 11.4 3.8 1.0 34.1 0.0 53.7 28.1 5.4 2.7 29.4 0.0 52.8 32.2 24.4 13.7 28.1 0.0 47.8 31.4 21.6 8.8 23.4 3.8 48.8 25.4 16.6 9.5 32.5 6.3 60.8 30.0 20.3 11.8 23.0 6.9 44.4 26.0 17.3 11.1 24.6 6.2 56.7 25.2 14.9 8.7 23.8 6.3 47.5 25.5 16.1 9.5 25.8 6.2 53.6 26.6 16.0 9.5 21.6 5.4 47.8 23.9 13.1 7.7 25.9 5.0 49.8 28.1 17.7 9.5 22.4 5.2 42.6 25.8 15.0 10.1 21.7 5.4 45.4 24.7 14.1 8.5 24.1 5.2 43.8 27.6 16.9 10.1 19.8 4.0 42.9 22.0 12.9 7.6 21.7 3.3 40.6 25.4 11.1 6.9 20.7 0.0 41.0 21.7 7.2 2.4 17.6 0.0 46.1 19.2 4.7 0.6 18.3 0.0 38.6 19.9 2.4 0.2 13.7 0.0 39.5 5.8 0.6 0.0 1.4 0.0 22.2 3.0 0.6 0.0 3.3 0.0 33.4 4.5 2.1 0.6 1.4 0.0 14.2 3.3 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.6 0.2 0.0 0.0 31.2 0.0 57.2 28.4 1.4 0.0 29.9 0.0 49.3 33.1 23.8 10.7 30.6 0.0 54.3 30.8 19.1 6.0 30.3 0.2 55.6 29.0 16.7 4.5 31.4 2.1 53.0 30.2 16.0 6.0 23.5 3.3 53.7 26.0 13.6 7.6 23.6 4.7 49.3 25.8 14.1 9.5 27.7 7.1 49.2 29.7 17.0 10.5 33.7 7.7 60.1 32.6 19.2 11.4 26.9 5.6 52.9 29.0 16.2 9.4 28.9 4.0 46.2 29.3 13.8 7.2 34.5 5.6 74.6 29.6 17.4 10.3 19.7 5.6 42.7 19.7 11.1 8.4 25.2 4.0 44.7 28.5 14.6 7.1 24.4 9.5 39.2 27.8 22.1 16.4 26.6 4.5 45.3 29.9 14.6 8.5 26.9 2.1 46.8 30.4 12.6 5.2 24.2 3.0 49.3 22.4 8.5 6.0 19.7 1.0 43.4 13.8 8.2 3.5 18.6 2.7 55.2 20.0 12.1 8.5 6.5 0.0 16.9 9.4 5.4 2.4 3.0 0.0 17.0 4.5 2.4 1.0 5.8 0.0 21.6 8.7 3.8 1.4 5.4 0.0 35.6 7.7 4.0 2.1 37.0 0.0 55.9 37.0 4.3 1.8 35.0 3.3 57.9 36.7 25.2 13.4 31.0 3.3 49.8 34.0 23.6 12.1 31.7 3.8 58.0 34.2 18.7 8.5 33.6 3.8 58.1 33.2 17.4 7.2 27.2 5.8 51.0 29.5 18.2 11.1 29.5 8.7 50.4 32.2 22.5 12.6 29.6 7.6 51.4 33.1 18.6 11.3 28.4 7.4 51.0 32.4 21.0 11.6

Appendix B-2

Canyon Spring Date Time 2021-05-10 13:00:00 2021-05-10 14:00:00 2021-05-10 15:00:00 2021-05-10 16:00:00 2021-05-10 17:00:00 2021-05-10 18:00:00 2021-05-10 19:00:00 2021-05-10 20:00:00 2021-05-10 21:00:00 2021-05-10 22:00:00 2021-05-10 23:00:00 2021-05-11 00:00:00 2021-05-11 01:00:00 2021-05-11 02:00:00 2021-05-11 03:00:00 2021-05-11 04:00:00 2021-05-11 05:00:00 2021-05-11 06:00:00 2021-05-11 07:00:00 2021-05-11 08:00:00 2021-05-11 09:00:00 2021-05-11 10:00:00 2021-05-11 11:00:00 2021-05-11 12:00:00 2021-05-11 13:00:00 2021-05-11 14:00:00 2021-05-11 15:00:00 2021-05-11 16:00:00 2021-05-11 17:00:00 2021-05-11 18:00:00 2021-05-11 19:00:00 2021-05-11 20:00:00 2021-05-11 21:00:00 2021-05-11 22:00:00 2021-05-11 23:00:00 2021-05-12 00:00:01 2021-05-12 01:00:00 2021-05-12 02:00:00 2021-05-12 03:00:00 2021-05-12 04:00:00 2021-05-12 05:00:00 2021-05-12 06:00:00 2021-05-12 07:00:00 2021-05-12 08:00:00 2021-05-12 09:00:00 2021-05-12 10:00:00 2021-05-12 11:00:00 2021-05-12 12:00:00 2021-05-12 13:00:00 2021-05-12 14:00:00 2021-05-12 15:00:00 2021-05-12 16:00:00 2021-05-12 17:00:00 2021-05-12 18:00:00 2021-05-12 19:00:00 2021-05-12 20:00:00 2021-05-12 21:00:00 2021-05-12 22:00:00 2021-05-12 23:00:00 2021-05-13 00:00:00 2021-05-13 01:00:00 2021-05-13 02:00:00 2021-05-13 03:00:00 2021-05-13 04:00:00 2021-05-13 05:00:00 2021-05-13 06:00:00 2021-05-13 07:00:00 2021-05-13 08:00:00 2021-05-13 09:00:00 2021-05-13 10:00:00 2021-05-13 11:00:00

Raw LAeq LAFmin LAFmax LAF10.00 LAF50.00 LAF90.00 27.3 8.7 54.1 29.1 19.0 12.1 28.8 10.0 50.0 30.5 20.6 15.5 28.5 10.4 46.2 32.3 21.9 14.5 31.2 10.6 54.6 32.1 20.6 13.6 30.1 7.9 49.6 34.8 16.8 9.3 25.0 7.4 47.0 23.0 11.1 8.2 27.4 7.6 53.1 27.2 11.6 8.6 16.1 6.5 39.5 17.5 7.6 7.0 20.7 6.3 46.9 13.1 7.0 6.7 13.3 6.2 35.8 11.9 6.9 6.6 20.2 6.2 48.5 16.0 7.0 6.6 15.4 6.2 41.2 7.7 6.9 6.6 14.5 6.1 45.9 8.7 7.1 6.6 7.8 6.2 29.4 8.7 7.3 6.6 10.1 6.2 31.8 8.2 6.9 6.6 32.2 6.4 53.9 30.7 8.2 7.1 32.9 6.4 52.8 32.9 22.5 10.7 27.3 6.3 51.6 30.4 15.7 7.3 25.1 6.5 44.6 29.4 14.3 7.9 32.4 7.1 57.7 31.4 17.6 9.0 26.8 7.6 52.3 25.5 13.4 9.1 27.3 8.4 54.8 23.5 15.3 10.4 24.1 8.8 43.2 27.0 15.8 11.5 23.6 8.7 49.2 24.4 14.7 10.5 22.2 8.3 44.3 23.0 13.8 10.1 25.6 8.5 47.0 24.3 13.5 9.6 26.5 8.7 54.8 23.4 14.3 10.2 23.7 7.7 46.3 25.6 11.8 8.7 22.3 7.8 51.5 22.4 13.4 9.3 31.1 6.9 59.4 17.3 10.1 7.7 22.0 6.6 48.5 25.0 8.2 7.1 18.5 6.8 40.1 21.1 8.7 7.4 16.3 6.4 40.5 16.3 8.1 6.8 14.0 6.5 35.7 14.1 7.2 6.8 14.4 7.0 36.5 13.5 8.9 7.9 15.3 6.5 36.9 10.7 8.4 7.4 9.5 6.7 36.3 9.6 8.0 7.3 8.2 6.8 17.5 9.0 8.0 7.4 15.0 6.6 35.4 11.4 8.6 7.5 35.5 6.5 54.6 37.6 7.9 7.1 31.9 6.8 51.9 32.6 22.3 11.0 26.4 6.5 46.2 30.5 21.1 10.4 27.0 6.6 60.5 29.8 14.6 8.0 29.8 7.5 47.4 34.6 17.2 9.3 28.9 8.0 57.9 29.6 19.0 11.6 31.0 9.2 59.5 29.9 21.5 12.6 30.8 8.9 57.2 27.1 17.8 12.3 26.9 9.4 52.4 25.9 16.9 11.1 26.3 10.0 45.2 29.9 21.0 14.4 26.5 9.8 50.2 29.0 19.3 13.3 24.3 9.2 43.1 28.2 17.6 11.8 26.5 8.9 44.4 30.5 19.2 12.8 26.8 8.8 46.4 29.4 18.1 11.1 22.3 9.5 42.8 24.8 16.4 11.5 20.8 7.2 42.6 22.7 11.8 8.1 17.2 6.9 38.4 19.5 7.9 7.4 20.8 6.8 43.2 16.9 7.8 7.3 25.8 6.8 61.6 21.7 8.3 7.2 14.2 6.3 35.8 12.9 8.3 7.5 17.9 6.6 45.0 12.0 7.5 7.1 8.8 6.4 25.0 9.2 7.4 6.8 8.5 6.7 29.8 9.2 7.8 7.2 10.5 6.8 27.2 10.3 8.5 7.2 32.1 6.6 51.4 34.0 10.9 7.4 28.4 7.0 50.3 31.1 21.9 11.0 28.9 6.8 47.7 33.5 22.0 10.1 29.5 7.1 48.1 33.7 22.5 9.8 29.6 7.6 49.9 32.4 20.1 9.9 29.8 9.2 55.4 31.4 18.9 12.5 25.2 9.3 45.8 27.0 16.8 11.7 27.7 9.3 54.7 27.1 18.5 12.5

Noise floor corrected LAeq LAFmin LAFmax LAF10.00 LAF50.00 LAF90.00 27.3 5.8 54.1 29.1 19.0 11.0 28.8 8.0 50.0 30.5 20.6 15.0 28.5 8.7 46.2 32.3 21.9 13.9 31.2 8.9 54.6 32.1 20.6 12.9 30.1 4.0 49.6 34.8 16.8 6.9 25.0 2.7 47.0 23.0 9.7 4.7 27.4 3.3 53.1 27.2 10.3 5.6 16.1 0.0 39.5 17.5 3.3 1.4 20.7 0.0 46.9 12.2 1.4 0.2 12.5 0.0 35.8 10.7 1.0 0.0 20.2 0.0 48.5 16.0 1.4 0.0 14.9 0.0 41.2 3.5 1.0 0.0 13.9 0.0 45.9 5.8 1.8 0.0 3.8 0.0 29.4 5.8 2.4 0.0 8.2 0.0 31.8 4.7 1.0 0.0 32.2 0.0 53.9 30.7 4.7 1.8 32.9 0.0 52.8 32.9 22.5 9.1 27.3 0.0 51.6 30.4 15.7 2.4 25.1 0.0 44.6 29.4 13.7 4.0 32.4 1.8 57.7 31.4 17.6 6.3 26.8 3.3 52.3 25.5 12.6 6.5 27.3 5.2 54.8 23.5 14.8 8.7 24.1 6.0 43.2 27.0 15.8 10.2 23.6 5.8 49.2 24.4 14.1 8.8 22.2 5.0 44.3 23.0 13.1 8.2 25.6 5.4 47.0 24.3 12.7 7.4 26.5 5.8 54.8 23.4 13.7 8.4 23.7 3.5 46.3 25.6 10.6 5.8 22.3 3.8 51.5 22.4 12.6 6.9 31.1 1.0 59.4 17.3 8.2 3.5 22.0 0.0 48.5 25.0 4.7 1.8 18.5 0.6 40.1 21.1 5.8 2.7 16.3 0.0 40.5 16.3 4.5 0.6 13.3 0.0 35.7 13.4 2.1 0.6 13.8 1.4 36.5 12.7 6.2 4.0 14.8 0.0 36.9 9.1 5.2 2.7 7.2 0.2 36.3 7.4 4.3 2.4 4.7 0.6 17.5 6.3 4.3 2.7 14.5 0.0 35.4 10.1 5.6 3.0 35.5 0.0 54.6 37.6 4.0 1.8 31.9 0.6 51.9 32.6 22.3 9.5 26.4 0.0 46.2 30.5 21.1 8.7 27.0 0.0 60.5 29.8 14.0 4.3 29.8 3.0 47.4 34.6 17.2 6.9 28.9 4.3 57.9 29.6 19.0 10.3 31.0 6.7 59.5 29.9 21.5 11.6 30.8 6.2 57.2 27.1 17.8 11.3 26.9 7.1 52.4 25.9 16.9 9.7 26.3 8.0 45.2 29.9 21.0 13.8 26.5 7.7 50.2 29.0 19.3 12.5 24.3 6.7 43.1 28.2 17.6 10.6 26.5 6.2 44.4 30.5 19.2 11.9 26.8 6.0 46.4 29.4 18.1 9.7 22.3 7.2 42.8 24.8 16.4 10.2 20.8 2.1 42.6 22.7 10.6 4.5 17.2 1.0 38.4 19.5 4.0 2.7 20.8 0.6 43.2 16.9 3.8 2.4 25.8 0.6 61.6 21.7 5.0 2.1 13.6 0.0 35.8 12.0 5.0 3.0 17.9 0.0 45.0 10.9 3.0 1.8 6.0 0.0 25.0 6.7 2.7 0.6 5.4 0.2 29.8 6.7 3.8 2.1 8.8 0.6 27.2 8.5 5.4 2.1 32.1 0.0 51.4 34.0 9.4 2.7 28.4 1.4 50.3 31.1 21.9 9.5 28.9 0.6 47.7 33.5 22.0 8.2 29.5 1.8 48.1 33.7 22.5 7.7 29.6 3.3 49.9 32.4 20.1 7.9 29.8 6.7 55.4 31.4 18.9 11.5 25.2 6.9 45.8 27.0 16.8 10.5 27.7 6.9 54.7 27.1 18.5 11.5

Appendix B-3

Canyon Spring Date Time 2021-05-13 12:00:00 2021-05-13 13:00:00 2021-05-13 14:00:00 2021-05-13 15:00:00 2021-05-13 16:00:00 2021-05-13 17:00:00 2021-05-13 18:00:00 2021-05-13 19:00:00 2021-05-13 20:00:00 2021-05-13 21:00:00 2021-05-13 22:00:00 2021-05-13 23:00:00 2021-05-14 00:00:00 2021-05-14 01:00:00 2021-05-14 02:00:00 2021-05-14 03:00:00 2021-05-14 04:00:00 2021-05-14 05:00:00 2021-05-14 06:00:00 2021-05-14 07:00:00 2021-05-14 08:00:00 2021-05-14 09:00:00 2021-05-14 10:00:00 2021-05-14 11:00:00 2021-05-14 12:00:00 2021-05-14 13:00:00 2021-05-14 14:00:00 2021-05-14 15:00:00 2021-05-14 16:00:00 2021-05-14 17:00:00 2021-05-14 18:00:00 2021-05-14 19:00:00 2021-05-14 20:00:00 2021-05-14 21:00:00 2021-05-14 22:00:00 2021-05-14 23:00:00 2021-05-15 00:00:00 2021-05-15 01:00:00 2021-05-15 02:00:00 2021-05-15 03:00:00 2021-05-15 04:00:00 2021-05-15 05:00:00 2021-05-15 06:00:00 2021-05-15 07:00:00 2021-05-15 08:00:00 2021-05-15 09:00:00 2021-05-15 10:00:00 2021-05-15 11:00:00 2021-05-15 12:00:00 2021-05-15 13:00:00 2021-05-15 14:00:00 2021-05-15 15:00:00 2021-05-15 16:00:00 2021-05-15 17:00:00 2021-05-15 18:00:00 2021-05-15 19:00:00 2021-05-15 20:00:00 2021-05-15 21:00:00 2021-05-15 22:00:00 2021-05-15 23:00:00

Raw LAeq LAFmin LAFmax LAF10.00 LAF50.00 LAF90.00 26.5 9.3 48.3 30.6 20.5 12.7 34.7 8.6 60.2 30.6 16.3 10.1 30.0 9.3 54.3 26.8 16.4 11.6 29.6 9.9 51.1 29.5 17.9 12.1 27.3 8.8 52.1 27.4 16.5 11.9 30.7 8.4 54.8 32.2 15.5 10.0 28.7 8.6 49.3 29.3 16.2 10.9 30.2 8.0 64.8 25.5 15.6 10.0 19.7 7.1 40.9 23.2 8.6 7.6 15.5 6.9 35.6 16.7 8.4 7.6 21.3 6.8 43.1 24.6 7.6 7.2 12.1 6.9 33.9 11.4 8.3 7.4 16.6 7.0 39.0 18.4 9.0 7.6 17.9 7.2 38.0 20.4 10.1 7.9 11.5 7.4 27.3 12.6 9.6 8.5 10.1 6.9 35.2 10.9 7.8 7.3 36.8 6.7 57.4 36.8 10.2 7.2 39.8 7.0 64.4 34.3 23.7 11.5 30.7 6.8 53.8 30.7 19.4 9.1 28.3 7.1 63.3 29.2 14.5 8.5 32.0 7.5 57.1 26.3 12.3 9.4 21.7 8.0 46.5 23.4 14.7 9.6 36.4 8.3 64.0 31.5 17.5 10.9 29.5 9.6 54.7 31.7 19.9 13.2 26.1 9.6 49.6 29.6 19.1 12.7 29.1 8.8 57.1 26.7 18.3 10.9 34.0 8.5 62.0 22.7 12.6 9.9 27.7 8.3 46.1 31.6 17.2 9.6 30.5 9.4 58.2 25.5 15.7 11.5 19.2 8.2 38.9 20.8 12.6 9.5 39.0 7.8 60.7 33.2 14.2 8.6 26.7 7.6 52.0 26.0 13.2 8.6 19.6 7.0 39.9 23.2 9.8 7.5 21.6 6.9 40.5 25.0 8.1 7.3 22.5 7.0 46.7 25.5 7.7 7.3 19.2 6.9 42.3 17.3 8.1 7.3 17.2 8.9 40.4 18.5 14.8 10.9 15.5 8.3 36.3 17.6 13.5 9.4 9.2 6.8 33.8 10.4 7.5 7.2 11.0 6.8 34.6 9.7 7.9 7.3 37.2 6.7 55.0 41.0 12.1 7.2 26.2 7.0 44.2 29.7 18.7 10.0 27.2 7.0 57.3 27.8 18.6 10.5 27.9 8.4 61.1 28.0 16.3 10.7 31.9 9.3 60.8 28.3 20.2 15.0 54.9 8.9 85.6 31.2 20.6 13.9 29.9 12.0 54.1 32.5 24.5 17.2 34.0 16.4 53.4 36.9 31.3 23.9 35.0 13.0 58.1 37.6 30.9 22.3 35.3 18.2 51.0 38.9 32.8 25.2 32.7 13.8 53.3 36.0 29.9 24.8 32.1 13.4 52.8 35.4 28.8 19.4 33.0 13.3 56.6 34.8 27.3 22.1 28.8 15.6 50.7 29.5 24.1 20.3 32.0 11.9 53.9 33.8 21.2 14.5 32.3 8.3 55.6 26.4 13.0 10.3 19.2 7.8 43.8 21.0 10.4 8.8 18.4 7.0 40.2 20.8 9.6 7.8 20.5 6.8 42.0 21.5 7.7 7.1 12.0 6.7 35.6 10.0 7.3 7.1

Noise floor corrected LAeq LAFmin LAFmax LAF10.00 LAF50.00 LAF90.00 26.5 6.9 48.3 30.6 20.5 11.8 34.7 5.6 60.2 30.6 16.3 8.2 30.0 6.9 54.3 26.8 16.4 10.3 29.6 7.9 51.1 29.5 17.9 11.0 27.3 6.0 52.1 27.4 16.5 10.7 30.7 5.2 54.8 32.2 15.0 8.0 28.7 5.6 49.3 29.3 16.2 9.4 30.2 4.3 64.8 25.5 15.1 8.0 19.7 1.8 40.9 23.2 5.6 3.3 15.0 1.0 35.6 16.7 5.2 3.3 21.3 0.6 43.1 24.6 3.3 2.1 11.0 1.0 33.9 10.1 5.0 2.7 16.6 1.4 39.0 18.4 6.3 3.3 17.9 2.1 38.0 20.4 8.2 4.0 10.2 2.7 27.3 11.6 7.4 5.4 8.2 1.0 35.2 9.4 3.8 2.4 36.8 0.2 57.4 36.8 8.4 2.1 39.8 1.4 64.4 34.3 23.7 10.2 30.7 0.6 53.8 30.7 19.4 6.5 28.3 1.8 63.3 29.2 13.9 5.4 32.0 3.0 57.1 26.3 11.3 7.1 21.7 4.3 46.5 23.4 14.1 7.4 36.4 5.0 64.0 31.5 17.5 9.4 29.5 7.4 54.7 31.7 19.9 12.4 26.1 7.4 49.6 29.6 19.1 11.8 29.1 6.0 57.1 26.7 18.3 9.4 34.0 5.4 62.0 22.7 11.6 7.9 27.7 5.0 46.1 31.6 17.2 7.4 30.5 7.1 58.2 25.5 15.7 10.2 19.2 4.7 38.9 20.8 11.6 7.2 39.0 3.8 60.7 33.2 13.6 5.6 26.7 3.3 52.0 26.0 12.4 5.6 19.6 1.4 39.9 23.2 7.7 3.0 21.6 1.0 40.5 25.0 4.5 2.4 22.5 1.4 46.7 25.5 3.5 2.4 19.2 1.0 42.3 17.3 4.5 2.4 17.2 6.2 40.4 18.5 14.2 9.4 15.0 5.0 36.3 17.6 12.7 7.1 6.7 0.6 33.8 8.7 3.0 2.1 9.5 0.6 34.6 7.6 4.0 2.4 37.2 0.2 55.0 41.0 11.0 2.1 26.2 1.4 44.2 29.7 18.7 8.0 27.2 1.4 57.3 27.8 18.6 8.8 27.9 5.2 61.1 28.0 16.3 9.1 31.9 6.9 60.8 28.3 20.2 14.5 54.9 6.2 85.6 31.2 20.6 13.2 29.9 10.9 54.1 32.5 24.5 17.2 34.0 16.4 53.4 36.9 31.3 23.9 35.0 12.1 58.1 37.6 30.9 22.3 35.3 18.2 51.0 38.9 32.8 25.2 32.7 13.1 53.3 36.0 29.9 24.8 32.1 12.6 52.8 35.4 28.8 19.4 33.0 12.5 56.6 34.8 27.3 22.1 28.8 15.6 50.7 29.5 24.1 20.3 32.0 10.7 53.9 33.8 21.2 13.9 32.3 5.0 55.6 26.4 12.1 8.5 19.2 3.8 43.8 21.0 8.7 6.0 18.4 1.4 40.2 20.8 7.4 3.8 20.5 0.6 42.0 21.5 3.5 1.8 10.9 0.2 35.6 8.0 2.4 1.8

Appendix B-4

Canyon Spring Date Time 2021-05-04 15:21:47

2021-05-04